The Book of Revelation & The Verb "Signified"

[Pastor Scott Markle]

On ‎1‎/‎20‎/‎2016 at 2:36 PM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Revelations 1:1-2 states, “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John: who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.”

Due to the use of the verb “signified” in Revelation 1:1, some indicate that the book of the Revelation is to be taken as a prophetic communication of symbolism, rather than literalism.  So then, is this a valid understanding and restriction due to the use of the verb “signified”?

The verb “signify” in Revelation 1:1 is translated from the Greek verb “semaino.” This Greek verb is also employed five other times throughout the New Testament, and every one of those times it is translated with some form of the English verb “signify.”  These five other times are as follows:

John 12:32-33 – “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.  This he said, signifying what death he should die.”

John 18:31-32 – “Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death: that the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signifying what death he should die.”

John 21:18-19 – “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.  This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God.  And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.”

Acts 11:28 – “And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar.”

Acts 25:27 – “For it seemeth to me unreasonable to send a prisoner, and not withal to signify the crimes laid against him.”

Now, there is not a single one of these five other uses for the Greek verb “semaino,” as translated by some form of the English verb “signify,” wherein the verb means “a communication of information through symbolism.”  Rather, in every one of these five cases, the verb means “a communication of information through description.”  As such, although the communication that is indicated by this verb may, or may not include some symbolism within the communication, the meaning of the verb itself does not at all indicate a communication with a focus upon communicating through symbolism, but rather indicates a communication with a focus upon communication through description.  Even so, although the prophetic utterances of the book of the Revelation may indeed include some symbolisms, the use of this verb in Revelation 1:1 would move us to expect, not a prophetic utterance that is primarily symbolic language, but a prophetic utterance that is primarily literal description.

(Note: There are two other Greek verbs that are also translated with some form of the English verb “signify.”  The first is the Greek verb “emphanizo” in Acts 23:15, which Greek verb means “to manifest, to show, to exhibit, to reveal, to make know; and in the passive, to appear.”  The second is the Greek verb “deloo” in Hebrews 9:8; Hebrews 12:27; 1 Peter 1:11, which Greek verb means “to declare, to make evident, to reveal.”)

3 hours ago, Paul said:

The title and Pastor Markle's discussion focuses greatly on the "verb" signified.  So I looked it up and the word "signified" is actually a noun, while the words "signify" and 'signifying' are verbs.  The definition of "signified" is "the meaning expressed by a sign rather than the physical form it is expressed in" (Collins dictionary).  As a noun the word "signified" combined with "it" (signified it) can describe a state or quality, that is the state of revelations being in signs or sketches rather than literal.  

A major problem with accepting that there is a mix is that people get to cherry pick which parts they consider literal and soon enough another revelation is born, a literal thousand years on earth after the resurrection is a long running beauty for example.  No Apostle mentioned this and it's nowhere else in the Bible, and Jesus refutes it in John 18:36 (also Romans 14:17 is worth looking up).

In the first place, the above posting is not accurate to my word study.  My word study did NOT focus primarily upon the English verb "signified."  Rather, my word study focused primarily upon the GREEK VERB "semaino," from which the English verb "signified" is translated in Revelation 1:1.  In the Greek, the word "semaino" is MOST DEFINITELY A VERB.

In the second place, the above posting is not even precisely accurate to the claims of Collin's dictionary.  While Collin's dictionary does indeed present the word "signified" itself as having a usage as a noun, Collin's dictionary also presents the following word forms for the VERB "to signify" -- "signifies, signifying, SIGNIFIED."  Thus even Collin's dictionary, which is the specific dictionary authority that is being used in the above posting, acknowledges that "SIGNIFIED" is a VERB form for the verb "to signify."  Now, since Collin's dictionary would thus be indicating that the word "signified" could either be grammatically used in a given sentence as a noun or as a verb, we must ask -- In which grammatical way is it being used in Revelation 1:1?  In answer I would contend that since the English word "signified" is translating the Greed VERB "semaino" in Revelation 1:1, we should recognize that the English word "signified" is also to be taken grammatically as a VERB.

[DaChaser]

On 1/20/2016 at 2:36 PM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Revelations 1:1-2 states, “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John: who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.”

Due to the use of the verb “signified” in Revelation 1:1, some indicate that the book of the Revelation is to be taken as a prophetic communication of symbolism, rather than literalism.  So then, is this a valid understanding and restriction due to the use of the verb “signified”?

