Revelation 11 and the Kitos Revolt -- Christian Genesis, part 1

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Revelation 11 and the Kitos Revolt -- Christian Genesis, part 1

Post by Joseph D. L. »

Greetings and Salutations. As a first time poster here I figure a brief introduction is appropriate. You can call me Joseph D.L. and my main focus and interest is in the origins of Christianity, the books of the New Testament, as well as the impact that culture had on shaping the identity of Christianity. While this will, with any luck, be further expanded upon in future posts, right now I'll limit it to one of the avenues of study I'm engaged in.

The Kitos revolt was an uprising of Jews during the last three years of Trajan's rule. While the direct cause is unknown, as a good portion of information regarding it is lost, the best conclusion is that it was a reaction to Rome's invasion of Parthia the year before the uprising.

While local uprisings appeared independently of one another, it's the march of rebellion along the North African coast which led to the most brutal assault the revolt saw. Beginning in Cyrene at the start of the revolt, Jews, led by a figure known either as Lucas or Andrew (conjoined as Lukuas-Andreas), destroyed many temples to pagan gods, as well as slaughter the population of Greeks and Romans. They moved eastward through Lybia and into Egypt. Marcus Rutilius Lupus, governour of Alexandria, anticipating that the mob would reach the city, had ordered an evacuation (among those forced to leave was the historian Appian). When the mob arrived they were quashed by Quintus Marcius Turbo.

After this Turbo made his way to Palestine, perhaps in pursuit of Lucas. While it is unclear of what became of him, it is possible that he was defeated and executed in Alexandria (as alluded to in Acta Pauli et Antonini), or fled to Palestine and was one of those executed by Lucius Quietus in Lydda.

In Lydda another uprising had been sparked by the brothers Julian and Pappos. This uprising, in a critical trade route, disrupted the grain supply from Egypt to Parthia. While the two brothers were captured by Quietus. The account in the Talmud (Ta'anit 18b) of the brother's deaths may appear to be the result of liberties taken with history. The text reads that Trajan himself was present during the trial, and was killed himself minutes after the siblings' own death. Actually, Trajan died in Salinus. Rather it is understood that it was Quietus who had ordered the execution. Nevertheless this sparked an annual celebration of "Trajan's day" on the twelfth of Adar.

A passage appearing before this however notes that the celebration of Trajan's day had been discontinued out of respect for the brothers Shemaya and his brother Ahiya. The possibility thus that these two pairs of brothers are the same is, to me at least, made clear.

With this we can move onto the crux of the matter: that Revelations 11 was written with the Kitos revolt in mind.

Now as sensational as that may sound, I must clarify that I do not take that as meaning tat Revelation 11 predicted the Kitos revolt. Rather, it was written after it as a means of attaching apocalyptic significance to it. My view of Revelations is that 1) it is a composition spanning close to a century, with numerous redactions and historical anachronisms interwoven into it, and 2) that the main purpose of this text was as a means of divining history; that history was the language of God and revealed past and future events. As a whole, the book is dated to the end of the first century; but I believe the composition spanned from roughly 59 ad to at least the time of Justin Martyr, ca. 160 ad.

Also, Revelations 11 may be viewed as allegorized history. It is not meant to be a direct account of the revolt, but as an allegory of important events that happened during it. I don't now if that matters but I thought I should make that apparent.

