The Book of Revelation - Part 3

15 Feb 2026 · this lesson on the church site

Taught by Dr. Keith Palmer, Grace Bible Church, Granbury, Texas — from the church’s Sunday School series on Revelation. These are lightly edited transcripts of the audio, posted for personal study; the teaching and its content belong to Dr. Palmer and Grace Bible Church. Listen to the originals and find his notes on the church website. Transcribed from the audio by AI. Edited only where the audio was unclear (all edits marked with *). Errors are possible — the recording is the authority.

Review and Outline (00:00)

We're looking at Revelation chapter 1. Just by way of review, this is the revelation of Jesus Christ. It comes from God to Jesus to John via these visions and these angels that are involved in communicating it. As we'll see today, as we get further into the book, these angels, these angeloi, the messengers, get more involved in terms of their role.

We're thinking here about an outline. This is just from John MacArthur's material, and it gives us a general idea. We're in that introductory part right now. We'll probably start next week on the letters to the seven churches. Once we get through those, in chapter 4 and following, those are the things that take place after, and that's the big mystery. What does that mean? When do they take place, and how do we understand those things? So there's lots of fun to come, culminating in the final judgment and the new heavens and the new earth.

The Graphic Overview (01:02)

I put out a graphic last week, so hopefully those of you who wanted it have it. It's my understanding that it's copyright free, so tell me if you've heard otherwise. It's helpful for graphically thinking through the book, because there are lots of different elements and it's easy to get distracted by the details, the weeds, and the different visions. We'll get to all that, but hopefully it gives you a bird's-eye view.

We're in the section we're calling vision number one. This is the first actual material John is going to see. Let me read the section we're going to look at today, and then we'll jump back into our study.

Reading Revelation 1:9–20* (02:08)

Chapter 1, verse 9: "I, John, your brother and fellow partaker in the tribulation and kingdom and perseverance, which are in Jesus, was on the island called Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus. I was in the spirit on the Lord's day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like the sound of a trumpet saying, 'Write in a book what you see and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamum, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.'"

"And then I turned to see the voice that was speaking with me, and having turned, I saw seven golden lampstands, and in the middle of the lampstands I saw one like a son of man, clothed in a robe reaching to the feet and girded across his chest with a golden sash. His head and his hair were white like white wool, like snow, and his eyes were like a flame of fire. His feet were like burnished bronze when it has been made to glow in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters. In his right hand he held seven stars, and out of his mouth came a sharp two-edged sword, and his face was like the sun shining in its strength."

"John writes: And when I saw him I fell at his feet like a dead man. And then he placed his right hand on me, saying, 'Do not be afraid, for I am the first and the last and the living one, and I was dead, and behold I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades. Therefore write the things which you have seen, and the things which are, and the things which will take place after these things. As for the mystery of the seven stars which you saw in my right hand and the seven golden lampstands: the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.'"

Opening the Passage (03:12)

Lest you think that Jesus is boring, let me help your theology today. So let's take this apart.

First of all, John writes in chapter 1, verse 9, "John, your brother, your fellow partaker in the tribulation." Remember that word just means affliction. He's not necessarily using it in some technical sense of a specific time in history, although we're going to talk about that. He's a partaker in the tribulation, the affliction, in the kingdom and the perseverance which are in Jesus. He was on the island of Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus.

Patmos and Banishment (04:15)

That's probably a reference to banishment: because of the word and the testimony, his witness to Jesus, he was sent off the continent onto this little island. It was not uninhabited, you'll recall. It was partially inhabited, but the Romans were known in this day to send prisoners off to uninhabited or minimally inhabited islands as a form of punishment, and that appears to be what's going on here.

I was reading some of the history these last couple of weeks, and we don't know what that condition was like for John. There are some historical sources that say John could have been under forced labor. If you picture John hiding in a cave somewhere, sipping his latte and writing the book of Revelation, that's not it at all. The chances are he was involved in some sort of hard forced labor, or certainly isolation in some other way. He was a prisoner there. So we don't want to get the wrong idea about his participation. We don't know for sure what that was like, but it was not a vacation.

