PREFACE
This commentary on the Revelation of John has been prepared for general readers of the Bible who desire to deepen their understanding of God's inspired word. It is not a technical commentary, although it draws on the best in current biblical scholarship. It is not a devotional commentary, although the reader will find that Revelation certainly speaks to our day. My primary aim has been to provide a clear, concise explanation of what the biblical text means, showing the evidence on which my conclusions are based.
Extensive cross-referencing makes this volume a convenient reference tool for those seeking insight into a particular passage. However, I strongly recommend that users read through the entire commentary from beginning to end, considering each text in its broader context. It is particularly important to read the Introduction. There I define key terms ("kingdom of God," "labor pains," "apocalypse," etc.) and explain the historical, literary, and theological setting for John's work. Readers who truly desire to understand Revelation will find this approach most productive.
For many years I have taught Revelation at Minnesota Bible College and in other settings. Therefore most of the research for writing this commentary was already done. Nevertheless, completing this project on a tight deadline has been a major undertaking. Many people have provided assistance and support to make this book possible. MBC's President, Mr. Robert Cash, relieved me from certain duties as Vice President of Academics and Professor of New Testament so that I could make a research trip to Virginia. Dr. Mark Mangano, MBC's Professor of Old Testament and Biblical Languages, took over one of my classes to reduce my teaching load. The elders of the Meadow Park Church of Christ in Rochester, Minnesota, granted me a leave of absence from elders' duties so I could devote more time to writing. Dr. Harold Mahan, Director of the G.H. Cachiaras Memorial Library at MBC, provided research assistance. Dr. John Trotti and Mr. Roger Pittard, of Union Theological Seminary in Virginia, also provided library support. My dear wife Cathy read the entire manuscript and provided secretarial assistance. The series editors, Dr. Jack Cottrell and Dr. Tony Ash, also read the manuscript and offered helpful suggestions. Mr. John Hunter of College Press guided me through the publication process. My students and colleagues at MBC, my family members, and so many others offered help and encouragement along the way. The women of the Disciple's Prayer Life Sunday School class have bathed this entire project in prayer. To all these brothers and sisters in Christ, I offer my sincere thanks.
Christopher A. Davis
Rochester, Minnesota
July 2, 2000
-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV
INTRODUCTION
I. INTENDED TO REVEAL NOT TO CONCEAL
The Revelation of John is one of the most often read, but least understood books of the Bible. The first three words of the Greek text of Revelation are ajpokavluyi" =Ihsou' Cristou' (apokalypsis Içsou Christou), or "apocalypse from Jesus Christ." Apokalypsis is a combination of two Greek terms: The noun kaluvptra ( kalyptra ) refers to some sort of "covering," particularly a woman's "veil." The preposition ajpov ( apo ) communicates the idea of "movement away from" or "removing" something from one location to another. The term apokalypsis literally means, then, "the removal of that which conceals" or "the removal of the veil" (so that one may see what is under it). In English, the term is usually translated "revelation" - something that does not "conceal" or "cover," but which "unveils" or "reveals." So John's own title for his book is "Apocalypse from Jesus Christ" or "Revelation from Jesus Christ."
Beginning with the very first word of the book, the author claims to be revealing something. John expects that his Christian readers will not be puzzled, but able to comprehend his meaning. He does not intend the Revelation to be an enigma, but to be understood . For centuries, however, the book's mysterious symbolism has served to hide more than it reveals. Anyone who reads interpretations of Revelation - from Irenaeus in the second century, to Joachim of Fiore in the twelfth century, to Hal Lindsey in the twentieth century - finds very little agreement regarding what the book means. The reason is that Revelation is so unusual, so unique in the New Testament, that many Bible students simply do not know how to approach it. They lack the "key" for unlocking the secrets John intends to share.
II. APPROACH TO REVELATION
A. AN HISTORICAL AND CRITICAL APPROACH
A breakthrough has come in our own time. Before the mid-1800s, the Bible was viewed as little more than a vast collection of proof texts that could be taken apart and used to support the doctrinal systems of the various churches. No serious effort was made to understand each book as a whole or to seek insight into the meaning of the biblical books by examining the historical circumstances in which they were written. Beginning with Ferdinand Christian Baur in the mid-nineteenth century, a new group of scholars has urged a different approach to Scripture - an historical and critical approach. This is the kind of approach to Revelation adopted in this commentary.
By "critical" we do not mean mere "faultfinding." Instead, being "critical" involves asking questions, weighing evidence, and forming judgments. If we ask no questions of Revelation, then we get no answers. Since we wish to understand this word from God, we ask the same kinds of penetrating questions of it that we ask of any other piece of literature, whether it be the orations of Cicero, the plays of Shakespeare, or the novels of Mark Twain. We ask questions such as: Who wrote this book? When? Where? How? For what purpose? To what audience? In what circumstances? Using what sources? Why is the book structured in the way it is? What did the terminology used by the author mean to the readers of his time? What literary techniques does he employ?
We take an "historical" approach to Revelation because we believe that the Bible should not be studied in a vacuum as if it had no relationship to the events surrounding its writing. One of the primary convictions of the Christian faith is that God does not reveal himself in a vacuum, but in history. He is not just "God." He is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; the God of Moses and the Exodus; the God who made an eternal covenant with King David; the God who came among us in the person of Jesus Christ in history. For this reason, one of the best ways to gain an understanding of the Bible is to learn something about the historical settings in which it was produced.
In this commentary, we uncover the meaning of Revelation by asking an historical question: What did this book communicate to its first readers? What did Revelation reveal to the Christians for whom John wrote? How would they have understood its message? In order to answer this question, we must learn all we can about who the first readers were. We must acquaint ourselves with their time, their location, their circumstances, their language, their literature, and their culture. Only then will we be able to discern what Revelation meant to the believers for whom it was intended. Only then will we begin to work out an accurate interpretation of Revelation in its historical context. We will find that most of the truths Christ revealed to the first readers are applicable to his modern-day disciples as well.
B. RESOURCES FOR THE STUDY OF REVELATION
What resources from the ancient world assist us in our efforts to correctly understand and interpret Revelation? Primary texts include:
1. The Hebrew Old Testament
The Old Testament contains history and theological reflection regarding God's covenant relationship with the people of Israel. Christians consider the Old Testament and New Testament (see below) to be the inspired, authoritative word of God.
2. The Septuagint
The Septuagint is a Greek version of the Old Testament. This translation was begun in the third century B.C. after Alexander the Great made Greek the common language uniting his empire. According to legend, seventy Jewish scholars independently produced identical translations of the Hebrew Scriptures, thus attesting to divine inspiration of the Greek text. For this reason, "LXX" (the Roman numeral for "70") serves as the common abbreviation designating the Septuagint translation. The Septuagint was the "Bible" of most of the first Christians, who lived in the Greek-speaking eastern half of the Roman Empire. Nearly every line of Revelation contains allusions to either the Septuagint or the Hebrew Old Testament. The Septuagint also includes the Apocrypha.
3. The Old Testament Apocrypha
The Apocrypha is a collection of Jewish writings, most of which date from the second century B.C. through the first century A.D. Christians from the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox traditions consider them part of the authoritative Christian canon. Most Protestants view the Apocrypha as useful, edifying works, but do not give them a status equal to that of the Old and New Testaments.
4. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha
The Pseudepigrapha is a collection of Jewish and Christian documents, with the majority dating from the third century B.C. through the second century A.D. About one-third are called "apocalypses" because they resemble the Revelation of John in their language, style, use of symbolism, and/or shared concepts. Since they represent the same literary type, or "genre," they prove an invaluable aid to the study of John's vision (as discussed below in Part III). James H. Charlesworth has edited a two-volume collection of these writings in English.
5. Ancient Near Eastern Texts
Texts surviving from the Ancient Near East shed light on the cultural roots of ideas found in Revelation. To illustrate, the Babylonian Creation Myth offers insights into the symbolic meaning of the "sea" and the "sea monster" in John's vision. J.B. Pritchard has edited a useful collection of such texts in English translation.
6. The Dead Sea Scrolls
Called "the greatest manuscript discovery in modern times" by W.F. Albright, the Scrolls were produced by a Jewish community at Qumran on the northwestern shore of the Dead Sea. Some of the texts are biblical manuscripts, while others describe the beliefs and rules of the Qumran sect. Dating from the end of third century B.C. to A.D. 70, the Dead Sea Scrolls shed light on Palestinian Judaism in the years prior to the writing of Revelation.
7. The New Testament
Written in the first century A.D., the New Testament draws together writings of the very first Christian communities. As such, it represents our earliest and most precious witness to Jesus and the church he founded.
8. Josephus
A contemporary of John, Flavius Josephus composed valuable histories of the Jewish people. He provides us, for example, with a vivid, first-hand description of the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 - an event alluded to in Revelation.
9. The New Testament Apocrypha
The New Testament Apocrypha is a collection of extracanonical Christian writings (some from Gnostic or other heretical groups) from the second century A.D. and beyond. It provides us with additional samples of early Christian apocalypses.
10. Early Christian Fathers
Writings of Christian leaders from the post-New Testament period cast light on the circumstances surrounding Revelation's composition. To illustrate, Eusebius's History of the Church (ca. A.D. 325) identifies the author and date of Revelation. Eusebius also describes two great persecutions suffered by first-century believers - events that play a role in John's vision.
11. Rabbinical Writings
Although most date to the post-New Testament period, teachings of ancient Jewish rabbis (Mishnah, Talmud, Midrashim, etc.) sometimes illuminate the biblical text. We turn to them, for example, when interpreting the symbolism of the four living creatures in Revelation 4.
12. Classical Greek and Latin Literature
Ancient Greek and Latin writers open a door to the world of the first readers of Revelation. To illustrate, Suetonius has left us biographies of the first twelve Roman emperors, some of whom play a role in Revelation. The correspondence of Governor Pliny and the Emperor Trajan explains Roman policy toward Christians in the early second century. The nearly five hundred volumes of the Loeb Classical Library (Harvard University Press) make this wealth of knowledge available to English readers.
We will utilize all these resources and more as we interpret the Revelation of John. We study other ancient writings not because we consider them to be inspired or authoritative - not because we place them on an equal level with the Bible. Rather, we study them because they help us to enter the thought world of John's first readers, so that we may understand Revelation as they understood it.
C. STRENGTHS OF THE HISTORICAL AND CRITICAL
APPROACH TO REVELATION
The weakness of alternative approaches to Revelation is seen in their failure to create a consensus regarding the meaning of the book. There have been nearly as many interpretations of Revelation as there have been interpreters. The weakness of alternative approaches is further highlighted by the erroneous predictions made on the basis of those approaches. To illustrate, when the former Soviet Union disintegrated, many scholars' interpretations of Revelation perished with it.
The strength of an historical and critical approach to Revelation is demonstrated by several facts: First, there is a great deal of agreement among historical and critical scholars regarding the meaning of John's vision. They have found the key to interpreting Revelation, while others must rely heavily on guesswork. Second, an historical and critical interpretation of Revelation makes sense today, and it would have made sense to the first-century Christians for whom the book was written. Third, an historical and critical interpretation reveals that the message of Revelation is wholly compatible and consistent with the message of the rest of the New Testament. Finally, the accuracy of an historical and critical interpretation of Revelation can be demonstrated with objective evidence drawn from other ancient writings. It does not rest on subjective speculation.
III. APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE
Other New Testament writers communicate through narrative or epistle, but in Revelation John employs striking imagery and vivid symbolism. Although Revelation is unique in the New Testament, it was not at all unique in John's time. Revelation belongs to a genre, or type of literature, that was most popular in Palestine from the second century B.C. through the second century A.D. Such writings are called "apocalypses," or "apocalyptic literature," partly because they are revelatory in nature and partly because they resemble the Apocalypse of John (see Part I above).
A. JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN APOCALYPSES
The only apocalyptic writing in the Old Testament is the Book of Daniel. Some believe that Daniel is the oldest apocalypse and that later writers imitate its style. Others argue that the Book of the Watchers ( = 1 Enoch 1-36) is older. Whatever the case, Jewish theologians found apocalyptic to be a powerful tool for expressing their convictions concerning God and his dealings with the world. The most important Jewish apocalypses for our purposes are 1 Enoch (a compilation of five originally independent works dating from the second or third century B.C. to the first century A.D.), 2 Enoch (late first century A.D.), 2 Baruch (ca. A.D. 100), 3 Baruch (first to third century A.D.), 4 Ezra (ca. A.D. 100), the Apocalypse of Abraham (ca. A.D. 100), and the Apocalypse of Zephaniah (first century B.C. to first century A.D.). Beyond the apocalypses themselves, other writings from the period contain apocalyptic sections or features. Two examples are the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (second century B.C.) and the Sibylline Oracles (second century B.C. through seventh century A.D.). All of these writings are preserved in the Pseudepigrapha (described above in Part II.B.4).
Early Christian apocalypses include, for example, the Shepherd of Hermas, 5 Ezra, and the Apocalypse of Peter (all dating to the second century A.D.). The Revelation of John appears to be the first Christian apocalypse - the first Christian adaptation of the apocalyptic form. Other New Testament writings certainly contain apocalyptic ideas, but in Revelation alone do we find a fully developed apocalyptic vision. Since John's Christian apocalypse builds on the earlier Jewish apocalyptic tradition, those Jewish documents serve as one of the most valuable resources for understanding the nature and meaning of Revelation.
