Tagged: Free Bible study

Christ’s letters to the seven churches: An introduction

As we begin to study Revelation 2-3, the following introductory notes may prove helpful.

The angels

John is instructed to write to the “angels” of the seven churches in Asia Minor, which is modern-day Turkey. Some interpreters believe the angels to be human messengers, perhaps the pastors of these churches, while others argue that the Greek word aggeloi in Revelation is used overwhelmingly of spirit beings and therefore in this context means guardian angels. In any case, the “angel” of each church bears the responsibility of sharing an important message from Christ with the congregation.

The interpretation

There is little controversy among Bible interpreters concerning the letters to the seven churches, primarily because these letters do not predict future events. This does not mean, however, that the four major views of Revelation – preterist, historicist, futurist, and idealist – are in complete agreement.

For example, interpreters of the preterist and idealist schools, and some of the futurist school, “understand the letters to be addressed to the actual, historic churches named in them, and by extension to any churches that may find themselves in similar circumstances to theirs” (Steve Gregg, Revelation: Four Views, p. 62). However, historicists, and many futurists (especially dispensationalists), conclude that the seven letters provide a panoramic view of the church age. According to this view:

  • The church at Ephesus describes the church during the apostolic period until about 100 A.D.
  • Smyrna represents the church from 100 – 313 A.D. as it suffered under a succession of Roman emperors.
  • Pergamos characterizes the carnal and false-doctrine-riddled church from Constantine’s Edict of Toleration (313 A.D.) until the rise of the Papacy (about 500 A.D.).
  • Thyatira is seen as the Papal church until the Reformation (500 – 1500 A.D.).
  • Sardis is the church during the Reformation (1500 – 1700 A.D.).
  • Philadelphia depicts the missionary-minded church from 1700 A.D. – present.
  • And Laodicea describes the lukewarm, liberal and backslidden church of modern times.

This view has many problems, not the least of which is its attempt to paint the church of a certain era with a broad brush. No doubt there have been mission-minded, carnal, lukewarm, and even dead local churches at the same time throughout the church age. To characterize the entire body of Christ as monolithic at various times in history is an overly simplistic approach that robs the text of its meaning to all readers at all times.

Perhaps the best approach to Revelation 2-3 is to understand the initial audience as real churches facing real challenges, and then to see how the unique situations in each church may be found in churches throughout the church age. This view is faithful to the text and relevant to us as 21st century believers.

Pattern

While each of the seven letters is unique, all of them share a common pattern: 1) Christ describes Himself in terms borrowed from chapter 1; 2) Christ evaluates the church’s condition, beginning with the words “I know;” 3) Christ offers comfort and/or commands based on His assessment of the church; 4) Christ urges everyone to “listen what the Spirit says to the churches;” and 5) Christ promises blessings to the “victor,” foreshadowing the final visions in Rev. 21-22. We will follow this pattern as we look more closely at the seven letters.

Next: The letter to the church at Ephesus

An Introduction to Revelation

Who wrote it?

The author of Revelation identifies himself as “John” four times (1:1, 4; 21:2; 22:8). The earliest church fathers, from Justin Martyr to Tertullian, unanimously agreed that this John was none other than the son of Zebedee, one of the 12 apostles, and the “beloved disciple” of Jesus, the same John to whom is attributed the writing of the Gospel of John and 1, 2 and 3 John.

In the third and fourth centuries, however, some church leaders attributed the book to another John and point out grammatical differences between Revelation and the other writings of the apostle. Nevertheless, the apostle continues to be widely credited as the author of this apocalyptic/prophetic work for several reasons:

  • John is described in Acts 4:13 as “unschooled” and may have been incapable of writing in cultured Greek.
  • It’s unlikely that anyone in the early church, other than the apostle, was so well-known to identify himself simply as “John.”
  • Many expressions in Revelation are common to John’s other writings. For example, the word “Logos” as a term for Christ is used only in John’s Gospel and Revelation (John 1:1; Rev. 19:13). And the term “the Lamb” as a messianic title is found only in the same writings.

While we cannot say with absolute certainly that the apostle John wrote Revelation, we have the testimony of the early church fathers and a lack of sufficient evidence against their claims. The apostle John most likely is the author.

What kind of book is this?

First, Revelation, like most New Testament books, is an epistle, a letter intended for a specific audience. Rev. 1:11 makes this clear: “What you see, write it in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia …” The closing of the book also resembles an epistle: “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.”

