A Recapitulation –
A vision not in chronological order. In chapter 9 and 11 we have the beast coming out of the “bottomless pit” and in chapter 20 the beast is being cast into it. Victorinus was the first to suggest this theory of recapitulation. The bottomless pit is also consistent with the beast that was, is not, and yet is. The two beasts are really the same.
A Record of What Wasn’t –
A problem with Eusebius and Victorinus. They don’t seem to be aware of the seven churches of the Apocalypse. Eusebius mentions six of the seven churches but never associates them with the Apocalypse. Victorinus mentions the seven churches that Paul wrote to but not the seven churches of the Apocalypse. Was there a version of the Apocalypse that did not have the seven churches?
A Dog That Didn’t Bark –
A commentary by Victorinus on the Apocalypse. He mentions the seven churches that Paul wrote to but not the ones John wrote to. Eusebius has the same problem. He mentions six of the seven churches of the Apocalypse but never associates any of them with the Apocalypse.
A Vision Repeated –
A problem with interpretation. There is an unfounded assumption that the chapters of the Apocalypse are in chronological order which makes it impossible to understand. Each vision does not necessarily depend on the previous or following chapter. This was understood by Victorinus in the third century. It is called Recapitulation.
A Connection With Chapters 9, 11, 17, and 20 –
A beast that was, and is not, and yet is. This beast has seven heads and ten horns. It comes out of the pit before it is locked up in chapter 20. This means the chapters are not in chronological order which is consistent with the theory of Recapitulation first introduced by Victorinus in the third century.
A Prophesy Again
A book with three writers named John: John who bare record, John to the seven churches, and John who am your brother. Lots of unsettled questions: Who?, When?, and now Where? Only the third John admits to being on the Isle of Patmos. Eusebius mentions six of the seven churches but never associates them with the Apocalypse. Victorinus only mentions the seven churches Paul wrote to. So why not speculate?
A Problem with the Churches
A strange commentary by Victorinus. He mentions the churches Paul wrote to but not the ones John wrote to. This is hard to believe but it would be consistent with both Eusebius and Victorinus looking at the Apocalypse John the Baptist wrote and that would not include the seven churches.
A Church History
A problem with the churches. Eusebius mentions six of the seven churches of the Apocalypse but never associates them with the Apocalypse. He doesn’t mention Antipas. All this would be consistent with an earlier version of the Apocalypse written by John the Baptist. Victorinus has a similar problem.
A Servant of God
A “lamb” and the “bare record” ties John the Baptist to the Apocalypse. Vischer holds the Apocalypse to have been originally a purely Jewish composition. It would not have included the seven churches that Eusebius and Victorinus failed to recognize. A reasonable explanation why they didn’t.
A Church History that includes six of the seven churches that John wrote to but Eusebius never associates them with the Apocalypse. Victorinus doesn’t even mention them. Is it possible there is a version of the Apocalypse that doesn’t include the seven churches? It could be a reasonable explanation for what we are looking at.