← All lessons

The Book of Revelation - Part 20

09 Aug 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.

Introduction to Revelation 8 and the Views of the Book (00:00)

Verse by verse through Revelation, we're turning the page today to chapter 8, so we're coming up. We're not quite halfway through the book, but I think we're making a good pace, hopefully in a good stride at this point. I told you this was coming, and I've been debating. There's so much about Revelation that we have to talk about beyond just going verse by verse. For many of you, you've studied Revelation before, you've done some reading, and there is a lot here. The big question that hangs over this whole book is, how do we understand the whole book? With that, we begin asking questions like, when does this happen, or when did these events happen? Is this past, is it present, is it future, or is it all three of those?

What I want to do today is get into chapter 8, which is the seventh seal. The seventh seal inaugurates a series of seven trumpet blasts that bring again successive events of God's judgment upon the earth. But before we get there, I want to spend a minute talking about a global view of the book of Revelation, just to give you some vocabulary and some overview. Then I'm going to give you a homework assignment, so be looking out for that. It's coming here soon.

Okay, this is our general outline, which we've seen over and over again, and we'll come back to it in a moment as we talk about the views. It's the diagram you're all well familiar with to help navigate a complicated book. Let me jump right in if you've got Revelation open, and we'll look at some of this.

There are basically three views on how we approach the book of Revelation, how we think about it, and all three of these views are represented by authors that you and I would love and trust. So we're not talking about some rogue viewpoint out there. There's actually a fourth view, but I'm not going to talk much about it, because I don't think it's consistent with how we view the Bible and how we view interpreting the Bible. It's out there, but I don't think it's a candidate to consider before us.

What I want to do is introduce these three views to you. I'm going to do a deep dive on each one, but I want your participation. I don't want to just say, okay, here it is, and here are the strengths and weaknesses. I know many of you are studying this with me and that you're reading and looking even beyond what we're doing on Sunday. So I want to introduce these views, and then you can study as much or as little as you want. In the near future we'll come back and look at each of the three one by one, and hopefully we'll have a better conversation because you've had a little time to study should you desire to do that.

I want you to ask questions too. As I present these, go ahead and say, what about this, what about that, and we'll have time to do that.

The Preterist View (01:06)

The first view is called the Preterist view, or Preterism. Have you heard of Preterist or Preterism before? Okay, maybe 20% of you. This is one of those things you need to at least learn about, because it is held by men that we hold in high esteem, and there's a reason for this. When you first hear about Preterism, your first reaction might be, huh, that's interesting, and then you want to know more.

The word Preterist, which you may know, comes from a Latin word meaning past. So when you think Preterism, think past. The Preterist view essentially says that most, or even all, of the events the book of Revelation describes have already happened in the past.

For example, most of our Preterist friends are going to say that most or even all the events happened in the first century, particularly in 70 AD. What event happened in 70 AD that was very, very significant? The Romans invaded Jerusalem and eventually destroyed it. That actually happened in the mid to late 60s. It took a few years, but in 70 AD the job was completed, we might say. So our Preterist friends would say that the book of Revelation envisions judgments directed particularly at Israel, fulfilled in the late 60s leading into 70 AD with the destruction of Jerusalem. Okay, so far so good. Preterism, think past. Most of the events are fulfilled in 70 AD.

Full and Partial Preterism (05:32)

Now, we want to make a distinction here, not to get super technical, but between what are called full Preterists and partial Preterists. Welcome to theology class. Are you glad you're here? Stay with me.

A full Preterist, as the name implies, holds that all of Revelation in its entirety was fulfilled in the past, in 70 AD. I know what you're thinking, because you've read Revelation: wait a minute, Revelation talks about Jesus coming back. It talks about a final judgment. It talks about new heavens and new earth and the eternal state. So how do our full Preterist friends handle that? If you're a full Preterist, correct me, or if you've read up on this more than I have. I think they would say we believe all those things happened, but they happened in a spiritual sense. They would say this is the new heavens and the new earth, and Jesus has already come back. Yes, there's some cleanup that's going to happen down the road, but those things have already happened. That's the full Preterist view: not an actual physical, bodily return of Christ, but more of a spiritual event.

