What you were never told about Revelation

[job 1:21]

What you were never told about the Book of REVELATION
The Apocalypse
[one of the Jewish and Christian writings of 200 b.c. to a.d. 150 marked by pseudonymity, symbolic imagery, and the expectation of an imminent cosmic cataclysm in which God destroys the ruling powers of evil and raises the righteous to life in a messianic kingdom]
Introduction
Dating the Book of Revelation
One of the most important items in terms of interpreting the Bible is to understand the historical context in which it was written. Much of the debate concerning Bible Prophecy hinges on when Revelation was written. While dispensational scholars insist that John wrote his apocalypse in the mid 90's, a more compelling argument can be made for a much earlier date, around 65-66 AD.
Now one may ask, "Why is this important?" After all, it was nearly 2,000 years ago. What difference does 30 years make? Obviously, 30 years (or even 10 years) can make a big difference in the history of a nation. Germany and Japan in 1950 were quite a bit different than they were in 1940. In the same way, Rome and Jerusalem, the two main players in the Book of Revelation, were much different in 96 AD then they were in 66 AD. Thus the dating of the Book of Revelation becomes crucial in properly interpreting the book.
External Evidence
I.) The Syriac History of John, the Son of Zebedee makes reference to John's banishment under Nero, who reigned from 54 to 68 AD. It states:
"After these things, when the Gospel was increasing by the hands of the Apostles, Nero, the unclean and impure and wicked king, heard all that had happened at Ephesus. And he sent and took all that the procurator had and imprisoned him; and laid hold of St. John and drove him into exile; and passed sentence on the city that it should be laid waste."
Elsewhere in the Syriac tradition, we should note that both of the Syriac Versions of the Revelation give in the title the statement that John was banished by Nero. Their titles say. -"The Apocalypse of St. John, written in Patmos, whither John was sent by Nero Caesar." Since John was banished to Patmos by Nero, and Nero died in 68 AD, then Revelation was written prior to 68 AD.
II.) The Muratorian Canon states "...for the blessed apostle Paul himself, following the order of his predecessor John, he wrote to only seven churches by name, in the following order...". Paul was killed in 68 AD by Nero. Since Paul copied John's example of writing to 7 churches, then John wrote Revelation prior to 68 AD.
III.) In his work Against Jovinianum (1:26), Jerome states, "But if thou art near to Italy, thou hast Rome, where we also have an authority close at hand. What an happy Church is that, on which the Apostles poured out all their doctrine, with their blood: where Peter had a like Passion with the Lord; where Paul bath for his crown the same death with John; where the Apostle John was plunged into boiling oil, and suffered nothing, and was afterwards banished to an island." It is almost universally accepted that Peter and Paul were murdered by Nero. Jerome places John's banishment in the same time period (as do many other church fathers).
IV.) In Quis Salvus Dives (Section 42), Clement of Alexander writes, "... a true account of John the apostle that has been handed down and preserved in memory. When after the death of the tyrant he removed from the island of' Patmos to Ephesus,"
The fact that Clement does not identify "the tyrant" suggests that it was probably Nero, not Domitian. Nero was universally feared and despised, and his name became the household word for anything evil.
Internal Evidence
I.) Revelation was written during the reign of the 6th Roman Emperor (Nero) -Revelation 17:10.
"There are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet come. And when he comes, he must continue a short time."
Date Emperor
69 B.C. -44 A.D Julius Caesar
31 B.C. -14 A.D Augustus Caesar
14 A.D. -37 A.D Tiberius Caesar
37 A.D. -41 A.D. Gaius (Caligula)
41 A.D. -54 A.D Claudius
54 A.D. -68 A.D Nero Caesar
The Seventh king was Galba, who was killed in office after only 6 months.
II.) Revelation was written during a time of great persecution of the Church -Revelation 2:10.
"Do not fear any of those things which you are about to suffer. Indeed, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be tested, and you will have tribulation ten days. Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown of life."
III.) Revelation was written while the temple was still standing in Jerusalem, before the Romans destroyed the holy city -Revelation 11:1-2
"Then I was given a reed like a measuring rod. And the angel stood, saying, "Rise and measure the temple of God, the altar, and those who worship there. But leave out the court which is utside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles. And they will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months."
IV.) Revelation was written while there were still other apostles alive Revelation 2:2.
"I know your works, your labor, your patience, and that you cannot bear those who are evil. And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars;"
V.) There is a lot more internal evidence, such as Judaists in the church and the state of the churches themselves. For more information, read "Before Jerusalem Fell" by Kenneth Gentry.
Evidence for a late date?
The only evidence for the 95 AD date is a vague statement made by Irenæus, the second century bishop of Lyons. In his book "Against Heresies", he writes,
"We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen not very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign." – Against Heresies Book V, Chapter 30, Verse 3 (Domitian reigned from 81 to 96 AD).
Irenæus's statement is quite vague. He's not real clear on exactly what was seen "towards the end of Domitian's reign." However, even if we allow for the understanding that John saw the vision during Domitian's reign, Irenæus remains a questionable source at best. In this same book, he wrote that Jesus had an earthly ministry of 15 years and live to be almost 50 years old.
"For how had He disciples, if He did not teach? And how did He teach, if He had not a Master's age? For He came to Baptism as one Who had not yet fulfilled thirty years, but was beginning to be about thirty years old; (for so Luke, who hath signified His years, hath set it down; Now Jesus, when He came to Baptism, began to be about thirty years old:) and He preached for one year only after His Baptism: completing His thirtieth year He suffered, while He was still young, and not yet come to riper age. But the age of 30 years is the first of a young man's mind, and that it reaches even to the fortieth year, everyone will allow: but after the fortieth and fiftieth year, it begins to verge towards elder age: which our Lord was of when He taught, as the Gospel and all the Elders witness..." – Against Heresies Book II, Chapter 22, Verse 5
Irenæus was a great Christian and church father, but was a poor historian. Those who continue to hold to the late date based on Irenæus's statement do so out of theological desperation, not sound historical research.
There are other church fathers, such as Victorious and Eusebius, who also hold to this late date. However, they clearly use Irenæus as the source for their belief.
"Irenæus, in the fifth book of his work Against Heresies, where he discusses the number of the name of Antichrist which is given in the so-called Apocalypse of John, speaks as follows concerning him:" Eusebius – History of the Church Book III, Chapter 18, Verse 5.
In fact, Eusebius, in his work "Evangelical Demonstrations", contradicts this belief, placing John's banishment under Nero.
Conclusion
When the evidence is weighed, both internally and externally, it clearly supports the Neronic date. This fact is crucial considering that John was writing to the First Century Churches of Asia Minor regarding "things which must shortly take place" (Rev. 1:1), were "near" (Rev. 1:3), and were "about to take place" (Rev. 1:19).
Chapter One Tradition vs Traditional
Gentle Reader,
I've been thinking about the recent events in the Middle-East and how "Christians believers" if there are any left are holding their breath based on their understanding of prophecy and especially the book of Revelation. So many like their understanding to be like a old pair of slippers, broken down in the heel and comfortable, the traditional approach to predict the
"future" A tradition is a ritual, belief or object passed down within a society, also a basic character of a society still maintained in the present, with origins in the past. They, believe it or not would call themselves orthodox but are in fact technically "futurist". The best known to come to mind is Jack Van Impe, and in his hit series Left Behind, Tim LaHaye writes a fictional account based on his theological position that the events of Revelation will occur in the future. The futurist view teaches that Revelation prophesies events that will take place in the future. These events include the rapture of the church, seven years of tribulation, and a millennial rule of Christ upon the earth. This view is seemly held by the most fundamental of believers, who would prefer their "Christianity" with no surprises, everything * neatly into a package that they can show off like a shiny new bauble at Christmas time.
Then we have another group that would be called Historicist. The historicist view teaches that the book of Revelation is a symbolic presentation of church history beginning in the first century AD through the end of age. The prophecies of Revelation are fulfilled in various historic events such as the fall of the Roman Empire, the Protestant Reformation, and the French Revolution.
Yet another group the idealist view teaches that Revelation describes in symbolic language the battle throughout the ages between God and Satan and good against evil.
The last group that we might discuss would called the preterist view teaches that the events recorded in the book of Revelation were largely fulfilled in AD 70 with the fall of the Jerusalem Temple.
Now Gentle reader, far be it from me to hold any of these groups up to criticism. Each group/ view attempts to interpret Revelation according to the laws of hermeneutics, (the art and science of interpretation). This is central to the debate about how we should approach and interpret Revelation. The idealist approach believes that apocalyptic [which means
uncovering or disclosure, predicting or presaging imminent disaster and total or universal destruction: ] literature like Revelation should be interpreted allegorically. The preterist and historicist views are similar in some ways to the allegorical method, but it is more accurate to say preterists and historicists view Revelation as symbolic history. The preterist views Revelation as a symbolic presentation of events that occurred in AD 70, while the historicist school views the events as symbolic of all Western church history. The futurist school believes Revelation should be interpreted literally. In other words, the events of Revelation are to occur at a future time.
So you can see each of these groups are trying to make sense out of a written record that is at least 2000 years old. However not many are willing to consider (even for a New York minute) that there might be a alternate and different way to consider this Book of Prophecy that's what I want to bring to your attention, not that I'm right in everything that I present but you already know that I will look objectively (I stand ready to alienate all those who demand to be absolutely right on everything)!
Where did the Book of Revelation come from and why? (Part 2)
Gentle Reader,
The anti-Christ. The Battle of Armageddon. The dreaded Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.
You don't have to be a student of religion to recognize references from the Book of Revelation. The last book in the Bible has fascinated readers for centuries. People who don't even follow religion are nonetheless familiar with figures and images from Revelation.
This is a small attempt to teach you a wee bit of history and at the same time unfold some things that you may not have heard but are certainly worthwhile to consider especially if your one of these people who read their
horoscope every day to see what is in their future.
Current events in the United States have provided a catalyst for the already intense fascination many have had with Revelation. Stan Campbell and James S. Bell, Jr., authors of The Complete Idiot's Guide to The Book of Revelation, write in the front cover of their book: "In the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, media commentators began making references to 'apocalyptic scenarios' and using similar terms. Some preachers were quick to suggest that the last days were indeed upon us. The sales of Bibles and end-times books and commentaries shot up overnight. Some people began stocking up on food, buying gas masks, and preparing for the worst." In the vast Complete Idiot's Guide series, only one volume has been dedicated solely to a book of the Bible. That Revelation was chosen for this honor over the other books of the Old and New Testaments is perhaps a significant indication as to the unique place this book holds in American culture.
In Raymond Brown's [ a Roman Catholic priest who held a distinguished Biblical professorship at ( largely Protestant) Union Theological Seminary in New York City] An Introduction to New Testament, he begins his section on Revelation with the following comments:
[Revelation] is widely popular for all of the wrong reasons, for a great number of people read it as a guide to how the world will end, assuming that the author was given by Christ detailed knowledge of the future which he communicated in coded symbols. For example, preachers have identified the Beast from the Earth whose number is 666 as Hitler, Stalin, the Pope, and Saddam Hussein, and have related events in [Revelation] to the Communist Revolution, the atom bomb, the creation of the State of Israel, the Gulf War, etc. The 19th and the 20th centuries have seen many interpreters of prophecy who used calculations from [Revelation] to predict the exact date of the end of the world. Up to the moment all have been wrong! Some of the more militant exponents of [Revelation] have aggravated law-enforcement authorities to the point of armed intervention (the Branch Davidians in
Waco, TX).
We will seek Gentle Reader, to examine Revelation in its historical context, including the book's authorship, provenance, date, and original recipients
The development of the Christian canon is one of the more controversial elements of the Christian faith. It is especially important to those who hold dear the doctrine of the infallibility/inerrancy of the Scriptures. For those who are unfamiliar with the concept of a "canon", all the word means is a "measuring stick" or a "straight rod, edge, or ruler". In other words it is the authority by which all other teachings that are considered Christian are to be measured against. Or as N.T. Wright would say, "it is the first four acts of a five act play that is missing its fifth act". It is not a legal document but rather a guide which to measure our performance by.
One of the most controversial books to be accepted into the Christian canon is what has been called The Book of Revelation. Many have attributed authorship to the Apostle John but leading Johannine while scholars, like the aforementioned Raymond Brown, believe that the author was someone other than John the Apostle. Some believe it was another John, John the Elder, who may have been a disciple of John the Apostle. Never the less, other that the testimony of the Church Fathers, there is reason to believe that the authorship of Revelation is suspect. I for one will share with later who seems to be my canidate for the author of Revelation and why, but you have to wait a wee bit.
The content of Revelation has also caused much concern. The very same Jesus which is depicted in the canonical Gospels as a loving Savior figure is depicted as a vicious king seeking revenge on those who do not accept his rule. There is a taste of this in some of the epistles, but not to the extent of what we see in Revelation. The problem of content though has often been handled by an appeal to the genre that Revelation represents–apocalyptic. For most apocalyptic means "end of the world" but as a genre it is more like–once again parroting N.T. Wright here–as a picture of what is going on
"behind the scenes" or as we would say in our silly modern vernacular "in the spirit realm".
Outside of questions pertaining to apostolic authorship and biblically coherent content is the testimony of the canonical status of this book. As the canon etched closer and closer to formation the church historian Eusebius writes, in the fourth century, concerning "the Revelation of John" that "some reject it, others include it among the recognized books". Also in the fourth century bishops like St. John of Chrysostom argued against it because of the trouble they had interpreting it. And for what it is worth the Greek Orthodox tradition has never accepted it as canonical.
Of course it seems a majority of Christian scholars have accepted it throughout history. This does not mean that it is legitimate, but it does show the support of the Christian community over hundred's of years. It is probably safe to assume that interpretation must be done in humility and reverence (unlike the popular Left Behind series) due to the impact a wrong interpretation could have on the Christian community. It should also be read, as aforementioned, as an apocalyptic work. Paul and Peter's epistles may be the best sources we have on the belief of early Christians concerning the Second Coming. Unlike Revelation they are fairly straight forward. The Gospels, due to the mix and match of history and literary agendas found within, are a difficult source concerning the Second Coming (consider the vast interpretations of Matthew 24). The author of Revelation was trying to encourage the followers of Jesus at a time when their world seemed doomed Revelation was an anti-Roman tract and a piece of war propaganda wrapped in one. The message: God would return and destroy the Romans. Also the writer of Revelation didn't really intend 666 as the devil's digits. He was describing another incarnation of evil: The Roman emperor, Nero.
The arrogant and demented Nero was particularly despised by the earliest followers of Jesus, including the writer of Revelation. Nero was said to have burned followers of Jesus alive to illuminate his garden.
Well that's enough to give food for thought to some of you and for the rest you may now put your wee head down and take a nap
A Reality check for Christians (Part 3)
Gentle Readers,
Having given you a wee taste of the book of Revelation and the various points of view (any of which you may decide this is the one I believe) I now propose to present as your guide (historian and linguist ) to propose another path (some would say, "Denis, your going down another rabbit trail, Again")! Bare with me as a trial lawyer builds his case, I present another way to look at the Book of Revelation. To clear the air to begin with, if you have attended a church or Bible study and the subject of the Book of Revelation comes up, you will have been told that The Apostle John (who walked with Jesus) wrote Revelation around 95 A.D. And if your like me you probably didn't question these "facts". Surprise! Gentle Readers, now we are going to ferret out as best we can together what is the truth and what is the tradition about this most controversial and exciting book.
Now here is what I propose, do not buy everything that I present just to make it easy on me, for I would not want that. We are going to be real researchers (detectives) and examine every bit of evidence to settle once and for all what is the Book of Revelation all about. Does it mean that it predicts the future, who wrote it in what circumstance and when? But as I build a case for us together allow me to sift through all the research before you make a finial judgment. As the Life Insurance salesman would "buy or don't but just listen (in our case I want you to think for yourself to "think outside the box" as it were. I don't know that I have any of the answers, but I'm not afraid to look.
One of the ways that I have found to encourage looking is to have someone to share that search with. I'll write it down and you serve as my sounding
board.
We will look at External evidence: We have Polycarp's statement, with all of it's uncertainly, is the only evidence used to support the "late date" theory of Revelation authorship/ It has been accepted by later generations of people without anyone questioning or examining it in the light of the internal facts of the book itself (until now)! The late date theory has been passed on to us in the same way it was passed on to Eusebius, one must admit that "it [was] handed down by tradition" However Gentle Reader, tradition is not the proper way to interpret the historicity of Scripture and establish dates of writings and events,
We will also need to consider Internal evidence, did the author of Revelation expected the end to come soon or as we have been taught for two thousand years?
In the Apocalypse the author (named) John says, for the time is at hand (Rev. 1:3). The author also said the book was about things which must shortly come to pass (Rev. 1:1). And the prophecy closed with the declaration: "for the time is at hand" (Rev. 22:10) and "And, behold, I come quickly" (Rev. 22:12).
I want you to think about the possibility that Revelation could have been written much earlier that the accepted 95-97 A. D, Perhaps written as early as 27-67 (40 years generation). Consider that the finished copy of the Apocalypse was received before AD 68, and not the assumed date 9597.
If (and here I'll use the Greek if, if and it could be true) the Apocalypse was received and the oral prophecy was written down after the destruction of the Temple and fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD then that would shed a whole new outlook on the things that would shortly come to pass.. So if we can establish the date and author we can have an important part in a correct interpretation of the book of Revelation.
For think about this Gentle Reader, every Theologian gives us one of two
opinions as to when this book was written and these two hypotheses are summed up simply as the ...
1) "late date theory or
2) "early date theory"
which we will look at next time.
The Late Date Theory (Part 4)
Externals of Dating
The Late date theory was, according to tradition, handed down to Church Historians from those that it handed down to them according to tradition. And here we have again a split between the Western Churches those governed by Rome and the Eastern churches who rejected the governance of Rome over an autonomous churches governed by individual bishops, while the natural learning centers of the Church were Antioch and Alexandria. Orthodox apologists point to incidents as early as the 2nd century as examples of claims by Rome to papal primacy and rejection by Eastern Churches.
And without going down that "rabbit trail" today Gentle Reader, it was "traditionally" understood by the Western Church in Rome that the author the Apocalypse to be none other than the Apostle John (who walked with Jesus). The list of of early church father who accepted John's authorship is formidable Melito, Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen , Cyprian, Athanasius, Cyril of Alexandria, and Basil to name the most prominent. All good and well intentioned men to be sure.
One can find the "late date theory" in the external writings of Eusebius Accredited as the "Father of Church History", "Ecclesiastical History" among others. Now if you were in one of my classes Gentle Reader, you
would find a list of Names asking for their dates and whether they were early or late date theorist.
Eusebius stood on the shoulders of Origen, an elitist. We might point out that Eusebius lacked originality in his thinking and duplicated the thought and work of Origen and had no fresh ideas on his own. Eusebius held to the "late date theory" and believed that Revelation was written during the time of Domitian Caesar (81-96 A.D.) Based on the statement from Irenaeus (130-202 A.D.)
Here's the quote from Adversus Haereses by Irenaeus regarding the date of the book of Revelation in the context of the Apostle John's life:
"We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision.
For [it or he] was seen not very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign."
-Irenaeus, Adversus haereses 5, 30, 3
I read the Greek text preserved by Eusebius and it's ambiguous. The part about "being seen" could be translated in three ways:
Option #1
For it, that is the vision, was seen not very long ago, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign.
Option #2
For it, that is the written book, was seen not very long ago, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign.
Option #3
For he, that is the Apostle John, was seen no very long ago, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign.
So which is it? I think that it's interesting that the classic Patristic text for proof that John wrote the Apocalypse around A.D. 95 is ambiguous.
The interpretive tradition has favored Option #1 (because that is the spin that Eusebius gave it).
Note: The bottom line is that there is some degree of uncertainty regarding what Irenaeus meant. Was it Domitian or Domitius (Nero) that Irenaeus was referring to? Where the book of Revelation is included in the Syriac versions it is referred to as "The Revelation which was made by God to John the evangelist in the island of Patmos, into which he was thrown by Nero Caesar."
There is much more that we could, if you ask, provide, for example the modern scholar usually doubts that the numerous heresies could have existed any earlier that the end of of the first century partly because they imagine early Christianity as a undogmatic spiritual movement so the letters to the Churches must have been written latter!
Enough for now Gentle Reader, for your assignment -go check me out and I meet you back here when your done.
Part 5 Truth or Tradition?
Dear Gentle Readers,
Having considered the Late Date exponents we turn now to those who felt that the "traditional" beliefs were in a word erroneous. Remember we said last time, "Just because something is accepted as tradition or traditional does not mead that it is true!"
Those who doubted Johanine authorship were Dionysius, Denis of Alexandria, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory *, and John Chrysostom.
Most of the doubters, however had one thing in common: they strongly objected to what they perceived to be the book's millenarian slant. They believed that an apostle would never have held the millenarian position that they thought was integral to the Apocalypse.
In that they were right. If the Apocalypse taught a future thousand-year corporeal reign of Christ after the second advent, the book could not have been apostolic in origin. The concept was Jewish in origin, but not part of the deposit of Faith Christ gave to the apostles.
The Authors the "Late Date"theory were wrong and here are my reasons why.
First, Irenaeus neither witnessed nor received it by revelation from the Lord. However, he referred to Polycarp who supposedly knew the apostle John, son of Zebedee, if this was the author in question.
Secondly, the key lynch pin "it is not long since it was seen" was misleading. According to Irenaeus recollection, Polycarp saw "it" sometime in 95-96 A.D., during the last part of Domitian's reign.. This "it" is a strong part of the late date theory, "it" could be the breaking point of the argument.
Third, of most importance, we do not know of the "it" that Polycarp was referring to was the person of John, the visions he saw, the name of the anti-Christ, or the book itself. Another factor to be considered is that we don't know if Polycarp meant that the oral sayings of the book were finally written at that time or not, Not only that but a written "late date" book scenario comes to us through three people separated by three centuries. To put in basic terms, this is only traditional hearsay which for researchers as we want to be cannot be completely trusted as historical fact. As we said
before, Polycarp's statement, with all of it's uncertainly, is the only evidence used to support the "late date" theory of Revelation authorship/ It has been accepted by later generations of people without anyone questioning or examining it in the light of the internal facts of the book itself (until now)! The late date theory has been passed on to us in the same way it was passed on to Eusebius, one must admit that "it [was] handed down by tradition" However Gentle Reader, tradition is not the proper way to interpret the historicity of Scripture and establish dates of writings and events.
The disciples were warned of the Talmud which was condemned in the Bible by Paul "being the traditions of the Elders" not giving heed to Jewish myths and to commands of men turning away from the truth. (Titus 1:14).
We too must be warned against traditions handed down to us from unfounded facts. The "late dating" of the Apocalypse is tradition, that is, only tradition. In Irenaeus fifth book, he seems to indicate the earlier date for he speaks as follows concerning the Apocalypse of John and the number of the name of the Anti Christ:
"As these things are so, and this number is found in all the approved and ancient copies."
He lived in the reign of Vespasian's son Domitian and he spoke of the Apocalypse as being written in "ancient copies" cause doubt as to the "vision" being seen in 95 A.D., which was almost in his own day. His account suggest an earlier time that was somewhat removed from his own day. Tradition has taken Irenaeus' words out of their true meaning and given modernity only biased and unfounded information. There are far more examples Gentle reader, the Old Testament of the * was translated into the Syriac from the Hebrew probably in the second century excluded certain disputed books 2nd Peter, 2nd & 3rd John, Jude, Revelation ), had become standard by the early 5th century.
The inscription of the books in the Syrian version, first published by Deuteronomy Dieu in 1627, and afterwards in the London Polyglot Reads this way "The Revelation, which was made by God to John the Evangelist, in the island of Patmos, to which he was banished by Nero the Emperor."
Since Nero died in 68 A.D. this would place the writing of Revelation prior to the assumed year of 95-96 A. D.
So gentle reader, if the author of Revelation was in Patmos during the reign of Nero, as this external evidence maintains, he must have written the Revelation before the death of Nero in 68 A. D.
Next time we will look within the book itself for the proof of the date.
Since its been some time that I've written about the Book of Revelation lets take a few minutes to review. Remember if you will that I wrote that unlike those lockstep scholars and those ill taught in linguistics or history of early Christianity, I hold that one needs to examine all the evidence on a matter before rendering a verdict.
With the dating of Revelation, you establish the true historical prospective. If you date it early, you have its fulfillment in God's judgment on Israel. If you date it late, you have every man's idea. So dating plays a very important part in its interpretation.
There are differences of opinion as to when this book was written. These can be summed up as the "late date" and the "early date" theories. First, we'll cover the late date theory. Then we'll examine the facts which support the early date theory.
The Late Date Theory
Those who hold to the "late date," have Revelation written during the time
of Domitian Caesar (AD 95-96). This date is determined by the following statement by Irenaeus (AD 130 to AD 202), as quoted by Eusebius, the church historian, in AD 325: "We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign."
There are things about this statement that need to be noted. First, Irenaeus did not witness this. He referred to Polycarp (who supposedly knew the apostle John). Secondly, the key part — "it is not long since it was seen" — is ambiguous. According to Irenaeus recollection, Polycarp saw "it" sometime in AD 95-96, during the last part Domitian's reign. Thirdly, we do not know if the "it" Polycarp was referring to was John, the visions he saw, the name of anti-christ, or the book itself and we do not know if he meant that the book was written at that time or not. Furthermore, it comes to us through three people separated by three centuries. Simply put, this is hearsay.
This statement, even with all of this uncertainty, is the only evidence used to support the "late date" theory. It has been accepted by generations of people without really questioning it or examining it in light of the book itself. The late date has been passed on to us in the same way it was passed on to Eusebius, "...it [was] handed down by tradition..." Tradition is not the way to interpret Scripture.
Another statement by Irenaeus seems to indicate the earlier date also. In his fifth book, he speaks as follows concerning the Apocalypse of John and the number of the name of the Antichrist: "As these things are so, and this number is found in all the approved and ancient copies." Domitian's reign
was almost in his own day, but now he speaks of the Revelation being written in ancient copies. His statement at least gives some doubt as to the "vision" being seen in 95 AD which was almost in his day, and even suggests a time somewhat removed from his own day for him to consider the copies available to him as ancient.
The Early Date Theory
So, where can we turn to find evidence for the dating of Revelation? Within the book itself! It will be shown, (as I will point out next time) from internal evidence, that Revelation was written before the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.
John must prophesy again
The first point to consider in favor of the early date is the fact that John was told that he "must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings" in Revelation 10:11. Now, if Revelation was written in AD 95-96, John would have been over 90 years old and it would have been very difficult for him to travel to the various "nations and...many kings" and preach. However, with Revelation written earlier, John would have been in his mid 60's and at that age, his traveling would have been more feasible.