Now, just to remind you, this is the island today, a relatively small island. Let's begin with geography. The red marker there, of course, if you're watching the Olympics, we know most of those are taking place up in this part of Italy. If we zoom in on the coast of Turkey, here's our little island. Zoom in a little more and you can see this is it right here. Those of you who can read Greek, if you can read that, you've got 20/20 vision, right? But you see that Patmos is just a transliteration of the Greek word there. So that's the island we're talking about.

John as Visual Scribe (06:22)

Back to the vision. He says, "I was in the spirit." This is review, by the way; we're not in your notes just yet. "In the spirit" references the agency of the Holy Spirit, who made possible the experiences mentioned in the book. So the fact that he could see these visions and hear them, however God worked that out, he's on the island, but it's the Spirit's agency that allows him to receive these visions and revelations. "The Lord's Day," of course, is a reference to Sunday. That's the meaning there.

Then John writes that he heard, all of a sudden, a loud voice like the sound of a trumpet, telling him to write in a book what he sees. We're going to see this repeated multiple times, where John is told to write down what he sees. We're going to talk about this a little because part of understanding symbolism and literary effects is figuring out what the author is doing, and the author is putting these elements in here. John essentially is not offering much commentary on what he's seeing, and we'll talk about this as it develops. John is mostly functioning as a visual scribe. He's seeing something and writing what he sees.

He does have to make choices, word choices, about how he sees this and how he describes it. Sometimes he's hearing things and writing down what he hears. But notice that this is not John saying, "Oh, I'm going to write this apocalypse, and it's going to have all this literary..." John's not sitting around trying to be creative and artistic. He's writing what he's seeing.

Who's the source of the vision? Jesus is, isn't he? So if anybody is to be blamed for the visionary elements and the symbolism, it's Jesus himself presenting it that way. That makes sense. So we don't want to focus too much on "Did John mean this? Did John mean that?" This is a unique book in that he's merely writing what he sees and hears. There are moments where he does reflect and interact with the angels, and we'll see some of those parts. Right now he's just told, "Write what you see." In light of even just the passage we looked at today, his answer was probably something like, "Yes, sir."

The Seven Churches (08:30)

He's going to send it to these seven churches. Just to remind you, these are seven historic, actual churches in the first century, located roughly on the west side of what is Turkey today. In ancient times this was called Asia Minor. You recognize some of this: the Galatian region, Bithynia, Pontus. We get down here to the land of Israel, Jordan over here, Egypt down here. So this is Turkey, Asia Minor, the west coast of Turkey. Again, in proximity, there's Patmos. Those are the seven churches:

Ephesus
Smyrna
Pergamum
Thyatira
Sardis
Philadelphia
Laodicea

Write what you see and send it to the churches. Those are his marching orders. So he hears this voice that sounds like a trumpet saying, "Write what you see," and naturally, what does he do? He turns around. What is this trumpet-like voice he's hearing? Is that an adjective? Can we make that an adjective? What did that even sound like? So he turns to see what's creating this voice.

Symbolism and Interpretive Discipline (10:45)

The first thing he notices, according to the text, looking back at chapter 1, verse 12, is golden lampstands. I'll show you some pictures in a minute. Pastor Cherry talked about this not too long ago in Luke. These were clay lamps that held oil and were used to light various things. They didn't have* incandescent technology yet, and they* definitely didn't have* LED or any other light technology. So the way you lit rooms so that you could see was through oil lamps, and that's probably what he sees here. But he sees seven of them. Looking back at verse 13, "in the middle of the lampstands," he sees one like a son of man. We would think they're lamps on lampstands.

Now I want to stop right here, because this is where we have to pull the car over and talk about symbolic language and literary devices. Revelation is one of those books where we have to be disciplined in interpreting. We can't just let our imagination run wild and read whatever meaning we feel like into it. That's true of every book of the Bible; we never want to read something into Scripture. But Revelation, because of the nature of the literature, the graphic language, and the visions, is more easily abused if we're not careful to interpret it responsibly. So what I want to do right now, and I know you're dying to see the vision, is slow down first, and we're going to get there.

