The apocalyptic XVIth chapter of the Didache

[Charles Wilson]

FJV --

Please consider this in a constructive manner, not argumentative. We're not that far apart considering our relationship to other Posters on this site.

1. One of the larger problems in the NT Puzzle is found in following the numbers:

Acts 6: 5 (RSV):

[5] And what they said pleased the whole multitude, and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, and Proch'orus, and Nica'nor, and Ti'mon, and Par'menas, and Nicola'us, a proselyte of Antioch.

Seven of the Little People in the early Church, correct? No. Who was "Nicholas, Proselyte of Antioch"? That would be Octavian/Augustus, who favored Antioch and was the Champion of that City. This, then, is an inverted List of Caesars. Julius Caesar was not a Caesar. In fact, he gave Aristobulus 2 a coupla' Legions to go into Syria to Kick Ass and Take Names. So there is a question here as to whether to count JC as an Evil One or not. BTW, this makes "Stephen Martyr" one Frugi Piso, the four day emperor (With a change of "stoned" for "Opened his veins..." we have the Death of Stephen Martyr. See AGAIN, Tacitus, Histories, Book 4.).

So, if we count Piso and not JC, is the 8th Caesar Piso? If we don't count Piso, is the 8th to be Otho? Should we count JC? Vespasian gave his Pledge to Otho and I believe the Empty Tomb is built around the Death of Otho. Whatever the count, Otho is the last since Vitellius is reviled as no other to the Flavians. I believe Vitellius is identified with Simon Magus in Acts, one of the "Magicians" (as was Nero - "Elymas").

Domitian rewrites much of this while appearing as "The Holy Spirit" (from the Courts of Trajan and at least through Nerva). 'N as I hold the texts up to the sunlight, twist my head and squint my eyes, I can see Zakkai and a few others, laboring after the Fall of the Temple, leaving clues that may or may not have been changed by Domitian and Company.

2. For God (Diuus Claudius)
so loved the world that (we're told)
he gave his only begotten son (Britannicus)
that whosoever believeth in him (Titus)
should not perish (Titus supposedly eats from the poisoned dish of Britannicus and is sick almost to death for a long time. Upon recovery and ascension, Titus orders a golden statue of Britannicus in his honor)
but have everlasting life (Eternal Life is for Divine Emperors, not the Little People - "Didn't the Egyptians teach you slaves anything?...)

So much tension! There is evidence that the Roman emperors thought they were gods and loved and so much. As much evidence shows that, in Judea, they were reviled. Both alternatives are easily seen in the NT. Which "Son of God" predominates? I agree that #1 is Titus. The Sign's Gospel in John points to Titus and, among other pointers, the Baptism of the Holy Spirit replacing the Baptism of John before the Baptism of John is even known very much in the Corners of the Empire points - as if more evidence were needed - to Titus.

There are other "Sons" lurking in the Data, however. Frugi Piso is one and his importance did carry weight. Nero is the important alternative. His bio father was truly was an evil man. You can look him up. He is found in Acts. Nero was adopted by Claudius. He did "appear" as the "Son of God".

3. The one area that I genuinely disagree with is the "Abomination of Desolation/Desolating Sacrilege". This is a "Proof Item" that the NT was a sophisticated rewrite that unifies the Judaic Culture with Rome for the purpose, as Josephus argues, for the Transfer of Divine Blessings from Judaism (Judea) to Rome.

The Abomination of Desolation was committed by the Greek General Demetrius Eucerus against Alexander Jannaeus at Gerizim. The Story is well hidden by Josephus. Nonetheless, much mischief has come from this. "Not only do we transfer Authority from the Julio-Claudians to our Flavian family, we obtain the Authorization from the God of Israel!" Neat trick, you "Magicians".

Thanx,

CW

[FransJVermeiren]

CW

Thank you for your contribution. Without going in detail, I think we should consider the events of 70 CE to be a mental earthquake with magnitude 10 for the Jews. As the first Gospel was written shortly after 70 CE, we should not only give the war events an a priori preference for being discussed in (the apocalyptic parts of) the NT, we should also give the protagonists of the war an a priori preference for being staged in these writings. From the Roman side: Nero, Vespasianus and Titus. What did, in these horrible circumstances, Claudius, Britannicus or Alexander Jannaeus bother the Jews? The Gospels were not just written after the war, they were written because of the war.

