Revelations Books

T. F. Torrance has been an important voice in Protestant theology for over 50 years. This relatively brief book offers an accessible summary of what he takes to be theology's claims to speak truth about reality. His writing is marked by an impressive awareness of historic Christian theology combined with an equally impressive awareness of contemporary writers such as Dummett, Gadamer, and (above all) Polanyi. Anyone interested in Christian epistemology should be aware of Torrance, and this book is a fine place to start.

Guerra's expert editing makes this the best introduction to one of our best political and theological thinkers today.

This book is the English adaptation of Antonio Livi's treatise of the rational basis for belief in Christian Revelation. Livi's popularity in Italy will undoubtedly spread to the United States and other English speaking countries as serious scholars discover his new insights into an ancient debate, i.e., the rationality of belief. At a time like our's when "belief" abounds yet often times without consideration of the inherent logic of the truth claims of those beliefs, Livi's book will move the debate forward, just like John Haldane and Alvin Plantinga have done for the past two decades. A must read for serious thinkers, not only for those of the Thomistic tradition, but also for those of the analytical and phenomenological schools of thought.

The back cover of this book has the following quotes from book critics:

"...the literary style is a model of English clarity...."
"...the logic is beautiful...."
"...refreshing honesty pervades the entire book...."

These critics are not exaggerating! This book is one of the great masterpieces of Christian philosophy and apologetics. The flagship of Clark's thought, it is brilliantly written and reasoned from beginning to end.

Religion, Reason, and Revelation is made up of five chapters. The first answers the question, Is Christianity a religion? Here Clark lays the groundwork from which he reasons. He covers the issues of what religion is, emotion v. intellect, the description v. presupposition, meaningful words, and what constitutes Christianity.

The second chapter deals with the relationship between faith and reason. Clark argues that the only true relationship between the two is a reason that is founded on faith. In his usual manner, Clark critiques natural theology, the cosmological argument, impiricism, irrationalism, and everyone from Hume to Hodge.

The third chapter covers inspiration and language, what the Bible claims, objections to inspiration, problems with linguistics, logical positivism, and the like.

The fourth chapter is Clark's thought on revelation and morality. How can men know what is right and wrong? Is there a universal standard for ethical decision-making? What roles do experience and reason play in determining morality?

The final chapter is God and Evil, the perennial objection to Christianity. After explaining what he believes to be the biblical view of the problem of evil, Clark forcefully asserts, "Let it be unequivocally said that this view certainly makes God the cause of sin." He further explains the law's relation to both God and man, causality v. authorship, etc.

As one can see, Clark dives into each topic and discusses them great breadth and depth. Religion, Reason, and Revelation is a very thorough philosophical text.

While those unfamiliar with Clark's thinking will find this book a most unusual read, I believe that those who think through his arguments will find them intriguing. He was certainly one of the most original thinkers of any era, and those who thoughtfully read this book will enjoy having their minds stretched and their beliefs challenged.

This is an exceptionally good book, it offers the very best of Sivananda. He talks to you, instructs and guides you in this book. It is highly instructive, practical and inspiring. Not for beginners, but if you are on the path and searching for guidance, let Sivananda shine a light on your path.

This study isn't your usual symbol study. John Ortberg takes the book of Revelation and expounds upon it using other Scripture to give you tools for everyday living - in my view the reason it was written.

This book has touched my soul like no other book.
I wept upon completion.
Life-changing is an understatement.
I regret not having discovered this book earlier, it's insight and powerfull, raw beauty has opened my eyes, nay, it has opened my heart and allowed me to see this world and my place in it from a entirly different perspective.
A world of Love, passion and yes pain, but brimming with hope.
I commend this author.

The Revelation of Jesus to John--whom I'll take to be (as traditionally believed) the disciple who spoke most about feeling Jesus' love--is both prophetic and apocalyptic. As prophetic, Revelation refers both to John's present and to our future. As apocalyptic, Revelation is timeless.

John R. Yeatts's 2003 one-volume commentary gives studied attention to all three of these aspects of Revelation, with a bias toward the timeless idealistic view. Citing Eugene Boring favorably, Yeatts views Revelation as an "art gallery," not a calendar. (350) To imagine the effect of Revelation on its hearers, let me offer as an analogy the 1977 film Star Wars, which consistently ranks among the best films of all time. As C. S. Lewis has pointed out, science fiction is the apocalyptic literature of our day. Revelation, like Star Wars, is intended to bring its viewers hope and encouragement that the good guys will win (Rev. 1:3). How can that happen when the very title "Revelation" seems to be mocked by the book's obscurity on the face of it? For that, having a source to explain the historical context and the mindset of first-century Jews living under Rome is invaluable.

