“LIGHT IN THE SHADOW OF THE APOCALYPSE”
A STUDY OFTHE BOOKS OF
DANIEL AND REVELATION
C O N T E N T S
LESSON # SUBJECT PAGE
PREFACE…………….………….………………..………2
1. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………5
2. IT’S ALL ABOUT FAITH-FULNESS………….……….13
3. COMPARING and CONTRASTING……………….…...21
- NUMBER OF WAYS TO NUMBER OUR DAYS...... 31
- ‘BITING’ THE ESCHATOLOGICAL ‘BULLET’………39
- IN ALL THE DRAMA, WHERE’S THE CHURCH…...... 48
- GATES OF WRATH: BEASTS, BATTLES…...... 60
- THE SOVEREIGN LORD – ULTIMATE FOCUS…...... 67
APPENDIX #I……………………………………………...76
APPENDIX #II……………………………………………..78
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS………………………………81
REFERENCES …………………………………………...... 99
PREFACE TO
LIGHT IN THE SHADOW OF THE APOCALYPSE
“GETTING AN OBJECTIVE PERSPECTIVE”
Theology is more than a mere intellectual discipline; in fact, without prejudice, it is perhaps the widest and most intriguing of all the disciplines. Of course, someone from another field may lay claim to that same credit for theirs; and that is understandable. However, since theology is a study that goes beyond the known sciences, and has to ‘pull’ from the unfamiliar realm of the ‘unknown’ in order to state and, at times, substantiate its case, makes it a most unique endeavor. There are instances, and areas of study that no human being, living or dead, was present to produce empirical evidence as to their validity. As such, maybe the most profound aspect of all theology is the area of God’s self-disclosure, which we call revelation; for had He not taken the initiative to reveal certain things about Himself, we would not have had the faintest clue of his Being
“Eschatology – the Doctrine of Last Things – itself is the most recent division to theology,” so says Millard J. Erickson, in his 1977 book Contemporary Options in Eschatology (p12), quotingJames Orr; but that does not exempt it from the same rigid scrutiny as those that preceded it. An eschatologist, like all other theologians, must be eternally vigilant in seeking to be objective in his approach to the subject.[1]
A persistent error has been observed, however. Many (Students and scholars alike) seem unaware, that being ‘hooked’ unto a particular doctrine, or school of thought, or even more specifically, having gravitated to a denominational position on an issue, the assumption is made that every other aspect of that denomination or school of thought is equally ‘correct’. Quite frankly, it has been shown that that is not always the case. As a result, many Christians’ approach to their personal faith often borders the subjective.
Maintaining an objective approach in the study of eschatology is never an easily challenge. Agreeing with a position taken by a well-known or highly respected theologian, does not necessarily mean that one is obligated to agree with every other position he holds. To put it contrastingly, one can even find occasional virtue coming from those we deem out-right heretics. So, bracing oneself not to simply allow others to tag us along, but to prove all things and hold fast to that which is true, is the most objective, and biblical stance to adopt.
Take for example, many proponents teaching on Last Thingsoften segment their doctrine into truncated slots, and attach tabs to those slots by which they identify themselves and/or their teachings (Premillennialists, Amillennialists, Postmillennialists, Post-tribulationists, Mid-tribulationists, Pre-tribulationists, Dispensationalists, etc). In this study, every attempt is being made to avoid undue dogmatism, yet at the same time try not to function is an aimless vacuum, with no semblance of meaningful direction.
What happens in reality is that a person holding either of these afore-mentioned postures may not necessarily con-cur in every defining point with others like himself who hold to the same view. Using as an instance, a person might hold himself to be a Premillennialist (that, in un-technical terms, means he subscribes to the belief that the Second Coming of Christ will take place before the special Millennium of peace and prosperity kicks in); however, it is not to be assumed that he necessarily endorses the views of the Pretribulationist (who holds that the Rapture of the Church will occur before the Great Tribulation).
