With a word of prayer. Father, we certainly are delighted to be here in your presence this day, knowing that we gather together in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you have promised to be with us. We ask that as we open your word and think on it, that we will be open to what you have to communicate to us in this. Thank you for the ability to have your word, to be able to study it and to be able to learn from it. This is my prayer in Christ's name. Amen. Alright, well we are into this study of Revelation. As we said last week, it's not going to be a verse-by-verse study as we did with Hebrews. It's going to be more of a trying to understand how Revelation is I don't know why this thing does this way, but why Revelation is the way it is. And then look at some of the different sections on Revelation. Now, is it going to do me again that way? All right. Where am I? There I am. All right. Last time, you remember that we talked about some of the things that we need to avoid as we look at this book. First, future obsession. This is rather than seeing Revelation simply as a message that deals with things that will come, that we must see it as a message about our God who holds the future and see that the events that it describes are events that have been going on from the time that John wrote this. It was meaningful in his day, in other words. We then looked at the idea of event substitution, if you remember the picture of the helicopter, that people have always been about seeing what's going on today and saying that's what Revelation is talking about. Now there may be some truth in some of those because wherever there is a, for example, a government that is coming down on the church and abusing the church and tormenting the church, it does fulfill some of what we see in Revelation. But to say that a two, what do you call those things on top of helicopters? propellers rotors yeah two-rotor helicopter is what the revelation was talking about with these lotus um and chapter nine is just not the right way to go about it so the corrective is to make a shift from this future obsession to past revelation understanding that john was writing to people in his day and it had to be meaningful to people in his day so we can do this shift from future obsession to past revelation if we search for the meaning and the use in the apocalyptic symbols with which this book is filled, these symbols that come from sources that were used by John who received this revelation. So these sources we talked about last time, primarily the Old Testament, and we spent some time looking at Daniel, comparing it to Revelation. We also saw some allusions to the New Testament passages, as we looked last week, and the Jewish apocalyptic writings from the 2nd century BC to the 1st century AD, and we looked at some examples from 1 Enoch. So when we look at these symbols, the question that we asked was, did the meanings of the symbols change from their use in the Old Testament, from the use in the intertestamental Jewish literature, apocalyptic literature, or did our author, John, have a common stockpile of images of apocalyptic symbols from which he could choose? And we saw that there was a common stockpile. However, we must be careful to seek to determine the variation from writer to writer, whether it be whoever wrote Enoch, whoever wrote Estrus, whoever wrote whatever, see how it's the variation that is used in these symbols, not that the meaning changes so much as the application changes. And a good example that we saw, and we'll look at this a little bit more in a little while, was Daniel. In Daniel 7, we see these four beasts come out of the sea, whereas in Revelation, we're going to see one beast that have has characteristics of two of those four beasts that we saw in Daniel. So John can use the symbols in a different way than they were. Yes. The opening prologue tends to indicate that it is something that's future, but future the time of the writing of Revelation, but very close to the time of the writing of Revelation. Yes, and as we look at it, we'll see that it's things that are about to be rather than things 2,000 years from now. Yeah, and that's key. And this morning as we get to, well, we'll get to it right now. This is the important thing as we look at Revelation. The orientation point that is key to our understanding of Revelation is not the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, as many people think. The orientation which will keep us from misunderstanding and misinterpreting the message of Revelation is the Cross, Resurrection, Ascension of Jesus Christ. And so as we look at this, the apocalypse exalts the righteousness of God in that event. I'm calling those cross-resurrection ascension as an event, singular rather than plural, just because we're grouping them together that way. This is what reveals the ultimate victory is the cross-resurrection ascension, not the second coming. the consummation of this time-changing event has not yet come, but it has begun already." Now I put red there because I want you to see this, not yet already, which is so