The chapter opens with the author (presumably John) being handed a measuring rod [Also, this is from the English Standard Version translation]:
Then I was given a measuring rod like a staff, and I was told, “Rise and measure the temple of God and the altar and those who worship there, but do not measure the court outside the temple; leave that out, for it is given over to the nations, and they will trample the holy city for forty-two months. And I will grant authority to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth.” These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth. And if anyone would harm them, fire pours from their mouth and consumes their foes. If anyone would harm them, this is how he is doomed to be killed. They have the power to shut the sky, that no rain may fall during the days of their prophesying, and they have power over the waters to turn them into blood and to strike the earth with every kind of plague, as often as they desire
The appointing of the two witnesses here, if my interpretation holds water, would be the brothers Julian and Pappos. Indeed, given how they are described as causing death to those who oppose them hints at a necessity for violence, as was the case for the revolt. What's more is that the two brothers were also apart of a campaign to rebuild the Temple. It's rejection may have added fuel to the fire which caused the revolt.
And when they have finished their testimony, the beast that rises from the bottomless pit will make war on them and conquer them and kill them, and their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city that symbolically is called Sodom and Egypt, where their Lord was crucified. For three and a half days some from the peoples and tribes and languages and nations will gaze at their dead bodies and refuse to let them be placed in a tomb, and those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them and make merry and exchange presents, because these two prophets had been a torment to those who dwell on the earth.
The death of the brothers by Quietus, who makes war against them, here transposed as the beast.

It is here that a most crucial point is raised in regards to this interpretation. The chapter identifies their-- the two witnesses--Lord as being crucified in the same city in which they too were killed by the beast. So what is the great city to mean for this theory? Biblical exegetes and commentators interpret it to mean Jerusalem, as that is the city in which Christ is crucified. (Though outside the city walls). But beyond that there is no reason to presume this to be the only viable option; especially considering the allegorical nature of the text. The great city could truly be any city: Jerusalem, Babylon, Alexandria, and even Lydda.

And supposing the two witnesses were indeed the brothers Julian and Pappos, who then is their Lord referred to.

The fate of Lukuas-Andreas is not known. Both Eusebius and Cassius Dio only mentions him as leading the revolt, but not what happened to him after his defeat in Alexandria. The papyrus Acta Pauline et Antonini gives the impression that it was there he was executed (with mock performances of this being enacted). While on the authority of Abulfaraj, a tenth century Arabian historian, Friedrich Munter writes that Lucas had fled to Palestine (see The Wars of the Jews, pg. 18-19.) But then there is also the association of Lydda with yet another obscure figure hitherto misappropriated by a good many researchers: Yeshu ben Stada.

This Yeshu ben Stada, appearing only in a handful of scattered references in the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmud, does at once seem to fit the pattern established thus far with this interpretation of Revelation 11 and the Kitos revolt. Accordingly he was the product of a shameful conception, had traveled to Egypt where he was learned in the esoteric knowledge of the Egyptians, and returned to his native Judea a sage and a healer. After a course he was ordered to be stoned, in accordance with Deut 21:23, which occurred in Lydda.

Though I will fully admit that this is speculation, conjecture, and just down right guesswork, I do think that Lukuas-Andreas and Yeshu ben Stada are in fact one and the same. The evidence is circumstantial, (the coming from/fleeing from Egypt, the messianic pretense, as well as the possible connections to Lydda), but I hope there is enough to present at least an argument worth considering.

But if indeed this is the case then it may also brings together various other traditions of the theology: Simon of Cyrene, Simon Magus, and Simon of Jerusalem, may all be one and the same figure. I will elaborate upon this in future posts, but mention it hear to put a proverbial bug your ears.

But returning to the subject of the two witnesses, the chapter continues with this:
But after the three and a half days a breath of life from God entered them, and they stood up on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them. Then they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, “Come up here!” And they went up to heaven in a cloud, and their enemies watched them. And at that hour there was a great earthquake, and a tenth of the city fell. Seven thousand people were killed in the earthquake, and the rest were terrified and gave glory to the God of heaven.
The resurrection of the two witnesses are followed by them being assumed up into heaven. This trope follows that of Enoch and Elisha in the Old Testament, but also that of the brothers Castor and Pollux in Greek mythology. The possible significance of this will also be elaborated in another post.

