Posted by Georg S. Adamsen on February 7, 2008
The commentaries included in the category Scholarly commentaries are either scholarly (i.e., written for scholars and serious students) or written by scholars and with a specific, valuable view on Revelation or one of the topics discussed on Revelation Resources.
Although it is hardly possible to rank commentaries objectively, I would suggest that some commentaries should be consulted more unhesitatingly than others. Comments are welcome!
Of the most recent commentaries I would mention:
Two commentaries with a focus on the history of interpretation are recommended (in chronological order):
I would also suggest the following commentaries (in chronological order):
- Peder Madsen, Johannes’ Aabenbaring (1894-1896)
- Henry Barclay Swete, The Apocalypse (1906)
- Wilhelm, Bousset, Die Offenbarung Johannis (1906)
- I. T. Beckwith, The Apocalypse of John (1919)
- R. H. Charles, Revelation (1920)
- Theodor Zahn, Die Offenbarung des Johannes (1924-1926)
- Ernst Lohmeyer, Die Offenbarung des Johannes (1926)
- William Hendriksen, More Than Conquerors (1940)
- Holger Mosbech, Johannes’ Aabenbaring (see also his history of interpretation) (1943; 1934)
- G. B. Caird, The Revelation of St. John the Divine (1966; 1983)
- Robert L. Thomas, Revelation 1-7; Revelation 8-22 (1992; 1995)
- Heinz Giesen, Die Offenbarung des Johannes (1997)
- Grant R. Osborne, Revelation (2002)
Many – especially German – scholars were and are Lutherans. Some seem to be more distinctively Lutheran than others. I would mention the following:
- R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. John’s Revelation (1935; repr. 2001)
- Eduard Lohse, Die Offenbarung des Johannes (1960; 8th ed. 1993)
- Martin H. Franzmann, The Revelation to John (1968; 2nd. 1978; repr. 1986)
- Siegbert W. Becker, Revelation: The Distant Triumph Song (1985)
- Gerhard A. Krodel, Revelation (1989)
- Louis A. Brighton, Revelation (1999)
Any comments?
Posted by Georg S. Adamsen on February 2, 2008
This topic includes references to on-line material or written contributions in the Scandinavian languages (Danish, Norwegian and Swedish) that are either scholarly of nature or written by scholars. See the individual posts and/or “Danish writings on Revelation,” “Norwegian writings on Revelation,” and “[Swedish post to follow]” for more information.
Theses
In his thesis, Christ the Conqueror: Ideas of Conflict and Victory in the New Testament (London: SPCK, 1954), Professor of NT Ragnar Leivestad (1916-2002), University of Oslo, included a detailed discussion of Revelation.
Professor Jarl Henning Ulrichsen’s unpublished doctoral thesis “Das eschatologische Zeitschema der Offenbarung des Johannes”, submitted to the University of Tronheim, Oslo, 1988.
Aage Hauken submitted his “The Greek Vocabulary of the Roman Imperial Cult and the New Testament: Del I [Sic]” to the Pontificia Universitas S. Thomae de Urbe, probably in 1992.
Håkan Ulfgard, Revelation 7:9-17 and the Feast of Tabernacles. This thesis was accepted by the University of Lund.
Sverre Bøe, a Norwegian theologian, defended his doctoral dissertation on Gog and Magog in 1999 at the Norwegian Lutheran School of Theology in Oslo. It was published in 2001 by Mohr Siebeck in Tübingen.
Georg S. Adamsen, a Danish theologian, submitted Parousia and Paraenesis to the Norwegian Lutheran School of Theology in Oslo. This thesis is not yet published.
Sigve Tonstad is the author of Saving God’s Reputation: The Theologial Function of Pistis Iesou in the Cosmic Narratives of Revelation. Library of New Testament Studies, 337. London; New York: T & T Clark, 2006. [See more here: Norwegian writings on Revelation]
Full-scale exegetical commentaries
Major scholarly commentaries are few: Peder Madsen, Johannes’ Aabenbaring and Holger Mosbech, Johannes’ Aabenbaring with the two accompanying volumes: Mosbech, Fortolkningen (history of interpretation) and Mosbech, Sproglig Fortolkning (a linguistic commentary).
Other commentaries etc.