important to our understanding of how really anything about the coming of the Lord and eschatology and that sort of thing. So redemption is not yet, there's those words again, completed, but it is accomplished. and victory is sure. Revelation uses apocalyptic techniques to uncover the righteousness and victory already attained in Christ Jesus, and the age to come has broken in on this present evil age." Sometimes we'll see that talked about as an overlap of the ages. Yes, we as Christians are strangers and aliens, to use Peter's term, in this world, in this age, this present evil age, but we are also, we have entered that age to come in an already not yet a manner. So, John's not giving us an interpretation of the future. He is proclaiming the significance of the crucifixion, resurrection, and exaltation of Jesus for the future. So the meaning of the cross resurrection for time and history until the end is that orientation point. God's on His throne. Christ has won, not will win, Christ has won the victory. God is at work in the midst of world's chaos. Despite the appearances that we see every day, whether it be the persecuted church or even our own government here, despite the appearances to the contrary, the true victors are those from every tongue, nation, people, and who have been called in Christ Jesus. That is what we will see and that is what we will hear as we study the apocalypse. God is sovereign over all history, that's certain. That is actually the same theme that we see in the book of Daniel, at least the second half of Daniel. He's sovereign over all of history, though now only that is known through the eyes of faith. What the apocalypse will tell us is that the final stanza will reveal that all history is his story. It will be seen not only through the eyes of faith, but will be seen here on earth. So as the interpretive center of the apocalypse, the cross resurrection and ascension is the lens through which John sees his vision and he interprets it for us. So rather than imposing Old Testament apocalyptic concepts on the pictures that will be painted for us by John, we then should determine how John interprets those pictures in light of the cross resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ. For example, again, go back to Daniel 7. He has the vision of these four beasts. John combines two of these four anyway in Revelation 13. So we have to move beyond what Daniel is told that these four represent four kingdoms and move to what John is showing us. And that is a spiritual level of this same idea of powers that are exerting forces upon the people of God. So the main purpose of the book, having looked at the orientation, having looked at the background and sources, the main purpose of this book is to comfort the militant church. What is the militant church? It's the church here on earth. So this book is to comfort the militant church from the time of John and those seven churches in Asia to our time today, the church today. It's persecuted, always has been. It's struggling, always has been. In its conflict against evil forces, this book is to be comfort. We see that because God sees their tears, meaning He sees our tears. He sees their and our prayers. He hears those prayers and are influential in world affairs. I forgot to give out readings. So I guess I'm stuck with doing the readings today. I'm gonna read to you from Daniel 9. Now, this is Daniel speaking, while I was speaking and praying and confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel and presenting my supplication to the Lord my God in behalf of the holy mountain of my God, while I was still speaking in prayer. Now, the context is this, Daniel in chapter 9, is praying repentance, not only for himself, but for his nation. Why? Because he realizes that it's been 70 years. And what's the significance of that? it said what 70 years in Babylon so Daniel now is praying and but he understands that that that God will only respond to the prayer of repentance and so he's been praying while I was still praying he says then the man Gabriel who's Gabriel Okay, the man Gabriel the angel Gabriel whom I had seen in the vision previously Came to me in my extreme weariness about the time of the evening offering and he gave me instruction and talked to me and said Oh Daniel, I have now come forth to give you insight with understanding at the beginning of your supplications The command was issued and I have come to tell you that you're highly esteemed So give heed to the message and give understanding to the vision Daniel has been praying. He has sent the angel Gabriel in response to his prayer. God hears prayers. Now, it just so happens that the message he's given is a 70 weeks vision. Yeah. It's whatever God says it is. Yeah. Actually, he had been in prayer longer than just the, the, he'd been, yes, it is. He is whenever he said, that's right. It's whenever the Lord decides. But the key thing is in some instances, it's been 2000 years. This church has been praying Maranatha come Lord Jesus. But, uh, he does, he does hear our prayers. He does answer our prayers. He also, or the