The second is partial Preterism. As the name implies, it teaches that most, not all, of the events of the book of Revelation were fulfilled in 70 AD, but chapters 20 to 22 actually prophesy future events, including Christ's return.

I think we would all say, with all due respect to full Preterism, that viewing the return of Christ as only a spiritual event, and not a physical, literal, bodily one, is out of alignment with orthodox theology and with so many other passages that make clear it will happen. From Zechariah through First Thessalonians to First Corinthians 15, and so on. So I don't think full Preterism is really an option to consider. However, partial Preterism is a view that some of our authors within the larger evangelical movement hold.

Partial Preterists (07:38)

Who are those guys? R.C. Sproul would be the one most of you know. Hank Hanegraaff, do you know Hank Hanegraaff? Remember, how many remember Martin? Walter Martin? Okay. The old Bible Answer Man. Hank Hanegraaff took over for Walter Martin, and they wrote that book on the Kingdom of the Cults. You remember that? Some of you are going, you have no idea. That's because you're too young. But Hanegraaff was the Bible Answer Man for many years. It was a call-in radio show where you called in with your Bible question, and Hank, and in the old days Walter, would respond. I recently found out that Hank Hanegraaff actually went Eastern Orthodox, back in 2017. There's a back story, so he is no longer an evangelical. But at least at the time he was writing, he was into that.

Then, R.C. Sproul. I have great respect for Sproul. He's with the Lord now, but he would have been a partial Preterist. I think Jay Adams, those of you who have done some biblical counseling reading, was also a partial Preterist.

Let me stop right there. Preterism, talk to me. What do you think? Yes, Joan?

Joan asks, is it inconsistent hermeneutics? Hermeneutics is the set of rules for how we interpret Scripture. Is that inconsistent? We need to talk about hermeneutics, because everything you believe in the Bible is a fruit of your hermeneutics. To me, hermeneutics is one of the most important things we're going to discuss in the book of Revelation. Is it inconsistent? I don't know. We need to investigate it. I will say this: I can't do my R.C. Sproul impression. Anyway, you can almost go Columbo with Sproul. They have a lot of the same mannerisms. Some of you are going, Columbo?

I know, you're too young. Ask your parents.

Covenant Theology and Preterism (09:50)

I think if Sproul were here, he would say that everybody agrees, except full Preterists, that the book of Revelation seems to address current events as well as future events. So I don't think it's a breach of hermeneutics to say we think most of the book happened in the past and some of it is in the future, because everybody agrees some of it is past or present and some of it is future. I think that's what Sproul would say.

Yes, ma'am, follow up?

It's related to covenant theology, but not all covenant theologians hold to Preterism. Right, I know. Isn't this great? Don't you love getting into the weeds? Some of you are like, I hate the weeds. Okay, you're correct that I don't know any Preterists who are not covenant theologians. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think those tend to go hand in hand, though not all covenant theologians are Preterists.

A covenant theologian holds a way of looking at the whole Bible that sees more continuity between the Old and New Testaments. There are two particular features:

  1. A covenant theologian tends to see that the church replaces Israel, so many of the promises given to Israel in the Old Testament are realized spiritually in the church.
  2. A covenant theologian tends to see more of Christ in the Old Testament, wanting to read New Testament realities back into the Old Testament.

There's more to it than that, but those are the two features. Jump in here and say anything you want.

Yes, the question is, is there a particular passage that Preterists use to support their view?

Well, two things. They put a lot of stock in when Jesus says in Matthew 24, "this generation will not pass away till these events fulfill," and they take this generation to mean the disciples' generation. So if that's true, they're right. I think Jesus uses this language multiple times, and it doesn't always mean the present generation. So I think those of us who are not Preterists would say, if that's what Jesus meant, then you're right, but there are other ways to take that phraseology.