Symbolism as a Literary Device (11:49)

Let's talk a little bit about symbolism and how we're going to navigate our way through this in a responsible way. Again, you ask questions, and you push back if you think there's another way to look at it. But let's just think about this. Where are my English teachers, by the way? English teachers, literary professors? Jen, it looks like it might be you, ma'am. So we will lean on you as our literary expert today.

First of all, everybody agrees. Nearly every commentator and interpreter agrees that the book of Revelation contains elements that are symbolic. Nobody is saying there's no symbolism in the book of Revelation. It's there. So the question is, how do we understand that?

For you non-literary people, you math and science people who slept through literature class, shame on you, and Ms. Jen has some extra homework for you. But symbolism, you'll recall from fourth grade, is a literary device where an author uses an element of a story to represent something else. That's all it is. Symbolism means it's a literary device, meaning an author intends, in the writing, for an element to be understood as pointing to something beyond itself. An object, a sound, that represents something else. In this case, the typical meaning of the element is intended to be understood to point to something different, beyond or more than its ordinary usage.

I don't know if any of you got your wives red roses yesterday. Why red roses on Valentine's Day? Because those red roses symbolize what? Abiding love. It's actually a flower, yes, and it's actually red, but what does the red rose symbolize? In our culture, it symbolizes love. So there's an example from yesterday. Red roses. We doing okay, Ms. Jen? Jump in here. Remember, I'm the recovering math science engineer, guys, so correct me and don't hesitate. That's what we're talking about: an element that's intended to be understood to point to something else, different, beyond, or more than its ordinary usage.

Now, you guys are very familiar with this, so let's do a little quiz. You tell me what comes to mind when I show you this. What is that? The symbol of all things evil in the world? No, no, no, that's not it. I'm going to strain myself here. What is that?

Apple computer.

It makes you think of Apple computer. That doesn't say computer. It doesn't say iPhone. It doesn't say laptop. How did you know you were supposed to think Apple computer?

Branding.

Yes, branding takes advantage of symbolism, visual symbolism. Literally, what is that? Take a literal interpretation. Literally, what does it look like? It's sort of a picture of an apple. It's not red, or it's not red delicious, or I don't know my apples. It's obviously an apple, but it's a graphic. It's not intended to look like a real apple. And what's interesting about it is that it has a bite out of it.

The bite.

That's right. Very observant. That is Apple's branding. Do you remember the old one that had the rainbow in it? Anybody old enough to remember the Apple IIc and the IIe and the GS? I'm dating myself here. But see, that's an example of symbolism. When you saw that, you didn't think, huh, what a strange apple, I'm not sure I would eat that. You thought about the technology company.

My favorite, when I teach symbolism to kids, is this one. Every kid knows this, right? Wow, that's a really neat M, Pastor Key. No, what is that? Kids, what is that?

McDonald's.

How do you know that?

It's a registered trademark.

Carl noticed it there. Yes. Branding. It's the golden arches. Some of you are salivating for McNuggets right now just thinking about it. But it's symbolism. Remember that from TNT? You see something and it makes you think of something else. Those are visual and they're connected to branding and modern culture, but you get the idea. You see something and you automatically think about something else. It's symbolic of something else. It's not meant to make you see the golden arches and think, wow, that's a tall yellow M. That's literally what it is, but it's designed to represent or symbolize something else. That's very simple symbolism. Some of the stuff we're going to see in Revelation is more complicated, but we've got to get the concept first. So that's where we're going. Now, come back to the text.

The Challenge of Authorial Intent (17:03)

The challenge, and this is the $100 question, is figuring out the intention of the author. It is possible to interpret certain elements of a story as symbolic when the author did not intend them to be understood that way. Ms. Jen can speak at length to this. When I was in school, right after they invented some of this stuff, there was a very popular literary trend called reader response theory. Who knows, besides Jen, what reader response theory is? Nobody knows. Okay.