apocalypse also will tell us that Christ reigns forever, governing the world in the interest of His church. Now, there are many times when it doesn't look like He's governing the world in the interest of His church, but He is. He always is. When Daniel goes through his visions and sees these different kingdoms that are gonna be torturing the people of God, he is doing this and as we go through Revelation we'll see this he's doing this for for a reason he's doing in the interest of the church it may be to purge the church it may be to cleanse the church but it's always in the interest of his church that he's acting final victory is assured why do i say that because it's already been won it just has to be put in place the blood of The church will be avenged. We'll see that message. And he's coming again to take his people to himself and to live with him forever. That is the comfort that this book will present to the militant church, to the church here in this world. So not only can we yet expectantly hope for the glorious coming of the Son of Man, but the Apocalypse tells us that He is already with us in the Spirit. It pictures it in the very first vision as walking in the midst of the seven golden lampstands, i.e. the seven churches. So He is with us now. That being with us will be consummated at some point. victory of Christ and his church over Satan and his collaborators is for sure. Things are not as they seem to be. It seems that the beast out of the abyss is victorious in chapter 11 because he makes war with the saints and overcomes them and kills them. That does not look like the church is being held up. However, in just a few verses, we're told that, and I think I have a reading on this one, but what we're told is that, in reality, the saints who triumph in Jesus Christ receive the breath of life from God. In other words, the response of God to the overcoming and killing is eternal life, is entering into, for me to live is Christ to die is gain. and the story of the New Testament. So throughout the book, Christ is pictured repeatedly as victor, as conqueror, as overcomer. We see I've listed some verses there where this is very specific. He conquers death. He conquers Hades. He conquers the dragon. He conquers the sea beast or the beast out of the sea. He conquers the land beast who will transform into the false prophet. He conquers the men who worship the beast. He is called the conqueror victor over all of these things. And because he is victorious, so is his church. And so are we. That is the message of this book to comfort us, George. Well, it's the church here on the earth that is you can call it at war spreading the gospel. It's a term from church history that has been applied to the church. It means this church here on earth as opposed to the church in heaven. So the militant church just means the church on earth. That's all that means. Now, The Apocalypse is rooted in the Sacred Scriptures and it should be interpreted then in harmony with the teachings of the entire Bible. So as we look at how do we interpret Revelation, the first thing we need to understand is that it is steeped in Scripture, especially Old Testament. the mind of the seer John was immersed in scripture. And this would have been for him the Old Testament, though the New Testament hadn't been collected yet. Yes, the writings were around. I'm sure he was familiar with them, including some of the Gospels and Paul's writings, but his Bible would have still been the Old Testament. His Old Testament, if he was stationed or centered in Ephesus, as we think, was probably the Greek version, the Septuagint, and that might have included some of what we consider non-canonical writings, what we call Apocrypha. But, and we will see, or we have seen already some of how he can allude to those things. The New Testament alludes to some of the Apocrypha. If you remember Jude, if you remember 1 Peter. So alluding to those things doesn't make them canon. But anyway, John is steeped in the scripture. He's immersed in this scripture. And we need to look into the entire religious heritage, not only of John, but of those to whom he writes, the believers in the churches of Asia at the time, at the end of the first century AD. Now, an example of this is, again, the beast in Revelation 13, being rooted in Daniel 7. In Daniel there were four beasts. They represent four kingdoms. How do I know that? Because Daniel is Tobit. In Revelation there's one beast and this beast is a composite, at least halfway composite, of the four beasts of Daniel. Only two of the four beasts are represented in John's beast, but it's obviously those those same pictures. The suggestion that we get from the way John uses the Daniel symbol is that the beast in Revelation represents something like the four beasts in Daniel. In Daniel, there are specifically four successive kingdoms, and that doesn't mean one immediately after the other necessarily, but four successive kingdoms or empires. Then we need to look at this idea of powers anti-christian powers as being what is uh what john is picturing in his composite beast we'll talk about