The Grammar of Apocalypse: Splitting Hairs

One of the funny things that I hear the average person say is the book of "Revelations".  So what is the problem here?  Our title for the book is found in the very first clause of Johns apocalypse, Ἀποκάλυψις Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (The Revelation of Jesus Christ). Ἀποκάλυψις is a feminine singular noun, showing this message belongs to Jesus Christ and is given to John.  Revelation NOT Revelations

This sounds like I am getting to picky. I am also sure that I have pronounced it wrong at times as well.  I think this happens because the book isn't studied or preached often within Christianity. 

I also think that this false plurality is metaphorical to the way we view the book.  We are almost Gnostic in the way that some people pick it apart trying to find hidden meanings and messages.  Revelation has becomes a book of multiple messages, and the original message to the original recipients is simply not shocking enough. 

This is just an example of a greater problem of how many teach the Bible now, and it isn't happening just in Revelation.  People want sensation (and often teachers want to give it), in multiple ways, but often the simplest reading of scripture is the best thing for us. We also think that it is our right to have individual interpretations-in that way the most fundamentalist person can be thoroughly postmodern.  As the Church continues to find ways to explain the story of God in the 21st century it might have to relearn some practices from the past, while finding the best way to express them in the present.  Why not stick to what we (plural intentional) did for centuries?

Glory be to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit;
As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be

Comments

[Cheryl Mitchell]

I totally agree with you assessment, Chad. We were just having this discussion as a family last night as a matter of fact.

[Chad]

Thanks Mrs. Cheryl-it was a treat to see your comment come through.

[Meredith]

Kind of like the misuse of expresso and Masters of Divinity