There are two essentially different methods of Interpretation that have been followed in attempting to arrive at the meaning of this manifestly difficult book, which are founded upon different conceptions of its didactic purpose, and proceed upon different lines of inquiry, viz. the Historical, and the Symbolical.

The Historical Interpretation regards the book as a prophetic review and forecast of history veiled in symbol, [pg 044] and seeks the meaning and fulfilment of the visions in certain specific historical events which either have occurred, are occurring, or will occur within the sphere of human life and experience. There are three different forms of this method of interpretation, all of which specialize the prophecy but differ as to the time and nature of the fulfilment, viz. (1) the Preterist view (also called the Contemporaneous-Historical), which regards that the visions relate mainly to events in the history of the early church, and that they have been already fulfilled in the far past; (2) the Futurist view (also called the Future-Historical), that the visions relate mainly to events which shall occur in the last days, and that the fulfilment is to be looked for chiefly in the more or less remote future; and (3) the Progressivist view (also called the Continuous- or Church-Historical), that the several visions constitute a continuous and progressive series, covering the whole period of the church's history from the time of John to the last judgment, and that their fulfilment is therefore to be found in a successive line of historical events, part of which lie in the past and part in the future.

The Symbolical Interpretation, upon the other hand, regards the book as a prophetic idealization of history, dealing with the general course and outcome of man's life upon the earth, and disclosing under the form of symbols the spiritual and moral forces which give to history its deeper meaning; and seeks the significance and fulfilment of the visions not, therefore, in particular events, but rather in classes of events, not solely at one definite time, but at many different times, finding the revelation mainly illustrative of general principles of the divine government rather than predictive of particular facts of history, a view of various phases rather than of historic stages of the church's experience,52 and interpreting its symbols in the genuine spirit of Apocalyptic as pictorial representations of the prevailing fortunes of the church in the world as she moves forward to the final consummation.53 This method of interpretation, which is commonly known as [pg 045] the Symbolist view (also called the Spiritual), presents no such marked difference of form as the Historical, but with a wider outlook regards that the visions relate to all such like events in every age as specially manifest God's rule in the world sending forth judgment unto victory, and such as particularly exhibit the progressive development of good and evil in human life, together with their constant conflict and their final reward and punishment.

All the current interpretations may be classified under one or other of the above heads, yet in the hands of individual interpreters they are often modified and blend into each other in their application—a manifest recognition of the fact that there is an element of truth underlying each view, which we may perhaps say has been unduly emphasized, for all agree that the interpretation is somehow and somewhere to be found in human life and history.

What might be called still another method of interpretation is the Apocalyptic-Traditional (or Tradition-Historical) view of late critical writers on the Apocalypse already referred to, which approaches the question from the viewpoint of literary origin, and attributes certain portions of the book to the introduction of traditional Jewish or Jewish-Christian Apocalyptic fragments that have been utilized by the author and applied to the historical conditions of his time, adapting them to a new meaning. This, however, is not so much a separate method of interpretation as it is a corollary of the present Literary-Critical method of dealing with the book, which regards it as an early Christian work in successive editions that has taken into itself certain Jewish elements. With this origin assumed the interpretation does not differ materially from the Preterist view except, perhaps, that it is less rigorous in its application to current events, and recognizes more fully the idealism of the author; for the historical outlook has measurably lost its value except as an indication of the date of writing, and for most who hold this view the book has no longer any distinctive prophetic message for the church; it has become chiefly a fantastic dream, a pious dream it is true, but only a dream of the far past.