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE
But what exactly is an "apocalypse"? What sets these books apart and leads us to place them in a special class? First, Jewish apocalyptic literature is characterized by a particular kind of theology - a particular understanding of who God is and how he deals with his creation. Apocalyptic theology is rooted in the Jewish Scriptures since apocalyptic was initially a Jewish phenomenon. Christian apocalyptic writers later modified this theology in significant ways due to their encounter with Jesus Christ (see below).
Second, apocalyptic writers utilize a particular manner of communicating that theology - a distinctive form or style of writing . For example, they tend to make heavy use of symbolism.
So apocalyptic theology is a certain network of beliefs about God and the apocalyptic form is a certain means of expressing those beliefs. It is possible to have a message containing apocalyptic theology that is not communicated in the apocalyptic style. (An example would be the gospel preached by the Apostle Paul, which J. Christiaan Beker rightly describes as an "apocalyptic interpretation of the Christ-event.) However, true apocalypses - like the Revelation of John - display both apocalyptic form and apocalyptic theology.
1. Common Characteristics of the Apocalyptic Form
Some of the most common characteristics of the apocalyptic form are described below. Not every apocalypse includes every feature.
a. Visions or Revelations
Apocalypses take the form of visions or revelations from God. Whereas Old Testament prophets experience God directly ("The word of the Lord came to me" or "In the year that king Uzziah died, I saw the Lord"), the apocalyptic seers receive their revelations through an intermediary - often an angel. Their visions usually concern the future, giving apocalyptic a strong "eschatological" element.
b. Symbolism
Apocalyptic visions are filled with vivid symbolism. Over time, as various apocalyptists adopted and adapted the images used by others, a set of common symbols was developed. For example, the sea typically represents the forces of evil and chaos. Stars often represent angels. Beasts symbolize political powers opposed to God and his people. If we read Revelation alone (as so many do), then we may find John's symbolism puzzling and impenetrable. However, if we study other apocalypses as well, then we begin to see the patterns and Revelation becomes less intimidating.
c. Esoteric Elements
Apocalyptic writings are esoteric; they contain an element of mystery or secrecy. They are not meant for the general public, but for "insiders" who are acquainted, for example, with the meaning of the conventional apocalyptic symbols. John apparently considers his readers to be insiders able to grasp his meaning. By acquainting ourselves with their literature and culture, we can become insiders too.
d. Symbolic Numbers
Apocalyptic writers place symbolic meaning in numbers. Here, too, a set of conventional symbols emerge:
Two is the number of valid witness. Its Jewish roots are found in Deuteronomy 19:15 where the Lord requires at least two witnesses for a matter to be established in a court of law.
Three often relates to God. This symbol also has Old Testament roots in passages such as Isaiah 6:3 where the Lord receives the threefold worship of the seraphim: "Holy, holy, holy is the LORD Almighty." Christian writers tend to see Trinitarian connotations in this number since the Lord has revealed himself to us as God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.
Four often symbolizes the world, or God's creation. This goes back to the idea that the "four corners of the earth" (Ezek 7:2; cf. Rev 7:1), the "four quarters of the earth" (Isa 11:12), or the "four winds" (Jer 49:36; Ezek 7:9; Zech 6:5; Dan 7:2; cf. Matt 24:31//Mark 13:27; Rev 7:1) - i.e., north, south, east, and west - together encompass the whole of creation.
Five, the number of fingers on the human hand, describes a "handful" or a "few."
Ten - two "handfuls" - represents "several." Neither ten nor five should necessarily be interpreted literally in apocalyptic writings.
Seven is the number of "fullness," "completeness," "perfection." In some texts this number carries connotations of goodness or morality, for the author is thinking of persons or things being "complete" in the sense of being everything God intends them to be. However, the dominant meaning for seven is not "perfection" in the sense of being morally faultless, but "perfection" in the sense of being "complete" or "whole." We may trace the origin of this symbol to Old Testament texts such as Genesis 1-2, where seven days form a "complete" week.
Six is one less than seven; it does not "measure up" to seven or attain to the fullness of seven. Six, then, symbolizes "incompleteness," "imperfection," and sometimes evil.
Eight, in Christian apocalypses, symbolizes Jesus Christ. For an explanation, see the comments on Revelation 13:18.
Twelve tends to represent the people of God - those who love him and serve him faithfully (i.e., Law-keeping Jews in Jewish apocalypses and faithful Christians in Christian apocalypses). The idea no doubt comes from the Old Testament, where the twelve tribes of Israel together form the covenant community of God.
Multiples of these numbers typically represent the "fullness" or complete number of the thing symbolized. For example, the 144,000 (12 12 1000) in Revelation 7 represent the full number of the people of God. Other symbolic numbers used in Revelation will be explained at appropriate points in the commentary.
e. Pseudonymity
Rather than writing in their own names, apocalyptists typically employ pseudonyms, or false names. They attribute their works to an ancient hero such as Abraham, Jacob, or Ezra. What is the reason for this practice? Various theories have been put forward.
Many apocalypses (including Revelation) were composed in times of persecution. Some suggest that the pseudonyms and mysterious symbols are aimed at hiding the author's identity and message from hostile political authorities. One may question how successful this tactic would have been. Could any of John's neighbors read his description of the Whore of Babylon (Revelation 17) without seeing in it a criticism of Rome?
Apocalyptic literature became popular during the first and second centuries B.C., as Jewish prophecy declined and the Old Testament canon was being finalized. At the same time, Greco-Roman society tended to devalue the present and glorify the past. All of these factors would have made it difficult for newer theologians to gain a hearing. Perhaps they attributed their works to respected ancient luminaries in order to deceive their readers and add authority to their message. They pretended to predict events leading up to their own time, and thereby added credibility to their real predictions concerning the readers' future. The difficulty with this theory is that it assumes a great deal of gullibility on the part of the readers. Would many people really believe that writings of Enoch, the seventh descendant of Adam (Gen 5:18-24), had suddenly appeared in the second century B.C.?
It seems more likely that pseudonymity was openly used as a literary device. In other words, the readers knew very well that the writer was not Jacob or Moses or Ezra. Attributing a book to one of these Jewish heroes was a way of saying: What you are about to read is an apocalypse, so read and understand it as such. The "pen name" was chosen according to the subject matter of the apocalypse. For example, Baruch was the secretary of the prophet Jeremiah, who interprets the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians in the sixth century B.C. (Jer 32:12-16; 36; 43:1-6; 45:1-2). Similarly, the author of the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch writes of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in A.D. 70. He presents himself as a "second Baruch" helping his readers understand why God again allowed the holy city to fall.
Whereas most apocalypses are pseudonymous, Revelation proves the exception to the rule. As we will see below (Part IV), John writes in his own name.
2. Common Features of Apocalyptic Theology
In addition to sharing a distinctive form of writing, Jewish and Christian apocalyptists tend to hold a number of common convictions concerning God and his ways with the world. This distinctive apocalyptic theology, or worldview, is rooted in the Old Testament. At the risk of oversimplifying a complex matter, we will trace the historical development of the apocalyptic worldview through three primary, overlapping stages: the Old Testament period, the intertestamental period, and the New Testament period.
a. Roots of Apocalyptic Theology in the Old Testament Period
(1) Genesis 1-5. Several key elements of apocalyptic theology appear in the opening chapters of Genesis, the foundational book of the Old Testament. First, God exists and he is the creator of all that is, including human beings. "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth" (Gen 1:1). God made humankind, both male and female, in his own image and his own likeness (Gen 1:26-27).
Second, by virtue of the fact that he is creator, God is also the owner, the king, the sovereign Lord over all creation. This truth is implicit in Genesis but is made explicit elsewhere in the Old Testament. For example, the Psalms proclaim that
The earth is the LORD's, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it; for he founded it upon the seas and established it upon the waters (Ps 24:1-2).
God is the King of all the earth (Ps 47:7).
As creator and king, God alone has the right to decide what his world should be - what he considers "good" in his creation and what he considers "evil."
Third, as sovereign Lord, God created the world good. "God saw all that he had made, and it was very good" (Gen 1:31) - that is, pleasing to God, perfectly conforming to his will.
Fourth, Genesis does not state that human beings are immortal by nature. Instead, the first humans, Adam and Eve, were created mortal and their lives were sustained only by God's provision. God placed the tree of life in the center of the garden so that, by eating its fruit, the man and the woman could potentially live forever (Gen 2:9; 3:22). Life is the gift of God and is sustained by God alone at his good pleasure.
Fifth, God's creatures have rebelled against his sovereign will, thus introducing "sin" or "evil" into God's "good" creation. According to Genesis 2:16-17, God issued one command to Adam:
You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.
Chapter 3 describes how one of God's creatures, the serpent (discussed below), tempted Eve to sin - that is, to "be like God" by deciding good and evil for herself (Gen 3:5). (Note that the Book of Genesis implies a rebellion against God on the part of the serpent that preceded the rebellion of Adam and Eve.) As a result, she and Adam disobeyed God, ate the forbidden fruit, and thus introduced sin into the human race (Gen 3:6).
Sixth, God has responded to the sin of his creatures by pronouncing several terrible judgments: He cursed the serpent and promised that the woman's "offspring" would crush its head and thereby destroy it (Gen 3:14-15). He condemned the woman to pains in childbearing and domination by her husband (Gen 3:16). He cursed the ground so that it would resist Adam's efforts to cultivate it and would bear fruit only through painful toil (Gen 3:17-19). Finally, God kept the promise made in Genesis 2:17 by condemning Adam and Eve to death. Genesis 3:22-24 reads:
And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." So the LORD God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.
Separated from the tree of life, "nature" took its course: Adam and Eve - and their descendants after them - eventually died (see Gen 5:5-31).
Note that, within the framework of Genesis, death is the destruction of God's creation. Furthermore, it is God's penalty for sin, for the idolatrous effort to be one's own "god" by deciding good and evil for oneself. Human beings die as a result of their own sin (e.g., Adam and Eve themselves) and/or as a result of their ancestor's sin (Adam and Eve's descendants - including, for example, innocent babies who sometimes die not because they have rebelled against God on their own, but because they have been cut off from the tree of life due to the sin of their ancestors) and as a result of the serpent's sin (since the serpent played a role in the fall of Adam and Eve, which led to their death and that of their descendants). As the Apostle Paul would later phrase it, "the wages of sin is death" (Rom 6:23).
(2) Promised Salvation from Sin and Death. However, throughout the Old Testament, God, in his grace and mercy, declares that he will not allow sin and death to have the last word. For example, he vows that Adam and Eve's "offspring" will crush the serpent's head (Gen 3:14-15). He swears to the nomad Abraham that "all people on earth will be blessed through you" (Gen 12:3). He promises King David that, "when your days are over and you rest with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, who will come from your own body, and I will establish his kingdom . . . forever" (2 Sam 7:12-13). To the prophet Isaiah God reveals his future plans: "Behold, I will create new heavens and a new earth. The former things will not be remembered, nor will they come to mind" (Isa 65:17).
b. Development of Jewish Apocalyptic Theology in the Intertestamental Period
(1) Rebellion in Heaven . In reading the Old Testament and attempting to discern the truths contained in it, Jewish apocalyptists draw the logical conclusion that the serpent of Genesis 3 must have been an angel who rebelled against God. After all, the Scripture says that, "in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth" (Gen 1:1). The "heavens and earth" include everything that exists - both the natural, "earthly" realities and the supernatural, "heavenly" realities. Therefore the serpent must have been some sort of creature of God.
This talking "serpent" was certainly unlike other serpents; it apparently did not belong to the natural sphere. Therefore it must have been some sort of supernatural creature - a heavenly or angelic being.
Genesis states that " all that [God] had made" was "very good" (Gen 1:31), and yet the serpent reveals itself to be very evil by tempting humans to sin. Apparently, the "serpent" was an angel who had fallen away from God - a heavenly creature who had surrendered its original goodness and rebelled against the creator. Jewish apocalyptists conclude, then, that the "serpent" must have been a supernatural, angelic being (known to Christians as the "devil" or "Satan"), and that rebellion against God in the heavenly sphere must have preceded Adam and Eve's rebellion against God in the earthly sphere.
This type of interpretation of the Genesis story is found, for example, in 2 Enoch, a Jewish apocalypse dating to the late first century A.D.:
But [Satanail] from the order of the archangels deviated, together with the division [of angels] that was under his authority. He thought up the impossible idea, that he might place his throne higher than the clouds which are above the earth, and that he might become equal to my [i.e., God's] power.
And I hurled him out from the height, together with his angels [to the earthly sphere] . . . . And he will become a demon, because he fled from heaven; Sotona, because his name was Satanail. In this way he did become different from the angels. His nature did not change, [but] his thought did, since his consciousness of righteous and sinful things changed. And he became aware of his condemnation and of the sin which he sinned previously. And that is why he thought up the scheme against Adam. In such a form he entered paradise, and corrupted Eve (2 Enoch 29:4-5 and 31:4-6 [J]).