[Charles Wilson]

Thank you for your kind words.

I think we should consider the events of 70 CE to be a mental earthquake with magnitude 10 for the Jews.

Agreed, agreed and agreed some more. Why was this so? The Jews, denigrated and hated so much for the past 2000+ years, had a Deep Culture with History behind it. Herod's last speech gives a hint as to the Problem: He brags that he had accomplished more in his reign than the Hasmoneans did in the previous 125 Years. Herod wasn't even considered a Jew by the People. The People even argued in front of Caesar that they would be Good Citizens if Caesar would appoint some kindly Syrian Governor over them. Make no mistake: The Temple Mishmarot Service continued until its termination in 70. The last Mishmarot Group to perform the Sacrifices was Jehoiarib, of which the Hasmoneans were assigned. Funny how those Hasmoneans are seldom named but always participate...

As the first Gospel was written shortly after 70 CE, we should not only give the war events an a priori preference for being discussed in (the apocalyptic parts of) the NT, we should also give the protagonists of the war an a priori preference for being staged in these writings.

We can argue over the dates of the first Gospel Authorship. I believe that the earliest is about 98 CE but the Signs Gospel, the Story of the Mishmarot Group Immer as well as other Texts argue for inclusion of Documents much earlier than 98. Jay Raskin has some interesting arguments for inclusion of the early 30s in the mix. The point you make, however, is a good one: The War that ended the Judaic Culture in 70 should be given first examination. It's what I start with - Nothing makes sense about a savior/god until you examine what was destroyed and what took its place. In Rome, the Flavians took over from the Julio-Claudians. In Judea, the Romans destroyed the Culture and the Religion. They allowed a very few (Zakkai and others) to live. Weitzman's Community was overtaken by Roman Sensibilities - and Christianity, as was the case elsewhere.

From the Roman side: Nero, Vespasianus and Titus. What did, in these horrible circumstances, Claudius, Britannicus or Alexander Jannaeus [[do to]] bother the Jews? The Gospels were not just written after the war, they were written because of the war.

Again, agreed. I cannot help it if I see the hand of the earlier Judean and Roman Cultures in the NT. You can make it all from new cloth or you can use the advantage of theft over honest toil. If your purpose is to show that Rome is the chosen city of God, you use Stories that tell of the Triumph of the King and Temple of God and its Priests:

Revelation 5: 10 (RSV):

[10] and hast made them a kingdom and priests to our God,
and they shall reign on earth."

You take the Piyyutim of Jannaeus and the Priesthood living in Galilee and rewrite it for the Glory of Rome. Caligula demands a statue of him be placed in the Temple. Claudius (Supposedly) evicts the Jews from Rome. Nero orders Vespasian to re-conquer Jerusalem. Titus finishes the job and Domitian begins his Deification as "Lord God Domitian". We would be surprised if History carried no records of these events.

Josephus, Antiquities..., 17, 9, 3:

"The people assembled together, and desired of Archelaus, that, in way of revenge on their account, he would inflict punishment on those who had been honored by Herod; and that, in the first and principal place, he would deprive that high priest whom Herod had made, and would choose one more agreeable to the law, and of greater purity, to officiate as high priest.

That's the job that needs to get done. Replace the Hasmoneans, and by extension the House of Eleazar and Ithamar and PROVE that it was all a mistake, at least until the Romans would make the Better Chosen People. The Romans succeeded, as we see "down to this day".

CW

[FransJVermeiren]

(part 4)

Didache XVI verse 5
Then shall the creation of mankind come to the fiery trial and many shall be offended and be lost, but they who endure in their faith shall be saved by the curse itself.

