On the Book of Revelation being revelation.
The last book of the Bible is not unnecessary. You can not put the book of Revelation all together from the other 65 books of the Bible. The other 65 books do inform the book of Revelation, BUT the book of Revelation ALSO informs the other 65 books. If it does not, then it does not stand on an equal level with those other 65 books.
Believing that the book of Revelation is necessary, and God's revelation in Scripture would be incomplete without the book of Revelation, we are then faced with some basic foundational questions as we approach this last book of the Bible.
What is the purpose of the book of Revelation in relation to the totality of the revelation we have in the other 65 books? What does the book of Revelation give us that was not found in the other 65 books, but was needed to complete God’s revelation in Scripture?
It is at this point the amillennialists insistence that they are interpreting the book of Revelation according to the "analogy of Scripture", with the implied assumption and allegation that premillinialists ignore the "analogy of Scripture" is exposed for the hollow argument it is. As another has put it:
“Use the clear texts interpret the difficult ones.” I don’t remember where I learned that but I do remember learning it and using it. It stuck with me for a long time. Then I took a class with Grant Osborne and he made a great point about this approach. He said, in effect, that what is a difficult text for you may not be a difficult text for someone else. Grant is an Arminian and so the texts that he finds clear can be troublesome for Calvinists. And visa versa. You have to include the “difficult” texts in the formulation of your theology. If you ignore them till the end and then make them fit, you’re in danger of misreading them. Wise words! Probably the very best thing I learned in his class...
I don’t want to oversimplify the complexities of handling the Book of Revelation but I don’t want to treat it as second class revelation either....
("The Saints and the Millennium"
By Tim Etherington | August 18, 2009)
To which I reply, "Neither do I."
~ The Billy Goat ~