PATMOS AND SOUTHLAND: AUSTRALASIAN PENTECOSTAL READINGS OF REVELATION
Jon Newton
Abstract
This article offers a survey and critical analysis of writings about the book of Revelation from Pentecostal sources in Australia and New Zealand. The title reflects the sense of prophetic destiny for Australia, sometimes encapsulated in the phrase “great southland of the Holy Spirit.” It is usually assumed that Pentecostal eschatology and interpretations of Revelation are governed primarily by a form of premillennial dispensationalism. However, much of the written material on Revelation from Australasian Pentecostals does not adhere to this line. The viewpoints of the authors I am analyzing are classified as follows: conventional futurist approaches similar to a dispensationalist reading; unconventional futurist approaches; historicist approaches; preterist approaches and eclectic approaches. I will look at both external and Pentecostal influences in the positions taken by these authors and conclude with some critical comments on their approach and suggestions for future Pentecostal reading of Revelation.
Introduction
The phrase “great southland of the Holy Spirit”, which also became a song by Geoff Bullock popular with many Australian Pentecostals in the 1990s, reflected the sense of prophetic destiny they felt. It was derived from “terra australis del espiritu santo,” a title bestowed on the famous (and largely mythical) unknown southland by the Portuguese explorer De Quiros in 1606 and preserved in the island Espirito Santo in Vanuatu.[1] However, it has rarely influenced Pentecostal readings of Revelation, as will be made clear in this survey and critical analysis of writings about the book of Revelation from Pentecostal sources in Australia and New Zealand.
It is usually assumed that Pentecostal eschatologies and interpretations of Revelation are governed primary by premillennial dispensationalism, or at least a Pentecostal version of this view. However, much of the written material on Revelation from Australasian Pentecostals does not adhere to this line, as we will discover. There are few actual commentaries on Revelation written by Australasian Pentecostals[2] so most of the material used in this paper comes from books on eschatology or very general treatments of Revelation like my own.
The viewpoints of the authors I am analyzing may be classified as follows:
1. Conventional futurist approaches similar to a dispensationalist reading (Majdali, Keys)
The most common Pentecostal interpretations of Revelation worldwide follow a futurist reading, one that assumes that most of Revelation predicts events surrounding the second coming of Jesus and subsequently (hence future to us). Thus most Pentecostal eschatologies are premillennialist: they expect that the second coming will inaugurate a thousand year rule of Christ (Rev.20:1-7), often expected to take the form of a visible kingdom with Jerusalem as its capital, as asserted by dispensationalism.[3] This view of Scripture contains, among other features, the idea that the prophetic passages in the Bible should be interpreted as literally as possible and that a strong differentiation must be maintained between Israel (or the Jews) and the church. Israel is central to their eschatology, which includes the expectation of a rebuilt Jewish temple with reinstituted animal sacrifices. Dispensationalists believe that the second coming is actually in two stages, beginning with a “rapture” of the true church (1 Thess.4:16-17), followed by a seven year period of Tribulation for the world arising from the rise of the final Antichrist,[4] and then by Christ’s public return to begin the millennium. The first Pentecostal writers in this survey hold to something like these views.
Dr Kameel Majdali is the former principal of Harvest Bible College, the largest Pentecostal college in Victoria. While he has not produced a systematic study of Revelation, his approach to interpreting Revelation is clear from a study of his eschatological writing, in particular his book Alpha and Omega: The Beginning of the End.[5] The chapter “Take Another Look at Revelation” is a balanced study of key themes in Revelation and independent of dispensationalism in places, as in the assertion that “Revelation is about the Church” and “the principles and warning espoused [in Rev.2-3] apply to the church throughout the ages.”[6] Majdali’s survey of the major interpretive approaches to Revelation[7] is reasonably fair and balanced.
However, elsewhere in the book, it is clear that Majdali takes a futurist line on biblical prophecy and Revelation; for example, he claims that “at least one-quarter to one-third of Scripture is devoted to the future”[8] and speculates that developments in modern technology and current events make predictions in Revelation (and other biblical prophecy) plausible.[9] He strongly advocates a “literal” interpretation of biblical prophecy[10] and his discussion of rapture theories (in which he clearly supports a “pretribulation” view) largely assumes a futurist reading of Revelation.[11] He assumes or advocates a premillennial position[12] and takes a broadly dispensationalist approach to the prophetic questions about Israel and the Gentiles[13] and interpretation of Daniel.[14] He supports many “signature” dispensationalist ideas, such as predicting a revival of animal sacrifices in a future millennium.[15]
At times, however, Majdali’s pretribulationist position does not follow the dispensationalist line, apparently because of his Pentecostalism. For example, his expectation of the future is not all negative, as when he states, commenting on Isaiah 60:1-2, “at this very time when the world system is becoming darker and darker, the Lord’s light will become brighter and brighter on His righteous ones.”[16] He also cautions the reader against extreme practices found in “pop eschatology” books, such as looking for fulfillments everywhere.[17]
A similar set of views can be found in the writing of Dr Tony Keys, the former principal of Jubilee International Bible College in Brisbane. In his study guide to Revelation, “I Was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day” Rev.1:10,[18] he begins by labeling his approach as “Premillennialism and Pretribulationism.”[19] This label implies a futurist reading and Keys immediately reads the phrase “must shortly come to pass” (Rev.1:1) in a way that says, in effect, shortly to us, the modern readers, without any recognition of the original readers’ context.[20] Much of the exegetical commentary in Keys’ study guide, especially on Revelation 1-5, is anchored in historical context and gives attention to the frequent references in Revelation to the Old Testament, as in Keys’ discussion of Rev.12:1-6.[21]
In other places, however, his reading is strongly dictated by a dispensational futurist line, as in his argument for a literal interpretation of the burning of one-third of the earth’s vegetation in Rev.8:7. Here the idea of an ancient fulfillment is rejected because literal fire falls from heaven in other places (such as the judgement on Sodom) and “if one is to apply the historical view to Rev.8:7, one must consider the same with these other scriptures; and if we do that we can do away with all miracles recorded in scriptures.”[22] Other tell-tale signs of dispensationalist influence are belief in a rebuilt future temple[23] and a pretribulation rapture of the church (in tension with his recognition of the clear existence of “saints” on earth in the tribulation[24] who “have found Christ as Saviour”).[25]
As is often the case, however, his historical research frequently undermines or qualifies his futurism, as in his example of ancient demonised statues in the discussion of Rev.13:15.[26] Moreover he avoids or qualifies some of the more speculative futurist attempts to identify characters in Revelation with modern realities.[27]
A similar interpretation of Revelation is found in a shorter study of Revelation published in 1992 by the late David Cartledge, a prominent Pentecostal minister and President of Southern Cross College of the Assemblies of God (now Alphacrucis College) for some years.[28] In this case, a somewhat conventional pretribulation premillennial futurist approach is combined with a Pentecostal recognition of current worldwide church expansion, conflicting with the pessimistic view of the church’s future found in most dispensationalism. There is also some attempt at short-term prediction out of Revelation and Daniel, backed by a claim in the Foreword to have predicted other world-shaking events (such as the breaking up of the Soviet Union) in a previous series of studies in the 1980s.