that more when we get to that but um here we can see this idea of successive phases and embodiments of anti-Christian power in a composite beast in John. And this might be governments just like it was with Daniel. It could be other institutions, quasi-governmental institutions, for example, educational accreditation bodies that take so many positions that are against the church. And if that bothers any of you, I'm not sorry. It could be professional associations. It can be trade cooperatives. It can be a 501c3 organization. Can anybody say ACLU? Anything that might have any kind of, or might can impose any anti-Christian philosophies or policies or influences that go against the church could be represented in this beast that John presents to us. In Revelation, the composite beast is further described as having seven heads, which are seven kings, five have fallen, one is, the other is not yet. Let me read that to you. Here is the mind which has wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits. there are seven kings five have fallen one is the other is not yet to come when he comes he must remain a little while and the beast which was and is not is himself also the eighth and is one of the seven and he goes to destruction now in a minute i'm going to mention how we got to be careful how we use that description i think as we think about interpreting revelation we need to do this with Daniel in mind. If you remember in Daniel, well, I didn't read that passage from Daniel 7 this week, we're at last week. There were also these heads and horns and things on the beast. But here, if we keep Daniel in mind, we can understand that these institutions, as I called them in the previous slide, which the world's persecuting power is embodied is pictured by this beast that has these heads and the seven kings and all that sort of thing. So the important thing to keep in mind here is to see how John is using the symbols. I'm not trying to explain them fully now because we'll do that when we go through it, but I want you to see this idea of how we're going to approach interpreting Revelation. The other important thing is, of course, context. Context is always king. First and foremost, we always do justice to the immediate context in which a passage is embedded. So it makes a difference if what we are reading is one of the seven bowls, for example, or seven trumpets of judgment, or one of the seven seals. All of those kinds of immediate contexts are very important, and the most important thing. Secondly, we look for parallel passages. We look for those passages, first of all, in the apocalypse itself. For example, we will read about a crystal sea around the throne of God in chapter four, and again in 15, it'll be a crystal sea with fire upon which the saints stand, again in heaven or around the throne of God. Perhaps we ought to keep those things in mind when we get to chapter 21, and it makes this little phrase that people have argued about forever, and there's no longer a sea. You can be thinking about that, but when we get to it, we'll think about it even more. Again, immediate context is key. Excuse me, the parallel passages in the book is key. Finally, this is especially significant when we come to the symbols in Revelation. We need to keep in mind the context of the whole Old Testament in which this book is steeped. Now, let me give us a caution as we go. John is not a mere copyist. He is not looking at something and writing down, trying to do exactly what he has seen or heard or whatever. He's received visions. These visions are of such character that they could only be received by an apostle whose mind and moral compass or moral consciousness were saturated with the teachings of the Old Testament. However, having received these visions, having heard these messages, he's writing them down, what he sees, what he hears, for others to understand. And he must do that in a way in which they could understand it. Now, the people in John's day understood these apocalyptic symbols. They could understand it. We'll suggest that in a subsequent session, we will suggest that possibly he wrote this way to hide the meaning of his message from the powers that were to be. Because if he were to write against Domitian, and we'll mention him in a minute, and Domitian knew that, exile to Patmos would not have been the answer to that. Likewise, if he wrote in such a way that the people who received it was recognized about them that they were reading something against Domitian then they too would have been put at risk. Perhaps he is writing now say perhaps because number one I'm not fully convinced and number two it hasn't been fully proven this is so that the reason he uses apocalyptic is as a protective mechanism but having chosen to do that then the visions he sees and the message he hears has to be put in this way put in this way, putting is not a word is it, has to be put in this way in order to accomplish what he wants to accomplish that his readers could understand it with a perhaps that others couldn't. Now is that a problem? No. You remember what Jesus said about why he