Lastly, the mention of a great earthquake which followed their assumption also corresponds with the revolt. Cassius Dio records that at the beginning of the revolt an earthquake struck Antioch:
"While the emperor was tarrying in Antioch a terrible earthquake occurred; many cities suffered injury, but Antioch was the most unfortunate of all. Since Trajan was passing the winter there and many soldiers and many civilians had flocked thither from all sides in connexion with law-suits, embassies, business or sightseeing, there was no nation of people that went unscathed; and thus in Antioch the whole world under Roman sway suffered disaster. There had been many thunderstorms and portentous winds, but no one would ever have expected so many evils to result from them. First there came, on a sudden, a great bellowing roar, and this was followed by a tremendous quaking. The whole earth was upheaved, and buildings leaped into the air; some were carried aloft only to collapse and be broken in pieces, while others were tossed this way and that as if by the surge of the sea, and overturned, and the wreckage spread out over a great extent even of the open country. The crash of grinding and breaking timbers together with tiles and stones was most frightful; and an inconceivable amount of dust arose, so that it was impossible for one to see anything or to speak or hear a word. As for the people, many even who were outside the houses were hurt, being snatched up and tossed violently about and then dashed to the earth as if falling from a cliff; some were maimed and others were killed. Even trees in some cases leaped into the air, roots and all. The number of those who were trapped in the houses and perished was past finding out; for multitudes were killed by the very force of the falling débris, and great numbers were suffocated in the ruins. Those who lay with a part of their body buried under the stones or timbers suffered terribly, being able neither to live any longer nor to find an immediate death." ~Cassius Dio, Roman History, book 68, chapter 24
The closing verses also reflects a similar description of the earthquake:
Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet, 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 forever and ever.” And the twenty-four elders who sit on their thrones before God fell on their faces and worshiped God, saying, “We give thanks to you, Lord God Almighty,
 who is and who was,
 for you have taken your great power and begun to reign. The nations raged,
 but your wrath came,
 and the time for the dead to be judged,
 and for rewarding your servants, the prophets and saints,
 and those who fear your name,
 both small and great,
and for destroying the destroyers of the earth.” Then God's temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant was seen within his temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, peals of thunder, an earthquake, and heavy hail.
All of this, as disparate and coincidental as it may be, leaves me to theorize that Revelation chapter 11 was an allegory of the Kitos revolt; that Lukuas-Andreas was the crucified messianic figure; and that his two supporters, the brothers Julian and Pappos, were the two witnesses fighting on his behalf.

With the above I hope I have at least intrigued some of you to give this a thoughtful consideration, even if I am mistaken or there is disagreement with you. Anyway, that's all I've got at the moment. So until next time: Amen.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Revelation 11 and the Kitos Revolt -- Christian Genesis, part 1

Post by Joseph D. L. »

Criticisms are of course welcome.
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Revelation 11 and the Kitos Revolt -- Christian Genesis, part 1

Post by andrewcriddle »

A lot of this seems to be based on Talmudic tradition, which may or may not be historical. Do we have any non-rabbinic evidence for two brothers being involved as leaders in the Kitos revolt ?

Andrew Criddle
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Revelation 11 and the Kitos Revolt -- Christian Genesis, part 1

Post by MrMacSon »

There is an account in Eusebius C.E. bk IV, chap 2 -

1. The teaching and the Church of our Saviour flourished greatly and made progress from day to day; but the calamities of the Jews increased, and they underwent a constant succession of evils. In the eighteenth year of Trajan’s reign973 there was another disturbance of the Jews, through which a great multitude of them perished.974

2. For in Alexandria and in the rest of Egypt, and also in Cyrene,975 as if incited by some terrible and factious spirit, they rushed into seditious measures against their fellow-inhabitants, the Greeks. The insurrection increased greatly, and in the following year, while Lupus was governor of all Egypt,976 it developed into a war of no mean magnitude.

3. In the first attack it happened that they were victorious over the Greeks, who fled to Alexandria and imprisoned and slew the Jews that were in the city. But the Jews of Cyrene, although deprived of their aid, continued to plunder the land of Egypt and to devastate its districts,977 under the leadership of Lucuas.978 Against them the emperor sent Marcius Turbo979 with a foot and naval force and also with a force of cavalry.
4. He carried on the war against them for a 175 long time and fought many battles, and slew many thousands of Jews, not only of those of Cyrene, but also of those who dwelt in Egypt and had come to the assistance of their king Lucuas.