The Seven Churches in Asia
Another point is that if John wrote Revelation to a specific group of
churches in Asia (Revelation 1:4). The importance of this statement cannot be overlooked (even though it has been by many scholars). There is only one small window of time in which there were only seven churches in Asia. The early AD 60's. The apostle Paul established nine churches in that area, but only seven were addressed in Revelation. The reason for this is that the cities of Colosse, Hierapolis, and Laodicea, were all destroyed by an earthquake around AD 61. Laodicea was rebuilt soon afterwards, but the other two cities were not. This left only seven churches in Asia during the five years just prior to the beginning of the Roman/Jewish war.
Of particular importance is the message to the church of Philadelphia (Revelation 3:7-13). In verse's 10 and 11, Christ told John to inform them that an "hour of temptation" was "about to come upon all the world," i.e., the Roman Empire. Christ then told them that He was coming quickly and that they should hold fast. The reason this is important (besides the fact that this was directed to an actual church in the first century) is that the first persecution of Christians took place under Nero Caesar in AD 64. Therefore, Revelation must have been written before that time.
The Temple was still standing
One of the most compelling proofs that Revelation was written before Jerusalem was destroyed is the fact that the Jewish temple was still standing!
Revelation 11:1-2, "And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months." How do we know that this was the temple of the first century and not some future one? First, there is not one verse in the entire Bible that speaks of a
"rebuilt" Jewish Temple. Not one. That alone should be proof enough.
However, this passage is very similar to Luke 21:20-24. Notice that Jesus told the disciples that they would see this event. They had asked Him about their temple (verse 5), and Jesus told them it would be destroyed before their generation passed away (verse 32). Notice again what Jesus said in verse 24, "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles." This is the same thing Christ told John in Revelation 11:2. Therefore, since the disciples' generation has long since passed away, Revelation must have been written before the nations trampled Jerusalem under foot in AD 70.
The Tribes of the Earth
Most writers consider the theme of the book to be Revelation 1:7. This verse is very similar in context to Matthew 24:30.
Revelation 1:7, "Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds [Greek phule meaning offshoot, that is, race or clan: -kindred, tribe.] of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen." Matthew 24:30, "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes [Greek phule] of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory." Note: the book refers to a specific group of people those related to the Jewish people not to everyone in the world
It may not be conclusive standing alone, but you can see that just based on the language, a case can be made that the two verses are speaking of the same event. Matthew 24:30 is a verse that speaks of the fall of Jerusalem. And that is just the case that we are attempting to make about the book of Revelation --it speaks of the fall of Jerusalem.
Notice also the language of Revelation 1:7. It speaks of those who "pierced him." Although we know that the Romans crucified him and pierced him, the apostles accused the Jews (hence the overwhelming anti Semite attitude at the time and of course down through the ages to even today) of the act. In Acts 2:23,36, Peter says that they crucified Jesus. He continues to state this in his following sermons (Acts 3:15; 4:10; 5:30). Stephen, in Acts 7:5152, calls them murderers. And Paul, in 1 Corinthians 2:8, speaks of the Jews killing the Lord. And also in I Thessalonians 2:14-15, he speaks of the Jews that killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets. So perhaps the book concerns itself with the Jews.
This view is further reinforced with the phrase, "kindreds of the earth." ("kindreds" is from the Greek word phule, which means "tribe"). This is a direct allusion to the Jewish tribal system. Now, we must identify, from Scripture, who those "tribes" were. To do that, we must keep in mind this simple rule of interpreting the Bible: let Scripture interpret Scripture. We can do that quite easily by looking at Zechariah 12:10-14.
Zechariah 12:10-14, "And I will pour upon the...inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son...In that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem...And the land shall mourn, every family apart; the family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart; The family of the house of Levi apart, and their wives apart; the family of Shimei apart, and their wives apart; All the families that remain, every family apart, and their wives apart." This is the foundation for John's statement that "every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth (or land) shall wail because of him" So, in essence, Zechariah was saying that the "tribes
of the land" would mourn for Him whom they had pierced. Who were those tribes? "The inhabitants of Jerusalem." This also helps us identify the "earth" in Revelation 1:7. According to Zechariah, the "earth" is the land of Palestine, specifically, Jerusalem. Also, it is those tribes, i.e., the nation of Israel, who would "look upon Me whom they have pierced." And because of that, "the mourning in Jerusalem" would be great. With all of this information, we can see that the "tribes of the earth" in Revelation 1:7 are the nation of Israel. The "earth" is Palestine. The land that would mourn is Jerusalem.
So, the main purpose of Revelation would be to reveal Jesus to the nation of Israel. The place of this revealing would be Jerusalem. Lastly, this revealing would be to those who pierced Him, i.e., the Jews. This is not a general reference to the Jewish nation, but to Christ's contemporary generation. That generation was destroyed in AD 70, by the Roman Legions. Therefore, the book of Revelation must have been written before that event.
The Woman
The next thing that we need to look at is "the woman" found in chapters 17 and 18. John wrote that he saw a "woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus" (17:6). The "woman" had this name written on her forehead: "MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH" (17:5). The angel said that "the woman" was a poetic symbol of "that great city" (17:18); in whom "was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth." (18:24). Then John wrote, "Rejoice over her, thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and prophets; for God hath avenged you on her... Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all." (18:20, 21). So who was this "woman?" This "great city?"
John gave us a clue in Revelation 11:8, where he wrote, "And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified." This shows us, as we saw above, that John was referring to the Jerusalem of his day.
To check this assertion, Let's look at the term "Sodom." John wrote that this is a "figurative" name. That means it does not tell us the actual name of the city, but it's spiritual condition. Once more, in letting the Bible interpret itself, we find this is a reference to Jerusalem. In Isaiah, chapter 1, after declaring that he had a "vision...concerning Judah and Jerusalem" (verse 1), Isaiah wrote, "Hear the words of the Lord, you rulers of Sodom." In Jeremiah 23:14, because of the adulterous prophets, God said that Jerusalem and her inhabitants were "all of them unto me as Sodom."
But what about "Egypt?" No where in the Bible is Jerusalem called Egypt. However, the first century generation was also in an exodus. While Old Testament Israel's exodus was from the bondage of Egypt, the New Testament Israel's exodus was from the bondage of the Old Covenant Law. The most recognizable passage that depicts this "new exodus" is found in I Corinthians 10:1-11. Paul wrote, "Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come." His contextual foundation for this statement was the Old Testament exodus from Egyptian bondage. He wrote that they had passed through the sea (verse 1). They ate manna and drank from the rock (verse's 3-4). He then relays how they wandered in the wilderness (verse 5), became idolaters (verse 7), tried the Lord and were destroyed by serpents (verse 9). This shows us that, just like the "type and shadow" of the Old Testament and their deliverance from bondage, the New Testament saints were undergoing the same exodus. The only difference was that Paul's generation was the reality to which the Old Testament example
pointed.
Furthermore, in Luke 13:33-34, Jesus said, "[T]oday and tomorrow, and on the following [day], I must travel on, because it is not possible [for] a prophet to perish outside Jerusalem. Jerusalem! Jerusalem! The [one] killing the prophets, and stoning those having been sent to her." Then, in Matthew 23:29-37, Jesus accused the people of His day for killing the prophets and the apostles. He declared that they are the children of their fathers who also killed the prophets. Then in verse 32, Jesus said that they would complete the sin that their fathers started. But the most crucial evidence is found in verse 35, where Jesus said, "upon you (i.e., the Jews of His day) may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on the earth." Then He said, "I tell you the truth, all of these things will happen to you people who are living now. Jerusalem, Jerusalem! You kill the prophets and stone to death those who are sent to you" (verse's 36-37). In both passages, Jesus told the Jews of His day that they were guilty of "all the righteous blood shed upon the earth" (see also Acts 7:51-52).
Therefore, since both of these passages deal with the same crime and the same judgment, the "great city" of Revelation must be the Jerusalem of Christ's generation. Which gives evidence that Revelation must have been written before Jerusalem fell in AD 70.
The Sixth King
So far we have seen that Revelation deals with the revealing of Jesus to first century Israel. As noted above, "the woman" John saw was first
century Jerusalem. The "kings," therefore, were the rulers of the known world of John's day, i.e., the Roman Empire. The "kings" were not ruling at the same time, for the text stated "five fell," meaning that five of those kings had come and gone. Then "one is," meaning the "king" who was ruling at the time Revelation was written. Here in this verse, we have one of the clearest evidence for dating this book. If we simply examine the list of Roman Emperors, we will be able to determine who the sixth king was, and the time Revelation was written.
Here are the Roman Emperors: Julius Caesar; Augustus; Tiberius; Gaius (Caligula); Claudius; and the sixth emperor was...Nero. Nero reigned from 54AD to June of 68AD, with Galba to follow who reigns but six months. Here we find the terrible persecutors of the Christians (at whose hand Peter and Paul were martyred), whom God used to destroy the Jews. Nero was in power and he gave the command to Vespasian to destroy Jerusalem. This was the sixth king, proving beyond any doubt that Revelation was written before the Roman/Jewish war.
Historically, Nero is the one that persecuted Christians beyond all comparison. John's writing from Patmos was itself a result of the great persecution of Nero. The apostle Paul was tortured and then beheaded by the evil Emperor Nero at Rome in A.D. 67. The apostle Peter, who was crucified upside down, was another victim of Nero.
The Song of Moses
To anyone familiar with the Law of Moses and Jewish tradition, Revelation 15:2,3 will have meaning. It says that those martyrs "who had come off victorious from the Beast" were singing "the Song of Moses."
So let me ask a question at this point: if these martyrs are Christians living 2,000 years after Christ, why would these Christians be singing the Song of
Moses? Does any Christian alive today know how to sing this song? Deuteronomy 32:1-43 is the song that John has reference to.
The people were to sing this song to remind themselves of what would befall them "in the latter days" (Deuteronomy 31:29). the song talks about "their end" -the Jews (verse 20), and details their destruction by a consuming "fire" (verse 22), "famine" (verse 24), "plague" (verse 24) and "bitter destruction" (verse 24). God calls them a "perverse generation" (verses 5 and 20), and says He will "render vengeance" upon them and "vindicate His people" (verse 41 and 36 respectively). Why would Christian martyrs of the 21st century be singing this song about the Romans, when the song had reference to the Jews living in the 1st century? It wouldn't make much sense.
Aren't these the same who cried out earlier, "How long, O Lord, wilt Thou refrain from judging and avenging our blood" (Revelation 6:10)? Who was it who had all the "blood of the righteous" martyrs imputed against them? Clearly, it was the remnant who had kept their faith in Jesus, in spite of the intense persecution, and "had come off victorious from the Beast." (See Matthew 23:35 and Luke 13:33)! This passage (Revelation 15:2,3) points very clearly to followers of Christ living in the first century.
In Revelation 16:10,11, it says that the people in the Beast's kingdom "gnawed their tongues because of pain." They had great sores on their bodies along with other plagues that had been poured out on them. We know from Josephus when the Jews literally gnawed their tongues for lack of food during the siege of AD 70! And, it is interesting that Josephus even calls the Jewish Zealot forces a "wild beast" in several places (Wars V.1.1; IV.7.4; IV.9.8; V.2.5)! This point is emphasized even more by the fact that the whole context of the Song of Moses is full of references to "beasts," "serpents," and "dragons" (Leviticus 26; Deuteronomy 28-32; Deuteronomy 32:24,33).
Next lets consider
The Time Element
Next consider the expectations of the author, Jesus Christ. He tells John to expect the fulfillment of the prophecy soon (Revelation 1:1,3; 2:16; 3:11; 22:6,7,10,12,20).
In Revelation 1:1,3, right off the bat, John informed his readers, the seven churches of Asia (verse 4), that the contents of this volume "must shortly come to pass." Please note, that John did not write that some of the events, or even most of the events must shortly take place. He wrote that all of the events contained in Revelation "must shortly come to pass." Why? Why must those things "shortly come to pass?" Because "the time (was) at hand." At hand for whom? The seven churches of Asia, specifically, and to the church of the first century in general. The time for what was at hand? "The Revelation of Jesus Christ." Remember, as we saw above, this is the main episode of Revelation.
In Revelation 22:6, John wrote that the Lord sent an angel to John "to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done." Here, at the end of the book of Revelation, John recorded the exact same message that he did in chapter 1. This again emphasizes that all of the events contained in Revelation were about to take place in the first century — not stretched throughout time, and certainly not for any future generation.
In Revelation 22:10, the angel of the Lord said to John, "Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand." Once more, we have proof that the events of Revelation were about to take place in the first century. However, another element was added to this warning. The
angel told John not to seal the Scroll. Why is this important? To answer that, let's look at the book of Daniel.
After Daniel had received visions concerning his people (the nation of Israel), he was told, "thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book" (12:1). Daniel is then told how they would be rescued — by resurrection, some would be rewarded with "everlasting life" and others with "everlasting contempt" (verse 2). But then, Daniel is told something very peculiar. In verse 4, Daniel was told, "shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end." Please note that this verse says the "time of the end", and not "the end of time". There is a huge difference between the end of time and the time of the end. Now, we must ask "Whose time of the end?" Verse 1 told us that Daniel's visions
concerned the nation of Israel, not mankind in general.
Next, Daniel saw two angels talking about the fulfillment of all that he had seen (verse 6). One asked the other, "How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?" The answer was, "when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished." (verse 7). But Daniel could not understand what they meant, so he asked again, "When?" The angel answered "Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end." Now that we have looked at this passage, how does it relate to Revelation 21?
Did you know that there is only one other place in the Bible where a sealed book is referred to? Revelation, chapter 5. How Daniel relates to Revelation is that Revelation is the opening of Daniel's sealed book!! Remember, Daniel's visions were concerning the "time of the end" of Israel, and Revelation is about God's judgment on Israel. They are one and the same. The reason this has direct bearing on Revelation 21, is that Daniel was told to seal his book concerning the end "for it pertains to many days in the future" (Dan.8:26), but John was told not to seal his book "because the time is at hand" (Revelation 22:10). The end of Old Covenant Israel was at hand.
All things written had to be fulfilled by the time Jerusalem fell in AD 70 (see Luke 21:20-22). Therefore, since Revelation is the opening of Daniel, then it must have been fulfilled by the summer of AD 70.
Our next time statement is found in Revelation 21:12. There, Jesus told John, "And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be." Notice that Jesus did not say that "when I come, I will come quickly," He emphatically said that He was coming "quickly." But He also said something else. He said that His reward was with Him to give every man according to his works. Now some state that this has not happened yet. However, we must let Scripture interpret Scripture, and turn to Matthew 16:27-28 and Mark 8:38-9:1 and Luke 9:26-27.
Jesus said the exact same thing in these three verses that He did in Revelation 21. In Revelation 21, He said He was coming and "he shall reward every man according to his works." These are the exact same "comings" with the exact same "rewards." But, Jesus also said in these three verses, "There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." Notice that Jesus tied His coming to the lives of His disciples. He said that some of his listeners would not die until He came. But to whom is He coming? And what will be their reward? Jesus said that the "coming" would be to the first century generation of Israel (Matthew 24:34, Mark 13:30, Luke 21:32). Daniel told us that the "rewards" would be that some would be resurrected to "everlasting life" and others to "everlasting contempt". Now, let's put these two passages together. Jesus said He was coming and He was going to reward each according to his works, and that some of the disciples wouldn't die until they saw this take place. Therefore, since all of the disciples are dead, Jesus must have returned and rewarded each according to his works. Furthermore, in Revelation, He said the same thing, therefore it must be fulfilled!
Conclusion for now ought to give you some food for thought. Gentle readers ....
If one can not believe the first three verses of Revelation (i.e., the near expectation of the events), neither will he believe the rest of the book. For if a person is unwilling to accept the time constraints of the text, the rest of the document can mean anything that the reader desires.
If John the Baptist (supposing that he might have been the author) was on Patmos under the reign of Nero, as the internal evidence indicates, he wrote the book of Revelation about AD 68 or 69, which was after the death of that emperor; but the gospels and epistles some years later. One of the oddest facts about the New Testament is that what on any showing would appear to be the single most datable and climactic event of the period — the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 — is never once mentioned as a passed fact. The inscription to the book of Revelation, in the Syrian version, first published by Deuteronomy Dieu, in 1627, and, afterwards in the London Polyglot, is the following, "The Revelation which God made to John the evangelist, in the Island of Patmos, to which he was banished by Nero Caesar."
This places it before the year of our Lord 69AD.
Part 7
The Internal aspects of dating
Gentle Readers,
Where can we find evidence for the actual dating of the Apocalypse? Isn't it possible that the truth of the matter is hidden in plain sight? I want to suggest to you that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem in
A.D. 70 based on internal documentation. In fact lets take it even one step further and suggest that it could have been written before Christ approached John the Baptist in A.D. 27. The prospect that the oral information began around A.D. 24-29. Perhaps the first Ebyon Hebrew Christians wrote down the sayings of the Baptist within a decade of its origin. They began following John the Baptist with his prophetic message that "He that cometh" is greater than I am and then later began following Jesus the Messiah that has come. We need at this point to look at these pro-to believers that are called Ebyon Hebrews if we are to have a clearer understanding of Christianity before we had the written New Testament.
Christianity before the New Testament:
The very first followers of Jesus were Jewish and called Ebyons (Hebrew: the poor). They spoke Aramaic and the Old Testament was written in Greek (29 AD). Jesus did not write to them because they were mostly illiterate. Oral sayings were very important to them. After the death, entombment and resurrection of Christ (31 AD), Peter and James became the leaders of the Ebyon Christians in Antioch and Jerusalem. They set their affections on things above and were the first to be called Christians. The Ebyons did not believe in the virgin birth because they believed that Jesus was adopted as the Son of God at John's baptism. If the first Christians were authentic, the belief in the virgin birth was not a part of the belief system. They also believed that Jesus was just a man and became the adopted son of God. This was when He became "the Christ." Therefore, they did not believe that Jesus was God. They had no New Testament at the beginning, only hear-say or oral tradition. Later, the Marcionites (130 AD) believed that Jesus was God and only seemed to be a man. These two groups were some of the first Christians. Were they authentic Christianity? The Ebyons believed in one God, the Old Testament God. Marcionites believed in two Gods, the mean old OT God and the loving NT God and Father of
Jesus Christ. Marcion had collected nine of Paul's epistles and the Gospel of Luke (minus chapters 1 & 2) as their New Testament. The other writings were rejected (140 AD). What kind of a Bible would authentic Christianity possess. The proto-orthodox Christians were developing until 200 years later (325 AD) they established an Imperial Orthodox Roman Church that believed in a Trinity (God in three persons) and a high-arche of selected men ruled over the people. Many, at the time, said that this was polytheism... more than one God. The Orthodox Church of Rome canonized the 27 books of the New Testament and labeled all other writings as false. Is this Bible the result of an authentic Christianity among the protoorthodox Christians? The Ebyons said that one must become a Jew before they can become a Christian and must also keep the Law of the Old Testament to stay a Christian. Paul said that the Law of God was a curse and only the Grace of God was important to save and keep the individual (57 AD). Imperial Roman Christianity said that baptism replaced the circumcision of the Jews and was important to church salvation, which was an ongoing salvation that could be lost (200 AD). Yet, the epistles of Paul instructed that Grace alone was the true authentic message
Chew on that for a while Gentle readers and get back to me later...
To be continued. . .
Part 8 Internal aspects of Dating continued...The lessons begin in earnest
Gentle Readers,
I do hope you have been taking notes or at least underling your computer screen with a magic marker! From here forward it's a big boys game. No room to sugar coat what we are learning about early Christianity and the book of Revelation.
The reason I write this is because this is the history that has been either ignored, forgotten or conveniently "shelved" by most. Why? We leave that
to be answered for another time, but if in the excitement of discovering I forget to come back to that question, remind me won't you? Mark this down in your wee notes books, History and tradition con only support and explain Scripture, but can never refute it or discredit it.. The problem arises from taking tradition and ignoring Scripture, or ignoring history in favor of a position that proves to be untenable. So lets move on. You need to keep in mind that of the 27 books we have in the New Testament there were several hundred to chose from that provided comfort and encouragement to the new believers and many were lost to us until recently. Were they inspired perhaps not, were they of some value for insights to the mind of the 1st century believers understanding of their new found faith? Most definitely! For the longest time the Book of Revelation was not accepted into canon and although written earlier than many that were accepted was not considered to be a book to be included until later. In fact Revelation was finely accepted at the Council of Carthage of 397 AD Second century Christians in Syria rejected the book because it was relied heavily upon by Montanism, a sect which was deemed to be heretical by the believers of that day [Christian sect arising in the late second century and stressing apocalyptic expectations, the continuing prophetic gifts of the Spirit, and strict asceticism]. .
Now to get a handle on Revelation we need to jump ahead to A.D. 130. Around that time believers began to select and divide texts that aligned well with what would become to called orthodox "canon" or "measuring stick" of accepted texts from those that promoted "heresy" another choice.
[ Orthodox' literally means 'the right way'. Most would like people to believe that there were no differing perspectives in early Christianity and that the opponents in any conflict with other texts or points of view were just small splinter groups invested in deceiving people into "heresy" literally meaning 'choice'-which would mean that a heretic is someone who willfully chooses not to believe the "right things"]
The earliest New Testament canon contained ten of Paul's Epistles and the
Gospel of Luke minus the first two chapters . The book of Revelation was too Jewish with its priestly pictures and the brutal wrath of the Old Testament God to be included in the earliest New Testament Canon that pictured a loving Father/God. That debate over what books should be included continued for many decades.
Now think about the prospects of John prophesying again in his old age... The first particular to consider in favor of an "early date" is the fact that the prophet John was told that he ... And he said unto me, Thou must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings. (Revelation 10:11)
If we assume the Authors of the "Late Date" theory are correct in saying that the Apocalypse was written in 95-96 A.D. Then any one of the "Jons of the New Testament would have been around one hundred years old and it would have been difficult for them to physically travel by boat, horse to the various "nations and many kings" to prophesy.
However if (there is that Greek prepositional if again, if and it could be true) the Apocalypse were written earlier, the prophet John would have been in his late 20's and that age, his traveling would have been more feasible for the exposure to the conditions of weather and opposition.
Although we are getting into the really "good stuff" I don't want to weary your wee heads with to much information at once. So you'll have to come again to follow this stream of thought. And some of you thought this was just a pretty blog!
Till next time....
Part 9 Thinking about the book of Revelation
Dear Gentle Reader,
You will remember that I pointed out that the Apocalypse better known as the Book of Revelation was not received with any sort of eagerness by those who were establishing what we now call the canon of Scripture. There were many writings that claimed to be authentic, written by those who claimed to either have walked with Jesus or one of His select twelve disciples. We could stray from our destination to find out if at all possible when the book of Revelation was written and then a corollary to this first goal, to determine which John actually wrote this enigma that so many devote themselves too.
Professor Bart Eharman used a phrase in one of his book called Lost Christianities although I am not convinced that it was originally his. The phrase was " history is written by the victors" but in trying to determine who might have said it first we have such notables as Winston Churchill, Napoleon Bonaparte, George Orwell, Alex Haley, and Pliny the Elder who was known as Gaius Plinius Secundus, better known as Pliny the Elder, "History is the polemics of the victors." -Wm. F Buckley, Jr.. The only thing that we can be certain is that the phrase was common enough to be axiomatic The point being is that whoever wrote the Book of Revelation certainly had overcome those who would have left it out of the Canon.
Within the book itself we can find that both in content and structural construction it is obviously an appealing Jewish Apocalyptic writing and yet it was with much difficulty that it was begrudgingly accepted in the New Testament Canon. It seems that the Revelation falls into three parts (for our purposes) Chapters 1-3, 4-11 and 12-22. Chapter one verses 1-3 gives us the reader the title of the book ans says that it is the "Word of God" [compare 1 Chron 17:3; Jer.1:4, 13; Ezek. 1:3; and Joel 1:1 ] Please note that each of these citations come from the Hebrew Scriptures in what we call the Old Testament a term used by biblical scholars to refer to the Tanakh. This
first verses speak of the prophecy as the testimony of Jesus Christ. While Chapters 2-3 speak of the people on. the old earth, the seven churches. Chapters 4-11 radiate from the circle of John the Baptist and reflect his own and his disciples' expectations of "He that cometh" before they were introduced to and could be enlightened by the life of Jesus Himself. If we compare Rev 4:1 and following to Paul's statement I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven. (2 Corinthians 12:2). It would seem that Paul was speaking of John the Baptist and not the Apostle John.
As John the Baptist was pictured as the keeper of the sheepfold and stood at the door of the sheepfold waiting for the true shepherd to come for his sheep, John allowed Jesus, the shepherd of the sheep to go in. John sees a door in heaven and being in the spirit (in or out of body experience, no one knows) hears a voice like a trumpet talking.
It seems that these chapters were not given to John the Evangelist after the death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus, but rather given to the prophet John the Baptist, the forerunner of Jesus Christ before the public ministry of Jesus Christ that was approaching that age. The Gospel of John (1:15-34) tells us that the Baptist received a revelation from God about "He that cometh" the one we traditionally call Messiah. God told the Baptist , And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. (John 1:33)
And there Gentle Reader, you have a wee bit to chew on until we get back together. It was Paul who knew that the man who had the vision and was caught up to the third heaven wasn't Paul himself as so many want to think but was in fact John the Baptist!
Till next time....
Part 10 Continuing the reevaluating of the dating of Revelation
Dear Gentle Reader,
Dr. Richard B. Hays, Dean and the George Washington Ivey Professor of New Testament at Duke Divinity School, an internationally recognized scholar for his work on the letters of Paul and on New Testament ethics. Recently brought to my attention that the Apostle Paul has used the method similar to the exegesis found in the Qumran biblical commentaries (e.g., IQpHab), where the biblical text is treated as a cryptically encoded allegory of the community's own history apocalyptically interpreted. You will find this important as we dig even deeper into the Book of Revelation
As we said previously there are in the New Testament four themes that are unique to the Apocalypse and found in sections of the Gospels that concern John the Baptist. 1) The Lamb (of God, a reference to Isaac), 2) The term "He that cometh" 3)The concept of a baptism by fire 4) The direct application of the figure of the bridegroom to Jesus 5) The wrath of God 6) Tree as a metaphor for leaders of the people 7)Interest in the liturgy (remember the Baptist's father named Zacharias, was a priest and the Baptist's vision occurred in the sanctuary) and 8) The idea of the adulterous generation, which was the belief of the Qumran culture in contrast to the other Judeans.
All of these themes are amplified in the Apocalypse. Not only that but we need to keep in mind that Jesus spoke in Matthew "But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? behold, they that wear soft clothing are in kings' houses. But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet. For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare
thy way before thee. Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he." (Matthew 11:8-11).
Can one think that this part of the Apocalypse contains what then was revealed to John the Baptist and committed to the writing by one of John's disciples from the Qumran community. We now certainly have enough circumstantial evidence to give more than a cursory look in this direction.
