Again, there are many, many more things that we could mention. First, we need to remember that this epistle—this letter—was addressed to the seven churches of Asia. There is significant history, it would seem, which has transpired within those congregations. The “Late Date” of the mid-90’s would have allowed much more time and opportunity for the history of these congregations to have evolved, or to have taken place, as compared to the “Early Date.” Second, and I mentioned a little about this before, the persecution under Domitian was more universal than that of Nero. Again, all of this is substantiated and can be verified, both in church history, as well as in secular history.

So, the “bottom-line” is: I believe and I understand from my study, and most of the reliable sources that I have read believe, that the “Late Date” is actually the date. Therefore, the interpretation of many of the signs and symbols within the book of Revelation are not tied to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple; rather, they have to do with the Empire-wide persecution that was going on at that time.

We’ve mentioned a couple times certain difficulties in understanding the book of Revelation. It presents something of a challenge to us, and understandably so. I’m not here to minimize this. Believe me, I don’t stand before you suggesting that I’ve got a “lock” on all of this, but, let me just mention a couple of the problems that we have.

First of all, the writing in the book is different from any of the other books in the Bible. It is “apocalyptic” in its nature. It is “unveiling”—it is “pulling back the curtain.” It is also highly “symbolic.” Now, it’s not the only book in the Bible that contains symbolism, but there is probably more symbolism here than in any other book, Old Testament or New, perhaps rivaled only by the book of Daniel. Because this unique style of writing—this apocalyptic literature—is something we’re not used to, we have a problem with it. However, historically we know that from around 200 B.C. to around 200 A.D., this writing was fairly common. It was a style of writing that was understood—it was known—during that time. Therefore, for those early Christians, and for the Jews converted to Christianity, this style of writing would, perhaps, have been more easily understood and more easily recognized.

The very first verse in the book sets the tone of the book. We can pass over that rather quickly without really noticing it. But if you notice there in chapter 1, verse 1, “And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John,” that word “signified” sets the symbolic nature—the symbolic tone—of the book. It tells the reader that much of what you are going to be reading here is going to be “figurative” in its nature. [One explanation of the word “signified” that has been used is “sign-ified,” to show by signs, symbols, figurative language.]

We are not only far removed and unfamiliar with this type of writing, but we are also distant from the historical setting and the cultural context of the book. To properly understand the book, one must ask the questions: “What did the book mean to the Christians who read it for the very first time?” “How did they understand it?” Again, that’s what Brother W. B. West suggests—looking at Revelation Through First Century Glasses—trying to understand and comprehend the historical setting, the cultural contexts, and so on. We are going to try to do that.

There are several BASIC APPROACHES TO the book of Revelation, when it comes to INTERPRETING. I want to just mention these and make them a little familiar. Again, this is not all that significant, but it will help us in our overall study as we go through the book.

First, there is the “Preterist View.” The Preterist View is that approach which sees the entire events of the book being fulfilled in John’s own time. Therefore, the visions recorded apply primarily to the Jewish nation and to pagan Rome itself.

The next one is the “Futurist View.” This view is just the opposite of the Preterist View. It contends that the book is largely prophetic in its nature, and that most, if not all, of the events described in the book are yet to come, and these events will come to pass just prior to the second coming of Christ. Therefore, the book is especially relevant to the last generation—whatever that last generation will be.

Then there’s the “Historical View.” This view is also known as the “Continuous Historical View” or the “Chronological View.” It sees the book in sort of a panoramic view of history of the church, from the days of John until the end of the age.

There is also the “Idealist View.” This view is sometimes known as the “Spiritual View.” It sees the book as setting forth the ageless struggle between right and wrong. It does not attempt to assign meanings to the symbols or the figures in the book; but rather, it sees it as a representation of the age-old battle of good and evil. The intent here is to emphasize basic principle, rather than historical facts.

There is one other view, and that is the “Contextual View.” This view sees the book reflecting the context of its own time. The churches of Asia faced a great deal of persecution and opposition. The Roman Empire had become a cruel, tyrannical world government. Christians needed hope and encouragement at the same time as they were needing to remain faithful. The Book of Revelation, in this Contextual View when it comes to interpreting, was written to meet the needs of the early church. Therefore, with this view in mind, the message of Revelation would apply primarily to its own day and time, and by application to the church throughout the ages.