Exegetical Toolkit, Part 9
Worldview Analysis
(avg. read time: 10–20 mins.)
Part 1: Introduction and Context
Part 3: Grammatical-Syntactical Analysis
Part 8: Biblical Theology/Theological Interpretation
Part 10: History of Interpretation
This entry will be something of an exception in this series in that it is focused on a tool not as widely used as the others. That is, I am looking here at the use of worldview analysis. It is related to the previous part in this series in that theology is a form of reflection on worldview, but the terminology of “worldview” is obviously of more recent vintage, and so it has a less direct connection to tradition. As far as I know, N. T. Wright has done the most work with this in biblical studies in his Christian Origins and the Question of God series. This was a tool I used in my dissertation as well. Otherwise, it is generally something for which one can apply a variety of approaches in other fields to biblical texts. It serves best as an integration of insights drawn from the use of other tools in our toolkit, which is one reason I have held off on using it until this point in the series.
Since I have already written a series based on my dissertation about worldview analysis, including on various models and the one I use based on Wright’s work, I will not reiterate all that subject matter here. This introductory section will thus be shorter than the others in this series. Still, I should make some points of clarification and application.
Just as I think biblical theology should be properly normative and not only descriptive, I think when we use worldview analysis for studying Scripture, we are not concerned so much with an author’s purported personal/subjective worldview. Rather, I think this form of analysis should be concerned with Scripture’s role in both communicating a worldview and in formation of a worldview for its audience in the various dimensions of narrative, symbols, praxis, and answers to basic questions.
Worldview analysis has particular utility for the purpose of comparison. That is what I used it for in my dissertation, and it can prove illuminating to show just how shallow or deep similarities and differences are between the comparanda. Here, for example, as I have looked at Revelation throughout this series, one might use worldview analysis to compare Rev 1:1–8, or Revelation more generally, with other works designated as “apocalyptic.” Or it could be compared with other Johannine works (approaching what I have done here from a different angle). Or it might be compared with other parts of the canon (particularly in light of what we noted in Part 7).
And as in my dissertation, one could apply this analysis to particular elements in relation to what I have referred to as worldview functions and worldview foundations. I have done this for resurrection in select texts. It could be done for other elements. It could even be done for non-texts, but that is not something I have devoted time to exploring, and we are interested in exegesis here.
Application to Rev 1:1-8
There are a number of specific elements we could focus on here in terms of worldview function and foundations, such as what this text says about the Trinity, the gospel, resurrection, the people of God, and so on. But for the application today, I only want to provide an overview via the rubric of the four component functions of narrative, symbols, praxis, and answers to basic worldview questions.
Narrative
We have observed the levels of significance to referencing God as “the one who is, the one who was, and the one who is coming” (1:4, 8) and “Alpha and Omega” (1:8). These appellations are significant for characterization and for articulating the worldview narrative. Combined with the understanding of God as the Creator, Judge, Lord, and Savior, these appellations describe God as the Author of the grand narrative who is providentially directing it to his purposes. They also help convey that the Author is the central character of that narrative. From the beginning to the end of this text, and from the beginning to the end of time itself, the story is fundamentally about him. And as I have noted elsewhere, God is presented here as in the rest of Revelation as Trinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
The narrative context of the text is one wherein an appointed time is approaching (1:1, 3). The story conveyed in the text has an eschatological function in that, as I have defined it previously, eschatology (in terms of worldview analysis) concerns what is climactic in the communal/scriptural worldview narrative and/or is instrumental to the resolution of that grand story. But as we have observed previously, the eschatology of this text is an inaugurated eschatology. The present is linked with the hoped-for future in being the time of fulfillment. This is conveyed by Revelation as a whole, but it starts here with a few indications.
One, this part of the textual framework is linked with the gospel story. This what the “word of God” and the “testimony of Jesus Christ” concern (1:2), as I have noted in Part 3. The phrase “word of God” identifies God as the source of the gospel, as it is his life-giving word, the story through which he gives everlasting life that goes beyond his initial gift of life. Similarly, the testimony about Jesus Christ concerns the gospel. The word that comes from God is about Jesus Christ, as Jesus was, is, and will be the executor of God’s will. The word is about the Word through whom God accomplished his will, especially in his death, resurrection, and exaltation. Jesus is thus the medium and the message. The story is even summarized here in terms of the major gospel events (1:5). With this knowledge of the gospel shared between John and his audience also comes the shared sense of its eschatological significance, as it is because these events have already happened that the present has eschatological significance. And the subsequent story that Revelation narrates is one that not only invokes the gospel events that have already happened, but it also supplies the consummation of that story with Jesus’s return, the resurrection, final judgment, new creation, God dwelling with humans, and so on.