It is a well known understanding that as the canon was written down many times the author attributed to a particular work was in fact that of an Amanuensis (rather like a secretary ). And other times it was written by a disciple of that personage. We find that this to be the case in chapters 1222 and are of a latter date but still originate from the disciples of John the Baptist before 70 A. D., whp may or may not have joined the "Christians" converting to become followers of Christ and then joined the Ebyon/Jews, who were zealous of the Law. These chapters represent the view point of those that predicted the fall of Jerusalem under the rule of Rome in 68-70
A.D. and ascribed this to the unorthodox behavior of their fellow Jews in Jerusalem.
That attitude would be shared by such a culture as the Ebyon covenanters . . [Note: EBIONITES, Judaizing Christians who developed into a separate sect by the last quarter of the second century and had some influence on the early history of the church in Egypt. The term "Ebion" is probably derived from the Hebrew ebyon (the poor). It is an attribute of those who serve the Lord, in contrast with him who "would not make God his refuge but trusted in the abundance of his riches" (Psalm 52:7). The Covenanters of the Dead Sea regarded themselves as the "Congregation of the Poor" who would inherit the earth (Commentary on Psalm 37 in Vermes, 1975, pp. 243-44). Among the Essenes—who, if not identical with the Covenanters, were closely allied to them and had settled near Alexandria (Eusebius Historia ecclesiastica 2.18)—equality in
wealth and community of property were strictly adhered to. The description of Josephus (Jewish War II.8.3), "It is impossible to find anyone amongst them exceeding others in possessions . . . ," is that of an ideal that was to pass into Egyptian monasticism. Jesus' ideal as recorded in the Gospels was close to that of the Essenes and Covenanters so far as it concerned possessions. "Take no thought for the morrow," "Blessed are the poor" (Luke 6:20), and the dispatch of the Twelve to teach the Kingdom and heal, "taking nothing for their journey, no staff, nor bag, nor bread, nor money" (Luke 9:3) are entirely in harmony with those who equated the Congregation of Israel with "the Poor." The ideal of poverty, however, was one of those that did not survive the Pauline revolution. Paul's hearers were not to be found among the rural poor but were recruited largely from the literate congregations of the Hellenistic synagogues in the larger towns of western and southern Asia Minor and Greece. It may well be that proponents of poverty in the sixth and seventh decades of the first century were to be found among Paul's opponents, the "Judaizers". That the two began to be equated is evident from a statement made by Ignatius of Antioch about 109 in his letter to the Philadelphians. Criticizing the Judaizers, he asserts, "such a man is poor of understanding as he is by name an Ebionite" (Ad Philadelphenses 6). With the triumph of Paul's interpretation of the Gospel, the Ebionites gradually became reduced to the level of a sect.
From the writings of Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Hippolytus, it would seem that by the end of the second century, they could be identified as those who insisted on strict Jewish ritual, including the observance of the Sabbath and circumcision for their members. They accepted one Gospel only, that of Matthew, and rejected the Pauline Epistles. They believed that Jesus was born a man by ordinary birth, but became exalted to a status greater than Moses and higher than the prophets through his outstanding virtues, because God's angel dwelt in him. They practiced strict asceticism in their lives. In the fourth
century Epiphanius (Panarion XXX) describes the Ebionites as having their own Gospel, which seems to have been identical to that described by Origen (Homiliae in Lucam 1.1) as the "Gospel of the Twelve Apostles."
The Ebionites' link with Egypt apart from the Alexandrian Essenes continued but is not easy to follow. One may discern it through the numerous fragments of Matthew's Gospel found at Oxyrhynchus and the association of those with fragments of the Gospel of Thomas (see Oxyrhynchus Papyri 1 and 654). The latter's praise of abstinence, poverty, and the solitary life (cf. Logia 49, 69, 75) is in line with Ebionite teaching. If one accepts the Gospel of Thomas as one of the influences that contributed to Egyptian monasticism, then the Ebionites must be included among the movements that lay behind this feature of the Coptic church. The monastic ancestry of the Coptic church extended back through Thomas to the Essenes and the ascetic movements within Judaism at the time of Jesus, and included the Ebionites among its formative influences.]
of Qumran and was intimated by the Baptist himself (see Matt. 3:7-10 anf John 1:19-27) and perhaps the primitive Jerusalem church once led by Jacob (James) the "brother" of the Lord.
We can also detect that Chapters 1-3 and 22:16a, 20b, 21 were added later by a Jewish Christian disciple, one who had come to believe in Jesus as the Messiah more accurately, like the disciples of the Baptist at Ephesus in Acts 19:1-7. Or the scholar of Scripture Apollos in Acts 18:24-28. They still retained the fiery and pessimistic outlook of John their former master and leader. They looked forward to the imminent Second Coming of Christ (compare 2 Peter 3:1-18) and their additions to the text of Revelation influenced others to relate this expectation to the rest of the Apocalypse. Note: [ Messiah is a title, not a person. The Hebrew form is mashiah and the Greek form is Christos, commonly rendered in English as Christ. For
Jews, the Messiah is the "anointed" or "consecrated" one. Kings, priests, and prophets were all anointed in some fashion, but the Messiah is typically regarded as the perfect union of all three: a king, priest, and prophet picked by God to lead his chosen people. ]
.
Dating the Book of Revelation (Part 11 in the series )
As we continue our investigation of the Revelation, I feel that it is incumbent upon me to point out once again that what we call books were not written before they were spoken. Many time the book were written to preserve the thoughts and intents of the one spoken about lest they should have been lost.
We see that Rev.. Chapters 4-11 in its oral form (not written) form would be assigned to the time of John the Baptist and to a era prior to Jesus public ministry (27-30 AD). Rev. 12-22 would have been dated in the mid-sixties as the Roman Civil War gathered momentum.
In reading chapters 4-22 which would have been the original written Apocalypse, with several additions in the last chapter, we find that we have an entirely Jewish book that lster became a Jewish/Christian work. The fact that it received additions should not be surprising as we have the same additions taking place in a well known texts at the time called 1ST AND 2ND Enoch [The Ethiopic Book of Enoch, Oxford University. Press), which I believe to be the best translation currently available I concluded that the book is probably what it appears to be; well preserved, ancient and genuine. Enoch was the great-grandfather of Noah, and father of Methuselah, and his book gives a unique view of the world before the flood; which recent research suggests may have occurred as long ago as 17,000 BC.] not to mention "Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs" [There are several passages with Christian content, but these are assumed to come from Christian redaction of an originally Jewish document] The problem that many believers have is being caught in the trap of holding
that there is only one author for one book!. This happens in many cases but not all.. For example the "five books of Moses"
also known as the Pentateuch ("five volumes"), seem to say one author, Moses, wrote the books. The Five Books of Moses are the biblical books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. Collectively these books are known as the Torah. In Hebrew, these books have very different names, each taken from the first Hebrew word that appears in the book. They are:
•
Genesis -Bereisheet. "Bereisheet" means "in the beginning." This Hebrew word begins the narrative of Creation.
•
Exodus -Shemot. "Shemot" means "names" in Hebrew. Exodus begins by naming the sons of Israel who went to Egypt.
•
Leviticus -Vayikra. "Vayikra" means "And He called" in Hebrew. This book of the bible deals mostly with priestly subjects (how to run the sanctuary, etc) and begins with God calling Moses to speak with him.
•
Numbers -Ba Midbar. "Ba Midbar" means "In the wilderness" in Hebrew. This book chronicles the Israelites' journey through the wilderness.
•
Deuteronomy -D'varim. "D'varim" means "Words" in Hebrew. D'varim chronicles the words of Moses and mostly consists of speeches wherein Moses talks to the Israelites about the journey they have shared. At the end of D'varim, Moses dies and the Israelites enter the Promised Land. The five books of or about Moses indicate that someone other than Moses must have written unless Moses wrote about his own death and entombment in the book of Exodus.
Next time we will look at and consider the seven churches in Asia.
The seven churches in Asia (Part 12 )
Now here is a question for all my New testament scholars In Revelation there are seven churches mentioned(Rev 1:4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia:) . Why these seven ? And can you name the nine churches that Paul Established in Asia?
Gentle Reader, One has only to consider that John the Baptist wrote the Apocalypse to be read and not preached to a select group of Jewish fellowships in Asia. These groups are not found in the Apocalypse from the Qumran which I'll share with you later. Note: Here is an example of inserting into a book something that was not there in the original. Can we overlook the importance of this statement? Many Scholars have done that very thing. There was only a very small window of time in which there were only seven churches in Asia. And that time was the early 60's. Paul the Apostle and others had established nine churches in Asia, but note only seven are addressed in the Revelation. The Greek geographer, philosopher and historian Strabo gave us the reason for this. These cities Colossae, Laodicea, and Hierapolis were the target of a devastating earthquake around AD 60-62, probably just after Paul wrote his letters to the Christians of that area. According to historians, all three cities were destroyed. Barring miraculous intervention, this historic event probably claimed some of the lives of our Christian ancestors. Eusebius is said to have chronicled an earthquake destroying Colossae, Laodicea, and Hierapolis (Chron. Olymp. 210.4) in the 10th year of Nero [AD 64]. Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible: "That this city [Colossae] perished by an earthquake, a short time after the date of this epistle, we have the testimony of Eusebius..."
Tacitus records the quake in the 7th year of Nero (Nero was Emperor of Rome from AD 54-68, putting the earthquake around AD 61—Annals 14.27. Tacitus recorded that Laodicea was also destroyed in the quake, but was later rebuilt apparently without Roman assistance. Note that Jesus wrote to Laodicea, but Colossae was not mentioned among the letters of Revelation. By this time (AD 96), Colossae in large part no longer existed.
A few people were said to have formed a small village from the ruins of Colossae. The village was totally abandoned in the 8th century.
Paul did not refer to this catastrophic event; thus, scholars believe Paul had either not yet heard the news, or that his letters to Colossians and Philemon predated the quake.
As mentioned, the church at Colossae may have met in the home of Philemon, to whom Paul also wrote a brief letter (the "Book of Philemon"). Philemon had a slave named Onesimus who had escaped to Rome, where evidently Paul met him and led him to Christ. Paul urged Onesimus to return to Philemon. One wonders if Onesimus returned and, along with the inhabitants of Colossae, became a victim of the quake. No known historians indicate if Philemon's home was destroyed in the earthquake.
The hot springs of Hierapolis, and the beautiful pools of adjacent Pamukkale, were apparently formed due to the earthquake faults of the area, which are believed to have caused the great earthquake that destroyed Hierapolis (AD 60)—along with Colossae and Laodicea. "The tectonic movements that took place in the fault depression of the Menderes river basin did not only cause frequent earthquakes, but also gave rise to the emergence of a number of very hot springs. It is the water from one of these springs, with its large mineral content—chalk in particular— that created Pamukkale."
"The main active fault at the toe of the Pamukkale range-front is a normal fault...capable of earthquakes of at least magnitude 6...[and responsible for]...the earthquake of AD 60..." which destroyed nearby Hierapolis. "Most of the active thermal springs [of the Hierapolis area] are lined up along the fault," which cuts through the center of ancient Hierapolis. [pp 97-98]
Of the cities that were rebuilt only Laodicea would have been able to rebuild itself as they were "rich' enough not to ask for funds from Rome. The other two locations Colosse and Hierapolis were not safe enough to rebuild for some time. This left only seven Jewish/Christian churches in
Asia durinf the five years just prior to the beginning of the Roman/Jewish war in A.D. 68-70
Finely in this part, I want to bring to your attention the importance of the message to the church of Philadelphia (Revelation 3:7-13). In the verses .Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth. Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown. (Revelation 3:10-11), Christ told the author to inform them that the "hour of temptation "[ Gk. peirasmos = the trial of man's fidelity, .
integrity, virtue, constancy] was "about to come upon the world" i.e. the Jewish cosmos [ Gk. oikoumene ] specifically the Roman empire: -earth, world -the world in which the Jews lived in the Roman Empire]. Christ then revealed that He was to "come quickly" to them and that they should "hold fast" The reason that this is important [beside the fact that this was directed to actual churches in the first century] is that the first persecution of Christians took place under Nero Caesar in A.D. 64. Which means that the Revelation must have been in the hands of the Ebyon Christians before A.D. 61 or the latest possible date of A.D. 64 in order to be a prophecy . No prophecy was written after the event.
To be continued . . .
**************************************************************
The Seven Letters even have elements more suggestive of a period of time prior to the destruction of the Temple. A major one of these has been discussed previously: the presence of strong Jewish elements in the churches. This feature bespeaks an early period of Christian development prior to the cleavage between Jew and Christian,
which was enforced by the complex of events associated with both the Neronic persecution and the Jewish War (Rev. 2:9; 3:9)
Part 13 Dating the Book of Revelation
Gentle Reader,
Those who take their Irish coffee black, hardy and strong can never appreciate the nuances or the delicate shades of difference that a dollop of whipped cream can deliver to the weary traveler and the end of a long days journey. The same can be said about Scripture and the study of the Word and words of God as He presents them to us.. They should be read, meditated upon, savored and time should be spent in gleaning as much as we can from each word. Sadly to say in this "information age" none of this is done to any degree. And much that would provide benefit to our spiritual growth as well as our understanding is lost by the shear fact that we will not spend the time with Him that He may teach us the things dear to His heart. Jeremiah, sometimes called the weeping Prophet said " Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart: for I am called by thy name, O LORD God of hosts." (Jeremiah 15:16)
One Word from God is worth all the words pronounced by men. For there is a depth in that word that has no limit and should be appreciated by those who claim the Name of the Most High God. Here is just a wee sample of a word ignored by most and yet an explanation of rare worth to those who search for it.. Think about this word.:
And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread
under foot forty and two months. (Revelation 11:1-2). That little word, Gentle Reader, found in a book of Prophecy, overlooked by many. The most compelling proof that the Apocalypse was in fact written before the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. What is seen is the Jewish temple was still standing at the unveiling of the "Coming One". How can I be so sure that this was the temple of that first century and not some future one? First there is nowhere in the Bible, not one verse that supports or speaks of a "rebuilt"Jewish Temple. Not one! That should be proof enough for those thoughtful individuals with eyes to see.
The First Temple was an Israelite Temple built by Solomon. Solomon's Temple commenced -970 BCE , Solomon's Temple completed -964 BCE and then Solomon's Temple destroyed -586 BCE.
That brings us to, Zerubbabel, in 538 B.C.was part of the first wave of Jewish captives to return to Jerusalem (Ezra 1:1-2). The Persian king appointed Zerubbabel as governor of Judah (Haggai 1:1), and right away he began rebuilding the temple in Jerusalem with the help of Joshua, the high priest (Ezra 3:2-3, 8). It had been 70 years since the destruction of Solomon's temple, also known as the first temple, by the Babylonians in 586
B.C. (2 Kings 25:8-10).
It took Zerubbabel two years to rebuild the foundation of the temple. Then construction was delayed by Samaritan settlers whose friendly overtures masked a hidden hostility (Ezra 4:1-5). As a result of the opposition to the temple construction, Persia withdrew support for the project for 17 years (Ezra 4:21).
The temple had remained unfinished long enough. Finally, God sent the prophets Haggai and Zechariah to encourage and support Zerubbabel (Ezra 5:1-2), and the work resumed. Four years later, in 515 B.C., the temple was completed and dedicated with great fanfare (Ezra 6:16). It was also celebrated by the observance of the Passover (Ezra 6:19). It's interesting that Zerubbabel is never mentioned in connection with the dedication
ceremonies, nor is his name mentioned again after Ezra 5:1. For this reason, Zerubbabel's temple is also referred to simply as the "second temple." This second temple that we call a Jewish temple a result of a return to the land from Babylon captivity. There is no indication of or direction to build a third temple. The only temple that we can find there is the Mosque of Omar, a Muslim Temple. Which has occupied this area for more years that the First and Second temples combined.
Notice what Jesus told His disciples in Luke Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. (Luke 21:21-24)
This is the prophecy that the risen Christ told John in Revelation But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months. (Revelation 11:2)
Since the disciples' generation has long departed this mortal coil, the Revelation certainly was written before the nations trampled Jerusalem under foot in 70 A.D. A prophecy that came true in their day while the Second temple was still standing, not some future day in modernity. The Temple that we read in Revelation is not the Third temple but the Second Zerubbabel's/Herod's temple.
Who were The Tribes in the Earth (Part 14 )
Gentle Reader,
As we look at the internal evidence I am reminded of this verse ""Arise up and stand, behold the number of those that be sealed in the feast of the Lord;'' (2 Esdras 2:38)
In the first chapter of Revelation we have the verse that many feel represents the "theme" and gives credence to their thinking os to soon coming of the Lord. "Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen." (Revelation 1:7) The person referred as the "cloud comer" directs our thoughts to the Book of Matthew, "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory". (Matthew 24:30)
The term Kindred refers to and is a direct reference to the Jewish tribal system KIN'DRED, n. [from kin, kind.]
Here we have the Greek word phule which means tribes
1.
Relation by birth; consanguinity.
Like her, of equal kindred to the throne.
2.
Relation by marriage; affinity.
3.
Relatives by blood or marriage, more properly the former.
Thou shalt go unto my country and to my kindred. Gen 26.
4. Relation; suit; connection in kind.
KIN'DRED, a. Related; congenial; of the like nature or properties; as kindred souls; kindred skies.
All the tribes of the land. By this the Jewish people [the house of Judah the southern kingdom. Note: the Gentiles that were grafted into the
covenant that Paul taught were from the Nation of Israel the Northern kingdom, not all Gentiles are from the other nations but the Gentiles that Paul went to were what we would call Israelite strangers . See Eph 2: 11-14] are most evidently intended, and therefore the whole verse may be understood as predicting the destruction of the Jews; and is a presumptive proof that the Apocalypse was written before the final overthrow of the Jewish state. While it may not be conclusive standing alone, but one can consider and based on the language that the case can be made that these two verses are speaking of the same event. Matthew 24 speaks of the fall of Jerusalem. Revelation in this first chapter is speaking about the same fall of Jerusalem.
Note if you will in the seventh verse of Chapter One the language. It speaks of those who " pierced him"! We know that it was the Romans who crucified and pierced Him, but the Apostles accused the Jews of the act. Peter says directly that it was the Jews that were responsible for the crucifixion of Christ. You can find him saying this in these verses : But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you; And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses. (Acts 3:14-15)
Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. (Acts 4:10)
Others also Stephen: Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: (Acts 7:51-52) And again Paul; Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. (1 Corinthians 2:8). Not the devils, as some have thought, who had they known what God designed to do by the death of Christ, would never have
Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of
been concerned in bringing it about; nor so much the political governors of the Roman empire, particularly in Judea, as Herod and Pontius Pilate, who also were entirely ignorant of it; but rather the ecclesiastical rulers of the Jewish church state, called "this world", in distinction from "the world to come", or times of the Messiah. In Thessalonians Paul speaks of Jews that killed both the Messiah and the prophets For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: (1 Thessalonians 2:14-15)
So you ought to now begin to make the connection and understand why the Book of Revelation concerns itself exclusively to the Jews and the Jewish nation.
Now who were the "Tribes"? In Zechariah And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of
supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn. In that
day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon. And the land shall mourn, every family apart; the family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart; The family of the house of Levi apart, and their wives apart; the family of Shimei apart, and their wives apart; All the families that remain, every family apart, and their wives apart. (Zechariah 12:10-14)
This was the prophesy of John, the foundation of the expression "every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds (or tribes ) of the earth (or land ) shall wail because of him.
Zechariah was saying thar the "tribes of the Land" would mourn for Him
who they had pierced. Who were the tribes? The inhabitants of Jerusalem. And the earth? Not the whole world as perhaps you have heard it said! But the "earth" is the homeland of the Jews . The land that would mourn would be Jerusalem!
The main purpose of the book of revelation was to reveal Jesus Christ to the Nation of Israel.
Reexamining the book of Revelation (Part 15)
Gentle Reader,
We concluded last time with looking at the phrase "Tribes in the Earth" and I might point out a few further items to add to our investigation.. We said last time the the purpose of this particular book was written to reveal the Messiah, the Christ, Jesus to the nation of Israel. And the place of the revealing was to be in Jerusalem. And furthermore the revealing would be to those who pierced Him (The Jews in Judea). One wonders at times that those of us reading this book some twenty-one centuries in the future would not have at least given serious consideration that these scriptures were not just a general reference to the nation down though the years, but to the contemporary generation, that generation that would fall under the judgement of God and became desolate in not the Jewish "present age" but in the "ages to come". See The Wars of The Jews by Flavius Josephus Written in 75 A.D.
Brief summary of Josephus' record:
The Judgment on Jerusalem according to History and Destruction of the temple
Heavenly phenomena
A star resembling a sword
A comet A bright light shining around the altar and the temple A vision of chariots and soldiers running around among the clouds and all cities of Palestine.
Earthly phenomena
(reported by priests)
A quaking A great noise The sounds of a great multitude saying, "Let us remove hence."
In Josephus'Wars and Antiquities, we read the following eyewitness account from the Jewish priests about what they felt and heard in the Temple on Pentecost in the year AD 66, at the very time when the Zealot war with Rome was about to begin:
. . . at that feast which we call Pentecost, as the priests were going by night into the inner [court of the] temple, as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that, in the first place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after that they heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, "Let us remove hence."[Wars
6.5.3 (6.299-300)]
Josephus gives us the exact day and hour when this event occurred (on the
day of Pentecost at the hour of the evening sacrifices), where it occurred
(in the Jerusalem Temple), and who witnessed it (the officiating priests).
Furthermore, Josephus puts this story in the mouths of his fellow priests who were in the Temple at the very time these events occurred. He seldom gives this kind of strong eyewitness testimony to confirm his account, especially to the point of giving a date and place, and naming his sources, as he does here.
The fact that he quotes these witnesses and identifies them, lends much
credence to his story. Out of all the possible eyewitnesses who could be deemed reliable in the first century, the priests in the Temple would have been at the top of the list. Those priests were lawyers, judges, scribes, and teachers of the Law. They understood the penalty for false testimony. Some of those priests survived the destruction of Jerusalem, and could have easily discredited Josephus' account. Yet, as far as we know, this account was never challenged by them, but instead verified "at the mouth of two or more" reliable first-century eyewitnesses (Deut 19:15) and accepted as true by contemporary historians such as Tacitus.
R. C. Sproul, Sr., calls this particular section of Josephus "one of the weirdest passages you ever read in ancient history" ("Last Days Madness" speech, Ligonier Ministries National Conference, Orlando, Florida, 1999). When quoting this passage in The Last Days according to Jesus, he describes it as a "most remarkable record" (pp. 123-127). He notes that this story is "corroborated by others" in the first century such as Tacitus (Eusebius, Yosippon, and Hegesippus also record this event). As Sproul suggested, this testimony of Josephus "lends credence" to the idea that there was some kind of coming of Christ associated with the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 ("Last Days Madness" speech, Ligonier Ministries National Conference, Orlando, Florida, 1999)
So Gentle reader, we have learned that Rome and her legions destroyed that generation (the generation that Christ spoke about ) in 70 A.D.. And so we have additional evidence the points to the book of Revelation being written long before the events of 70 A.D.
My thanks to Ed Stevens who provided additional research and quotes for this subject...
16
Reexamining the book of Revelation in light of recent scholarship Part
Who is the woman in Red?
Gentle Reader,
I do hope you have been taking notes and while the title of this study may be a bit deceiving when you read the associated verses you understand why I chose this as the title. So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration. (Revelation 17:3-6)
It occurred to me that in order to attempt to explain this next few verses or at least give you some of my understanding of these terms and words given in this seventeenth and eighteenth chapters that you need a refresher course in how we scholars and theologians understand the Book of Apocalypse. I was just told in a recent email that I wrote in what this author called " l think the language is too high, this is pure English Literature!" So bearing that in mind I will try not to get too professorial in my explanations. However if we are to understand this Book and what is written we must first have a basic understanding of the words and intent behind them.
There are two types of interpretation which have a vital effect on Eschatology: ( a branch of theology concerned with the final events in the history of the world or of humankind.) The allegorical and the
grammatical-historical methods.
The allegorical method is an ancient method of interpretation. The literal meaning of the text is either, not the true meaning, or only one of many meanings. The elements of each passage have a corresponding spiritual reality which is the "real" or ultimate meaning of the passage.
In direct opposition to the allegorical method of interpretation stands the literal or grammatical-historical method. The aim of the historical-grammatical method is to discover the meaning of the passage as the original author would have intended and what the original hearers would have understood.
The method employed by the scribes was not an allegorical method, but a literal method. It is recognized by all that the Bible abounds in figurative language ( 217 figures of speech found in the Bible ). Then finally The first principle is the fact that the book of Revelation uses extensive figurative language. Revelation is a book of apocalyptic literature. Several books of Jewish apocalyptic literature are available for study. In the Old Testament, the books of Daniel, Ezekiel, Isaiah, and Joel contain apocalyptic literature. Also, certain extrabiblical books such as the Book of Enoch, the Assumption of Moses, and the Book of Baruch fall into the literary category of apocalyptic writings. Apocalyptic literature uses signs and symbols to veil its message to outside readers. This type of literature was written when the Jewish nation was amidst one of its most tumultuous times—when the Israelites were under attack, or ruled over, by another powerful nation. Therefore, we must read Revelation with figurative language at the forefront of our mind, remembering that apocalyptic literature had an elaborate system of such language that was used to convey social and political happenings of the time.
What we have seen over a long period of time is that depending on ones Eschatological view the book of Revelation can have the meaning that one puts into it. Here is just one example The Two Babylons, subtitled The
Papal Worship Proved to Be the Worship of Nimrod and His Wife is a religious pamphlet published in 1853 by the Presbyterian Free Church of Scotland theologian Alexander Hislop (1807-65), expanded in 1858, and finally published as a book in 1919. Its central theme is its allegation that the Catholic Church is a veiled continuation of the pagan religion of Babylon, a product of a millennia-old conspiracy. It has been generally regarded by scholars as discredited, with one calling it a "tribute to historical inaccuracy and know-nothing religious bigotry" with "shoddy scholarship, blatant dishonesty" and a "nonsensical thesis". Hislop ultimately traces Catholic doctrines back to the worship of Nimrod, claiming that the Roman Catholic Church is the * of Babylon in the Bible Book of Revelation 17:5, and that "the Pope himself is truly and properly the lineal representative of Belshazzar". He claims that the Christogram IHS really stands for Isis, Horus, Seth.
Although scholarship has shown the picture presented by Hislop to be based on a misunderstanding of historical Babylon and its religion, his book remains popular among some fundamentalist Protestant Christians.
So when we now go back to our verse in Rev. 17:6 , you have at least some idea of the reason for the Apocalyptic Language used in these verses. The danger was real, and present and to disguise the "real" meaning certain words in place of others. Only those in the know would understand! " MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH" Notice what the angel said that "the woman"was a poetic symbol of that great city !. And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth. (Revelation 17:18) And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth. (Revelation 18:24). Then John wrote Rejoice over her, thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and prophets; for God hath avenged you on her. And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all. (Revelation 18:20-21).