Fiery trial

----------------Didache XVI---------------	--------------------------Josephus------------------------	---------------------New Testament-----------------
Verse 5	War book VI, 232-235, 250-284 and 407	Mt 24, 29
“Then shall the creation of mankind come to the fiery trial …”	232-235 Burning of the porticoes of the Temple 250-280 Burning of the Temple itself 281-284 Burning of the surrounding area 407, the final day of ancient Jerusalem: “They ceased their slaughter at dusk, but fire gained the mastery in the night, and the dawn of the eighth of the month of Gorpiaeus rose over Jerusalem in flames.”	“Immediately after the catastrophe of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light …”

(D) ‘Then shall the creation of mankind come to the fiery trial’ sounds quite enigmatic. But the Greek κτισις does not only have the meaning of ‘creation’ but also ‘foundation’, ‘authority system’, and combined with των ανθρωπων it could mean something like ‘the authoritative (or leading) part of mankind’. It is interesting to compare with 1 Enoch 20, 5 “Michael, one of the holy angels, namely the one put in charge of the best part of humankind, in charge of the nation”, the nation being ancient Israel. Κτισις των ανθρωπων might be a veiled description of the Jewish people.

(J) In War V 469 and VI 178 Josephus mentions the use of a combination of wood, pitch and bitumen to set a Roman ramp and the western portico of the Temple compound on fire, respectively. Pitch and bitumen produce a thick black smoke when burning.

(NT) In its veiled description of the then events the Synoptic Apocalypse does not mention the fire but the enormous black smoke column covering Jerusalem and its neighborhood when the Temple was burning. ‘Immediately after the catastrophe’ points to the catastrophe (θλιψις) as the cause of the darkening.


Many die, some are saved

----------------Didache XVI---------------	------------------------Josephus----------------------	---------------- ----New Testament---------- -------
Verse 5	War book VI, 420	Mt 24, 22
“Many shall be offended and be lost, but they who endure in their faith shall be saved by the curse itself.”	Josephus mentions 1.100.000 dead and 97.000 captives. This first amount is considered to be a gross exaggeration. Between 250.000 and half a million victims is a more realistic estimate.	“And if those days had not been shortened, no human being would be saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened.”

(D) “By the curse itself” is quite enigmatic. The discussion of this fragment, about which a lot has been written, would lead too far here.

(J) See Josephus, The Jewish War, p. 450 (Gaalya Cornfeld, editor).

[FransJVermeiren]

(part 5)

Didache XVI, verse 6
And then shall appear the signs of the truth. First the sign spread out in the sky, then the sign of the sound of the salpinx, and thirdly the resurrection of the dead.

The first sign of reality: the sign in the sky

----------------Didache XVI---------------	-----------------------------Josephus---------------------------	------------------------New Testament-------------------
Verse 6	War book V, 471	Mt 24, 29
“First the sign spread out in the sky …”	“At first there arose a dense cloud of smoke and dust as the flames were smothered by the debris …”	“… the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.”

(D) The Greek αληθεια means truth as well as reality. I think reality is the best choice here. I translate οὐρανός as sky instead of heaven.
That the sign is spreading out is quite suggestive for a huge column of smoke rising and spreading out afterwards.

(J) In his description of the burning of the Temple compound, Josephus concentrates on the fire (see part 4). In the verse above he mentions smoke production earlier during the siege of Jerusalem.

(NT) The smoke production is so enormous that the sun and the moon are hided from view.


The second sign of reality: the sound of the salpinx

---------------------Didache XVI-------------------	---------------------------Josephus-------------------------	-----------------------New Testament--------------------
Verse 6	War book III and IV	Revelation 11, 15
“Then the sign of the sound of the salpinx …”	III, 86, 89, 90: The salpinx in Roman camp life III, 124 and V, 48: The place of the salpinx players before the eagle and surrounded by the sacred standards when the Roman legions are on the march III, 91: Announces the ‘ready for war’ cry of the Roman legionnaires III, 265: Gives the sign for the Roman attack on Jotapata IV, 20: Gives the sign for the attack on Gamla VI, 68-69: Roman salpinx players and salpinxes at the surprise attack on the Antonia fortress	“Then the seventh angel blew the salpinx, and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, ‘The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign for ever and ever.”

The salpinx is a musical instrument of the ancient Greek that had its most important function in warfare. As throughout all the relevant literature (also in the Septuagint) the Greek σαλπιγξ (and derived words) is used, I have kept it.

(J) Josephus extensively mentions the salpinx in different aspects of Roman warfare in the war against the Jews.

