Four Approaches to Revelation (Revelation Series Part II)

(and why one of the four approaches is no good)

When you pick up a book, what you know about that book will often determine how you read it. For example, imagine someone picks up a book that reads "Harry Potter" across the front. Imagine this person has never read Harry Potter, but has grown up hearing and seeing a lot about it. When they pick up that book to read it, they are immediately prepared to enter into a magical land filled with wizards, witches, fantastical creatures, and a plot line that follows an unlikely hero saving his school and standing up for his friends–all that before they even begin to read the book! You are ready for all of that because Harry Potter has become such a well-known product.

I use the word "product" for a reason. Harry Potter is a good story, but those invested in the property that is Harry Potter do so for the purposes of financial gain and not because of the story (don't get me started on the HBO remakes).

While this isn't a 1-for-1 parallel on the way Revelation is read today, I do believe there have been similarities in the past, and if we aren't careful, we can fall into the same problem.

I have noticed people will often read Revelation, not for the story–the truth of John's prophecy–but for what they can gain. Namely, control. Control over people and a sense of control over the future.

In the past, this has taken the form of several Christians leading fringe movements away from the gospel of Jesus Christ based on misreadings of Revelation. Craig Koester details some of these in his book on Revelation.1 William Miller (Seventh-Day Adventists), Charles Taze Russell (Jehovah's Witnesses), and Victor Houteff (The Branch Davidians) were all religious leaders who, based on Historicist/Futurist readings (we'll get to the meaning of those terms shortly) made failed predictions of Jesus' return.2 These stories are not harmless. Based on these attempts to make Revelation about the future from a modern perspective, religious leaders have convinced Christians into terrible positions (selling possessions, land, etc.) with little to no remorse over their proposterous predictions.

These religious charlatans are only caricatures of what many Christians end up doing when entering John's vision in Revelation–taking up the more enticing images of the book and reconstructing their own vision.3 Typically, these visions are based on a fearful, miserable, deterministic view of the future, where, for a time, Christians suffer at the hands of Satan while beasts and demons rampage throughout the world unchecked.

I wish I were just using hyperbole right now, but I can't count the number of conversations I have had with Christians where they assume these very things I have just mentioned.

One conversation from over a decade ago still sticks with me when a young teen, during a late-night "come to Jesus" moment, looked at me with all the fear of the world in his eyes while discussing his concerns regarding faith and said, "Aren't we going to have to fight Satan in the end? How am I supposed to beat a demon in a fist fight? Will I at least get a sword?" While he hadn't mentioned Revelation in particular up to this point, I was stunned by what dots this teen must have had to pull together to create this narrative. I could tell, through the rest of our conversation, that he had been told a horror story about what was waiting for Christians in the end based on the book of Revelation.

A lot more could be said about "bad" readings of Revelation. But I'm going to adjust my aim for the rest of this article to (1) survey the popular approaches, (2) the benefits and failures of each approach, and (3) an important question for us to ask ourselves as we attempt to understand the truth of John's revelation.

Surveying the Approaches

When we're talking “approaches” to Revelation, we're talking the WHEN of Revelation. Considering what I just discussed above, determining what period of history John is referring to sets you up to read Revelation in a variety of ways. Yet even with all the diverse readings, your approach will typically fall into one of four:

Futurist. This approach can be exemplified by some of the examples I listed above. In short, it views everything from Rev. 4–22 as set to occur just before “the end.” Hence, “future” signifies that the contents of Revelation are ahead of us. (Proponents: J. Dwight Pentecost, John Nelson Darby, John Walvoord, Grant Osborne [eclectic or "mixed" in that he combines several views]).

Historicist. This approach, not necessarily to the exclusion of others, sees 1:19 (“Now write what you have seen, what is, and what is to take place after this.”4) as the interpretive lens for the book. So, aspects of Revelation have occurred, some are going on right now, and others still are in the future. (Proponents: Joachim of Fiore, Martin Luther, Isaac Newton [you read that right], and G. K. Beale [eclectic]).

Preterist. This approach reads all of Revelation as a past event. There is, however, an important and prominent deviation of this approach called “partial preterism” that would give the caveat that the last few chapters (typically from either 19:1; 20:7; or 21:1) are still in the future and tied to Jesus’ second coming. (Proponents: R. C. Sprout, N. T. Wright, James B. Jordan, and David Chilton).

Idealist. This approach, while by no means abandoning the historical situation of the letter, attempts to keep it from being tied so tightly to history or future events and rather understands John to be speaking to all Christians at all times regarding the same eternal truth. (Proponents: Origen, Augustine, William Hendrickson, and Richard Bauckham [eclectic]).

I think those are fair descriptions; however, if you know yourself to be in a particular camp and feel I am unjustly describing your position, please let me know! In a real attempt to be fair, here is what I would identify as the positives and negatives of each view. Yes, I do have a particular stance, but I’ll hold that back for now. I really encourage you to consider these stances and consider them for their own worth.