The book differs from other New Testament writings, however, in two key ways:

  • Unlike other biblical epistles, Revelation is a prophecy (1:3; 22:7, 10, 18, 19), which forthtells the word of the Lord for the present and foretells future events.
  • Revelation is apocalyptic literature, a style popular in John’s day but unknown to many modern-day readers. Apocalyptic literature is a special kind of writing that arose among Jews and Christians to “reveal certain mysteries about heaven and earth, humankind and God, angels and demons, the life of the world today, and the world to come,” according to Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Dictionary. Many noncanonical books were written in this style between 200 B.C. and 100 A.D., among them: The Book of Enoch, The Psalms of Solomon, and Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.

Key features of apocalyptic writing include: the appearance of angels as guides and interpreters; authorship during times of intense persecution of believers; the use of vivid images and symbols; and the use of numbers to convey concepts.

When was it written?

Most modern scholars believe Revelation was written about 95-96 A.D., late in the reign of the Roman emperor Domitian (81-96 A.D.), who carried out a consistently brutal campaign against Christians. Many evangelical scholars, however, favor an earlier date. Specifically, they believe Revelation was written during the reign of Nero (54-68 A.D.) prior to the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Nero severely persecuted Christians, and scholars who hold to a preterist view of Revelation believe much of what is written foretells the destruction of the temple and God’s judgment of both Romans and Jews who persecuted Christians.

Where was it written?

John tells us that he was on the Island of Patmos when he received the Revelation (1:9). Patmos is in the Mediterranean Sea and lies west of the coast of modern-day Turkey. John was exiled to Patmos for his faithful testimony of the risen Christ.

Why was it written?

According to the HCSB Study Bible, “This prophetic book originally intended to teach that faithfulness to Jesus ultimately triumphs over all the evils of this world and that Jesus will return to earth as King and Lamb-Bridegroom. God’s people who read and study Revelation today should view it with this original purpose in mind.”

How does it affect me?

Revelation teaches us many truths. First, it reminds us that God is sovereign over human events and angelic forces. He is moving human history toward its climax in the return of Christ and the establishment of new heavens and a new earth. Second, this apocalyptic book tells us how the early church faced intense persecution and was encouraged to persevere as believers looked for God to vindicate them and judge the wicked. Third, the prophetic nature of Revelation shows the timeless message of Christ’s redemption as it spoke to believers in John’s day and speaks yet to us today. Finally, Revelation gives us a glimpse, however hazy, of Christ’s certain, future, glorious, personal return to earth. We may proclaim confidently, as John did, “Come, Lord Jesus” (Rev. 22:20).

The Parable of the Ten Minas

Following is chapter 17 (the final chapter) of The Kingdom According to Jesus. You may order the entire study from a number of the nation’s leading booksellers.

Luke 19:11-27

11 As they were listening to this, He went on to tell a parable because He was near Jerusalem, and they thought the kingdom of God was going to appear right away.
12 Therefore He said: “A nobleman traveled to a far country to receive for himself authority to be king and then return.
13 He called 10 of his slaves, gave them 10 minas, and told them, ‘Engage in business until I come back.’
14 But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him, saying, ‘We don’t want this man to rule over us!’
15 At his return, having received the authority to be king, he summoned those slaves he had given the money to so he could find out how much they had made in business.
16 The first came forward and said, ‘Master, your mina has earned 10 more minas.’
17 ‘Well done, good slave!’ he told him. ‘Because you have been faithful in a very small matter, have authority over 10 towns.’
18 The second came and said, ‘Master, your mina has made five minas.’
19 So he said to him, ‘You will be over five towns.’
20 And another came and said, ‘Master, here is your mina. I have kept it hidden away in a cloth
21 because I was afraid of you, for you’re a tough man: you collect what you didn’t deposit and reap what you didn’t sow.’
22 He told him, ‘I will judge you by what you have said, you evil slave! [If] you knew I was a tough man, collecting what I didn’t deposit and reaping what I didn’t sow,
23 why didn’t you put my money in the bank? And when I returned, I would have collected it with interest!’
24 So he said to those standing there, ‘Take the mina away from him and give it to the one who has 10 minas.’
25 But they said to him, ‘Master, he has 10 minas.’
26 ‘I tell you, that to everyone who has, more will be given; and from the one who does not have, even what he does have will be taken away.
27 But bring here these enemies of mine, who did not want me to rule over them, and slaughter them in my presence.’”

