Christian Theological/Philosophical Book Club discussion
This topic is about
Revelation - The Way it Happened
The Forum - Debate Religion
>
The Book of Revelation - Apocalyptic Showdown
Robert post 50 - is your argument on thin ice, so you have to resort to personal attacks?I can do the same - those of you who kick Revelation into the future are then able to ignore its message for today. It is no coincidence that the same people who taught me the Left-Behind view basically baptize America as God's chosen nation. We pledge allegiance to the flag and applaud the torture of the bad guys because clearly God has blessed us...in your words, it makes it real easy to forget all about your own sin when you just look at the rest of the world as the sinners.
Calvin - who wrote the Wycliffe commentary? It certainly wasn't Wycliffe himself, he died in the 1300s, two centuries before Luther and Calvin.Thanks for your post.
David - no, my argument is not on thin ice. NKJV states in REV 6:8 "And power was given to them over a fourth of the earth, to kill with sword, with hunger, with death, and by the beasts of the earth." One could make the case Lee does that the one-fourth pertained to the Mediterranean region and "many" died. It is equally plausible one-fourth of the earth WILL die in this event, which hasn't happened throughout history implying a futurist interpretation for Revelation.As for any personal attack - I wasn't aware that I made one, but if the shoe fits..........
David wrote: "Calvin - who wrote the Wycliffe commentary? It certainly wasn't Wycliffe himself, he died in the 1300s, two centuries before Luther and Calvin.Thanks for your post."
***********************************************
My particular hard copy, some 1,525 pages long, was copyrighted by The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago in 1962. Forty-six contributors, representing fifteen denominational backgrounds and twenty-five schools of Christian higher education, including but not limited to Baylor University, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wheaton College, Fuller Theological Seminary, Dallas Theological Seminary plus at least a dozen more collaborated on the commentary.
I have no idea why the publisher decided to call it "The Wycliffe Bible Commentary," particularly because the KJV is used throughout and not John Wycliffe's translation of the late 1300s. On the other hand, perhaps the Wycliffe Translators (established in 1942) organization played an important role but declined to toot their horn in the commentary's preface.
Sorry if I misunderstood your post Robert. It looked to me like you were implying those of us who take Revelation more symbolically are doing so in order to justify our sin.I can't imagine any of the traditional views of Revelation being on "thin ice" since they've all been held by people much smarter (and who are probably much better Christians) then me. This is why it is a secondary issue and I need to keep reminding myself not to worry about it too much.
Back to the issues:
*If Revelation is symbolic literature, then of course 1/4 is not meant to be taken literally.
*Even you take some things symbolically - at the end of Rev. 6 the stars fall from the sky. If that "literally" happened there would be no one left to curse God, the story would end right there. How do you explain those verses in a "literal" understanding?
My opinion is that the literal view falls apart in light of such verses, being forced to say stars do not literally fall from the sky since that would destroy earth, something more symbolic/metaphorical is meant.
CHAPTER 4: FIRE AND BRIMSTONEok, let's jump into chapter 4 so we can talk about falling stars. It's a fascinating topic.
Scholars have long recognized the similarity between chapter 8 of Revelation and the eruption of Vesuvius as told by Pliny the Younger. Yet Revelation commentators in general don't know what to make of it. Most pass it off with wimpy statements like "John's description in Revelation was probably influenced by Vesuvius."
Sorry, that's not good enough. This is HUGE. Vesuvius is NOT another Mt. Saint Helens as Robert proposes. An eruption of this magnitude just doesn't happen routinely. History records the many who were certain this was the end of the world. But the problem fitting it into Revelation is the timing...it happens years after the war is over.
If the war was devastating, so was the eruption. The trumpets are as huge as the seals. John is saying just look around you at what's happening, this has gotta be the end of it all! The time is now! Are you finally ready to believe?
re: stars and angels, now the stars DO start falling and burning up the earth. Remember that throughout scripture, stars are used to refer to angels. This is not unexpected, given the early belief that stars WERE thought of as gods or beings. So, whether literally (perhaps still believed by some) or symbolically (by the more enlightened in the first century), the falling stars are angels from heaven. I picture an angel bearing a torch and setting the fields to flame.Remember too that people had seen stars falling many times before. Where do YOU think they fell to? Earth, of course, there's nothing else to fall to! The earth was still flat back then.
There is no question that one particular star is a person: see verse 9:1
And the fifth angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit.