So who was this "woman and where was this great city?" John points to a clue given in Revelation 11:8, where he wrote, And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. (Revelation 11:8)
This tells us, as we just saw that John was referring to the city Jerusalem of his day.
We have just a wee bit more in this study of the "Woman in Red" but I'm going to let you think about these things that I've pointed out so we'll take a break until next time. And as I have said previously check me out.
Revelation reexamined (part 17)
Gentle Reader, We took a wee break for two reasons 1) I gave you a lot the think about and 2) even there was just a wee bit more to suggest in our search for the identity of "The women in Red" , I wanted to step back for a moment to consult with other colleagues to determine if I was as you say "pushing the envelope" to make my case.
So here we are again continuing to look at the concept of "MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH" The clue we talked about previously was found in Revelation 11:8, where John wrote, And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. And if you remember that I suggested that John was writing not about Rome as some would like to believe, but was referring to the city of Jerusalem of his day!
Now I think you need to comprehend my reasoning for this assertion . Let's
look at the term that our author, John, used. "Sodom" John wrote that this is a "figurative name" That means that John was not telling us the real name but its spiritual condition. Once more we must allow Scripture to interpret itself, where we find this the a reference to Jerusalem. In Isaiah the first chapter after declaring that he had a vision The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah. (Isaiah 1:1) We find Isaiah writing to Judah and Jerusalem in this manner Hear the word of the LORD, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah. (Isaiah 1:10) In Isaiah's eyes Jerusalem was Sodom!
Next turn with me to the Prophet Jeremiah who on his part addresses Jerusalem "I have seen also in the prophets of Jerusalem an horrible thing: they commit adultery, and walk in lies: they strengthen also the hands of
evildoers, that none doth return from his wickedness: they are all of them unto me as Sodom, and the inhabitants thereof as Gomorrah. (Jeremiah 23:14)
But what about "Egypt?" We don't find in Scripture where Jerusalem is directly called Egypt. As we can read in the book of Exodus in what is called the "Old Testament" by those who have left the study of Hebrew culture to those who some would call "wonks" Israel's exodus was the bondage of Egypt, the New Testament, that more people are familiar with, was from the bondage of the man made Old Covenant Law.
Who should come along but the Apostle called Paul. A bi vocational preacher! A tent maker by trade and a Pharisee trained in the understanding and use of Rabbinic Traditions. Some modern day scholars have accused Paul of doing what modern day preachers do. That is pick a topic and find a proof text to back it up and twists scripture to fit. But those who would say that have never bothered to see what Paul was seeing or think Paul's thoughts. To even asserting anachronistically that Paul read the Old Testament as "real history" have been misled.
For Paul his many times "misleading" or one could say misuse of scripture to make a point was the Jewish way of interpretation scripture. We might call that rabbinic midrash. But rather than give you what Paul's understanding of Scripture was all about let's let him speak for himself.
The most recognizable passage pointing to the "New"exodus in the New Testament is found in Paul's writings in 1 Corinthians 10 :1-11
Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; And did all eat the same spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ. But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness. Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted. Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play. Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand. Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents. Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed of the destroyer. Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of
the world are come. Paul's contextual foundation for this statement is to be found in the Old Testament narrative of the Exodus from Egyptian bondage. He wrote that ... 1) They passed through the sea (verse 1) 2) The ate manna and drank from the rock (verses 3-4) 3) They wandered in the wilderness (verse 5) 4)They fell into idolatry (verse 7)
5) They tried the Lord and were destroyed by serpents (verse 9)
Here we can see that "type and shadow" was what Paul alluded to in Corinthians ( Midrash is commonly defined as the process of interpretation by which the rabbis filled in "gaps" found in the Torah.) harkened back to the Old Testament, and the New Testament believer would undergo the same exodus. The only difference was what was past in the Old Testament was a current reality in Paul's generation.
Consider Jesus saying Nevertheless I must walk to day, and to morrow, and the day following: for it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not! (Luke 13:33-34)
And in Matthew 23:29-37 Jesus upbraids the Jews of His day for killing the prophets. He declares that they are the children of their fathers who killed the prophets before them.. And then we find the most damming evidence in verse 35 where He says: That upon you (the Jews of His day) may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. (Matthew 23:35) And then in verses 36-37 He says Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! (Matthew 23:36-37)
In both of the above passages Jesus told the Jews of His day that they were guilty of "all the righteous blood shed upon the earth" (C.F. Acts 7:5152) Same crime, same judgement, the "great City" of the Apocalypse was the Jerusalem of Christ's generation leading us once again to think that the writing of Revelation was before the fall of Jerusalem and certainly before 70 AD.
To be continued . . .
Part 18 The Sixth King in the continuing study of Reexamining Revelation
One of my favorite quotes comes from a dear Rabbi friend, who says this "When you get six Jews together you will have twelve opinions". It seems its that way when it comes to understanding the Book of Revelation too. When we have opinions we find that one's opinion should only be as strong as one's knowledge on the matter. So before we tackle this next perspective of the kings of Revelation let's at least give those who have an opinion to express it. "If John wrote near the end of his reign, that would place the writing of Revelation somewhere in the 90's. "
"Traditionally, the book of Revelation has been dated near the end of the first century, around A.D. 96" . The testimony of Irenaeus, not far removed from the apostolic age, is first rate. He places the book near the end of Domitian's reign, and that ruler died in A.D. 96. Irenaeus seems to be unaware of any other view for the date of the book of Revelation.
Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 155-215) says that John returned from the isle of Patmos "after the tyrant was dead" (Who Is the Rich Man? 42), and Eusebius, known as the "Father of Church History," identifies the "tyrant" as Domitian (Ecclesiastical History III.23).
And of course we have those with differing opinions Here is a sampling of those:
.States Revelation was written under "Claudius [Nero] Caesar." (Epiphanies, Heresies 51:12,)
George Edmundson (1913) "I mean the Apocalypse of St. John. The Apocalypse is full of references to historical events of which the author had quite recently been himself an eyewitness at Rome, or which were fresh in the memories of the Roman Christians with whom he had been associating, and it can be dated with great exactitude from internal evidence as having been written at the beginning of the year 70 A.D."
Dr. E. Earle Ellis (1980) "At the same time in some New Testament books the silence about the destruction of Jerusalem is very surprising; that is, in books where Jesus' prophecy of the destruction appears (Matthew, Mark, Luke), where the critique of the temple or its transitory character is a major theme (Acts, Hebrews) and where God's judgments on a disobedient Jewish nation are of particular interest to the writer (Acts, Jude). In these cases the absence of any illusion to the destruction would seem to be a fairly strong argument that such books were written before that event took place. The fall of Jerusalem is important in another respect. It marked not only the catastrophic destruction of a city but also the end of the Jewish world as it had been known." ("Dating the New Testament", New Testament Studies, 26; p. 488)
George E. Ladd (1972) "The problem with this [Domitian date] theory is that there is no evidence that during the last decade of the first century there occurred any open and systematic persecution of the church ." (George E. Ladd, A Commentary on Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1972), p. 8.)
Robert Mounce (1977) "the Cambridge trio (Westcott, Lightfoot, and Hort) were unanimous in assigning the Apocalypse to the reign of Nero or the years immediately following." And "such a threefold cord of scholarly opinion is not quickly
broken" but that he (Swete) is "unable to see that the historical situation presupposed by the Apocalypse contradicts the testimony of Irenaeus which assigns the vision to the end of the reign of Domitian." Mounce seem to agree with Swete on this (p. 21).
J. A. T. Robinson (1976) "It is indeed generally agreed that this passage must bespeak a pre-70 situation. . . . There seems therefore no reason why the oracle should not have been uttered by a Christian prophet as the doom of the city drew nigh." (Redating the New Testament pp.. 240-242).
Albert Schweitzer (1906)
"The apocalyptic discourses in Mark xiii., Matt. xxiv., and Luke xxi. are
interpolated. A Jewish-Christian apocalypse of the first century, probably
composed before the destruction of Jerusalem, has been interwoven with a
short exhortation which Jesus gave on the occasion when He predicted the
destruction of the temple.. His construction rests upon two main points of
support; upon his view of the sources and his conception of the eschatology
of the time of Jesus. In his view the sole source for the Life of Jesus is
the Gospel of Mark, which was "probably written exactly in the year 73,"
five years after the Johannine apocalypse." (Quest for the Historical
Jesus)
Philip Schaff (1877)
"On two points I have changed my opinion --the second Roman captivity of
Paul (which I am disposed to admit in the interest of the Pastoral Epistles),
and the date of the Apocalypse (which I now assign, with the majority of
modern critics, to the year 68 or 69 instead of 95, as before)." (Vol. I,
Preface to the Revised Edition, 1882 The History of the Christian Church,
volume 1)
So Gentle Reader you can see by this small sampling that there are excellent scholars on both sides of this issue. Not that this one issue is the end all be all of evidence. Dr. Bart "Ehrman ' puts the matter this way,
"The search for truth takes you where the evidence leads you, even if, at first, you don't want to go there." But as an old Pastor once said to me when he picked up a music stand and carried it across the platform "Sometimes, you have to take a stand!" So from a historical position here is where I will take a stand and until further evidence come to the forefront this is my best take on this piece of evidence
. So far we have seen that Revelation deals with the revealing of Jesus to first century Israel. As noted above, "the woman" John saw was first century Jerusalem. The "kings," therefore, were the rulers of the known world of John's day, i.e., the Roman Empire. The "kings" were not ruling at the same time, for the text stated "five fell," meaning that five of those kings had come and gone. Then "one is," meaning the "king" who was ruling at the time Revelation was written. Here in this verse, we have one of the clearest proofs for dating this book. If we simply examine the list of Roman Emperors, we will be able to determine who the sixth king was, and the time Revelation was written.
Here are the Roman Emperors: 1)Julius Caesar (45 B.C.) Time being
important to the people and the priests. Julius introduced a new calendar,
the Julian calendar:
2) Augustus (27 B.C.-14 A.D.) After more than a century of war and turmoil.
Following the defeat of Antony and Cleopatra in 30 B.C., Octavian becomes
Augustus and ruled for a period over a relative serene Empire ;
3)Tiberius (14 A.D-37) The was Rome's tyrant, a ruthless ruler;
4) Gaius (Caligula) (37 A.D.-41)According to ancient sources, Caligula loved
his horse Incitatus so much that he gave the animal a marble stable, a
jeweled collar and servants who fed him oats mixed with gold flakes. ;
5) Claudius (41A.D. -54); and the sixth emperor was...
6) Nero. Nero reigned from ( 54AD to June of 68AD), with Galba to follow
who reigns but six months. Here we find the terrible persecutors of the
Christians (at whose hand Peter and Paul were martyred), whom God used to
destroy the Jews. Nero was in power and he gave the command to Vespasian to destroy Jerusalem. This was the sixth king, proving beyond any doubt that Revelation was written before the Roman/Jewish war.
Historically, Nero is the one that persecuted Christians beyond all comparison. If the note in the Apocalypse in the Syrian version was correct, John's banishment to Patmos was itself a result of the great persecution of Nero. The apostle Paul was tortured and then beheaded by the evil Emperor Nero at Rome in A.D. 67. The apostle Peter, who was crucified upside down, was another victim of Nero.
However, the Apocalypse said that John "was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ" Rev. (1:9). It does not say that John was banished or imprisoned. As Paul went to Arabia for his revelation and Moses went into the Mountain for his revelation, John the Baptist went to Patmos for his revelation
To be continued . . .
Part 19 Reexamining Revelation The Song of Moses
Gentle Reader,
We are searching in paths that for the most part have not been traveled frequently. I ask several groups about our previous study to write about the kings referred to in revelation. Virtually all including some Hebrew scholars indicated the Party line" Revelation written in 90-95 A.D. by the Apostle John. Some even went so far as to make Revelation fit into modern present times. Which Gentle Readers is called Eisegesis.Eisegesis is the process of interpreting a text or portion of text in such a way that it introduces one's own presuppositions, agendas, and/or biases into and onto the text. The act is often used to "prove" a pre-held point of concern to the reader and to provide him or her with a confirmation bias in accordance with his or
her pre-held agenda. Eisegesis is best understood when contrasted with exegesis. While exegesis draws out the meaning from a text in accordance with the context and discover-able meaning of its author, eisegesis occurs when a reader imposes his or her interpretation into and onto the text. As a result, exegesis tends to be objective when employed effectively while eisegesis is regarded as highly subjective.
So you can see that we have not taken the easy path. Yogi Berra of baseball fame once said "When you come to a fork in the road take it" And that's what we are doing. Not the easy path but tracking down clues which may give us more reason than ever to reject the "everybody's says" concept. Now we need to look at another passage that has been looked at and at the same time in many cases overlooked. And I saw as it were a sea of glass mingled with fire: and had been victorious from the Beast" were singing "them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name,[ Note over the number of his name — The Vulgate, Syriac, and Coptic omit the words in English Version, "over his mark." The mark, in fact, is the number of his name which the faithful refused to receive, and so were victorious over it.
stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God. And they sing the song of Moses the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, Great and marvellous are thy works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are thy ways, thou King of saints. (Revelation 15:2-3) We have not only now consider not only the Law of Moses but also the traditions of the Qumran Ebyon/Nazarenes before these verse will be put in they proper perspective. I might point out, although unnecessary for my regular readers that not many, if any, have bothered to take this path (too much like work-reminiscent of the elementary schools daze)
When we look at Moses' Law and then at the Dead Sea Scrolls we find the reference to those who "had been victorious over the Beast" Greek, "those (coming) off from (the conflict with) the beast-conquerors." were singing the "Song of Moses" [ Note at this point we might make a
distinction between two songs 1) found in Exodus 15:1 "Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song unto the LORD, and spake, saying, I will sing unto the LORD, for he hath triumphed gloriously: the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea." And 2) the other Song we may reference is to be found in Deuteronomy 32: 1-44 The song exhibits striking originality of form; nowhere else in the Old Testament are prophetic thoughts presented in poetical dress on so large a scale.
So then Gentle reader, those who hold that this is written To them rather than For them might do well to ask the question (which not many again have thought about) If believers (Christians) were somehow martyrs living in modern times, why would they be singing the Song of Moses? Do you know any believer today that knows how to sing that song?
Moses said: "Just and right" are God's "judgments."
Deuteronomy 32
The Lamb says: "Just and true" are "thy judgments."
Revelation 15. There were two songs given by Moses, forty years apart, one at the crossing of the Red Sea and the other was the song Moses' sang the day that he died. The reason Jews were to sing this song was to remind them of what would befall them "in the later days" in Deut. 31 (I suggest to get the full impact of the song read this entire chapter -Now therefore write ye this song for you, and teach it the children of Israel: put it in their mouths, that this song may be a witness for me against the children of Israel. (Deuteronomy 31:19) and teach it the children of Israel; teach them by it, instructing them in the meaning of it: thus it was usual in ancient times to write things in verses, that they might be the more pleasingly attended to and regarded, and be longer retained in memory; and especially this practice was used with children, and still is:
We find the song talking about the End (of the Age) and "their end" in their present captivity, as they called it (being ruled not by the Spirit of the
Most Holy but by th Roman Empire!
We ask again, our brethren, why would those living today, Christian martyrs be singing a song about the Romans that no longer exist, when the song had reference to the Jews living in the 1st century that were being ruled over by the Romans? It would make much sense to sing that same song today.
And aren't these the same martyrs who cried out earlier " How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them..." (Rev. 6:10 )
Who was it who had all the "blood of the righteous" martyrs imputed against them? dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? the men of the world, idolatrous persons, earthly princes, who had shed their blood; the ungodly, of earth, earthly, as distinguished from believers who had given their all!. Clearly it was those who had kept their faith in the Messiah in spite of intense persecution and had "had come off victorious from the Beast" (See Matthew 23:35 and Luke 13:33)! This passage ( Revelation 15:2,3 ) points clearly to followers of Christ living in the First century during "the wrath of God" Rev.15:1.
Now in Revelation 16:10,11 it says that the people in the Beast's kingdom "gnawed their tongues because of pain." They had great sores on thier bodies along with other plagues that had been poured out on them. We also have the testimony from the writings of historian , Josephus that the Jews literally gnawed their tongues for lack of food during the siege of AD 6870! And, it is interesting that Josephus even calls the Jewish Zealot forces a "wild beast" in several places (Wars V.1.1; IV.7.4; IV.9.8; V.2.5)! This particular is emphasized even more by the whole context of the Song of Moses is full of references to "beasts" "Serpents," and "dragons" (Leviticus 26; Deuteronomy 28-32; Deuteronomy 32:24, 33. We should also notice that the Song of Moses, read as a prophetic prefiguration of God's dealings with Israel through Paul's handling of his Gospel becomes in his hands a hermeneutical key of equal importance with the prophecies of DeuteroIsaiah.
The song describes in sequence God's election of and care for Israel (Deut. 32:6-14), Israel's inexplicable rebellion (Deut. 32:15-18, cf 32:5), God's judgement upon them (Deut. 32:19-35), and ultimately and mysteriously God's final deliverance and vindication of his own people (Deut. 32:36-43). In Deuteronomy 32, Paul found not only the prophecy of Israel's lack of faith and but also the prefiguration of the prophecy of God's intentions to "stir them to jealousy" through embracing the Gentiles (Deut.32:21). It can not seem coincidental that Paul quotes both of these verses explicitly (Rom. 10:19, 15:10). Deuteronomy 32 contains Romans in nunc. And would place more evidence that Paul had meet John the Baptist from our part 9 "I knew a man...."
Next time we'll consider the time element and expectations of the author called John. In Part 20.
The Element of time [Part 20]
Gentle Readers,
My wife herself, tells me that I have no sense of time, I fear that she will be right once again! I always feel that when going to the market I have enough time to look at the newest computers or HDTV's when I just went out for a loaf of bread or a tin of tea.
To be truthful, I attempt to be "in the moment" in the Now! For if one thinks about things there is no past nor future only the Eternal Present! What we have done as mankind with our limited vision is to set into the motion the notion in our our thinking the concept of a past and a future.
Everyone admits there are numerous New Testament passages that say "The coming of the Lord is at hand;" or in other ways indicate Christ's return was imminent--and that was almost two thousand years ago! One of the ways men have dealt with the problem is to say "Yes, the Bible said the
coming of the Lord was 'at hand' in the first century, but time doesn't mean anything to God therefore 'at hand' didn't really mean it was imminent."
Do you see the problem? The problem is real and has troubled honest Bible students for centuries. The question is "Can God tell time?" As we now perhaps have seen for the first time (no pun intended), when God uses time words he does not have a special hidden meaning unknowable to man! Prophetic time statements are not so "elastic" that the words "near" and "at hand" can encompass hundreds, or even thousands of years! At hand means at hand whether it referred to the coming of the kingdom or the coming of the Lord!
There is no question that "time" is nothing to God. A thousand years are like yesterday to Him (Psa. 90:4). In II Peter 3:8, we find the statement about "one day being as a thousand years," etc. [By the way, please note the verse does not say one day IS a thousand years with the Lord]. In verse 9 we find a forgotten statement: "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness;" The word "slack" means "slow" [Greek "braduno"]. Peter's point is that if God sets a time for fulfillment, God fulfills on time! He is not slow; God can tell time and knows how to keep his promises on time! This verse asserts in no uncertain terms that God is a God who keeps his promises!
But time is nothing only to God. When God communicates time to man, He reasons with His creation in a way that man can understand Him. But in the scripture, God spoke to MAN! The time statements about the kingdom's establishment were made to MAN! The time statements in the Bible were spoken to man to encourage or to warn man. If God did not mean TIME when he used time words, what did he mean? Since man thinks in time when "a long time" or "at hand" is used, would it not have been misleading on God's part to say something was not going to happen for a long time when in fact it was imminent? Conversely, would it not have been misleading for God to say something was at hand when it was really not to happen for
centuries?
The question here is one of communication. Can God communicate with his creation in an understandable way; or does God speak in purposely ambiguous ways? Does the Lord hold out a carrot stick of imminent blessings to his hurting creation while knowing all the time he is not really going to bring the promises soon? Did God constantly threaten nations with imminent judgment and not punish them for centuries? Where then is the reality of the threat to the wicked? Does God's transcendence over time prevent him from speaking to man in words that convey genuine nearness?
Here is a question to consider: if God is in the practice of saying something is imminent when in reality it may not transpire for centuries, why is there not one single Old Covenant prophecy of the kingdom that said it was "at hand?" Daniel said the kingdom would be established in the days of the Roman empire; he called it "the last days" (Dan.2:28). From Daniel's perspective, it was several hundred years away. From God's perspective of course, it was only a moment; but that is not the issue. God was speaking to Daniel about things to happen in man's world--not in (the present that man calls timeless eternity. This is why God did not cause Daniel to say the kingdom was "near," "at hand," "right at the door," or coming "very, very soon."
It was not until John the Baptist came that the message "the kingdom of heaven is at hand" was preached; and the kingdom was established in the very generation that heard John say it was at hand! In other words, God did not allow his prophets to say the kingdom was at hand until it was REALLY AT HAND! It would have been something less than honest if God had said the kingdom was imminent when it was really hundreds of years away!
Consider the expectations of the real author of Revelation , Jesus Christ. He tells John to expect the fulfillment of the prophecy soon (Revelation 1:1,3; 2:16; 3:11; 22:6,7,10,12,20).
In Revelation 1:1,3, right off the bat, John informed his readers, the seven churches of Asia (verse 4), that the contents of this volume "must shortly come to pass." Please note, that John did not write that some of the events, or even most of the events must shortly take place. He wrote that all of the events contained in Revelation "must shortly come to pass." Why? Why must those things "shortly come to pass?" Because "the time (was) at hand." At hand for whom? The seven churches of Asia, specifically, and to the church of the first century in general. The time for what was at hand? "The Revelation of Jesus Christ." Remember, as we saw above, this is the main episode of Revelation.
In Revelation 22:6, John wrote that the Lord sent an angel to John "to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done." Here, at the end of the book of Revelation, John recorded the exact same message that he did in chapter 1. This again emphasizes that all of the events contained in Revelation were about to take place in the first century — not stretched throughout time, and certainly not for any future generation.
In Revelation 22:10, the angel of the Lord said to John, "Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand." Once more, we have proof that the events of Revelation were about to take place in the first century. However, another element was added to this warning. The angel told John not to seal the Scroll. Why is this important? To answer that, let's look at the book of Daniel.
After Daniel had received visions concerning his people (the nation of Israel), he was told, "thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book" (12:1). Daniel is then told how they would be rescued — by resurrection, some would be rewarded with "everlasting life"
and others with "everlasting contempt" (verse 2). But then, Daniel is told something very peculiar. In verse 4, Daniel was told, "shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end." Please note that this verse says the "time of the end", and not "the end of time". There is a huge difference between the end of time and the time of the end. Now, we must ask "Whose time of the end?" Verse 1 told us that Daniel's visions
concerned the nation of Israel, not mankind in general.
Next, Daniel saw two angels talking about the fulfillment of all that he had seen (verse 6). One asked the other, "How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?" The answer was, "when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished." (verse 7). But Daniel could not understand what they meant, so he asked again, "When?" The angel answered "Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end." Now that we have looked at this passage, how does it relate to Revelation 21?
Did you know that there is only one other place in the Bible where a sealed book is referred to? Revelation, chapter 5. How Daniel relates to Revelation is that Revelation is the opening of Daniel's sealed book!! Remember, Daniel's visions were concerning the "time of the end" of Israel, and Revelation is about God's judgment on Israel. They are one and the same. The reason this has direct bearing on Revelation 21, is that Daniel was told to seal his book concerning the end "for it pertains to many days in the future" (Dan.8:26), but John was told not to seal his book "because the time is at hand" (Revelation 22:10). The end of Old Covenant Israel was at hand. All things written had to be fulfilled by the time Jerusalem fell in AD 70 (see Luke 21:20-22). Therefore, since Revelation is the opening of Daniel, then it must have been fulfilled by no later than the summer of AD 70.
Our next time statement is found in Revelation 21:12. There, Jesus told
John, "And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every
man according as his work shall be." Notice that Jesus did not say that
"when I come, I will come quickly," He emphatically said that He was coming
"quickly." But He also said something else. He said that His reward was with
Him to give every man according to his works. Now some state that this has
not happened yet. However, we must let Scripture interpret Scripture, and
turn to Matthew 16:27-28 and Mark 8:38-9:1 and Luke 9:26-27.
Jesus said the exact same thing in these three verses that He did in
Revelation 21. In Revelation 21, He said He was coming and "he shall reward
every man according to his works." These are the exact same "comings" with
the exact same "rewards." But, Jesus also said in these three verses,
"There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see
the Son of man coming in his kingdom." Notice that Jesus tied His coming to
the lives of His disciples. He said that some of his listeners would not die
until He came. But to whom is He coming? And what will be their reward?
Jesus said that the "coming" would be to the first century generation of
Israel (Matthew 24:34, Mark 13:30, Luke 21:32). Daniel told us that the
"rewards" would be that some would be resurrected to "everlasting life"
and others to "everlasting contempt". Now, let's put these two passages
together. Jesus said He was coming and He was going to reward each
according to his works, and that some of the disciples wouldn't die until
they saw this take place. Therefore, since all of the disciples are dead,
Jesus must have returned and rewarded each according to his works.
Furthermore, in Revelation, He said the same thing, therefore it must be
fulfilled!
So Gentle reader,
What we have is not only a lesson on Revelation, But one on Quantum Physics
and time as you currently understand, I do hope you'll set your clocks ahead
and join me in the "Present-the Now of God's time"
If a person doesn't believe the first three verses of Revelation (i.e., the near expectation of the events), neither will he believe the rest of the book. For if a person is unwilling to accept the time constraints of the text, the rest of the document can mean anything that the reader desires.
If the John was on Patmos under the reign of Nero, as the internal evidence indicates, he wrote the book of Revelation about AD 68 or 69, which was after the death of that emperor; but the gospels and epistles some years later. One of the oddest facts about the New Testament is that what on any showing would appear to be the single most datable and climactic event of the period — the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 — is never once mentioned as a passed fact.
Determining the authorship of the Apocalypse Part 21 Phase 2
Gentle Readers,
At this point you may be convinced that the Book of the Apocalypse (Revelation) at least may have an early dating. So at this point we are going in another direction briefly or as I like to say down another rabbit trail. There is a method to my madness, which if you bare with me a wee longer all with become clear. Who might the author of Revelation be? Could there be more than one? Here we present for your edification what others have written (because we all know once you write something down that makes it right and its permanent !):
" . . . from the beginning of the church's history much speculation has been rife about him. It was the almost universal belief of the ancient church from the middle of the second century that the author was the apostle John. Justin and Hippolytus at Rome, Tertullian in North Africa, Clement and Origen of Alexandria, Irenaeus of Lyons, all spoke of this John as one of the Lord's apostles (or disciples). Modern scholarship, however, has remained unconvinced, preferring to identify the John of Revelation rather with John Mark, John the Elder, an otherwise unknown John, or a
pseudonymous writer claiming for his work the prestige attaching to the name of the apostle." (The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible, p. 60.)