The Good

Futurism: Urgency and Preparation. What does a reading that understands the images of Revelation to be signs of Christ’s return? It creates believers who are consistently watching—and that's good! I see this as something all Christians need to be reminded of and something Christ himself taught on (Matt 25:1–13). There tends to also be an emphasis on the evil nature and deeds of the Beast, which creates in the Futurist a resistance to evil in their lives and in the world.

Historicism: Connected in Faithfulness. Because there is an overwhelming sense of “God is in control,” there is a confidence in the providence of God as the Historicist can trace God’s action in history and know what he will do in the future. They, in turn, as faithful Christians, are connected to a long line of faithful Christians as they prophetically place themselves in the narrative of Revelation.

Preterism: Encouragement in Persecution. Considering the 1st century churches' faithfulness in persecution, Preterists are encouraged to stay faithful while looking to “older brothers and sisters” who have done the same. The big takeaway from Revelation becomes the authority and Lordship of Christ, which strengthens the readers' worship as well.

Idealism: Endure! Because the battle of light and darkness is ongoing in the lives of every believer, and Revelation simply puts words to this fight, reading through the visions gives spiritual discernment to our current faith. Readers are encouraged to take hope in Christ’s victory and be moved to worship and witness that hope to the world.

The Bad

Futurism: Escapism and Speculation. There is a tendency with this approach to focus a lot of effort and time on aligning current events with John’s prophecy. It leads some groups into paranoia and definitely a loss of credibility among believers and nonbelievers like. Not only that, with such a grave view of the world as worshippers of the Beast, a stark “us vs. them” mentality can develop where, figuring the world is set for destruction, a hostility towards outsiders or a withdrawal from culture is almost a given.

Historicism: Arrogance and Conspiracy. What can develop with this approach is a theological arrogance as believers overestimate their ability to interpret events and identify historical fulfillments. This leads interpreters to vilify institutions like the Catholic Church or government entities as they identify them with the Dragon, the Beast, or other images. Conspirators will map Revelation onto American history in particular to draw out secret systems working behind the scenes, often promoting a fear-driven faith. This approach also takes on all the negatives from the Futurist position as well.

Preterism: Minimization and Complacency. A denial of Revelation as pertaining to endtime events leaves believers robbed of any future eschatological comfort. Worser still, Revelation becomes irrelevant because there is a sense that “it's all in the past, so why does it matter for me today?” A familiar sentiment I heard growing up was, “Don't worry about studying Revelation. Just know that in the end, God wins!” Yeah, that is comforting. It’s also all the excuse I need to stay away from the inspired Word of God (how sad is that!). "Full" preterism is therefore heretical as it denies the future return of Christ as depicted in the final chapters of Revelation. The only acceptable form of this few would be "partial" preterism.

Idealism: Vaugeness and Detachment. If Revelation is reporting real, historical (whether in the past or future) events, then this view misses the boat altogether. The images John chose then hold little water because, really, any image will do if it conveys a similar sentiment. Not only that, the overspiritualization of our faith can lead to a “everything is spiritual” and keeps us from acting in the world around us and against the social injustices in our own cities.

So, if none of them are perfect, which one am I supposed to pick? In my opinion, there has to be a lot of humility in staking your claim on Revelation through any one approach. Some of the theologians I highly admire take an “eclectic” approach, which really just means they take the best of two or three views in hopes of diminishing the negatives (Osborne, Bauckham, and Beale, for example).

I would encourage you to do the same. Read the text and let scripture guide you. At the same time, know that the path has already been forged and many Spirit-guided brothers and sisters have left a lot of wisdom for us to follow. Keep the approaches in mind, but dont be beholden to them.

The Outcome of a Reading Approach

Regardless, here is an important question to ask yourself when beginning your reading of Revelation: Does how I read it, and those who might take opposing views, really matter? It’s a good question. If I am the one to answer it, I would have to say “YES!…and no.” I 100% believe your reading of Revelation matters for a couple of reasons:

1. If this is a vision of Christ’s rule and the consequences of his rule, it is important that I understand what has been accomplished in Christ and how the Christian hope is hopeful.

2. The affirmation of one of these approaches will either support or give foundation to how your eschatology (your belief in what happens when Jesus returns) and that can really impact how you live your life in the present in regards to evangelism, whether or not you live in joy or fear of the future, the role of evil and its boundaries established by God.

3. These approaches can, in some way, determine what you think the letter is about. Your focus in the letter could be on Christ, his magnificence and his authority, or it could be directed towards “signs” of his coming. If it's the latter, you miss the heart of John’s purposes and, in light of the divine revelation given to John, God’s purposes (Rev 1:1).

