I agree with Martin Luthers early opinion on Revelation "neither apostolic nor prophetic" and "Christ is not found in it." He would later have a change of heart, but I'm not sure that he ever figured out what revelation revealed.
In my theology the Urantia Book reveals what the BOR originally revealed but did not survive intact. Some material was removed, other material added by opocolyptic writers.
A book of revelation should at least reveal something.
Let me give you the historical approach. (This is not going to be historical progression through the centuries).
1, the 7 churches were the Christians in Judea who needed to escape from Judea in the late 60s; many went to be near the best known apostles, in Little Asia (modern western Turkey).
2, the Rev is a revelation of CHRIST, as it says. Most people read that and think it was saying of final events. It is revealing that Christ is Lord of history even when the worst of persecution happens.
3, the beast is Rome, but riding on the beast is something even more insidious for the 1st century believer: Jerusalem/Judaism/Israel. Many Roman cities had leaders who were Jewish who thrived there, helped the city like Daniel (seek the prosperity of the city where I take you), and believed that the messianic age was that of taking the torah to the nations.
4, the harlot harms the believers. But eventually the beast turns on the harlot and ruins her. That's the destruction of Jerusalem.
5, with the harlot out of the way (stoned), Christ and the bride can marry. However, even if John wrote this in the late 60s (during the DofJ) or right after, Paul had already said the marriage had taken place. Perhaps now, John meant, the bride can thrive on earth, without the harrassment of Judaism which was profoundly minimized. But the city to which Christ is married never quite lands on earth, either in John's visions or in Paul (Gal 4, or Heb 12). It is hovering above.
6, at the end of time all the world will be judged and the result will be life in the NHNE or destruction.
The Rev is not a prediction of world events. It is not a 'safe' Nostradamus scroll. It is not prognostication. It is a pastoral vision to tell believers that Christ will be victor over all things thrown at the believers. Those would be believers who had lost children, parents, spouses, friends, to Judaism or Rome.
The delay of the final judgement of God was a question as large as the inclusion of the Gentiles. Mt 24 etc indicates it would happen right after the awful destruction of Jerusalem. But it also allows a delay, as does Mark and Peter. Luke (with Paul) does not. Paul is always referring to a very short time frame and return of Christ. But as you know, 2 Peter 3 is written specifically to deal with the objection of the delay of the coming (surely that cannot be the 1st coming...). The delay was the greatest question for the remaining apostles after the DofJ, but as Lattourrette shows, there is nothing conclusive other than 2 Peter 3. We are simply in a delayed return period.
