FAQ - why should I trust your commentary?

Name

Ross A Taylor, I live in London but spend six months a year travelling overseas as an engineer.

Age

Born in 1955. I have been a Christian since 1973

Church affiliation

In my life I have been part of the Church of England, Baptist, Assembly of God and Charismatic churches.

I was converted under David Watson while at university studying physics in 1973. David Watson was quite a famous church of England evangelist in England (York) - his ministry was mainly to students. He is now dead. I am conservative, by conservative I mean that the first three years of my Christian life was at university and teaching of the Christian Union was conservative as in IVP publications.

When did I write the commentary?

It was mostly written between Feb1995 and July 1997, before I went on the internet in Aug 1997. This site was started in March 1999. A Spanish translation was complete in Dec 1998 and a French translation in Dec 1999. I still occasionally update the commentary and the latest updates can be found on the Downloads page.

Why did I write the commentary?

In 1985 I heard a set of tapes about Revelation by Malcolm Smith, who demonstrated to me that the key to its interpretation lies in the rest of the bible. His tapes are still available. In 1995 I started my commentary. At the time I wrote it for myself, then in 1997 I found the internet and put it on an early website, later it was translated into Spanish (who are the majority of my web visitors) and later into French.

Revelation Theology

It is God's last letter to the Church -- to encourage her and sustain her through the difficult times ahead. It is non-dispensational, in which the church is not raptured at Rev 4:1. Post-tribulation rapture. Amillennial on Rev 20. On the rest I am mainly Idealist with some futurist, which means that Revelation is relevant to Christians of every age. I assume that any interpretation of Revelation should come from the rest of the bible. There is an emphasis on persecution, as well as worship and idolatry. My emphasis is on the church (the 144,000, the two witnesses, the woman of ch 12), it is after all written to the seven churches.

Why should I trust that your commentary is OK?

Ultimately you will have to judge for yourself by reading it. There is no list of right answers to the symbols in Revelation, a glance at the various interpretations used by commentators will show this. However, I consulted many of the available scholarly commentaries as I wrote it. With the exception of dispensational commentators, there is overall a broad consensus among scholarly commentators.

Unlike most books in the bible there are is great variety of differences in the interpretation of the book of Revelation. Generally there are four main schools:

• Preterist - it is speaking about the fall of Jerusalem or the Roman empire
• Historicist - it is giving an overview of church or world history
• Idealist - it gives spiritual principles that are valid throughout church history
• Futurist - it speaks of events close to the Second Coming

Many now use an eclectic position in which the preterist, idealist and futurist approaches are combined, this is my approach too. The beast is the Roman empire, and a succession of other persecuting powers leading to the empire of the antichrist. It is generally recognized that the approach one uses is not a test of orthodoxy. In addition there is the dispensationalist school of interpretation, which frankly I think is wrong and I have not used.. The approach that I have used is mainly idealist - meaning that it has lessons for every age of the church. Craig Keener has put forward the interesting idea, that because Satan does not know the date of Jesus return he has an antichrist waiting in the wings at all times. So the church of John's time had the Roman empire, the church of the reformation had the papacy, the German church had Hitler and the Chinese church has the state (Revelation is banned in China).

Chapter 20 of Revelation has been controversial since it was written and here there are three main interpretations:

• Premillennial - the Second Coming is before (pre-) the millennium
• Amillennial - the church age is the millennium
• Postmillennial - the Second Coming is after (post-) the millennium

Commentaries used

I used quite a number of recognized commentaries as I wrote it so you should not find anything weird or bizarre in it. For chapter 20 I have have given both the Amillennial and Premillennial interpretation (I am amillennial on Ch 20). Above all I have tried to use the rest of the bible to interpret Revelation. I use a similar approach as William Hendriksen who wrote More than Conquerors. I also write particularly for the persecuted church which Revelation is intended to encourage. I still study Revelation and have some more commentaries on order. The main commentaries I used at the time were Mounce, Barclay, G. B. Caird, Hailey, Hughes, Johnson, Ladd, Lang, Milligan, Hendriksen, Morris and Wilcock. Since then I have updated my commentary based on Beale, Krodel, Chilton and Osborne.

If you want a dispensational commentary, in which the church gets raptured in Rev 4:1 then mine will not be for you. I do not mention the middle east, tanks or nuclear bombs.

Of course I am not saying that everything that I wrote is correct - I have not yet found the 'perfect' commentary. But, apart from the dispensational commentaries, what I write is pretty main-stream. I have compared and reviewed over 30 of the available commentaries on my site. I have tried to include the best of what other commentators wrote in my commentary.

For what it is worth I have not had any critical emails or comments in my guest-book saying that I am wrong. It has had a good reception, especially from Spanish speakers who have fewer resources than English speakers. My only critics came from two 'KJV only' people who objected that I used the NIV for the basis of my commentary, as a result I did a careful comparison between the two versions, see the results.

Anyway, you will have to judge for yourself. It is a difficult book but I was blessed as I wrote the commentary (as well as depressed when I did not understand something). You will certainly see that I have tried to be biblical. If you find places where you think that I am unclear or unbiblical let me know.

If you have any other questions, please let me know.

Sign My Guestbook View My Guestbook

Testimonials:

Thus far I am very pleased with all I have read and have already incorporated some of your comments in my introduction. I concur with your evangelistic style and enjoy the copious cross references for further study. One other point of credibility afforded to your work is that it reflects what I have found in other reputable sources such as Haley's Bible Handbook, and Strong's Concordance. - Steven Welsh

I was searching for information on the Revelation to help me prepare to teach a bible study at my church (Central Baptist). I appreciate the fine work you have done in your commentary. I have found it most informative and useful. I am using the material for my own preparation only. I have given your URL to the class as a reference. Again, thank you for the fine work you have done and also for making it available on the Internet. - R M

I am writing to let you know how much I appreciate your efforts in writing your commentary. You have brought together important information that has helped me in teaching my Sunday School class. As you probably know, the study and effort required to teach a subject like Revelation made me learn more than I could pass on to my class. Your commentary was an essential part of my preparation for each Sunday's lesson. Thank you and may God bless you for this work. - J M

You have done a marvelous work which has greatly added to my ability to understand, validate and preach what is rapidly become my favorite book of the Bible. On behalf of myself and my small congregation, Thank you! and my God richly bless your ministry. - JSA

comments or feedback email: rossuk12@hotmail.com