Reader response theory is a way of reading literature that emphasizes the reader as determining the meaning, as opposed to the author. This was frustrating for me, being a logical, rational person going through high school and into college and being told that the goal of reading this book or this poem, whether we were reading Beowulf or The Iliad or some Shakespeare play, was to ask what it means to you and how it makes you feel. I'm like, I don't care. I want to know what Shakespeare meant.

Reader response theory says the reader determines the meaning, as opposed to the author. And at the moment we decide that's how we're going to read, guess what it does? It opens the door to read in, to symbolize, to theorize, and to conclude all sorts of things that might seem right to you but were not intended by the author. Is this sounding familiar? Maybe you didn't know the term. How many of you had some exposure to that in school? I'm curious. Students, do they still do that in college? Is that still popular? Well, look at that. Anything you want to add to that, Jen? Is that pretty accurate?

So the danger here is for me to read this and say, well, what does this mean to me? Or what do I think it means? Or what do I think it symbolizes? That's dangerous in literature, because what we should be asking is what the author intended. Is there symbolism and metaphor and irony and all these other literary elements? Sure. Really good authors do that, and that's part of the beauty of literature. As I've gotten older and appreciated it more, I've come to appreciate the artistic wisdom of a writer who puts those elements into a story in a way that adds to the overall meaning and presentation. And it's not just literature. Movies do this. Film does this. TV does this. Songs do this. Symbolism is all over media in general, and you probably know this about your favorite film. There are elements in it that make it more interesting.

But here's the caution: did the author mean it that way?

Since Scripture is God's word, we have an extra caution. If we get Shakespeare wrong, shame on us. If we get God wrong, we misrepresent him. We might misrepresent what he says to others, and we might actually put our own lives and destiny in jeopardy because we think the text says something it doesn't mean. Are you with me? This is serious stuff.

So back to my note. It's particularly important that the reader exercise caution so as not to read symbolic, or overly symbolic, meaning into elements of a book where God did not intend such meaning. To do so is to misrepresent God and distort the meaning of his word. No one wants to do that. I know you're saying, Pastor Key, I do not want to do that. None of us want to do that.

So here's the question: how do careful readers of Scripture avoid this error and yet wisely recognize valid symbolism when it occurs? Let me give you some helps here, and again, interact and talk to me.

Principles for Interpreting Scripture (21:15)

The first thing is that we want to interpret Scripture using a consistent hermeneutic. Remember, hermeneutic just means the rules of interpretation. We don't want to jump around in the Bible and use one set of rules over here, a different set over there, and another set somewhere else. We want to strive for a consistent hermeneutic.

What is that consistent hermeneutic? Some of you have taken classes here. You've taken Precept studies and GBI classes. I know this is review, but if it's a little fuzzy, remember there are a couple of principles that make up sound hermeneutics:

Literal, historical, grammatical interpretation. - Literal means we take the Bible in its normal, plain sense. A footnote: when we talk about a literal hermeneutic, we're not saying woodenly literal. A literal hermeneutic doesn't mean we never allow for symbolic language, imagery, metaphor, poetic language, or anything like that. Literal means we take it in its normal, plain sense, which means when you read the book of Psalms, you recognize that it's poetry and has poetic elements, because that's the normal, plain reading of a poem. - Historical means we interpret it in its historical context. What we don't want to do is read the Bible like a twenty-first-century Westerner. We want to read it like a first-century Jewish person or someone who came out of the exile. Whatever the book is about in terms of its historical context, we want to put ourselves into the historical context of the author and the original reader and what was going on in that day. So we definitely want to dig into the history. - Grammatical means we honor the syntax, how the words are arranged into sentences, including sentence structure and the function of words. It also means lexical data: what do words mean? We look up the dictionary and say this word means this. And how does it fit in the context?
Authorial intent. Secondly, we attempt to determine the intent of the author as the original audience would have understood it. You hear this from the pulpit. You hear this in GBI. We talk about this in Awana. We're really interested in knowing not what I think the Bible means, but what the human author intended and how the original audience would have understood it. That's really the issue in understanding what God meant.
Singular meaning. Thirdly, the principle of singular meaning simply says we're striving to understand that there is one intention of the author, one meaning. We don't believe it's a valid reading of Scripture to say there are multiple valid interpretations that run parallel to each other. We believe God intended one meaning, though that one meaning may have multiple applications.