". . . it cannot be said that John the seer of Revelation has been identified with any known John in the first century of the church's life. There must have been many Christians of this name in those early days, and there is no internal proof that the church's tradition identifying the seer with the apostle of the same name is correct. We know the John of Revelation only as the seer or prophet and shepherd that he claims to be." (ibid.)
". . . the author could have been one of several people having the common name John (JOHN THE APOSTLE; JOHN THE BELOVED DISCIPLE; JOHN THE DIVINE). (The Family Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 17, p. 3216, Curtis Books, Inc., New York, 1972) "Was St. John the apostle and evangelist the writer of the Revelation? The evidence adduced in support of his being the author consists of (1) the assertions of the author, and (2) historical tradition. (1) The author's description of himself in the 1st and 22d chapters is certainly equivalent to an assertion that he is the apostle. He names himself simply John, without prefix or addition. He is also described as a servant of Christ, one who had borne testimony as an eye-witness of the word of God and the testimony of Christ. He is in Patmos for the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. He is also a fellow sufferer with those whom he addresses, and the authorized channel of the most direct and important communication that was ever made to the Seven Churches of Asia, of which churches John the apostle was at that time the spiritual governor and teacher. Lastly, the writer was a fellow servant of angels and a brother of prophets. All these marks are found united in the apostle John, and in him alone of all historical persons. (2) A long series of writers testify to St. John's authorship. Justin Martyr (cir. 150 A.D.), Eusebius, Irenaeus (A.D. 195), Clement of Alexandria (about 200), Tertullian (207), Origen (233). All the foregoing writers, testifying that the book came from an apostle, believed that it was part of Holy Scripture. (Smith's Bible Dictionary, pp. 562-563, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1984.)
These quotes were given to me to use by a gentleman who holds what we call the "orthodox position (or thinking) based on the quotes that you just read. So if your satisfied with his explanation you can close your laptop or shut your computer down and drop off to sleep, but . . . if your like me your not going to settle with out more evidence We are after all on the trail of an elusive person. Who is this John? And what is his relationship to Christ? Could it be that simple "Its John the Apostle, and that settles it!" Is it the principle of Occam's razor is also called the principle of parsimony. These days it is usually interpreted to mean something like "the simpler the explanation, the better" or "don't multiply hypotheses unnecessarily."
Well Gentle reader, that may be sufficient for some. But I want more. So . . . Another viewpoint about the authorship of Revelation comes from the early church fathers who were the first bishops. Leaders like Dionysius, Origen believe that the book of Revelation was written by someone other than John the apostle. There are theories that the authorship may belong to a disciple of John's. It was tradition to attribute one's writing to that of the teacher. If John had a disciple, that man could have written the book, and said it was John. The Church fathers believe John the apostle, John the Epistle, and the John of Revelation could be three different Johns. In fact John was just as common a name in Biblical days and time of Christ as it is today.
There have been, however, a good number of scholars over the past two thousand years who have leaned heavily toward the late 50's or early 60's
C.E. for the composition of the Book of Revelation simply because the historical indications within the book point more appropriately to that time. And true enough, if John were recording historical events contemporary with the writing of the book, then the composition must be dated to near 60 C.E. Let us look at some of the reasons for this.
Recall in previous chapters that the apostles, and many Jews and Gentiles, were expecting the soon appearing of the Messianic kingdom on earth. The
critical date for the apostles appears to have been the Sabbatical Year of 62 to 63 C.E. Up to that time the apostle Paul was emphasizing the nearness of the second advent, but by 63 or 64 C.E. he had adopted a completely different attitude to the matter. The apostles Peter and John may have waited until after the miraculous events in the spring of 66 C.E. concerning the Temple before they decided for certain that Christ was not returning in that generation, but whatever the case, the period before C.E.62 was alive with the imminent expectation of the Kingdom of God on earth.
Confused? Well imagine the confusion of those who study Prophecy (for a living). Trying to make things fit so they can be right. But Gentle reader, sometimes the most direct route is not the right way to approach things. I am reminded of the sign telling the western settlers going West "Choose your ruts carefully, you'll be in them for the next one hundred miles!" So with that in mind lets take a more circular route.
Lets go back to the Apostle Paul. You remember in part 9 or chapter 4 depending on where your reading this Paul's statement I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth) such an one caught up to the third heaven. (2 Corinthians 12:1, 2 & 4). Compare [I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, (Revelation 1:10)]
It would seem that Paul was speaking of John the Baptist and not the Apostle John. Written AD 57 -from Macedonia Paul was exposed to a great danger in Proconsular Asia, i.e. at Ephesus (2 Cor. 1:8). This happened in Acts 19:23-41. Paul traveled from Troas after staying there for some time and then made his voyage to Macedonia (Acts 20:1). Paul was in Macedonia at the time of the writing (2 Cor. 9:2). The verb is in the present tense. He intended (2 Cor. 13:1) shortly to visit Corinth. This was the course of his journey in Acts 20:2. And for those who read seriously Paul's experience was after his personal conversion and Paul was not referring to himself for he goes on to say Of such an (other ) one will I glory: yet of myself I will not glory, but (only ) in mine infirmities. (2
Corinthians 12:5) Written in the winter of A.D. 57. Above 14 years (14 years ago ) before would make that about A.D. 43.
Paul said that he "knew a man" and this would be an inexplicable way to speak of himself ( in the third person) The reason was that the Greek word Paul used for "knew" is oida which means to know intuitively without effort or maybe (an even better phrase would be ) "to understand about the life of a man that was well known to all" Paul did not make an effort to know this man or he would have used the Greek word, ginosko . It was without effort after his conversion on the road to Damascus near the Qumran community of the zealous, law keeping Ebyon/Covenant Jews (where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered in 1947). Everyone in Qumran knew and talked about the "Prophet", John the Baptist. For it was understood that he was a Nazarene above all Nazarenes that had lived among them and he, above all else in Israel, received a revelation from God and prophesied of "He that cometh." These Ebyon/Covenant Christian/Jews followers of John the Baptist, "The Prophet". John introduced them to Jesus Christ as the "lamb of God" (pictured by the sacrifice of Isaac) The Hebrew/Ebyon followers of Christ believed that God adopted Jesus as His son at the baptism of John when God said " And there came a voice from heaven, saying, "Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." (Mark 1:11)
Part 22
Will the real author please stand
Gentle Reader,
As we all know from reading the Book of Acts Chapter 15 that James ( whose real name was Jacob-the brother of Jesus ) and Peter were the leaders of the Christ-following Ebyons [Note:"The Poor Ones" was a name of the followers of James in the Jerusalem Church in the New Testament. Paul claims the only condition James imposed upon him in his missions to the
gentiles was to remember the poor. He is reminding him to send money not for any poor but for "The Poor", the Nazarenes, who, after the defeated uprising, had a lot of widows to support.] Origen classified the Ebionites as those who believed in the virgin birth and those who rejected it. Both the Jewish sabbath and the Christian Lord's Day were holy to them, and they expected the establishment of a messianic kingdom in Jerusalem. Eusebius describes as Ebionites those who held the brother of Jesus, James the Just, in special regard
These were the ones in Jerusalem and Antioch, who were followers of John the Baptist were the first to be called "Christians" at Antioch.
And Barnabas went forth to Tarsus, to seek for Saul, and having found him, he brought him to Antioch, and it came to pass that they a whole year did assemble together in the assembly, and taught a great multitude, the disciples also were divinely called first in Antioch Christians.(Acts 11:25,26). Now we find in an old commentary by Adam Clark this phrase and understanding I knew a man in Christ -I knew a Christian, or a Christian man; for to such alone God now revealed himself, for vision and prophecy had been shut up from the Jews.2Cor 12:2 Since Malachi 400 hundred years there had been no vision nor prophecy. And now there burst a fresh vision not from Paul but from a Nazarene Prophet, John the Baptist ! John has gone from being a prophet to "The Prophet" caught up into the "Third Heaven". This is where Paul came to know John, while he was in Antioch, where the Ebyons (the poor) were taking care of the poor. And Paul learned of John the Baptist there. John was the one who had pointed out Jesus John 1:29 on the morrow John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, `Lo, the Lamb of God, who is taking away the sin of the world; It was This John who had pointed the Qumran/Ebyons to Christ and had told them to follow Him. This John had received a new revelation of "he that cometh" recognized Jesus as the Christ This seems to have been after Christ had been forty days in the wilderness, from where he now returned, and came to attend on John's ministry; both to do honour to him, and that he might be made manifest by him; and this was the day after John had bore such a
testimony concerning him, to the priests and Levites.
The former followers of John (Ebyon Christians) believed that one must be baptized and become a Jew before they could become a "Christian" The Church Fathers spoke of early Christian sects (Ebionaioi) which still held on to some (if not all) Jewish beliefs. In Hebrew, "ebyon" means "poor". Irenaeus (AH 1:26:2), Origen (CC 2:1; DP 4:1:22) and Eusebius (HE 3:27) say Ebionites were called poor because of their "poor and mean opinions concerning Christ". In fact, the name was used by the Essenes of themselves, as the Scrolls show plainly. Aramaic quite commonly uses as nouns adjectives like "poor", "pious", "holy", "just", "righteous", "perfect" and "meek". The Qumran literature often speaks of the community as "The Poor," "The Meek" and "The Downtrodden" which, in the scrolls, seem to be used interchangeably. The scrolls have hymns to "The Poor". This name the Essenes gave to themselves was a reaction to the cultural imperialism of the Greeks—Hellenization—which had led to the displacement of the original Persian Magi ("Hasidim", The Holy Ones) from the temple, and the substitution of Hellenized priests. The Hasids who remained faithful to the original Persian traditions constantly opposed the new rulers in Jerusalem (the Scoffers), and were persecuted by them. Thus they remained poor but true to their traditional conception of Judaism. "The Poor" are those who believed in the spiritual virtue of poverty, like Christ himself! That is the meaning of the phrase "poor in spirit", used both by Christ and the Essene sectaries, and practised by the apostles and the Essenes. Can it be coincidence that "The Poor Ones" was a name of the followers of James in the Jerusalem Church (Gal 2:10 and Jas 2:3-5)? What the Greeks translating the words of the evangelists did not know was that the words they used when they said—"the poor", "the holy" or "the righteous" meant the Essenes and not the poor, holy or righteous in general. Paul claims the only condition James imposed upon him in his missions to the gentiles was to remember "the poor". He is reminding him to send money not for any poor but for "The Poor", the Nazarenes, who, after the defeated uprising, had a lot of widows to support (Acts 6:1-6). Though there must be occasions in the New Testament when these words have been used in a
general sense, perhaps by a later editor, in their original use they refer to the Essenes. Plainly, they were the orthodox Jewish Christians of Palestine who continued as Jews to observe the Mosaic Law. Isolated from the bulk of Christians from the time of the Jewish War they continued to practice the apostolic life, like the Essenes and Jesus, unpolluted by gentile adaptations until, the gentile Church Fathers declared them heretical. It was the gentile Church that was "The Meek" was also one of the community's names for itself. Jesus said "Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth" (Mt 5:5) an exact expression of the community's beliefs about itself for, when God created His kingdom on earth, the elect would inherit it. In one scroll fragment (4Q521), the pious are glorified on the throne of the everlasting kingdom, and the righteous are promised resurrection. Adonai (Lord—God or the messiah?) visits "the meek", calls the righteous by name, makes the blind see, raises up the downtrodden and resurrects the dead, and his spirit hovers over "the meek" announcing to them glad tidings. This astonishing little fragment alone ought to be sufficient to prove the relationship of early Christianity with the Essenes... this passage contains an exact verbal parallel with the passages in Matthew and Luke for identifying the times of the messiah. It appears in the "Q" source common to Matthew and Luke, thought to have been a pre-gospel collection of worthy sayings. Here we have a precise verbal formula, repeated in this fragment and in the source "Q", showing some at least of its material was pre-Christian—not merely pre-gospels—because it was Essene. The early Christians, like the Essenes called "elect" or "saints", were expecting to rule over the gentiles and even judge angels (1 Cor 6:1-4).
These believers held that only "The Law"brought a person to God.
The leaders of the "Jerusalem Church" James and Peter in Antioch did not regard themselves as founders of a new religion or for that matter connected with any Gentile fellowships that appeared on the scene after Paul's teachings. They were and regarded themselves as Jews (from the house of Judah) while the Gentiles were (Israelite foreigners). The Jews were from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin and Levi. While the Gentile
believers that Paul was bringing into the Fellowship of Christ were from the tribes of Israel: Gad, Ephraim, Naphtali, Manesseh, Reuben, Asher, Simeon, Zebulun, Issachar. These were the two joining together of Jews and Gentiles in Ephesians is the binding of the two twigs spoken of in the Old Testament. It is the joining together of the twelve tribes. These are the "Gentiles" that we read about throughout Paul's writings, and who he was sent to in the commission of Acts chapter 9 There are times when the Scriptures address the total nations of the earth but most times in the singular the Scripture is speaking about the race of 12 tribes called by the southern tribes "goy" Israel. Goy (Hebrew: regular plural goyim ) is the standard Hebrew biblical term for a "nation," including the "great nation" of Israel. Use of the plural, "nations," to refer to non-Jews is found from "I will cast out the nations before thee" (Exodus 34:24) and long before Roman times it had also acquired the meaning of "gentile"
Now look at the second chapter of Ephesians verses 12-14 and see the barrier between the two tribes and the ten coming together by the preaching of Paul.
And we'll leave there for now and pick up the author of Revelation next time.
Part 23 .
As we pointed out before the leaders of the "Jerusalem church James, (Jacob the brother of Jesus) and Peter (in Antioch) did not regard themselves as founders of a new religion or connected with any Gentile fellowships that appeared on the scene after Paul's teachings. They regarded themselves as Jews, who were differentiated from there fellow Jews only by their belief in Jesus as Messiah. They held a confidence that when the resurrected Jesus returned to earth, which in their expectations would be very soon, God would perform through his agency astounding
miracles for his chosen people. It is not a well known fact in Christianity today but miracle working in the first century was common place. There was a man by the name of Apollonius of Tyana (a city south of Turkey) who was in every way a miracle worker equal to Jesus. Apollonius of Tyana was a first century AD sage who had a miraculous birth, gathered disciples, taught wisdom, performed miracles, healed the sick, cast out demons, and raised the dead. After he died he was worshiped as a God. You can read about this unusual man [Philostratus, The Life of Apollonius of Tyana, 4.10 (217 AD), --which you can find in: Conybeare, F. C. Philostratus I: The Life of Apollonius of Tyana, Books I -V (Loeb Classical Library #16) (2000), pg. 389-91.
So you can see that Jesus had certainly competition. The followers of Jesus also expected that God would defeat the Romans by supernatural means and rout them from the land of Israel. Then all Jews would except Jesus as the "real Messiah" and would be united under his royal rule in a theocracy governed by the prescription of the Torah of Moses, as interpreted by the Oral Law, administered by the Pharisees. They did not envision any split between the followers of Jesus and the main body of Jewish believers. For they all observed the Laws of the Jewish nation, prayed the same prayers, as their fellow Jews with the addition of certain prayers such as the "Lords prayer" which was added to the normal service in the way that groups among the Jews as the Hasidim have done without any sense of schism. What if the Lord's Prayer is neither a Jewish prayer for Jews nor yet a Christian prayer for Christians? What if it is—as this study suggests—a prayer from the heart of Judaism on the lips of Christianity for the conscience of the world? What if it is—as this study suggests—a radical manifesto and a hymn of hope for all humanity in language addressed to all the earth? The Lord's Prayer is, for me, both a revolutionary manifesto and a hymn of hope.
The movement at Jerusalem, known as "the Way" did not observe the service known as "The Eucharist, or the Lords Table, Communion or any kind of Mass that marked off what came to be known as Christianity as a separate religion eventually. No Hebrew could ever bring himself to see
Jesus as God or a god. They had learned their lesson well in captivity. And the Shema (the central statement of Jewish belief, the sentence "Hear, O Israel: the Lord is your God; the Lord is One") was indelibly left on their
psyche. " Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt
love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes. And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates. (Deuteronomy 6:4-9). To them this would be pagan. However, Paul with new Revelation, new understanding of the Torah, new insights, brought to the Nation, a different Jewish thought and presented Jesus as divine.
The Ebyons were a large part of the uprisings and sealed their fate with Rome and the Temple Priest in Jerusalem. They opposed the Herodians and Sadducees that controlled the temple in Jerusalem. These Ebyon/Hebrew followers first of the prophet and the "The Prophet" John, and finally Jesus were called "Nazarenes and later called Essenes by those who recorded their story as well as called Christians and talked much about the Revelation of John.
Part 24
We have been considering the author of Revelation, and you don't need to explain to me that it is settled in stone that everyone agrees that John the Apostle who was banished to Patmos, everyone except those of us who are not willing to take someone's declaration as settled . I have given you evidence that first it was not the writer who was banished (if we allow Scripture to speak for itself). But if you listen to some who have decided
that you should believe them rather than see for yourself well then . . . Yes there was a John there but Nowhere does it say that he was banished! And second while there was a John which John? John the Apostle? Was this the John who had a prophetic vision of 2000 + years into the future? Or could there have been another John, writing to those in the first century about the things there were about to take place? We shall see.
Now, if your remember we said that Paul had a dust-up (commotion, quarrel, or fight run in) with Peter and James (Jacob) about the Gentiles (remember who they are) being circumcised, baptized and keeping the Law before being accepted as a follower of Jesus.
Galatians 2:1-16
(1)
Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also.
(2)
And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain.
(3)
But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised:
(4)
And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:
(5)
To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.
(6)
But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person:) for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me:
(7)
But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
(8)
(For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)
(9)
And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the
circumcision.
(10)
Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I also was forward to do.
(11)
But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.
(12)
For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.
(13)
And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
(14)
But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
(15)
We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,
(16)
Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
After Paul's conflict with James and Peter about certain followers pressuring Gentiles to become Hebrews before becoming what we now call as Christian, they all agreed that Peter and James would minister to the "Circumcision" under the "Law"and Paul to the "Uncircumcision" Grace was the message to the Gentiles. Paul never called believers , followers of Jesus "Christians" in any of his epistles or messages in the Acts of the Apostles. While the "New Testament" followers were zealous of the Law and emphasized baptism and works ( read the Didache or the teaching of the Twelve Apostles).
If we look at Paul's letters, it is not difficult to pull out what on the surface appear to be directly opposing views, anti-and pro-Israel:
I. Anti-Israel:
•
"All who rely on works of the law are under a curse" (Galatians 3:10).
•
"No one is justified before God by the law" (Galatians 3:11).
•
"For [some manuscripts add 'in Christ Jesus'] neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation is everything!" (Galatians 6:15).
•
"No human being will be justified in his [God's] sight by works of the law, sincethrough the law comes knowledge of sin" (Romans 3:20).
•
"Israel, who pursued righteousness based on the law, did not succeed in fulfilling that law" (Romans 9:31).
•
"But their minds were hardened. Indeed, for to this day, when they read the old covenant, that same veil is still there, because only through Christ is it taken away. Yes, to this day, whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their minds" (2 Corinthians 3:14–15).
II. Pro-Israel:
•
"What is the advantage of the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision?
Much in every way" (Romans 3:1).
•
"Do we not overthrow the Law by this notion of faith? By no means. On the
contrary, we uphold the Law" (Romans 3:31).
•
"What shall we say? That the Law is sin? By no means" (Romans 7:7).
•
"Thus the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good"
(Romans 7:12).
•
"To the Israelites belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving
of the Law, the Temple, and the promises. To them belong the patriarchs
and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ" (Romans 9:4).
•
"Has God rejected his people? By no means" (Romans 11:1).
•
"All Israel will be saved" (Romans 11:26).
•
"Is the Law then opposed to the promises of God. Certainly not!"
(Galatians 3:21).
These two sets of quotations appear to contradict one another. But do
they? Was the apostle to the gentiles incapable of consistent thinking?
Some recent Paul scholars have made precisely this claim. The Finnish
exegete Heikki Räisänen, for example, has taken what I call a
"contradictionist" view of Paul's letters, insisting that "Paul's thought on the
law is full of...inconsistencies."
Other scholars have sought to resolve the dilemma by supposing that the problem was introduced by later editors. Thus the eminent Australian Bible scholar J.C. O'Neill has stated: "If the choice lies between supposing that Paul was confused and contradictory and supposing that his text has been commented on and enlarged, I have no hesitation in choosing the second." And so O'Neill proceeds to eliminate many passages, arguing that they were introduced into the text by later editors who profoundly misunderstood him..
The salvation of all Jews at or immediately prior to the eschaton, presently holds the majority. After the "fullness of the Gentiles" (11:25) has come in, the Jews will finally be saved all at once, probably through a mass conversion of all Jews to Christ, perhaps brought on by the jealousy sparked by the Gentile mission, though there is some debate as to whether "all Israel" means every individual Jew will be saved or idiomatically represents ethnic Israel as a collective. The majority of scholars hold the latter view. A minority advocate a larger, diachronic view of "all Israel". It is therefore clear that to solve this passage one must satisfactorily answer three primary interpretive questions: (1) how Paul defines "all Israel," (2) what Paul means by "the fullness of the nations," and (3) how the salvation of "all Israel" is related to (..t..) the ingathering of "the fullness of the nations." In short, the essential question can be framed as follows:
What does the ingathering of "the fullness of the Gentiles" have to do with the salvation of "all Israel"?
As Josephus informs us, the term ("Jew" or "Judean") refers to a person descended from the southern kingdom ofJudah, which is only a part of the larger historical entity called Israel. Regardless of whether it refers to "Judeans" or "Jews" living outside Judea, the term is necessarily limited to descendants of the southern kingdom, which was exiled to Babylon and then returned (or to proselytes and their descendants, who are regarded as having become a part of this people). In
contrast, "Israel" is a polyvalent (often confusing) term, with several distinct references in the Hebrew Bible/LXX [Septuagint ]: (1) the patriarch Jacob/Israel; (2) "the nation composed of his descendants, that is, all twelve tribes of 'Israel,' including Judah"; (3) the northern kingdom, the ten tribes of the "house of Israel," excluding the southern kingdom, the "house of Judah"; and (4) the returnees from Judah after the Babylonian Exile. To use a modern parallel, a Floridian would surely be called an American when being distinguished from an Australian, but not all Americans are Floridians. In the same manner, the term "Israel" may—and often does—refer to Jews, though its meaning is not limited to just the Jews. The addition of the quantifier "all" (as in Rom 11:26) helpfully narrows the possibilities. In the O.T. the expression 'all Israel' relates exclusively to the tribal structure of the descendants of Jacob/Israel," while also consistently referring to the twelve tribes in Jewish literature of the Second So, in a technical sense, "Israel" necessarily includes Jews but is not limited to the Jews, while "all Israel" more specifically refers to all twelve tribes as a whole.
The key question is whether first-century Jews (Paul in particular) continued to make this distinction. The evidence points to an answer in the affirmative. Josephus certainly upholds the distinction, using the terms only in the first eleven books of the Antiquities—books dealing with the preexilic and exilic periods—and nowhere else in the Josephan corpus., on the other hand, occurs 1,190 times in the Josephan corpus—but only twenty-seven times in the first ten books of the Antiquities. Once the northern tribes are off the scene, Josephus restricts himself to more precise terminology referring only to the southern tribes —he no longer speaks of "Israel," but only "the Jews." But when all twelve tribes are in play, Josephus clearly prefers the more comprehensive term "Israel." The Qumran community maintains similar distinctions. It is noteworthy that the sect "generally refrained from simply calling [itself] 'Israel.'" Indeed, "the members seem to have been conscious of their status as sectarians, chosen from out of Israel, and as being a forerunner of the true Israel, which God would establish to fight the decisive war,"
identifying themselves as a faithful subset within Israel (e.g., "the remnant of Israel," "captives of Israel," "house in Israel," and "repentant of Israel"). They likewise avoid calling themselves "Judah" or "Judahites
But notice as I wrote before that Paul never called believers those who became or would become Jesus followers, "Christians". Paul emphasizes the idea of Grace and Mercy which abounded in the Hebrew Scripture. It was as Paul considered the thoughts given to him on His Damascus Road experience that he began to realize the importance of the Law guiding the chosen of God toward Himself. We might say that Paul had an epiphany [(From the Greek epiphaneia, "manifestation, striking appearance" is an experience of sudden and striking realization. Epiphanies are relatively rare occurrences and generally follow a process of significant thought about a problem. Often they are triggered by a new and key piece of information, but importantly, a depth of prior knowledge is required to allow the leap of understanding].
Paul never gave up his Jewishness or the Law but expanded his understanding of the ramifications more fully than anyone had ever imagined. However it was the fundamentalists Ebyon Christians who called Paul "The Liar." Next time we'll look at a few of the summaries of the beliefs of the Ebonites.
Part 25
We have been looking like a sleuth for clues as to not only the dating of the Book of Revelation but as a wee side trip can we determine who might have actually written that book. Last time I wrote that the Ebonites called Paul "The Liar" We are going to take a look at the some of the Ebonite beliefs but first you need to know that one of the issues. which to those who want everything wrapped up in a neat package will undoubtedly set your hair on fire.
According to radical critic Hermann Detering, Simon Magus may be a
proxy for Paul of Tarsus, with Paul originally being detested by the church, and the name changed when Paul was rehabilitated by virtue of forged Epistles correcting the genuine ones.
THE EBIONITE LEGACY...THEIR WRITINGS
The testimony of the Ebionites has been preserved in two forms.
First, there are the summaries, already mentioned, of Ebionite beliefs found in the writings of the Church authors Justin Martyr (second century), Irenaeus, Hippolytus and Tertullian (end of the second century and the first half of the third), Origen (middle of the third century), and Epiphanius and Jerome (fourth century). These all confirm that the Ebionites opposed Paul as a false apostle.
The second type of testimony is more indirect, depending on the detective work of modern scholars, yet it is very convincing. Certain texts which have been handed down from the ancient world and the early middle ages are ostensibly not writings of the Ebionites, but of other religious groups; but the painstaking analysis of scholars has shown that embedded in each of these works is a stratum written by an Ebionite author, which has been taken over and adapted by a non-Ebionite author. The two examples that are most pertinent here (since they show how the Ebionites thought of Paul) are the following.