This passage from 2 Enoch also illustrates another important aspect of apocalyptic theology: While there was a rebellion against God in the heavenly sphere, this rebellion did not succeed. The rebels were put down and God maintained his sovereignty. Apocalyptic writers often express this conviction by speaking of God binding the devil and his angels in prison (e.g., 1 Enoch 10:4-6; cf. 18:12-19:1; 21:1-6; Test. Levi 18:12; Mark 3:26-27; 2 Pet 2:4; Jude 6) or casting them out of heaven onto the earth (as in the passage quoted above). Defeated on the supernatural plane, they continue their warfare on the natural plane by inciting human beings to join their fight against God.
(2) The Present Evil Age and the Kingdom of Satan . As noted above, Genesis 3 attributes pains in childbearing, painful toil, and human death to God's judgment against the sin of Adam and Eve. Jewish apocalyptists read the Scripture, consider the outcome of the Fall, and draw this conclusion: The sin of Adam and Eve caused the world to be afflicted not only with the judgments mentioned above, but with all manner of evils. To illustrate, 2 Baruch (ca. A.D. 100) maintains that
When [Adam] transgressed, untimely death came into being, mourning was mentioned, affliction was prepared, illness was created, labor accomplished, pride began to come into existence, the realm of death began to ask to be renewed with blood, the conception of children came about, the passion of the parents was produced, the loftiness of men was humiliated, and goodness vanished (2 Apoc. Bar. 56 @ :6).
Realizing that the entire human race has been adversely affected by Adam's sin, the author of 4 Ezra (ca. A.D. 100) comes close to despair:
It would have been better if the earth had not produced Adam, or else, when it had produced him, had restrained him from sinning. . . . O Adam, what have you done? For though it was you who sinned, the fall was not yours alone, but ours also who are your descendants (4 Ezra 7:46[116], 48[118]).
Yet Adam does not shoulder the whole blame for warping God's creation. All creatures (both human and angelic) who choose evil over the good, who ally themselves with Satan against God, contribute toward the ruin of God's handiwork. Second Baruch declares:
. . . although Adam sinned first and has brought death upon all who were not in his own time, yet each of them who has been born from him has prepared for himself the coming torment [i.e., the coming judgment/punishment for sin]. . . . Adam is, therefore, not the cause [of "destruction," or "retribution"], except only for himself, but each of us has become our own Adam (2 Apoc. Bar. 54:15a, 19).
Jewish apocalyptists and other writers of their era refer to this world corrupted with evils, this world marred by death, this world fallen away from its original goodness, using a number of different terms. For example, they call it "the present evil age" - they claim that the "present age" is characterized by "evil." They describe this fallen world as the "kingdom of Satan" - that is, a world where Satan and his allies (both human and angelic) exercise a degree of "kingdom" or "kingship" or "rule," a degree of power and influence. Human beings have collaborated with Satan to transform God's good creation into the "present evil age," the "kingdom of Satan," a world twisted and ruined by evil and death.
(3) The Eschatological Age and the Kingdom of God . The Jewish apocalyptists are hardheaded realists who see more clearly than most the nature and pervasiveness of evil in the created order. Still, they do not despair, for they believe the Old Testament promises of redemption. Though extremely pessimistic about the ability of human beings to purge the world of evil, they are extremely optimistic that God will prove true to his word. They trust that God will someday break into history and radically transform the cosmos, that he will "create new heavens and a new earth" through his promised Redeemer. Then sickness and death will be no more. No more will the untamed forces of nature maim and destroy. God will wipe away all tears and restore broken relationships. He will put an end to sin and evil and demonic activity in the world. Death will give way to eternal life. Now evil is tolerated, but then God will suffer evil no more. Now we are living in the "present evil age," but then God will inaugurate a "new age" or "last age" or "eschatological age" (from the Greek term e[scato" [ eschatos ], which means "last"). Now we know only the perversion of creation, but then God will make a "new creation." Now the world is the "kingdom of Satan," but then he will transform it into the "kingdom of God."
(4) The Shift of the Ages. Through what sequence of events will this radical reconfiguration of all things come about? In general, the Jewish apocalyptists anticipate that the world will first undergo a time of terrible "distress" or "tribulation" as Satan and his allies make one last attempt to overcome God and his people. They liken this period of turmoil to the "woes" or "birth pains" that a woman endures in childbirth. In their minds, this time of suffering for God's people will be the "labor pains" preceding the "birth" of the "new creation."
Second, God will send the promised Savior and Redeemer, the Messiah and Christ, the Son of David and Son of Abraham.
Third, they predict that the "labor pains" and the coming of the Messiah will be followed by a great day (sometimes called the "day of the Lord") in which God will suddenly raise the dead (either all the dead or only the servants of God, depending on the writer) to new life.
Fourth, the Messiah will carry out God's final judgment against all his enemies. In other words, God, through his Messiah, will set all wrongs right and put an end to the evil that pollutes his creation. Satan, his angels, and humans allied with them will either be annihilated or forced to suffer an eternal punishment (depending on the writer).
The end result will be a "new age" or "new creation" in which every aspect will conform to God's good and perfect will - the "consummation" of the kingdom of God, or the coming of God's sovereign rule in its fullness.
Who will participate in this new world? Virtually all the Jewish apocalyptists agree that only righteous, covenant-keeping Jews who obey the Law of Moses (not Gentiles) will inherit a place in the consummated kingdom of God.
These sorts of expectations are characteristic features of Jewish apocalyptic theology - common elements of the apocalyptists' understanding of God and his dealings with the world. To illustrate, most are found in two passages from the book of Daniel, a Jewish apocalypse included in the Christian canon.
In Daniel 2, King Nebuchadnezzar has a dream in which he sees an enormous statue with a head of gold, chest and arms of silver, belly and thighs of bronze, legs of iron, and feet made partly of iron and partly of baked clay. As the king watches, a rock "cut out, but not by human hands" (i.e., cut out by God) strikes the statue and shatters it to dust. Then the rock becomes a huge mountain that fills the whole earth (see Dan 2:31-35). In verses 36-45 Daniel interprets the vision, telling Nebuchadnezzar:
. . . You, O king, are the king of kings. . . . You are that head of gold.
After you, another kingdom will rise, inferior to yours. Next, a third kingdom, one of bronze, will rule over the whole earth. Finally, there will be a fourth kingdom, strong as iron - for iron breaks and smashes everything - and as iron breaks things to pieces, so it will crush and break all the others. Just as you saw that the feet and toes were partly of baked clay and partly of iron, so this will be a divided kingdom; yet it will have some of the strength of iron in it, even as you saw iron mixed with clay. . . .
In the time of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, nor will it be left to another people. It will crush all those kingdoms and bring them to an end, but it will itself endure forever.
Daniel predicts that a series of temporal, human kingdoms (represented by the statue) will be replaced (on the "day of the Lord" at the "final judgment") by the eternal kingdom of God (represented by the rock).
Other common elements of Jewish apocalyptic theology appear in Daniel 12:1-3:
At that time [the archangel] Michael, the great prince who protects your people [ = the Jews], will arise. There will be a time of distress such as has not happened from the beginning of nations until then [ = the period of "labor pains"]. But at that time your people - everyone whose name is found written in the book - will be delivered. Multitudes who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake [ = the resurrection]: some to everlasting life, others to shame and everlasting contempt [ = the division made between the righteous and unrighteous at the final judgment]. Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness [ = obedience to the Mosaic Law], like the stars for ever and ever.
(5) Apocalyptic Transcendence, Dualism, and Pessimism. We have seen that the Jewish apocalyptists hold a transcendent worldview. They believe that beyond the visible, material, earthly, physical realities, there lie invisible, immaterial, heavenly, spiritual realities. Spiritual powers influence the material universe in significant ways. The apocalyptic worldview makes room for the supernatural.
Since some angels and some humans oppose God, apocalyptic theology also includes a strong element of dualism. In other words, there are two opposing powers in the world - the evil and the good. What we are witnessing in history is a struggle between the forces of good (God, his angels, his righteous servants) and the forces of evil (Satan, demonic powers, unrighteous persons who do not submit to the Lord). Apocalyptists do not believe in an absolute dualism, for the power of Satan and his allies is not equal to that of the creator and Lord of all. However, evil powers do exercise a degree of influence in the world because the sovereign God - for the time being - permits it. One of the reasons the righteous suffer is that they are being attacked and persecuted by the enemies of God, both human and demonic.
Most apocalypses come out of communities experiencing such persecution firsthand. Their prolonged struggle with evil has led them to a certain kind of pessimism. The Old Testament prophets look for God's good purposes to be worked out within the historical process - in the world as we know it. In contrast, Jewish apocalyptists do not expect the world to improve. They doubt that human beings will ever overcome evil to build a good, just, and godly society on their own.
(6) Apocalyptic Optimism, Determinism, and Triumph. Although they are pessimistic about humanity's ability to redeem a fallen world, the apocalyptists are optimistic that God will do just that. From the Old Testament, they know that God is good, just, powerful, and true. If he is good, then he will not allow evil to stand forever. If he is just, then he will punish the wicked and reward the righteous. If he is powerful, then he can do it; and if he can do it, then he will do it. But if this is so, then why do so many of God's faithful servants suffer hardship, poverty, and even violent death? If this is so, then why do so many of the wicked live prosperous lives and then die peacefully in bed? With remarkable faith, apocalyptic writers conclude that God will be true to himself and true to his promises. He will punish evildoers and vindicate his holy people - if not before death then after death, if not in this life then in another, if not in this world then in a new world created just for them. History has a goal predetermined by God: The Sovereign Lord will redeem his fallen creation, purging it from evil and bringing every detail into conformity with his good and perfect will. The Lord will indeed triumph; his kingdom will come.
c. Development of Christian Apocalyptic Theology in the New Testament Period
Against this background, we now turn our attention to the New Testament period. When the German theologian Ernst Käsemann identifies Jewish apocalyptic as "the mother of Christian theology," he is not far off the mark. When Jesus of Nazareth arrives on the scene, he confirms that much of the apocalyptists' interpretation of the Old Testament is correct. Influenced by Jesus and the first disciples taught by him, New Testament writers introduce many elements of Jewish apocalyptic theology into the Christian Bible. Some elements they adopt wholesale; others they modify or transform as their insight into God's purpose - enacted through Christ - surpasses that of their predecessors. Christian theology, then, is largely apocalyptic theology.
(1) Supernatural Forces of Evil . New Testament writers share the apocalyptists' belief in both the earthly and heavenly, the natural and supernatural spheres. Behind the evils plaguing this world - behind the deeply rooted systemic wickedness, behind the sophisticated lies that have for centuries held entire civilizations captive under false worldviews - lies an intelligence, a power beside and beyond that of mere human beings. As Paul says,
Our struggle is not against flesh and blood [i.e., human beings - creatures of the earthly, natural sphere], but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly [supernatural] realms (Eph 6:12).
(2) Adam and the Present Evil Age. New Testament writers also hold to the notion of the "kingdom of Satan" or "present evil age" - an era marred by sin and death that begins with the rebellion of Adam and ends with the consummation of God's kingdom. To illustrate, Paul maintains that
. . . sin entered the world through one man [Adam], and death through sin, . . . many died by the trespass of the one man . . . . The judgment [of God] followed one sin and brought condemnation . . . . by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man . . . (Rom 5:12,15,16,17).
The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed [at the resurrection]. For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay [including death] and brought into the glorious freedom [from decay] of the children of God (Rom 8:19-21).
(3) The Kingdom of God and the Ministry of Jesus . Working from within this kind of apocalyptic worldview, New Testament writers show that Jesus - in his words and even more so in his deeds - claimed to be the promised Messiah, the one sent by God to annihilate the kingdom of Satan and inaugurate the kingdom of God. As 1 John 3:8 words it, "The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil's work."
That this was Jesus' purpose and mission is seen in every aspect of his ministry. For example, the coming of God's kingdom was the subject of Jesus' preaching, as shown by the summary of his message found in Mark 1:14-15:
After John [the Baptist] was put in prison, Jesus went into Galilee, proclaiming the good news [or "gospel"] of God. "The time has come," he said. "The kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news!"
Note that the "gospel" message, according to Jesus, is the proclamation of the "good news" - the apocalyptic promise - that God will soon annihilate evil and transform the entire cosmos to conform to his will.
God's coming kingdom was also the focus of Jesus' teaching. For example, in teaching his disciples to pray, Jesus tells them:
This, then, is how you should pray: "Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven" (Matt 6:9-10).
When Jesus calls on people to repent and "leave your life of sin" (John 8:11), he is urging them to turn away from evil - to renounce their alliance with Satan (whether conscious or unconscious) and conform their lives to the coming "kingdom" or "rule" or "Lordship" of God. When Jesus forgives sins as only God can (see, e.g., Luke 5:17-26), he shows that God - through his Messiah Jesus - is in the process of doing away with evil, in the process of wiping away the sin that has corrupted his creation for so long. When Jesus gathers disciples to himself and commands them to "love each other as I have loved you" (see, e.g., John 15:12), then he is beginning to form the community of the "eschatological age," when men and women from all nations will live together in peace forever under the beneficent kingship of God.