The verb “signify” in Revelation 1:1 is translated from the Greek verb “semaino.” This Greek verb is also employed five other times throughout the New Testament, and every one of those times it is translated with some form of the English verb “signify.”  These five other times are as follows:

John 12:32-33 – “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.  This he said, signifying what death he should die.”

John 18:31-32 – “Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death: that the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signifying what death he should die.”

John 21:18-19 – “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.  This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God.  And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.”

Acts 11:28 – “And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be great dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar.”

Acts 25:27 – “For it seemeth to me unreasonable to send a prisoner, and not withal to signify the crimes laid against him.”

Now, there is not a single one of these five other uses for the Greek verb “semaino,” as translated by some form of the English verb “signify,” wherein the verb means “a communication of information through symbolism.”  Rather, in every one of these five cases, the verb means “a communication of information through description.”  As such, although the communication that is indicated by this verb may, or may not include some symbolism within the communication, the meaning of the verb itself does not at all indicate a communication with a focus upon communicating through symbolism, but rather indicates a communication with a focus upon communication through description.  Even so, although the prophetic utterances of the book of the Revelation may indeed include some symbolisms, the use of this verb in Revelation 1:1 would move us to expect, not a prophetic utterance that is primarily symbolic language, but a prophetic utterance that is primarily literal description.

(Note: There are two other Greek verbs that are also translated with some form of the English verb “signify.”  The first is the Greek verb “emphanizo” in Acts 23:15, which Greek verb means “to manifest, to show, to exhibit, to reveal, to make know; and in the passive, to appear.”  The second is the Greek verb “deloo” in Hebrews 9:8; Hebrews 12:27; 1 Peter 1:11, which Greek verb means “to declare, to make evident, to reveal.”)

 

I think that many misunderstand the symbolic aspect of the revelation, as while it is true that parts of it are given in symbolic terms and visions, they all line up with OT prophecies, and they all pretty much refer to a real historical events or persons just being described in symbolic ways.

 

[D. Bovee]

The Greek word "semaino" means: "to indicate (show/communicate) by the use of signs or symbols."  This meaning is verified by almost all Greek Lexicons and Dictionaries available to any true seeker of Biblical understanding and interpretation.  There may possibly be some literal interpretation/understanding within the Book of Revelation.  However, having said this, we must understand that any literal interpretation and understanding that there may possibly be within the Book of Revelation should always be considered as a secondary interpretation/understanding.  Everything within the Book is set forth in the language of "signs" and "symbols."  Remember that John "was in the Spirit" when he saw these things.

In the five verses that were previously quoted from the New Testament it is plain to see that the Holy Spirit was using literal things and realities and events as "signs" or "symbols" to point to other, and far more important Godly and spiritual events, which have deep spiritual meaning, such as the crucifixion of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.  Jonah was literally in the belly of the great fish for three days and three nights, but his literal experience was a "sign" or "symbol" pointing to the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus.

If we were to interpret/understand the Book of Revelation in the literal sense we would be subjecting God's Word and Vision to our own carnal and natural thought processes.  We are admonished in the scriptures to "Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding." (Proverbs 3:5)  Unfortunately, we, all too often, do just the opposite of this.  It is very unfortunate that most of those who insist on interpreting the Bible literally will abandon their literal interpretations/understandings in favor of symbolic or spiritual interpretations when a literal interpretation does not verify/justify their biased doctrinal positions.  Most literal interpreters of the Scriptures like to pick and choose which portions of the Bible they will interpret literally and which portions they will symbolize or spiritualize.  They (the literalists), of course, should be the ones to let the rest of us know which portions of the Bible should be literal and which portions should be symbolic or spiritually interpreted/understood.

I will give a quick example of what I am talking about.  In Matthew 5:29 & 30 the following words of Jesus are written:  29) "And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee:  for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.  30) And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee:  for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell."  Now here is a very interesting thing to me.  I know of no literal interpretationist who literally believes that we, or anyone, should be plucking out our literal right eye and cutting off our literal right hand.  They rightly interpret the first parts of these verses as being symbolic/spiritual.  However, they will take the second parts of these same verses and interpret them as being literal when it comes to being cast into hell.  Does this make any Biblical sense to anyone?  Of course not!

To symbolize/spiritualize the first part of a verse of Scripture and literalize the second part of the same verse of Scripture is ridiculously foolish and absurd.  It is Biblical madness to say the least.  To say that the plucking out of an eye and the cutting off of a hand is definitely symbolic/spiritual language and then say the hell that a person is cast into is definitely literal, within the same verse, is nothing more than Biblical gymnastics and Scriptural hoop-jumping.  This is done so that the literal interpretationists can justify their belief in a literal burning, blazing and blistering hellish lake of fire without making themselves look too foolish by saying that people should literally pluck out their eyes and cut off their hands.