And those scenarios run randomly among the varying views, i.e. Posttribulationists and Postmillennialists occasionally agree on matters though they hail from different perspectives. Then you can have a Dispensationalist who flatly opposes the Midtribulationalist. Hence the call for objectivity in the pursuit of understanding God’s eschatological program for mankind and the world.
This study has the above situation in mind, as the compendium of Light in the Shadow of the Apocalypse, along with Contemporary Options in Eschatology, is fleshed in the class (or individual study) setting.
The Objectivesare:
- Students should have a practical, layman’s understanding of Eschatology.
- Be able to simply define the various Eschatologists’ views.
- Be able to have a clear grasp of the books of Daniel & Revelation.
- Be able to present a written Paper on an Eschatological issue on the Study as it relates to a current affair.
Course Credits:
30% Credits will be given for Class Attendance
10% Credits will be given for Class Participation.
10% Credits will be given for Class Presentation.
50% Credits will be given for Final Paper
* Those in the Bachelors’ program will do a Research Paper – 5-6 pages in total.
* Those in the Masters’ program will do a Research Paper – 10-12 pages in total.
* The Choice of Topics will be given out during the Class sessions.
* Presentations should be doubled-spaced, with a clear, readable font.
* Attention should be paid to Grammar and Language style.
* Also noteworthy credit would be given to the extent of research done.
“LIGHT IN THE SHADOW OF THE APOCALYPSE”
A STUDY OFTHE BOOKS OF
DANIEL AND REVELATION
[THIS IS A STUDY OF THE TWO MOST GRAPHIC ACCOUNTS IN SCRIPTURE OF THINGS TO COME. IT LOOKS AT THEIR DIFFERENCES AND SIMILARITIES, THEIR CONTENT (WHAT THEY ACTUALLY SAY), INTENT (WHAT THEY ACTUALLY MEAN) AND EXTENT (WHAT IS THEIR LIKELY RELEVANCE), ALONG WITH THEIR THEOLOGICAL VALUE AND PHILOSOPHICAL VIRTUE. [All Scripture quotations, unless otherwise indicated, are from the New International Version (NIV) of the Bible.]
I N T R O D U C T I O N
On the Daniel account, it would be of immense assistance if we take a peek into the existing culture of his time, which would help us appreciate the reason behind certain areas of emphases that today we pay comparatively little attention to; in that way we can deduce meaning from ancient information and practice, to see what application they would have to our times and cultures.
The name Daniel, for instance means “God is my Judge”, “Judgment of God”, “God is judging” or “God will judge” – sustaining all the variants. And, if we were to dissect it (Dan...i..El) into parts, we would notice that he himself very likely hailed from the tribe of Dan(which means “justice”). Remembering that the name was given to the first son of Rachel’s maid (Bilhah) whom she gave to Jacob when she became aware that she was unable to have children, saying that “…God has vindicated me (intervened on my behalf); he has listened to my plea and given me a son” (Genesis 30:6). The “i” is a suffix denoting a genitive relationship; and “El” = God. The fact that he carried a name that reminded him that he virtually reflects God’s judgment was in itself an awesome task. No wonder the Babylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar, was anxious to change the young prophet’s name to Belteshazzar, which meant Bel’s Prince (a name after his god), along with the other three Hebrew boys: Hananiah (to Shadrach), Mishael (to Meshach) and Azariah (to Abednego) (Dan. 1:6-7).
So while Daniel per se did not deal with the immediate judgment that had befallen the Jewish people, having been confined to Babylonian captivity because of their unrestrained idolatry and apostasy brought about during the reign of Athaliah, Ahaz, and particularly Manasseh, which, according to Dr. George W. Westlake, Jr. in his Textbook on Daniel and Revelation (Third Edition 1999, p. 17), “including worship of planets, human sacrifice, and devil worship. He (Manasseh, also) approved of astrology, divination, and occultism – all of these were practiced regularly.”[2] It is therefore not too early to learn from this that God’s judgment becomes synonymous with apostasy, which is the spirit that characterizes our time.