Jesus' miracles also proclaim the "good news" of God's emerging kingdom. They show that, in the person of Jesus the Christ, God has entered into his sinful, fallen, perverted creation in order to set things right - to reestablish his kingdom rule over it. For example, by healing the sick, Jesus shows that God is going to put an end to the pain and suffering and misery that have warped his good creation. This is why Jesus, in Luke 10:8-9, gives these instructions to his disciples when he sends them out with authority to preach and heal in his name:
When you enter a town and are welcomed, eat what is set before you. Heal the sick who are there and tell them, "The kingdom of God is near you" (italics added for emphasis here and throughout the commentary).
He says, when you heal the sick, you must not forget to tell them what it means - what it signifies. The healings are intended to show that the kingdom or lordship of God is near - that it is becoming a reality through the Messiah Jesus (here working through his disciples).
When Jesus exorcises demons, he shows that God is in the process of destroying the kingdom of Satan and establishing the kingdom of God. To illustrate, Luke 11:14-20 recounts how, on one occasion,
Jesus was driving out a demon that was mute. When the demon left, the man who had been mute spoke, and the crowd was amazed. But some of them said, "By Beelzebub [another name for Satan], the prince of demons, he is driving out demons." Others tested him by asking for a sign from heaven.
Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them: "Any kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and a house divided against itself will fall. If Satan is divided against himself, how can his kingdom stand? I say this because you claim that I drive out demons by Beelzebub. Now if I drive out demons by Beelzebub, by whom do your followers drive them out? So then, they will be your judges. But if I drive out demons by the finger of God [i.e., by the power of God], then the kingdom of God has [already] come to you."
When Jesus calms the storm and walks on water (see Matt 14:22-33; Mark 6:45-52; John 6:16-21), he shows that even the forces of nature - all God's creation - will be brought under his lordship so that they bend to his will and no longer hurt and destroy. When Jesus resuscitates the dead (e.g., Lazarus in John 11), he points forward to the day when all God's people will be raised up to eternal life in his consummated kingdom.
(4) The Kingdom of God and the Death of Jesus . What is the relationship between Jesus' death on the cross and the kingdom of God? During the Old Testament period, covenants - i.e., formal relationships between two parties - were established or sealed through animal sacrifices. To illustrate, Exodus 24:1-11 describes how God established a covenant with the people of Israel that was mediated by Moses (the so-called "Mosaic Covenant"). The Law of the Lord was read to the people, specifying the behavior that would be required of them in their new relationship with God. Israel then "responded with one voice, 'Everything the Lord has said we will do'" ( vv. 3,7). They agreed to enter into the type of covenantal relationship with God described by the Law. Next, animals were sacrificed and Moses sealed the covenant with blood: He "took the blood, sprinkled it on the people and said, 'This is the blood of the covenant that the Lord has made with you'" ( v. 8) - i.e., the sacrificial blood that seals or establishes the Mosaic Covenant. Finally, the elders of Israel, on behalf of the entire nation, ascended Mount Sinai, saw God, and ate and drank with him. They shared a "covenant meal" celebrating the new relationship with God Israel now enjoyed through the blood sacrifices.
During his last meal with his disciples - on the evening before his crucifixion - Jesus took simple bread and a cup of wine, and he used them to offer the most detailed explanation of his death in the Gospels:
When the hour came, Jesus and his apostles reclined at the table. And he said to them, "I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I tell you, I will not eat it again until it finds fulfilllment in the kingdom of God."
After taking the cup, he gave thanks and said, "Take this and divide it among you. For I tell you I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes."
And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me."
In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you" (Luke 22:14-20).
Jesus says, "This is my body given for you (uJpeÉr uJmw'n, hyper hymôn) . . . . my blood, which is poured out for you (hyper hymôn)." Although not readily apparent in English translation, this is sacrificial language from the Greek version of the Old Testament. Jesus is saying that his impending death will be a sacrifice. But what kind of sacrifice? The Lord tells them: "This cup is the new covenant in my blood." He uses language nearly identical to that employed in Exodus 24:8 ("This is the blood of the covenant") to identify his death precisely as the kind of sacrifice that establishes a covenant. What covenant? Not the Mosaic Covenant, but a "new covenant." What, then, is the significance of the ritual meal of bread and wine - the "Eucharist" or "Lord's Supper" Jesus commands his disciples to observe "in remembrance of me"? It is the "covenant meal" celebrating the establishment of the "new covenant" through Jesus' sacrifice. Who participates in this "new covenant"? God, who sent Jesus to establish the covenant, and Jesus' disciples - those from "all nations" (see Matt 28:19), Jews and Gentiles alike , who accept God's lordship over their lives as exercised through his Messiah. In other words, those persons to whom the "covenant meal" is offered. Finally, when may Jesus' disciples participate in this "new covenant" relationship with God? The answer is: Both now and, more completely, in the future. The "new covenant" was established in the past by Jesus' sacrificial death. It is in place now, in the present , so that Jesus' disciples - who were once "God's enemies" - are now at "peace with God" and "reconciled to him through the death of his Son" (Rom 5:1,10). Yet disciples of Christ will experience this new relationship with God on an even deeper, more intimate level, in the future - when they are raised from the dead, when they "see him as he is" (1 John 3:2), when the new covenant "finds fulfilllment in the [consummated] kingdom of God."
Who participates in the Kingdom of God - the coming "new creation" in which every detail will conform to the will of God? All those who share in the "new covenant." And who participates in the "new covenant"? All those who choose to be disciples of Jesus. All those who conform to the will of God as he makes that will known through his Messiah. All those who embrace God's kingdom rule over their lives in Christ. In essence, Jesus offers "all nations" a place in the kingdom of God now in the form of the "new covenant" established by his sacrificial death. This truth is extremely important: Jesus' death on the cross forgives sins not merely in the sense that, through it, God pardons wrong deeds. (The sinner receiving such a pardon would still be trapped in a fallen world and doomed to death.) Jesus' death forgives sins in the sense that it provides an escape from the "present evil age" - and entrance into the emerging kingdom of God - in the form of a "new covenant" relationship with God. By his sacrificial death, Jesus shattered the kingdom of Satan, the powers of sin and death, and thus established the kingdom of God. The New Testament writers testify to this wonderful truth:
. . . the Lord Jesus Christ . . . gave himself for our sins to rescue us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father . . . (Gal 1:3-4).
Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death - that is, the devil - and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death (Heb 2:14-15).
[God] has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins (Col 1:13-14).
. . . our Savior, Christ Jesus, . . . has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel (2 Tim 1:10).
Since death came through a man [Adam], the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man [Jesus Christ] (1 Cor 15:21).
Jesus is the full realization of the Old Testament and apocalyptic hopes. He is the "son of Adam" who crushes the serpent's head for his disciples by dying to make a place for them in God's kingdom. He is the "Son of Abraham" who offers this blessing to "all people on earth." He is the "Son of David" who rules over an eternal Kingdom - not through military force, but by dying as a sacrifice for his people. He is the promised one who freely offers "new heavens and a new earth" to all who desire it - to everyone willing to live as his disciple, willing to accept the beneficent rule of God over his or her life.
(5) The Kingdom of God and the Resurrection of Jesus . Jesus died on the cross, and on the third day - much to the surprise of his disciples - God raised him from the dead. What is the meaning and significance of his resurrection? Many answers to that question are found in the New Testament, but we shall mention only four: First, the fact that Jesus was raised from the dead means that he is our contemporary, that he continues to live and work among us. His Spirit is continuously present with us today in accordance with the promise he gave to his first disciples: "Surely I am with you always, to the consummation of the age" (Matt 28:20).
Second, Jesus' return from the grave shows that life after death is possible. Furthermore, such life takes the form of resurrection, by which the biblical writers mean transformed, bodily existence in the eschatological age . Resurrection is a bodily form of existence in the sense that, like the risen Jesus, raised persons possess bodies (sw'ma, sôma). They are not ghosts or disembodied spirits. Like Jesus, they also retain their memories, their personalities, their identities - everything that made them who they were before death, everything that made them some body . (The Greek idea of the sôma includes both the "body" in the sense of the "physical frame" and the "body" in the sense of the "person.") Resurrection is a transformed kind of existence in the sense that, like Jesus, raised persons enjoy a better, higher, more glorious, more exalted, more lasting form of existence than they knew before death. Resurrection is existence in the eschatological age in the sense described below.
Third, the resurrection of Jesus marks the beginning of the general resurrection of the righteous anticipated by the apocalyptists. Thus Paul calls Christ "the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep" (1 Cor 15:20) and "the firstborn from among the dead" (Col 1:18) - that is, the first of many to rise from death to eternal life. This is why Christ's resurrection was more than an anomaly, why it gives Christians sure hope for their own resurrection. Jesus' emergence from the tomb shows that the apocalyptists' hopes were not misplaced - that there is indeed such a thing as the resurrection, that it has begun, and that we should expect for many more to be raised in the future. When will this "general resurrection" take place? Jesus indicated that it would occur at his "Second Coming" or "Parousia" (from the Greek term parousiva for "coming," "arrival" or "appearing"), when he returns to carry out the final judgment and consummate the kingdom of God. Paul describes this event in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18:
Brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who fall asleep, or to grieve like the rest of men, who have no hope. We believe that Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. According to the Lord's own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming [ parousia ] of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. Therefore encourage each other with these words (1 Thess 4:13-18).
From that time forward, "there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away" (Rev 21:4).
Fourth, the resurrection of Jesus marks the beginning of the eschatological age and the kingdom of God. The Jewish apocalyptists had predicted that the resurrection of the dead would announce the coming of God's kingdom (see above). The resurrection of Jesus, "the firstborn from among the dead," showed his first disciples that the anticipated event had begun - that God was beginning to fulfilll his eschatological promises, that the kingdom of God had arrived. At the same time, the fact that sin and evil continued to mar the world, the fact that human beings continued to die, demonstrated to first century Christians that the kingdom of Satan had not yet entirely passed away. In light of these two undeniable realities (the continued presence of evil in the world and the eschatological event of Christ's resurrection), they concluded that God's intention must be to establish his kingdom more gradually than the Jewish apocalyptists had anticipated. In other words, the "present evil age" and the "eschatological age" would coexist - or "overlap" - for a time.
Day of the
Sin of Adam Lord
& Eve
PRESENT EVIL AGE
(Kingdom of Satan)
Eternal life for
"Labor pains" righteous Jews and Gentiles
Rebellion ("overlap" of the ages)
in heaven
ESCHATOLOGICAL AGE
(Kingdom of God)
Creation Messiah comes Messiah returns
Resurrection
Final Judgment
Fig. 2. The Shape of Christian Apocalyptic Theology
In the recent past, the kingdom of God had invaded the kingdom of Satan with the coming, the ministry, the death, and the resurrection of the Messiah. In the present (which becomes the period of "labor pains" in Christian theology - see below), God is allowing the two kingdoms, the two realities, to coexist. The "new covenant" is in place and Christians are embracing the kingdom of God over their lives; but death, the "last enemy," has not yet been completely "destroyed." In the future, however, Christ will return a second time to annihilate the kingdom of Satan and consummate the kingdom of God. In this way, Jesus' resurrection from the dead gave Christian theology its distinctive shape as compared to Jewish apocalyptic theology (compare Fig. 2 with Fig. 1).
Romans 13:11-14 shows that the Apostle Paul arrived at this understanding of God's actions in Christ. In this text, he compares the kingdom of Satan to the darkness or nighttime and the kingdom of God to the light or daytime:
And do this [i.e., live as kingdom people by obeying Christ's command to "love one another"], understanding the present time [oJ nu'n kairov" ( ho nyn kairos ), Paul's technical term for the "overlap" of the ages]. The hour has come for you to wake up from your slumber [i.e., act as if the daytime/kingdom of God has arrived and the nighttime/kingdom of Satan has ended], because our salvation [i.e., our resurrection to eternal life in the consummated kingdom of God] is nearer now than when we first believed. The night is nearly over [i.e., the kingdom of Satan has not entirely ended, but its days are numbered]; the day is almost here [i.e., the kingdom of God has not yet completely arrived, but it has "dawned"]. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. Let us behave decently, as in the daytime [i.e., as if God's kingdom rule had already fully come], not in orgies and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and debauchery, not in dissension and jealousy. Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the sinful nature.
That the "overlap" of the ages was Jesus' own understanding of God's plan is shown by his masterful Parable of the Weeds:
Jesus told them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven [ = the kingdom of God - the sovereignty God exercises from the heavenly sphere, rather than any human sovereignty exercised from the earthly sphere] is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared.
"The owner's servants came to him and said, 'Sir, didn't you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?'
"'An enemy did this,' he replied.
"The servants asked him, 'Do you want us to go and pull them up?'
"'No,' he answered, 'because while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them. Let both grow together [ = the "overlap" of the ages when the kingdom of Satan and kingdom of God coexist - see the interpretation of the parable given below] until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.'"
Then he left the crowd and went into the house. His disciples came to him and said, "Explain to us the parable of the weeds in the field."
He answered, "The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man [i.e., Jesus, the Messiah, who inaugurates the kingdom of God by preaching the gospel and dying as the sacrifice that makes it possible for people to become disciples/participants in the "new covenant"/"sons of the kingdom"]. The field is the world, and the good seed stands for the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, and the enemy who sows them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age [i.e., the final judgment when a division is made between the wicked and the righteous, when the "present evil age" is ended and the "eschatological age" comes in its fullness], and the harvesters are angels.