Well, I have written much more than what most people really want to read or hear.  I am sorry if anyone is offended by my lengthy exposition.  

Edited January 11, 2020 by D. Bovee
correcting misspelled words

[DaveW]

I love the way you mischaracterise the literal interpreter so that you can then discredit them.

That is what is called a "Straw man argument".

The literal interpreter takes the literal interpretation unless there is a reason to take it otherwise. The reason could be a literary mechanism, such as when the Bible uses the term "like", which indicates that something is not the literal stated item but is "like" it.

Mat 3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:

Not an actual dove, but "like a dove".

Or it might be where the context clearly indicates a literal interpretation is not intended.

Mat 3:7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?

Jesus was not saying the Pharisees and Saducees were actually descended from snakes.......

The ones leaning to their own understanding are the symbolisers. They decide what the symbols mean based on nothing more than their desires to find a particular interpretation or doctrine.

Of course there are some literalists who do the same, but the safest way is to let the Bible tell us clearly what is literal and what is symbolic, and that lies with the literal interpretation.

The point is that the literalist will accept symbolic meaning not at a whim as you suggest, but when it is clearly indicated, and will them interpret that symbol within the context of the passage. The symboliser takes whatever he wants as symbolic when it fits his purpose and then interprets it to mean what fits best with his doctrine.

One is clearly not relying on the words of the Bible to define symbolic and literal.

[No Nicolaitans]

I literally believe that it is indeed literally better to pluck out one's eye or cut off one's hand (and live the rest of one's life maimed) than to literally spend eternity in the literal lake of fire.

There is literally nothing symbolic about the comparison that Christ was referring to. 

[Dr. Robert S. Morley]

The discovery of other uses of the term does mean Revelation is "a prophetic utterance that is primarily literal description."

Furthermore, context still determines the word meaning intended by the author.

Signified. Jesus Christ signified, i.e. made known by symbol and figure, the things which must come to pass. "Signify" (σημαίνειν) is characteristic of St. John, to whom wonders are "signs" (σημεῖα) of Divine truths. "This he said, signifying [by means of an allegory] by what manner of death he should die" (John 12:33; comp. 18:32; 21:19) - (Bible Hub, Rev. 1:1, Pulpit Commentary).

The following is from my book, Dismantling Dispensationalism: A guide to better understanding the Last Days and the End Times

Consistency of Interpretation

. . . to be consistent when interpreting Revelation, a book loaded with symbolism, why would the ‘7 spirits of God’ (Rev. 1:4) allegorically represent the Holy Spirit while the reign of a ‘thousand years’ (Rev. 20) be literal? On what basis would the number ‘7,’ associated with the term ‘spirits of God,’ be allegorical and, yet, the number ‘1,000,’ associated with the term ‘years,’ be literal? And, what of the 24 elders, the 12,000 stadia, the 144,000 redeemed, etc.?

. . . 

I argue that numbers should be considered figuratively if:
- the literature is apocalyptic (a genre that uses symbolism and allegory);
- there is clear use of numerology;
- numerology is used at the outset;
- numbers associated with Biblical numerology are used;
- numbers associated with Biblical numerology are used throughout;
- only numbers associated with Biblical numerology are used throughout;
- credible Biblical meaning is consistently the outcome when interpreting numbers as symbols;
- multiple cases exist, making chance unfeasible.
Revelation ticks all of the above; therefore, it is imperative that we interpret the figurative meaning of the numbers in Revelation rather than their literal meaning.

 

Edited April 16, 2023 by Dr. Robert S. Morley
Edited to remove links

[BrotherTony]

7 hours ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

The discovery of other uses of the term does mean Revelation is "a prophetic utterance that is primarily literal description."

Furthermore, context still determines the word meaning intended by the author.

Signified. Jesus Christ signified, i.e. made known by symbol and figure, the things which must come to pass. "Signify" (σημαίνειν) is characteristic of St. John, to whom wonders are "signs" (σημεῖα) of Divine truths. "This he said, signifying [by means of an allegory] by what manner of death he should die" (John 12:33; comp. 18:32; 21:19) - (Bible Hub, Rev. 1:1, Pulpit Commentary).

The following is from my book, Dismantling Dispensationalism: A guide to better understanding the Last Days and the End Times.