The Pseudo-Clementine writings:
These writings were preserved as orthodox patristic works because they were falsely attributed to the authorship of Pope Clement I, who was popularly supposed to have been a disciple of Peter himself. In fact, the core of these writings, as was pointed out by F. C. Baur in the nineteenth century and as most scholars now agree (after an interim of dispute and denigration of Baur's work), is Jewish Christian or Ebionite, stemming from second-century Syria. This core shows a staunch adherence to the Torah, and contains an impassioned attack on those who attributed anti-Torah
views to Peter. Paul is not mentioned by name, but he is strongly hinted at as the supreme enemy under the disguise of "Simon Magus," against whom Peter is represented as polemicizing. Peter's attack on this lightly disguised Paul is on the grounds that he is a false prophet, that he has spread lies about Peter and, most telling of all, that he knows nothing about the true teachings of Jesus, since he never met him in the flesh and bases his ideas of Jesus on delusive visions. That this "Simon Magus" is really Paul is now accepted by scholars, despite many desperate attempts to resist this conclusion made by critics of Baur who realized how profound would be the consequences of such an admission. For it shows that Paul, far from being a unanimously accepted pillar of the Church, like Peter, was a controversial figure, whose role in the founding of Christianity was a subject of great contention.
The Arabic manuscript discovered by Shlomo Pines.
Some interesting evidence of the views of the Jewish Christian community of Syria at a later date, probably the fifth century, was discovered by the Israeli scholar Shlomo Pines. While studying a tenth-century Arabic work by "Abd al-Jabbar in a manuscript in Istanbul, he was able to prove that one section of this work had actually been incorporated from a Jewish Christian source. The standpoint of this incorporated section is that of the Ebionites: belief in the continuing validity of the Torah, insistence on the human status of Jesus as a prophet, and strong opposition to Paul as the falsifier of Jesus' teachings. According to this source, Paul abandoned the observance of the Torah mainly in order to obtain the backing of Rome and achieve power and influence for himself. Paul is even held responsible for the destruction of the Temple by the Romans, since his anti-Jewish propaganda inflamed the Romans against the Jews. His Christianity, says this source, was "Romanism; instead of converting Romans into Christians, he converted Christians into Romans. In general, the picture emerging from this text is of a Jewish Christian community, in the fifth century, out of touch in many ways with its own sources and barely managing to preserve an underground existence, yet still
clinging to elements of belief deriving from centuries earlier and, at certain points, still linked to the earliest Jewish Christians of all, the Jerusalem Nazarene community of James and Peter. The Ebionites did not survive for the simple reason that they were persecuted out of existence
Part 26
Last time we challenged you to think outside the box for a moment to consider that Simon Magus might have been Paul the Apostle. Simply because the Ebionites called Paul a liar! Which if you care to look, many still do today. Before we continue on as I feel Paul was instrumental in our study, I want to clear up some misunderstanding about Paul.
If Israel's Scriptures were the textual matrix within which Paul's thought took place and with which he wrestled, it is reasonable to ask if indeed he had a coherent and consciously articulated hermeneutic. Paul was insistent that his message stood in direct continuity with Scripture (which was the reason, over and over, he defended his position as Apostle) and at the same time that his gospel was radically new, a revelation that would demand a reassessment of all that was past. One might ask how was this possible? Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus. Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. (Galatians 1:17-18) As N. T. Wright tells us "We don't know, say most of the commentators, why Paul went to Arabia or what he did there. We aren't even sure which bit of "Arabia" he visited.
In what is, for Paul, an unusually long autobiographical section (Gal 1:112:21), he describes the events leading up to and following from his dramatic experience on the road to Damascus, including two visits to Jerusalem, his confrontation with Peter at Antioch— and his trip to Arabia. Whatever precise reasons one gives for this lengthy
account, it clearly has something to do with reinforcing the basic point he enunciates in 1:11-12: he received his gospel message not from other human sources (to whom, by implication, his hearers might appeal, over his head, for a more accurate version) but rather by "a revelation of Jesus Christ" (1:12).
It would lead us to at least entertain the idea that Paul was revising his previous Jewish understanding based on "New" revelation.
Why Arabia? Some think it was a time of solitary meditation, in preparation for the Gentile mission; others, that it was Paul's first attempt at Gentile evangelism. Where was "Arabia," anyway, at that time? No really precise or attractive answers have been forthcoming to these quite natural questions. Most agree that the main point Paul is making in the passage is that he did not go to Jerusalem. But the question of Arabia is still a puzzle. I wish to propose a solution to it.
Paul indicates in 1:14 that he belonged, before his conversion, to the tradition of "zeal for the law." This zeal led him not just into zealous study and prayer but into violent action. Zeal of this sort was part of a long tradition within Judaism, looking back to particular scriptural and historical models. Of these, the best known was Phinehas, whose brief moment of glory appears in Num 25:7-13, when he intervened to kill a Jewish man consorting with a Moabite woman. Phinehas remained as a model for subsequent "zealous" activity, not least in the Maccabean period, when the same issue (compromise with pagans and paganism) was perceived to be at stake. In these developed traditions, the other figure who emerges prominently is Elijah. The reason is again obvious: Elijah, too, acted zealously, killing the prophets of Baal who were leading Israel into paganism.5 So strong, indeed, is the connection between Phinehas and Elijah in the popular consciousness of "zeal," not least in the first century, that the two figures are actually merged in several traditions, with Phinehas-like attributes being credited to Elijah and vice versa. Elijah, too, was clearly a man of "zeal." "I have been very zealous for YHWH of Hosts," he says
(LXX: And he saith, `I have been very zealous for Jehovah, God of Hosts;
for the sons of Israel have forsaken Thy covenant, Thine altars they have thrown down, and Thy prophets they have slain by the sword, and I am left, I, by myself, and they seek my life--to take it.' ) (1 Kgs 19:14). His zeal, of course, had consisted precisely in slaying the prophets of Baal, as recounted in the previous chapter. But he had been stopped in his tracks, confronted by Ahab and Jezebel with a threat to his life (19:1-2); and he had run away "to Horeb, the mount of God" (19:8), apparently to resign his prophetic commission. There, in the famous story, he was met by earthquake, wind, and fire, but YHWH was in none of them. Finally he heard "a still small voice," inquiring why he was there. His explanation, as we just saw:great zeal, and now great disappointment. "I alone am left, and they seek my life."
Back comes the answer: Go, return on your way to the wilderness of Damascus; when you arrive, you shall anoint Hazael as king over Aram. Also you shall anoint Jehu son of Nimshi as king over Israel; and you shall anoint Elisha son of Shaphat of Abel-meholah as prophet in your place. Whoever escapes from the sword of Hazael, Jehu shall kill; and whoever escapes from the sword of Jehu, Elisha shall kill. Yet I will leave seven thousand in Israel, all the knees that have not bowed to Baal, and every mouth that has not kissed him. (1 Kgs 19:15-18)
What has this to do with Galatians?
Saul of Saul of Tarsus, prior to his conversion, was a "zealous" Pharisee. As I have suggested elsewhere, this means that he belonged to the Shammaite school and was ready to take the law into his own hands and act even when the official authorities were apparently negligent. One who had "advanced beyond most of his contemporaries" in his study and knowledge of Jewish law and lore would undoubtedly have been well aware of the Phinehas/EIijah tradition; one who had come to the conclusion that "zeal" was the only proper response to the crisis facing Israel would have been ready to follow the Maccabees in imitating Phinehas/Elijah. This did not mean that Saul was a member of something called "the Zealot party," for at that time it is quite
likely that things were not so formalized. It does mean that he sympathized, and acted in tune, with those who were choosing the route of violence against Jews who were regarded as traitors. Someone in this position would naturally choose certain appropriate styles of action, based on scriptural and traditional models, in the belief that Israel's God would vindicate such action. That, it appears, is what Saul of Tarsus did. Saul saw himself, I suggest, acting out the model of Phinehas and/or Elijah.
His zeal led him into physical violence against those whom he saw as the heirs and successors of the compromised Jews of Numbers 25 and the Baal worshipers of 1 Kings 18 (see Acts 22:3-5). He "was persecuting the church with great violence and was trying to destroy it" (Gal. 1:13) However, when stopped in his tracks by the revelation on the road to Damascus he again did what Elijah did. He went off to Mount Sinai.11 The word "Arabia" is very imprecise in Paul's day, covering the enormous area to the south and east of Palestine; but one thing we know for sure is that, for Paul, "Arabia" was the location of Mount Sinai. Indeed, Gal 1:17, our present passage, and 4:25, "for Sinai is a mountain in Arabia," are the only two occurrences of this Word in the whole New Testament.
And, in case this remarkable coincidence of themes is still unconvincing, we may note that in the same passage Paul describes his call in "prophetic" terms: "the God who set me apart from my mother's womb . . ." (Gal 1:15; cf. Isa 49:1; Jer 1:5). Even though the Hebrew scriptures are silent about Elijah's birth or call, this locates Paul firmly within the prophetic tradition of which Elijah was one of the foremost members. If I am correct, Saul certainly did not go to Arabia in order to evangelize. He might have been doing what a puzzled zealous prophet might be expected to do: going back to the source to resign his commission. Alternatively, and perhaps preferably, he might be conceived of as doing what a puzzled, newly commissioned prophet might do, complaining (like Moses, Jeremiah, and others) that he is not able to undertake the work he has been assigned.14 And whatever still, small voice he may have heard, it was certainly not underwriting the land of zeal in which he had been
indulging up until then. . His zeal was now to be redirected (Gal 4:18; see also 2 Cor 11:2). He was to become the herald of the new king. Saul was sent back from Arabia to be the herald of the newly anointed Messiah, Jesus (1:16, 23). His was the kingship that would challenge all pagan powers (4:1-11), that would create the true community of the people of God.
Saul, having taken the Elijah of 1 Kings 18 as his role model in his persecuting zeal, took the Elijah of 1 Kings 19 as his role model when confronted, after his zealous triumph, with a totally new reality that made him question his whole life and mission to date. Paul saw Isa. 49:l-6 as setting out his apostolic agenda, Paul may here be indicating that he had exchanged the role of Elijah-like zeal for the role of the servant. Instead of inflicting the wrath of YHWH on rebellious Jews, he would become the light of the nations
Paul faces the question: Granted the failure of Israel to believe in its Messiah, is salvation now impossible for a Jew? Paul replies with an indignant denial. He is, himself, the living proof to the contrary. But, though he may sometimes feel totally alone, he has heard the Sinai oracle that assures him this is not the case.
The Post Christian Paul's verdict on the pre-Christian Saul is this: he had a zeal for Israel's God, but it was an ignorant zeal, seeking to establish a covenant membership for Jews and Jews only, and to see that identity marked out by the works of Torah. What Saul learned on the road to Damascus, and perhaps on Sinai too as he reflected on Elijah's post-zeal humiliation, was that the true remnant was a remnant defined by the divine call, not by works
So now you have some wee idea of why the Ebyon believers would have branded Paul as "The Liar!"
What was important to these Ebyonites believers was first becoming a Hebrew and being baptized. In the Jewish sacred writings Abraham was the first person to be designated "a Hebrew" (Gen. 14:13). Abraham crossed over the river Euphrates to come out of the land of his birth, ancient Iraq, into the land of Canaan, present day Israel (Josh. 24:2-3). Hence, Abraham lived up to his name. He was a real "Hebrew", ( the name [Hebrew] is derived from the root 'avar, meaning to pass beyond, over, or through.") one who crossed the river. When Abraham crossed the river it was not just a physical crossing. He left his culture, background, religion, and traditions to enter into a new realm, a life with God and for God. And all that followed Abraham became Eberites or Hebrews by that baptism through the water and by passing through the water identified them as Eberites.
Notably, Simon Magus is sometimes described in apocryphal legends in terms that would fit Paul, most significantly in the previously mentioned Clementine Recognitions and Homilies. It is contended that the common source of these documents may be as early as the 1st century, and must have consisted in a polemic against Paul, emanating from the Jewish side of Christianity. Paul being thus identified with Simon, it was argued that Simon's visit to Rome had no other basis than Paul's presence there, and, further, that the tradition of Peter's residence in Rome rests on the assumed necessity of his resisting the arch-enemy of Judaism there as elsewhere. Thus, the idea of Peter at Rome really originated with the Ebionites, but it was afterwords taken up by the Catholic Church, and then Paul was associated with Peter in opposition to Simon, who had originally been himself.
Part 27
Here we need to take a wee step backward to move forward in our quest. Terah, the father of Abraham was a priest in Babylon of the Nibiru worshipers. Jews, Christains and Muslims don't pay that much attention to the fact that Abraham came from Ur in ancient Sumeria and they don't consider the fact that he was probably brought up and lived like any other inhabitant of this very early, but sophisticated civilization. The fact that
Abraham's original name was Ab.Ram clearly suggests that he was a native Sumerian and was brought up as a Sumerian, because Ab.Ram had a definite meaning in the ancient Sumerian language, which is "Father's Beloved". Also Abraham's family identified themselves as Ibri, which is the origin of the word Hebrew. The word Ibri is usually translated as "wanderers" or "those who crossed over", but in the ancient Sumerian language it meant natives of IBR. IBR is also connected to the original Sumerian name for the city of Nippur, which is NI.IB.RU, which is translated to mean "The Crossing Place". Cuneiform tablets tell of Nibiru being the "cross over" Planet where the "gods' lived.
Drop the N from Nibiru and you have the origin of the word Hebrew Nibiru was pronounced Ibiru and became Ebrew or Hebrew. With this as a background let's go back even further to the flood narrative with Noah and compare that with the Babylonian account and if you can bare with me a bit more all will become clear.
Noah's ark and the flood Comparison of the Babylonian and Noachian flood stories
Comparing the stories
The Chaldean Flood Tablets from the city of Ur in what is now Southern Iraq contain a story that describes how the Bablylonian god Enlil had been bothered by the incessant noise generated by humans. He convinced the other gods to completely exterminate every person on Earth as well as land animals and birds with a great flood. One of the gods, Ea, went against the decision of the rest of the gods, and told a human, Ut-Napishtim, to build an ark to save a few humans, and some animals.
Excerpt from the Epic of Gilgamesh as translated by N. K. Sandars:
"You know the city Shurrupak, it stands on the banks of the Euphrates.
That city grew old and the gods that were in it were old. There was Anu,
lord of the firmament {earth}, their father, and warrior Enlil their counselor, Ninurta the helper, and Ennugi, watcher over canals; and with them also was Ea. In those days the world teemed, the people multiplied, the world bellowed like a wild bull, and the great god was aroused by the clamor. Enlil heard the clamor and he said to the gods in council, 'The uproar of mankind is intolerable and sleep is no longer possible by reason of the babel {everyone talking at once}.' So the gods agreed to exterminate mankind. Enlil did this, but Ea warned me in a dream. He whispered their words to my house of reeds, "Reed-house, reed-house! Wall, O wall, hearken reed-house, wall reflect; O man of Shurrupak, son of Ubara-Tutu; tear down your house and build a boat, abandon possessions and look for life, despise worldly goods and save your soul alive. Tear down your house, I say, and build a boat. These are the measurements of the barque {boat} as you shall build her: let her beam equal her length, let her deck be roofed like the vault that covers the abyss; then take up into the boat the seed of all living creatures."
The flood story from "The Epic of Galgamesh" and the Hebrew story in Genesis are very similar with almost 20 major points in common. Their texts are obviously linked in some way. Either:
Genesis was copied from an earlier Babylonian story, or
The Galgamesh myth was copied from an earlier Hebrew story in
Genesis, or
Both were copied from a common source that predates them both.
In both the Genesis and Gilgamesh stories:
The Genesis story describes how mankind had become obnoxious (sinful) to God; they were hopelessly sinful and wicked. In the Babylonian story, they were too numerous and noisy.
The gods (or God) decided to send a worldwide flood. This would have drowned all men, women, children, babies and infants, as well as eliminate all of the land animals and birds.
God (or one of the gods) knew of one righteous man, Ut-Napishtim or Noah.
One of the gods (or God) ordered the hero to build a multi-story wooden ark (called a chest or box in the original Hebrew).
The ark would be sealed with pitch.
The ark would have many internal compartments
It would have a single door
It would have at least one window.
The ark was built and loaded with the hero, a few other humans, and samples from all species of other land animals.
A great rain covered the land with water.
The mountains were submerged under water.
The ark landed on a mountain in the Middle East.
The hero sent out birds at regular intervals to find if any dry land was in the vicinity.
The first two birds returned to the ark. The third bird apparently found dry land because it did not return.
The hero and his family left the ark, ritually killed an animal, offered it as a sacrifice.
God (or the gods in the Epic of Gilgamesh) smelled the roasted meat of the sacrifice.
The hero was blessed.
The Babylonian gods seemed genuinely sorry for the genocide that they had created. The God of Noah appears to have regretted his actions as well, because he promised never to do it again.
There were a number of details in which the two stories differed:
Noah received his instructions directly from Yahweh; Ut-Napishtim received them indirectly during a dream.
Noah's ark was 3 stories high and rectangular in shape. Two estimated dimensions are 547 x 91 ft. and 450 x 75 ft. The Babylonian ark was 6 stories high and square.
Ut-Napishtim invited additional people on board: a pilot and some skilled workmen.
Noah's ark landed on Mt. Ararat; Ut-Napishtim's at on Mt. Nisir; these locations are both in the Middle East, and are located few hundred miles apart.
In the Bible, some of the water emerged from beneath the oceans. The
rains from above lasted for 40 days and nights. A 40 day interval often
symbolized a period of judgment in the Hebrew Scriptures. In the
Babylonian account, the water came only in the form of rain, and lasted only
6 days.
Noah released a raven once and a dove twice; Ut-Napishtim released three
birds: a dove, swallow and raven.
Significance of the two stories To conservative Christians,
Genesis is inerrant: it is completely truthful and contained no error in its
original autograph form. God inspired Moses to write the book and
preserved him from including any errors. Thus the Noachian flood really
happened exactly as stated in Genesis. The similarities between the
Babylonian and Hebrew texts were probably caused by two factors:
Both were accounts of the same worldwide flood.
The Genesis account is absolutely true and was written down during the
Exodus of the Jewish people from Egypt. The Babylonian account was
written later; its author may have copied elements from the Hebrew story.
Frank Lorey, an author at the Institute for Creation Research, wrote: "The
Epic of Gilgamesh, then, contains the corrupted account as preserved and
embellished by peoples who did not follow the God of the Hebrews."
To liberal/progressive Christians,
The flood story in Genesis were mainly written by three unknown authors:
"J" used Yahweh as the name of God, and wrote circa 848 BCE to 722 BCE.
"P" a priest who lived much later, sometime before 587 BCE.
"R", an unknown redactor, who joined the writings of J and P and two other
writers together. He added only one sentence of his own to the flood story.
The story is a legend with spiritual significance. However there was no
actual worldwide flood. The story is a myth, derived largely from the earlier Babylonian account. It was picked up by the ancient Israelites as an oral tradition and later written down by "J" and "P."
The Babylonian tablets which contain the full story of the flood have been dated circa 650 BCE. However, portions of the story have been found on tablets from about 2000 BCE. A study of the language used in the tablets indicates that the story originated much earlier than 2000 BCE. 3 Variations of the original story have been found translated into other ancient languages.
Many conservative Christians believe that the flood occurred circa 2349 BCE, and that the account in Genesis was written by Moses circa 1450 BCE, shortly before his death. Thus, the Babylonian text must be a corrupted version based on a Paganized adaptation of the true story in Genesis. Alternatively, it might be an independent attempt at describing the worldwide flood. Liberal theologians, noting the different names used to refer to God, and the different writing styles throughout the Pentateuch (first 5 books of the Hebrew Scriptures), believe that Genesis was assembled over a 4 century interval, circa 950 to 540 BCE by authors from a variety of Hebrew traditions.
J and P seem to have based their stories on two original stories from Mesopotamian sources, perhaps based on a massive series of floods in Ur and surrounding areas circa 2800 BCE which would be perceived by the local population as being very extensive; perhaps world wide. Alternatively, it may have been based on the catastrophic flooding of the Black Sea.
So whether you're a conservative or a progressive there is a version for you. But what is overlooked in either of these versions is "hidden in plain sight" the water! Crossing over or passing through!
Now we move forward to Abraham's father Terah was the priest of the
Nibiru worshipers. And even Moses "crossed over or through the Red Sea (Reed Sea) and those who were followers of Moses through the water were identified as a nation of Hebrews. The closer to our subject John the Baptizer calls the nation out of the wilderness, tells them to repent and "cross over" or through the Jordan River to be identified as true Hebrews, and Jesus joined the rite of initiation of baptized converts and became identified with the followers of John as a true Hebrew.
The baptism or ancient "crossing over" or through the water practice was important to the Ebyons and they could not relinquish the rite of baptism through water. They believed that one Must be identified as a Hebrew before they could become identified as a Christian and be a true "cross over follower of Jesus
Part 28
What a shock eh? That we could have a similar account in the Bible as in the Babylonian Tradition of "The Epic of Gilgamesh" But we noted that the important issue for the purposes of our study about the Book of Revelation, the date written and the author was the "Water" and the crossing over" for those of the Ebyon/Nazarenes who followed after John the Baptist. For them the issue was far more simple as we might think. Baptism! The crossing over or in Moses case crossing through the water! In the Mesopotamia festivals, the "crossing over" or baptism identified the initiates as true worshipers of Elohim of Gods. Just as baptism represented to this Ebyon/Nazarene sect becoming a "true" Hebrew.
The ancient Hebrews were important to Paul as well as to the Ebyon believers. So when we look at the epistle to the Romans for example we find that Paul was ministering to the "the Jew first" But look at what he was tols
as recorded in the book of Acts But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: (Acts 9:15) Notice the order of the desire of God and the reverse order that Paul went. It is brought out to those who have eyes to "see" for a reason to call attention to the fact that it was never in Gods plan to totally abandon the Jews.. And it the writings of Paul the epistles of 1st and 2nd Thessalonians, Galatians, 1st and 2nd Corinthians, Romans and Hebrews were for the most written to and for the Hebrew followers of Christ.
While Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians were written to the Gentiles ( Remember who I wrote were the Gentiles, if not look back in your notes). The purpose in writing to this group was to show how the cross and Resurrection brought them near to the chosen people of God.
Paul seemed to be totally uninterested in the"historical " Jesus (another reason that some today think that Paul had started another "Religion"! Jesus birth, and teachings were not the focus of Paul's efforts. It was the Parousia (the appearing of the Messiah) that was important, very important to those first century believers and Paul letters dealt almost exclusively and extensively with the subject of binging Gentiles to the soon appearing Christ.
Paul was completely and engulfed in the death, entombment, resurrection and the seating in the heavenlies and the soon appearing with His Holy Ones. Lets look briefly at Paul's writings to confirm this hypotheses In his first epistle to the Thessalonians, Paul told them to expect the speedy coming of Christ (in their lifetime within a generation-which in those years would have been forty years) He also warned of the wrath of God and with the appearance Of Christ and the events that would ensue.
In Paul's second epistle to the Thessalonians, he speaks of the time of judgment to the enemies of Christ (both Jew and Gentile) and the deliverance to His people (followers). He speaks of the "apostasy"(is the
formal disaffiliation from or abandonment or renunciation of a religion by a person.) There are at least four distinct images in Scripture of the concept of apostasy. All connote an intentional defection from the faith." These images are: Rebellion; Turning Away; Falling Away; Adultery and the "man of Sin"
In the First epistle to the Corinthians Paul spoke of their attitude in relation to the Parousia. The nearness of the approaching consummation and "Day of the Lord" was something they must consider. He said that the end of the age had already arrived (note: Not the end of the World!) There were only two (2) ages in Jewish understanding the present age and the age to come (the Messianic age) . He wrote of the events that would accompany the Parousia and that the living saints would be changed at the Parousia. He wrote of "the Last trump" and the watch word would be "Maran-atha"
And in Paul's second epistle to the Corinthians he was anticipating the "End" and 'the Day of the Lord' along with the Dead in Christ to be presented along with the living at the Parousia. As well as expectation of Future Blessedness at the Parousia.
In Galatians Paul speaks of 'The present Evil Age, or Aeon' and the two Jerusalem's-the Old and the New.
But in Romans, Paul addresses The Day of Wrath, Nearness of the Coming Salvation and the Prospect of Speedy Deliverance.
In his first epistle to Timothy, Paul tells that there would be an apostasy in the Last Days and it was already manifesting itself. In his second epistle to Timothy that the Apostasy of the 'Last Days' was imminent.
In Titus Paul tells Titus that Anticipation of the Parousia could be expected.
In Hebrews, he says the Last Days have already come and the great
consummation was near All of theses epistle written by Paul early not late in the first century. All prior to 70 A.D.
I have deliberately left the prison epistles out to this study as I wish to spend a wee bit more time on them , but never fear we will return and include them in our ongoing study.
Next time we'll take the other authors who chimed in the the expectation of the Return of Christ.
Part 29 There were others in that first century that expected the soon return of Jesus. Peter expected the coming of the Lord in his lifetime. James spoke of the last days as being upon them because of the nearness of the Parousia. In Peter's first epistle he instructs the scattered Judeans that their salvation was ready to be revealed in the last day, with the approaching revelation of Jesus Christ. He gives the relationship of the redemption of Christ to the time before the flood. He declares the nearness of Judgment and the end of all things, the nearness of Glory that was about to be revealed in the day of salvation.
In Peter's second epistle, he speaks of scoffers in these last days and the approaching consummation. He encourages those that think the Parousia was delayed.
In John's first epistle, the idea was put forward that the world (Gr. Cosmos or world of the Jews) was passing away and that it was the last hour because the Antichrist was present.
THE WORLD PASSING AWAY: THE LAST HOUR COME.
1 John ii. 17, 18.---'And the world passeth away, and the
lust thereof. . . . Little children, it is the last time' [hour]. We have frequently in the course of this investigation had occasion to remark how the New Testament writers speak of 'the end' as fast approaching. We have also seen what that expression refers to. Not to the close of human history, nor the final dissolution of the material creation; but the close of the Jewish aeon or dispensation, and the abolition and removal of the order of things instituted and ordained by divine wisdom under that economy. This great consummation is often spoken of in language which might seem to imply the total destruction of the visible creation. Notably this is the case in the Second Epistle of St. Peter; and the same might also be said of our Lord's prophetic language in Matt. xxiv. 24.
THE ANTICHRIST COME, A PROOF OF ITS BEING THE LAST HOUR.
1 John ii. 18.---'And as ye have heard that [the] antichrist cometh, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know it is the last hour' [wra]. In this passage for the first time 'the dreaded name' of antichrist rises before us. This fact of itself is sufficient to prove the comparatively late date of the epistle. That which appears in the epistles of St. Paul as a shadowy abstraction has now taken a concrete shape, and appears embodied as a person,---'the antichrist.'
It is certainly remarkable, considering the place which this name has filled in theological and ecclesiastical literature, how very small a space it occupies in the New Testament. Except in the epistles of St. John, the name antichrist never occurs in the apostolic writings. But though the name is absent, the thing is not unknown. St. John evidently speaks of 'the antichrist' as an idea familiar to his readers,---a power whose coming was anticipated, and whose presence was an indication that 'the last hour' had come. 'Ye have heard that the antichrist cometh; even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last hour.' We expect, then, to find traces of this expectation---predictions of the
coming antichrist---in other parts of the New Testament. And we are not disappointed. It is natural to look, in the first place, to our Lord's eschatological discourse on the Mount of Olives for some intimation of this coming danger and the time of its appearance. We find notices in that discourse of 'false christs and false prophets' (Matt. xxiv. 5, 11, 24), and we are ready to conclude that these must mean the same evil power designated by St. John the antichrist. The resemblance of the name favours this supposition; and the period of their appearance,---on the eve of the final catastrophe, seems to increase the probability almost to certainty.