Here, my imagination took off a little in my book. I imagine that this angel unlocks the mountain, causing the eruption, and fire spews from the underworld. Indeed, the wording and timing fits with my imagination! So I ran with it, regardless of how fantastic the story sounds. And it's going to get even more fantastic in the next chapter of my book. Yet I suspect many readers of Revelation pictured it precisely the way I described it. Remember: this fiery mountain cast into the sea is HUGE, an event of cosmic significance for sure in first-century thinking.
David - what I meant was an insult, but not to anyone in particular on this board. What I tried to convey was that those who consider the ENTIRE Bible symbolic do so because they do not wish to adhere to the specifics so gloss them over with a poet's touch. This usually applies foremost to sin, but in other instances may be used to deny Judah her convenants, or to any other threat to whatever flavor of Christianity the individual or congregation holds dear and feels he must protect from outside influences.
Lee - wow, you woke up at your hyperbolic best this morning. Makes me feel like I'm at an old YOU WERE THERE episode. Yes, there were a ton of witnesses to Vesuvius; yes, they were still given to superstition; and, yes they were eager for the quick return of the Messiah. But, alas it's just a volcano, has no cosmic significance despite it's dramatic appearance and none of the highly imaginative descriptions you're tossing around with such vigor are anything more than natural phenomena at work. I'm sure to 1st century observers it did seem like the End Times, but now feels like the End Times to me. However, for some strange reason, I didn't get raptured last night, nor did the entire Italian peninsula disappear because of the eruption, so I guess everyone should just heave a big sigh and wait a little longer.
Somehow, I think we misunderstand each other, Robert. I didn't write Revelation. Should you not be directing these comments to John of Patmos instead of me?
Lee - no, I'm actually complimenting you on the fulsome use of imagery to successfully transcend the years and make us feel the shock and awe of the witnesses of 1st century happenstances. I fully realize you're presenting a scenario and letting the reader decide. I've decided. I'm not being a detractor of anything you present (for once). I can enjoy literary efforts without necessarily being moved to action by them. I'm not arguing with John the Revelator, just making the case that his visions from God weren't applicable to the times he lived in.
Ah...then I thank you very much, and if I ever meet John in the afterlife, I will pass on your compliments to him. :)
Speaking of awe, what do you guys think of Revelation 8:8 about the mountain being thrown into the sea? Very picturesque, isn't it? I fell in love with this picture of Vesuvius thrown into the sea, especially in light of this verse in Mark:“Truly, I tell you, if anyone says to this mountain, ‘Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in their heart but believes that what they say will happen, it will be done for them."
I'm unaware of any scholar who thinks this verse in Mark was written AFTER the eruption, so no hocus-pocus there. A pretty fascinating prediction by Jesus, eh? Wouldn't it be scary but still cool for first-century Christians to see it actually happen? Who in their right mind would have taken Jesus seriously, until it happened? So cool!
Scholars have long recognized the similarity between chapter 8 of Revelation and the eruption of Vesuvius as told by Pliny the YoungerWhat scholars have you studied in this regard?
I admit I am a bit confused (and like I said, I read the book a while back and am not re-reading it so maybe you cover this). But you are saying Revelation 8 is the eruption of Vesuvius? So is the Jewish War limited to Revelation 6? To me, Revelation reads to vague to pin it to events, whether first century or today, so i am skeptical of that conclusion.
That said, if Revelation was written in the 90s (as most scholars believe...and I don't really have a dog in the fight) couldn't it be just as likely Vesuvius was a nice literary model to use? If I am preaching a sermon and describing something abstract, I want to use a real world example but the real world example is not the point.
For example, as a Penn State guy, I recall seeing a huge parallel in the destruction of the temple to the fall of JoePa who we all admired so greatly (and many still do). I wrote a blog post and talked to many people how we tend to put our hope in the wrong thing (temples, idols, celebrities) and when they fall (literally in the Jerusalem temple's case in 70 AD) we are reminded of where our hope truly lies. The point is not the real world types - the point is moving to life-change.
That is why I see the trumpets and other judgments as warnings - they expose the things we usually trust in as untrustworthy. We are either driven to worship the Lamb or angered into the camp of the Beast.
Maybe all this to say, I look at Revelation more as a preacher and less as a scholar?
Robert, who considers the entire Bible symbolic? What does that even mean? That guy who thinks the disciples made up Jesus from scratch?I think most interpreters try to take things as they are meant - poetry is probably symbolic (Psalms) while narrative leans more historical. Discover the genre, which is the argument about Revelation.