A similar parable appears in Matt. 25:14-30. Yet these parables differ in several respects. The parable in Matthew is spoken after Jesus enters Jerusalem; the parable in Luke, while He is on His way there. The parable in Matthew is delivered on the Mount of Olives; the parable in Luke, in the home of Zacchaeus. Finally, the parable in Matthew is delivered to teach Jesus’ followers the necessity of improving the talents committed to them; the parable in Luke, primarily to correct the false notion that the kingdom of heaven would immediately appear.

The context

Jesus is passing through Jericho and has dined in the home of Zacchaeus, chief of the tax collectors, amidst grumblings from onlookers that “He’s gone to lodge with a sinful man” (v.7). Upon Zacchaeus’ declaration of repentance, Jesus announces that salvation has come to his home, consistent with His words to the chief priests and elders in Matt. 21:31 that “Tax collectors and prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God before you!” Now, with the crowds listening and thinking that “the kingdom of God (is) going to appear right away” (v.11), Jesus tells the parable of the 10 minas.

Central theme

The central theme of this parable is that the kingdom of heaven will come in its fullness at a later time. Jesus’ followers “thought the kingdom of God was going to appear right away” (v. 11). His parable corrects that shortsighted view. At the same time, the central theme feeds two other truths: first, the Jews would be judged for their rejection of the Messiah; and second, the King would hold His servants accountable for their stewardship.

The day is coming when all believers must “stand before the judgment seat of Christ” (Rom. 14:10 KJV). At that time, “each may be repaid for what he has done in the body, whether good or bad” (2 Cor. 5:10). The apostle Paul writes that this judgment is like a fire that refines good works and consumes dead works (see 1 Cor. 3:11-15). For faithful believers who wisely use all that God has entrusted to them while He is in “a far country,” they will receive rewards, referred to throughout the New Testament as “crowns” (see 1 Cor. 9:25; Phil. 4:1; 1 Thess. 2:19; 2 Tim. 4:8; James 1:12; 1 Peter 5:4; Rev. 2:10).

Central character

The central character in this parable is the nobleman, who leaves the country to receive authority to be king and then returns. This clearly represents Christ, who tells His disciples He must “go away” (John 16:7) but promises to return (John 14:3). Like the nobleman who is “hated” by his subjects, who send a delegation after him saying, “We don’t want this man to rule over us” (v. 14), Jesus is “despised and rejected by men” (Isa. 53:3). Further, “He came to His own, and His own people did not receive Him” (John 1:11). Jesus gives His listeners a clear message that the kingdom cannot come in its fullness until He completes the work of salvation and goes to His Father in heaven, returning one day “on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” (Matt. 24:30).

An interesting side note is that in Judea in Jesus’ day, the Roman emperor had to formally recognize the right of a prince or king to rule. To acquire this authority, the prince or king had to travel to Rome. Archelaus, a son of Herod the Great, went to Rome to obtain a confirmation of the title his father had left him. Previously, his father had done the same thing to secure the aid ofAntony. Agrippa the younger, grandson of Herod the Great, also went to Rome to obtain the favor of Tiberius and to be confirmed in his government. So Jesus’ listeners clearly understood the concept of traveling to a far country to receive authority to be king.

Details

The slaves are the followers of Christ, who expect to be made princes, judges and rulers at once if the kingdom comes in its fullness as Jesus enters Jerusalem. The apostles have dreamed of sitting next to Jesus in His kingdom, sharing His authority. But Jesus instead tells them they are slaves with much work to do. The number of slaves summoned – 10 – does not appear to have any special significance, much as the number of virgins in the parable of the 10 virgins does not reveal any profound truth other than that was the minimum number of people required to hold synagogue, have a wedding, etc.

The Hebrew maneh, or Greek mina, translated “pound” in some versions, is a measure of weight equal to about 1.25 pounds. When used in a monetary sense, it is about $34 in silver or $510 in gold by 1915 standards (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia). A marginal note in the New American Standard Bible says one mina is equal to about 100 days’ wages. In any case, the nobleman tells his slaves to “engage in business” or put the money to work until he returns. “The pounds here denote the talents which God has given to his servants on earth to improve, and for which they must give an account in the day of judgment” (Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament).