But the other thing you bring up is, what about all the other New Testament passages? The Preterist view requires that the book of Revelation be written earlier rather than later, in the sixties, leading up to the AD 70 invasion. We talked about the dating of the book of Revelation. Certainly the vast majority of evidence points to the authorship of Revelation in the nineties, around AD 95, which, of course, if that's true, then the Preterist view dissolves. So a Preterist has to hold to an early date for Revelation. That's what they would say. John, have you had this? Well, that's debatable. The question is, when did he end up on Patmos*? We know he was there when he wrote Revelation. So was he there early enough? That's one of those things where we don't have enough evidence to say conclusively. Yeah, thank you.

David is saying another evidence that our Preterist friends would put forth is that it seems like the book of Revelation uses language that points to a fulfillment of the events described as coming in the near future. Revelation 1:1 talks about these events that must shortly take place, and it's not the only one. There are multiple passages in Revelation that make it sound like this is imminent, so they would argue that as well.

Historicist View (14:08)

Okay, so that's Preterism. Again, we're going to do a deep dive, and we're going to get into some of the things you guys are talking about, and you'll be much more conversant with this. But I just want to introduce these views and concepts with you at this point. I'd say Preterism is a minority view. If we think about all of our friends who agree on the Gospel, agree on the Bible, and agree on the basic tenets of Christianity, a minority of them would hold to this position. So I'm not saying that's insignificant, just that there are not as many Preterists out there as some of these other views.

Okay, the second view is what we might call the Historicist view. The Historicist view of Revelation interprets most of the events of the book as symbolic of major events in Western church history from the time of the Apostles to the return of Christ. In this view, events like the Protestant Reformation, the French Revolution, and various people, especially the Popes, are referenced in the book.

I'll give you one example. This is not true of every Historicist, but if I pick one example so you get what we're talking about, they would see the events we've been talking about, the horsemen and the bowls* and the judgments and the seals and all of that, as corresponding to different events or even different seasons in church history, starting with the Apostles all the way to Christ's return. We're a couple thousand years into it. They would say the first three chapters, which most people agree refer to current church history, but they would see those seven churches as representative of seven periods of church history. The rest would break down like this:

  1. Chapters 4 to 7 would be the fall of Rome in the fourth century, which is how one Historicist might read it.
  2. Chapters 8 to 10 would be the invasions of the Roman Empire, with various particular battles against particular people.
  3. Chapters 11 to 13 would reference the Protestant Church's struggle against Roman Catholicism.
  4. Chapters 14 to 16 we haven't gotten to yet, but this is God's judgment on the Roman Catholic Church.
  5. Chapters 17 to 19 are the final victory over the Roman Catholic Church.

When was this view really popular? Do you remember? Church history guys, when was the Historicist view particularly popular? In the Protestant Reformation. That's right, good job, Dave. Why might this view have been especially popular in and during the Protestant Reformation? Yeah, there was so much persecution. Okay, who's enemy number one in the Protestant Reformation? The Catholic Church. So who's the Antichrist? The Pope is. Of course. Come on, guys, you know. That was their view. Now, to their credit, the Protestants who held this view, if you know your church history, you know that the Popes in that generation were horrible. I mean, they really were horrible. I'm not saying every Pope in all of history was like that, but in that particular era it was quite wicked and quite significant. So they're thinking, what we're seeing is the Protestant Church emerging in the sixteenth century and on, and they're seeing that as against the Roman Catholic Church. In many circles, the Historicist view becomes primarily about the Gospel's victory over Roman Catholicism, Western Catholicism here. That's the view, and it's not surprising. Look at all the guys who support it. They're all our Protestant heroes, and so they tend to view Revelation through that lens.