In Danish
Danish commentaries written by scholars include (apart from Madsen and Mosbech mentioned above): Torm, Johannes’ Åbenbaring, Anna Marie Aagaard’s Danish commentary on Revelation and Thestrup Pedersen, Johannes’ Åbenbaring.
See my separate entry with an overview of a number of Danish writings on Revelation.
In Norwegian
Torm’s commentary from 1941 was mentioned above. Important is professor Olaf Moe’s commentary from 1960 and Martin Synnes’s commentary on Revelation 2-3. Martin Synnes has also published two articles on the millennium (see Synnes, Tusenårsrike). Moe and Synnes were professors at the present Norwegian Lutheran School of Theology.
Separate entry with an overview of a number of Norwegian publications will follow.
In Swedish
Otto Ferdinand Myrberg (1888) and David Hedegård (1944) [description to follow].
Bullinger’s commentary (2nd ed., 1909) was translated into Swedish and published in 1927.
In 2007, teol.dr. Leif Carlsson published a 272 page commentary on Revelation. Carlsson is the author of Round Trips to Heaven: Otherworldly Travelers in Early Judaism and Christianity. Lund University, 2004 (description to follow).
Separate entry with an overview of a number of Swedish publications will follow later.
In Finnish
Finnish does not belong to the Scandinavian languages, but Anssi Simojoki’s thesis Apocalypse Interpreted should be noted.
Academic articles
Select articles are listed in the individual entries: Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish [links to follow].
Updated: July 9th, 2008
Posted by Georg S. Adamsen on August 28, 2007
The entries marked structure deal with the problem of structure, one of the more controversial, but also important issues as regards the interpretation of Revelation.
This issue has two aspects: First, the question of the textual organisation of Revelation (i.e. its “outline”), and, second, the relationship between the text and the events to which the text refers. The first is dealt with as structure, the second as the narratological relationship between discourse and story, which, of course, cannot ignore the first.
One of the views is the so-called recapitulationist view (see Hendriksen, More than Conquerors).
Various strategies for analysis of this issue have been proposed. Some very good places to start are the dissertations by Kempson and Mazzaferri, and the introductory chapter in Bauckham, Climax. Mazzaferri’s analysis of the outline is very good, although some refinements may be made. Bauckham argues that Revelation is designed for reading, which means that the structural markers must be aurally. Among the most important aurally structural markers are the numbers.
In his commentary, J. R. Michaels, among others, further argues that the so-called interlude in chapter 7 is not really an interlude. This may suggest that the analysis of the structure of Revelation should pay careful attention to the numberings as structural markers as well as reconsider the whole concept of interludes.
Professor Felix Just has compiled some five different proposals of Revelation outlines as well as given his own. This is a good on-line place to start.
Today one should not attempt to analyse the structure without paying careful attention to the insights gained by narratological analysis.
Posted by Georg S. Adamsen on
This topic deals with the relationship between the Old Testament and Revelation and of methodological considerations concerning this problem.
Those commentaries that treat this topic in a systematic way will be listed.
A special area of research within this topic is the question of typology, which therefore has its own topic (or category).
The problem as to whether Revelation uses the Hebrew or the Greek or both Testaments is dealt with under language.
Posted by Georg S. Adamsen on August 27, 2007
This topic refers to various studies which, while analysing various aspects of Revelation, employ ancient or modern rhetorical theory.
As with alle the other topics, suggestions or contributions are welcome.
Posted by Georg S. Adamsen on
Denne gruppe indeholder henvisninger til online materiale eller trykte bøger og artikler, som jeg vurderer, man kan lære noget af. Der er ikke nødvendigvis tale om egentlig videnskabelige artikler. Nogle af artiklerne kan hjælpe ikke-fagfolk i gang med at læse Johannes’ Åbenbaring.
De skandinaviske sprog er i øvrigt: dansk, norsk og svensk, men strengt taget ikke finsk.
At jeg medtager en henvisning, betyder ikke nødvendigvis, at jeg er enig i de fremførte argumenter eller synspunkter.
Posted by Georg S. Adamsen on
As is obvious from even a cursory reading of works on history of art, Revelation has had a profound influence on art. Art may reveal how Revelation was interpreted at a given time and place.