Two, the gospel story is both the narrative context for this text, as indicated by reference to it in this textual framework, and it is the identifying story for God’s people (1:2, 5–6). This is something I have gone over in more detail elsewhere (especially here). To summarize briefly for our purposes, we can see how this works on communal and individual levels. On the communal level, the gospel story is established as the story by which God constitutes his people, even as the exodus was the major constitutive event in the old covenant. God’s people as a whole will participate in the consummation of the victory God has achieved in the gospel. On the individual level, the framing story of the gospel is what forms the identity of each member of God’s people as they each are made more like Christ. This is expressed in terms of their sharing in his victory through their suffering in faithful obedience, resurrection to everlasting life, and exaltation to reign with him. The gospel story is thus also crucial to characterization as well as storytelling in this context. As the gospel story reaches its culmination in Revelation, so too does the communal story and each individual story reach their culminations.
Three, as we observed in Part 7, various features of the language in this textual framework anticipate what we see throughout the book in drawing on the OT. This prophecy tells of the canonical story coming to fruition and through whom it does so. Of course, we have seen elsewhere how the Gospels convey this in other ways of using the language of the OT. That climax of the story has begun in the events the Gospels narrate, but it reaches its resolution here. There is still more text to fulfill with the events of his Second Coming and so on, as 1:7 shows. There is still a “not yet” to this eschatology because other threads of the canonical narrative must be tied up.
Four, in that same part of this series (and in work on Revelation and the Gospel according to John), we have seen how this text is in continuity with other parts of the NT. While the gospel story is central, other features of the language of this textual framework (and of other parts of Revelation, as seen here) show that this story is the culmination of the new covenant era more generally. One cannot merely move from the OT to Revelation to grasp the worldview story at work here or the characterization of the characters involved. One must also account for other revelations that have come with the new covenant, the greater clarity provided thereby, and other instruction provided to the new covenant community. In terms of the historical audience, John is not exactly addressing them for the first time ever here, nor is he assuming that he is writing to people who are new to the faith. Some background and foundation work has already been done, including of articulating God’s faithful love in the gospel, the hopes of what is still to come, and what obligations we have in light of these things. It is in that context that John writes.
Revelation’s narrative is also remarkable for the extensive participation in angels, which begins here with the reference to an angel being a means of communication with John (1:1; cf. 22:6, 16). That is, the worldview story Revelation is based on and presents in its text is not one that involves only God and humans, nor is it one that simply has a broader scope of involving God and earthly creatures. It also stresses the involvement of angels and demons in this story. This is crucial to the revelatory presentation of this text of what is going on behind the curtain of empirical reality. As I have briefly reviewed here, angels or messengers are linked with individual cities or individual assemblies (1:20; 2:1, 8, 12, 18; 3:1, 7, 14). They are present as witnesses (in one capacity or another) at the final judgment (3:5; 14:10). Their speeches and actions in participating in works of judgment are crucial to the movement of the plot in Revelation, as well as to God’s revelation for John (5:2; 7:1–3; 8:2–13; 9:1, 11, 13–15; 10; 11:15; 14:6–10, 15–20; 15:1, 6–8; 16; 17:1, 7; 18:1, 21; 19:6–10, 17–18; 20:1–3; 21:9). They participate in worship, which is a prominent element of Revelation (5:11–13; 7:11–12; 8:3–4; 11:15; 14:7; 19:6–10; 22:8–9). Angels and demons both have rather prominent roles in chs. 12–13, and we see both at work in ch. 16. As they are present in heaven throughout the narrative, they are also present in the union of heaven and earth in the new creation (21:12). The presence and roles of angels in the narrative of Revelation are consistent with the underlying worldview narrative in which angels are characterized as heavenly servants of God who work for his glory and for the benefit of creation. They are beings who are intermediaries between heaven and earth, serving in revelatory functions, enforcing and witnessing judgment, and participating in worship while carrying out God’s salvific will.
The fact that this book is described as a prophecy (1:3; cf. 19:10; 22:7, 10, 18–19) is also noteworthy for our purposes. On the one hand, it signifies the text as bearing a divine message, divine words mediated through third-person and first-person speech (1:8, 17; 2:1, 7, 8, 11, 12, 17, 18, 29; 3:1, 3, 6, 7, 13, 14, 20; 13:9; 14:13; 16:15; 21:6–7; 22:7, 12–13, 16–17, 20). While the revelation is most prominently visual, there are many auditory elements as well with calls to hear (1:10; 2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:3, 6, 13, 20; 4:1; 5:11, 13; 6:1, 3, 5–7; 7:4; 8:13; 9:13, 16; 10:4, 8; 11:12; 12:10; 13:9; 14:2, 13; 16:1, 5, 7; 18:4; 19:1, 6; 21:3; 22:8, 17). This is a fundamental element of continuity between John and the OT prophetic tradition that he and the God who speak through him evoke throughout the book. It involves further revelation, but it still calls for faithful love and obedience in light of what the audience has already received (2:26; 3:3, 8, 10; 12:17; 14:12).