taught in parables? so that you could understand it but those that can't don't understand it you got to have the ears to hear to be able to hear and of course hear means understand so same type of a thing here now the old testament teachings are often but not always poured into new molds thereby they acquire slightly modified connotations not meanings but connotations, and the only way we can determine that is the immediate context in which they're found. Now, finally, in terms of interpreting scripture, let us always remember that the apocalypse is rooted in special revelation. It is directly from God. You remember while somebody had Revelation 1.1, are you right there, Joe? All right, read Revelation 1.1. take place. He made it known by sending his angels to his servant John, who bore witness to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw. Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear and keep what is written, for the time is near. Alright, so we see that this is a message directly from God. This is special revelation. This is scripture. It has its origin not in John's mind, but in the mind of God. However, it was God who had prepared the mind, the soul of John, so that he was able to receive this prophetic apocalypse and then to communicate on with it. Now, before we get into some of the background, let me pause here and ask, are there any questions about this, what we have talked about so far? Sources, symbols, theme, purpose, any of that stuff, how we're gonna go about interpreting. So we're in the reign of Domitian. That's what we're getting ready to see, exactly. All right. Traditionally, the author of the Apocalypse has been known to be the Apostle John, the author of the fourth gospel and the epistles. The author calls himself John, and the next verse after where Joe stopped, and later on, he has been In some early church writings, he was claimed to be another John called John the Elder. This John the Elder was also associated with the church at Ephesus. as was John the Apostle. And so this John the Elder, some suggested is the John that wrote this, and probably because it reads so much differently than the Gospel and the Epistles. I'll say a little bit more about that in just a minute. However, this idea of John the Elder has never been accepted fully, either in the early church or today. Neither has John the Elder been clearly differentiated from John the Apostle. Because what better description of John the Apostle in AD mid-90s would there be than elder? Now you remember Peter called himself a fellow elder, so to call yourself an elder in terms of an office wouldn't have been beyond John. But John would really have been an elder too at this point in time, most likely in his 90s or thereabouts. But anyway, John the Apostle is pretty much the accepted author of this book. He claims to be the servant of Jesus Christ. He claims to be brother of the Christians who are in the churches of Asia, their fellow sufferer in the tribulation. He is exiled on Patmos on account of his preaching of the word, and he himself heard and saw the things recorded in this book. That's what we know for sure about the author of Revelation. Now, I mentioned the Greek of Revelation, The Greek of this book is written as if it's a second language. If you have a second language, you know you're not, well, I assume you're not as, well, here we go. Are you as fluent in your second language as you are in English? No. Even though you do it every day? Yes. And so this reads as if Greek is the second language for this writer. He will often translate a Hebrew idiom into Greek, and we can tell that he is writing it in a way a Hebrew person or an Aramaic speaking person would have said it. It's much as if I, if I recognize some information received as being effective, and I was writing to Greek speakers and Greek readers, I wrote, Nun altos ha skoulos kounigese, Now, a Greek reader or writer would read that and say, now that dog will hunt. Now that dog will hunt? Not before? Or, no, that dog will hunt? Not before? Why in the world is Steve talking about a dog hunting? Well, any of us from the South know now that dog will hunt means that works, man. But that's the way he would have done things. Anybody in here, that's the first time they've heard that? Well, that dog will hunt. Well, let me tell you a story about it then. When I was training in pediatric surgery up in Washington, D.C. at the Children's Hospital, a lot of the staff were foreign people and, of course, they spoke with foreign accents. No biggie-dillie. When Steve's suits from South Carolina opened his mouth, everybody stopped and turned, where are you from? Well, they didn't say it like that because they weren't from the South. But anyway, one day, an intern comes up to me and says, I need you to help explain something to me. Right next door to the Children's Hospital was the Washington Hospital Center, big trauma center, big burn center. And the surgeon that headed up the burn center happened to be from Georgia. And she says, this guy is always saying that dog a hunt. What does that mean? And so I had