David wrote: "Scholars have long recognized the similarity between chapter 8 of Revelation and the eruption of Vesuvius as told by Pliny the YoungerWhat scholars have you studied in this regard?
eeek, I have a huge stack of books about Revelation, I'd have to go digging. Many scholars come to mind, but I hesitate to list them without looking up their works first. David Aune comes to mind, of course.
Today's conservative Christians lean toward the 90s for publication. Preterists say early 60s. With my historical-critical approach, I find another date much more likely. I propose that Revelation was written right around the year 80 CE, for lots of historical reasons. I time Revelation's writing to three main events:
1. The eruption of Vesuvius.
2. The publication of Josephus' War of the Jews.
3. The reappearance of the beast.
These three things, with the Great War a recent memory, spurred John to write telling the churches of Asia to get ready for Jesus' return. The time had come.
So yeah, it's been a while since you read the book, David. If Revelation describes past, present, and future, then in oversimplified terms I see the seals in John's past (the war), the trumpets in his present (primarily Vesuvius) and the bowls of wrath in the expected immediate future (Armageddon, after Jesus comes back).
David wrote: "Maybe all this to say, I look at Revelation more as a preacher and less as a scholar? "Surely that is an appropriate division for all scripture, not just Revelation.
David wrote: " So is the Jewish War limited to Revelation 6?"Oh, it just hit me what you may be asking. No, there are lots of verses in Revelation that refer to events during the period 66-70 CE. Revelation is not written chronologically. However, six of the seven seals definitely refer to the war, yes.
Might it be possible to relate them to other events throughout history, too? Of course! But I have little doubt that John was writing about the war. Much the way (as in your example earlier) Isaiah thought he was writing about the birth of a child in his day, when it turned out (according to Matthew) he was actually predicting the birth of Jesus.
David - I think in msg #66 you are saying that the veracity of Scriptural content is solely dependent upon the form in which it is written. I find this high dangerous as great truths and great lies have been cached in all forms of literary fiction and nonfiction and to favor one form over another for pursuing the Word of God seems an unlikely path for a preacher to take who presumably is trying to convert the heathen into believers.
Another general comment - it is rather difficult to communicate with someone who doesn't have a synthesized worldview revolved around their religion which is purportedly the centerpiece of their life. When I communicate with David, I don't know whether I'm talking to David the preacher, or David the Bible Scholar, or David the peace and love activist who hates traditional American values. Similarly, Lee is agnostic one day and a Jesus freak the next who attributes all his compassion to a Lord who philosophically he denies. Wouldn't it be easier to have one Big Truth that you can exhibit to the world rather than a bunch of little situational truths? Talking to a liberal is largely a waste of time because you never know what Truth hat he's wearing on any given day.
um, I am a Jesus freak and an agnostic every day, and if I ever find this ultimate Truth you seek, I'll let you know. Until then, I'm enjoying the search.
All I am saying is that symbolic does not equal bad.One step in interpreting the Bible is to determine the genre - is it poetry or history? prophecy or proverb?
Lee - you should be enjoying the search - your comment indicates you've yet to identify the starting line.
lol. I wish I could disagree.
Lee - you make the Ultimate Truth sound like its a knock down, drag out intellectual enterprise hidden deep in the bowels of some half-forgotten artifact repository. But how difficult can it be when 5-year-olds can commit to it?
Well, Robert, we can talk about the quest for truth, or we can talk about religious beliefs, or we can talk about following Jesus. I enjoy all three, and children can be a part of all three, but I don't mix them up. To do so makes too many suppositions for me to stomach.Revelation provides a perfect example. What is its impact on Christian beliefs today? What was it really about, back when it was written? And does its picture of Jesus jibe with the Gospels, or contradict the teachings of Jesus? These are three entirely different questions, best handled one at a time.
Lee - I would think suppositions would be your stock and trade. I'm afraid you'll have to mix them all together, they're inextricably intertwined.
That comment puzzles me, Robert. My entire approach to the Bible is to back off our religious assumptions and reexamine everything critically to get at the real truth. If that truth contradicts long-held beliefs, well, so be it. It is entirely impossible, for example, for me to assume Revelation speaks of things still in our future merely because they didn't seem to happen when they were expected to, or how we imagine they were supposed to, 2000 years ago. That is a religious assumption which is just too much for me to swallow.
Lee - I'm not sure what puzzles you. The quest for truth, religious beliefs, and following Jesus are all integral parts of the thoughtful Christian's manner for treating incoming data. Critical analysis allows him to keep or discard suppositions based upon what he is able to swallow. Children are able to assimilate that Jesus loves them and somehow wants to protect them from harm forever and is worthy of worship. How Revelation fits into your personal algorithm for the unification of divergent knowledge fields will probably always remain a mysery to me, no matter how you explain it. The totality of our individual perceptions gleaned from even a common source available to us, like the Bible, seems to be in such disagreement, it is no surprise we place differing time periods and differing cosmic expectations on Revelation.
