In studying the teaching of the New Testament books, a great deal can

be gathered from the way in which they use the Old Testament Scriptures.

When we find that Matthew refers to the Old Testament Scriptures more than

ninety times, and that the epistle to the Hebrews contains in its short

compass 102 Old Testament references, we are at once impressed with the fact

that these books contain some line of teaching which has a real relationship

with the purpose and people of Old Testament times.  When we consider the

Prison Epistles, and note how very few quotations they contain of the Old

Testament, we are at once in possession of that which helps us to see that

these epistles are not a continuation of the teaching of the Old Testament,

but they are a revelation of something new, even as they themselves claim

(see Ephesians 3).

What shall we say then, when we find no less than 285 references to the

Old Testament in the book of the Revelation, or more than the references of

Matthew and Hebrews put together?  Surely this is a witness that must not be

overlooked.  Further, the visions, the symbols, the general character of the

language of the Revelation is similar to that of Daniel, Zechariah, Joel and

the Old Testament prophets generally.  If we approach the Revelation with a

mind stored with the teaching of the prophets of old, we shall not need

explanation of much that would otherwise mystify us, and we shall be spared

the utterly vain attempt to find, by ransacking the history of Europe,

something approaching to an interpretation.

As a consequence of many years' study, we hold very strongly that the

Bible explains itself, and that all necessary information is found within its

pages.  If the child of God must possess a knowledge of the acts of Goths and

Vandals, and of the tortuous intricacies of European and Roman history before

he can understand this book, then but a very few can possibly hope to acquire

sufficient data even to commence the study.  This shuts us up to the few

whose opportunities for research have been more advantageous than the

majority, and finally calls us either to rest upon the conflicting findings

of these frail and erring teachers, fallible as ourselves, or to turn away

disheartened from this prophetic light that shines in a dark place.

The simplest believer who may never have heard of Caligula, nor of

Alaric, to whom such phrases as `political heavens' and `ecclesiastical suns'

may be utterly unintelligible, can nevertheless understand all the mind of

God as revealed in this book without one single additional outside or

historical allusion.  Revelation studied in the light of Isaiah, Ezekiel,

Daniel, Joel, Zechariah and Malachi, is luminous, and in turn reflects light

on some otherwise difficult passages in those prophecies.  This is

particularly so in the understanding of the place that the seven churches

As we compare the Old Testament prophecies written before the

captivity, and those written during and after the captivity, we shall find a

marked change.  Ezekiel's prophecy is full of symbols, so also is Daniel's;

Zechariah devotes six chapters to symbols.  This change, this important place

given to symbols, is worthy of notice.  During the time of Israel's decline

and failure, symbolic prophecy is in the ascendant.  When we come to the

Revelation we find these symbols referred to as `mysteries', e.g., `the

mystery of the seven stars' (Rev. 1:20).  Mystery first appears in the New

Testament in Matthew 13, when Christ, as Israel's King, had been rejected by

the nation (see Matt. 11 and 12).  It was because of this that He spoke in

parables, and it is because Revelation deals with this same people, their