Okay, talk to me about the Historicist view. Yes, Katie? They would say it hasn't happened yet. It was in process. The Protestant Reformation was a pushback against the Roman Catholic Church, and then there's persecution. But in their view, the events of Revelation continue to unfold until the true Gospel finally stands victorious over Roman Catholicism. Oh, yes, no problem. Some of the examples are:

Okay, yes. I love that Andrew's thinking ahead, so that's great. The question is, I'm hearing these views, so where do post-millennial, premillennial, and all that fit in? If we go back to Preterism, Preterism of necessity requires an amillennial viewpoint, because if all these things have happened in the past, then they would either say we are living in the millennium, or it's a spiritual millennium sort of situation. So Preterism almost always aligns with the amillennial view. And again, correct me if I'm wrong. There's always a rogue view out there that maybe I haven't read. In terms of the Historicist view, and then in a moment the Futurist view, the millennial part is going to vary from author to author. So maybe a short way of saying it is that the Historicist position and the Futurist position we'll talk about in a minute don't necessarily require a particular view on the millennium. There are multiple views.

But I will circle back, because I know you're wondering how we think about the book of Revelation. Underneath that, we think about things like: Is the tribulation literal, or is it ongoing through church history? Is the millennial kingdom literal, or is it spiritual? When did it start? When does the Antichrist show up? Is that an actual person, or is that the personification of evil forces against the church throughout history? We'll get to all those things, but I'm glad you're trying to fit them together, because we do need to get there at some point. Yes, John? Okay, so John's saying it's maybe too narrow a focus, both in scope and time. Yeah. We'll get into this in a deep dive, but one of the weaknesses of this view is that nobody agrees on which events in Revelation correspond to particular historical events. Not surprisingly, depending on the author you read, they tend to view it as events in their own day. And I think another weakness is, are we just talking about Western Christianity, when Christianity is around the world and has been going around the world since the first century? So we could call that a weakness, according to some.

Yes. Where does the rapture and the second coming fall in the Historicist position? Again, it really depends on where you land on the significance of events. Probably many Historicists don't think of a rapture as a second event. They would think the second coming and the passages in the New Testament that reference a rapture are the same events. Many of our Historicist friends would say the second coming comes at the end of all these events, whereas our Preterist friends would say all of those happened back in AD 70. So it really just depends, and that's what I'm trying to help you see. You may say, get us out of the weeds, Keith, get back to verse by verse. But these global viewpoints on how we view the book of Revelation do not usually necessitate saying, I have this millennial view, this rapture view, this tribulational view. You can have variations even within that. Help me here. I know some of you may hold to some of these views and have a much deeper well of knowledge, so feel free to jump in and comment. We will do a deeper dive into this. I'm just trying to give you a lay of the land in terms of the main systems.

Futurist View (23:28)

The third position is the Futurist view, which views the book of Revelation, as the name implies, as primarily occurring in the future. That's why we call it futurism. Theologians are not marketing people. Have you noticed that they do not come up with creative, easy-to-remember names? It's very functional. We call it futurism because we think it's going to happen in the future, but maybe it's easy to remember in that way.

So where does this come from? We talked about this way back at the beginning of the book. If we think of Revelation 1:19, where Jesus seems to give us something of an outline of the book, when Jesus talks about "the things you have seen, what is now, and what will take place after," those correspond to the three sections of the book:

Chapter one references the past.

  1. Chapters two and three represent what is present.
  2. Chapters four and following represent the future.

Just a footnote here. Some guys, typically the more dispensational futurists, are going to say that chapter four starts in a future time called the tribulation. Within that camp, some of them are going to say the church is raptured before that, so in that view, most Christians will not experience the events of chapter four and following. But not all futurists are pre-tribbers in that way. I think most Futurist authors are going to say that Revelation 1:19 is what leads us to the conclusion, or at least is a data point toward that conclusion, that we're thinking mostly about a book that is yet future. Usually this view holds that chapters four and following take place in a period called the tribulation. We've talked about that recently.