Notable and highly respected Bible commentator, born almost 3 ½ centuries ago in Broad Oak, Matthew Henry, in his well used One Volume Commentary on the Whole Bible, 1960 Edition, made an extensive exposition on the Book of Daniel in which he makes a pertinent comparison to Ezekiel. In it he says: “Ezekiel told us what was seen, and what was foreseen, by him in the former years of the captivity: Daniel tells us what was seen, and foreseen, in the latter years of the captivity. And it was a comfort to the captives that they had first one prophet and then another, to show them that God had not quite cast them off. ” Then his Commentary went on to explain that: “1.Concerning this prophet…Ezekiel, his senior, speaks of him as an oracle when he upbraids the king of Tyre with his conceit: Thou art wiser than Daniel, Ezek. xxviii. 3.Noah, Daniel, and Job are reckoned as three men that had the greatest interest in heaven, Ezek. xiv. 14.Some of the Jewish rabbinrank among theHagiographa, not among the prophecies. One reason is because he did not live such a mortified life as Jeremiah and other prophets (ch. vi), and mortifying himself as other prophets did, when he ate no pleasant bread (ch. x. 3.), and fainted and sick when he was under the power of the Spirit of prophecy,ch. viii. 27. Another reason they suggest is because he wrote his book in a heathen country, and there had his visions, and not in the land of Israel; but for the same reason, Ezekiel would also be expunged out of the roll of prophets. But the true reason is that he speaks so plainly of the time of the Messiah’s coming that the Jews did not care to hear of it. Josephus calls him one of the greatest of the prophets. He lived an active life in the courts and councils of some of the greatest monarchs, Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, Darius. The Spirit, as the wind, blows where it lists. And, if those that have much to do in the world plead that as an excuse for the slightness of their converse with God, Daniel will condemn them.”[3]
Revelation, on the other hand, is the last canonical book of the NT, and the name also carries several variants. Typically called The Revelation of John, it should, however, be more appropriately called, as the book infers, The Revelation of Jesus Christ. For all good intent and purposes, many renowned theologians have dubbed it The Apocalypse, due of course, to the sheer nature of its content. Not that there is anything blasphemous about it being called the Revelation of John; after all, it was to him the messages, visions, symbols, signs and their interpretations were given. To him it was told to write what he had “seen (historical information), what is now (current to his time) and what will take place later (future events)” (Revelation 1:19). It was he who was exiled “on the island of Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus” (1:9), and saw and heard privileged things that many would wish to have been a part of. The very term Revelation means “the act of revealing or disclosing, or making something obvious and clearly understood through active or passive communication with the divine.”[4]
One would find it surprising that Matthew Henry had comparatively little to say in his introduction of the Revelation of John. He simply says that: “It ought to be no prejudice to the credit and authority of this book that it has been rejected by men of corrupt minds. The church of God has generally received it, and found good counsel and great comfort in it. Christ himself prophesied of the destruction of Jerusalem; and, about the time in which that was accomplished, he entrusted the apostle John with this book of revelation for the support of the faith of his people and the direction of their hope.”[5]
Concerning the Revelation though, Dr. Kenneth S. Wuest, in his Expanded Translation of the Greek New Testament notes: “There are some important matters with reference to the translation work (of the Book of Revelation) with which the reader should be acquainted(and would very well serve for us to not just get a feel, but also get into the mental and spiritual state of the author).
