The message of Revelation speaks to Christians for all times, and historically has especially encouraged persecuted groups. Today Christians in many parts of the world are also at opposition to the worldview of the time. Revelation gives strength to those who are oppressed, and John R. Yeatts' commentary attends to themes of martyrdom, suffering, service in the world, hope, the triumph of Christ, and the role of the church in bearing witness to the triumphant Christ. The commentary includes clear biblical commentary, relationships between various portions of Scripture, and applications drawn from the Anabaptist tradition and the larger Christian community. 304 Pages.
Revelation (Believers Church Bible Commentary)
and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle.
Learn more
| ||||||||||||||||||||
Book Description
Frequently Bought Together
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
9 of 9 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback
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.
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.
Inside This Book
(learn more)
Browse Sample Pages:
Front Cover | Table of Contents | First Pages | Index | Back Cover | Surprise Me!
Front Cover | Table of Contents | First Pages | Index | Back Cover | Surprise Me!
Suggested Tags from Similar Products(What's this?)Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product).
|
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