to explain this thing to her. John wrote things in Revelation that were like that dog a hunt, that would have been something that a Hebrew person would have understood very well. Well, he takes unusual liberties with the syntax of the language. Now, syntax is a way that elements of a sentence may be put together, whether it be words or phrases put together or clauses put together, the way that everything comes together as a syntax. And he takes liberties with it that you wouldn't see in high Greek. Let's put it that way. His style is unique. It would be like, for example, in English, we typically say subject, verb, object, right? And in deference to our Georgia friends, I'll say the sentence, Georgia wins championships. No problem. Well, what if I were to say, championships, Georgia wins. Now, you would understand what I'm saying, but it's a funny way to say it. You might even say that's the way Yoda would say it. No, that's not the way Yoda would say it. Yoda would say, uh, Georgia championships wins. But anyway, that kind of thing is what he does with the Greek language. It's clearly different from the Apostle and the Epistles. And that could very easily be either because John used an amanuensis, a scribe, for the Gospel, the Epistles, or Revelation. Something different that way. But it could also be because it's a different type of literature. John is an apostle. We see this very clearly because he writes as one who has authority over the churches of Asia, but unquestioned authority over them. But we also see in him a profound spiritual insight and maturity, a maturity and sanctification that would be recognizable in someone like John the apostle. It seems obvious that it was written during a period of severe persecution in the first century, and early tradition and recent opinion have identified this as Domitian's reign and persecution. Nero was a very popular choice at one time, or idea at one time, suggested at one time. The problem with Nero's period is, yes, there was severe persecution of Christians in Rome, but not beyond Rome. So if there's persecution of the churches in Asia, Nero's time in the 60s doesn't fit that. There was severe persecution of the churches even in Asia under Domitian's reign. Yes. When you were talking, you made a comment about John having a scribe or a copyist. Did I get that right? Yeah. He may have. He may have. If he had, would that person have ever taken liberties to not write exactly what John was saying? Yes. Yeah, it wouldn't have been a transcription like you and I think of transcriptions. It wouldn't have been expected in those days. John would obviously have had to approve it before it went out. Paul did the same thing. He tells us he does the same thing. So that's not an uncommon thing. that the copyist wrote down was the word that God always wanted. God was just as in control of the copyist if there was one as he was in the primary guy, yes. This is God's word, primarily. God's not limited to one guy in production of that. Now, Domitian's persecution, and this is key, is primarily because Christians refused to worship the emperor, him. There was no big push for emperor worship during Nero's time. So this persecution because of the refusal to worship the emperor was something that was seen during Domitian's time. As we read the seven letters to the churches, seven churches of Asia, we'll also see that these churches are obviously not new or young churches, which they would have been in the 60s if that was when this book was written. But these are churches that have been around for a while and have some history. Because of the symbolic nature of symbols, I couldn't figure out a better way of saying that. I mean, of course, if it's a symbol, it's symbolic. But anyway, because of the symbolic nature of symbols in Revelation, what John writes in 17th chapter cannot be used to calculate which emperor's picture. Here's what I'm talking about. that that i read to you about the seven heads or seven mountains on which the woman sits now that is a clear picture of what rome with its seven hills or uh all right they are but they're also seven kings now how can they be mountains and be kings well this is a phrase you're going to hear over and over and over again for the next several months this is apocalyptic How can it be mountains and kings? This is apocalyptic. And that's what you expect in apocalyptic. Now, the seven kings, five have fallen. One is, the other's not yet come. When he comes, he will remain a little while, and the beast is the eighth. So, you go to the list of Roman emperors, and you try to figure out who the one is that's gonna be here in a little while, and who the one is that is now. And you can't do it. and come up with either Nero or Domitian, which everybody wants to do one or the other. You either have to leave some out or you have to see some emperors as not being emperors. There were emperors who were only emperors for a few days. But so there's just no way of using that description and remember this is apocalyptic. It's not meant to be used to calculate things that way, but you can't come up