The “subjects” symbolize the nation of Israel, and particularly the Jewish religious leaders, who have rejected Jesus as Messiah. They are fully aware that Archelaus had gone to Rome to obtain from Augustus a confirmation of his title to reign over the portion of Judea left to him by his father, Herod the Great. The Jews, opposing him, sent an embassy of 50 to Rome to ask Augustus to deny the title, but they failed. While Jesus is in no way of the same character as Archelaus, He is letting the Jewish leaders know that they have even less chance of successfully petitioning the Heavenly Father against Him than they had petitioning Augustus against Archelaus. Verse 27 may be seen as a dual prophecy in which Jesus foretells the destruction of Jerusalem and the Diaspora in 70 A.D., as well as the final judgment of unbelievers before the great white throne (Rev. 20:11-15).

The rewards granted by the returning king should not necessarily be applied literally to the believer’s reward at the judgment seat of Christ. Faithful believers may or may not be given cities to rule over. The point is that our reward in heaven will be in proportion to our faithfulness in improving our talents on earth.

The response of the third slave, who was entrusted with one mina, calls for a closer look. He wraps his mina in a cloth, or napkin, trying to convince his master that he has taken great care of it. Many gifted people guard their abilities but never employ them in the work of the kingdom and thus will be in a similar situation at the final judgment. Next, notice how the slave thought of his master – as someone to be feared, tough and demanding. In fact, the word translated “tough” or “austere” is commonly applied to unripe fruit and means sour, unpleasant, or harsh. Further, his reference to his master as one who collects what he doesn’t deposit (v. 21) is used to describe a man who finds what has been lost by another and keeps it himself. “All this is designed to show the sinner’s view of God. He regards him as unjust, demanding more than man has power to render, and more, therefore, than God has a right to demand” (Barnes Notes on the New Testament).

The master tells the slave, “I will judge you by what you have said, you evil slave” (v. 22). Even though the master is neither unjust nor austere, the slave’s supposing that he is should have spurred him to be obedient to the master’s command. A sinner’s mischaracterization of God does not excuse him or her of accountability on the day of reckoning.

Finally, the master orders that the mina be taken away from the unfaithful slave and given to the one who earned 10 minas. Some are surprised at this and object, “Master, he has 10 minas” (v. 25). But the master’s response illustrates a kingdom truth: To every person who is faithful and improves what God gives him or her, God will give that person more. As for the evil slave, it is interesting to note that he is not slaughtered with the rebelling subjects (v. 27). Perhaps instead Jesus is telling us what Paul writes about in 1 Cor. 3:11-15, in which the believer who fails to build upon the foundation of Christ escapes the judgment, “yet it will be like an escape through fire.”

Spiritual application

One day all believers will “stand before the judgment seat of Christ” (Rom. 14:10 KJV) and give an account of our stewardship. That judgment will not determine where we spend eternity, but how. We will have to give an answer for how we employed our time, talents, spiritual gifts, relationships, material possessions – all that Christ has entrusted to us while He has gone into heaven, preparing His return as King of kings and Lord of lords.

How should we understand Revelation?

LISTEN: “How should we understand Revelation?” Podcast

READ: “How should we understand Revelation?”

The four major views of the end times – postmillennialism, amillennialism, historic premillennialism, and dispensational premillennialism – are based on biblical interpretation and may be found on a scale that ranges from a strict, literal interpretation of scripture to a figurative understanding of biblical passages concerning the Day of the Lord. So how do proponents of these views understand the Book of Revelation?

There are five major interpretations of the so-called Apocalypse of John, but one cannot say, for example, that all postmillennialists hold to a certain interpretation and all premillennialists to another. Nevertheless, in general terms, premillennialists tend to view Revelation through a literal lens, while post- and amillennialists see the text more figuratively.

The five major views of Revelation are: preterist, historicist, futurist, idealist, and eclectic:

  • Preterists see the events of Revelation, for the most part, to have been fulfilled in the first centuries of the church age, either at the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. or at both the fall of Jerusalem and later at the fall of Rome in the fifth century. The book was written, preterists say, to comfort Christians who suffered persecution at the hands of the Romans and the Jews. Many biblical scholars favor the preterist view.
  • Historicists view the events of Revelation as unfolding throughout the course of history. This view meshed with the thinking of the Protestant Reformers, who equated the papal system of their day with the Apostle John’s vision of the Antichrist. This view largely has fallen out of favor due to the difficulties of matching historical events to biblical prophecy, requiring constant revision.
  • Futurists argue that the events of Revelation are largely unfulfilled, especially chapters 4-22. Premillennialists tend to embrace a futurist interpretation of the Apocalypse. And while many scholars favor the preterist view, it may be said that the masses prefer the futurist interpretation.
  • Idealists see Revelation as setting forth timeless truths concerning the battle between good and evil – a battle that continues throughout the church age. Instead of predicting future events, Revelation inspires and encourages believers of all times as they endure persecution at the hands of God’s enemies.
  • Eclectics glean the strengths of the other four views while avoiding their pitfalls. Many leading evangelical scholars today have embraced the eclectic approach, arguing that it provides a balanced approach to scripture.