Singular Meaning and Application (24:28)

So, for example, we're going to read about the church in Ephesus next week. According to Jesus, through John, the church of Ephesus had left its first love. What the author meant was that the church in the first century at Ephesus had actually abandoned its first love. Now, can we look at that and say, by way of application, how are we doing? Has our church done that? Have I done that? That's a valid application. We're not saying that it meant the same thing. It meant Ephesus, and it also meant Granbury. No, it was intended for Ephesus, but we can apply that meaning, which was meant for Ephesus, to our own church and our own hearts. So there is one interpretation, though there might be multiple applications.

Okay, let me stop right there. Is this review or is this wild and new? Okay, good. So, the principle of singular meaning.

Literary Devices (25:30)

In doing so, we want to recognize the legitimate use of literary devices when employed by the author. When Jesus says, "I am the good shepherd," what's that? Was Jesus' vocation to herd sheep around? Is this a trick question, Pastor? It's not a trick question. Was that his actual vocation? No, it wasn't. So when he says, "I am the good shepherd," what does he mean? He takes care of his people the way a shepherd takes care of sheep. You say, "Well, how do you know that?" Because he goes on to explain that in the context.

So we're not saying there aren't legitimate literary devices used throughout Scripture. We recognize that. You do that all the time. Are you watching the Olympics? Are you sleep deprived because you're staying up too late watching? Alright, we'll get that personal with you. What are we watching? Was it the Super Slalom? I don't get all these names. There are 19 downhill skiing events, and they all have different names, right? But they said, "This guy is a rocket," and the guy's name was "The Rocket." You did not think in that moment, "Huh, he doubles as a SpaceX rocket in his spare time. He's going down the hill on skis." You didn't do that. What did your brain automatically do when you heard that? It's an analogy, right? He skis fast like a rocket.

See, we do this all the time, and often there's not a whole lot of thought behind trying to figure things out. Sometimes symbolism is mystifying and we have to sit and think about it. But sometimes we interpret it that way normally, because we've been around and we understand, and our brains and learning allow us to do that. So we're not saying there is not a legitimate use of literary devices. There are, and we recognize that biblical authors employ them. What we want to do is strive to understand Scripture in its plain, ordinary sense. That's what we're trying to do.

Two Exceptions to the Plain Sense (27:35)

We're going to do that unless, here are the two exceptions:

The passage simply does not make sense if understood in this way.
The context makes clear that the passage is to be understood symbolically.

So, Jesus says, "I am the door." Is that a 36 or a 40 or is it a hollow core? That doesn't make any sense, does it? So to take it literally, or in its normal sense, doesn't make any sense. When the normal literal sense is not logical, we say, "Okay, is there a symbolic meaning? Is there a metaphor or an analogy being used here?" In that case, the metaphor "I am the door" means he's an entryway, right?

So if the passage does not make sense, we look away from that ordinary plain meaning to something more symbolic. Or perhaps there are elements in the context that make clear it is to be understood symbolically. This is where it's context, context, context, right? You guys know this. The context helps us determine the meaning. Sometimes we may be reading and there are other things the author is telling us, or other elements in the story, that lead us to say, "Aha, there's something more than just the plain normal sense. There's something more than just the plain normal intent here." So we do that.