"As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. [Note that Jesus considers the field/world to be his kingdom. God has never surrendered his good creation to the evil one, but at the final judgment will root out and destroy his evil works.] They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth [i.e., eschatological condemnation for the wicked]. Then the righteous will shine like the sun [i.e., the radiant glory of the resurrection body] in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear" (Matt 13:24-30,36-43).
d. Major Differences between Jewish and Christian Apocalyptic Theology
Jewish apocalyptic is indeed "the mother of Christian theology." The first Christians interpret Jesus in apocalyptic terms, as the Lord himself taught them to do. However, while Jesus does fulfill apocalyptic expectations, he does not do it in the way most Jews expect. Consequently, their first-hand experience with God's Messiah leads the early Christians to recast apocalyptic theology in several significant ways (again, compare Fig. 1 with Fig. 2).
(1) Identity of the Messiah . Christian apocalyptic writers name Jesus of Nazareth as the promised Messiah who destroys the kingdom of Satan and establishes the kingdom of God. Non-Christian Jewish apocalyptists do not, of course, make that identification.
(2) The Coming of God's Kingdom. From the point of view of Jewish apocalyptists, the coming of God's kingdom rule lies in the future, at the long-anticipated "Day of the Lord." In contrast, Jesus' first disciples see the kingdom as both a present and a future reality. They proclaim not that God has made promises that he will someday fulfill, but that he has made promises that he has already begun to fulfill in their own lifetime. The kingdom of God has begun to appear with the first coming of Jesus. With his Second Coming it will reach its sudden and swift consummation. In other words, for Jewish apocalyptists the kingdom of God comes suddenly in the future. For Christian apocalyptists it comes more gradually, in two stages.
Scholars sometimes refer to this idea as "the already, but not yet" of Christian theology. The kingdom of God has already broken into history with the coming of Jesus, but it has not yet come in its fullness. Another way of saying this is that Christian theology contains a strong element of "realized eschatology." This is the belief that many of the eschatological events (e.g., the "labor pains," the coming of the Messiah, the resurrection, the coming of God's kingdom) are already, to some extent, being "realized" or experienced in the present.
(3) The "Labor Pains." Jewish apocalyptists view the period immediately preceding the consummation of God's kingdom as the "labor pains" - a time of intense suffering and persecution for God's people. Christian writers agree that the "labor pains" precede the consummation. However, they differ from their predecessors by identifying the "labor pains" with the period between Christ's first and second comings - the "overlap" of the ages.
(4) Participants in God's Kingdom . Both Jewish and Christian apocalyptists agree that resurrection to eternal life in the consummated kingdom of God is for the "righteous" - that is, for covenant-keepers. They disagree regarding which covenant leads to this salvation. Jewish apocalyptists reserve resurrection to life for persons who participate in the Mosaic covenant and obey the Mosaic Law. In most cases, this limits salvation to Jews, since the Mosaic Law was given to the Jewish people. Christian apocalyptists believe that salvation comes to those who share in the new covenant established by Christ's sacrificial death. This new covenant is based not on Jewish descent, but on "faith" or commitment to God/Christ as Lord. It therefore opens the way for both Jews and Gentiles to enter the rule of God.
(5) Expectation and Fulfillment. The gap between Jewish expectation and the actual fulfilllment of God's promises proved a stumbling block to many Jews of the first century. Luke shows that even John the Baptist was bewildered by the way in which Jesus carried out his messianic mission:
John's disciples told him about all these things [Jesus was doing]. Calling two of them, he sent them to the Lord to ask, "Are you the one who was to come, or should we expect someone else?"
When the men came to Jesus, they said, "John the Baptist sent us to you to ask, 'Are you the one who was to come, or should we expect someone else?'"
At that very time Jesus cured many who had diseases, sicknesses and evil spirits, and gave sight to many who were blind. So he replied to the messengers, "Go back and report to John what you have seen and heard: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the poor. [As we have seen, all these activities are manifestations of the end of Satan's rule and the coming of God's rule through Jesus the Messiah.] Blessed is the man who does not fall away on account of me" (Luke 7:18-23//Matt 11:2-6).
In other words, blessed is the one who does not miss the coming of the Messiah and God's kingdom because Jesus does not fulfill the apocalyptic prophecies in the way that most Jews expect.
The Revelation of John is an expression of Christian apocalyptic theology in the apocalyptic form. For this reason, its message goes far beyond that of non-Christian apocalypses. Christian theology is rooted in Jewish apocalyptic theology, but Jesus Christ transforms apocalyptic expectation in significant ways.
IV. AUTHOR, DATE, PLACE OF WRITING,
OCCASION, AND FIRST READERS
Before examining the message of Revelation, we must first address several important introductory questions concerning this book: Who is the author? When was the book written? Where was the author when he wrote the book? To whom was Revelation written? What occasion or situation does the author address? In seeking answers to these questions, we will examine both internal evidence (i.e., answers found within Revelation itself) and external evidence (i.e., clues to the origin of Revelation from outside the book).
A. INTERNAL EVIDENCE
In the first chapter of Revelation, the author provides us with important information concerning himself and his intended readers:
John,
To the seven churches in the province of Asia: (Rev 1:4)
I, John, your brother and companion in the suffering and kingdom and patient endurance that are ours in Jesus, was on the island of Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus. On the Lord's Day I was in the Spirit, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet, which said: "Write on a scroll what you see and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea" (Rev 1:9-11).
1. First Readers
The author identifies his audience as "the seven churches in the province of Asia" - specifically the Christian congregations in the cities of "Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea." The Roman "province of Asia" made up the western third of Asia Minor (modern Turkey), with Ephesus serving as the provincial capital. The churches here had historical ties to the Apostle Paul, who established several congregations in this region during the late 40s and early 50s. For two or three years, Paul used Ephesus as his base of operations for training leaders and evangelizing the whole province (see Acts 19:8-10). John's "seven churches" may refer to seven literal churches. However, since the number "seven" tends to symbolize "completeness" in apocalyptic literature, these churches probably represent the whole of the Christian community in Asia.
The Asian churches were mixed bodies of Gentile and Jewish believers, reflecting the ethnic diversity of the province. By the late first century, about one million Jews made their homes in Asia Minor where they established more than fifty synagogues. Some had migrated to Asia from Palestine after the Jewish revolt against Rome in A.D. 66-73. Jewish Christians from Palestine would have been familiar with apocalyptic, for many apocalypses were produced in Palestine during this period.
2. Author
The author's name is "John." He calls himself a "brother" - that is, a Christian. He functions as a prophet or spokesman for God.
Revelation contains several indications that the author was a Palestinian Jew: First, the name "John" (=Iwavnnh", Iôannçs), a Greek form of the Hebrew "Johanan" (meaning "the LORD is gracious"), was common among first century Jews. Second, the structure and phrasing of Revelation suggest that the author thought in Hebrew (the original language of the Jewish Scriptures) and/or Aramaic (the closely related language spoken by ethnic Jews in Palestine). He spoke Greek only as a second language. Third, through over one hundred allusions to the Scriptures, the author demonstrates extensive knowledge of the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, as well as the Greek. Fourth, John writes in the apocalyptic genre, which was most popular in Jewish circles in Palestine. Finally, symbols such as Armageddon (Rev 16:16), the new Jerusalem (21:2), and the temple (11:1-2) are based on actual places located in Palestine (although such knowledge could have been drawn not from firsthand exposure but from the Old Testament). It may be, then, that the author of Revelation was one of the Jewish Christians who moved to Asia from Palestine due to the war with Rome. Who this "John" was cannot be determined from the book of Revelation in itself.
3. Occasion and Place of Writing
John identifies with his readers by describing himself as their "companion in suffering . . . and patient endurance." John himself has been exiled to the island of Patmos, just off the western coast of Asia, "because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus." Other portions of Revelation (particularly the letters to the seven churches in chs. 2-3) show that at least some of John's readers are also being persecuted for their faith. To Ephesus and Smyrna the Lord writes:
You have persevered and have endured hardships for my name, and have not grown weary (Rev 2:3).
I know your afflictions and your poverty - yet you are rich! I know the slander of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan. Do not be afraid of what you are about to suffer. I tell you, the devil will put some of you in prison to test you, and you will suffer persecution for ten days. Be faithful, even to the point of death, and I will give you the crown of life (Rev 2:9-10).
Christ mentions past afflictions, hardships, poverty, and slanders from Jews. When he speaks of "what you are about to suffer," he anticipates still more difficulties to come - persecution, imprisonment, and perhaps even death.
The Lord addresses these words to the church in Pergamum:
I know where you live - where Satan has his throne. Yet you remain true to my name. You did not renounce your faith in me, even in the days of Antipas, my faithful witness, who was put to death in your city - where Satan lives (Rev 2:13).
At the time when John writes Revelation, Christians in Asia are under intense pressure to renounce their faith in Christ. At least one martyrdom (Antipas) has already occurred.
Philadelphia and Laodicea receive these assurances:
I know your deeds, your love and faith, your service and perseverance, and that you are now doing more than you did at first (Rev 2:19).
I know your deeds. See, I have placed before you an open door that no one can shut. I know that you have little strength, yet you have kept my word and have not denied my name. I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars - I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you. Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth (Rev 3:8-10).
Again we see pressure to deny Christ, troubles with Jews, and an expectation of further hardships to come ("the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world").
The vision of the fifth seal describes multiple Christian martyrs, whose numbers will continue to grow:
When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained. They called out in a loud voice, "How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?" Then each of them was given a white robe, and they were told to wait a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and brothers who were to be killed as they had been was completed (Rev 6:9-11).
John later sees a woman symbolizing Rome, with a golden cup, "drunk with the blood of the saints, the blood of those who bore testimony to Jesus" (Rev 17:6). She has not merely sipped from her gruesome cup; she has gorged herself with the blood of God's people to the point of intoxication. Numerous Christians are being murdered for their loyalty to Christ.
4. Summary
Internal evidence suggests that Revelation was written by a Jewish Christian from Palestine named "John." John received the Revelation on the island of Patmos, where he had been banished for witnessing to Christ. The book addresses all the churches in the Roman province of Asia. Together with John, these believers are being harassed and persecuted because of their commitment to Christ - some to the point of death. At the time of writing, the author expects the suffering to continue and the number of martyrs to grow.
B. EXTERNAL EVIDENCE
Revelation itself gives us a good start in discovering the origins of this book. Yet important questions remain unanswered: When was Revelation written? Precisely why were the first readers being persecuted and killed? Who is John? For insights into these issues, we turn to "external evidence" from outside the New Testament.
1. Author
Regarding the identity of "John," three possibilities seem most likely: First, the author could be John the Apostle, brother of James and son of Zebedee, one of the original Twelve disciples of Jesus (see Matt 10:2). Second, he could be someone writing in the name of John the Apostle, in which case Revelation would be pseudonymous like so many other apocalypses. Third, the writer could be some other person named "John" writing in his own name.
a. "John" a Pseudonym?
Of these three possibilities, we may eliminate the second immediately. Revelation is certainly not pseudonymous - not because such a practice would be unthinkable in a Christian apocalypse, but because the evidence makes this theory untenable. The author of Revelation never gives any indication that he is an Apostle. He simply calls himself a "servant" of God (21:1) and "your brother" (21:9). He recounts no stories or sayings from the ministry of Jesus, nor does he give any other indication that he had known Jesus during his earthly ministry. Many scholars (this writer not included) think that the author actually distinguishes himself from the Apostles in Revelation 21:14: "The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb" - that is, the past founders of the people of God.
If the author of Revelation is someone other than John the Apostle, then this easily explains why he does not identify himself as the Apostle. If the author actually is John the Apostle, then we could attribute his silence to modesty. (The author of the Gospel and letters attributed to John displays similar modesty, being more interested in telling others about Jesus than in telling them about himself.) However, if what we have in Revelation is someone who wants to present himself as John the Apostle, then he fails miserably by never clearly identifying himself as that hero of the faith. The theory of pseudonymity seems quite implausible in the case of Revelation.
b. Evidence from the Early Christian Fathers
We are left, then, with two possibilities: Is the author of Revelation John the Apostle, or is he some other "John" entirely? Perhaps the Early Christian Fathers can help us with this question. As leaders of the Church in the postapostolic period, they were certainly closer to John in time and space than we are. What do they tell us regarding the origin of Revelation?
(1) Timeline. Before we put the Fathers on the "witness stand," we should acquaint ourselves with the time period in question. Revelation - like all New Testament books - was written during the first century A.D. Thirteen Roman emperors reigned during that century, as outlined below:
Augustus (30 B.C.-A.D 14) was emperor at the time of Jesus' birth (which took place in 4-6 B.C. - see Luke 2:1) and also during his boyhood.
Tiberius (A.D. 14-37) ruled throughout the period of Jesus' adulthood, his public ministry (see Luke 3:1), and his death and resurrection (which occurred in A.D. 33).
Caligula, Claudius (mentioned in Acts 11:28
Caligula (37-41) and 18:2), and Nero reigned during the period when the Apostle Paul carried out
Claudius (41-54) his mission to the Gentiles and Christianity spread across the Mediterranean world.