These authors are strongly influenced by dispensationalism, but there is a certain tension between that and their Pentecostal position.
2. Unconventional futurist approaches (Smith, Beacham, Conner)
A different kind of futurist readings of Revelation, more independent of dispensationalism and more creative in many ways, is represented by the second group of authors identified in this article.
Barry Smith was a New Zealand evangelist who preached in both New Zealand and Australia in the 1980s and 1990s, including the pulpits of some of the larger Pentecostal churches, and wrote a series of books on “end times” beginning with Warning in 1980, then Second Warning (1985), Final Notice (1989), Postscript (1992), Better Than Nostradamus (1996), The Devil's Jigsaw (1998) I Spy with My Little Eye (1999) and Unlocking the Ultimate Secret (2002). These books, and his preaching, were characterized by a combination of reports on current affairs from newspapers and other media with seemingly “matching” verses in the Bible related to the second coming, the tribulation and the rise of the antichrist and, in consequence, an attempt to identify, at least tentatively, the antichrist and his base. His “understudy” Jeff Beacham continued this approach in his Apocalypse How?, published in 1990-1993.
Smith and Beacham clearly adopt a futurist line on Revelation and other related Scriptures. As Smith claimed, “One third of the Book is devoted to prophecy, or telling of future events.”[29] He puts most events in Revelation into the (near) future (to us); for example, identifying Russia with Gog from Ezekiel and Revelation 20[30] and seeing the 200 million strong cavalry in Rev.9:14-19 as the modern Chinese army that invades Israel when the Euphrates is dried up (Rev.16:12).[31]
Smith’s identification of key twentieth century events with prophetic significance is clear from the start of his first book:[32]
Amongst many signs that we see regularly reported by our newscasters are four that are outstanding:
1. The Sign of the Rise of the E.E.C. in Europe.
2. The Sign of Church Union under the W.C.C. banner.
3. The Sign of the Nation of Israel.
4. The Sign of Holy Spirit Power in the Churches today.
He then proceeded to predict the future of the E.E.C., as it then was,[33] using Revelation and other biblical passages, mainly from Daniel.[34] Quoting a 1957 speech of the then N.A.T.O. secretary-general,[35] he predicted that the final new world leader will arise from the E.E.C. (based partly on Revelation)[36] and added that this man “is indeed around today”, “a mature man with ambitions for world domination,”[37] possibly Henry Kissinger.[38] His rise would be precipitated by a world financial crisis caused by such anti-heroes of conspiracy theories as the Illuminati, Freemasons and Zionist bankers[39] and lead to a compulsory marking-cum-branding scheme related to identity and money transfers (Rev.13:16-18).[40] Smith saw Australia and New Zealand as “guinea pigs” for the new cashless financial system with its associated developments[41] and frequently implied that this was about to happen, for example in the presidency of George Bush, senior.[42] In one place he asserted, “December 31st 1992 is the beginning of the end for this world system as it exists today.”[43]
Smith embraced many aspects of dispensational interpretation, such as distinguishing between the church and Israel,[44] seeing Israel as a “prophetic clock”[45] and predicting a Russian-led invasion of Israel.[46] He advocated the historicist interpretation of Revelation 2-3, arguing that the seven churches stand for seven periods of church history.[47]
However, he frequently departed from standard dispensationalism. For example, his penchant for date-setting[48] conflicts with dispensationalism’s insistence that the rapture is imminent with no preceding signs. Like “mid-tribulationists,” he anticipated that believers will remain on earth for the first three and a half years of the rise of the antichrist before being “raptured” for the really heavy tribulation,[49] though his description of the “rapture” is similar to that of many dispensationalists.[50] In fact, Smith combined these two points to warn believers they have 3½ years left once they see a seven-year peace treaty between Israel and her neighbours brokered by a new world leader[51] and that during this time there may be significant persecution and trials for Christians.[52] His Pentecostal influence appears at this point as he predicts a massive worldwide movement to Christ, attended by supernatural signs, during this period before the rapture.[53]
Another unique Pentecostal author is Dr Kevin Conner, perhaps the most thorough commentator on Revelation among Australasian Pentecostals. A highly respected Bible teacher, former principal of Portland Bible College in Portland, Oregon, USA and later senior pastor of Waverley Christian Fellowship, Melbourne,[54] Kevin Conner is the author of numerous well-researched books on the Bible, Christian doctrine and other topics, including two books directly on Revelation[55] and one on eschatology.[56]
Principles of Interpreting the Revelation is, as the title implies, mainly a book of hermeneutical principles that may help readers makes sense of Revelation. The book does not argue strongly for any position. However, Conner’s overall position is clear. He reads Revelation as a Futurist[57] and premillennialist,[58] though he rejects large slabs of dispensationalism, such as the secret rapture[59] and the restoration of old covenant rituals,[60] and locates the writing of the text in the time of persecution under Domitian.[61] His futurist view is partly based on preferring a literal and chronological reading, though he is aware of symbols and figurative language.[62] In The Book of Revelation (An Exposition), Conner walks a fine line, repeatedly disparaging “spiritualizing” or “allegorizing” readings against a “common sense” interpretation, but sometimes allowing for both a literal and spiritual interpretation of a subsequent passage.[63]
Conner’s monumental study, The Exposition, is the largest study of Revelation by an Australasian Pentecostal, at 667 pages.[64] Conner starts by setting out his eschatological beliefs: these include premillennialism, though not the two-stage return of Christ envisaged by dispensationalists, and presuppose a futurist reading of Revelation.[65] Conner toys with similar views to Barry Smith about the mark of the beast and identity cards[66] and argues that there will be a rebuilt large city of Babylon before the second coming, ready for a fresh and more dramatic destruction than occurred in ancient times, in keeping with a literal reading of the Old Testament prophecies and Revelation 18.[67] He predicts a future apostate church symbolized by the whore of Revelation 17 and flowing on from Roman Catholicism.[68]
But his views also include some distinctively Pentecostal and “latter rain” features: “a universal outpouring of the Holy Spirit as early and latter rain on all flesh” and “the fulfilment of the Feast of Tabernacles.”[69] Conner is the only Australasian author known to me who does significant study of the Holy Spirit[70] and the traditional Pentecostal expectations of a great end-time revival or “latter rain”[71] in relation to Revelation.
