This work affirms the centrality of Jesus and His coming work of retribution and reward as the keys to understanding Revelation.

Should Christians be embarrassed by the book of Revelation? The Revelation of John has long confused and disturbed readers. The Apocalypse of John among Its Critics confronts the book's difficulties. Leading experts in Revelation wrestle honestly with a question raised by critics: Should John's Apocalypse be in the canon? (Alan S. Bandy) Was John intentionally confusing? (Ian Paul) Was John a bully? (Alexander E. Stewart) Did John delight in violence? (Dana M. Harris) Was John a chauvinist? (Külli Tõniste) Was John intolerant to others? (Michael Naylor) Was John antisemitic? (Rob Dalrymple) Did John make things up about the future? (Dave Mathewson) Did John advocate political subversion? (Mark Wilson) Did John misuse the Old Testament? (G.K. Beale) Engaging deeply with Revelation's difficulties helps the reader understand the book's message—and respond rightly. The book of Revelation does not need to be avoided or suppressed. It contains words of life.

The study explores the eschatological reinterpretation of the Yom Kippur ritual found in the Apocalypse of Abraham where the protagonist of the story, the patriarch Abraham, takes on the role of a celestial goat for YHWH, while the text’s antagonist, the fallen angel Azazel, is envisioned as the demonic scapegoat. The study treats the application of the two goats typology to human and otherworldly figures in its full historical and interpretive complexity through a broad variety of Jewish and Christian sources, from the patriarchical narratives of the Hebrew Bible to early Christian materials in which Yom Kippur traditions were applied to Jesus’ story.

Reprint of the original, first published in 1845.