At Home On Piety Hill

In the center, around the throne, were four living creatures, and they were covered with eyes, in front and in back. The first living creature was like a lion, the second was like an ox, the third had a face like a man, the fourth was like a flying eagle. Each of the four living creatures had six wings and was covered with eyes all around, even under his wings. Day and night they never stop saying: “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty, who was, and is, and is to come.” Revelation 4:6b – 8

Jim and Kevin wondered if the faces of the four creatures might relate to Israel somehow or if that idea, which they remembered hearing before, really had any validity. Again, what do we know? We see simile again; the first creature was like a lion. But, what significance can we see in them? Well, we saw the relation to the common thread running through chapter 4 and that is God receiving glory in all of creation. So, what about the appearance of the four creatures and their relation to Israel in the wilderness? Actually, Beale finds a source in the Targums and provides an application here:

The tribes of Israel were divided into four groups in the wilderness, and each group was located at one of the four directions of the compass, with the sanctuary in the middle of the camp. According to Targ. Pal. Num. 2 each group had a standard with the colors of the stones representing their tribes on the priest’s breastplate and with an insignia on it: a lion, a stag (originally an ox), a man, and a serpent (which later tradition changed to an eagle). Later Jewish tradition affirmed that this configuration was intended to reflect the arrangement of the four guardian angels around the divine throne… it could suggest further that the living creatures in Rev. 4:8ff represent humanity, especially the worship of the ideal community of God. The Book of Revelation pg. 331

On the identification of the creatures with the four gospels, George Eldon Ladd gives us a brief synopsis for those who may want to track these down:

From early times, these four creatures have been thought to represent the four gospels. Irenaeus… thought that the lion represented John, the ox Luke, the man Matthew, and the Eagle Mark. Victorinus… followed by Jerome … changed the order. The lion was Matthew, the man Mark, the ox Luke, and the eagle John. Such interpretations are interesting… A Commentary of the Revelation of John pp. 77 & 78

John Walvoord gives us a very good discussion on the four creatures in The Revelation of Jesus Christ pp.108 – 112 and comes to virtually the same conclusion as Beale, Alan Johnson and Robert Mounce; the creatures are angelic or heavenly beings, reflecting God’s majesty, “fullness of life and power.”

Tonight, at our study in Revelation we discussed thoroughly the thrust of chapter 4, which we concluded was the centrality of God in His universe and the promise that in heaven and soon (we hope) on earth, all creation will fulfill it’s purpose in glorifying God and bringing Him praise.

Also before the throne there was what looked like a sea of glass, clear as crystal. Revelation 4:6

Some of us were captivated by the imagery of the sea of glass and Paul took us to Ezekiel chapter 1, the most likely background for John’s image. Jen began musing on this and wondered if there was a connection between the sea of glass in chapter 4, the crystal expanse in Ezekiel 1 and the sea spoken of in Revelation 15, where the victors stand on the shore of the sea of “glass mixed with fire.” Then, she went to the “river of the water of life” in chapter 22. She wondered if she was coming up with a novel concept or if someone else had followed these lines. I quote Greg Beale, who is so thorough:

The “sea” is also associated with the idea of evil. Caird has argued that here it connotes cosmic evil, since it often has such a nuance in the OT and sometimes elsewhere in Revelation (see Rev. 13:1; 21:; and especially 15:2, as well as “abyss” in 11:7). This speculation receives support from the modeling of these chapters on Daniel 7, and the scenes of Daniel 7 and Ezekiel 1 have integral literary links, the former usually seen as dependent on the latter… In view of the Daniel and Exodus [24:9-1] imagery, there is then a hint that John sees the chaotic powers of the sea as calmed by divine sovereignty. Rev. 5:5ff reveals that Christ’s overcoming through his death and resurrection is what defeated the power of evil and so calmed Satan’s watery, tumultuous abode. 4:6 gives a picture of the stilling of the hellish waters from the heavenly perspective, though the devil displays his wrath even more furiously on earth because he has been decisively defeated in heaven… The lamb’s “overcoming” has also paved the way for the saint’s “overcoming” of the beast at the same sea, as pictured in 15:2-4. When John later says that “there is no longer any sea” (21:1), he means that all evil on the earth will be not only defeated but also eradicated when Christ’s kingdom is established consummately on earth. In fact, the “sea of glass like a crystal before the throne” in 4:6 may be an intentional contrast with “a river of the water of life, clear as crystal, coming from the throne” in 22:1. The sea as the source of satanic evil opposing God’s throne has been eliminated and replaced by the river of redemption, which has its source in the throne. The Book of Revelation, pp 327 & 328

That sounds almost exactly the way Jen articulated it to me. So, if you are tuning in, you are not alone Jen. In fact, you are running with one of the foremost authorities on Revelation, on John’s use of Daniel in Revelation and on apocalyptic literature. Not bad.

What do most seem to agree on with great certainty? That we are seeing a simile here… the sea is like glass. It certainly conveys the glory and majesty of the presence of God and is related somehow to His sovereignty over creation (4:6 – 11). It also has something to say about His ability to see all and manage His creation.

Let me take a moment to say that this is just the sort of thing I wanted to open this discussion up for. A worthwhile topic was brought up, which was beyond the scope and time constraints of our study. It involves a number of opinions from various sources and Beale even refers to this line of thought as “speculation,” even though he cites some pretty compelling (if circumstantial) reasons. But, these kinds of topics can be rich, rewarding and build up the Body of Christ, if done with thoughtfulness and love. So, feel free to comment here.

Next, I think I’ll track down those references to the faces of the four beasts and their relation to the tribes of Israel traveling through the wilderness.

