Not a theological discussion JUST a simple question:
Do I/we need to have a solid understanding of the Book of Daniel in order to help better understand or interpret the Book of Revelation?
Just some thoughts please
mm.
Eze there. But you'd need to confirm with John (decide which one, and after you die).
If its "Dan", isn't it "Jack"?
The way you wrote your question I would say yes. "to better understand". To understand Revelation on its own, not necessarily. John draws from many OT referrals, so to better understand yes. IMO, in a study of eschatology, from a purely Biblical studies standpoint, I would start with Revelation, then allow other Biblical sources to inform on each other.
FWIW, I am currently preaching through Revelation after about a year of preparing for it.
Hey?! No tomfoolery [:@]
Thanks.
Would I be missing out if I didn't have a good handle on Daniel or isn't it a big deal if I don't had a good working knowledge of Daniel?
Just trying to figure out the best course of action...
The way you wrote your question I would say yes. "to better understand". To understand Revelation on its own, not necessarily. John draws from many OT referrals, so to better understand yes. IMO, in a study of eschatology, from a purely Biblical studies standpoint, I would start with Revelation, then allow other Biblical sources to inform on each other. FWIW, I am currently preaching through Revelation after about a year of preparing for it.
G. K. Beale's commentary on Revelation in the NIGNT series would be invaluable for you, since he is a leading expert on the New Testament's use of the Old Testament. He would be able to point out Old Testament allusions as they came up in you study, and allow you to dig deeper into areas of interest to you. His commentary is 1245 pages long, so it is very in depth.
Thanks. Would I be missing out if I didn't have a good handle on Daniel or isn't it a big deal if I don't had a good working knowledge of Daniel? Just trying to figure out the best course of action...
I think if you were to use a more technical or scholarly commentary, (not pastoral/devotional) then you would be fine. They will bring up these references, and point you in the right direction to dig more.
If your aim is to understand Revelation, then start there and let the digging take you where it does. If your study is simply eschatology, then find a Biblical Theology that suits you, it will cover all the Biblical references on the subject.
I have found that no matter what subject or book of the Bible I study, I find interesting rabbit trails. I believe that is because the Word is living and active.
@ Bobby & Everett:
Thanks. I think I'll start with Revelation and take a "trail" or two. I have Beale and Koester so I'll use them. Just need to read and re-read Revelation and then go from there.
Thanks again
I suggest you read the introductions for both of them and then read through Revelation, and then come back through it with the commentaries. They will give you a good foundation to build from and an idea of what to look for.
Good suggestion. I think I will read through the intros to Beale and Koester and then go from there. By the way your web page is down. rev ev dot org
Yeah, I've taken a break from blogging for a bit now. Not that I had much to say anyway...
I would say absolutely yes. There are many allusions to the book of Daniel in Revelation and what Jesus taught in Matthew 24-25 go hand in hand with the events in Revelation and Daniel. I would encourage you to purchase Charts on the Book of Revelation: Literary, Historical, and Theological Perspectives by Mark Wilson and look at the list of verses in Chart 9 9. Allusions and Verbal Parallels in the Old Testament and Extrabiblical Literature
Mark Wilson, Charts on the Book of Revelation: Literary, Historical, and Theological Perspectives, Kregel Charts of the Bible and Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Academic & Professional, 2007), 25.
Whoa there. Tom was the doubter, not the fooler.
Just to confuse you, there's 518 OT citations/allusions in Rev to the OT. Give or take. 88 are from Dan. 278 surround Jer, Eze, Zec, Psa, and for good measure Exo.
So, chances are, maybe you may want to consider ... the OT.
Whoa there. Tom was the doubter, not the fooler. Just to confuse you, there's 518 OT citations/allusions in Rev to the OT. Give or take. 88 are from Dan. 278 surround Jer, Eze, Zec, Psa, and for good measure Exo. So, chances are, maybe you may want to consider ... the OT.
So maybe I should go through Beale's John’s Use of the Old Testament in Revelation then????
OOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRRR
I think it would be helpful to list the goals you have in mind and then priotize and engage those. Do you want to be a master of all things eschatology? Then start reading all of it, but have a plan to do so. Are you just studying Revelation? Then start with an intro and dig in. Do you want a full understanding of the OT in Revelation, then use the suggestions above.
It is not critical to begin your study (as it sounds ) by having a grasp on Daniel. I do think it is possible to so overload your mental palate that you will not be able to focus on just one key thought/phrase/theme.
Daniel will help, here are some extracts from NAC on Revelation
The best conclusion for understanding the nature of the Revelation of John is to see it as a prophetic circular letter which not infrequently makes use of apocalyptic imagery and device. Clearly, the author understood his role as that of prophet. On the other hand, he lived in a day of conflict with imperial authorities and had learned the value of the apocalyptic as a mode of communication to the faithful. Having much in common with the biblical books of Daniel and Ezekiel and citing or alluding to massive amounts of Old Testament prophecy, the author of Revelation has provided a genuinely unique treatise.
Paige Patterson, Revelation, ed. E. Ray Clendenen, vol. 39, The New American Commentary (Nashville, TN: B&H, 2012), 25.
Commonly noted is the similarity between Revelation and the prophecies of Daniel, Ezekiel, and Zechariah. Almost unnoticed is the shared hermeneutical circumstance of the Revelation with Shir Hashirim or the Song of Solomon and perhaps with the book of Job. Both Revelation and the Song share a sharp contrast between literal and allegorical interpretive frameworks, beginning with a commentator’s assumptions that determine in advance many of the conclusions to which he will be drawn. Literalists typically see the Song as a beautiful poem depicting the sanctified affections of Solomon for the Shulamith.33
Paige Patterson, Revelation, ed. E. Ray Clendenen, vol. 39, The New American Commentary (Nashville, TN: B&H, 2012), 26–27.