5. But the emperor, fearing that the Jews in Mesopotamia would also make an attack upon the inhabitants of that country, commanded Lucius Quintus980 to clear the province of them. And he having marched against them slew a great multitude of those that dwelt there; and in consequence of his success he was made governor of Judea by the emperor. These events are recorded also in these very words by the Greek historians that have written accounts of those times.981

https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.ix.ii.html

  • 978 Lucuas is called by Dion Cassius (LXVIII. 32) Andreas. Münter suggests that he may have borne a double name, a Jewish and a Roman, as did many of the Jews of that time.

    981 The language of Eusebius might imply that he had other sources than the Greek writers, but this does not seem to have been the case. He apparently followed Dion Cassius for the most part, but evidently had some other source (the same which Orosius afterward followed), for he differs from Dion in the name of the Jewish leader, calling him Lucuas instead of Andreas. The only extant accounts of these affairs by Greek historians are those of Dion Cassius and Orosius, but there were evidently others in Eusebius’ time
FransJVermeiren
Posts: 253
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2016 1:14 am
Contact:

Re: Revelation 11 and the Kitos Revolt -- Christian Genesis, part 1

Post by FransJVermeiren »

If we consider Revelation 11:1-15 (or at least 3-15) to be a homogenous account, then Jesus is its protagonist. His resurrection and ascension are clearly described in verse 11 and 12.

Revelation is an encrypted historical account of the war of the Jews against the Romans. Different encryption techniques have been used, and sometimes the technique is as simple as it is effective. Duplication (or multiplication) is one such simple technique:
• Four horses in chapter 6 = 2 equites = Vespasian and Titus
• Two witnesses in chapter 11 = 1 person (with a royal and priestly function) = the messiah = Jesus
• Twenty-four thrones and twenty-four elders in chapter 4= 12 thrones and 12elders = the representatives of the twelve tribes of Israel on their
throne
• The kings (plural) of the east in chapter 16 = the king (singular) of the east = the messiah.
www.waroriginsofchristianity.com

The practical modes of concealment are limited only by the imaginative capacity of subordinates. James C. Scott, Domination and the Arts of Resistance.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Revelation 11 and the Kitos Revolt -- Christian Genesis, part 1

Post by Joseph D. L. »

A lot of this seems to be based on Talmudic tradition, which may or may not be historical. Do we have any non-rabbinic evidence for two brothers being involved as leaders in the Kitos revolt ?

Andrew Criddle
Not that I am aware of, and even the Talmudic sources seem to hold conflicting information about them. Though Ta'anit 18b emphatically puts their deaths during the reign of Trajan, other passages have them actually surviving the revolt and dying during the bar Kochba revolt.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Revelation 11 and the Kitos Revolt -- Christian Genesis, part 1

Post by Joseph D. L. »

If we consider Revelation 11:1-15 (or at least 3-15) to be a homogenous account, then Jesus is its protagonist. His resurrection and ascension are clearly described in verse 11 and 12.

Revelation is an encrypted historical account of the war of the Jews against the Romans. Different encryption techniques have been used, and sometimes the technique is as simple as it is effective. Duplication (or multiplication) is one such simple technique:
• Four horses in chapter 6 = 2 equites = Vespasian and Titus
• Two witnesses in chapter 11 = 1 person (with a royal and priestly function) = the messiah = Jesus
• Twenty-four thrones and twenty-four elders in chapter 4= 12 thrones and 12elders = the representatives of the twelve tribes of Israel on their
throne
• The kings (plural) of the east in chapter 16 = the king (singular) of the east = the messiah.
This seems wrong to me. The only implicitly stated resurrection in the chapter are those of the two witnesses who are killed by the beast. Jesus, I take, not to be the Lord mentioned as crucified; but rather is referring to Lukuas-Andreas.

