In his new book — excuse me, it’s not a book, rather a “manifesto for the church in exile” — amidst all the “reverse-exodus” and “anti-empire” language, mixed with a very poor theology of the Kingdom, Rob Bell writes this: 

Imagine how dangerous it would be if there were Christians who skipped over the first-century meaning of John’s letter and focused only on whatever it might be saying about future events, years and years away. There is always the chance that in missing the point, they may in the process be participating in and supporting and funding the various kinds of systems that the letter warns against participating in, supporting, and funding. That wouldn’t be what Jesus had in mind. That would be anti-Jesus. That would be anti-Christ. Were the people in John’s church reading his letter for the first time, with Roman soldiers right outside their door, thinking, “This is going to be really helpful for people two thousand years from now who don’t want to get left behind”? It’s a letter written to a real group of people, in a real place, at a real time, enduring excruciatingly difficult times. Christians were being killed by the empire because they would not participate. John comforts them, challenges them, warns them, teaches them, inspires them—don’t take the mark of the beast. 

What Rob says may sound good on the surface. However, it’s content is problematic for the following reasons: 

1. Revelation’s meaning centered around “future events” for the 1st century Christians, just as it is the meaning for us today. John is clear in Revelation 1 concerning his purpose: “to show God’s servants the things which must soon take place” (verse 1). Again, it is called a prophecy in verse 3. 

2. Rob makes it sound as though it is not certain that Revelation has a message that concerns itself with real future events. 

3. Rob calls focusing on the future events “missing the point.” Perhaps he would like to re-write Revelation 1:1-3? 

4. Rob seems to think that the 1st century Christians would not be comforted by the fact that a time period is coming where Christ will set things straight upon this earth in every sphere of life. It is in this age, that He will rule with a rod of iron along with those who are faithful to the end (Revelation 2:26-27; 3:21).

5. Somehow focusing on Christ’s future reign is missing the point and consequently opening us up to participating in the work of anti-Christ? This is absurd. Interestingly, the word “antichrist” isn’t actually used in the book of Revelation. However, it used by the same author in 1 John and on four occasions. From John’s usage it is fairly clear that there are presently many antichrists which prefigure the Antichrist. The heart of anti-christ heresy is that Jesus Christ did not come in the flesh, that Jesus was not really Messiah, or that there is no Father and Son. Hardly should the term be used of those who look to Revelation to develop a scheme of future events!