Nero (54-68) According to the Church Fathers, both Peter and Paul died under a persecution of Christians sparked by Nero.
Galba, Otho, and Vitellius (68-69) held power only briefly as the Empire suffered through a period of murder, intrigue, and civil war.
Vespasian (69-79) was the Roman general charged with putting down the Jewish revolt that began in A.D. 66. When his forces defeated Vitellius and made him emperor, Vespasian left the siege of Jerusalem to return to Rome.
Titus (79-81), the son of Vespasian, took over his father's command and destroyed Jerusalem in A.D. 70. He later succeeded his father as emperor.
Domitian (81-96) According to the Church Fathers, Domitian (another son of Vespasian), Nerva, and Trajan
Nerva (96-98) played a role in the events surrounding the writing of Revelation (see below).
Trajan (98-117)
Against this background, what do the Church Fathers tell us about "John" and the writing of Revelation? Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Eusebius prove particularly helpful to our inquiry.
(2) The Testimony of Justin Martyr. Our earliest evidence that Revelation was written by John the Apostle comes from Justin Martyr, a teacher of the church at Rome in the mid-second century. In his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, Justin recalls:
. . . a man among us [Christians] named John, one of Christ's Apostles, received a revelation and foretold that the followers of Christ would dwell in Jerusalem for a thousand years, and that afterwards the universal and, in short, everlasting resurrection and judgment would take place. (Justin refers to John's vision in Rev 20:4-22:5.)
As we will see, some of Justin's fellow believers agree that the Apostle wrote Revelation, while others have their doubts.
(3) The Testimony of Irenaeus. During the late second century, Irenaeus served as bishop of Lyons in what is now France. In Against Heresies (ca. 180), a refutation of Gnosticism, he defends the apostolic origin of the Christian gospel. In the process, he provides details concerning the later life of John the Apostle.
For we learned the plan of our salvation from no others than from those through whom the gospel came to us. They first preached it abroad, and then later by the will of God handed it down to us in Writings, to be the foundation and pillar of our faith. For it is not right to say that they preached before they had come to perfect knowledge, as some [Gnostics] dare to say, boasting that they are the correctors of the apostles. For after our Lord had risen from the dead, and they were enclothed with the power from on high when the Holy Spirit came upon them, they were filled with all things and had perfect knowledge. They went out to the ends of the earth, preaching the good things that come to us from God, and proclaiming peace from heaven to men, all and each of them equally being in possession of the gospel of God. So Matthew among the Hebrews issued a Writing of the gospel in their own tongue, while Peter and Paul were preaching the gospel at Rome, and founding the Church. After their decease Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, also handed down to us in writing what Peter had preached. Then Luke, the follower of Paul, recorded in a book the gospel as it was preached by him. Finally John, the disciple of the Lord, who had also lain on his breast, published the Gospel, while he was residing at Ephesus in Asia. All of these handed down to us that there is one God, maker of heaven and earth, proclaimed by the Law and the Prophets, and one Christ the Son of God. If anyone does not agree with them he despises the companions of the Lord, he despises Christ the Lord himself, he even despises the Father, and he is self-condemned, resisting and refusing his own salvation, as all the heretics do.
Note that, according to Irenaeus, the Fourth Gospel was written by the Apostle John (whom he identifies with the "disciple whom Jesus loved," who reclined next to the Lord at the "Last Supper" - see John 13:23). The bishop also identifies John's home at the time of the writing as Ephesus in the Roman province of Asia.
Elsewhere in Against Heresies , Irenaeus writes:
The church in Ephesus also, which was founded by Paul, and where John survived until the time of Trajan, is a true witness of the tradition of the apostles.
Here the writer again locates John at Ephesus. Furthermore, he dates John's death to the reign of Trajan (A.D. 98-117). If John was as young as fifteen when called to be Jesus' disciple in about A.D. 30, then the Apostle would have been eighty-three years old when Trajan's reign began in A.D. 98. The Apostle John could have been in his nineties - or even one hundred years old - when he died (hence the rumors that he would not die mentioned in John 21).
(4) The Testimony of Eusebius, Origen, and Papias. Eusebius was bishop of Caesarea in Palestine and a confidant of Constantine, the first Christian emperor of Rome. After Constantine legalized Christianity, Eusebius wrote a History of the Church from its origins with Jesus and the Apostles to his own time in A.D. 325. In constructing this history, he used a number of sources, including the writings of Origen (Christian teacher in Caesarea active during the first half of the third century) and Papias (a bishop from Phyrgia who lived in the early second century). In several passages, Eusebius discusses the authorship of Revelation.
Meanwhile the holy apostles and disciples of our Saviour were scattered over the whole world. Thomas, tradition tells us, was chosen for Parthia, Andrew for Scythia, John for Asia, where he remained till his death at Ephesus. Peter seems to have preached in Pontus, Galatia and Bithynia, Cappadocia and Asia, to the Jews of the Dispersion. Finally, he came to Rome where he was crucified, head downwards at his own request. What need be said of Paul, who from Jerusalem as far as Illyricum preached in all its fulness the gospel of Christ, and later was martyred in Rome under Nero? This is exactly what Origen tells us in Volume III of his Commentary on Genesis.
Note that Peter and Paul were martyred at Rome during the reign of Nero, who persecuted Christians there. Furthermore, Eusebius - like Irenaeus - places John's death at Ephesus.
Elsewhere Eusebius describes a later persecution carried out against Christians by another emperor after Nero:
Many were victims of Domitian's appalling cruelty. At Rome great numbers of men distinguished by birth and attainments were executed without a fair trial, and countless other eminent men were for no reason at all banished from the country and their property confiscated. Finally, he showed himself the successor of Nero in enmity and hostility to God. He was, in fact, the second to organize persecution against us, though his father Vespasian had had no mischievous designs against us.
There is ample evidence that at that time the apostle and evangelist John was still alive, and because of his testimony to the word of God was sentenced to confinement on the island of Patmos. Writing about the number of the name given to antichrist in what is called the Revelation of John, Irenaeus has this to say about John in Book V of his Heresies Answered :
Had there been any need for his name to be openly announced at the present time, it would have been stated by the one who saw the actual revelation. For it was seen not a long time back, but almost in my own lifetime, at the end of Domitian's reign. . . .
After fifteen years of Domitian's rule Nerva succeeded to the throne. By vote of the Roman senate Domitian's honours were removed, and those unjustly banished returned to their homes and had their property restored to them. This is noted by the chroniclers of the period. At that time too the apostle John, after his exile on the island, resumed residence at Ephesus, as early Christian tradition records.
According to Eusebius, Domitian carried out an organized persecution against Christians involving confiscation of property, banishment, and executions. He was the second Roman emperor to persecute Christians after Nero. During this time, John the Apostle was exiled to the island of Patmos. There he wrote the Revelation "at the end of Domitian's reign" (i.e., A.D. 95-96). After Domitian's death and during the reign of Nerva (A.D. 96-98), John was released from Patmos and allowed to return to his home at Ephesus.
The author of Revelation identifies himself as "John" (Rev 1:1,4, 9). Eusebius quotes Irenaeus, who suggests that this was probably ("ample evidence") the same John who wrote the Fourth Gospel - that is, John the Apostle. Irenaeus also says that the "antichrist" mentioned in Revelation refers to Domitian, and that his identity would have been clear to anyone living at that time.
If Eusebius' information is correct, then we have the author, date, occasion, and an important key to understanding the book of Revelation here in his History of the Church . We will see, however, that Eusebius and other Christians of his time were not certain that this tradition was entirely accurate.
The bishop continues:
Now let me indicate the unquestioned writings of this apostle [John]. Obviously his gospel, recognized as it is by all the churches in the world, must first be acknowledged. . . .
Of John's writings, besides the gospel, the first of the epistles has been accepted as unquestionably his by scholars both of the present and of a much earlier period: the other two are disputed. As to the Revelation, the views of most people to this day are evenly divided.
Note that, by A.D. 325 (when Eusebius writes his History ), the fourth Gospel and 1 John are generally considered compositions of John the Apostle. However, the authorship of 2-3 John and Revelation are still disputed. Many Christians doubt the "ample evidence" given by Irenaeus and the other Church Fathers.
Eusebius therefore suggests an alternative theory:
Papias has left us five volumes entitled The Sayings of the Lord Explained . These are mentioned by Irenaeus as the only works from his pen:
To these things Papias, who had listened to John and was later a companion of Polycarp, and who lived at a very early date, bears written testimony in the fourth of his books; he composed five.
That is what Irenaeus says; but Papias himself in the preface of his work makes it clear that he was never a hearer or eyewitness of the holy apostles, and tells us that he learnt the essentials of the Faith from their former pupils:
I shall not hesitate to furnish you, along with the interpretations, with all that in days gone by I carefully learnt from the presbyters and have carefully recalled, for I can guarantee its truth. Unlike most people, I felt at home not with those who had a great deal to say, but with those who taught the truth; not with those who appeal to commandments from other sources but with those who appeal to the commandments given by the Lord to faith and coming to us from truth itself. And whenever anyone came who had been a follower of the presbyters, I inquired into the words of the presbyters, what Andrew or Peter had said, or Philip or Thomas or James or John or Matthew, or any other disciple of the Lord, and what Aristion [the reputed author of the present ending of the Second Gospel - i.e., Mark 16:9-20] and the presbyter John, disciples of the Lord, were still saying. For I did not imagine that things out of books would help me as much as the utterances of a living and abiding voice.
Here it should be observed that he twice includes the name of John. The first John he puts in the same list as Peter, James, Matthew, and the rest of the apostles, obviously with the evangelist in mind; the second, with a changed form of expression, he places in a second group outside the number of the apostles, giving precedence to Aristion and clearly calling John a presbyter. He thus confirms the truth of the story that two men in Asia had the same name, and that there were two tombs in Ephesus, each of which is still called John's. This is highly significant, for it is likely that the second - if we cannot accept the first - saw the Revelation that bears the name of John. Papias, whom we are now discussing, owns that he learnt the words of the apostles from their former followers, but says that he listened to Aristion and the presbyter John with his own ears. Certainly he often mentions them by name, and reproduces their teachings in his writings.
Eusebius raises the possibility that there were two Christian leaders, living in Ephesus, who shared the name "John" - namely, John the Apostle and John the Presbyter. He suggests that perhaps John the Presbyter is the "John" who was exiled to Patmos and who wrote the Revelation.
c. Conclusions
We possess significant external evidence from the Early Christian Fathers that John the Apostle wrote Revelation. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origen, Papias, and others, together suggest that, later in life, the Apostle moved from Palestine to Ephesus in the Roman province of Asia. There he wrote the fourth Gospel and three New Testament epistles (1-3 John). During the persecution carried out by Domitian, he was exiled to the island of Patmos, where he received the Revelation. After Domitian's death, during the reign of Nerva, John returned to Ephesus. He died during the reign of Trajan after living an unusually long life. The external evidence meshes well with internal evidence suggesting that the author was a Palestinian Jew, exiled to Patmos, writing to Christians in Asia during a time of severe persecution. That John the Apostle wrote Revelation has been the traditional view of the church for centuries.
However, we have seen that - even in ancient times - there were many Christians who doubted this conclusion. As late as A.D. 325, when Eusebius wrote his History of the Church , opinions regarding the apostolic origin of Revelation were "evenly divided." As far back as A.D. 250, Dionysius of Alexandria questioned whether the same person who composed the simple yet profound language of the fourth Gospel and Johannine Epistles could have written the complicated prose of Revelation. (Of course, some of the differences must be attributed to the radically different genre of an apocalypse.) The controversy over whether or not Revelation should be included in the Christian canon was not finally settled until the Councils of Hippo (A.D. 393) and Carthage (A.D. 397).
Did early Church Fathers, such as Justin and Irenaeus, attribute the Revelation to John because they had solid, reliable information that the Apostle did indeed write the book? Or were they making an intelligent (but not necessarily correct) guess based on what evidence they had? For example, did they say that the Apostle John moved to Asia because they knew that he did? Or did they assume that the "John" who wrote Revelation was the Apostle, take note that this "John" was in Asia, and therefore assume that John the Apostle moved to Asia?
The fact that the authorship of Revelation was still heavily debated in Eusebius's time indicates that the early Church lacked solid proof one way or the other. For this reason, we must acknowledge the very real possibility that Revelation was written by someone other than John the Apostle - perhaps by John the Presbyter. We possess very good evidence that Revelation was written by John the Apostle, but not conclusive evidence.
2. Date
According to Irenaeus (see above), John wrote Revelation at the end of Domitian's reign - that is, about A.D. 95 or 96. This date is almost certainly accurate for the reasons given below.
