Jim Davis and Skyler Flowers argue that the book of Revelation doesn’t have to be so difficult and mysterious if we would only grasp the author’s use of recapitulation: a literary device where the same event is addressed repeatedly from different angles or perspectives.
Revelation isn’t meant to be read merely as a chronology of fantastic events. It should be seen as one set of events repeated seven times, each with increasing intensity. Revelation is apocalyptic—a genre defined by images, symbols, and references to the Old Testament and John’s ancient world. It’s intended to help the churches to whom it’s written see the world in a different way.
Their analysis is worth considering, though I concede that they don’t provide much evidence for the presumption of recapitulation. What do you think? What evidence is there in the book itself to suggest the author is or is not using the device of recapitulation?
