Do I need a Jew to understand?

So I've pretty well nailed down what I need to have, read and prepare for a study on Revelation. Which by the way is much more entailed than I had previously thought. Just can't start at Rev 1.1. Need to do a bunch of pre-work.

However, what I do want to know is, how important is a "Jewish worldview" of the, temple, Messiah and other relevant OT topics for my study?

Or are the standard non-Jewish books sufficient?

If it's important what resources can you suggest?

mm.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

TCBlack

how important is a "Jewish worldview" of the, temple, Messiah and other relevant OT topics for my study?

IMHO some/all of this is absolutely vital if for no other reason than that the writer was Jewish, but he was told to address the letter to seven Gentile churches.

I didn't read the entire other thread, but just in case I do recommend Revelation: Four Views by Steve Greg; if for no other reason than to challenge preconceptions.

Rich DeRuiter

However, what I do want to know is, how important is a "Jewish worldview" of the, temple, Messiah and other relevant OT topics for my study?

Which Jewish worldview? There isn't a single Jewish worldview, not even at the time of Jesus (by which time the worldviews were unbiblical and ungodly--at least among the religious leaders, according to Jesus). I would focus more on the Biblical material about the temple, including both the tabernacle of Moses and that of Solomon.

But temple imagery is only a part of what is going on in Revelation. It would be just as helpful to be aware of apocalyptic literature in the Bible, Biblical symbolism, etc. An awareness of extra-Biblical apocalyptic may also prove helpful.

Or you could just get some good commentaries that point you toward further study as you go. In recommending that, every commentary will bring it's own preconceptions about what the book is about, it's purpose, etc. Be aware and try to get a broad range of perspectives (pre-, post-, and a- millenial, at least!).

On a personal note, I find that many "miss the forest for the trees" in Revelation. The message of Revelation is clear: we are in a battle; we win; don't lose hope; stay firm to the end; Jesus will return; we will spend eternity with Him with a new heaven and a new earth. Explaining all the details of all the visions is (I believe) proved impossible by the myriad of well-reasoned conclusions by sincere and well-trained scholars, that differ widely from each other. I have found this book to be daunting or full of rabbit-trails, unless one focuses on the message of the book, setting aside a need to explain all the baffling images one encounters. I say that recognizing that some would find my approach an impoverished one, but I have found no wealth of knowledge, or riches for living in the endless charts, explanations or esoteric conclusions some have drawn. Finally, any interpretation of Revelation that stirs up fear, rather than hope, misses the message of the book entirely (IMHO, of course).

Milkman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/575863#Comment_575863

@ TCBlack,

Thanks. I have the Four Views book. Will have to re-read.

Milkman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/575867#Comment_575867

@ Richard.

Yeah I'm not into the whole chart thing etc. Yes we do/have won because of Him.

Maybe I could re-phrase my initial question a bit.

I heard about a guy on Logos. His name is Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum. I don't anything about him, should do some checking, but I wonder if his "Jewish worldview" would be helpful. What do you think?

mm.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/575869#Comment_575869

He would have to be an understanding Jew, which is about as common as an understanding Christian. In other words, you would probably lose as much (or more) as you gain. More knowledge is better than less knowledge, but that doesn't necessarily translate to understanding. The simple fact is that no one can tell you anything of value besides what is in the Bible, and I include the books of the Maccabees as well, since they enlighten aspects of Daniel and Revelation. Josephus doesn't hurt, but he isn't entirely reliable.

I will suggest one Jew: Alfred Edersheim. If you have some of his stuff, it might be helpful. He has a book about the temple and its service.

Milkman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/575871#Comment_575871

@ David,

Thanks. Sounds like many verdicts are out there. Time to bear down and dig in. I do have Edersheim's works both in Logos and book form.

Thanks again.

I just want to say THANKS TO ALL OF YOU for your great and valuable opinions. They have helped me to determine my direction. So now it's time to do the fun stuff and dig into the Word. What can be more exciting than that? Maybe a round or two of good golf on a sunny Saturday morning with the boys, but other than that - studying the Word! Thanks again!!

mm.

Allen Browne

However, what I do want to know is, how important is a "Jewish worldview" of the, temple, Messiah and other relevant OT topics for my study?

In your preparatory reading, you will already be aware that Revelation doesn't fit into any particular genre neatly. Is it prophecy? Apocalypse? Letter? In his introduction to his 2011 commentary on Revelation (New Covenant Commentary Series page xii), Gordon Fee says:

What one must understand before reading John’s Revelation is that he has purposely set out to write something that has not been done before, something that he sets up his readers to understand at the very beginning. Thus in 1:1 he identifies what he is about to write as an apocalypse, translated “revelation” in the NIV, which in 1:3 he refers to as a prophecy. But in the next two verses he begins again with all the formal aspects of an ancient letter. So the reader is given these three different pieces of information at the outset. What is unique about John’s Apocalypse is the fine blending of each of these three kinds of literature—apocalypse, prophecy, letter—into a single whole piece.

So, how did such a form of literature come to exist? To understand it, you will need to understand the narrative of the OT: the intent of creation (Gen), how the people of God came to be (Ex), worship and God's presence among his people (Ex, Lev, Psa), the promise of the kingship and the disaster of Assyria & Babylon (former prophets), and the promise of restoration by the hand of God through a faithful remnant (latter prophets). As this story continued unresolved for centuries, the justice question--how it will ultimately be sorted out--gives rise to the apocalyptic literature (Daniel, Enoch, etc).