John Stott, commenting on Revelation 3:18 - 20:

But it is not merely for supper that Christ enters the human soul. It is also to exercise sovereignty. If he comes in to bestow his salvation, he comes in also to receive our submission. His entry is an occupation. He comes in to take control. No room may be locked against him. He has conquered us. He is the master of the house. His flag flies from our roof. This is what it means to be committed to Christ, and to be wholehearted in our allegiance to him. It is to surrender without conditions to his lordship. It is to seek his will in his word and promptly to obey it. It is not just attending religious services twice a Sunday or even every day, let alone on the major festivals. It is not just leading a decent life or believing certain articles of the creed. No, it is first to repent, turning decisively from everything we know to be wrong, and then to open the door to Jesus Christ, asking him to come in. It is getting our gold, our clothes, and our eye salve from him. It is being personally and unconditionally committed to him. It is putting him first and seeking his pleasure in every department of life, public and private. Nothing less will do.

What Christ Thinks Of The Church, pp. 121 & 122

The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, who testifies to everything he saw — that is, the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. Revelation 1:1 & 2

When studying Revelation, it doesn’t take long before we find diverging opinions. I think Alan Johnson has some good advice for us here:

What do the imagery and visions mean? Another problem involves chronology: When do the things spoken of occur… what is symbolic and what is literal? Answers to such questions will determine the interpreter’s approach. Since few of these questions are capable of dogmatic answers, there is a need for tolerance of divergent aproaches in the hope that the Spirit may use open-minded discussion to bring us further into the meaning of the Apocalypse.

In chapter 1, verse 1, we are told that what follows must soon take place. How soon is soon and how does the answer to that question affect our approach to the rest of Revelation? This is how Robert Mounce deals with the question:

That more than 1900 years of church history have passed and the end is not yet poses a problem for some. One solution is to understand “shortly” in the sense of suddenly, or without delay once the appointed time arrives… The most satisfying solution is to take the word in a straightforward sense, remembering that in the prophetic outlook the end is always imminent. This perspective is common to the entire NT. Jesus taught that God would vindicate his elect without delay (LK 18:8), and Paul wrote to the Romans that God would soon crush Satan under their feet (Rom 16:2o).

I might add that the end is always imminent in apocalyptic, which is so prevalent in Revelation. Greg Beale, an amillennialist, takes soon or shortly in the literal sense as we would expect — that the events in Revelation would take place in the very near future. However, he has a unique take on what is taking place:

John’s substitution of en tachei implies his expectation that the final tribulation, the defeat of evil, and establishment of the kingdom, which Daniel expected to occur distantly “in the latter days,” would begin in his own generation, and indeed, that it had already begun to happen (for the idea of tribulation preceeding the divine kingdom see Daniel 7, which is a parallel prophecy to Daniel 2).

Yet, he goes on to point out:

Indeed what follows shows that the beginning of fulfillment and not final fulfillment is the focus [Daniel's prophecy of the latter days].

I suppose this is an example of the “already” - “not yet” approach to Revelation.

Welcome to the first installment of our online discussion of The Apocalypse or The Book of Revelation! Each Tuesday night at Nevada County Christian Fellowship, we are going verse by verse through the revelation of Jesus Christ, which He showed John the apostle in the first century. Our purpose in the Tuesday night study has a very practical aim: we are approaching this letter as written specifically to us — disciples of Jesus Christ engaged in the monumental struggle between the Kingdom of God and the kingdom of this world. Each week, we conclude by asking ourselves, “what will be my response, as a disciple of Jesus?” We want to worship Him, tell others about Him and live for Him.

“To him who overcomes, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I overcame and sat down with my Father on his throne. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.” Revelation 3:21 & 22

So, if you would like to participate, you are welcome. I’ve posted some etiquette for participation in the discussion in the left column. Our purpose in this blog is to dialogue on topics of interest that we don’t have time to cover in detail on Tuesday nights or those things that are beyond the scope or outside the purpose of our weekly study. For example, we touched briefly on the dating of the Book of Revelation, but this would be an appropriate venue to talk about that issue in greater detail. I hope this will prove fruitful.

I thought it would be good to begin by asking, “where are you coming from?” What is your purpose in studying Revelation along with us on Tuesday nights? Do you have a view of eschatology that guides you through Revelation or do you favor one interpretive method above another? Are you a futurist? A preterist? A partial preterist? Historicist? Idealist?

I’ll start. For the longest time, I was put off by the wrangling and hard feelings in the Body of Christ over eschatology and different views of The Apocalypse. Sure, I’d studied Revelation, Daniel, the letters to the Thessalonians, Matthew 24 and actually remember getting a lot out of A.T. Robertson’s treatment of Revelation in Word Pictures in the New Testament. I was really apprehensive about teaching it, because I didn’t feel I had the depth in the Old Testament it takes to do a good job and, frankly, I still need a lot of work there. But, lately I felt compelled to get into Revelation and it has been one of the most exhilarating and profitable undertakings in my entire Christian walk. As of this writing, I am premillennial in my view of Revelation. I think the millennium is a literal period of Christ’s reign on earth, but I am decidedly not dispensational. I suppose I would be labeled historic pre-mil.

At this point in time, I take a preterist position on the Olivet Discourse… I think most, possibly all of it, took place by about 70 AD. I also take the traditional view that the 70 weeks in Daniel have already been fulfilled. I think there will be a future tribulation, possibly the great tribulation, but I’m not sure how long it will last or if there are multiple great tribulations.

Interpretation? I take an ecclectic view - a position which seems to be gaining popularity nowadays. I see some things as fulfilled, some future, yet all things are ideal or profitable to Christians of every age, who take seriously their discipleship. How about you?