So as one example of this, we've seen this every week: the things that take place after, so past, present, future. And then we've seen the throne room. We're in this section that Jesus describes in Matthew 24 and in the book of Revelation,

Interpreting the Symbols (25:38)

Chapter 7 describes* a great tribulation. Chapter 19 describes the return of Christ. We've recently talked about the white horses, right? Of course, chapter 19 is when Jesus returns on a white horse with armies of believers with him. So for the return of Christ in chapter 19, and the millennium, do we take that as figurative, literal, or spiritual? Then there's a thousand years representing something in chapter 20, a final judgment, and then the new heavens and the new earth. A futurist would say these are all future events, or mostly future events, and would tend to take them in a more straightforward sense.

We talked about hermeneutics, the rules we use to interpret the Bible. The big debate is how much of Revelation is to be taken as symbolic and how much is to be taken in a more normal, literal sense. We've talked about that along the way. What I've tried to do is show you factors in the book itself that help us answer that question.

Clearly some things are symbolic, because Jesus has told us. The seven lampstands represent seven churches, right? And the incense, as we're going to see today, represents the prayers of the saints. Because the book tells us that certain features symbolize other realities, we know that some of it is symbolic. We also know this is apocalyptic prophecy, and that genre lends itself more toward symbolic images. However, to what degree is it symbolic? If we hear the number seven, for example, how do we understand it? Does it mean seven literal churches, or does it represent completion? If it represents completion, then it's not actually seven literal churches. It's talking about the entirety of the church. You can see there's a way to take that.

Within a certain realm, the actual meaning of the book doesn't change hugely within a certain amount of symbolism. But at some point, take the thousand years, or take the 144,000 Israelites we talked about last week, that does become significant. Are we talking about Jesus ruling for a thousand years, and it's a thousand years? Or are we saying, no, that's symbolic of a spiritual reign of Christ that's already going on on the earth? That is very different in terms of how we take it. Hermeneutics, how we interpret the Bible, is really the most significant factor in each of these views.

Futurism (28:43)

Futurism tends to have a more normative hermeneutic. It's not purely literal, because sometimes you're literal and think there's no symbolism at all. But futurists tend to take the text at face value and interpret symbols when they're obvious, without being super excited to over-symbolize everything, if I can put it that way. Authors such as John MacArthur and David Jeremiah would be popular futurists. Tim LaHaye would be another. There's a fair number of futurists you would know. There are also some you might not expect, so if I told you what their view was, you'd say, "Really?" You can do some of your own homework on that.

Questions on futurism? Back to the future. I try to give just a couple of representatives.

So, not to talk about the millennium and tribulation right now, but just the three main ways of viewing the overall message of the book:

  1. Preterists say it happened in the past.
  2. Historicists say it is symbolic of events throughout church history.
  3. Futurists say most of this is going to happen in a more or less literal way in the future.

Are you having fun yet? Do you want me to go back to the text? I know you're wondering which one we should think is right. That's why I'm giving you this. I want you to go study it, for as much or as little as you're interested in. Read up, but obviously be careful what you read online. Not everything is reliable, but it can give you a sense of background. If you want to study a little more, we'll have a future conversation about this.

Returning to Chapter 8 (29:46)

Let's come back to chapter 8. Remember, we're in the middle of the vision John is seeing of the throne room. He has seen the Lamb, and the Lamb is beginning to break the seals on the scroll. When each seal is broken, it initiates a measure of judgment upon the earth. We've seen the four horsemen. We've seen peril, and the creation beginning to fall apart. In the midst of that, at the fifth seal, we learned about the martyrs, the souls of Christians who have been martyred for their faith, asking the Lord how long they will wait to see his justice on the earth.