Interestingly, while Daniel and Ezekiel are generally considered to be the major books on which John is dependent, Isaiah forms the backdrop for much of the book.
Paige Patterson, Revelation, ed. E. Ray Clendenen, vol. 39, The New American Commentary (Nashville, TN: B&H, 2012), 156.
Daniel is really one of many books you need to a little understanding to better grasp Revelation.
My tip is if you have a copy of Ben Witherington's mobile ed course of NT221 The Wisdom of John: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on Johannine Literature work thru his sections of the Book of revelation especially the readings he links to.
If you were watching the community pricing when it came out you would have got it for $41USD
I started to post this the other day, but I was a passenger in a car, and my internet cut out. I forgot, and now its several days later. Any way - for what its worth - any time I've taken a class that touched revelation, they started with Daniel, and touched on the other OT prophetic books too - but mostly daniel. In fact I took a class on Daniel and Revelation as an undergraduate. We went chapter by chapter through Daniel first, then hit revelation, and jumped around to OT passages as they became relevant to the Revelation passage we were covering. It was interesting. Taught from a progressive dispensationalist pre-millenial perspective. Not sure I agreed 100% with everything the professor had to say, but I will say he stuck pretty close to scripture - something I appreciated then and now.
Can you understand one without the other? With the Holy Spirit, anything is possible. But I think you're better off slowly working your way through one, then the other - and remember you're dealing with passages of scripture that people like Calvin were reticent to comment on. I kind of wish more of the great preachers of the past had spent some time and energy on the eschaton.
Not a theological discussion JUST a simple question: Do I/we need to have a solid understanding of the Book of Daniel in order to help better understand or interpret the Book of Revelation? Just some thoughts please mm.
I would argue yes you do. The 70th week is really important. As another poster said there are loads of references to the OT (my teacher quoted 800+) so having a good understanding - or a very good book/teacher will help you understand. For instance reading and understanding Ruth will also explain a lot (about the scroll and Jesus's relationship to us as he participates in his role as our kinsman redeemer..) and the last few chapters of Ezekiel fit snugly into the understanding as does ( I think) Joel etc. For me Revelation is the most integrated book in the bible and links most of the bible up. I'm not an expert btw, just a child Christian but there is a lot in it .. well worth studying.
Still reading replies - Thanks and keep them coming.
Lots of very helpful suggestions.
Still reading replies - Thanks and keep them coming. Lots of very helpful suggestions.
I'll add my thoughts. As I do, please note that I write from a historic Reformed perspective that doesn't often emphasize eschatology (the joke is that eschatology is the last things we Calvinists ever talk about [;)]).
The reason Daniel is helpful is because it's also apocalyptic literature (at least beginning with chapter 7). It's important to understand what apocalyptic literature is, and how it functions to convey a message, if you're going to make sense out of much of Revelation. You may want to brush up on, or learn about apocalyptic literature before diving in, since it's a unique form of Scripture that needs to be understood within its own way of speaking.
That said, I do believe that it's a fools errand to try to identify all the images, symbols, etc., and attempt to draw thick and straight lines to specific historical events. First, because I don't believe that is what apocalyptic literature is for. Second, because doing so is so utterly subjective (we have to figure it out on our own, since the symbols are so obscure), and therefore such conclusions are necessarily subject to our own cultural and theological myopia. Throughout history so many of these symbols have been clearly identified with things/nations/people that have since passed away without the rest of the prophecy being fulfilled. We should learn from these mistakes.
Instead, I read Revelation for the message it gives, which is quite clear, even when the symbology isn't. Here's the message of Revelation as I read it: Things may get rough, and at times it may look like the bad guys are winning, but stay strong, stay faithful, don't give up and in the end, we win and receive our glorious and eternal reward. If we don't read Revelation as a book that gives us hope, we're reading it wrong. If all we get are charts, timelines, explanation of symbols, references to modern (or ancient) history, we are missing the point. The message of the book is clear. Don't miss it!
The students of Scripture in Jesus' day missed the Messiah because they did not expect the Messiah Who actually came - He didn't fit their cultural and theological framework. Yet, after Jesus was revealed to be the Messiah, all these Scriptures fell into place to show us that Jesus is the Messiah that the prophets foretold. I believe that we should consider that we may not actually understand all of what Revelation is revealing until we look back upon it from the other side of its fulfillment. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't learn from this book. I just think we should only assert our understanding of how these prophecies will be fulfilled with the greatest humility. Also, we should read it for the message of hope and encouragement to be faithful no matter what, that this book clearly gives.
...my .02 is this...having a good basic understanding of both books is essential.
Daniel is my favorite book of the OT but dense and rich.
Why not add Ezekiel and/or Jeremiah to the mix too - to me they seem related or adjoining?
Isn't it great that all things will be clearer to us one day.
(I personally am wrestling with trying to squeeze in "supposed Bible difficulties" to help answer questions in the future some may/might have.Ken Ham's books are on order.)
...as for Daniel...I find his perseverance/faith/focus in a troubled time in an unGodly location (sound pertinent?) well worth the study and time.Would that an angel would come to any of us similarly and help explain things and help us too, huh?
Daniel does forthtell all the coming Kingdoms and The Rock that is Jesus - Glory to God!
G K Beale also has a shorter commentary on Revelation which might be more accessible and cheaper!
https://www.logos.com/product/47515/revelation-a-shorter-commentary
P A
