This is a commentary on the Greek text and the author shows himself to be a seasoned exegete in teasing out the meaning of the text. Codes or product keys that accompany this product may not be valid. . Osborne's was more technical than I would've liked, which, frankly, I should've known given its girth. He also examines elements that complicate the interpretation of apocalyptic literature. Campbell, Themelios The Book of Revelation contains some of the most difficult passages in Scripture. People of similar theological perspective as Osborne i.
This is because there are few source-critical problems to fight through. To determine which view is best, several issues must be discussed. Like most commentators, Grant too easily dismisses the arguments for an early date of the book, but the commentary is still well worth consulting. Grant Osborne's commentary on Revelation aims to interpret the text while also introducing readers to the perspectives of contemporary scholarship in a clear and accessible manner. Osborne avoids an overly technical interpretative approach.
Readers will find here a fair-minded, if traditional interpretation of this enigmatic New Testament work. Osborne divides the commentary as follows: 1:1-8; 1:9-3:22; chs. Certain differences do in part distinguish the two forms: prophecy tends to be oracular and apocalyptic visionary, and prophecy has a certain optimistic overtone if the nation repents, the judgment prophecies will not occur , while apocalyptic tends to be pessimistic the only hope lies in the future rather than the present. This probably caused some of the pressure reflected in the book. Dāgeš present for euphonious reasons is not indicated in transliteration. There is little evidence in the book for official Roman persecution at the time of writing, and only two of the letters mention affliction Smyrna and Thyatira , although the letter to Philadelphia presupposes it. Ephesus was the third, and it was especially linked with establishing the Flavian dynasty in Asia.
Helmbold 1961—62: 77—79 points out that the Apocryphon of John, a likely mid- to late-second-century work, also attributes the book to the apostle John. These depictions of the social world described in the book contain a great deal of truth. John calls his work a prophecy 1:3; 22:7, 10, 18, 19 , and he was probably the leader of a group of prophets who ministered to the churches of Asia 22:6, 9. Schüssler Fiorenza 1980: 121—28 sums up the issue well: Revelation is a literary product of early Christian prophecy that took place in Asia Minor and was influenced by the post-Pauline ideas of that part of the church. Thompson and Aune argue again that the reports of widespread persecution in Tacitus, Suetonius, and others were the result of a relatively tight circle of politician-writers associated with the senatorial aristocracy with which Domitian was frequently in conflict Aune 1997: lxvii.
It was this tax that allowed the Jews freedom from participation in the imperial cult. The Book of Revelation contains some of the most difficult passages in Scripture. It is clear that the seven churches were in a hostile environment from two directions—the Jewish world and the Roman world. Like most commentators, Grant too easily dismisses the arguments for an early date of the book, but the commentary is still well worth consulting. Overall, a good commentary, although I would also recommend John G Butler and Adrian Rogers' commentaries on Revelation as a good, less technical, and more accurate balance. They are not by any means the only five commentaries a student of Scripture should consult.
But the Neronian persecution was limited to Rome as far as the data tell us, and there is no evidence for it extending to the province of Asia at that time. People who come to the text with a different theological commitment have an excellent resource introducing the major issues that surround the interpretation of any given text in Revelation. I enjoyed the introduction in which Osborne puts both preterism better explained as John's sitz em laben and futurism together to come to his conclusions. Thompson 1986: 169—70 says that their identification with the crucified king separated them from society. In some of the hotly debated passages on Revelation, I did agree with Osborne, and his presentation of those passages were solid.
This is the only commentary on Revelation you will need! When Christians refused to do so, a great deal of antipathy was naturally directed against them. The Book of Revelation contains some of the most difficult passages in Scripture. Therefore, there is a great deal of intertextual data in the book, and on key words I provide the reader with an overview of the term and related terms throughout the Apocalypse I use Apocalypse and Revelation interchangeably for variety along with theological commentary on the theme in the book. It is this aspect that first convinced me to change my earlier view of a Neronian date. Its more-than-800 pages render excellent reference material.
Upsilon is transliterated u only when it is part of a diphthong i. With extensive research and thoughtful chapter-by-chapter exegesis, these commentaries will be valued by students, professors, and pastors alike. Usable and affordable for wider classroom use and the needs of the average pastor. Of these, most contemporary scholars opt for either Nero or Domitian. Grant Osborne was one of my professors at Trinity.