(NT) As the sing of the salpinx seems to herald an important event, I think we should not look at Josephus in the first place, but to Revelation and the Old Testament. In Revelation the salpinx is heralding God’s and his Christ’s final victory over the κοσμος (the Roman empire?), and also 1 Sam 13, 3 heralding victory is the function of the salpinx. In Joel 2, 1 the salpinx heralds the day of the Lord, the day that concretely turned out to bring along Roman victory. But perhaps the most interesting relation can be drawn with Isaiah 27 (10a/11b/13a): “For the fortified city is solitary, a habitation deserted and forsaken, like a wilderness; (…) For this is a people without discernment; therefore he who made them will not have compassion on them, he that formed them will show them no favor. (…) And in that day a great salpinx will be blown …” So the sign of the salpinx heralds the final Roman victory, the fall of Jerusalem’s Upper City, the last part of the city that was in the hands of its defenders.


The third sign of reality: the recovery of the moribund

-----------------Didache XVI------------------	------------------------------Josephus-----------------------------	----------------------New Testament-------------------
Verse 6	War VI,414-419 and 428-434 War VII, 26-35	Mt 27, 52
“and thirdly the resurrection of the dead.”	VI, 414 “survivors appeared constantly” VI, 429 “For after every man who showed himself had either been killed or captured by the Romans, those in the underground passages were fettered out.” The fate of John of Gischala is described in the same passage. VII, 26-35 describes the Simon bar Giora’s emergence from a secret passage and his subsequent capture.	“The memorials also were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised.”

(D) Αναστασις νεκρων is traditionally translated as ‘resurrection of the dead’, but as the streets and hiding places of Jerusalem were filled with living corpses in that days, the translation ‘recovery of the deathly ill’ or ‘recovery of the moribund’ seems more appropriate (see BDAG p. 667 for the translation of νεκρος as deathly ill).

(NT) The people who had fallen asleep are apparently those who were exhausted as symptom of the terminal phase of their famine (like Jesus’ followers in the garden of Gethsemane). The most illustrious moribund who recovered were Jesus, Simon bar Giora and John of Gischala. Jesus’ recovery is the most spectacular one as it followed his crucifixion and resulted in a permanent escape. Matthew suggests that the moribund hided in memorials, Josephus speaks of underground passages. Matthew’s use of μνημειον can be inspired by Jesus’ stay in a memorial after he had been taken from the cross. (In the singular Matthew’s verse reflects Jesus’ situation remarkably well: ‘The memorial also was opened, and the body of the saint who had fallen asleep was raised.’)

I believe these three signs in verse 6 present a nice chronological unity describing the culminating events of the war:
1. The sign in the sky: The burning of the Temple (beginning of August 70 CE)
2. The sign of the salpinx: Final Roman victory / Fall of Jerusalem (end of August 70 CE)
3. The resurrection of the dead: The appearance of starved and hidden survivors in the days after the fall of the city with Jesus as the most important amongst them.
Signs of a disastrous reality with a spark of hope.

[DCHindley]

(part 5)

Didache XVI, verse 6
And then shall appear the signs of the truth.
First the sign spread out in the sky,
then the sign of the sound of the salpinx,
and thirdly the resurrection of the dead.

For the sake of discussion:

καὶ (and) τότε (then) φανήσεται (will appear) τὰ (the) σημεῖα (signs) τῆς (of the) ἀληθείας (truth)
πρῶτον (first) σημεῖον (a sign) ἐκπετάσεως* (flying out, opening) ἐν (in, on, by means of) οὐρανῷ (heaven)
εἶτα (then) σημεῖον (a sign) φωνῆς (a voice) σάλπιγγος (from a trumpet)
καὶ (and) τὸ (the) τρίτον (third [sign]) ἀνάστασις (a resurrection) νεκρῶν (from dead ones)

DCH

* I've heard some folks try to interpret this as referring to the "stretching out" of the arms in crucifixion. Cue the heavenly crucifixionists! This would have to be by relation to the verb ἐκπετάννυμι, spread or hold out, rather than from the noun ἐκπέτασις, which is rare as all heck.

[FransJVermeiren]

DCH

Thank you for your clarification.