Let’s take a closer look at each of these interpretations.

The preterist view

Those who hold a preterist (past) perspective of Revelation relate the book to the Apostle John and his immediate audience. In other words, they emphasize that John addresses his writings to  real churches that face real challenges in the first century A.D. John uses symbolic language to tell his readers how God will intervene on their behalf to deliver them from persecution by the Jews and the Romans.

There are two main schools of thought in the preterist camp. The first prefers an earlier date for Revelation and sees the book as a prophecy of the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. The beast is Rome and Babylon is unbelieving Israel, which cooperates with Rome in persecuting the church. Armageddon is the siege of Jerusalem. This view, however, is at odds with a multitude of scholars who date John’s apocalyptic writing to the last decade of the first century during the reign of Domitian (81-96 A.D.) rather than the reign of Nero (54-68 A.D.).

The second school of thought holds that Revelation predicts the fall of the Roman Empire (Babylon the Great) in 476 A.D. and allows for late-first-century authorship. The Roman system comes under judgment for oppressing Christians, who worship God alone, not the emperor. John urges his readers to stay faithful to the Lord and assures them that He will deal harshly with their enemies.

Two historical challenges provided the impetus for Revelation, according to Ken Gentry Jr.:

In the first place, it was designed to steel the first century Church against the gathering storm of persecution, which was reaching an unnerving crescendo of theretofore unknown proportions and intensity. A new and major feature of that persecution was the entrance of imperial Rome onto the scene. The first historical persecution of the Church by imperial Rome was by Nero Caesar from A.D. 64 to A.D. 68. In the second place, it was to brace the Church for a major and fundamental re-orientation in the course of redemptive history, a re-orientation necessitating the destruction of Jerusalem (the center not only of Old Covenant Israel, but of Apostolic Christianity [cp. Ac. 1:8; 2:1ff; 15:2] and the Temple [cp. Mt. 24:1-34 with Rev. 11])” (Before Jerusalem Fell: Dating the Book of Revelation, pp. 15-16).

The preterist view may be traced to the rise of postmillennialism, which teaches that Jesus Christ will return after the Millennium, a period of peace and blessing brought about by the conversion of the nations as they respond positively to the gospel message. Daniel Whitby (1638-1726), a Unitarian minister in England, generally is credited with developing the postmillennial view.

The historicist view

The historicist approach argues that Revelation provides a prophetic overview of church history from the first century until the return of Christ. This view was especially popular during the Protestant Reformation and was embraced by Martin Luther, John Calvin and other prominent Christian leaders of their day. Reformers identified the Antichrist and Babylon with the pope and Catholicism. More recently, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Finney and Charles Spurgeon advocated a historicist approach to Revelation. Over the years, the so-called “newspaper approach” to apocalyptic literature has led historicist interpreters to identify the Antichrist with figures like Charlemagne, Napolean and Hitler.

Classical or historic dispensationalists generally interpret the letters of Revelation 2-3 using a modified historicist approach. In addition to the immediate and local applications of the letters, many expositors believe the messages to the seven churches picture the chronological development of church history. The letter to Ephesus, for example, seems to describe conditions in the church during apostolic times, while the progression of evil climaxing in Laodicea seems to foreshadow the final state of apostasy that signals the return of Christ.

While the historicist approach helps the interpreter make sense of Revelation, its weaknesses outweigh its singular strength. For example, the historicist approach sees fulfillment of Revelation’s prophecies mostly in light of the Western church. In addition, because characters like the beast of Revelation 13 are usually seen as fulfilled in people contemporary to the interpreter, the historicist approach is constantly being modified as new world leaders emerge and new political, economic, social and religious realities come to pass. One final weakness of this view is that it would have held little relevance to the first readers of Revelation. For these reasons, the historicist view has largely fallen out of favor with biblical scholars today.