Scripture Interprets Scripture (28:40)

Let's not forget this too. You guys know this from your classes: Scripture interprets Scripture. Let the text itself provide the interpretation. It is amazing, and you raise your hand if you've had this experience. You're reading your Bible one morning, and you're on a passage, and you're like, "What does this mean? What does this mean, Lord?" All of a sudden you pull out your phone, you're doing word studies, and you're looking at all this, and you're kind of like, "Well, it could be this. I don't know." Then you read the next verse, 37 minutes later, and what does the next verse do? It explains it.

That's why we're not a fan of reading a verse in isolation. Read it in context. Read it in the paragraph. Read it in the flow. Very often the context is at least going to give you clues about what's going on. Sometimes, I'll say even most of the time, the context is going to make clear what the meaning is, so you don't have to guess.

So we're going to try to use a consistent hermeneutic. We're going to strive to interpret Scripture in its plain, ordinary sense unless one of those two exceptions applies, and we're going to let the text provide the interpretation.

Example: The Son of Man (29:41)

Let's do an example. We have one right before us in the text. Look at Revelation 1:12. In this vision of the Son of Man, the text says there are seven golden lampstands and seven stars. If there was a guy standing there, and there were seven golden lampstands with little lamps on top of them, would that be weird? Is it impossible to take that literally? No, it's not impossible. There's a guy standing among seven lamps, and they happen to be golden lampstands. Okay, what? Right?

What about this guy holding seven stars? Now we get a little bit stranger, don't we? If this is the Son of God, the one who made the heavens and the earth and sustains things to this day by the word of his power, Jesus can hold seven stars if he wants to. No problem. But we still have to scratch our heads and say, "Well, what are we to get out of that?" Whether we take that literally or not, what do we get out of it?

Watch this. The text states that John literally saw seven golden lampstands, and one like the Son of Man who was holding seven stars. There's no doubt what John actually saw. We're not saying, "Ooh, that's what he saw." He's just writing what he sees. He sees seven lampstands. He sees a guy holding seven stars. Taking these verses in their plain, ordinary sense, what John viewed is clearly understood. But the question is, is there more to read into that? Is there something that those elements symbolize?

The text goes on to explain that some of what John literally saw in his vision has a symbolic meaning. Look down at Revelation 1:20. Guess what? The context interprets it for us. Jesus says, "I know you're wondering about these stars that I'm holding. Let me tell you about them." What do the stars represent? The seven angels assigned to the seven churches. What do the lampstands represent? The seven churches themselves.

So we don't have to sit there and scratch our heads and wonder how we are to understand this. For what he literally saw, Jesus provides a symbolic interpretation. The context does that for us.

Now, don't you wish every time the Bible came to something symbolic, there was some sort of divine running commentary saying, "Here's what you're looking at"? That way the Reformed, recovering engineers like me could read it. The Bible does not always do that. But the book of Revelation actually interprets itself. This is something I was surprised by as I was preparing this study. The book of Revelation interprets itself more often than we give it credit for. So we're obviously going to give that a priority. If there's something else we have to figure out, we're going to do that with humility. These guidelines will help us do so responsibly.

Patmos Is an Island (32:58)

By way of contrast, it would be incorrect to conclude, for example, that the mention of the island of Patmos, an actual island, should be understood symbolically. Hmm. It means isolation? What other deeper meaning could we read into that? You would just go nuts on that, right? But there's nothing in the context and nothing in the language that would lead us to believe this is some sort of spiritual island. It's an island in the water off the coast, okay? The plain normal sense of the term makes sense in the context. No contextual factors lead the reader to conclude that the term should be understood otherwise.

So does that make sense? In one case, we say, "Yeah, it's interpreted for us." In the other, we say, "There's no reason to take it other than its normal plain sense."

Questions on Symbolism and the Number Seven (34:01)

Let me stop right there. Talk to me. Does that make sense? Are you tracking with the questions?