We have already seen that Revelation was written at a time when Christians were beginning to be persecuted and killed by Roman authorities in Asia. The author expected the harassment and killings to escalate. We have also seen that, according to the Church Fathers, second century Christians possessed an historical recollection of two great persecutions during the first century. The earliest occurred during the reign of Nero in A.D. 64 or 65. At that time there was a great fire in Rome. Rumor had it that Nero wanted to build some new buildings, so he had the fire started in order to burn down a lower class part of town to make room for new construction. The fire burned out of control and destroyed a large portion of the city. Nero first tried to use the Jews as scapegoats. When that tactic failed, he blamed the Christians. Large numbers were executed with tortures that sickened even the Romans. Tacitus, a Roman historian writing about fifty years later, describes that terrible time:
But neither human help, nor imperial munificence, nor all the modes of placating Heaven, could stifle scandal or dispel the belief that the fire had taken place by order [of Nero]. Therefore, to scotch the rumor, Nero substituted as culprits, and punished with the utmost refinements of cruelty, a class of men, loathed for their vices, whom the crowd styled Christians. Christus, the founder of the name, had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate, and the pernicious superstition was checked for a moment, only to break out once more, not merely in Judaea, the home of the disease, but in the capital itself, where all things horrible or shameful in the world collect and find a vogue. First, then, the confessed members of the sect were arrested; next, on their disclosures, vast numbers were convicted, not so much on the count of arson as for hatred of the human race. And derision accompanied their end: they were covered with wild beasts' skins and torn to death by dogs; or they were fastened on crosses, and, when daylight failed were burned to serve as lamps by night. Nero had offered his Gardens for the spectacle, and gave an exhibition in his Circus, mixing with the crowd in the habit of a charioteer, or mounted on his car[riage]. Hence, in spite of a guilt which had earned the most exemplary punishment, there arose a sentiment of pity, due to the impression that they were being sacrificed not for the welfare of the state but to the ferocity of a single man.
Christians remembered Nero as a bloodthirsty "beast" from this time forward.
The second systematic persecution of Christians occurred late in the reign of Domitian, in A.D. 95-96. Roman historians leave no clear record of Domitian himself ever ordering such a persecution. However, church leaders such as Irenaeus and Eusebius testify to at least a localized persecution, in the province of Asia, carried out in Domitian's name (see above). The question, then, is which persecution prompted the writing of Revelation?
Revelation was probably written during the persecution of Domitian, rather than during the persecution of Nero, for the following reasons: First, John (like the authors of 1 Peter, 4 Ezra, and 2 Baruch) uses "Babylon" as a symbol for Rome. He views Rome as a second "Babylon" because, just as Babylon had destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in 587 B.C., so did Rome destroy Jerusalem and its temple in A.D. 70. At the time of Nero's reign (A.D. 54-68) the temple was still standing, so Rome had not yet become "Babylon." However, by Domitian's rule (A.D. 81-96), this potent symbol had become available to John.
Second, Revelation contains many allusions to Roman emperor worship (discussed below in Part 3). As we shall see, such worship was much more prevalent during the reign of Domitian than it was during the reign of Nero.
Third, Revelation frequently portrays Roman political authorities as Nero redivivus ("Nero revivified" or "Nero come back to life") because, like Nero before them, they persecute Christ's church. If he speaks of "Nero come back to life," then John must be writing after Nero's death rather than during the persecution he instigated. Nero redivivus imagery, then, is a symbolic way of referring to Domitian and his deadly agents. (For a fuller explanation of the Nero redivivus idea in Revelation, see the comments on 13:3.)
Finally, the Church Fathers say that John wrote Revelation late in the reign of Domitian (see above), which dates John's Apocalypse to A.D. 95-96.
3. Occasion: Persecution Related to
Emperor Worship in Asia Minor
Domitian's persecution of the church was partly due to the Christians' refusal to engage in emperor worship. What were the issues at stake in this practice, and how did believers respond to it?
a. Historical Background
Although worshiping kings as deities had a long history in the east, the practice did not enter the western world until the time of Alexander the Great (late fourth century B.C.). As the young ruler won victory after victory over Babylonia, Persia, and other eastern lands, the conquered peoples began to proclaim him a god. Alexander encouraged such worship because he thought it would help to unify the diverse peoples making up his empire.
Following his assassination on March 15, 44 B.C., Julius Caesar was declared a god by the Roman Senate. Afterwards it became customary to honor dead emperors in this way. On his deathbed Vespasian announced sarcastically, "I am already becoming a god!"
Tiberius and Claudius discouraged worship of living emperors. However, Nero, Vespasian, and Titus tolerated the practice for its political benefits. Caligula, who suffered from mental illness, was the first emperor who actually believed himself divine.
Domitian insisted on being worshiped as a god during his lifetime, which scandalized his biographer Suetonius:
When [Domitian] became emperor, he did not hesitate to boast in the senate that he had conferred their power on both his father (Vespasian) and his brother (Titus), and that they had but returned him his own; nor on taking back his wife after their divorce, that he had "recalled her to his divine couch." He delighted to hear the people in the amphitheatre shout on his feast day: "Good Fortune attend our Lord [ Dominus ] and Mistress.". . . With no less arrogance he began as follows in issuing a circular letter in the name of his procurators, "Our Master [ Dominus ] and our God [ Deus ] bids that this be done." And so the custom arose of henceforth addressing him in no other way even in writing or in conversation. He suffered no statues to be set up in his honour in the Capitol, except of gold and silver and of a fixed weight. He erected so many and such huge vaulted passage-ways and arches in the various regions of the city, adorned with chariots and triumphal emblems, that on one of them someone wrote in Greek: "It is enough."
During Domitian's reign, at least three of the seven cities to which John addressed the Revelation had temples dedicated to the worship of Caesar - namely, Ephesus, Smyrna and Pergamum. Since 29 B.C., Pergamum (called "the place where Satan has his throne" in Rev 2:13) had been the official center of emperor worship in Asia.
b. Emperor Worship in Daily Life
By the late first century, emperor worship touched many aspects of Roman life, embracing the political, the economic, and the social. Civic events and legal transactions included pledges of allegiance to Caesar as "Lord" and "God" (i.e., dominus and deus in Latin, or kuvrio" ( kyrios ) and qeov" ( theos ) in Greek - the biblical titles Christians used for God the Creator and his Son Jesus Christ). As they entered the theater, sporting competitions, gladiatorial games, or public festivals, citizens tossed a pinch of incense on a small altar as a sacrifice to the "divine Caesar." When animals were slaughtered to provide meat for the marketplace, a small portion was set aside as a sacrifice for the gods. Collegia (private men's clubs) and trade guilds (similar clubs made up of people who practiced the same vocation) held banquets honoring the emperor and their patron gods as silent guests.
Such practices were not necessarily taken seriously as major religious events. Rather, they were expressions of patriotism, national unity, and gratitude for the benevolent rule of the Roman emperor. They were the equivalent of saluting the flag or removing one's hat at the playing of the national anthem. However, refusal to participate called into question one's loyalty to the emperor, and this could lead to the most severe of consequences.
c. Exemptions for Jews and Christians
The only groups really troubled by such practices were Jews and Christians, who were monotheists believing in one God alone. To them, honoring Caesar (a mere man) as "Lord and God" was idolatry. To avoid this sin, Jews of the first century B.C. worked out an agreement that convinced the Romans of their loyalty to the empire: They agreed to pray for the emperor, but not to him. In the temple at Jerusalem they offered sacrifices for the benefit of Caesar, but not to Caesar. This arrangement satisfied the Romans that the Jews were not dangerous rebels, and it was preferable to fighting a war against irrational religious zealots. So Jews were exempted from worship of the Roman gods - including the emperor - and permitted to practice their own religion. Titus instituted a two-drachma tax on each Jew for continuing this special privilege.
At first, the Romans viewed Christians as simply another variety of Jew - messianic Jews. Christians therefore enjoyed the same exemption from emperor worship given to other Jews. Over time, several events altered their status: First, through the successful missionary activity of Paul and others, Christianity became a predominantly Gentile faith. Second, when Jews rebelled against Rome in A.D. 66-73, Christians began to distinguish themselves from that group in order to keep themselves out of trouble. Finally, after the war, Judaism closed ranks and expelled "heretics" such as Christians from the synagogues. Jews quit saying that the Christians were part of their community, which removed the churches' exemption from emperor worship.
d. Christian Responses to the Emperor Cult
How did Christians respond to this situation? Some favored acknowledging the emperor as "Lord," offering sacrifice to his image, and eating with the collegia as harmless expressions of patriotism. After all, they could hail Caesar as "god," giving him that title of honor, without really believing that he was a deity in the literal sense. Did not Jesus himself command us to "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's" (Matt 22:21)? Did not our beloved Apostle Paul teach us to "Submit to the governing authorities" (Rom 13:1)? Should we give up our social life, invite financial ruin, and even risk death over a pinch of incense that means nothing?!
Others argued that confessing Caesar as "Lord and god," and offering sacrifice to the "divine Caesar," was rank idolatry. And did not Christ also say, "Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only" (Matt 4:10)? Did not Paul also say that "for us there is but one God ( theos ) . . . and there is but one Lord ( kyrios )"? John belonged to this latter camp that wanted nothing to do with worshiping the emperor or the other Roman gods. He has harsh words for compromisers in Revelation 2-3.
To avoid committing idolatry, Christians tended to withdraw from much of the social life of the city. Over time, they gained a reputation for being a rather strange and suspicious group, antisocial and lacking community spirit. Eventually the gossip mill started up, and vicious rumors spread:
These Christians are so unpatriotic! They refuse to honor the emperor! And what do they do in those secret meetings of theirs? You don't suppose they are plotting some sort of rebellion, do you? Hmmm . . . wasn't their own leader, Christos, crucified for claiming to be a king?
I heard that those "love feasts" of theirs are incestuous orgies. They say Christos taught them to love their "brothers" and "sisters"!
It's even worse! I heard them talking about eating the flesh and drinking the blood of the "Son." They are sacrificing babies and practicing cannibalism!
These "Christ people" are impious atheists! They say idols are not real and refuse to worship any of our gods.
As their neighbors turned against them, Christians became subject to social and economic discrimination, pressures and harassment, unofficial mob violence, and the plundering of their property. Later books of the New Testament mention these kinds of persecution (see, e.g., Heb 10:34; 13:3; 1 Pet 4:14-16; 5:9).
Tensions focused on Christians' refusal to worship the emperor, for this was not simply a religious infraction but apparent political subversion. Domitian, who had once said, "Not good is a number of rulers," prosecuted this crime without mercy. A possible reference to Christians being punished for such transgressions appears in Dio Cassius' Roman History :
. . . the same year (i.e., A.D. 95) Domitian slew, along with many others, Flavius Clemens the consul, although he was a cousin and had to wife Flavia Domitilla, who was also a relative of the emperor's. The charge brought against them both was that of atheism (i.e., refusal to worship the Roman gods - including the emperor?), a charge on which many others who drifted into Jewish ways (i.e., many Christians?) were condemned . Some of these were put to death, and the rest were at least deprived of their property. Domitilla was merely banished to [the island of] Pandateria.
Note that Dio describes events of the year 95, the very time period in which John wrote Revelation. Note also the kinds of penalties Domitian prescribed for "atheism" - namely, confiscation of property, banishment to an island (as John was exiled to Patmos), and death (as Antipas was killed in Pergamum).
There were political, social, and economic benefits to be gained by turning Christians over to the Roman authorities. For example, if there were two silversmiths in a city, and one was a Christian, then the other could eliminate his competitor by accusing the "disloyal" Christian. Jews could purge their synagogues of "heretics" by reporting that Christians were not true Jews and therefore not entitled to exemption from emperor worship. One's social or political rivals could be removed by posting an anonymous notice exposing them as Christians. The emperor cult handed a deadly weapon to anyone with a grudge or petty jealousy against any Christian.
e. The Correspondence of Pliny and Trajan
Unfortunately, we have no historical documents from Domitian's reign detailing governmental policy toward Christians in Asia. However, we do possess a series of official letters exchanged by Pliny Secundus, the Roman governor of Bithynia, and the Emperor Trajan. Bithynia was just north of Asia, and the letters were written only fifteen or sixteen years after Revelation, in A.D. 111-112. So this correspondence may offer a glimpse into the kinds of pressures faced by Christians during John's time.
Pliny to the Emperor Trajan
It is my custom to refer all my difficulties to you, Sir, for no one is better able to resolve my doubts and to inform my ignorance.
I have never been present at an examination of Christians. Consequently, I do not know the nature or the extent of the punishments usually meted out to them, nor the grounds for starting an investigation and how far it should be pressed. Nor am I at all sure whether any distinction should be made between them on the grounds of age, or if young people and adults should be treated alike; whether a pardon ought to be granted to anyone retracting his beliefs, or if he has once professed Christianity, he shall gain nothing by renouncing it; and whether it is the mere name of Christian which is punishable, even if innocent of crime, or rather the crimes associated with the name.
For the moment this is the line I have taken with all persons brought before me on the charge of being Christians. I have asked them in person if they are Christians, and if they admit it, I repeat the question a second and third time, with a warning of the punishment awaiting them. If they persist, I order them to be led away for execution; for, whatever the nature of their admission, I am convinced that their stubbornness and unshakeable obstinacy ought not to go unpunished. There have been others similarly fanatical who are Roman citizens. I have entered them on the list of persons to be sent to Rome for trial.
Now that I have begun to deal with this problem, as so often happens, the charges are becoming more widespread and increasing in variety. An anonymous pamphlet has been circulated which contains the names of a number of accused persons. Among these I considered that I should dismiss any who denied that they were or ever had been Christians when they had repeated after me a formula of invocation to the gods and had made offerings of wine and incense to your statue (which I had ordered to be brought into court for this purpose along with the images of the gods), and furthermore had reviled the name of Christ: none of which things, I understand, any genuine Christian can be induced to do.