Then there was a little interlude in chapter 7 to remind us that while these cataclysmic judgments are happening on the earth, some other really neat things are going on as well. We've seen that 144,000 saved Israelites are preserved through this judgment. We also see that throughout the tribulation, this time of judgment, men and women who are believers are dying, and they are going to be in glory. In chapter 7, verse 9, and following, we see a picture of the multitudes saved from every tribe, tongue, people, and nation, and they are joining the praise chorus around the throne with the 24 elders, the four living creatures, and the rest. That was a parenthesis in the unfolding of these events.

The Seventh Seal (31:55)

In chapter 8, verse 1, the breaking of the seals resumes. Before we jump back into the text, let me remind you that when the seventh seal is broken, it comes in a succession of other events. Seals 1 to 6 each unleash some type of judgment on the earth. When the Lamb breaks the seventh seal, that seal initiates a series of unfolding judgments. So let me break this down so you don't get confused. Look at the chart. Seals 1 to 6 all happen in chapters 6 and 7. The seventh seal occupies chapters 8 through 16*:

So the seventh seal, in terms of events, is elongated and appears to be more detailed in duration, and it is probably longer chronologically as well. This seventh seal is made up of the sounding of seven successive trumpets, and we'll see those unleashed with each trumpet. At the very end of the seventh seal, there are seven bowls that again unleash new levels of judgment upon the earth. So just remember that the seventh seal is composed of seven trumpets and seven bowls. Within the seven trumpets, there are three woes in trumpets 5, 6, and 7. Write this down. This is why people go nuts in the book of Revelation. This is why they skip Revelation. This is why they make their Bible reading plan a joke. "Hey, I'm done! Woohoo! I made it before Christmas," right? There are a lot of details here. Part of the chart is to help you track as you navigate the book itself.

Silence in Heaven (34:59)

Let's look at the introduction to the seventh seal, chapter 8, verse 1, and see how far we get in the next few minutes. "When the Lamb broke the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about a half an hour." Interesting. This raises the question of how we take time references, like a day, a week, or an hour. The Greek phrase for "half an hour" is translated just as we would say it in English, "about a half an hour." If I say, "I'll be at your house in about a half an hour," I'm not saying it's exactly 30 minutes, but about 30 minutes. That's how the Greek phrase is constructed here.

What do you think about that? Silence in heaven. First, what has the auditory experience been like in heaven thus far in Revelation? Talk to me. What have we been hearing in heaven so far?

Praise. Endless praise, continual praise, new levels of praise. They sing a new song, and something happens and they have a new chorus. The soundtrack of heaven thus far has been praise and thanksgiving, praise and thanksgiving, praise and thanksgiving, and then boom. It all stops for about a half an hour, and we say, "What just happened?" Whatever the seventh seal represents was significant enough to bring a collective hush over all the praise we've been seeing in heaven.

We'll talk about the options here. But have you ever watched an action movie? Who likes action movies? All right, men, yes. Some ladies like action movies too. We love you. The cinematography is jump cut, jump cut, boom, boom, boom, very fast. Then all of a sudden something happens, and what does the cinematographer do? It stops, right? It might go to slow motion. Maybe Tom Cruise is trying to thwart terrorists from using a nuclear bomb on... I don't know, I'm making stuff up. He's always running, and he doesn't quite get to the device in time. We see in the distance the nuclear cloud from the bomb that went off. Have you ever watched a scene like that? What happens to the soundtrack? It's gone. When a cataclysmic, horrible, destructive event happens in a movie, the sound goes away, the action stops, it goes slow-mo, and there's the mushroom cloud. I don't know that that's exactly what's going on here, but when I read that, I think something really bad is about to happen, or is starting to happen.

The Seven Angels and the Incense (38:13)

What's interesting is that this horrible pause is also connected with something in the text. When the Lamb breaks the seventh seal, there's silence in heaven. The singing stops, the action stops, the cameras stop cutting, and you feel like we're focused right here. Now listen to what happens in the events here:

A censer, what's a censer? It's used to burn incense, that's right. He stood before the altar with a golden censer, and much incense was given to him.