For example, in his comments on Rev.5:6, and especially the phrase “the seven spirits of God sent out into all the earth”, he says:
This expression is prophetic of the outpourings of the Holy Spirit …. as “early and latter rains” in the earth. Upon the basis of the blood of the Lamb, the Spirit may be sent out into all the earth in convicting, convincing and soul-saving power…. In Passover, Pentecost and Tabernacles, the Holy Spirit is sent forth as rain…. In the last days the Lord will pour OUT (not just ‘of’) His Spirit on all flesh. It is prophetic of the deluge of the Spirit’s powers, operations, graces, gifts and manifestations in the end of the age…..[72]
However, the Scripture references for these statements are largely not drawn from Revelation but from Joel 2 and Acts 2; the references to the feasts of Israel reflects Conner’s typological-restorationist approach to the Old Testament.[73] On the other hand, he interprets the two anointed witnesses of Revelation 11 as specific Jewish prophets (probably Moses and Elijah), not the Spirit-filled church,[74] predicting a special outpouring of the Spirit on “Jewry” after the revival among the Gentiles.[75] Other phrases in Revelation that could be taken as revivals are interpreted more literally and dispensationally, such as the river of life in Rev.22:1.[76]
Two other unusual features of Conner’s interpretation of Revelation are worthy of comment. One is his interest in angels, especially his blurring of the boundaries between angels, human beings and Jesus Christ.[77] For example, he views the “angels” of the seven churches as their leaders[78] and sees some angelic beings as actually Jesus,[79] whom he calls “the JEHOVAH angel.”[80] The other is his view of the end-time church in relation to the great tribulation. Conner rejects the idea of a secret pretribulation rapture but sees the (visible?) church being divided into three kinds of believers: the “manchild company” who are caught up to heaven (Rev.12:5), the “true church” of overcomers (the 144,000 and the woman of Revelation 12), who are specially protected on the earth during the Tribulation and the “non-overcomers” who suffer intense persecution, even martyrdom, but retain their salvation.[81] The fact that the martyrs are really the heroes of Revelation (e.g. Rev.12:11; 20:4) does not seem to have much weight for Conner, as for most Futurist writers.
Smith and Conner are perhaps the most original and creative interpreters discussed in this article, and the most willing to allow a Pentecostal stance to influence their reading, but they both still adhere to futurist and premillennial interpretive stances about Revelation.
3. Historicist approaches (Cooper, Foster, Taylor)
Historicism as a method of interpreting Revelation and similar sections of the Bible has been around for more than eight hundred years, since at least the time of Joachim of Fiore (1135-1202). Basically it sees Revelation as an outline in symbolism of the whole sweep of world or church history from the resurrection to the second coming of Jesus and beyond. It was the majority Protestant interpretation for at least two hundred years[82] and is still held by a minority of Protestants and some significant borderline groups such as the Seventh-day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses. In Australia, a new Pentecostal denomination (the Christian Revival Crusade) arose in the 1940s which adopted this approach to biblical prophecy[83] and for some time also espoused British Israelism.[84]
Thomas Foster was a leading CRC pastor and exponent of this eschatological approach; in fact, Leo Harris, the founder of CRC, credits Foster with introducing him to Historicism.[85] The book we will examine was originally entitled The Pope, Communism and the Coming New World, with the subtitles Amazing Book of Revelation Has the Answers and How the Bible Reveals the Future.[86] It was later re-issued as Amazing Book of Revelation Explained!, subtitled Its Great Mysteries Unfolded and New Light on the Pope, Communism and a New World.[87]
Foster starts by defining Historicism: “this view shows that the Revelation has been progressively fulfilled in history, from the time it was written in A.D. 96; first in the Pagan Roman Empire and then in the Papal Roman Empire.”[88] He argues that the fulfillment of Revelation’s prophecies began quickly, as the text suggested[89] (and in contrast to the Futurist interpretation that puts virtually all of Revelation into the future). Revelation is full of code language and symbolism, mostly derived from the Old Testament and designed to prevent Roman authorities from seeing its true meaning.[90]
The historical meaning of Revelation begins with the seven churches, which really stand for seven successive eras in church history up to approximately 1967.[91] A key focus of Foster’s interpretation here is the rise of the papacy and its persecution of true believers, symbolized by the church in Thyatira with its Jezebel figure,[92] and his connection of the church in Philadelphia with both great revivals and the rise of the British Commonwealth and related European nations supposedly descended from Israel.[93] A problem with this historical interpretation of Revelation 2-3, also held by many dispensationalists, is that it leaves the church ending in utter failure (Laodicea). However, Foster, as a Pentecostal, cannot fail to notice the worldwide charismatic renewal of the “lukewarm” churches, so he makes some attempt to integrate that into his scenario.[94]
Foster goes on to identify the seven seals (Revelation 6) with increasing Roman persecution of the early church as the empire itself declined.[95] He then makes a surprising turn, arguing that the passage in Revelation 7 about the 144,000 sealed from Israel’s tribes is about the Anglo-Saxons and other Nordic groups who moved into Britain around 500 AD.[96] In a similar way, the seven trumpets section “foretells” the invasion of the Roman empire by successive barbarian tribes, followed by the Arabs, Turks and Communists![97] The little scroll of Chapter 10 represents the Bible being made available again through the Reformation,[98] the killing of the two witnesses (Chapter 11) represents the martyrdom of early Reformers like Hus and the defection of England and other nations from Roman Catholicism, the woman in Chapter 12 is Israel, largely defined as the British and related tribes, the ten horns on the beast of Revelation 13 represents the ten “nations” that emerged out of the western Roman empire after its collapse in 476 and the beast is the papacy.[99]
Foster uses his interpretation of Revelation to make several predictions about “our day and generation.”[100] The UK will leave the “Common Market” (European Union) (Rev.18:4)[101] and Communist Russia will destroy the Common Market, capitalism and the papacy before being itself destroyed at the second coming.[102]
A more sophisticated Historicist approach may be found in Dr Charles Taylor’s Revelation As World History.[103] At the time of publication, Taylor was a semi-retired author with a doctorate in linguistics who had taught in this area at the University of Sydney and later taught at Garden City School of Ministries in Brisbane.[104]
Taylor begins by announcing in the title of his Introduction, “Most of Revelation fulfilled.”[105] He bases his historicist interpretation of Revelation on several hermeneutical arguments: that this was the interpretation of the early church,[106] that generally prophecies (and their interpretation) are vindicated by being fulfilled and hence we should look for their subsequent fulfillment,[107] and that prophecy is “the key to history” and should not be reduced to principles or pushed out of world history by an over-literal interpretation.[108] Taylor reads the claim of Revelation 22:10 that “the time is at hand” to mean that the fulfillment of Revelation’s prophecies began shortly after its writing[109] in accordance with the “progressive principle,” by which God’s plans (and biblical prophecies) are progressively clearer to successive generations as their fulfillment draws nearer.[110] Hence, “we may expect, then, that ……some, perhaps most, of Revelation wouldn’t become fully clear until right at the end of the period concerned.”[111] He also appeals to the Historicist “day-year” principle, based on his understanding of Daniel, which allows for some time periods in Revelation to be interpreted as much longer than a superficial reading might suggest and fitted into a historical time-scale beginning in the first century and stretching into the future.[112]
After arguing in favour of premillennialism,[113] Taylor enunciates his main thesis regarding Revelation:[114]
I believe that the correct way to interpret is both historicist and historical. By that I mean that (a) the view that Revelation symbolizes the condition of the church during the whole Gospel age is the best view, and (b) we should pay attention to what interpreters of the past have said, including views in the early church.