Others, whose names were given to me by an informer, first admitted the charge and then denied it; they said that they had ceased to be Christians two or more years previously, and some of them even twenty years ago. They all did reverence to your statue and the images of the gods in the same way as the others, and reviled the name of Christ. They also declared that the sum total of their guilt or error amounted to no more than this: they had met regularly before dawn on a fixed day to chant verses alternately among themselves in honour of Christ as if to a god, and also to bind themselves by oath, not for any criminal purpose, but to abstain from theft, robbery and adultery, to commit no breach of trust and not to deny a deposit when called upon to restore it. After this ceremony it had been their custom to disperse and reassemble later to take food of an ordinary, harmless kind; but they had in fact given up this practice since my edict, issued on your instructions, which banned all political societies. This made me decide it was all the more necessary to extract the truth by torture from two slave-women, whom they call deaconesses. I found nothing but a degenerate sort of cult carried to extravagant lengths. I have therefore postponed any further examination and hastened to consult you. The question seems to me to be worthy of your consideration, especially in view of the number of persons endangered; for a great many individuals of every age and class, both men and women, are being brought to trial, and this is likely to continue. It is not only the towns, but villages and rural districts too which are infected through contact with this wretched cult. I think though that it is still possible for it to be checked and directed to better ends, for there is no doubt that people have begun to throng the temples which had been almost entirely deserted for a long time; the sacred rites which had been allowed to lapse are being performed again, and flesh of sacrificial victims is on sale everywhere, though up till recently scarcely anyone could be found to buy it. It is easy to infer from this that a great many people could be reformed if they were given an opportunity to repent.
Trajan's Reply to Pliny
You have followed the right course of procedure, my dear Pliny, in your examination of the cases of persons charged with being Christians, for it is impossible to lay down a general rule to a fixed formula. These people must not be hunted out; if they are brought before you and the charge against them is proved, they must be punished, but in the case of anyone who denies that he is a Christian, and makes it clear that he is not by offering prayers to our gods, he is to be pardoned as a result of his repentance however suspect his past conduct may be. But pamphlets circulated anonymously must play no part in any accusation. They create the worst sort of precedent and are quite out of keeping with the spirit of our age.
The Pliny/Trajan correspondence illustrates that, if Christians were hauled before a Roman magistrate, they were required to prove their patriotism in three basic ways: They must sacrifice wine and incense to images of Caesar and the other Roman gods. They must declare Kyrios Kaisaros ("Caesar is Lord," an exact counterpart to the basic Christian confession "Jesus is Lord"). They must "repent" of their faith and curse Christ. If they refused, they would be executed.
f. The Christians' Choice
In such a terrible circumstance, what choices did Christians have? Dr. Boring summarizes them nicely: They could surrender their faith in Christ, but for John this would be to surrender "the crown of life" (see Rev 2:10). They could lie about their loyalty to Christ, but John reserves a place in the "fiery lake of burning sulfur" for liars (see Rev 21:8). They could try to change the laws, but this was not possible since Rome was not a democracy and Domitian would never accept a rival "Lord." They could fight the Roman government, but this was not practical. They could "adjust" by confessing Caesar as "god" without meaning it, but John rejects even feigned idolatry as unworthy of Christ. Finally, they could die, as Jesus himself had died. John affirms death for Christ's sake as the only truly "Christian" response. There is no other way.
He who has an ear, let him hear: If anyone is to go into captivity, into captivity he will go. If anyone is to be killed with the sword, with the sword he will be killed. Here is the patient endurance and the faithfulness of the saints. (Rev 13:10)
This is the challenge faced by the churches of Asia when John writes Revelation. It is a terribly hard book for terribly hard times.
V. THE STRUCTURE OF REVELATION
In Part III of the Introduction we identify Revelation as a Christian apocalypse - probably the first Christian apocalypse. Such writings often incorporate elements of other genres. For example, Daniel 1-6 consists largely of a narrative prologue to the apocalypse proper found in chapters 7-12. In the case of Revelation, John's apocalyptic vision is presented within the framework of a first-century letter.
A. THE FIRST CENTURY HELLENISTIC
LETTER FORM IN REVELATION
Letters written today generally bear certain standard features that conform to cultural norms (e.g., the name and address of the sender and receiver, a greeting formula such as "Dear Sir," and a closing formula such as "Sincerely yours"). New Testament epistles likewise conform to the standard Hellenistic letter form used in the Roman world of the first century A.D. The elements of this common letter form are listed below, along with examples of each element from Paul's First Letter to the Corinthians and his Letter to Philemon:
The name of the sender(s) (see 1 Cor 1:1; Phlm 1a)
The name of the recipient(s) (see 1 Cor 1:2; Phlm 1b-2)
The prescript , which is a greeting formula (see 1 Cor 1:3; Phlm 3)
The proem , which is a word of thanks, praise, or petition to a god (see 1 Cor 1:4-9; Phlm 4-7).
The introductory formula , which serves as the transition into the primary subject matter of the letter (see 1 Cor 1:10; Phlm 8-9).
The main body of the letter (see 1 Cor 1:11-16:18; Phlm 10-22)
Greetings (see 1 Cor 16:19-20; Phlm 23-24)
Benedictory wishes in the sender's own hand (rather than that of a secretary, if used), which serve to personalize the letter (see 1 Cor 16:21-24; Phlm 25)
Revelation bears most of the features of a first century Hellenistic letter, as shown below. This observation is important because it explains why certain elements appear in Revelation and why they are arranged as they are. John is simply following the conventions of his culture.
Name of Sender (Rev 1:4a):
John
Name of Recipient(s) (Rev 1:4b):
To the seven churches in the province of Asia:
Prescript (Rev 1:4c-5a):
Grace and peace to you from him who is, and who was, and who is to come, and from the seven spirits before his throne, and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth.
Proem (Rev1:5b-6): In this part of the letter, a pagan would often call upon the gods to grant good health and prosperity to the addressee(s). John Christianizes this portion of the standard letter form and transforms it into a doxology of praise to God:
To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, and has made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father - to him be glory and power for ever and ever! Amen.
Introductory Formula (Rev 1:9):
I, John, your brother and companion in the suffering and kingdom and patient endurance that are ours in Jesus, was on the island of Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus.
Main Body of the Letter (Rev 1:10-22:20)
Greetings are not found in Revelation.
Benedictory Wishes in the Sender's Own Hand (Rev 22:21):
The grace of the Lord Jesus be with God's people. Amen.
B. THE STRUCTURE OF JOHN'S VISION
Within the Hellenistic letter form, John structures Revelation in four main parts, as a careful examination clearly shows. The book begins with a Prologue (1:1-20) in which the author describes how Christ commissioned him to deliver a revelation to the seven churches of Asia. Near the end of this Prologue, in 1:19, the Lord summarizes the contents of the revelation itself:
Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later.
Notice that the vision contains two main elements: First, there is a revelation of the present - a revelation of "what is now." The "present," of course, refers to "what is now" from John's perspective. Christ offers John a vision of the late first century A.D. in Asia. Second, the Lord promises a revelation of the future - a vision of "what will take place later." Again, this is the "future" from John's point of view - the period from A.D. 95-96 through Christ's return and the consummation of the kingdom of God.
Which part of the book reveals John's "present" and which part reveals the "future"? John treats these two subjects in the order in which they are mentioned. His discussion of the "present" appears in 2:1-3:22 and takes the form of seven letters to the churches of Asia. This part of the vision describes the "present" circumstances of the Asian churches from Christ's point of view.
The Lord's revelation of the "future" appears in 4:1-22:6, as the structure of the passage makes clear. The first verse of this section (4:1) reads:
After this I looked, and there before me was a door standing open in heaven. And the voice I had first heard speaking to me like a trumpet said, "Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after this."
The initial phrase "After this," in and of itself, marks a transition - the end of one discussion and the beginning of another. Christ then introduces the next major portion of the book when he says, "I will show you what must take place after this" - that is, "after" the "present" described in chapters 2 and 3. Revelation 4:1 marks the beginning of the promised vision of "what will take place later."
Where does the vision of the future end? After a long series of images we come to Revelation 22:6:
The angel said to me, "These words are trustworthy and true. The Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent his angel to show his servants the things that must soon take place ."
This verse marks the end of John's discussion of the future. The remainder of the book (22:7-21) consists of a short Epilogue.
By far the largest portion of Revelation describes John's vision of the future (4:1-22:6). How has the author structured this important part of the book? The revelation of "what will take place later" begins with an introduction (4:1-5:14) in which John describes his new vantage point in heaven ("Come up here , and I will show you"). The prophet will see the future from God's point of view.
The rest of the section (6:1-22:6) contains the revelation of the future itself. However, a careful reading shows that John does not receive one long, sequential vision of the future. Instead, he receives three separate revelations of the complete future from John's time through the consummation of the kingdom of God . John describes how the future unfolds in 6:1-8:1. Then he starts over and describes the same period again in 8:2-11:19. Then he reviews the same period a third time in 12:1-22:6. The approach is cyclical, with each vision examining the future from a slightly different angle, and the third vision offering the most detail.
In view of these considerations, we outline Revelation as follows. The Commentary is structured accordingly.
I. Prologue (1:1-20)
II. The Revelation of "What Is Now" (2:1-3:22)
III. The Revelation of "What Will Take Place Later" (4:1-22:6)
A. Introduction: John's Heavenly Vantage Point (4:1-5:14)
B. The First Vision of the Future (6:1-8:1)
C. The Second Vision of the Future (8:2-11:19)
D. The Third Vision of the Future (12:1-22:6)
IV. Epilogue (22:7-21)
-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE
Barr, J. "Jewish Apocalyptic in Recent Scholarly Study." Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 58 (1975): 9-35.
Charlesworth, James H., ed. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: Volume 1 - Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments . Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1983.
Collins, John J., ed. "Apocalypse: The Morphology of a Genre." Semeia 14. Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1979.
. The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to the Jewish Matrix of Christianity . 2 nd ed. The Biblical Resource Series. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998.
. "Apocalyptic Literature." In Early Judaism and Its Modern Interpreters. Eds. Robert A. Kraft and George W.E. Nickelsburg, 345-370. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986.
Collins, John J., and James H. Charlesworth, eds. Mysteries and Revelations: Apocalyptic Studies Since the Uppsala Colloquium. Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Supplement Series, 9. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991.
Funk, Robert W., ed. Journal for Theology and the Church 6 (1969) [issue on "Apocalypticism"].
Hanson, Paul D. The Dawn of Apocalyptic . Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975.
. Old Testament Apocalyptic . Interpreting Biblical Texts. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1987.
Hellholm, David, ed. Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East: Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Apocalypticism, Uppsala, August 12-17, 1979. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1983.
Koch, Klaus. The Rediscovery of Apocalyptic: A Polemical Work on a Neglected Area of Biblical Studies and Its Damaging Effects on Theology and Philosophy . Studies in Biblical Theology, Second Series, 22. London: SCM Press Ltd, 1972.
Marcus, Joel, and Marion L. Soards, eds. Apocalyptic and the New Testament: Essays in Honor of J. Louis Martyn . Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series, 24. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1989.
Minear, Paul S. New Testament Apocalyptic . Interpreting Biblical Texts. Nashville: Abingdon, 1981.
Morris, Leon. Apocalyptic . Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972.
Murphy, Frederick J. "Apocalypses and Apocalypticism: The State of the Question." Currents in Research: Biblical Studies 2 (1994): 147-179.
Rowley, H.H. The Relevance of Apocalyptic: A Study of Jewish and Christian Apocalypses from Daniel to the Revelation . New York: Association Press, 1964.
Russell, D.S. Divine Disclosure: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992.
. The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic: 200 B.C.-A.D. 100. The Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1964.
Yarbro-Collins, Adela, ed. Early Christian Apocalypticism: Genre and Social Setting . Semeia 36. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986.
THE APOCALYPSE OF JOHN
Aune, David. Revelation . 3 Vols. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word, 1997-98.
Barclay, William. Letters to the Seven Churches . New York: Abingdon Press, 1957.
. The Revelation of John . 2 Vols. The Daily Bible Study Series. Rev. ed. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1976.
Bauckham, Richard. The Theology of the Book of Revelation . New Testament Theology. Cambridge: University Press, 1993.
Boring, M. Eugene. Revelation . Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching. Louisville, KY: John Knox Press, 1989.
Caird, G.B. The Revelation of St. John the Divine . Harper's New Testament Commentaries. New York and Evanston: Harper & Row, 1966.
Hemer, Colin J. The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia in Their Local Setting . Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series, 11. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1986.
Murphy, Frederick J. "The Book of Revelation." Currents in Research: Biblical Studies 2 (1994): 181-225.
Pilch, John J. What Are They Saying about the Book of Revelation? New York: Paulist Press, 1978.
Ramsay, W.M. The Letters to the Seven Churches . Updated ed. Edited by Mark W. Wilson. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994.
-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV
collapse all
Text -- Revelation 5:10-14 (NET)
Parallel
collapse allCommentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)
expand allCommentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes
NET Notes: Rev 5:10 The textual problem here between the present tense βασιλεύουσιν (basileuousin, “they...