In the translation above I only translated ουρανος as sky, and I preferred salpinx instead of trumpet, for the rest I kept Kirsopp Lake’s translation (Loeb Classical Library). As I believe that apocalyptic writings describe historical events, I would translate the whole verse as follows:

And then shall appear the signs of reality.
First the sign spread out in the sky,
then the sign of the sound of the salpinx,
and thirdly the rising of the moribund.

Above I jumped over ὑπ’ αὐτου τοῦ καταθέματος of verse 5. I intend to return to it later. What is your opinion about this phrase?

[FransJVermeiren]

(part 6)

Didache XVI verse 7
(6b) …and thirdly the rising of the moribund, (7) but not all of them, but as it was said, ‘The Lord shall come and all his holy ones with him.’

The day of the Lord
The ‘day of the Lord’ concept is a key concept in Jewish thought of the Second Temple period. In an undefined but not too far future God will sentence the evil generation that now inhabits the world and intervene in world history to crush all enemies of the Jews and all evildoers. Then He will install (anoint) His messiah to lead his chosen people into a golden future, with the former oppressors of the Jews and the whole world under their yoke.

One of these ‘day of the Lord’ texts is the OT book of Zachariah chapter 14, and this text is connected with Didache XVI through the quote in verse 7 ‘The Lord shall come and all his holy ones with him.’ The last sentence of the earlier Zechariah 14 verse 5 goes as follows: ‘The Lord my God shall come and all his holy ones with him.’ This verse is clearly the basis of Didache XVI verse 7.

Zechariah 14 is a special elaboration of this ‘day of the Lord’ concept, as it places this joyful day at the end of a catastrophic war, the war against the Babylonians in the 6th century BCE. The chapter starts as follows:
(1) Behold, a day of the Lord is coming, when the spoil taken from you will be divided in the midst of you. (2) For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city shall be taken and the houses plundered and the woman ravished; half of the city shall go into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be cut off from the city. (3) Then the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations as when he fights on a day of battle.

The next passage, on the splitting of the Mount of Olives, ends with ‘Then the Lord my God will come and all the holy ones with him’, and a little bit further verse 9 goes like this: ‘And the Lord will become king over all the earth; on that day the Lord will be one and his name one.’
So the lost war, catastrophic as it may be, does not settle history. At its ending God intervenes and history will take a turn in favor of the Jews, so that finally they will be victorious and reign over the whole world.

I believe the quote from Zechariah is placed determinedly in Didache XVI. As in Zechariah the Lord intervenes at the end of a catastrophic war, the same does happen in the Didache. The fiery trial and the signs of reality are veiled descriptions of the war against the new Babylonians, the Romans.

During the war the defenders of Jerusalem were eagerly looking out for God’s intervention in their favor, but the military situation continually worsened, up to the destruction of the national sanctuary and total national defeat. Was this God’s intervention? Had God left his chosen people so totally that there was nothing but this total humiliation? Or did in that days happen something which kindled the hope of the defeated? Did they descry a sign that God had not totally abandoned them, and that a beginning was made in the reversal of their utterly deplorable fate?

[Ben C. Smith]

(part 6)

Didache XVI verse 7
(6b) …and thirdly the rising of the moribund, (7) but not all of them, but as it was said, ‘The Lord shall come and all his holy ones with him.’

The "rising of the moribund"? I think a translation has gone slightly awry somewhere. The phrase is ἀνάστασις νεκρῶν: the resurrection of the dead, not of the dying; nor, to pay homage to The Princess Bride, even of the "mostly dead".

[FransJVermeiren]

If someone is ill in bed or lying down in exhaustion, and afterwards gets better and stands up, that’s this person’s αναστασις, his or her ‘standing up’ or ‘rising’. When the Gospel writers introduced the fictional succession of death-and-becoming-alive-again, a doctrinal translation was needed, and so in English ‘resurrection’ became the doctrinal translation of αναστασις. But as dead people do not become alive again, we should return to ‘rising’ or ‘recovery’ (in relation to illness or the end stage of famine). Above I already mentioned that νεκρος is a broad term covering ‘dead’ as well as ‘for dead’, ‘as dead’ or ‘deathly ill’ – see BDAG p. 667. And once again, as dead people do not become alive again, the obvious choice in this context is ‘deathly ill’ or ‘moribund’. Maybe the doctrinal translation is aberrant and not my rational down to earth translation.