In Yeatt's commentary we have such a source, and hence we have encouragement. It gives a fair hearing to a wide range of previous commentaries, ranging from the dispensationalist conservative John Walvoord to the progressive Walter Wink. You might be disappointed that it does not take a more forceful position among the many alternative readings of the text, but you will find here a scholarly, sensible view consistent with the Anabaptist heritage that the Believers Church Bible Commentary series proposes to promulgate. Yeatts discusses a variety of millennial positions, favoring an amillennial point of view (394). Yeatts cites scant contemporary authors in the References to various millennial views. For example, George Ladd's commentary appears in the References, but he is not cited as being premillennial (although at 377 compare Yeatts and Ladd on "two resurrections"). Anthony Hoekema is a contemporary amillennial voice, but is not cited in the References at all. Yeatt's sources on the whole, however, are exceedingly thorough. He offers frequent helpful use of apocryphal and other ancient extra-Biblical literature, as well as contemporary sources as recent as 2002--only a year before Yeatt's book was published.

Here are three examples of the commentary's distinctive Anabaptist perspective: Yeatts's treatment of avenging (129), of being faithful in persecution (188 et alia), and of orthopraxis as more important than orthodoxy. End of chapter sections on The Text in the Life of the Church (TLC) and The Text in Biblical Context (TBC) are helpful conclusions to each chapter, providing consistency with the other 16 volumes in the Believers Church Bible Commentary series, and in the case of TLC, removing the commentary from the purely academic.

The commentary has a complete source index and glossary, but regrettably no word index. The book is carefully edited. I found only two small errors (Antiochus IV Epiphanes died BC and not AD (192); Larry Norman's song is entitled "I wish we'd all been ready" (433)).

Can you dip into it? Yes, there is enough repetition that you don't need to read it from start to finish, although I enjoyed reading it all. It assumes some background, however. For example, there is no glossary entry for "Parousia" (although there is a TBC at 364, and to be fair "Parousia" is in standard English dictionaries). There are Greek words without translation (329). There is a principle of Hebrew semantics that is not explained at 401, without which Yeatts's conclusion there seems to be arbitrary. Yeatts does a good job of mapping Greek tense, aspect, and mood onto English in simple language: present (287, 403, 416, 416, 421), aorist (332), perfect (402).

The commentary is peppered with insight. Here are several: That salvation includes judgment. (351) That "evil is irrational ... [so] it should be no surprise that humans can't understand it." (225) That God protects in (not from!) persecution. (228) That demonic idols are powerless. (171) That metaphor is more powerful than direct language for portraying spiritual truth. (175) (We shouldn't be surprised about that conclusion, since Jesus used parables and Aquinas used analogical reasoning.) That bursting into song (366, 430, 463) or trumpets playing (172) show the exuberant worship that Revelation portrays. Those worshipful commentaries offer a joyful counterpoint to an otherwise academic treatment hedged with "perhaps" and "best taken" (125) and "probably" (163) and "it is best" (185). Sometimes Yeatts is so modest in stating his position that to find out what he believes you have to use the principle: If he said it last, it's his view (391-395, 433 line 3).

Is there anything here with which I disagree? No. There is one close call at one spot. On 204, Yeatts claims that "through suffering, the faithful Christian participates in Christ's redemption of the world." This is close to Philippians 3:10b, that I might know Christ ... in "the fellowship of His sufferings," but with a theologically questionable twist. God redeems. God reconciles the world to Himself. We are never the subject of the reconciling. Our suffering may purify us and be a good witness to others, but in it we do not participate in redeeming the world, except as we are agents of God's reconciling the world to Himself (II Cor. 5:20). That of course is surely what Yeatts means. Not one drop of saints' blood contributes anything to the completed work of Christ's redemption.

Whether by modesty or by academic professionalism--neither of which is necessary--Yeatts uses "they" when "we" would be more warm-hearted and more accurate. For example (376): "Christ's bodily resurrection ... gives his followers confidence they will also be resurrected ..." Of course Yeatts means "gives his followers confidence we will also be resurrected." That's his hope, and mine.

The book of Revelation is one of the most controverial and discussed books of the Christian bible. It is a book written by the Apostle John around the turn of the first century. John was exiled on the island of Patmos when he received the visions that he recorded in his book.

John's vision is written in symbolic terms and therefore is open to multiple interpretations. Lewis Foster takes the Bible student through the Book of Revelation a chapter at a time, and often a verse at a time. His interpretation is a summary of the majority scholarly opinion on Revelation. The reader is given a basic foundation on the book that is applicable to further study. Foster's Bible study is by no means exhaustive in discussing all the possible interpretations of the book. Rather, this is his interpretation based on years of study of Revelation and many other commentaries. Again, it is the standard accepted interpretation of Revelation. Personally, I believe Foster has a sound, rational and well-thought out interpretation of Revelation, and the Bible student cannot go wrong with this book.

I recommend this book as a starting point of study in Revelation. I also recommend Lewis Foster's other two commentaries of the Gospels of John and Luke.

Jim "Konedog" Koenig

This book gives a good overview of Revelation. It is a good place to start for the beginner or for someone wanting an overall picture as a jumping off point to deeper study. I am also making use of several of the references in the back. ex. Boring, M. Eugene