There is, however, a formidable objection to this conclusion, viz. that the false Christs and false prophets alluded to by our Lord seem to be mere Jewish impostors, trading on the credulity of their ignorant dupes, or fanatical enthusiasts, the spawn of that hot-bed of religious and political frenzy which Jerusalem became in here last days. We find the actual men vividly portrayed in the passages of Josephus, and we cannot recognize in them the features of the antichrist as drawn by St. John. nnot recognise in them the features of the antichrist as drawn by St. John. They were the product of Judaism in its corruption. There is much more that we can point to if you insist, but to do so would take us too far away from where we want to go. So I suggest a question for you consideration.
If this Parousia (arrival or presence of the expected Messiah ) was not to come upon that first century generation. Then why were they all urgently preaching its seriousness and adjusting to it as if the last hour of the day was already at hand. Did Paul write to his readers and give a worthless hope in a deluded belief that was for a generation thousands of years in the future. If Paul was writing his letters as an instrument of the Holy Spirit and saying the "The Lord IS at hand" should we not believe that it came to pass? And how should we believe this ? As the Jews who expected a bodily presence of Elijah The Jewish people of 2000 years ago were expecting to see the Old Testament Prophet Elijah literally, physically descend from heaven. They had been promised that this was going to happen by the Old
Testament Prophet Malachi. This prophecy reads:
"For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and... all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch... And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do [this], saith the LORD of hosts.... Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD" -Malachi 4:1-5
The reason why the return of Elijah prophecy was so important is that it became one of the primary reasons why the Jewish people rejected Jesus' claim to be the Messiah. The Jewish religious leaders of two thousand years ago knew that Elijah was going to return before the Christ was going to come. So, they concluded, that Jesus or anyone else who claimed to be the Messiah before Elijah visibly returned from heaven had to be an impostor.
The story of how the 'return of Elijah' prophecy was actually fulfilled can be found in two separate places in the New Testament. It can also be found in a 1900 year old, non-Biblical, Christian book that provides us with what is probably the most graphic example illustrating the importance of this prophecy.
Justin Martyr was a very prominent Christian at a time when Christianity was still in its infancy. In "Eerdman's Handbook to the History of Christianity" Justin Martyr is described as "the most notable of the second century [Christian] apologists." (p. 108)
Justin Martyr lived approximately 100 AD. He wrote a book titled The Dialogue with Trypho the Jew. This book is a record of a discussion between Justin Martyr and Trypho-a Jewish rabbi. This "dialogue" begins with Justin telling the rabbi that he believes that Jesus was the long awaited Messiah. The following excerpt contains this rabbi's response.
It reads:
"When I (Justin) had said this, [the students who were with the rabbi] laughed; but he smiling, says, 'I approve of your other remarks, and admire the eagerness with which you study divine things; but it were better for you abide in the philosophy of Plato..." Before Justin became a Christian he was a follower of the Greek philosophers and he still wore the characteristic flowing robes of a Roman philosopher. The quote continues:
"...It were better for you abide in the philosophy of Plato rather than be deceived by false words, and follow the opinions of people of no reputation... for when you have forsaken God, and reposed confidence in man, what safety still awaits you?" Now, here's the important part:
"...But Christ-if he has indeed been born, and exists anywhere... has no power until Elijah comes to anoint him, and make him manifest to all. And you, having accepted a groundless report, invent a Christ for yourselves, and for his sake are inconsiderately perishing." -Ante Nicene Fathers, Vol. 1, p. 198.
In this one short passage, this rabbi reveals exactly what the Jewish religious leaders and the Jewish people of two thousand years ago were expecting to see before the Messiah appeared. Trypho knew that Jesus could not possibly have been the Messiah because he knew from the unmistakable text of the 'return of Elijah' prophecy that anyone who claimed to be the Christ before Elijah the Prophet had visibly returned from heaven would have to be a false Prophet.
This prophecy was one of the primary reasons why the Jewish people rejected Jesus' claims to be the Messiah. No one had seen Elijah return from heaven yet... so how could Jesus possibly have been the Messiah?
Two thousand years ago, the Jewish people were expecting to see Elijah literally, physically descend from heaven... possibly in the exact same "chariot of fire" that he had used to ascend "into heaven." Furthermore, they also expected that soon after Elijah's return, the Messiah was going to appear. And they knew that when the Messiah came, he not only was going to free them from Roman domination, but he also was going to exalt Israel over all the nations of the earth. The Jewish people had good reason to believe these things. These expectations are derived from explicit statements made in the Bible. Jesus explains how these prophecies were actually fulfilled.
According to the Old Testament account, about 850 BC Elijah the Prophet ascended "into heaven." (see: II Kings 2) Then, about four hundred years later (in about 450 BC) the Prophet Malachi promised that Elijah will return from heaven before the Christ appears.
Malachi's prophecy reads:
"try me in this, says the Lord of Hosts: shall I not open for you the floodgates of heaven, to pour down a blessing upon you without measure... Lo, I will send you Elia (Elijah), the prophet before the day of the Lord comes, the great and terrible day."-Malachi 3:10-24
The Jewish religious leaders of Jesus' day were well aware of the 'return of Elijah' prophecy. At one time the rabbis had asked Jesus' disciples to explain how Jesus could possibly have been the Messiah when it was obvious that Elijah had not returned from heaven yet.
The Apostles couldn't answer this question, so they asked Jesus:
"Why do the Jewish leaders insist Elijah must return before the Messiah
comes?"
Jesus answered by first affirming that this question was valid and that this prophecy indeed was true. He said: "They are right. Elijah must come and set everything in order..." But then, to everyone's surprise, Jesus explained: "In fact, he [Elijah] already has come, but he wasn't recognized, and was badly mistreated by many... Then the disciples realized he was speaking of John the Baptist."-Matthew 17:10-13
Clearly, Jesus taught that this was a true prophecy. Jesus agreed that Elijah indeed "must return before the Messiah comes." But then, to the surprise to everyone there, Jesus claimed that John the Baptist was the fulfillment of this prophecy. John the Baptist WAS Elijah!
And Paul too delivered the message given to him by God and not by men And John the Baptist was the first to prophesy and the message of Paul, Peter, James, John and Jude followed that revelation in the days that followed.
Next time we'll look at the Author of Revelation and what he knew...
Part 30
The author of Revelation tells us that he was a prophet and that his words were prophecy. Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book. (Revelation 22:7)And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand. (Revelation 22:10) For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. (Revelation 22:18-19) They were about the Lamb of God. And the prophet, John the Baptist spoke of "one to come" and introduced Jesus to the Ebyon
Jews as the Lamb of God. This was the prophetic ministry of John the
Baptist. The long awaited Messiah had come to save and to judge.
Of all the places Yehohanan ben Zechariah (John son of Zechariah) could have chosen to begin his ministry why this desolate part of the Jordan River Valley? Wouldn't he have reached more people in the densely populated region of the Galilee or in the holy city of Jerusalem? The Jordan River flows from springs in the Golan Heights down through the Sea of Galilee southward through the barren wilderness into the lowest point on the entire face of the earth the Dead Sea (approximately 1,200 feet below sea level). Why would anyone want to travel all that way from the lush Galilee or even the 20 odd miles from Jerusalem through a desert wilderness to ford the Jordan River near Jericho and submit to some young priest who had separated himself from the Temple priesthood, and who was wearing such unattractive apparel as a camel-hair tunic and living on a meager diet of locusts and honey as he ritually purifies the covenant people in the muddy Jordan River? Any modern real estate agent could tell John that it is a question of location, location, location, for any such an adventure. Actually that is exactly true in this case....location is the answer to the question "Why did the people come?" It was all about "location" and the way this young priest dressed in a camel hair tunic with a leather belt.
For the Jews and Israelites of the Roman provinces of Judea and the Galilee the location of the ritual baptism and the attire of the priest would have spoken volumes symbolically. This location was the exactly where these people expected God to do great things: This was the place where the 9th century BC prophet Elisha cured Naaman, the servant of the King of Syria (2 Kings 5:1-14), and This was where a young Elisha saw his master, the prophet Elijah, assumed into heaven in a fiery chariot (2 Kings 2:1-10).
But most important, for these 1st century Jews and Israelites oppressed by the Roman Empire, this site would recall a period in their history when their people were freed from oppression and were given sanctuary and
freedom in a new land' the Promised Land.
The history of the children of Israel is why "location" is everything! This is the location of the "place of the crossing" (Beth Abarra in Hebrew) where God's holy nation crossed over the Jordan River into the land God had promised them. As God's holy prophet, and as a legitimate descendant of Aaron, John had called the people out into the wilderness to be purified with a baptism of repentance and afterward to re-enter their land [Matthew 3:11; Luke 3:3; Acts 19:4]. For the people this action of symbolically reenacting the Exodus experience signaled a new beginning with hopes for freedom from their current oppressors' Romans! No wonder the people came in huge crowds to this desolate site! All they needed now was another "Joshua" or "Yehoshua" to complete the prophetic picture!
Note: at this time the leadership of the priests in the Temple in Jerusalem was not through the direct descendants of Zadok in the line of Aaron, brother of Moses, the first High Priest. King David had designated Aaron's descendants "the sons of Zadok" as the legitimate line to succeed to the Aaronic priesthood. The last legitimate high priest of this line, Onias III, was assassinated in 170BC. Later when the Maccabees, a priestly family (not from Zadok), defeated the Greek Seleucid Empire that had controlled their country as well as the appointment of the High Priest, they [the Maccabees] usurped the office. In protest, a community was established near the Dead Sea. In their sectarian writings they refer to themselves as "the sons of Zadok" and they refer to the Jerusalem priesthood as "the wicked priests." It is this community that archaeologists call Qumran, and it is in caves near this settlement that the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered. The Dead Sea Scrolls comprise a library of what in the final count will probably be 1,000 volumes of scrolls, containing every book of the Old Testament [except Esther], Bible commentaries, non-canonical texts, the sectarian writings of the community as well as several cryptic [coded] documents and a treasure map written on almost pure copper.. These books date from 250BC to 68AD when the Romans destroyed the site. The buildings of Qumran are within site of where John was baptizing the people.
There were also other prophecies that would have increased the symbolic significance of John's baptismal site like the prophecy of Isaiah 40:3-5, &10-11: A voice cries, 'Prepare in the desert a way for Yahweh. Make a straight highway for our God across the wastelands [deserts]. Let every valley be filled in, every mountain and hill be leveled, every cliff become a plateau, every escarpment a plain; then the glory of Yahweh will be revealed and all humanity will see it together, for the mouth of Yahweh has spoken.'.....(10-11) Here is Lord Yahweh coming with power, his arm maintains his authority, his reward is with him and his prize precedes him. He is like a shepherd feeding his flock, gathering lambs in his arms, holding them against his breast and leading to their rest the mother ewes.
In 63BC the Roman Empire had conquered and absorbed Judah, establishing the Roman Province of Syria-Judea. The Romans allowed the Judeans to administer the civil law and to worship their God in the Jerusalem Temple, provided they made a daily sacrifice to the Roman emperor, but the Jews and Israelites of the 1st century AD desperately longed to be liberated from Roman oppression as their ancestors had been liberated from Egyptian oppression and to be intimately reunited with Yahweh as Isaiah had prophesied. And it is this very passage from Isaiah that John the Baptist claimed was his prophetic mission: He claimed to be "the voice crying in the wilderness" (Matthew 3:3; John 1:23). It is interesting that the Qumran [Dead Sea Scrolls] community chose this text as their reason for establishing their community in the desert wilderness near the Dead Sea.
Note: every Jew, a descendant of the patriarch Judah or a citizen of the kingdom of Judah, was an Israelite, but not every Israelite was a Jew. An Israelite was a member of one of the 12 tribes of the children of Israel. The Galileans had been part of the Northern Kingdom of Israel and were for the most part, Israelites. Perhaps this is why St. John, a Galilean Israelite is so critical of the Jews of Judea in his Gospel. Notice in John
1:47 that Jesus calls Nathaniel, a Galilean from Bethesda, an Israelite and not a Jew.
There is another passage that would also strike a longing cord in 1st century AD Jews and Israelites. It was another unfulfilled prophecy and it came from the prophet Hosea. The Assyrians had destroyed the Northern Kingdom of Israel in the 8th century BC, and the 10 northern tribes had been disbursed into the gentile world. Only a faithful remnant of those 10 lost tribes of Israel had returned and settled in the Galilee. Then, 135 years later, the Babylonians destroyed the Southern Kingdom of Judah and the Temple of Solomon, and the people were taken into exile. They had been allowed to return 70 years later to occupy the land and to rebuild their Temple, but the Holy of Holies was an empty room. No sacred "Ark of the Covenant" graced that room and God's presence did not fill and indwell the Temple as He had filled both the desert Tabernacle and the Temple of Solomon. There was a sense among the people of an imperfect restoration. But the prophets Ezekiel and Hosea had promised full restoration. God's prophet, Ezekiel, promised the re-uniting of Israel with Judah and the prophet Hosea promised that God would forgive His bride Israel for her unfaithfulness and take her back. God's people of the 1st century AD were looking for the time when these great prophesies would be fulfilled!
Now consider these verses in light of John the Baptist as the author of the Apocalypse. Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book. And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things. (Revelation 22:7-8)Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God. And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand. (Revelation 22:9-10) And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. (Revelation 22:12-13) I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify these things to you in the assemblies. I am the root and offspring of David, the bright and morning
star. (Revelation 22:16) For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. (Revelation 22:18-19)
It was Jesus speaking to the prophet John (not the apostle John) but in
fact John the Baptist!
Think on theses things and we'll take up more later.
Part 31
The fifty key documents discovered near Qumran were exclusively messianic, visionary and mystical even Kabbalistic in content and imagery. And the Book of Revelation fits within the writings of the Baptist's community at Qumran that eventually became followers of Jesus.
The Damascus Document speaks . . . of a [Teacher of Righteousness] And according to Michael O. Wise was the "first messiah", a figure predating Jesus by roughly 100 years. This figure -whom Wise believes was named Judah -rose to prominence during the reign of Alexander Jannaeus, and had been a priest, and confidant to the king. However, he became dissatisfied with the religious sects in Jerusalem, and in reaction, founded a "crisis cult". While amassing a following, the Teacher (and his followers) claimed he was the fulfillment of various Biblical prophecies, with an emphasis on those found in Isaiah. The Teacher was eventually killed by the religious leadership in Jerusalem, and his followers hailed him as messianic figure who had been exalted to the presence of God's throne. They then anticipated that the Teacher would return to judge the wicked and lead the righteous into a golden age, and that it would take place within the next forty years. Wise explains that dating of manuscript copies among the Dead
Sea Scrolls shows that the Teacher's postmortem following drastically increased in size over several years, but that when the predicted time frame failed to live up to expectations, his following dissipated rapidly.
4Q521 or the 4QMessianic Apocalypse is one of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
The text begins:
[for the heav]ens and the earth will listen to his Messiah, [and all] that is in them will not turn away from the holy precepts. Be encouraged, you who are seeking the Lord in his service! Will you not, perhaps, encounter the Lord in it, all those who hope in their heart? For the Lord will observe the devout, and call the just by name, .
The subject of the text is eschatological and makes connection the healing ministry of the Messiah. 4Q521 may be related to other apocalyptic end-time texts, 4QSecond Ezekiel 4QApocryphon of Daniel, and has been studied in relation to Gospel of Luke's Messianic Magnificat and Benedictus and especially striking is the comparison with Luke 7:22 about raising the dead.
The Damascus Document found at the end of the last century in the Cairo Genizah [Note:The Cairo Geniza is a collection of some 300,000 Jewish manuscript fragments that were found in the geniza or storeroom of the Ben Ezra Synagogue in Fustat or Old Cairo, Egypt. These manuscripts outline a 1,000-year continuum (870 CE to 19th century) of Jewish Middle-Eastern and North African history and comprise the largest and most diverse collection of medieval manuscripts in the world. The Genizah texts are written in various languages especially Hebrew, Arabic and Aramaic mainly on vellum and paper, but also on papyrus and cloth. In addition to containing Jewish religious texts such as Biblical, Talmudic and later Rabbinic works (some in the original hands of the authors)]. Contained the 'Community Rule' from "Cave One" and was about a single Messiah that most Hebrew Believers found familiar to the Gospel preached by the disciples in
the first century. These same teachings were characteristic of the Baptist's followers, the Qumran community.
Paul was on the Damascus road intent on killing the Ebyon Hebrew followers when according to his own testimony he was struck down and converted. This happened on the road leading toward the Qumran community and not the Damascus that lay north of Jerusalem. Paul was engaging believing ones thinking he was doing services to G_d and the Roman influenced Sadducees. Paul had heard about their righteous teacher and Prophet, John who had received the revelation from G_d of "He that cometh" and had announced publicly that "the time was at hand"
We'll take up the Authorship again next ...
Part 32
The Author of the Book of Revelation
We have noted that the book of Revelation was a prophecy ( 22:7, 10, 18,
19) And the author of Revelation testified that he was a Prophet and his
words were prophecy. He wrote about the Lamb of God. The prophet John
the Baptist spoke of "one to come " and introduced the bridegroom (Jesus
Christ ) to the Bride (Israel) and to the Ebyon Jews as the One who was
the coming Lamb of God. This was the prophetic ministry of John the
Baptist. The one who the Apostle Paul wrote about I knew a man in Christ
above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether
out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the
third heaven. And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) How that he was caught up into paradise,
and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. (2
Corinthians 12:2-4) The long awaited Messiah had come to judge and save.
Next consider that the author of the book of Revelation was well
acquainted with the Priesthood. John the Baptist was from a priestly family.
John's parents were Zechariah and Elizabeth, an elderly couple, both of priestly descent and hitherto childless. Zechariah belonged to the priestly 'course' or 'division' of Abijah—one of 24 courses which served in the Temple, each for one week at a time, twice a year. One day when Zechariah was on duty and the lot had fallen to him to make the incense-offering in the Holy Place, within the Temple and close to the Holy of Holies, the angel Gabriel appeared to him.
Gabriel announced that Elizabeth would bear a son, whose name would be John (Johanan, 'Yahweh has shown favour'). John would drink no wine or beer, but be filled with holy Spirit. He was to play the role of Elijah in the prophesy of Malachi, the words of which are echoed on the lips of Gabriel: "He will turn many of the people of Israel to the Lord their God. With the spirit and power of Elijah he will go before him, to turn the hearts of parents to their children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord." (Luke 1:16-17, cf .Mal.3:1, 4:56). When Zechariah asks for a sign that all this is true, he is given a punitive sign: he is struck dumb until the child is born.
John the Baptist knew well the activities and office of a priest. He would have been well acquainted with the furniture in the Temple and could write about the alter, candlestick and the other objects in the Holy Place. The author and the scribes of the book of the Apocalypse knew about all of the Temple furniture. This was the John the Baptist group that took his revelations and published the corpus later in a scroll for future generation to read.
Note: this is the only John (out of the five recorded) that fits the identity and certainty of being "the Prophet"! The only one that had knowledge of both the priesthood and the Temple. On the other had those who hold the Apostle John was the author neglect to take into consideration that the disciples that were the sons of Zebedee (James and John) were from Galilee and rich fishermen but were uneducated. So we may hypothesize
that the author of the Apocalypse and the gospel of John, could not have been the disciple, brother of James, son of Zebedee
Who wrote John's Gospel? James Charlesworth says, "The apostle Thomas." Ben Witherington believes it was Lazarus. And Esther de Boer contends the author of John's Gospel was Mary Magdalene! Many others believe the author was in fact a committee of unknown authors, editors, and redactors —the Johannine community. The traditional view of the Church has been that this is the "Gospel according to John," John the apostle, that is, as in John the son of Zebedee. How can reputable scholars dealing with the same evidence come to such drastically different conclusions? And where does the evidence really point?
In several publications, I have surveyed the external and internal evidence with regard to Johannine authorship. I have documented that the Church, from the second century until around 1790, has universally held that the apostle John wrote the Gospel that bears his name. When the apostolic authorship of John's Gospel was questioned, and the tide turned against Johannine authorship, this occurred not because the evidence supported a different outcome, but because in the wake of the Enlightenment scholars reacted against traditional ecclesiastical dogma, and Johannine authorship became one of the many casualties of critical scholarship.
One important internal datum from the Gospel is that "the disciple Jesus loved" (i.e. the author of the Gospel; compare John 21:24 with 21:20–23) is consistently paired with the apostle Peter (see John 13:23–24; 18:15–16; 20:2–9; 21:1–8, 15–23). This clearly points to the apostle John, as it is this disciple who is consistently paired with Peter elsewhere in the New Testament (cf. Luke 5:8–10; 22:8; Acts 1:13; 3–4; 8:14–25; Gal. 2:9). Also, note that John the Baptist, who in the other Gospels is called "John the Baptist" or "the Baptist" or "Baptizer," is called simply "John" in this Gospel —which is possible because the apostle John remains unnamed.
Now Witherington (BAR 32/2 [2006]: 24) believes the author of John's Gospel cannot be John the son of Zebedee because the sons of Zebedee are mentioned in John 21:2 (and Bauckham says the same). I would respond that, in fact, this reference considerably narrows the pool of candidates for "beloved disciple," who is mentioned later in the same narrative (John 21:7) and hence must be one of the 7 disciples referred to in John 21:2 but was obviously not Simon Peter, Thomas, or Nathaniel, so that he must have been either one of the sons of Zebedee (but not James who was martyred early) or one of the two other disciples not mentioned by name.
As I have suggested in a past study, that in could have been "disciple whom Jesus loved" could have been understood as an expression of authorial modesty, similar to the word "I suppose" in the last verse of the Gospel (John 21:25). This, as well as the author's practice of talking about himself in the third person singular or first person plural, is in keeping with first-century historiographical practice. There is therefore reason to overturn the long-standing belief, held by the Church through most of its history, that the author of John's Gospel was the apostle John, the son of Zebedee. But I will disagree! And here is why. The two authors of the Gospel of John were first an unnamed believer or follower of John and "the disciple whom Jesus loved" who was in fact "Lazarus" the beloved disciple.
After much research on the first century life in Judea, and several discussions with leading scholars which brought to light facts concerning John the Baptist as the actual author of the book of Revelation.
It is more than conceivable that The Prophet John the Baptizer was part of the Qumran community from an early age because the Qumran people had priestly connections, plus an interest in priestly matters and a priestly Messiah (1QS 5.2)
The first of at least five I will give you here and the other in a ensuing followup so you can check me out.
1) The Baptist had priestly connections because his father was a priest and his parents may well have passed away when he was quite young
And they had no child, because that Elisabeth was barren, and they both were now well stricken in years.(Luke 1:7), sterility and old age both met in the person of Elisabeth, to render the birth of a son (humanly speaking) impossible.
It is apparent in Jewish history that the Qumran community frequently adopted orphans. (See Josephus J.W. 2.120) Essene Monastic Rules 120 Although (the Essenes) are Jews by birth, they love one another even more than the others. They avoid pleasures as a vice and hold that virtue is to overcome one's passions and not be subject to them. Marriage is disdained by them. But they adopt the children of others while still young, leading them like kin through their studies and impressing them with their customs. Check it out and next time I give other reasons why I feel it was John the Baptizer who actually wrote The Book of Revelation.
For further study see the following writings by Dr. Köstenberger: "Introduction to John's Gospel" and "Early Doubts of the Apostolic Authorship of the Fourth Gospel in the History of Modern Biblical Criticism," Chapters 1 and 2 in Studies in John and Gender; Chapter 1 in Encountering John; John (BECNT), pp. 6–8; and " 'I Suppose' (oimai): The Conclusion of John's Gospel in Its Literary and Historical Context," in The New Testament in Its First Century Setting (ed. P. J. Williams et al.; Eerdmans, 2004), 72–88.
Part 33
Well now, since I have given away who I think wrote the book of Revelation lets see if I can make a convincing case for you scholars and amateur sleuths as to my reasons for believing John the Baptist might have been the author (or at least told the prophecy to his followers , who subsequently wrote down John's words.
First, we said that the author of the book of Revelation was well acquainted with the Priesthood.
Secondly, the location of the Baptist's ministry suggests a connection with the Qumran community.
Third, The Gospel tradition introduces John the Baptist as using Isaiah
40:3 The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God. (Isaiah 40:3) As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. (Mark 1:2) as a text that was very important at Qumran (1QS 8.14). Note: The prophet, therefore, represents himself as hearing the voice of a herald, or a forerunner in the pathless waste, giving direction that a way should be made for the return of the people. The whole scene is represented as a march, or return of Yahweh at the head of his people to the land of Judea. The idea is taken from the practice of Eastern monarchs, who whenever they entered on a journey or an expedition, especially through a barren and unfrequented or inhospitable country, sent harbingers or heralds before them to prepare the way. The Latins call stratores. Ipse (Johannes Baptista) se stratorem vocat Messiae, cujus esset alta et elata voce homines in desertis locis habitantes ad itinera et vias Regi mox venturo sternendas et reficiendas hortari. -Mosheim, Instituta, Majora, p. 96. "He (John the Baptist) calls himself the pioneer of the Messiah, whose business it was with a loud voice to call upon the people dwelling in the deserts to level and prepare the roads by which the King was about to march."
Fourth, John the Baptists disciplined diet and apparent penitent behavior is analogous with the Qumran culture. We also note that the Damascus Rule 12.13-14 in fact specifies how to eat honey and locusts.
Fifth, John's public water rite has similarities to Qumran ablution rites. Ablution is common to most ancient religions. Shintoists, Buddhists, and
Hindus all recognize ablution as part of their ritual practice and there is ample evidence concerning its role in ancient Egypt and Greece (Herodotus, 2:37; Hesiod, Opera et Dies, 722). Most ancient peoples held doctrines about ritual impurity and ablution was the most common method of purification. In varying forms ablution is important to Christianity and Islam as well; this is hardly surprising since they are both post-Judaic religions. In Jewish history there have been several sects that have laid great stress on the importance of ablution. The Essenes (Jos., Wars, 2:129, 149, 150) and the Qumran community (Zadokite Document, 10:10 ff.; 11:18 ff. and other DSS texts) both insisted on frequent ablutions as did the Hemerobaptists mentioned by the Church Fathers. The tovelei shaharit ("morning bathers") mentioned in Tosefta Yadayim 2:20 perhaps may be identified with the latter but more likely were an extreme group within the general Pharisaic tradition (Ber. 22a; Rashi, ad loc.).