 

Consistency of Interpretation

. . . to be consistent when interpreting Revelation, a book loaded with symbolism, why would the ‘7 spirits of God’ (Rev. 1:4) allegorically represent the Holy Spirit while the reign of a ‘thousand years’ (Rev. 20) be literal? On what basis would the number ‘7,’ associated with the term ‘spirits of God,’ be allegorical and, yet, the number ‘1,000,’ associated with the term ‘years,’ be literal? And, what of the 24 elders, the 12,000 stadia, the 144,000 redeemed, etc.?

. . . 

I argue that numbers should be considered figuratively if:
- the literature is apocalyptic (a genre that uses symbolism and allegory);
- there is clear use of numerology;
- numerology is used at the outset;
- numbers associated with Biblical numerology are used;
- numbers associated with Biblical numerology are used throughout;
- only numbers associated with Biblical numerology are used throughout;
- credible Biblical meaning is consistently the outcome when interpreting numbers as symbols;
- multiple cases exist, making chance unfeasible.
Revelation ticks all of the above; therefore, it is imperative that we interpret the figurative meaning of the numbers in Revelation rather than their literal meaning.

-----

The above can also be found in these blog posts on my website, Real Church Life: Bible Prophecy: Literal or Allegorical, and The Millennium.

 

I'm sorry but if I wanted to read your book I would do so. All of your posts seem like a braggarts way of posting, and I have to say, speaking for myself alone, I don't appreciate your posts. It seems you're here to promote your book, and that is all. Besides that, I find many of your conclusions problematic in that you're posting your opinions as facts. No interpretation of scripture is private. That's why we're told to study it for ourselves. We're also told that the Holy Spirit, not your book will lead us to the truth.

[Salyan]

The author has been asked to refrain from posting links in future, so you can now focus on discussion of the content instead of the presentation, okay, Tony?   We all say our opinions as if they’re facts, so again - content. 

[Dr. Robert S. Morley]

Hi Tony,

I would like to commend you for your zeal for the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit's instruction.

Here are some of my thoughts in regard to what you shared.

1. "No interpretation of scripture is private."

This is true, "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost" (2 Peter 1:21). This verse follows yours and explains that the "holy men of God," who wrote the Scriptures, didn't give their own interpretation.

2. "That's why we're told to study it for ourselves."

Yes, too true! We are encouraged to study the Bible for ourselves. It is a safeguard against false teaching. However, that does not mean that we have not been given teachers who can help us know how to interpret properly and others who expound God's word. For Christ "gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers" (Eph. 4:11). That said, James warns, saying, "My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation" (James 3:1).

3. "We're also told that the Holy Spirit, not your book will lead us to the truth."

I agree wholeheartedly, Tony. We should all be like the Jews in Berea who "were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so" (Acts 17:10).

[Pastor Scott Markle]

1 hour ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

Hi Tony,

I would like to commend you for your zeal for the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit's instruction.

Here are some of my thoughts in regard to what you shared.

1. "No interpretation of scripture is private."

This is true, "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost" (2 Peter 1:21). This verse follows yours and explains that the "holy men of God," who wrote the Scriptures, didn't give their own interpretation.

2. "That's why we're told to study it for ourselves."

Yes, too true! We are encouraged to study the Bible for ourselves. It is a safeguard against false teaching. However, that does not mean that we have not been given teachers who can help us know how to interpret properly and others who expound God's word. For Christ "gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers" (Eph. 4:11). That said, James warns, saying, "My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation" (James 3:1).

3. "We're also told that the Holy Spirit, not your book will lead us to the truth."

I agree wholeheartedly, Tony. We should all be like the Jews in Berea who "were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so" (Acts 17:10).

Hmmm.  While I most certainly do NOT agree with the position that you have taken concerning the Book of the Revelation, I DO wish to commend the above posting and comments.  They are well delivered, and points with which I can fully agree.  (Note: I myself believe that the "private interpretation" phrase from 1 Peter 1:20 is often taken out of context and thus misapplied.  I agree with your assessment concerning its contextual intent.)

Edited April 16, 2023 by Pastor Scott Markle

[SureWord]

I always to "signified' pretty much the same as "represent" and an ambassador usual represents his king literally.

When I see a sign (signify) along the road I usually take it quit literal. 

Etymonline.com says:

be a sign of (a fact or alleged fact), indicate, mean," also "declare, make known by signs, speech, or action," from Old French signifier (12c.), from Latin significare "to make signs, show by signs, point out, express; mean, signify; foreshadow, portend," from significus (adj.), from signum "identifying mark, sign"