The futurist view

The futurist approach to Revelation argues that Revelation 4-22 relates primarily to a future time before and after the return of Christ. Rev. 1:19 is seen as a key to the rest of the book: “Therefore write what you have seen [Rev. 1], what is [Rev. 2-3], and what will take place after this [Rev. 4-22].”

Many early church leaders held to some form of the futurist view, but it gave way to the allegorical method of interpreting scripture and the amillennialism of Augustine. But by the Protestant Reformation, and especially by the 19th century, the futurist view made a comeback, and today many evangelical leaders hold to some version of it. Two forms are prominent:

  • Dispensational futurism holds to a very literal interpretation of Revelation and argues that God’s plan of salvation unfolds in stages or dispensations. God elected Israel as His covenant people and has not abandoned them; in fact, there will be national revival in the last days as multitudes of Jews receive Jesus as Messiah. Meanwhile, the church holds a parenthetic place in the plan of God as Gentiles pour into God’s kingdom. At the end of the church age, Christians will be raptured, or removed from the earth, and a seven-year tribulation will follow, during which the Antichrist will rise to power and wage war against believing Jews. Christ will then return, defeat the Antichrist and his armies, and bind Satan for 1,000 years, during which time Jesus will sit on the throne of David and preside over a period of unprecedented – but not perfect – peace. Satan will be loosed for a short time after the Millennium, but Christ will defeat him, cast him into hell, resurrect all unbelievers and summon them before the great white throne. After they are given final judgment and cast into hell, Jesus will create new heavens and a new earth.
  • Historic futurism reads Revelation as prophetic-apocalyptic literature, where the images often represent other realities. Revelation does not unfold in a chronological sequence. This view does not see the church as a parenthesis in God’s work through Israel; rather, the church is the true Israel and the fulfillment of God’s plan. The church will enter the

tribulation before Christ returns to rescue His people and establish His millennial kingdom. Following the defeat of Satan and the final judgment, believers will enjoy eternal life in the new heavens and earth.

Those who challenge the futurist view say it removes Revelation from its original setting so that the book has little meaning for its initial audience. Futurists respond that the second coming of Christ has always been imminent and is therefore relevant at all times throughout the church age.

The idealist view

The idealist view sees Revelation as a symbolic description of the ongoing battle between God and the forces of evil. Instead of predicting future events, Revelation inspires and encourages believers of all times as they endure persecution at the hands of God’s enemies.

This view gained a foothold through the allegorical method of interpretation promoted by church fathers such as Origen and Clement. Along with Augustine’s amellennial view, the idealist view became the dominant interpretation of Revelation for a period stretching from several hundred years after the ascension of Christ until the Reformation. The view is popular today as well among scholars who see Revelation’s meaning neither in church history nor future events, but in the ongoing struggle between God’s people and God’s enemies.

The idealist view points to the symbolic language of Revelation, arguing that the seals, trumpets and bowls are judgments that fall on unbelievers of every age, and anti-Christian leaders of all times are depicted in the beast, false prophet, and Babylon. Meanwhile, the millennium describes the present church age and the prophecies underscore the biblical truth that ultimately God will conquer evil.

This approach to Revelation appreciates the prophetic teachings of John, embraces the theological importance of the book, and highlights the spiritual importance of its message for all Christians throughout the present age. However, it has been criticized for failing to pin any of Revelation’s symbols with historical events. “If there is no particular historical fulfillment of the prophecies of Revelation, in what sense are its ideals really relevant?” (Dictionary of Biblical Prophecy and End Times, J. Daniel Hays, J. Scott Duvall, C. Marvin Pate, p. 206).

The Eclectic View

This approach tries to combine the strengths of the other views while dodging their weaknesses. It agrees, for example, with preterists that Revelation must have meant something to its first readers; therefore, we should study the historical context carefully. It agrees with futurists that some portions of Revelation await fulfillment; therefore we may wait expectantly for the Lord to defeat evil at a future time. It agrees with idealists that Revelation has a relevant spiritual message for the church of every age; therefore we should seek to mine its depths for insights that have practical application today.

Many leading evangelical scholars today have embraced the eclectic approach, arguing that it provides a balanced approach to scripture and avoids the dangerous tendency to carry any view to extremes.

Much of the information for this article came from the Dictionary of Biblical Prophecy and End Times by J. Daniel Hays, J. Scott Duvall, C. Marvin.

The Parable of the Growing Seed

Following is chapter 16 of The Kingdom According to Jesus. You may order the entire study from a number of the nation’s leading booksellers.