with the Emperor that way. You have to come up with the Emperor the way we have suggested that you come up with it, and that is because Domitian and Domitian only fits that. All right, so Domitian's reign was from about AD 81 to 96. The 96 is a given, and we know he died then, so we know his reign ended then. So he's the emperor who's gone down in history as the one who bathed the empire in the blood of Christians. Now, not Rome, but the empire in the blood of Christians. And the primary purpose for his persecution was to enforce emperor worship. were statues of Domitian. There were temples to Domitian even in Asia. And so we know from archaeological findings they were there. We also know from writings that there was a police force that was used to enforce worship of the emperor. So we know that that was going on during the time of Domitian. Now there were periods later where this happened too, but that doesn't help us with something John writes in the mid-90s, that there were periods afterwards that were just like this period. But we see here that it was a reign of Domitian where the insistence on emperor worship was more threatening and more vehement than it had been before. The death of Domitian in 96 is the terminus ad quem of the book. In other words, it couldn't have been written after that if it was written during his reign. All right, the Terminus Aquo, the beginning, would have been the beginning of his reign in 81, but it would have taken some time for this emperor worship persecution to be set in place or to grow in place. And so the most common understanding now is it's a mid-90s writing, and most people will say somewhere between 94 and 96. I don't know why they don't just say 95 and say about 95, but anyway, it's sometime in that period of time. So that's the way I come up with the 90s dating, Joe, that you've asked me about. Who are the recipients of Revelation? Well, the first recipients were the seven churches that were in Asia. But as you see from that picture, if I were to go up to that map and you were to say, who are the recipients? I would take my finger and just circle that area. Well, isn't that what it's done? It's circled that area. As we will see as we go through this study, seven means more than seven. Seven means complete or perfect. And so if he's writing to the seven churches in Asia, he's writing to all the churches in Asia. These seven happened to be the seven places that would make the best points from which to serve the entire province of Asia. But there were also the seven leading cities of the area. So he's writing to the seven churches of Asia. And as we will see, when we look at the letters to the churches, these seven churches not only represent all the churches of Asia, but they represent all the churches from the cross-resurrection exaltation of Christ until it's coming again. Now, I don't say they come sequentially, that Ephesus is early and that Smyrna comes later and Pergamum, that's not what it is. But we'll go through that when we get to it. All right. The condition of the churches in Asia who first received this Apocalypse is very critical for the understanding of the book. First of all, we need to understand that Christianity by this time is an illegal religion in the Roman Empire. For one reason is that Christianity aspired to worldwide growth and Rome doesn't like that idea. Christianity also was exclusive. Now, had Christianity been willing to let its God be added to the other gods, there wouldn't have been any problem. Syncretistic, in other words. But no, they were exclusive. The Lord your God is one, even the Jews said that. No one comes to the Father but by me. So it's an exclusive religion, and Rome didn't like that. Christians were accused of many evils. We have secret meetings. And at these meetings we eat flesh and drink blood and we call them love feasts. Christians also refused to go to war for the empire. Most Christians were poor. They were outcasts and looked down upon. By this time, Rome looked down upon the Jews. Actually, it always looked down upon the Jews. It was not an illicit religion. Christians come into conflict with Templar officials. We saw this with Paul and Ephesus, if you remember. The silversmiths, because they were making their idols to Artemis of the Ephesians. We saw this then, and the same thing happens with churches of Asia during omissions time, whether it be the priests, the makers of idols, the vendors of the sacrificial animals, or whatever, so we see them in conflict with these. But primarily, the problem is that the Christians refused to worship the emperor, and because of that, the emperor's wrath came down upon them. So, in conclusion, and I might even give you 30 seconds early today, The Apocalypse is written in contemporaneous to John events and circumstances at that time, and it should be interpreted in light of conditions which prevailed when the book was written. Now, next time we'll move forward with some other types of things and how we approach Revelation. But in the 25 seconds that are now left, does anybody have any questions or comments? I appreciate you