The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text

The Book of Revelation: Commentary on the Greek Text, by G. K. Beale. NIGTC. Grand Rapids/Cambridge, UK: Eerdmans; Carlisle: Paternoster, 1999. Pp. Ixiv + 1245. 75. 00. The culmination of over a decade of research and writing on the Apocalypse, Beale's work makes a significant contribution to our understanding of Revelation. While the reader may not necessarily agree on all points, the commentary will certainly provide considerable insight into John's often perplexing vision. In particular, Beale's grasp of the Greek grammar of Revelation is outstanding. Too few scholars today have the linguistic expertise to furnish the reader with such extensive and thoughtful notes. At the same time, Beale does not assume that all readers understand technical terms, and he defines them upon first usage. Furthermore, Beale's often repeated insight, first noted with comments on 1: 4a (p. 188), that John's use of solecisms may be a means of calling the reader/hearer's attention to allusions to the Hebrew Bible, is most helpful. second major contribution is the discussion of Revelation's structure. Recapitulation is accepted, as is the literary unity of the book (pp. 108-44). Thus, John arranges his vision not in chronological but in topical order, emphasizing three motifs: judgment, persecution, and salvation (p. 144). While noting that there is little unanimity among scholars regarding Revelation's structure, Beale's own opinion is that a sevenfold or eightfold division of the book is most plausible (p. 114). Nevertheless, this arrangement maybe subordinate to a broader fourfold structure of (1) 1: 1-19 (20) ; (2) 1: 19 (20), 3: 22; (3) 4: 1-22: 5 and 22: 6-21. Linguistic markers from Daniel 2 (p. 115) denote these sections. A model for the compatibility of the multiple viable structures (p. 115) is possible because John arranges his account by overlaying interdependent elements, where earlier parts of the book are supplemented and explained by succeeding events and vice versa (pp. 115-16). Insightful analysis is also provided concerning the nonliteral, symbolic nature of John's vision. This is emphasized at many points, including the explanation of the topical rather than chronological arrangement of the book, the metaphors in Rev 11: 1-2 (pp. 557-71), the description of Babylon in chap. 17 (pp. 847-89), and the interpretation of the millennium in Rev 20: 1-6 (pp. 972-1021). Nevertheless, in the course of these discussions the reader is sometimes distracted by Beale's references to the inadequacies of the literalist interpretations, such as those provided by John Walvoord and Hal Lindsey. While agreeing with Beale's conclusions, one sometimes wonders if a dialogue with these authors, particularly Lindsey, might not be better served, and more accessible to a general public, in a popular treatment. Beale also provides the reader with a rich collection of intertextual references from the Hebrew Bible, rabbinic literature, Jewish apocalyptic, and early Christian texts. His discussion of chap. 14 (pp. 730-84; see esp. the excursuses on pp. 776--80) is masterful. …