Furthermore, I take the book of Revelation in it's entirety to be referencing many different events during a hundred year time span. The Jewish-Roman war is of course apart of it, but also is the Kitos revolt, and also bar Kochba in chapter 14.
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Revelation 11 and the Kitos Revolt -- Christian Genesis, part 1

Post by Joseph D. L. »

There is an account in Eusebius C.E. bk IV, chap 2 -
1. The teaching and the Church of our Saviour flourished greatly and made progress from day to day; but the calamities of the Jews increased, and they underwent a constant succession of evils. In the eighteenth year of Trajan’s reign973 there was another disturbance of the Jews, through which a great multitude of them perished.974

2. For in Alexandria and in the rest of Egypt, and also in Cyrene,975 as if incited by some terrible and factious spirit, they rushed into seditious measures against their fellow-inhabitants, the Greeks. The insurrection increased greatly, and in the following year, while Lupus was governor of all Egypt,976 it developed into a war of no mean magnitude.

3. In the first attack it happened that they were victorious over the Greeks, who fled to Alexandria and imprisoned and slew the Jews that were in the city. But the Jews of Cyrene, although deprived of their aid, continued to plunder the land of Egypt and to devastate its districts,977 under the leadership of Lucuas.978 Against them the emperor sent Marcius Turbo979 with a foot and naval force and also with a force of cavalry.
4. He carried on the war against them for a 175 long time and fought many battles, and slew many thousands of Jews, not only of those of Cyrene, but also of those who dwelt in Egypt and had come to the assistance of their king Lucuas.

5. But the emperor, fearing that the Jews in Mesopotamia would also make an attack upon the inhabitants of that country, commanded Lucius Quintus980 to clear the province of them. And he having marched against them slew a great multitude of those that dwelt there; and in consequence of his success he was made governor of Judea by the emperor. These events are recorded also in these very words by the Greek historians that have written accounts of those times.981

https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.ix.ii.html

978 Lucuas is called by Dion Cassius (LXVIII. 32) Andreas. Münter suggests that he may have borne a double name, a Jewish and a Roman, as did many of the Jews of that time.

981 The language of Eusebius might imply that he had other sources than the Greek writers, but this does not seem to have been the case. He apparently followed Dion Cassius for the most part, but evidently had some other source (the same which Orosius afterward followed), for he differs from Dion in the name of the Jewish leader, calling him Lucuas instead of Andreas. The only extant accounts of these affairs by Greek historians are those of Dion Cassius and Orosius, but there were evidently others in Eusebius’ time
I do find the meaning of the applied names to be somewhat revealing as to what Lukuas-Andreas was believed to be.

Andreas, or Andrew, may be considered a literal translation of the Hebrew איש, which--anyone familiar with Huller would tell you--is the prophetic Angelic figure that appeared to Moses as a burning fire and a thunderous voice.

Lukuas, I suspect, may have been a corruption of Lucius, which is derived from the Latin lux for light. Taken together we have a messianic figure with the applied name of Man of Light.
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8798
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Revelation 11 and the Kitos Revolt -- Christian Genesis, part 1

Post by MrMacSon »

Joseph D. L. wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2017 2:22 am
But if indeed this is the case then it may also brings together various other traditions of the theology: Simon of Cyrene, Simon Magus, and Simon of Jerusalem, may all be one and the same figure.
.
Joseph D. L. wrote: Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:02 pm
Andrew Criddle wrote:A lot of this seems to be based on Talmudic tradition, which may or may not be historical. Do we have any non-rabbinic evidence for two brothers being involved as leaders in the Kitos revolt ?
Not that I am aware of, and even the Talmudic sources seem to hold conflicting information about them. Though Ta'anit 18b emphatically puts their deaths during the reign of Trajan, other passages have them actually surviving the revolt and dying during the bar Kochba revolt.

This may not be relevant but I'll put it here anyway.

In discussing Hegesippus, who we largely know about through Eusebius, Peter Kirby noted

Eusebius quotes an account of the death of Symeon in the reign of Trajan, apparently in response to the Kitos War uprising recorded by Dio Cassius, a rebellion of Jews outside of Judea around 115-117 AD.

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 3.32.1-3.
1. It is reported that after the age of Nero and Domitian, under the emperor whose times we are now recording, a persecution was stirred up against us in certain cities in consequence of a popular uprising. In this persecution we have understood that Symeon, the son of Clopas, who, as we have shown, was the second bishop of the church of Jerusalem, suffered martyrdom.