This OT narrative, prophetically shaped and apocalyptically understood, then feeds into the NT where Jesus is viewed as the fulfillment of Torah and the prophets--the whole story! The gospels present Jesus in this way, and I would want to argue that Jesus saw himself like this (e.g. Mt 5:17; Luke 24:26). Paul certainly views Jesus as the one who fulfills the entire OT hope and intent. He and other NT letter writers also contribute the genre of Letter to the biblical stream (i.e. the letters explain the OT narrative, prophetically shaped, apocalyptically understood, finding fulfillment in Jesus and now in the body of believers who are in Christ).

But the story doesn't seem to be resolved yet. Jesus is Lord, but Rome is causing all sorts of grief for Christians in the late first century? The promises are there, but the suffering of God's people isn't over. Apocalypse is the genre for facing this incongruence/struggle.

So, when John comes to record his revelation, he writes something that is ALL of these literary steams, feeding into each other, and finally feeding into a kind of literature that has never been written before: the confluence of genres of the Biblical story. It is prophecy--the promise that God will bring his narrative to resolution. It is apocalypse--the natural literature for wresting with the already and not-yet. It is gospel, for Jesus is the core of how everything is resolved. It is letter, for that's the way you communicate the message to the churches.

The crucial thing is to see that Jesus is the person in which the entire Biblical story reaches resolution. That's the message: it is a revelation of Jesus, and he is the central character. The book is about him, and how everything finally comes together in him. Look for Jesus and you have the heart of the book.

As Greg Beale (NIGTC, 1999, p.97 ) says:

... for John the Christ-event is the key to understanding the OT, and yet reflection on the OT context leads the way to further comprehension of this event and provides the redemptive-historical background against which the apocalyptic visions are better understood.

Hope that's useful.

Paul C

However, what I do want to know is, how important is a "Jewish worldview" of the, temple, Messiah and other relevant OT topics for my study?

Or are the standard non-Jewish books sufficient?

We have Abraham for our father’; for I say to you that from these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham.

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/576027#Comment_576027

Thank you Allen I found that helpful.

However, what I do want to know is, how important is a "Jewish worldview" of the, temple, Messiah and other relevant OT topics for my study?

In your preparatory reading, you will already be aware that Revelation doesn't fit into any particular genre neatly. Is it prophecy? Apocalypse? Letter? In his introduction to his 2011 commentary on Revelation (New Covenant Commentary Series page xii), Gordon Fee says:

What one must understand before reading John’s Revelation is that he has purposely set out to write something that has not been done before, something that he sets up his readers to understand at the very beginning. Thus in 1:1 he identifies what he is about to write as an apocalypse, translated “revelation” in the NIV, which in 1:3 he refers to as a prophecy. But in the next two verses he begins again with all the formal aspects of an ancient letter. So the reader is given these three different pieces of information at the outset. What is unique about John’s Apocalypse is the fine blending of each of these three kinds of literature—apocalypse, prophecy, letter—into a single whole piece.

So, how did such a form of literature come to exist? To understand it, you will need to understand the narrative of the OT: the intent of creation (Gen), how the people of God came to be (Ex), worship and God's presence among his people (Ex, Lev, Psa), the promise of the kingship and the disaster of Assyria & Babylon (former prophets), and the promise of restoration by the hand of God through a faithful remnant (latter prophets). As this story continued unresolved for centuries, the justice question--how it will ultimately be sorted out--gives rise to the apocalyptic literature (Daniel, Enoch, etc).

This OT narrative, prophetically shaped and apocalyptically understood, then feeds into the NT where Jesus is viewed as the fulfillment of Torah and the prophets--the whole story! The gospels present Jesus in this way, and I would want to argue that Jesus saw himself like this (e.g. Mt 5:17; Luke 24:26). Paul certainly views Jesus as the one who fulfills the entire OT hope and intent. He and other NT letter writers also contribute the genre of Letter to the biblical stream (i.e. the letters explain the OT narrative, prophetically shaped, apocalyptically understood, finding fulfillment in Jesus and now in the body of believers who are in Christ).

But the story doesn't seem to be resolved yet. Jesus is Lord, but Rome is causing all sorts of grief for Christians in the late first century? The promises are there, but the suffering of God's people isn't over. Apocalypse is the genre for facing this incongruence/struggle.

So, when John comes to record his revelation, he writes something that is ALL of these literary steams, feeding into each other, and finally feeding into a kind of literature that has never been written before: the confluence of genres of the Biblical story. It is prophecy--the promise that God will bring his narrative to resolution. It is apocalypse--the natural literature for wresting with the already and not-yet. It is gospel, for Jesus is the core of how everything is resolved. It is letter, for that's the way you communicate the message to the churches.

The crucial thing is to see that Jesus is the person in which the entire Biblical story reaches resolution. That's the message: it is a revelation of Jesus, and he is the central character. The book is about him, and how everything finally comes together in him. Look for Jesus and you have the heart of the book.

As Greg Beale (NIGTC, 1999, p.97 ) says:

... for John the Christ-event is the key to understanding the OT, and yet reflection on the OT context leads the way to further comprehension of this event and provides the redemptive-historical background against which the apocalyptic visions are better understood.

Hope that's useful.