John’s statement, ‘I was in the Spirit’ (1:10, A.V.), needs the clarification which the Greek text and an expanded translation affords. The Greek word translated ‘was’ is not the verb of being, butginomai, which means ‘to become’. The verb is in the aorist tense; as to its classification, ingressive aorist, signifying entrance into a different state or condition. The word ‘in’ is the translation of en, a preposition followed by a locative case, here the locative of sphere. John writes literally, ‘I became in the sphere of the Spirit.’ The expanded translation offers, ‘I entered into a different experience in the sphere of the Spirit [His absolute control].’ This is not the relative control of the Holy Spirit which He exercises over John in his usual day-by-day experience…here the Spirit needed John’s perfect attention in order that he might receive the revelations contained in this book. Thus the degree of control is increased from a relative to an absolute one, one in which the control exercised by the Spirit superseded John’s free will for the time being.”[6]
The Purpose of Revelation
By virtue of the nature of the Book of Revelation that fills one with fascination and the lifting of one’s expectations, among other things, it’s important for one to become cognizant of the driving force that lay between its pages. Certainly God has far more important things to do than to be merely engaged in stimulating our imagination and tickling our fantasy with images and creatures and signs and symbols, if those objects mean nothing in themselves. Walvoord attempts to simplify that for us:
“The purpose of the Book of Revelationis to revealevents which will take place immediately before, during, and following the second coming of Christ. In keeping with this purpose the book devotes most of its revelation to this subject in chapters 4 – 18. The Second Coming itself is given the most graphic portrayal anywhere in the Bible in chapter 19, followed by the millennial reign of Christ described in chapter 20. The eternal state is revealed in chapters 21 – 22. So the obvious purpose of the book is to complete the prophetic theme presented earlier in the prophecies of the Old Testament (e.g., Dan.) and the prophecies of Christ, especially in the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24-25). Along with the predictive character of the Book of Revelation is extensive revelation in almost every important area of theology. In addition, many verses suggest practical applications of prophetic truths to a Christian life. Specific knowledge and anticipation of God’s future program is an incentive to holy living and commitment to Christ.”[7]
Dr. William Hendriksen, in his documentary, Survey on the Bible, is settled on Revelation’s theme in his mind. He says:
“The theme of this book is: The Victory of Christ and of His Church over Satan and His Helpers.
The Apocalypse intends to show us that things are not what they seem. The beast that comes up out of the abyss seems to be victorious…”[8]
Later, he showed that that victory was only for a brief moment.
The Fusing of Visions
The character of both books suggests that they be studied together since they, in effect, complement each other. Where Daniel for instance, paints future events with a broad brush, showing ‘mountain peaks’ of the prophetic manifestation of things to come; Revelation fills in the ‘gaps’ with pertinent details. Case in point: Daniel (12:2) predicts the resurrection of all mankind (Righteous and Wicked alike) as one, big conglomerate event (“Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt.”), while Revelation gives details (20:4-6) that explain not only a “first resurrection” (of the Righteous) and a later resurrection (of the Unrighteous), but also infers that there may be interval resurrections during the Tribulation period.
Also Daniel, when seeking clarification for some of the things he was seeing, was told in what seemed like a blunt response to “Go your way…because the words are closed up and sealed until the time of the end” (12:8-9). Whereas, in Revelation, John is seeing the seals being opened and disclosure of dark things, hidden for eons, are being made available to him for the overall benefit of the Church of Jesus Christ, in the first instance. There is undoubtedly a whole world of special information contained in these two marvelous books. Information that excites the spirit, stimulates the intellect, awakens the emotions and sends us down to the train station of expectation and desire to see their fulfillment. But that’s where a word of caution is fitting.For many have plunged headlong into the abyss of religious zeal, over-dogmatizing, pre-maturely concluding that theirs is the ultimate and only interpretation to this reservoir of prophetic utterances God has allowed to be written for our admonition and learning. A prayerful, objective, honest and open approach is still by far the best way to go. Academic satisfaction will no doubt be realized, but the ardent Student will find that that is neither the final nor only aim as the books of Daniel and Revelation are being perused; ones faith and spirit would be lifted to new dimensions and a greater appreciation that in the end Jesus Christ is the Conquering Lion of the Tribe of Judah – and of all nations of people and language and cultures and races.