The Prayers of the Saints (39:17)

So that he might add it to the prayers of all the saints on the golden altar, which were before the throne. Revelation 8:4: And the smoke of the incense with the prayers of the saints went up before God out of the angel's hand.

Okay, so on your notes there, remember the context: the singing and the praise, all of that stops, and the unfolding of judgment begins. That seventh seal is broken, and it's like, this is going to be bad. Now, this is what's interesting. This angel is adding incense to the prayers of the saints. Where have we seen that before? We've seen that back in chapter 5. So just hold your place there and look back to Revelation 5, where all this really started. This is where the Lamb comes and takes the book out of the right hand of him who sits on the throne.

Back to Revelation 5 (40:22)

Revelation 5:8: When he had taken the book, the four living creatures and the 24 elders fell down before the Lamb, each one holding a harp and golden bowls full of incense. Notice we don't have to guess what they represent, because it tells us those bowls full of incense are the prayers of the saints.

So this is interesting. Put this together now: the silence in heaven, the fact that more and more horrible judgment is coming, coupled with additional prayers of the saints being offered to God. What do you think is going on here?

What does Romans 8 say all creation is groaning for? Redemption. The whole creation groans. Why is it groaning? Look out there:

And the whole creation groans. What did we see those souls of the martyrs asking about in the fifth seal? They were asking the Lord, "How long?" How long until this madness stops? Specifically, they're asking about our blood being avenged. They've been murdered for their faith, and they're saying, how long are you going to let this play out?

Putting It Together (41:36)

We see here golden bowls representing the incense, and the incense representing the prayers of the saints, coupled with what the martyrs say, coupled with what we see here. Are the prayers of the saints going up to God representative of how long this happens, how long this goes on? And those prayers reach the Father. And what happens? Angel number one with the trumpet steps up and starts the next round of* judgment.

That's one way of putting it together, maybe not the only way. But there seems to be some relationship here between the prayers of the saints and the silence in heaven. One commentator I read suggested this, and it's possible. You notice I'm not saying this is definitely what everything says. We're in an area where we can't be 100% sure on everything.

The Silence and the Prayers (42:37)

But just like the silence, the dropping out of the soundtrack in a movie, causes you to focus on something, I think part of that is the focus given to these prayers that the saints have been praying for millennia. Well, I can't say millennia, because we don't know when this time is. Some time. We'll take it to play for some time, and we'll say that. The focus is being put on God's attention to those prayers. So perhaps the silence there is connected to that as well.

The Prayers Received (43:39)

And so those prayers arrive. The smoke of the incense, the prayers of the saints, went up before God out of the angel's hand, and they are received. Revelation 8:5: Then the angel took the censer and filled it with fire from the altar, and he threw it to the earth. And there followed peals of thunder, sounds, flashes of lightning, and an earthquake.

Revelation 8:6: And the seven angels who had the seven trumpets prepared themselves to sound. You can see them there with their trumpets ready to unleash more judgment. You'll have to come back next time to find out what happens next. Sorry, we're out of time. Keep reading. Do a little background on the three views if you're interested, and we'll come back next time and continue.

Closing Prayer (44:41)

Thanks for the joy of studying your Word, and even to be mesmerized at times by a book like this that is complicated in one way, and yet we are so thankful for what we see: that you are bringing judgment as you described, that Jesus is coming back, and that you hear the prayers of your people. We're thankful for these things that remind us that you have not taken your hand off the steering wheel of history in any way.

Thank you, Father. Make us, even as we think about this book and our study of it, while we marvel at the symbolism and the intricacies of all these things, aware of what this book does, and I think every position agrees with this: it focuses our attention on the mission of the gospel that we have. It reminds us that the time is short. It encourages us that Jesus is coming. So would you make us faithful yet another week, to do your work until you come. We pray in his name. Amen.

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

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.

← All lessons