On the other hand, this element of prophecy derives it significance from the larger worldview narrative that upholds belief in God’s providence. That is, God is ultimately directing history in accordance with his purposes. Prophecy, by its references to the past, present, and future conveys this message in various ways. Revelation relies on this background for its message to the original audience and to those who have heard and read it since then.
A final point of interest for our purposes here is the characterization of the people of God. In line with what we have seen elsewhere in the Johannine corpus (particularly 1 John), and in line with the precedent of Exod 19:4–6, God already declares the identity of the people in light of his ultimate purpose for them, that they will be a kingdom and priests to him (1:6). This fits the emphasis on fulfillment of Scripture and the culmination of its story in Revelation that we have noted previously. At the same time, they are presented in Christomorphic terms in light of the how the gospel story frames their own story, particularly in how John describes the faithful as witnesses. This is how John characterizes himself (1:2, 9), how he characterizes Jesus as the Faithful Witness (1:5; 3:14), and how he characterizes the faithful as bearing witness unto death (2:13; 6:9; 11:3, 7; 12:11, 17; 17:6; 19:10; 20:4). This fits a larger judicial presentation throughout Revelation that culminates with the final judgment in ch. 20 and the outcomes recapitulated in chs. 21 and 22, as well as the execution of precursor judgments throughout. I have gone over the significance of “witness/testimony” language here in Parts 3, 6, and 8 (as well as here), but fuller engagement with the subject is best left for another time. It also fits Johannine emphasis in characterizing disciples as witnesses of Jesus. This motif fundamentally summarizes the character of disciples of Jesus in how their lives should serve as testimony to the one they are proclaiming and the gospel narrative by which they are proclaiming him.
Symbols
To that point, we have already seen how the gospel story itself is a prominent worldview symbol. Like a symbol on a map, it is an orienting symbol pointing to the center of the worldview narrative, to the constitutive event whereby God has acted to save, and to the identifying event which God has primarily revealed himself. The summary reference to this story in 1:5 operates by appeal to symbolic language that condenses much significance in narrative tags, referencing his death by appeal to “blood” and “faithful witness,” referencing his resurrection by appeal to his being the “firstborn of the dead,” and referencing his exaltation by appeal to his being “ruler.” Each of these elements can be unpacked, as we have done elsewhere, but in any case, we should note how they show the gospel’s character as both a narrative and a symbol that unifies and condenses many levels of meaning in reference to God, God’s people, God’s purpose, and so on. We have also seen how reference to “the word of God” and “the testimony of Jesus Christ” (1:2) signify reference to the gospel and anticipate the use of these phrases elsewhere in Revelation. All of these points illustrate how the gospel is crucial to God’s revelation and to our identify formation (as I have reviewed elsewhere).
The description of what Jesus makes us also consists of deeply significant symbolism. We have already noted how our being a kingdom and priests to God draws its significance from one of the foundational identity statements of Exod 19:4–6. This language signifies the new covenant recapitulation, amplification, and fulfillment of that identity statement. There is also an element of Christomorphic identity to these declarations in light of what we see elsewhere in Revelation itself, Johannine writings, and the NT more generally. Kingdom language in particular is quite prominent in the NT, especially in the Gospels in the teachings of Jesus about the kingdom of God (or the heavens in much of Matthew). This language looks forward to the hope of that consummation while also acknowledging its inaugurated reality (cf. 3:21; 5:10; 20:4–6; 22:5). The priest description further signifies our communion with God, our union with Christ in being made like him (see here for example), and our participation in worship together with the rest of heavenly and earthly creation, as Revelation portrays throughout.
More could be said on this front, but in the absence of a focal point for our analysis this time, I would direct the reader to my analysis in Parts 3 and 4 on the use of the symbols of language. The reader should also consider Part 7 for how it illustrates the canonical significance evoked by that language. We have also explored theological symbolism concerning the Trinity in this series.