Mark 4:26-29 (HCSB)

26 “The kingdom of God is like this,” He said. “A man scatters seed on the ground;
27 he sleeps and rises—night and day, and the seed sprouts and grows—he doesn’t know how.
28 The soil produces a crop by itself—first the blade, then the head, and then the ripe grain on the head.
29 But as soon as the crop is ready, he sends for the sickle, because harvest has come.”

The context

Mark is the only gospel writer who records this parable, which Jesus tells after explaining the parable of the sower to His disciples (Mark 4:13-20) and after admonishing them to share His teachings with others (Mark 4:21-25). Commentators like Herbert Lockyer believe this parable “can be regarded as supplementary to the parable of The Sower, being designed to complete the history of the growth of the good seed which fell on the good ground. It is one of the three parables which reveal the mysteries of the Kingdom of God in terms of a sower’s work” (All the Parables of the Bible).

Central theme

The central theme of this parable is that God is sovereign over His kingdom. Christ’s disciples are to labor faithfully in His fields, but it is God who gives the growth (see 1 Cor. 3:5-8).

Central character

The central character in this parable is the man who “scatters seed on the ground” (Mark 4:26). This represents all those whom God uses to establish His kingdom in the hearts of men. Christ has finished the work of redemption and has given to His followers the responsibility of carrying the gospel message to the entire world (Matt. 28:19-20; Mark 16:15). God the Father draws people to Christ and grants them everlasting life through the mysterious work of the Holy Spirit, bringing the spiritually dead to new life in Christ. As Matthew Henry writes, “… we know not how the Spirit by the word makes a change in the heart, any more than we can account for the blowing of the wind, which we hear the sound of, but cannot tell whence it comes, or whither it goes” (Matthew Henry Unabridged). On this side of heaven, believers will never fully understand how God works to populate His kingdom, yet we are called to faithfully spread the good news of the kingdom (Matt. 4:23, 9:35, 24:14; Mark 1:14).

Details

According to Herbert Lockyer in All the Parables of the Bible, “Our Lord was directing His disciples to the three stages of The Kingdom of God:”

1.   The blade, or the kingdom in mystery (the church age);

2.   The ear, or the kingdom in manifestation throughout the millennial kingdom;

3.   The full corn, or the kingdom in its majestic perfection after God creates new heavens and a new earth.

While other commentators apply this parable to the believer’s personal spiritual growth, Lockyer’s interpretation seems to fit Jesus’ other parables of the kingdom of heaven. The Jews in Jesus’ day are expecting the kingdom to come in a singular, dramatic event. Yet Jesus teaches through His parables that the kingdom of heaven is both a present reality and a future hope, growing to full maturity over a long period of time.

Let’s look more closely at other elements in this parable:

  • The seed. Most certainly this is “the living and enduring word of God” (1 Peter 1:23). As Jesus explains following the parable of the sower, “The seed is the word of God” (Luke 8:11) – the good news that the kingdom has come in the Person of Jesus the Messiah and that all may enter into the kingdom by faith in Him, the Word (Logos, John 1:1).
  • The ground. As in the parable of the sower, the ground symbolizes the human heart. The ground cannot sow and it cannot reap, but it may receive the seed. The starting place of the kingdom of heaven is the heart captivated by God. When Jesus says, “The soil produces a crop by itself” (v. 28), we are not required “to suppose that our Saviour meant to say that the earth had any productive power by itself, but only that it produced its fruits not by the power of man. God gives it its power…. So religion in the heart is not by the power of man” (Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament).
  • The mystery of the growth. The sower sleeps, rises and does not know how the seed bursts forth into life and fruitfulness. In the same way, we do not understand the mysterious work of God in the hearts of men and women. Nor can we fully fathom His work in bringing the kingdom to full maturity. “For My thoughts are not your thoughts, and your ways are not My ways…. For as heaven is higher than earth, so My ways are higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts” (Isa. 55:8-9).
  • The harvest. This may be looked upon as the consummation of all things (Matt. 13:39) – “the most glorious consummation when with the devil forever vanquished, and sin completely destroyed, and the emergence of a new heaven and a new earth, Jesus will surrender all things to the Father” (All the Parables of the Bible).

Spiritual application

Just as Christ’s kingdom will grow to full maturity, God’s design for His children is that “we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of God’s Son, [growing]into a mature man with a stature measured by Christ’s fullness” (Eph. 4:13).