2. Hegesippus, whose words we have already quoted in various places, is a witness to this fact also. Speaking of certain heretics [a passage quoted in Bk. IV. chap. 22, §4] he adds that Symeon was accused by them at this time; and since it was clear that he was a Christian, he was tortured in various ways for many days, and astonished even the judge himself and his attendants in the highest degree, and finally he suffered a death similar to that of our Lord.

3. But there is nothing like hearing the historian himself, who writes as follows:
  • Certain of these heretics brought accusation against Symeon, the son of Clopas, on the ground that he was a descendant of David and a Christian; and thus he suffered martyrdom, at the age of one hundred and twenty years, while Trajan was emperor and Atticus governor.”

... [Hegesippus] is quoted as saying that jealousy arose because of the election of Symeon among the people who belonged to the family of the Lord (and descendants of David) who comprised the leadership of the church. It is most plausible that the one depicted as being snubbed is one who had some kind of legitimate claim to being elected at all, i.e., Thebuthis, a grandson of Judas (one of the remaining “family of the Lord” in the account above [I think Peter is referring to bk 3, chap. 20]), the brother of James the Just, instead of Symeon, supposedly the ancient son of Clopas, the brother of Joseph. He was one of those who were arrested and hassled by Domitian “when search was made for the descendants of David,” as already quoted.

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 3.32.4.
4. And the same writer says that his accusers also, when search was made for the descendants of David, were arrested as belonging to that family [<- a peculiar statement]. And it might be reasonably assumed that Symeon was one of those that saw and heard the Lord, judging from the length of his life, and from the fact that the Gospel makes mention of Mary, the wife of Clopas [ John xix. 25], who was the father of Symeon, as has been already shown.

http://peterkirby.com/chasing-hegesippus.html

E.H., 3.32.5-6.
5. The same historian says that there were also others, descended from one of the so-called brothers of the Saviour, whose name was Judas, who, after they had borne testimony before Domitian, as has been already recorded [chap 20], in behalf of faith in Christ, lived until the same reign.

6. He writes as follows:
“They came, therefore, and took the lead of every church as witnesses and as relatives of the Lord. And profound peace being established in every church, they remained until the reign of the Emperor Trajan [see chap. 20, §8. See note 5], and until the above-mentioned Symeon, son of Clopas, an uncle of the Lord, was informed against by the heretics, and was himself in like manner accused for the same cause before the governor Atticus. And after being tortured for many days he suffered martyrdom, and all, including even the proconsul, marvelled that, at the age of one hundred and twenty years, he could endure so much. And orders were given that he should be crucified.

PK: -
“relatives of the Lord,” as also attested by Julius Africanus, play a leadership role in the period after 70 AD and, according to this source, up to approximately 115 AD. They are leaders and witnesses whose presence was felt until the end of Trajan’s reign. The picture here is that of Symeon leading the churches up to the end of Trajan’s reign, with several leaders under him in many locations whose primary qualification is that they are descended from Judas, one of the “so-called brothers of the Saviour.”

http://peterkirby.com/chasing-hegesippus.html


Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 3.32.7-8.
7. In addition to these things the same man, while recounting the events of that period, records that the Church up to that time had remained a pure and uncorrupted virgin, since, if there were any that attempted to corrupt the sound norm of the preaching of salvation, they lay until then concealed in obscure darkness.

8. But when the sacred college of apostles had suffered death in various forms, and the generation of those that had been deemed worthy to hear the inspired wisdom with their own ears had passed away, then the league of godless error took its rise as a result of the folly of heretical teachers [bk. IV. chap. 22], who, because none of the apostles was still living, attempted henceforth, with a bold face, to proclaim, in opposition to the preaching of the truth, the ‘knowledge which is falsely so-called*.’
  • τὴν ψευδόνυμον γνῶσιν; 1 Tim. vi. 20. A few mss., followed by Stephanus, Valesius (in his text), Closs, and Crusè, add the words (in substance): “Such is the statement of Hegesippus. But let us proceed with the course of our history.” The majority of the mss., however, endorsed by Valesius in his notes, and followed by Burton, Heinichen, and most of the editors, omit the words, which are clearly an interpolation.