A lot of people start looking symbolically at the number. Why seven? We're going to have a whole talk about numbers, because the repetition of the number seven is obvious. So why is that? Do we need to read beyond that and say there were seven churches, there were seven angels of the churches, and the seven stars represent the angels? Or is there some more intended meaning? That's one thing we ask: is there any compelling reason to take it beyond its normal plain sense? I would say that, other than the repetition, not really, and even the repetition doesn't require it. But are there other clues in the context that might lead us otherwise? We'll have to ask that question as we go.

Why These Seven Churches? (35:04)

We have the seven churches, and some have a letter, like Ephesus, and some don't. Is there any indication why these seven churches, and not the church in Jerusalem or the church in Paris, were targeted for specific revelation? I'll say not yet. We'll look for that as we go along.

Just as you mentioned from the rest of the New Testament, why the church at Rome? There were dozens and dozens of churches, even in the first century, that didn't get a personal letter from the Apostle Paul. Why is that? I think the safe and certain answer is that it was God's kind intention to do it that way. But we want to ask along the way whether there is some other reason these churches were targeted. Some of them have historical circumstances that may explain why they were emphasized, but we'll get there in a few weeks. That's a good question to ask.

Okay. So far so good. All right.

The One Like the Son of Man (36:10)

So let's go back here. We probably won't finish this now, but that's okay. It's worth a couple of Sundays. Let's just start with this. Remember, he hears this voice that sounds like a trumpet, and he turns. He sees seven golden lampstands with lamps lit on top, and in the center of them, the text says, one like a son of man. So let's pick it up there and unpack it.

When you hear the term "son of man," what comes to mind? The book of Luke, Christ, Daniel? I think the book that uses the term most frequently is Ezekiel. That's God's title for Ezekiel all throughout the book: son of man, son of man, son of man. That's why I didn't put a reference there. There were too many.

Daniel 7:13 has the vision of the Ancient of Days, and one like the Son of Man approaches the Ancient of Days. We saw that last time. Certainly Matthew, and one of you mentioned Luke. All four Gospels reference Jesus with the term Son of Man, some like Matthew and Luke more frequently. Even the book of Acts, Acts 7. Do you remember what's going on in Acts 7? Stephen, the first martyr, is being stoned, and as he's dying, he sees heaven opened. What does he see? The Son of Man, standing. Very good.

So we have all this evidence of the term, and we see that it is not used exclusively for the Messiah. Hence the book of Ezekiel and other places where it might just mean a literal man. But we do have specific references in Daniel, in the Gospels, and in Acts that point to the fact that this was a title specifically of Jesus, the Messiah.

Now notice, John doesn't say, "I saw the Son of Man." What does he say? "One like the Son of Man." You're going to see, and I think we can learn from this, that there's a lot of tentativeness in what John writes. You can imagine him being cautious. So we need to appreciate a bit of that caution and tentativeness here.

His Robe and Sash (38:46)

He sees one like the Son of Man, and then he starts giving us a description. This one is clothed in a robe reaching to his feet and girded across his chest with a golden sash. The word translated robe is used in the Greek version of the Old Testament to describe the priests' robes. So it's possible that the language John chooses reflects what the priest would wear.

If you go back to Exodus and read the actual garments the priests wore, it does not match what Jesus is wearing. But the robe is the same word. The sash is called a golden sash, and John says he sees one. Read it in Exodus; don't necessarily focus on the goldenness of the sash. But it could be that we're seeing something representative of Christ and his priestly role.

Head, Hair, and Eyes (40:53)

His head and his hair were white, like white wool, like snow. That's the same description we see in Daniel 7, which we looked at. If you're reading through Revelation with me as you come to this study, especially in this first chapter, and then we'll get to other places later on, familiarize yourself with Daniel 7. We have a lot of similar imagery there.

His eyes were like a flame of fire. We'll see that also in Revelation 2:18 and 19:12. So what do we make of that? Do we read something into it? Right now John is just telling us what he's seeing: a priestly robe, surrounded by lampstands, with a head and hair white like wool, like snow.