The principal question of interpretation, as will be seen by a consideration of the current views, relates not only to the view-point, but also to the aim or design of the [pg 046] Revelation. The Historical method centers the chief aim of the book in a predictive-prophetic element which it finds throughout and regards as pointing to specific events in particular periods of history that are designed to teach important spiritual lessons. With this idea of the didactic purpose, it yet presents the widest variation of opinion concerning the viewpoint of the book, and includes upon the one hand the extreme rationalist who considers it a purely human writing, a Jewish apocalypse that has been revamped to include Christian ideas, which blends history with prediction and reflects only the horizon of the first century; and on the other hand the devout mystic who accepts its message as chiefly predictive prophecy of the far future, and interprets it well nigh literally as a prophetic account of the world's ending amid terror and blood. The Symbolist method, with a quite different conception, centers the aim of the book in an interpretative-prophetic element which it finds in every part, and regards as setting forth the principles of the divine government, and pointing to their exemplification in multiple events occurring in different periods of history that are working together toward the final consummation. According to this method of interpretation the viewpoint is idealistic, universal, and timeless, and the scope of the visions correspondingly wide.

The latter view, which is the one presented in the following outline, affords a fairly satisfactory interpretation that has been steadily gaining ground during the last half-century, and to the present author seems destined in some form to attain general though perhaps not universal acceptance. The views of the leaders in the symbolical school present no material divergence in general interpretation,54 and the principles of this interpretation seem likely to prevail throughout the Christian church of the future, though the form and application may be somewhat modified. The objection that “this system of interpretation is out of keeping with the general purpose of Apocalyptic literature”,55 loses its force if we grant that the book is inspired, and realize that the literary form was chosen because of its adaptability for the treatment of the topics dealt with in the Apocalypse; for once, the Apocalyptic form becomes the vehicle of a divine revelation, it thereby escapes some of the main limitations of its class, one [pg 047] of which was “the consciousness of no new message from God for the generation to which it was addressed”; and accordingly it should here be regarded as only the literary setting in which the message continually overtops the form, the art-form in which the art is lost sight of through the beauty and power of the truth which it presents. This view, although not without difficulties, is yet believed by a good proportion of eminent scholars to be based upon sound and temperate exegesis, to be best suited to the character of the book, and to give relative value to all the elements of truth contained in other views. The importance of the historical situation of John's time and of the lessons for that age is fully recognized, the eschatological element throughout is given due consideration, and the application of the prophecy to the entire trend and events of history is made apparent, while the precise time-relation of the visions is for the most part eliminated, and thus the field of prophetic prospective is maintained in its true breadth, and not narrowed as in the historical interpretation to a particular age or series of events. And the interpretation as a whole rests for its validity upon the scope and tenor of the book throughout, and can therefore be maintained without determining the full or specific meaning of every part. The Revelation thus understood ceases to be either a political diatribe of the first century, or the terrored story of the End; it rises above an epitome of history whether near or far, and takes rank as a true prophetic book in Apocalyptic form, dealing with the all-embracing plan of God for the ages, and the munificent purpose of redemption; and it is thereby rescued from many conjectural and contradictory interpretations which have obscured its meaning, and becomes a living prophecy of value to the church in every age.

The tendency toward wiser methods in the interpretation of the Apocalypse, and the growing spirit of unanimity concerning its larger lessons, provide good ground for encouragement to the troubled reader. And while, no doubt, the influence of the individual type of mind will continue to be felt in the interpretation, the rationalistic emphasizing the preterist application, the mystic the futurist, and the practical mind the symbolic and universal reference, yet it should always be kept in view that the chief importance of the book for the church at large [pg 048] transcends any question of theoretical interpretation, and lies in its practical worth in providing a rich source of religious inspiration, an invigorating aid to imperfect faith, and an abiding stimulus to the Christian imagination, in enabling the ordinary mind to realize the spiritual in the midst of and transcending the natural, and in making the deep conflict of life with its divine superintendence an ever present fact to the human soul. Indeed the book was evidently written for common use in the early church in public worship (ch. 1:3), which indicates an appreciation of its value in striking contrast with the modern indifference that passes it by as unintelligible. The Apocalypse has also a historical value, quite apart from its general meaning and use, that we should not overlook, for it throws important light upon the political and social conditions as well as the inner thought and development of the Christian church in the latter part of the first century. It reflects throughout the faith and temper in which the early church faced its growing conflict with the world. And it serves to show that at the close of the apostolic age there was a Christianity which was free from the law and universal, and yet continued to adhere to Jewish modes of expression.56