PK: -
"The implication of the source being paraphrased [t]here is that the crucifixion of Symeon ends the apostolic generation (at the latest extremity of Trajan’s reign, 115-117 AD). This is a contrast to the prevailing contemporary assumption that “the beloved disciple” of John’s Gospel was the last of that troop.
http://peterkirby.com/chasing-hegesippus.html

Then, in the next chapter, Chapter 33, Eusebius says -

E.H. 3.33.1-2
1. So great a persecution was at that time opened against us in many places that Plinius Secundus, one of the most noted of governors, being disturbed by the great number of martyrs, communicated with the emperor concerning the multitude of those that were put to death for their faith [ref to Pliny the Youngers Ep. 96, which recent research suggests could be fake] At the same time, he informed him in his communication that he had not heard of their doing anything profane or contrary to the laws,—except that they arose at dawn and sang hymns to Christ as a God; but that they renounced adultery and murder and like criminal offenses, and did all things in accordance with the laws.

2. In reply to this Trajan made the following decree: that the race of Christians should not be sought after but, when found, should be punished. On account of this the persecution -which had threatened to be a most terrible one- was, to a certain degree, checked, but there were still left plenty of pretexts for those who wished to do us harm. Sometimes the people, sometimes the rulers in various places, would lay plots against us, so that, although no great persecutions took place, local persecutions were nevertheless going on in particular provinces*, and many of the faithful endured martyrdom in various forms.
  • There was nothing approaching a universal persecution -that is a persecution simultaneously carried on in all parts of the empire- until the time of Decius.

Last edited by MrMacSon on Sun Nov 19, 2017 4:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
FransJVermeiren
Posts: 253
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2016 1:14 am
Contact:

Re: Revelation 11 and the Kitos Revolt -- Christian Genesis, part 1

Post by FransJVermeiren »

Joseph D. L. wrote: Sat Nov 18, 2017 4:40 pm
If we consider Revelation 11:1-15 (or at least 3-15) to be a homogenous account, then Jesus is its protagonist. His resurrection and ascension are clearly described in verse 11 and 12.

Revelation is an encrypted historical account of the war of the Jews against the Romans. Different encryption techniques have been used, and sometimes the technique is as simple as it is effective. Duplication (or multiplication) is one such simple technique:
• Four horses in chapter 6 = 2 equites = Vespasian and Titus
• Two witnesses in chapter 11 = 1 person (with a royal and priestly function) = the messiah = Jesus
• Twenty-four thrones and twenty-four elders in chapter 4= 12 thrones and 12elders = the representatives of the twelve tribes of Israel on their
throne
• The kings (plural) of the east in chapter 16 = the king (singular) of the east = the messiah.
This seems wrong to me. The only implicitly stated resurrection in the chapter are those of the two witnesses who are killed by the beast. Jesus, I take, not to be the Lord mentioned as crucified; but rather is referring to Lukuas-Andreas.

Furthermore, I take the book of Revelation in it's entirety to be referencing many different events during a hundred year time span. The Jewish-Roman war is of course apart of it, but also is the Kitos revolt, and also bar Kochba in chapter 14.
IMO verse 11 is quite explicit – and it doesn’t mention the beast: But after three and a half days a breath of life from God entered them, and they stood up on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them.
If we correct for the encryption technique of duplication, a breath of life from God entered him, and he stood up on his feet. Who else but Jesus?

The great fear (φοβος μεγας) in this verse matches with the fear of the disciples after Jesus’ resurrection in Mark 16:8: And they went out and fled from the tomb; for trembling and astonishment had come upon them; and they said nothing to any one, for they were afraid (ἐφοβουντο γαρ).
www.waroriginsofchristianity.com

The practical modes of concealment are limited only by the imaginative capacity of subordinates. James C. Scott, Domination and the Arts of Resistance.
Post Reply