But, Robert, is it not you who begins with the assumption that the Bible is inerrant...indeed, you encourage such leaps of faith by calling for people to trust in a Big Truth...and then, you let that assumption overturn what Revelation actually says? A half-dozen times or more, Revelation says the time is at hand, Jesus is coming soon, but that doesn't match your supposition so you rewrite the scripture you pretend to uphold. Is that not because of your suppositions and is that really the proper way to search for truth?I trust you realize that I do not in any way disregard the truth of your God-experiences, such as your conversion. I'm not making light of that. I just feel it's dishonest to draw assumptions from present-day experiences in order to rewrite ancient literature.
Lee - if I wasn't a scientist, I might agree with you, but time and again experts in a field think they've uncovered the true nature of some phenomena only to have the whole applecart upset by some unforseen and, until then, unknowable discovery. Search for the truth all you want, Lee - try to make sense of Revelation till you're blue in the face (I do in other areas), but please don't be surprised when all your human insight collapses because future events take a cosmic turn. I read, I think, I explore, then I pray - the fourth action by far yields the most fruit.
ok, that's fair, and I confess to a great deal of plausible speculation in my book. That's what makes it fun. But outside of a speculative read, I would say there are two basic facts to be gleaned from my book, which are in my mind indisputable given the wealth of evidence:1. Revelation was written about the first century and for a first century audience.
2. The beast of Revelation is Nero Caesar.
These two hard truths must be somehow reconciled with our own religious view if we are honest. How you reconcile will be different from how I reconcile, but we must face facts.
CHAPTER 5: THE COMING WORLD WARI think we can dig into the next chapter, as most of the discussion centers on topics still ahead in the book.
What happens next in Revelation can only be described as bizarre. Demons start coming up out of the abyss. John says they look like locusts, obviously tying these demons to the locust plague predicted by Joel. Other witnesses in Italy who saw the beings come up out of the fiery mountain said they looked like giants.
This plague lasts five months, a very weird number. It has puzzled Revelation scholars, but to me, it's just a matter of John counting the months since hell opened up...his way of saying the climax is fast approaching.
This chapter is where we begin to identify the beast of Revelation as Nero Caesar. The clues are starting to pile up (pp 94-95), though the most convincing are yet to come.
An invading army of 200 million is described, led by Nero. They wear red, blue, and yellow and ride horses, matching the colors and cavalry of the Parthians, of course ... the fear of a Parthian invasion from the East was very real in the first century. But what is Nero doing on their side?
Jesus, of course, will be the rescuer. He is described exactly like a stone relief found of Claudius Caesar, standing naked over land and sea. Very curious ... probably not a coincidence.
So the end is coming - Nero is attacking Rome with his Parthian hordes. Do you see John as saying the Christians are sort of caught in the middle...with Jesus as "the rescuer"?So for a current analogy, this would be like a politician all America hated returning at the head of an army of terrorists or something?
That analogy actually sharpens my focus because I see Revelation as warning to not put trust in the powers of this world. To them, that was Rome. So Nero is coming back with Parthians and everyone is going to put their hope in Roman legions. John is saying hope in Jesus.
The parallel would be - in the face of a war on terror, everyone says to be a good patriotic American. The call of Christ is to take a third way - to both condemn evil from the outside (the terrorists) and speak the truth that the "inside" is also touched by evil (America). Really, to me, this is just the teaching of the universality of sin, none of us are exempt from it (so beware only pointing out the sins of others...hey, we're back to the gospels).
yes, "caught in the middle" reflects my view too! But I wouldn't say the Christians; I would say the Jews are caught in the middle. The Christian army, led by Jesus, are the rescuers of the Jewish homeland caught in the middle. (The already-turned-Christians in my story are elsewhere, though it's confusing enough that I won't take a hard stance on what John imagined.)I pondered this battle for a long time before writing about it. It just didn't make sense. The legend of Nero was that he would revive and lead the Parthians in revenge against Rome. But if the bad guys in Revelation are Rome, how can this be? Or if the bad guys are the wayward Jerusalem leaders, it makes even less sense.
It didn't fall together for me until I began to see how pro-Jewish Revelation really is. God must inflict his covenantal promises on Israel, but does not abandon his people.