Jewish or Old Testament language in Revelation should be taken as typological, referring to the church.[115]
Taylor interprets Revelation 6 onwards as largely chronological (allowing for some parallelism and recapitulation) in a somewhat similar way to Foster, except that he avoids British Israelism.[116] He also sees the papacy as the beast arising after the fall of the (western) Roman empire, combining ideas from 2 Thessalonians 2 with the passages in Revelation.[117] The “great tribulation” of Revelation 7:14 lasted for the 1260 years of papal domination and is therefore now in the past.[118] Taylor also sees a potential revival arising out of the fall of “Babylon.”[119]
Dudley Cooper was another longstanding CRC pastor. His book The Second Coming of Christ[120] draws extensively from Revelation. Cooper early declares himself a Historicist[121] and adheres to a premillennial view of the second coming.[122] In a long section arguing in favour of a Historicist reading of Revelation and other biblical prophecy, Cooper begins by comparing the origins of the Futurist, Preterist and Historicist views, tracing rival views largely to Jesuit theologians and his own view back to medieval protests against the papacy.[123] Like most Historicists, he makes much of the adoption of Historicism by Reformers and provides a long list of worthies who held that view, including King James I of Britain![124] As far as Revelation is concerned, Cooper is mainly interested in chapter 13 and “the transfer of power from the Pagan Roman Dragon to the Papal Roman Beast,”[125] thus starting 1260 years of Papal dominance over Europe (using the day/year principle),[126] and the final chapters about the millennium and New Jerusalem.[127]
Historicism is likely to remain a minority position among Pentecostals, and it has been abandoned completely by scholars, but its prominence in the CRC has given it a longer “shelf life” than it might otherwise have enjoyed in Australasia. Historicists like those I have just analyzed are resistant to dispensationalism but still premillennialist in their interpretations, unlike the next group of writers.
4. Preterist approaches (Corbett, Hodge)
Preterist interpretations of Revelation are common in the scholarly community but less so among Pentecostals. Such interpreters see Revelation as referring largely to situations of the first century: John was either predicting the downfall of second temple Judaism and Jerusalem or denouncing the Roman empire. The former of these alternatives is found in two Australian Pentecostal writers.
Andrew Corbett, a former ACC[128] minister, is the pastor of Legana Christian Church, Tasmania and a radio speaker. In his book The Most Embarrassing Book in the Bible: Understanding the Book of Revelation,[129] he rejects the idea that Revelation speaks of events largely in the future[130] or that it provides a prediction of history from the first century onwards, and instead affirms that most of Revelation predicts the destruction of Jerusalem (AD 70). This is derived from his own “standard rules for sound Bible interpretation” such as respect for context, adherence to the overall message of Scripture, “interpret Scripture with Scripture” and the primacy of the author’s intention.[131] This last point also implies a single reference for biblical prophecies, ruling out multiple fulfillments.[132] Corbett’s interpretation also requires an early date for Revelation, in the 60s, as argued in the comprehensive work of Kenneth L. Gentry,[133] rather than the majority view that dates it in the 90s.
Corbett sees Revelation 1-19 as being fulfilled shortly after its publication in the events of Nero’s persecution of Christians and the Jewish-Roman war (66-70) which ended with the destruction of the temple. Thus the seven churches (Revelation 2-3) are literally first century churches, though the messages sent to them have application for churches today,[134] the four horses of Revelation 6 refer to the early Roman emperors starting with Augustus,[135] many passages refer to Nero’s persecution of the early church,[136] references to “sun, moon and stars” are about Israel[137] and much of the book is about the events of the siege and destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans.[138] Thus the 144,000 refers to the “redeemed of Israel,”[139] Jewish believers during the forty years between the Day of Pentecost and AD70, the seven trumpets predict the Roman attack on Jerusalem,[140] the two witnesses of Revelation 11 refer to Jewish Christians who had literally seen Jesus[141] and the seven bowls (Revelation 16) describe the final days of the Roman onslaught against Jerusalem.[142] The two beasts of Revelation 13 are the Roman empire, represented especially by Nero and Vespasian,[143] and first century Judaism collaborating with the Romans;[144] the beast and harlot in Revelation 17 likewise refer to the Roman empire and Judaism respectively.[145]
Corbett’s analysis draws heavily on Josephus[146] and on several older commentators such as Peter Holford,[147] J. Stewart Rusell (1897)[148] as well as Gentry.[149] On the question of the millennium, Corbett takes a modified postmillennialist (or positive amillennialist)[150] “partial preterist” position:[151] “we are now in the New Covenant Kingdom age”[152] but some aspects of Revelation 20 refer to the future, especially the return of Christ,[153] the final resurrection and the last judgement.[154] He emphasizes the downfall of Satan as a result of the Cross and ascension of Jesus,[155] though he rejects the view that the devil has already been removed,[156] and this leads him to a more positive expectation for the future than dispensationalists often take.
