Page 1 of 14

Introduction

Many of us have heard the statement that is almost a proverb, whether

expressed in churches, businesses or homes, “we have done it for so long, why

change it now.” This proverbial saying expresses something about our human

nature: that we do not like to change. When something goes on for long

enough, we get used to it. We often get so used to it that it becomes uncom- fortable to change. If it is something bad to which we have become accus- tomed, it often takes something radical to get our attention so that we will

change the bad situation.

Many of us who are parents have to do radical things to change bad behav- ior patterns that become habitual for our children. Perhaps we have to punish

them in order to get their attention.

Many of us have heard in the news or elsewhere how teenagers or young

people come under the influence of cultic religious groups and become subtly

brainwashed by the group. Sometimes parents have had to hire experts who

steal the children away from the cult and then use radical methods to depro- gram them so that they can step back into the reality of life and change.

Over the last few years, we have heard news about massive earthquakes,

tsunamis, and hurricanes. Then we saw pictures of these things. No doubt, by

seeing the tragedy, the severity of the destruction was impressed on us more

than if we merely heard about it. Perhaps some Americans, who would not have

otherwise taken action, were so moved by the visual images that they decided

to contribute to some relief aid being sent to the various ravaged areas.

The point is that we are people who need something radical to get our atten- tion in order to change a bad habit or in order to respond to a situation that is

bad.

If this is true on the mundane, everyday level, how much more true must it

be on the spiritual level. We are people who get accustomed to our sinful habit

patterns. This evening we want to ask what radical actions God takes to get our

attention so that we will see the seriousness of our sinful ways and take action

and change.

53

The Purpose of Symbolism

in the Book of Revelation

Gregory K. Beale

CTJ 41 (2006): 53-66

Page 2 of 14

The book of Revelation is a good place to see the radical way in which God

gets our attention about these matters. How does God communicate to his

people in this book? One popular approach to the Apocalypse is to try to

understand the majority of the book literally as much as possible, and when this

appears not to work, then interpret figuratively. Accordingly, this view under- stands most of Revelation’s pictures as a depiction of literal realities in the

future, especially events of terrible tribulation (as, for example, portrayed in

the series of seal, trumpet, and bowl plagues).

Let us investigate the most programmatic statement Revelation makes about

what is its main mode of communication, which occurs at the very commence- ment of the book in Revelation 1:1.

Is Revelation to be Understood Primarily as Literal or Symbolic?

The Greek word shmai,nw is used in Revelation 1:1 to indicate the manner of

God’s revelation to John: “the Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him

to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He

sent and communicated [evsh,manen] it by His angel to His bond-servant John.”

Various English translations render this Greek word as “communicated”

(NASB), “made known” (RSV, NIV, JB, ESV, NEB), “signified” (KJV, ASV, Douay),1 and

“made clear” (NETB).

The word shmai,nw elsewhere in the New Testament and in Hellenistic Greek

can have any of these ranges of meaning (albeit “made clear” is unusual),

although the notion of “symbolize, signify, communicated by symbols” is not an

untypical meaning (e.g., in classical Greek, the word could have the idea of giv- ing signals, as in “giving the signal” for a military attack to begin). In this

respect, it is significant to recall that the noun form for shmai,nw is shmeion, which

means “sign” and that the New Testament uses for Jesus’ miracles as “signs” or

“symbols” of his divine power (e.g., healing the lame man in Mark 2 was sym- bolic of his ability to forgive sin; feeding the multitudes in John 6 was symbolic

of his ability to give and nourish spiritual life).

The word in Revelation 1:1 could mean merely “make known” or “commu- nicated” and thus refer to a general idea of communication and not the par- ticular mode of communication, as it sometimes does in the ancient world. The

fact, however, that Revelation 1:1 is an allusion to Daniel 2:28-29, 45 confirms

that here the word does mean “symbolize.” 2

54

CALVIN THEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

1 NASB has a marginal reading of “signified.”

2 E.g., cf. Dan. 2:28 (LXX) reads, “he showed . . . what things must take place in the latter days”

with Rev. 1:1, “to show . . . what things must take place quickly.” For further discussion of the allu- sion, see G. K. Beale, Revelation, NIGTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 152-60. See also Beale,

Revelation, passim, for fuller discussion of all subsequent passages from Revelation mentioned in this

address.

Page 3 of 14

In Daniel 2:45 of the old Greek Old Testament, this word is used to describe

the symbolic vision that King Nebuchadnezzar had: “the Great God has

symbolized3 to the king what will come to pass in the latter days.” This refers to a

dream vision that the king had. He saw a huge statue composed of four sections

of different metals: gold, silver, bronze, and iron. The image is smashed by a

rock that grows and fills the earth. Daniel tells the king that this vision was sym- bolic: the statue that was divided into four metallic sections symbolized four

kingdoms (Babylon, MedoPersia, Greece, and Rome).4 The stone that

smashed the statue represented God’s kingdom that would defeat the evil king- doms of the world and dominate the world.

The symbolic use of shmai,nw in Daniel 2 defines the use in Revelation 1:1 as

referring to symbolic communication and not mere general conveyance of

information. Therefore, John’s choice of shmai,nw over gnwri,zw (“make

known”) is not haphazard but intentional. This conclusion is based on the sup- position that John uses Old Testament references with significant degrees of

awareness of Old Testament context.5

The nuance of “signify” or “symbolize” in Revelation 1:1b is also confirmed

by its parallelism with show (dei,knumi) in the first part of Revelation 1:1, because

“show” throughout the book always introduces a divine communication by sym- bolic vision (4:1; 17:1; 21:9-10; 22:1, 6, 8). In fact, regardless of any generally syn- onymous word John could have chosen here instead of shmai,nw(whether it be

gnwri,zw or other like terms), it still would have the sense of communicate by

symbols because that is the mode of communication in Daniel 2 and the mode

of revelation conveyed by dei,knumi elsewhere in the book.

In this light, the dictum of the popular approach to Revelation—interpret

literally unless you are forced to interpret symbolically—should be turned on

its head. Instead, the programmatic statement about the book’s precise mode

of communication in 1:1 is that the warp and woof of it is symbolic, so that the

preceding dictum should be reversed to say “interpret symbolically unless you

are forced to interpret literally.” Better put, the reader is to expect that the

main means of divine revelation in this book is symbolic.

If the main mode of communication in Revelation is that of symbolism, how

should we interpret the symbols? Some are defined clearly by John himself:

seven stars equal seven angels (1:20); seven lampstands equal seven churches

of Asia Minor (1:20); seven lamps of fire equal seven Spirits of God (4:5, i. e.,

the Holy Spirit); bowls of incense equal prayers of the saints (5:8); great dragon

equals Satan (12:9); the saints’ fine linen, bright and clean equals the righteous

55

THE PURPOSE OF SYMBOLISM IN THE BOOK OF REVELATION

3 This is a rendering of the Aramaic [dy (yeda‘), which has the default meaning “know” and in

the causative form “make known.”

4 Some commentators identify these nations differently, but it is not pertinent to our point to

enter in to that discussion.

5 For repeated examples of such contextual awareness on John’s part, see Beale, Revelation, passim.