By the way, the "red, yellow and blue" of the enemy meant nothing to me for quite a while. I puzzled and puzzled over it, though I suspected already that the Parthians were involved. Then--believe me or not--I actually dreamed the answer! I saw the Persian flag in my dream, and recognized the colors. I don't recall ever seeing the flag before dreaming of it, but I must have seen it before, in a history book perhaps. Anyway, i went and researched it and found that the same colors were used by Persians/Parthians/Iranians for thousands of years. I know it sounds like a little thing now, but I really started to get excited about my book at this point; everything was fitting together so well.
Lee - what, do I have to restate my position every post because you tend to forget? Last time: I'm enjoying the book as a well-researched, well-told fable. It doesn't jibe with ANYTHING I believe about Revelation, therefore, I don't have to, nor do I, believe ANY or your talking points. Reminds me of a potential wife I had long ago. She insisted that I love her friends and family as I loved her. I countered that I couldn't do that, but I would endeavor to meet them farther than halfway. She replied that wasn't good enough - too bad, she semed such a sexy, smart babe but ended up just a piece of fluff. Don't make me regard you the same way.
Not a problem, Robert. One has to be somewhat accomplished at ignoring evidence in order to be a conservative Christian. :)I am actually somewhat sympathetic to your position, because much of our history of the time comes from Josephus, a historian I've learned to distrust.
Lee - that's Ok, we make up for it by having a backbone.
Can we trust Josephus? What an interesting thought and challenge.
Rod wrote: "Can we trust Josephus? What an interesting thought and challenge."As my book is sort of a first-century history book, I have a controversial opinion of how Josephus fits into the book of Revelation! That'll be coming up soon, here! :)
Lee, Rod - in this case "sort of" looms rather large.
If you think I inaccurately describe anything that happened, I'd like to hear about it. With the exception of chapter one's rumors about Nero, I guess.
CHAPTER 6: A TRUE TESTIMONYAs there's some question about the accuracy of first-century historical reports, and Josephus in general, let's jump into the next chapter, about Revelation 11. One verse in particular helps us get our bearings:
The second woe has passed; the third woe is coming soon.--Rev 11:14
I suggest that this verse may provide a dividing line between what has happened and what has yet to happen...separating past from future in John's vision. Earlier in the chapter is a description of the Temple, which matches the Jerusalem temple that had already been destroyed (with its court of the Gentiles), so it's sort of obvious that this part of the story has indeed already happened. And immediately following that (but before the dividing verse, so before Revelation switches to future tense) is the story of the two witnesses.
Here is where comparing Revelation to what Josephus wrote gets very interesting. Revelation says two witnesses were murdered in Jerusalem during a great earthquake which killed 7,000 people, and the two witnesses' bodies were left unburied in the street to ridicule them. Josephus describes exactly the same thing happening to two important priests, though Josephus counts 8,500 casualties in the great earthquake. Can this possibly be a coincidence? Let's take a vote:
1. Josephus (who wrote about 80 A.D.) copied from Revelation.
2. Revelation copied from Josephus.
3. Neither copied from the other, but both describe the same event.
4. It's all a huuuuuge coincidence.
Lee - I'd vote for Josephus copied from Revelation.
Interesting thought Robert. I don't think i've ever heard a scholar claim that. Josephus was by no means a Christian from what little i've heard. So his motives and biases are present. I would doubt Revelation had an impact on his writings.
Am I wrong Lee? I could be.
I think God is getting the last laugh here. So many comical coincidences.
There are more weird "coincidences" to come. Enough for me to feel sure there is some sort of connection between Revelation and Josephus's War of the Jews. But Rod, I agree, Josephus was no Christian!
Lee do you think Josephus was even aware of Revelation or any endtimes claims? Even Old Testament predictions?
I don't like the word "prediction" - it seems too static to me. Like I "predict" the Eagles are going to win on Sunday (actually, much more likely with Rodgers out) and they either do or they don't. The Bible is not astrology or a Vegas oddsmaker; it is so much richer then that.
I guess I would say I am certain (well, more certain) of the challenge Revelation gives us today (live in the way of the Lamb, the way of Jesus, not as a follower of the beast). I am much less certain of what the future holds. I am open to a final sort of Beast with a capital B that is far worse then all the little beasts throughout history. Heck, with a global world the possibility of a person able to persecute with far more geographical intensity is a possibility, regardless of what the Bible says.
So yeah, I'm still good with that. It just has become less relevant for my life - as an evangelical teen we all thought the world was going to end around the year 2000; now as a parent of a two-year-old (with one on the way) I am more concerned with teaching my kids to be Jesus' disciples over the long-term.