A similar reading of Revelation is adopted by Dr Kent Hodge, an Australian Pentecostal serving as a missionary and Bible school principal in Nigeria, in Rediscovering Revelation.[157] Hodge vigorously opposes Futurism and dispensationalism because of their mistaken readings of Scripture, Matthew 24 and Revelation in particular,[158] and because such interpretations lead to “escapism” and negative expectations about the future.[159] He sets out his own hermeneutical principles for interpreting Revelation in various places (for instance, arguing for author’s intention as the key question[160] and for a Hebrew way of interpreting symbolic language)[161] and argues extensively for an early date for the book.[162] Hodge emphasizes the centrality of the church in Revelation,[163] for example, identifying the church as the “new heavens and earth” in Rev.21:1-2,[164] as opposed to the Israel emphasis of dispensationalists.[165] Hodge stirs the reader to a form of Christian activism[166] based on the positive expectation of worldwide gospel expansion since AD 70,[167] and sketches a moderate postmillennial position.[168] However, he is skeptical of chronological readings of Revelation 19-22 that lead to an expectation of a literally new planet.[169]
Like Corbett, Hodge advocates a preterist interpretation of Revelation: its prophecies were fulfilled shortly after the book was written,[170] largely in the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem and the second temple in AD 70.[171] However, he rejects “hyper-preterism”, seeing historical, future and spiritual elements in Revelation.[172] For example, when he describes Revelation “as a Revelation of Jesus and our union with him” which “reveals the sovereign rule of Christ over sin, over the beastly Adamic nature of man and the world,”[173] he edges towards an allegorical or “idealist” reading.[174]
Neither Corbett nor Hodge hold the majority Preterist “anti-Roman” view of Revelation but they are significantly different in their approach to the more popular views surveyed previously and their interpretation may allow more room for positive Pentecostal expectations of revival and mission.
5. Eclectic approaches (Chant, Newton)
A few other Pentecostal writers adopt a more eclectic strategy to reading Revelation, seeking to draw on insights from all the major approaches.
Dr Barry Chant is the founder of Tabor College and an ordained CRC minister. He was a key figure in the charismatic movement period in Australia (1970s and 1980s). He is a prolific author and the main historian of Australian Pentecostalism. New Zealand-born Winkie Pratney is a worldwide travelling Bible teacher who made a strong impact on Australasian Christian young people in the 1970s and 1980s. Together they authored a book on the second coming, The Return.[175]
Perhaps partly because of its dual authorship, The Return is not fully consistent in its statements on eschatology, Revelation and related topics. It also strives to be fair to all views and explain them accurately.[176] For example, the second chapter (written by Chant) states that Revelation 1:7 is a reference to the second coming, a view largely held by futurists and historicists.[177] But this is called into question in later chapters.
The authors are sensitive to pitfalls in interpreting biblical prophecy, such as ignorance of history, self-interest, short-sightedness and complacency.[178] They rightly emphasize that the purpose of prophecy is “to draw us closer to Jesus”[179] and repeatedly stress the ongoing relevance of prophecy, including Revelation.[180] Unlike most other writers, they are quite open to the possibility of multiple fulfillments of prophecies,[181] as in their discussion of the antichrist and the number of the beast.[182] When they do take a stand on particular issues, it is generally to argue against a pretribulationist position[183] and to espouse a form of historicism that identifies the “great tribulation” of Rev.7:14 with the whole church age until Jesus’ second coming.[184] On the other hand, they favour an amillennial reading of Revelation 20.[185]
Dr Jon Newton[186] is the Head of Biblical Studies and Research at Harvest Bible College, Melbourne and one of only two Australasian Pentecostal writers known to me who have studied Revelation at doctoral level.[187] He is the author of a short book Revelation Reclaimed[188] and several journal articles on Revelation.[189] In Revelation Reclaimed, Newton spends several chapters debunking common Pentecostal approaches to Revelation, including Barry Smith and futurist and historicist readings generally. He then seeks to describe a more productive approach to studying Revelation and finishes with a comparison of millennial views. His own way of approaching Revelation is somewhat eclectic, drawing on critical neo-preterist ideas but also advocating a kind of idealist reading.
Some Observations about Australasian Pentecostal Readings of Revelation
So what has this survey shown us? Clearly Australasian Pentecostals have put forward a range of different interpretations of Revelation. While it is probably fair to say that most Australasian Pentecostals read Revelation through Futurist and premillennial eyes, they are not all dispensationalist and often come up with creative forms of futurism or even non-futurist alternative approaches to the text. I offer the following observations based on the material discussed above.
First, the interpretations of Revelation put forward by Pentecostal authors in Australia and New Zealand usually relate to their denominational affiliation. Authors aligned with Australian Christian Churches (ACC) usually espouse a futurist interpretation of Revelation, frequently including a pretribulationist element, even though this is not required by the denomination, which mainly prescribes premillennialism. CRC authors mostly argue for a historicist reading. Preterist and Idealist interpretations are not espoused by any Pentecostal movement that I know of, so authors who put such ideas forward are minority voices. Moreover, a change in position regarding Revelation and eschatology has often led the interpreter to change their denominational affiliation, as Leo Harris did when he left the then Assemblies of God in Australia in 1941.[190]
Second, most of the authors I have surveyed (with the partial exception of the Eclectic group) have hardly ever interacted with recent critical scholarship on Revelation. Judging by their arguments and bibliographies, they are mostly either unaware of, or resistant to, such scholarship. However, a new generation of Pentecostals are emerging who are more aware of current scholarship and not completely hostile to it. So far, they haven’t written much in Australia and New Zealand.
Third, generally these authors interpret Revelation according to a largely naïve, pre-critical hermeneutic in keeping with their assumption of biblical infallibility. In practice, this tends to lead them towards literal readings or a historicist symbolism. Most of these writers thus see a definite historical connection (past, present or future) to the language of Revelation; that is, they see it as real prediction of real events future to its author, whether or not they are future to us. There also tend to read the Bible as largely a single book and thus to interpret Revelation through the use of Daniel or typology of the Old Testament.
Fourth, most of the interpretations surveyed above did not originate in Australasia but were adopted (or adapted) from overseas authors. For example, the Preterist authors surveyed relied somewhat on Kenneth Gentry as well as other earlier writers, mostly British. The conventional Futurists followed the interpretations of American and British Pentecostals and other dispensationalist writers. The Historicists also drew heavily on earlier British interpreters though they have perhaps made some innovative additions to this inheritance. Only Kevin Conner and Barry Smith made what we might call “original” contributions to the interpretation of Revelation.