Sixth, John's eschatological orientation and beliefs that judgments of God would soon fall upon Israel itself with the exception of those who would repent, coincide perfectly with the message of the Qumran community
One popular narrative among the Nazzarenes was of Elisha's miraculous sign of the tale of an ax-head that was lost in a river. Elisha caused the metal. Ax head to rise to the surface (2 Kings 6:6). Perhaps a minor miracle but one that pointed to God's power. The Qumran community held Elisha in high esteem among the Prophets of their past. And coupled with John's belief that the religious leadership of Israel was hopelessly corrupt struck a cord with the attitudes at Qumran. So much so that when the Baptist used the narrative of the ax head to prophecy that God's judgements was already laid at the root of the tree, for the end was near. And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: every tree therefore which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.(Luke 3:9). John the Baptist was the last of the prophets and the author of the Book of Revelation which takes us back to the date of Revelation would have been a early date.
John the Baptist had no thought of beginning a new off shoot of Judaism, nor did Jesus. The disciples were not cognizant that they were starting something radically new. In fact we have a startling lack of any evidence that a new religion was being brought into play. Pentecost was not the beginning of Christianity. It was merely (if I can use that phrase) an indication that the gift of prophecy was being renewed. This is what was expected to happen in what we would term. today the Messianic age "The Age to come" Gibbon based on information provided by Eusebius indicates the first ten bishops of the Jerusalem fellowship were circumcised Jews. They kept the dietary laws, the Sabbaths, festivals, including the Day of Atonement, the Jewish purity laws (when they entered the temple) and used the same Jewish liturgy for their daily prayers.
. To be continued . . .
Part 34
It should be clear that from John the Baptist to Peter and James that under no circumstance was a new religion was ever considered. They regarded themselves as being Jews in every respect and they belived that the Messiah had come and that did not in any way lessen their respect for Judaism or for that matter lessen their fellowship with other Jews. Was John the Baptist in any way involved with the Essenes? Was he close to them, or even an Essene himself? Was his baptism an adoption and continuation of Essene rites? These are questions that scholarship has concerned itself with for centuries, but reliable answers to them have become possible only with the Qumran discoveries. Other possible connections between John the Baptist and the Essenes are suggested by the content of the Qumran texts. Thus, we now have the appeal by both John and the Qumran writings to Isaiah 40:3, with its call for the preparation of a highway in the desert (1QS 8:12-16; Mark 1:2-3; Matt. 3:3; Luke 1:76; 3:4-6; John 1:23); the expectation by both parties of the Last Judgment as imminent and now at hand; both sides' call to " conversion " ; or the distance kept by both from the sacrificial worship of the Temple.
The very number of these parallels or possible connections often counts as clear evidence that there was a historical connection between John the Baptist and Qumran, however this connection may have presented itself concretely.
The only thing missing now is the baptizing that was such a salient characteristic of his exercise of his mission. Baptism presents itself neither in Malachinor in any other biblical source. True, one could like Paul appeal to the cloud and the crossing through the sea at die moment of Israel's flight f r o m Egypt (1 Cor. 10:1-2). But even then it would be a baptism by God himself, and not by a human figure. Of just as little help is the frequent reference to the healing of the Syrian military commander Naaman by way of his immersion in the Jordan (2 Kings 5:1-19); it was not the prophet Elijah who had sent him there, however, but his successor Elisha, who actually stayed at home and did not function as the baptizer of Naaman; and, finally, Naaman's sevenfold immersion in no way prefigured John's rite of baptism. Indeed, until John's appearance, neither in Judaism nor in die world around had anyone baptized other persons. True, there was a plethora of ritual purification, including the immersion of the entire body to that effect. But each person performed these rites of purification completely independently, without the cooperation of a baptizer. John was the very first to immerse others.
With all of that I must contend that the book of Apocalypse is not a Christian book. It is the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecy concerning the "coming One" The appearing was in A.D.70. Therefore, we should not expect any Old Testament prophecy to become part of our "Age of Grace".
Edmond Bordeaux Szekely (1905–1979) was a Hungarian philologist/linguist, philosopher, psychologist and natural living experimenter. Szekely received a Ph.D. from the University of Paris, and other degrees from the Vienna and Leipzig.[ He held professorships in philosophy and in experimental
psychology at the Bolyai University in Kolozsvár (now Cluj, and now in Romania). His books were published in English, Romanian, Esperanto, German, French, Hungarian, and Spanish, per the introductory bibliography in his 1938 book 'Cosmotherapy, the Medicine of the Future'. Szekely claimed to have translated a text he discovered at the Vatican in 1923, called The Essene Gospel of Peace which he published in four parts over several decades. With the 1974 edition, he also included what he said was the complete original Hebrew text from which he translated Book 1. Szekely claimed that, while studying at the Vatican in 1923, he had found and translated several obscure Hebrew and Aramaic texts. Szekely claimed to have found an Aramaic translation of The Essene Gospel of Peace and The Essene Book of Revelation at the Vatican library. In the scriptorium of the Benedictine monastery of Monte Cassino he claimed to have found the original Hebrew text of The Essene Gospel of Peace. His findings, as did the writings of Romain Rolland, often challenged the assumptions of conventional religious adherents and politicized, established religious institutions about the life and teachings of Jesus, and he was therefore often criticized by them
The Vatican also denied that Szekely had ever been admitted to the Vatican Archives in 1923. The third claimed manuscript source was the library at Monte Cassino, which was destroyed during World War II.
Which strikes me as unusual that Szekely's work would have been denied categorically by so many. In any case I will present this document in its complete form so that you may read and decide for your self. Could this have been the "original" Book that we call Revelation? And before you bother to ask I have contacted my Catholic sources in the Vatican for more information. At this point they have refused to acknowledge my requests
Part 35
The Essene Book of Revelations
Translated by E B Szekely
Note: The Ebyon/Nazarenes of Qumran believed that the Angel is the
Messenger and "every eye" is the "brotherhood" of Israel.
Behold, the Angel of the Air shall bring him,
And every eye shall see him,
And the brotherhood,
All the vast brotherhood of the Earth
Shall raise their voice as one and sing,
Because of him.
Amen.
Note: The second introduction to the Apocalypse.
"I am the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End;
What is, what was, and what is to come."
And the voice spoke, and I turned to see
The voice that spoke to me,
And being turned, I saw seven golden candles;
And in the midst of their blazing light
I saw someone like a son of man,
Clothed in white, white as the snow.
And his voice filled the air with the sound of rushing water;
And in his hands were seven stars,
And when he spoke, his face was streaming light,
Blazing and golden like a thousand suns.
And he said, "Fear not, I am the first and the last;
I am the beginning and the end.
Write the things that you have seen,
And the things that are, and the things that will come after;
The mystery of the seven stars which fill my hands,
And the seven golden candles, blazing with eternal light.
The seven stars are the Angels of the Heavenly Father,
And the seven stars are the Angels of the Earthly Mother.
And the spirit of man is the flame
That streams between the starlight and the glowing candle;
A bridge of holy light between Heaven and Earth."
These things said he who held the seven stars in his hands,
Who walked within the flames of the seven golden candles.
Note: the cofession
He that has an ear, let him hear what the spirit said:
"To him that overcomes I will allow to eat from the tree of life,
That stands in the midst of the shining paradise of God."
In Heaven
And then I looked, and behold,
A door was opened in heaven:
And a voice which sounded from all sides, like a trumpet,
Spoke to me: "Come up here, (Could this not be the baptizer John?)
And I will show you the things which must be hereafter."
And immediately I was there, in spirit,
At the threshold of the open door.
And I entered through the open door
Into a sea of blazing light.
And in the midst of the blinding ocean of radiance was a throne:
And on the throne sat one whose face was hidden.
And there was a rainbow around about the throne,
Which looked like emerald.
And round about the throne were thirteen seats:
And upon the seats I saw thirteen elders sitting,
Clothed in white raiment;
And there faces were hidden by swirling clouds of light.
And seven lamps of fire burned before the throne,
The fire of the Earthly Mother.
And seven stars of heaven shone before the throne,
The fire of the Heavenly Father.
And before the throne
There was a sea of glass like crystal:
And reflected within it
Were all the mountains and valleys of the Earth,
And all the creatures abiding therein.
And the thirteen elders bowed down before the splendour of him
Who sat upon the throne, whose face was hidden,
And rivers of light streamed from their hands, one to the other,
And they cried, "Holy, Holy, Holy,
Lord God Almighty,
Which was, and is, and is to come.
Thou art worthy, O Lord,
To receive glory and honour and power:
For thou hast created all things."
And then I saw in the right hand
Of him that sat on the throne,
A book written within and on the back,
Sealed with seven seals.
And I wept, because the book could not be opened,
Nor was I able to read what there was written.
And one of the elders said to me, 'Weep not.
Reach out your hand and take the book.'
And I reached out my hand and touched the book.
And behold, the cover lifted,
And my hands touched the golden pages,
And my eyes beheld the mystery of the seven seals.
And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels
Round about the throne,
And the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand,
And thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice,
"All glory, and wisdom, and strength,
and power forever and ever,
To him who shall reveal the Mystery of Mysteries."
And I saw the swirling clouds of golden light
Stretching like a fiery bridge between my hands,
And the hands of the thirteen elders,
And the feet of him who sat on the throne,
Whose face was hidden.
On Earth
Note: There no seven Christian churches in this Nazarene/Jewish
prophecy. First seal
And I opened the first seal.
And I saw, and beheld the Angel of the Air,
And between her lips flowed the breath of life,
And she knelt over the earth
And gave to man the winds of wisdom,
And man breathed in.
And when he breathed out, the sky darkened,
And the sweet air became fetid,
And clouds of evil smoke hung low over all the earth.
And I turned my face away in shame.
Second seal
And I opened the second seal.
And I saw, and beheld the Angel of the Water.
And between her lips flowed the water of life,
And she knelt over the Earth
And gave to man an ocean of love.
And man entered the clear and shining waters.
And when he touched the water, the clear streams darkened,
And the crystal waters became thick with slime,
And the fish lay gasping in the foul blackness,
And all the creatures died of thirst. And I turned my face away in shame.
Third seal
And I opened the third seal.
And I saw and beheld the Angel of the Sun.
And between her lips flowed the light of life,
And she knelt over the earth
And gave to man the Fires of Power.
And the strength of the Sun entered the heart of man,
And he took the power, and made with it a false sun,
And he spread the fires of destruction,
Burning the forests,
Laying waste the green valleys,
Leaving only charred bones of his brothers.
And I turned away in shame.
Fourth seal
And I opened the fourth seal.
And I saw, and beheld the Angel of Joy.
And between her lips flowed the music of life,
And she knelt over the Earth
And gave to man the song of peace.
And peace and joy like music
Flowed through the soul of man.
But he heard only the harsh discord of sadness and discontent,
And he lifted up his sword
And cut off the heads of the singers.
And I turned my face away in shame.
Fifth seal
And I opened the fifth seal.
And I saw, and beheld the Angel of Life.
And between her lips
Flowed the holy alliance between God and Man,
And she knelt over the Earth
And gave to man the gift of Creation.
And man created a sickle of iron in the shape of a serpent,
And the harvest he reaped was of hunger and death.
And I turned my face away in shame.
Sixth seal
And I opened the sixth seal.
And I saw, and beheld the Angel of the Earth.
And between her lips flowed the river of eternal life,
And she knelt over the Earth
And gave to man the secret of eternity,
And told him to open his eyes
And behold the mysterious Tree of Life in the Endless Sea.
But man lifted up his hand and put out his own eyes,
And said there is no eternity.
And I turned my face away in shame.
Seventh seal
And I opened the seventh seal.
And I saw, and beheld the Angel of the Earthly Mother.
And she brought with her a message of blazing light
From the throne of the Heavenly Father.
And this message was for the ears of Man alone,
He who walks between the Earth and Heaven,
And into the ear of man was whispered the message.
And he did not hear.
But I did not turn away my face in shame.
Lo, I reached out my hand to the wings of the angel,
In Heaven
And turned my voice to heaven saying,
"Tell me the message. For I would eat of the fruit
Of the Tree of Life that grows in the Sea of Eternity."
And the angel looked upon me with great sadness,
And there was silence in Heaven.
And then I heard a voice,
Which was like the voice that sounded like a trumpet,
Saying, "O Man, would you look upon the evil you have done
When you turned your face away from the throne of God?
When you did not make use of the gifts
Of the seven Angels of the Earthly Mother,
And the seven angels of the Heavenly Father?"
And a terrible pain seized me
As I felt within me the souls of all those
Who had blinded themselves,
So as to see only their own desires of the flesh.
Seven Trumpets and Incense
And I saw the seven angels who stood before God;
And to them were given seven trumpets
And another angel came and stood at the alter,
Having a golden censer;
And there was given to him much incense,
That he should offer it with the prayers of all the angels
Upon the golden alter that was before the throne.
And the smoke of the incense ascended up before God
Out of the angels hand.
Coals of Fire
And the angel took the censer,
And filled it with fire of the alter,
And cast it onto the Earth,
And there were voices and thunderings,
And lightnings, and earthquakes.
And the seven angels that had the seven trumpets
Prepared themselves to sound.
On Earth First Trumpet
The first angel sounded,
And there followed hail and fire mixed with blood,
And they were cast upon the Earth.
And the green forests and trees were burnt up,
And all the green grass shrivelled to cinders.
Second Trumpet
The second angel sounded,
And a great mountain burning with fire
Was cast into the sea
And blood rose from the earth as a vapour.
Note: the third Trumpet is missing Fourth Trumpet
And the fourth angel sounded,
And there was a great earthquake;
And the sun became as black as sackcloth of hair,
And the moon became as blood.
Fifth Trumpet
And the fifth angel sounded And the stars of heaven fell onto the earth Like figs from fig tree Shaken by a mighty wind.
Sixth Trumpet
And the sixth angel sounded
And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together.
And over the whole earth there was not one tree,
Nor one flower, nor one blade of grass.
And I stood on the earth,
And my feet sank into the soil,
soft and thick with blood,
Stretching as far as the eye could see. And all over the earth was silence.
Seventh Trumpet
And the seventh angel sounded.
And I saw a mighty being come down from Heaven,
Clothed with a cloud;
And a rainbow on his head,
And his face was as is it were the Sun,
And his feet were pillars of fire.
And he had in his hand a book open:
And he set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot on the earth,
And he cried with aloud voice, which was wondrous to hear:
'O Man, would you have this vision come to pass?'
And I answered, 'You know I would do anything
So that these terrible things might not come to pass.'
The Angel
And he spoke: "Man has created these powers of destruction.
He has made them from his own mind.
He has turned his face away
From the angels of the Heavenly Father and the Earthly Mother,
And he has fashioned his own destruction."
Reply
And I spoke: "Then is there no hope, bright angel?"
And a blazing light streamed like a river from his hands
As he answered, "There is always hope,
O thou for whom Heaven and Earth were created."
The Angel
And then the angel,
He who stood upon the sea and upon the earth,
Lifted up his hand to heaven,
And swore by him who lives for ever and ever,
Who created heaven and the things that therein are,
And the Earth, and the things that therein are,
And the sea, and the things that are therein,
That there should be time no longer:
But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel,
When he shall begin to sound,
The mystery of God should be revealed to those
Who have eaten from the Tree of Life
Which stands forever in the Eternal Sea.
Book
And the voice spoke again saying:
"Go take the book that is in the hand of the angel,
who stands upon the sea and upon the earth."
Reply
And I went to the angel, and said to him,
"Give me the book,
For I would eat from the Tree of Life
Which stands in the middle of the Eternal Sea."
And the angel gave to me the book,
And I opened the book, and I read therein
What had always been, what was now, and what would come to pass.
I saw the holocaust that would engulf the Earth,
And the great destruction
That would drown all her people in oceans of blood.
And I saw too the eternity of man
And the endless forgiveness of the Almighty.
The souls of men were as blank pages in the book,
Always ready for a new song to be there inscribed.
Hymn
And I lifted up my face
To the seven Angels of the Earthly Mother
And the seven Angels of the Heavenly Father,
And I felt my feet touching the holy brow of the Earthly Mother,
And my fingers touching the holy feet of the Heavenly Father,
And I uttered a hymn of thanksgiving:
"I thank thee, heavenly father,
Because thou hast put me at a source of running streams,
At a living spring in a land of drought,
Watering an eternal garden of wonders,
The Tree of Life, Mystery of mysteries,
Growing everlasting branches for eternal planting,
To sink their roots into the stream of life from an eternal source.
And thou, Heavenly Father,
Protect their fruits
With the angels of day and night,
And with flames of Eternal Light lighting every way.
The Angel
But again the voice spoke,
And again my eyes were drawn away
From the splendours of the realm of light,
"Heed thou, O man!
You may walk on the right path
And walk in the presence of the angels,
You may sing of the Earthly Mother by day
And of the Heavenly Father by night,
And through your being course the golden stream of the Law,
But would you leave your brothers
To plunge through the gaping chasm of blood,
As the pain-wracked Earth shudders and groans
Under her chains of stone?
Can you drink from the cup of eternal life While your brothers die of thirst?"
Reply
And my heart was heavy with compassion.
And I looked, and lo,
In Heaven
There appeared a great wonder in heaven:
A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet,
And upon her head a crown of seven stars.
And I knew she was the source of running streams
And the mother of the forests.
On Earth
And I stood upon the sand of the sea,
And saw a beast rise up out of the sea,
And from his nostrils wafted foul and loathsome air,
And where he rose from the sea, the clear waters turned to slime,
And his body was covered with black and steaming stone.
And the woman clothed with the sun
Reached out her arms to the beast,
And the beast drew near and embraced her.
And lo, her skin of pearl withered beneath his foul breath,
And her back was broken by his arms of crushing rock,
And with tears of blood she sank into the pool of slime.
And from the mouth of this beast there poured armies of men,
Brandishing swords and fighting, one with the other.
And they fought with a terrible anger,
And they cut off their own limbs and clawed out their own eyes,
Until they fell into the pit of slime,
Screaming in agony and pain.
And I stepped to the edge of the pool and reached down my hand,
And I could see the swirling maelstrom of blood,
And the men therein, trapped like flies in a web.
And I spoke in a loud voice, saying,
"Brothers, drop your swords and take hold of my hand.
Leave off this defiling and desecration
Of she who has given thee birth,
And he who has given thee thy inheritance.
For you the days of buying and selling are over
And over, too, the days of hunting and killing.
For he that leadeth into captivity will go into captivity,
And he who kills with the sword must be killed by the sword.
And the merchants of the earth shall weep and mourn
Because no man buys their merchandise any more.
The merchants of gold, and silver, and precious stones,
And of pearls, and fine linen, and purple dyes, and silk, and scarlet,
And marble, and beasts, and sheep, and horses,
And chariots, and slaves, and souls of men,
All these things you cannot buy and sell,
For all is buried in a sea of blood
Because you have turned your back on your father and mother,
And worshipped the beast who would build a paradise of stone.
Drop thy swords, my brothers, and take hold of my hand!"
And as our fingers clasped,
I saw in the distance a great city,
White and shining on the far horizon, glowing alabaster,
And there were voices and thunders, and lightnings,
And there was a great earthquake,
Such as was not since men were on the Earth,
So mighty an earthquake, and so great.
And the great city was divided into three parts,
And the cities of the nations fell.
And the great city came in remembrance before God
To give unto her the cup of the wine
Of the fierceness of his wrath,
And every island fled away,
And the mountains were not found,
And there fell upon men a great hail out of heaven,
Every stone about the weight of a talent.
And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone,
And threw it into the sea, saying,
"Thus, with violence shall the great city be thrown down,
And shall be found no more at all.'
And the voice of harpists, and musicians, and of pipers,
And of singers, and trumpeters,
Shall be heard no more in thee;
And no craftsmen, of whatever craft he be,
Shall be found anymore in thee;
And the sound of the millstone shall be heard no more in thee.
And the light of the candle will shine no more in thee
And the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride
Shall be heard no more in thee
For your merchants were great men of the Earth;
By there sorceries all nations were deceived.
And in her was found the blood of prophets and saints,
And all those who were slain upon Earth.
And my brothers laid hold of my hand,
And they struggled out of the pool of slime
And stood bewildered on the sea of sand,
And the skies opened and washed their naked bodies with rain.
In Heaven
And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters,
And as the voice of great thunder:
And I heard the sound of harpists playing their harps,
And they sang a new song before the throne.
And I saw another angel fly in the midst of Heaven,
Having the songs of day and night
And the everlasting gospel to preach to them that dwell on the Earth,
Unto them that have climbed from the pit of slime,
And stand naked and washed by rain before the throne.
And the angel cried out, "Fear God, and give glory to him;
For the hour of his judgment has come:
And worship him that made Heaven and Earth,
And the sea, and the fountains of waters."
White Horse
And I saw Heaven open, and beheld a white horse;
And he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True,
And in righteousness he does judge.
His eyes were like a flame of fire,
And on his head were many crowns,
And he was cloaked in blazing light
And his feet were bare.
And his name is called the Word of God.
And the holy brotherhood followed him upon white horses,
Clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
And they entered the eternal Infinite Garden,
In whose midst stood the Tree of Life.
And the rain washed naked throngs came before them,
Trembling to receive their judgment.
For their sins were many, and they had defiled the Earth,
Yea, they had destroyed the creatures of the land and sea,
Poisoned the ground, fouled the air,
And buried alive the mother who had given them birth.
But, I saw not what befell them, for my vision changed,
New Heaven and Earth
And I saw a new Heaven and a new Earth;
For the first Heaven and the first Earth had passed away;
And there was no more sea.
And I saw the holy city of the brotherhood
Coming down from God out of Heaven,
Prepared like a bride adorned for her husband.
And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying:
"Lo, the mountain of the Lord's house
Is established in the top of the mountains
And is exalted above the hills;
And all people shall flow to it.
Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord,
To the house of God;
And he will teach us of his ways,
And we will walk in his paths:
For out of the Holy Brotherhood shall go forth the Law.
Behold, the Tabernacle of God is with men,
And he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people,
And God himself will be with them, and be their God.'
And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes;
And there shall be no more death,
Neither sorrow, nor crying,
Neither shall there be any more pain:
For the former things have all passed away.
Those who made war shall beat their swords into ploughshares,
And their spears into pruning hooks:
Nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
Neither shall they learn war anymore: For the former things have passed away.
A New Creation
And he spoke again: "Behold I make all things new.
I am Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End.
I will give to him that thirsts at the Fountain of the Water of Life freely.
He who overcomes shall inherit all things,
And I will be his God, and he shall be my son.
But the fearful, and the unbelieving,
And the abominable, and murderers, and all liars,
Shall dig their own pit which burns with fire and brimstone."
Another vision
And again my vision changed,
And I heard the voices of the holy brotherhood raised in song,
Saying, "Come ye, and let us walk in the light of the Law."
And I saw the Holy City,
And the brothers were streaming to it.
And the city had no need of the sun,
Neither of the moon to shine on it:
For the glory of God did lighten it.
And I saw the pure river of the Water of Life,
Clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God.
And in the middle of the river stood the Tree of Life,
Which bore fourteen kinds of fruits,
And yielded her fruit to those who would eat of it,
And the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
And there shall be no night there;
And they need no candle, neither light of the sun,
For the Lord gives them light:
And they shall reign for ever and ever.
Conclusion
I have reached the inner vision And through thy spirit in me I have heard thy wondrous secret. Through thy mystic insight Thou hast caused a spring of knowledge To well up within me, A fountain of power pouring forth living waters; A flood of love and all embracing wisdom Like the splendour of eternal light.
Epilogue
The emphasis on Christian themes are noticeably absent in this Qumran Apocalypse. You should note that the message to the seven churches is missing. This would indicate that it was written prior to John the Baptist meeting Jesus. The Ebyon (Jewish) believers that followed John the Baptist were separate from those who followed Paul.
Peter and James the leaders of the Jerusalem fellowship comprised of the Ebyon Jewish followers of John the Baptist help that Paul had turned his back on the Torah and had for all intents and purposes become a Gentile (those who were related to the Jews within the land but separated buy culture and understanding of the Law of God). It was these factors as well as many more that caused the Ebyon believers to label Paul as "The Liar". Paul recognized his kerygma (message) of inclusiveness and the ecclesiocentric nature and character of his message would be not only hard to understand as Peter said: And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles,
speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction (2 Peter 3:15-16)
Paul agreed with James and Peter that they wold minister to the Jews and he would go to the Romans, Greeks and others outside of Judea. Therefore at this interchange of ministries the message would change. The spiritual gifts that were given as signs to Israel were beginning to wane and fade as a new age, ministry and message was approaching.
Some modern scholars and many followers of a more liberal persuasion would continue to hold that only seven book were written by Paul and that they doubt that the books of Ephesians and Colossians were not written by Paul because the author gives a message that was never spoken of before, a secret in ages past, but now is revealed to man. (Ephesians 3:1-13)
In the epistles of Paul, he preferred the term brothers (Adelphoi). And though the masculine noun was used generically for the whole Brotherhood, Paul addresses specific women followers of Jesus as Sister (Adelphe)-the wives of Peter and the Lord's brothers, for instance (1 Cor 9:5) or Phoebe (Rom 16:1). Other terms Paul used were The Holy (Hagioi or Hegiasmenoi) [Rom. 12;13]. Those in Messiah [Hoi en Christo . The Called (Kletoi ). Housefellows (Oikeioi ). Those of the Path (Hoi tes Hodou ) There were so many terms precisely because Christian had not yet been accepted to absorb them yet. The name was used derision by outsiders. In Scripture the disciples never called themselves by that name. Believers refused to be called Christian for over 130 years,
The evidence of the author of Revelation all indicates that it was probably John the Baptist and was first written down by his followers who expanded as it was passed from one group to another. The author of Revelation would not have recognized that humble son of a carpenter as the "coming one" in Revelation. Undoubtedly John was surprised when the Spirit descended upon him at his Baptism. The voice of
God convinced John that Jesus was the Son of God and the Lamb that would take away the sins of the world.. But the Baptist must have been astonished at the peaceful conduct and presentation of a loving and forgiving Father/God. This certainly would help to explain why after imprisoned by Herod, John would send his disciples to ask Jesus "Are you the Coming One , or should we look for another?" (Matt. 11:3 ).
The Revelation certainly shows that it could have been a composite work from the "Followers of John" the Ebyons or Nazarenes who represented a primitive form of Christianity and inherited the Baptist's apocalyptic and heated tendencies. It has been suggested that the gospels themselves presuppose the existence of a Baptist community in competition with the young and forming church (Kasemann: Essays on New Testament themes. And it was the task of the authors of the Gospels of John and Mark to modify this heated theology in comparison and contrasting with the "Gospel of Christ" For this reason we conclude that the book of Revelation may be assigned to the period prior to the writing of the First Gospel. And in the opinion of some the Book of Revelation with its obviously early dating could be considered the "First Gospel".



From:  https://www.academia.edu/4609411/What_you_were_never_told_about_Revelation_A_revaluation_and_reassessment