In a moment, John is going to mention the sun. Do you remember a few weeks ago, the Sunday we had to cancel church? Do you remember waking up that Sunday morning after the ice and snow went through, the sun was out, and you needed your sunglasses in your living room because it was so bright? That's what John is getting at in this imagery: the snow, the white wool, the sunlight. It's overwhelmingly bright.

Feet, Voice, and the Sword (42:01)

His feet were like burnished bronze when it has been made to glow in a furnace. Is Josh Anderson here? Josh is in here. When we look at Josh to speak to this, he does some work where you get metal really, really hot in order to manipulate it, and it glows. This is not just any metal; this is bronze. We know that color from the Olympic medals we've seen. So his feet are like burnished bronze, glowing as if in a furnace. I love this.

His voice was like the sound of many waters. Don't you wish we had an audio clip, or a video for that matter? What must it have sounded like when John turned and saw and heard this overwhelming being speaking, a sound like a raging waterfall, Niagara Falls? You can imagine it, though it's actually hard to imagine. Have you ever been in a situation where your body goes into sensory overload? Your body almost gets numb because what you're seeing, hearing, feeling, or experiencing is so powerful your body doesn't know how to deal with it. Perhaps that's what John felt as he turned to see this one like the Son of Man.

It's interesting. In Ezekiel 43:2, which we'll look at next time, the prophet describes it with the same language: a voice like the sound of many waters. In his right hand he held seven stars, and out of his mouth came a sharp, two-edged sword. Now what's that about? Swords don't normally emanate from people's mouths, but then again, people don't normally waltz through the park holding seven stars either.

Where do we see that sword used in Revelation? It's a sword of judgment, isn't it? We see it in Revelation 2:16, 19:15, and 19:21. Contextually, we know the sword that emanates from the

So what are we seeing here? We are seeing the Lord Jesus Christ, the one like the Son of Man, in his glory. We are seeing unveiled, undiluted truth, not behind the curtains. Everything is opened. In his being, his voice, his face, his nature, the fact that he's holding stars in his hands, and his voice like the sound of many waters, we are seeing the Lord Jesus Christ.

And what does John do? Can we get a selfie? Can I get your autograph? If you're ever tempted to be bored with Jesus, to think your favorite sports figure or rock star is more interesting, more important, or more compelling, it's because you haven't gotten to know Jesus for who he really is. John is seeing a visual and audio experience of what this Son of Man is like, with some of the veil removed, so that we can see him in all his glory and greatness.

We don't doubt, because of other places in Scripture, that for John to experience this, there was probably some divine attenuation going on. He wasn't getting the full brunt of God's glory, because the Bible says you die if you see that. But what an image, that he would get a chance to see this: Jesus is here, revealing himself, coming with a sharp, double-edged sword coming out of his mouth, his face shining, his head and hair white like wool, like snow. He's holding stars in his hands, and John says, "I'm dead."

There was another man, Isaiah, who saw God with some of that glory revealed, and he had the same reaction. To see God with some of that glory revealed is so overwhelming that people drop as if dead at the feet of the one. And I wonder, is that the Jesus you worship? Is he compelling like that? Is he overwhelming like that? Are you drawn to him? Are you afraid? In the best sense of the term. This is the disciple whom Jesus loved, the closest disciple, and he falls down like a dead man. What are we supposed to make of this? We'll find out next week.

Closing Prayer (49:40)

Father, thanks for these verses, which are really overwhelming to us. We are eager to learn more and to see more. But leave us today with this impactful thought: how do we view Jesus? If we're bored, if we're not drawn, if he's become an ordinary savior, just routine, might these verses reset our hearts. This is the one who is the Alpha and Omega, the God of the living and the God of the dead. This is the one who made all things, controls all things, upholds all things, lived and died and rose again, and is coming again to judge. I pray that we would walk away today with a more accurate view of who he is, and that we would take him seriously in light of what we've learned about him today. We're excited to see what you have for us as we continue to study, so give us grace as we do that. In Christ's name. Amen.

* = the audio was unclear here and the words were reconstructed from context. Scripture read aloud is in red.

← All lessons