Fifth, none of the writers I have surveyed have referred to popular Australasian Pentecostal or charismatic prophetic themes such as “the great southland of the Holy Spirit” or the prophecy, attributed to British evangelist Smith Wigglesworth,[191] of a great end-time worldwide revival starting in Australasia.[192] It was commonly believed by New Zealand Pentecostals in the 1970s that this would start specifically in New Zealand. Barry Smith refers to revival movements but his comments on the future of Australia and New Zealand largely relates to them being “guinea pigs” for a new world money order. He speaks of “The Sign of Holy Spirit Power in the Churches today” but doesn’t integrate this into his reading of Revelation or other Bible prophecy. Hodge is the most positive author in terms of his future expectations but somewhat general and cautious, and he certainly does not draw on Australian Pentecostal ideas. Kevin Conner is the only author who discusses broad Pentecostal expectations of the “latter rain” and restoration of the pure church.
Finally, and most surprisingly, the Pentecostal commitment of these authors only superficially affects their reading of Revelation, except in terms of the hermeneutical assumptions mentioned above. For example, with the exception of Conner, they hardly ever mention the work of the Holy Spirit in relation to Revelation or, indeed, to their future expectations. When such things are mentioned, they are not grounded in Revelation but other passages such as Joel 2 or Isaiah 60. In other words, we have hardly begun to see a truly Pentecostal reading of Revelation, that is, not a reading based on what Pentecostals have seen there so far but a reading informed by Pentecostalism’s distinctive ideas: the baptism in and gifts of the Holy Spirit, renewal, revival and restoration in the Christian church and worldwide mission.
Thus, in my opinion, we need an Australasian Pentecostal reading of Revelation that interacts with historical-critical and postmodernist thinking but is informed by Pentecostal expectations as identified above, including the expectation of a final “latter rain.” Such a reading would perhaps open dialogues with other distinctive Australasian Pentecostal eschatological concepts, such as the myth of the “southland of the Holy Spirit.” This may also lead, however, to a shift from traditional premillennialist views to a more positive eschatology.
[1] E.g, Col Stringer, Australia- South Land of the Holy Spirit (Robina Town Centre: Col Stringer Ministries Inc, 2006).
[2] The only extended commentary I have found is Conner’s Exposition, referred to later in this article.
[3] Dispensationalism originated largely with nineteenth century Anglo-Irish preacher J. Nelson Darby and was popularized by the Scofield Bible. It forms the basis of the recent books and movies in the Left Behind series. Peter Althouse (Spirit of the Last Days: Pentecostal Eschatology in Conversation with Jürgen Moltmann; London: T and T Clark International, 2003: 10-44) explains that the “latter rain” eschatology of primitive Pentecostalism, expecting a powerful worldwide revival, was later overshadowed by the pessimistic Fundamentalist dispensationalism that influenced Pentecostals later in the twentieth century.
[4] Often called “pretribulationism” (the “rapture” happens before the tribulation), as opposed to mid-tribulationism (the “rapture” happens in the middle of the tribulation) and post-tribulationism (the “rapture” happens after the tribulation, that is, at the public advent of Christ). I debunk this in Revelation Reclaimed: The Use and Misuse of the Apocalypse (Milton Keynes, UK: Paternoster, 2009).
[5] Mount Waverley: Teach All Nations, 2007.
[6] Majdali, Alpha and Omega, 202. Most dispensationalists view Revelation as largely about Israel.
[7] Majdali, Alpha and Omega, 39-44.
[8] Majdali, Alpha and Omega, 12.
[9] Majdali, Alpha and Omega, 22,29,83,216.
[10] Majdali, Alpha and Omega, 46-52, 118,129.
[11] Majdali, Alpha and Omega, 107-122,221-252. For example, his discussion of Rev.3:10 considers only future alternative readings (Ibid., 118).
[12] Majdali, Alpha and Omega, 125-141.
[13] Majdali, Alpha and Omega, 55-73,118-120.
[14] Majdali, Alpha and Omega, 75-103.
[15] Majdali, Alpha and Omega, 251.
[16] Majdali, Alpha and Omega, 15.
[17] Majdali, Alpha and Omega, 27.
[18] Tony Keys, “I Was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day” Rev.1:10 (self-published, 1986).
[19] Keys, I Was in the Spirit, 4. A chart on page 6 sets out a fairly typical dispensationalist reading of Revelation. Keys reaffirms his premillennial stance in Ibid., 130-133.
[20] Keys, I Was in the Spirit, 7. Comp comments on Rev.22:6-7,10 in Ibid., 145-146.
[21] Keys, I Was in the Spirit, 77-79.
[22] Keys, I Was in the Spirit, 51.
[23] Keys, I Was in the Spirit, 68.
[24] Keys, I Was in the Spirit, 28,47-48,85.
[25] Keys, I Was in the Spirit, 85.
[26] Keys, I Was in the Spirit, 87-88.
[27] E.g. Keys, I Was in the Spirit, 133 on Russia.
[28] David Cartledge, End-Time Events: A Study of the Book of Revelation (self-published, 1992). The short booklet was designed to accompany audio tape lectures.
[29] Barry Smith, Warning (Smith Family Evangelism, 1980), 3,6. Cf Barry Smith, Second Warning (Smith Family Evangelism, 1985), Final Notice (Barry Smith Family Evangelism, 1989)
[30] Smith, Second Warning, 173.
[31] Smith, Second Warning, 183-184. Comp. Jeff Beacham, Apocalypse How? (self-published, 1993), 60-62.
[32] Smith, Warning, 3. Comp. Beacham’s line-up focused on the year 1948 in Apocalypse How?, 37.
[33] Now the European Union.
[34] Smith, Warning, 15-23.
[35] Smith, Warning, 23; Final Notice, .126
[36] Smith, Warning, 27,53; Final Notice, 32,71,251-259. Cf Beacham, Apocalypse How?, 7,76-79.
[37] Smith, Warning, 23,24.
[38] Smith, Warning, 37-43,100-101; Second Warning, 57-63; Final Notice, 31-33,225-229,319-320. Kissinger, a secular German-born Jew, was National Security Advisor and then Secretary of State in the Nixon and Ford presidencies (1968-76) and was credited with bringing the Vietnam War and the Yom Kippur conflict (in the Middle East) to an end and brokering the visit of Nixon to China.
[39] Smith, Warning, 64-97; Second Warning, 1-15; Final Notice, 61-71,237-245. Smith gave favourable attention to the notorious “Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” though denying the authors were Jews (Ibid., 61).