Praxis
Most of what Revelation has to say on the matter of praxis is not directly reflected in the introduction. But it should be noted that Revelation’s function is not to give much new instruction on what to do now. The times to come are expected to be harder, but that does not mean a basic change in expected praxis is called for. Rather, the positive praxis the book calls attention to throughout is reaffirming what has already been said or exhortation to return to the course in one life once taken (as with some of the seven assemblies in chs. 2–3). Given the narrative and textual framework we have already explored and the Christomorphic tenor introduced therein and continued to the end of the book through the theme of participatory victory (as discussed here, here, and here), the royal and priestly imagery linked to Christ and Christians, and the emphasis on witness, the praxis presented therein could be described as “gospelizing.” Praxis is shaped by the gospel narrative the people have been incorporated into as they are made to be more like Christ.
Consistently with these points, John’s identity as a servant/slave/bondman is described in terms of him being a witness (1:1–2), even as Jesus himself is the Faithful Witness (1:5). Being such a witness calls for integrity and truthfulness. That is, one should have character so defined by integrity and truthfulness as to be an unimpeachable witness. It also means that one shows by their life that they take seriously the truthfulness of what they attest. Combined with the gospelizing and Christomorphic qualities of Revelation’s teaching, this motif also contributes to our being made more like Christ who is himself the Faithful Witness. Those who are faithful witnesses unto death will likewise share in the same resurrection of which Jesus is the firstfruits and firstborn.
Also consistent with what we have observed is the blessing given to those who keep/observe the words of the prophecy (1:3). This is reinforced on the other side of the textual framework as well (22:7, 9). It also establishes a motif we see at multiple points instructing the audience to keep/observe what they have already received (2:26; 3:3, 8, 10; 12:17; 14:12). This comports with the emphasis throughout Revelation on perseverance in suffering faithfulness. What we have already received is the anchor that keeps us grounded amidst the tossing seas of tribulation.
Answers to Basic Worldview Questions
Who are we? We have seen in this short range of text many statements about our identity. By the very opening, we are identified as recipients of divine revelation (1:1–3). Like John, as shown throughout Revelation (and as I addressed in Part 4), we are servants/slaves/bondspeople of God (1:2). We are witnesses bearing testimony to God-and-Christ by the empowerment of the Holy Spirit whose lives should point to the one who is himself the Faithful Witness (1:2). We are those identified as loved and saved by Christ (1:5). In turn, he has made us to be a kingdom, priests to God (1:6).
Where are we? We occupy the earthly space in a creation ruled by God. The rest of the text will show how this world has been subjugated by the demonic in rebellion against the King. It is thus a world where we are under pressure for our faithfulness as it seeks to push us into assimilation away from our allegiance to God. But by God’s providence, this world has a purpose in being made new in his kingdom that is still to come.
What is wrong/what is the problem? As noted in answer to the previous question, there are multiple levels of rebellious powers at work in this world, although that will be unpacked later in this text than this opening. The first indication of the problem here is instantiated in “our sins” from which Jesus acted to free us (1:5), for which reason he was pierced (1:7), and for which reason he had to die in order to become the firstborn of the dead (1:5) before taking his place as ruler. Otherwise, our sins would unite us in rebellion with the idolatrous and demonic powers doomed for destruction in death.
What is the solution? As indicated in the summary of 1:5, the solution has begun in what God has accomplished in the gospel. Indeed, divine salvific action begun in the gospel will be brought to fruition by the end of the book. Only by the action of the transcendent, eternal God can the problems of this world be solved. This promise of action is encapsulated by the reference to him not only as the one who is and the one who was (1:4, 8; cf. Exod 3:14), but also as the one “who is coming” (1:4, 8). As the one who encompasses history, he is the one who will bring it to his purposed goal, and he himself will come to do it. For the human part of creation, he will make them to be a kingdom and priests in consistency with his creative purpose for humans in the beginning (Gen 1:26–31) and in consistency with his purpose of fulfilling his promises in Christ and of making them like Christ.
What time is it? It is the time between times, the time of the inaugurated eschaton. It is the time between the First Coming narrated in the gospel and the Second Coming promised in the same. The one who has come will yet come again, and his action circumscribes this time. It is the time of fulfillment that has begun in the gospel, and the time of consummation is yet approaching (which is one of the reasons for the many links with the OT in this introduction and throughout this book).
How can we know these things? From the opening, an obviously emphasized source of knowledge is divine revelation (1:1). Likewise, the testimony to the gospel that reaches back to the time of Jesus is emphasized (1:2), which produces both oral testimony and the written testimony of the NT. The many allusions to Scripture in this introduction and, especially, in what follows stress the importance of Scripture as an interpretive framework for understanding what has happened, what is happening, and what will happen. To this point, God’s action that has already happened in history, particularly in the gospel story, gives us revelation of his purpose.