To the “no” aspect of my response, there has to be some leniency to another person's approach. You need to remain cautious so that you do not allow a disagreement to become a point of division. While I cannot say that all approaches are equal, I will not let someone else’s view keep me from loving and serving them as brothers and sisters in Christ. On the other hand, I will always do my best to lead others to the truth of divine scripture while doing so lovingly and gently (2 Tim 2:25).

Now that I have talked out of both sides of my mouth, let me give you an example. If someone holds to the Historicist view, which, on its own, I believe is incorrect, I will not castigate them. There are real, theological, and grammatical reasons to hold to this view. However, and this goes to the subtitle of this article, the Futurist position cannot be held on grammatical grounds, and theologically, you have to limit yourself solely to the book of Revelation to end up at that view. The moment you step outside of Revelation and see how other Old Testament and New Testament books speak of judgment, prophecy, end times, the glorification of the Son of Man, or a myriad of other things, you realize the Futurist position is not sustainable. I, in good conscious and for the purpose of helping others know God, cannot let others hold this view without challenging them on it.

And there is some crossover between the Futurist and Historicist view, so let me be somewhat clearer in saying that any interpretive approach—whether Futurist, Historicist, or otherwise—that treats Revelation as a codebook for identifying current events should be approached with caution.5 We'll see going forward that John isn't using coded language. He writes very plainly, even for Roman eyes, for others to understand what he is getting at. Using John's Revelation to decode your current events is like using the book of Numbers to do your takes–it was never meant for that.

The last thought I’ll leave you with is: how does reading Revelation bring you closer to Christ in that you know him better and your own thoughts and actions are brought more in line with his?

Since I have already shown a card from my hand, I'll continue. I do believe the Futurist or Historicist approach—unbridled and unfiltered by other approaches—leads believers into witless controversies, conspiratorial accusations, a diminishing witness to Christ, and a fear-filled heart devoid of the real hope in Christ’s love and authority over creation. Not only have I seen it personally, but there is a strong track record of Christians being led away from their mission because of this "decoding" approach. This outcome of reading Revelation as a hope of knowing the future, putting oneself at ease regarding tumultuous current events, or having a sense of control over the future by knowing the future are all outcomes that I believe are antithetical to the Christian life.

Regarding the "end of days," Christians have no idea what that day is going to be like. When we get into the millennium in Rev 20, maybe we can start taking some guesses. Any Jesus follower, however, when speaking of the end times, should always resort to Jesus' words on what the disposition of a Christ follower should be: full of faith that the Father will keep his promises.

Whether it was in his parables (Mark 13:34–37; Matt 24: 45–51; 25:1–13, 14–30; Luke 12:35–40) or less formal teaching moments (Luke 12: 54–56; 13:1–5; 17: 26–30) Jesus taught to be ready. Yes, a part of the teachings on readiness were to the Jewish community in regard to the Destruction of Jerusalem that would come 40 years later, but many of those verses I just listed are directed to the general audience. That is, you and me.

Luke 13:1–5 is the best example. People came to Jesus worried about troubling current events and attempting to decode their meaning, and Jesus didn't care. He didn't respond to the wild hysteria or anxiety-ridden crowd and instead calmly pointed them to what mattered for them–and now matters to us–repent! Do not bother trying to read the signs and forget where you are in relation. I sometimes wonder if those obsessing over signs and being able to predict his return are only doing so in order for them to know when to finally "get right" with Him.

I do not mean this in a belittling way, I believe some people are so scared of God that they never know if they are right with him. In some sense, if they know when he's coming, they can make sure they're forgiven before they hear the sound of trumpets.

If you find yourself viewing God like this, as a fearsome and overwhelming force poised to unleash judgment upon you, I offer to you my prayers and encouragement for you to join me in this study of Revelation. I think this book is riddled with images of God's justice, but also his mercy and grace towards those who love him. I hope you are as excited as I am!

May God Bless You!

When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. But he placed his right hand on me, saying, “Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, and the living one. I was dead, and see, I am alive forever and ever; and I have the keys of Death and of Hades." Rev 1:17–18

__________________________________________________________________________________

1. Craig R. Koester, Revelation and the End of All Things, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2018).

2. TIME Magazine has an interesting list of failed prophecies if you're interested: https://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/completelist/0,29569,2072678,00.html

3. Revelation‬ ‭1‬:‭19‬ ‭NRSVUE‬‬ https://bible.com/bible/3523/rev.1.19.NRSVUE

4. Maybe that's not the best term since, in many cases, I would think, they were convinced of their own readings of Revelation. Maybe something more like "fools" in the Proverbial sense (Prov 1:20–33).

5. Bruce M. Metzger, Breaking the Code: Understanding the Book of Revelation (Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1993) There is a newly updated version of this book that I do not possess. I believe it was released in 2019.