[40] Smith, Warning, 108-111; Second Warning, 17,20-26; Final Notice, 246-250. Comp. Beacham, Apocalypse How?, 11-20,91-93.
[41] E.g. Smith, Second Warning, 25-29; Final Notice, 4,13,36-49,78-83,135-136,160-172. In Final Notice, Smith spent several pages predicting that New Zealand will become part of Australia, using various press articles as he commonly did (Ibid., 13-18,54-55,138). One wonders what this has to do with Bible prophecy.
[42] Smith, Final Notice, 9,225.
[43] Smith, Final Notice, 255.
[44] Smith, Warning,111-114.
[45] Smith, Warning, 135; Final Notice, 312.
[46] Smith, Second Warning, 178-180; Final Notice, 213-214,314-316.
[47] Smith, Final Notice, 339-377; Beacham, Apocalypse How?, 22-23. Many dispensationalists also adopt this interpretation.
[48] Smith, Warning, 4-5. For example, writing in 1980, Smith made some vague predictions related to the 1982 planetary alignment (Ibid., 140-142). See also vague allusions to the end of 6000 years in Smith, Second Warning, 191. Later, based on calculations built on Israel’s independence date (1948), he wrote, “Before, after or during 1998, the Messiah will come” (Smith, Final Notice, 321).
[49] Smith, Warning, 28,106,150-157.
[50] E.g. Smith, Second Warning, 36.
[51] Smith, Warning, 35-36,163; Second Warning, 31; Final Notice, 31,225. Comp. Beacham, Apocalypse How?, .39,96.
[52] Smith, Warning, 142-149.
[53] Smith, Second Warning, 31-33,192; Final Notice, 378-380.
[54] Now Citylife Church, pastored by Kevin’s son Mark.
[55] Kevin J. Conner, Principles of Interpreting the Revelation (Vermont, Vic.: KJC Publications, 1995) and The Book of Revelation (An Exposition) (Vermont, Vic.: KJC Publications, 2001).
[56] Kevin J. Conner, The Christian Millennium: Studies in Eschatological Millennial Views (KJC Publications, 2000). Somewhat similar views are expressed by Richard J. Holland (Conner’s predecessor at Waverley Christian Fellowship) in The Bible and its End-Time Events (self-published, 1996).
[57] Conner, Principles, 61. See discussion of alternative view in Conner, Principles, 7-12.
[58] Conner, Principles, 126-127.
[59] Conner, Principles, 126.
[60] Conner, Principles, 112.
[61] Conner, Principles, 13-21.
[62] Conner, Principles, 22-29,126.
[63] E.g. compare Exposition, 498 and 504 and see Ibid., 329-330 on the fire coming out of the mouths of the two witnesses..
[64] Deliberately not 666 pages, I understand.
[65] Exposition, iii-iv; see also Ibid., 119-120 and comments on television in relation to future prophetic fulfilment in Ibid., 448-449.
[66] Exposition, 450-456.
[67] Exposition, 548-556.
[68] Exposition, 518-531.
[69] Exposition, iii.
[70] Exposition, 12-13, 154-155,328.
[71] Exposition, 102,155,191,200,214,256,265,282.
[72] Exposition, 154-155.
[73] Typology as a method of interpreting the Old Testament is very prominent in this book, e.g. tabernacle typology in Exposition, 359. See also his book length exposition of restorationism, the view that expects the full restoration of the New Testament church in its glory and power, in Restoration Theology (Vermont: KJC Publications, 1998).
[74] Exposition, 319-353, a very detailed discussion of the identity and work of the “two witnesses.”
[75] Exposition, 326.
[76] Exposition, 650.
[77] E.g. Exposition, 8-9, where he refuses to accept that the final link in the revelatory chain of Rev.1:1 is a literal angel and speculates it may be Enoch.
[78] Exposition, 9,39-40,43,45.
[79] Exposition, 224 (Rev.7:2), 251-252 (Rev.8:3), 291-294 (Rev.10:1-11), 595-598 (Rev.20:1-3).
[80] E.g. Exposition, 252; referring to Old Testament depiction of “the angel of the LORD.”
[81] Exposition, 244-248, 365-399, 442-443, 472-472, 607.
[82] Espoused by Isaac Newton, for example, who was obsessed with biblical prophecy and wrote more about that than physics.
[83] See the 1983 charter of the Christian Revival Crusade in Barry Chant, Heart of Fire (Plympton, SA: Tabor College, 1997), 364. See also Ken Chant, This We Believe! (Fullarton, SA: Christian Revival Crusade, 1967), 143-166.
[84] For the historical background, see Chant, Heart of Fire, 183-187.
[85] Thomas Foster, Amazing Book of Revelation Explained! (self-published 2nd edition, 1983), Foreword.
[86] Thomas Foster, The Pope, Communism and the Coming New World (self-published, 1977).
[87] Thomas Foster, Amazing Book of Revelation Explained! (self-published 2nd edition, 1983).
[88] Foster, Amazing Book, 1.
[89] Foster, Amazing Book, 4,6.
[90] Foster, Amazing Book, 4-5.
[91] Foster, Amazing Book, 6-18.
[92] Foster, Amazing Book, 12-15. Jezebel is sees as foreshadowing Mariolatry in the Roman Catholic Church.
[93] Foster, Amazing Book, 16-17.
[94] Foster, Amazing Book, 19-20.
[95] Foster, Amazing Book, 24-33.
[96] Foster, Amazing Book, Foster, Amazing Book, 34-37.
[97] Foster, Amazing Book, 38-50. Foster uses the common historicist “day/year” principle (Ibid., 46,55) to prove his dates for some of these events. Compare other “creative” interpretations of time language in Revelation in Ibid., 55-60.
[98] According to Foster, Luther saw this passage as predicting his and others’ work in translating the Bible (Foster, Amazing Book, 78). Unfortunately, he gives no source for this claim.
[99] Foster, Amazing Book, 50-75. Compare more recent interpretations influenced by British Israelism, such as Chris J. Chetland, The Book of Revelation: Historical Fulfillment (self-published, 2005).
[100] Foster, Amazing Book, 112. Compare the prognostications in Chetland (Historical Fulfillment, 36-37). Historicists can update their predictions as they become proven wrong.
[101] Foster, Amazing Book, 101-102.
[102] Foster, Amazing Book, 103-123.
[103] Charles V. Taylor, Revelation as World History (Gosford: self-published, 1994).
