This opening lesson lays the groundwork for our study of biblical eschatology by examining the Bible’s worldview of creation, the heavens, and the earth. Scripture frames all existence in two categories: the heavens above and the earth below. Unlike pagan philosophies or modern assumptions, the Bible presents a clear and consistent picture—God created the heavens and the earth, and He chose to dwell within His creation, close to humanity. This has profound implications for how we understand the gospel and the hope of the end times. Rather than seeing salvation as escape into a distant, immaterial heaven, we discover the biblical promise of restoration, resurrection, and the coming kingdom on earth. By recovering this foundational worldview, we can see how the gospel of the kingdom, as Jesus and the apostles proclaimed it, leads us to the true biblical hope: the return of Messiah, the renewal of all creation, and God’s eternal dwelling with His people.

This study surveys the central Jewish apocalypses—1 Enoch, 4 Ezra, and 2 Baruch—as the backdrop for understanding Paul’s letters and the New Testament’s apocalyptic worldview. It highlights how these writings interpret Israel’s story from Adam to the end of the age through visionary symbolism, culminating in judgment, resurrection, and the Messiah’s reign. In contrast to modern systematic theology, Paul assumes this shared apocalyptic framework when speaking of the Day of the Lord, resurrection, and the kingdom, only distinguishing himself with three key emphases: the Messiah’s suffering as atonement, the gift of the Spirit as a pledge of resurrection, and the mission to the Gentiles. By situating Paul and Jesus within this broader Second Temple context, the study underscores that New Testament references to judgment, Gehenna, resurrection, and the kingdom were not redefinitions but continuations of well-established Jewish apocalyptic hope.

The Book of Revelation is one of the most debated and misunderstood books in the New Testament, especially by Gentile readers throughout history. While chapters 1-5 and 19-22 are generally agreed upon, the real challenge lies in interpreting the heavily symbolic middle chapters, 6-18. These chapters have been the subject of numerous interpretations, yet the key to understanding them lies in their first-century Jewish context. Revelation is best understood when approached as Jewish apocalyptic literature, drawing heavily on themes from Daniel 7 and other prophetic writings. Just as the Didache reflects early Christian beliefs about the future, Revelation reveals the unfolding of God's redemptive plan through the messianic woes, ultimately pointing toward hope and salvation. By returning to the original Jewish framework, we can better grasp the profound message of Revelation and apply it meaningfully to our own lives.

This lesson explores the four main approaches to interpreting the Book of Revelation that have developed over the past 2,000 years: futurism, idealism, historicism, and preterism. We trace the understanding of Revelation from its roots in first- and second-century Jewish apocalyptic thought, through early church fathers, and into modern interpretations. Each approach offers a unique perspective on the book, whether it views Revelation as future prophecy, spiritual allegory, historical fulfillment, or a reflection of first-century events. Ultimately, the lesson emphasizes the importance of interpreting Revelation within its original Jewish apocalyptic framework.

This lesson explores the tension between ancient Jewish apocalyptic beliefs and modern Christian interpretations, focusing on how evangelicals often embrace the supernatural worldview of the first-century Jews while overlooking or reinterpreting their eschatological expectations. By examining scholars like Dr. Michael Heiser, who highlights the divine council and supernatural elements of the Old Testament, we delve into why these same perspectives often dismiss the Jewish hope for future judgment, resurrection, and the coming of God's kingdom. This contrast opens a deeper discussion about how to reconcile both viewpoints in contemporary theological understanding.