[104] Wikipedia (downloaded 14/04/13). Garden City School of Ministries was a Pentecostal Bible school in Brisbane that closed about 2009.
[105] Taylor, World History, 2. Comp. Ibid., 18.
[106] Taylor, World History, 2,3.
[107] Taylor, World History, 5-7,16.
[108] Taylor, World History, 10.
[109] Taylor, World History, 11,39-40. Comp. Ibid., 44-45
[110] Taylor, World History, 12-16.
[111] Taylor, World History, 14. See also Ibid., 89.
[112] Taylor, World History, 22-27,30-32, 61-63.
[113] Taylor, World History, 17-21, and again in Ibid., 101-108.
[114] Taylor, World History, 29.
[115] Taylor, World History, 33-37,76.
[116] Taylor, World History, 47-110.
[117] Taylor, World History, 64-68,75-83,91-94..
[118] Taylor, World History, 68. Comp. Ibid., 82-83,88
[119] Taylor, World History, 96-98.
[120] Self-published, undated (apparently about 1998, judging by the biographical details on page 148).
[121] Dudley Cooper, The Second Coming of Christ, 9,32.
[122] Cooper, Second Coming, 20-21,24, 109-124. Interestingly, Cooper’s discussion of this is informed by non-canonical texts such as Slavonic Enoch and the Epistle of Barnabas as well as a quote from Justin Martyr (Ibid., 20,21,27,111-112).
[123] Cooper, Second Coming, 33-41.
[124] Cooper, Second Coming, 43-48.
[125] Cooper, Second Coming, 78.
[126] Cooper, Second Coming, 81.
[127] Cooper, Second Coming,121-129.
[128] Australian Christian Churches, formerly known as Assemblies of God in Australia.
[129] Andrew Corbett, The Most Embarrassing Book in the Bible: Understanding the Book of Revelation (Legana, Tas: self-published, 2006).
[130] He especially rejects dispensationalism and the “secret rapture”, which he had formerly believed (Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 1-2,135-143,180-181).
[131] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, xv. See also Ibid., 4.
[132] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 7; see also Ibid., 126.
[133] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 5.
[134] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 19-34.
[135] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 48-50.
[136] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 50-51,73-76.
[137] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 53,183.
[138] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 53-54.
[139] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 61.
[140] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 62-71.
[141] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 74.
[142] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 90-94.
[143] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 81-83.
[144] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 83-87.
[145] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 94-96.
[146] E.g. Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 76,173-175,178.
[147] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 63,172. Interestingly, this is not in the book’s bibliography.
[148] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 86,148.
[149] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 90,94.
[150] As opposed to premillennialists, both postmillennialists and amillennialists expect Jesus’ second coming to occur after the “thousand years” of Rev.20:1-7 and to lead immediately to the last judgement. The “thousand years” is seen as referring to the present age (amillennialism) or to a special period of Christian triumph towards the end of this age (postmillennialism).
[151] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 107-110.
[152] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 108.
[153] Though on this point, Corbett seems to buy into aspects of hyper-preterism, e.g. identifying the parousia with Christ’s coming to judge Jerusalem in AD70, which would cast doubt on a future advent of Christ (Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 147,170-171,186-188).
[154] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 113-120,147-163..
[155] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 80,104-107,110-112,157-159.
[156] Corbett, Most Embarrassing Book, 114.
[157] Kent Hodge, Rediscovering Revelation (Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse, 2011).
[158] Hodge, Rediscovering Revelation, 9,14-15,29,99.
[159] Hodge, Rediscovering Revelation, 7,10,101.
[160] Hodge, Rediscovering Revelation, 23,28-30,99-100.
[161] Hodge, Rediscovering Revelation, 23-24, 37-38,62.
[162] Hodge, Rediscovering Revelation,44-49.
[163] E.g. Hodge, Rediscovering Revelation, 108,116.
[164] Hodge, Rediscovering Revelation, 12,81-84,88,90.
[165] Hodge, Rediscovering Revelation, 15-22,77-78,115.
[166] Hodge, Rediscovering Revelation, 25.
[167] Hodge, Rediscovering Revelation, 54-55,76,132-136.
[168] Hodge, Rediscovering Revelation, 136-145.
[169] Hodge, Rediscovering Revelation, 81-90.
[170] Hodge, Rediscovering Revelation, 33-34. See a critique of other interpretations in Ibid., 99-102.
[171] Hodge, Rediscovering Revelation, 39-45,49-55,66-75,79-81,85-86,122-124.
[172] Hodge, Rediscovering Revelation, 127-129.
[173] Hodge, Rediscovering Revelation, 77. See also Ibid., 85,122..
[174] Idealist interpretations of Revelation see it as portraying recurring or enduring themes in the life of the world, the church or the individual believer, as opposed to specific historical references.
[175] Winkie Pratney and Barry Chant, The Return (Chichester, UK: Sovereign World, 1991).
[176] Chant and Pratney, The Return, 118-128.
[177] Chant and Pratney, The Return, 42.
[178] Chant and Pratney, The Return, 73-77.
[179] Chant and Pratney, The Return, 83 (emphasis in the original).
[180] E.g. Chant and Pratney, The Return, 97,126,174.
[181] Chant and Pratney, The Return, 93-97,136-137.
[182] Chant and Pratney, The Return, 167-174.
[183] Chant and Pratney, The Return, 141-148.
[184] Chant and Pratney, The Return, 139-142,148,165-166.
[185] Chant and Pratney, The Return, 225-228.
[186] The author of this article.
[187] The other is Dr Van Shore, who has an earned doctorate from, I think, University of Queensland. He hasn’t published this but it has informed some of his writing (personal correspondence). There is also a new student starting a PhD program with Melbourne-based University of Divinity. His BTh honours thesis considered Revelation as drama.
[188] Jon K. Newton, Revelation Reclaimed (Milton Keynes, UK: Paternoster, 2009).
[189] Jon K. Newton, “Reading Revelation Romantically” (JPT 2009), “Time Language and the Purpose of the Millennium” (Colloquium, 2011), “Story-lines in the Book of Revelation” (Australian Biblical Review, 2013) and “The Epistemology of Revelation” (Heythrop Journal, forthcoming). A new book by Newton, The Revelation Worldview, is shortly to be published by Wipf and Stock.
[190] Chant, Heart of Fire, 183.
[191] An iconic figure among Australasian and British Pentecostals in the post-war years.
[192] Cf Stringer, South Land, 19-21. Barry Chant has recently cast doubt on whether this prophecy ever happened (unpublished paper PCBC Conference 2013).