Is Middle Revelation Historical, Mythical or Other?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2100
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Is Middle Revelation Historical, Mythical or Other?

Post by Charles Wilson »

In another Thread, Giuseppe has wandered into the forest again, this time concerning Revelation 11:8:
Giuseppe wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 8:51 am So the French Mythicist Maurice Mergui points out the important concept of LIMIT:
Now I see here a link with what Danielou says about the cosmic Cross as a celestial LIMIT:

it is, therefore, easy to see how on this view the Cross could come to be regarded as separating the lower world from the world above

...the entire quote is the following [No, it's not. I edited it]:

Now the Gnostics regarded the planetary world or hebdomad as the sphere of the Demiurge, who was a stranger to the Pleroma, and it is, therefore, easy to see how on this view the Cross could come to be regarded as separating the lower world from the world above. The reference to the Timaeus appears, therefore, to be by far the best explanation of the definition of the Cross as the Limit. But are there sufficient grounds for linking these ideas in this way? Gnostic texts make no allusion to the Platonic X, but on the other hand, this was identified with the Cross of Christ by second century writers of the Great Church. Thus the Demonstratio of Irenaeus states: 'He has imprinted the sign of the Cross on the universe,' which is in fact a scarcely altered quotation from the Timaeus of Plato (26 B-C), which Justin had seen as a prefiguration of the Cross in his First Apology: 'Plato, in the Timaeus, seeks to discover, in accordance with the laws of Nature, what the Son of God is, and puts it in these words: "He has marked Him in the form of a X on all things" (LX, I). Justin then explains that Plato borrowed this symbolism from the episode of the brazen serpent, and continues: 'which Plato reading, and not accurately understanding it, and not apprehending that it was a figure of the Cross, but taking it to be a X, he said that next to God the first principle, the second power, was traced in the form of a X upon the universe' (LX, 5-6). There is another detail in the text of the Timaeus which permits a still more definite conclusion. Plato explains that the function of the sphere of the fixed stars is to restrain (pedan) the movement of the planets. Now in the Acts of Andrew a eulogy of the Cross includes the following words: '0 Cross that hast restrained (pedesas) the moving sphere of the world' (JAMES,p. 360). It is impossible to avoid seeing in this an allusion to the Timaeus; moreover, the fact can be quite definitely established, thanks to a passage in Hippolytus on the disciples of Mark: '(The eighth heaven) has been added to the planetary sphere to restrain its rapid movement .... Hence it is an image of Horos ' (Elench. VI, 41; cf. also Irenaeus, Adv. haer. I, 17:I). Here the Gnostic Stauros-Horos is explicitly identified with the Platonic X.

(Danielou, The Theology of Jewish-Christianity, Darton, Longman & Todd, p.285-286, my bold)

In conclusion, the idea of LIMIT that was crossed through was both:
  • temporal: the "last times" are arrived
  • spatial: the Messiah has crossed the cosmic border between upper heavens and lower heavens: i.e. he is just entered in Outer Space
Hence, This is another answer for the question: why crucifixion?

Because the crucifixion represented the go beyond the LIMIT, both spatial and temporal, and hence the best sign of the coming of the Messiah.
Reminding me of an old Comment from a Commentator:

"This stuff is piled on really thick. We're going to have to use a Heidegger..."
BUT: That's OK. It's Giuseppe.

Joseph D. L. added:
Joseph D. L. wrote: Mon Apr 27, 2020 5:48 pm Revelation 11 is a historical witness of the Kitos revolt. There's nothing allegorical about it. Lukuas is the Lord crucified, Julian Alexander and Pappos are his witnesses who are killed by the first Beast, Trajan.

Not everything in Christianity involving crosses is reducible to Horos-Stauros or Plato's celestial chi.
He references his first Post:
Joseph D. L. wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2017 2:22 am 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.
I've always thought that the Revelation Section was Symbolically Rewriting the deaths of Aristobulus 2 and his son Alexander (Beheaded at the hands of Scipio). The Key Clue is that Aristobulus is left out in the open after an expository Scene where a small scroll is eaten that is sweet as honey in the mouth but bitter on the stomach:
Charles Wilson wrote: Sun Apr 26, 2020 1:04 pm Revelation 11: 8 - 12 (RSV):

[8] and their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which is allegorically called Sodom and Egypt, where their Lord was crucified.
[9] For three days and a half men from the peoples and tribes and tongues and nations gaze at their dead bodies and refuse to let them be placed in a tomb,
[10] 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.
[11] 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.
[12] Then they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, "Come up hither!" And in the sight of their foes they went up to heaven in a cloud.

What is this all about?

Josephus, Antiquities..., 14, 7, 4:

But some time afterward Cesar [sic], when he had taken Rome, and after Pompey and the senate were fled beyond the Ionian Sea, freed Aristobulus from his bonds, and resolved to send him into Syria, and delivered two legions to him, that he might set matters right, as being a potent man in that country. But Aristobulus had no enjoyment of what he hoped for from the power that was given him by Cesar; for those of Pompey's party prevented it, and destroyed him by poison; and those of Caesar's party buried him. His dead body also lay, for a good while, embalmed in honey, till Antony afterward sent it to Judea, and caused him to be buried in the royal sepulcher...

There is a Consistent Explanation for the Revelation verses. It has to do with honey.

Revelation 10: 9 - 10 (RSV):

[9] So I went to the angel and told him to give me the little scroll; and he said to me, "Take it and eat; it will be bitter to your stomach, but sweet as honey in your mouth."
[10] And I took the little scroll from the hand of the angel and ate it; it was sweet as honey in my mouth, but when I had eaten it my stomach was made bitter.

Ben is helpful as always:
Ben C. Smith wrote: Mon Apr 27, 2020 9:28 pm
Charles Wilson wrote: Mon Apr 27, 2020 7:24 pmI have this as going back to Pompey and being battered by Mithridiates the Poisoner after the "Honey Debacle" where Mithridates leaves poisoned honey (Rhdodendron honey) for Pompey's troops to eat.
Have you read Adrienne Mayor's biographical treatment of Mithradates? He was all about the poison, the trickery, and the intrigue.
Finally, I want to make this the longest Post ever so I want to include the pieces of Revelation that, I believe, show that these chapters are indeed about Jannaeus, Queen Salome and on as reflected in Josephus:

Revelation 6: 15 - 17 (RSV):

[15] Then the kings of the earth and the great men and the generals and the rich and the strong, and every one, slave and free, hid in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains,
[16] calling to the mountains and rocks, "Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb;
[17] for the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand before it?"

A longer Analysis finds "...him who is seated on the throne..." is Jannaeus with "...the Lamb" as the Mishmarot Group Immer.

Revelation 7: 10 (RSV):

[10] and crying out with a loud voice, "Salvation belongs to our God who sits upon the throne, and to the Lamb!"

The elect are named as those of the Tribes of the Israelites.
***
[13] Then one of the elders addressed me, saying, "Who are these, clothed in white robes, and whence have they come?"
[14] I said to him, "Sir, you know." And he said to me, "These are they who have come out of the great tribulation; they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.

PLZ note the Link between the Mishmarot Immer and those who came through the Great Tribulation.
The great Tribulation has already occured. It began with Luke 2: 36 - 38 (RSV):

[36] And there was a prophetess, Anna, the daughter of Phan'u-el, of the tribe of Asher; she was of a great age, having lived with her husband seven years from her virginity,
[37] and as a widow till she was eighty-four. She did not depart from the temple, worshiping with fasting and prayer night and day.
[38] And coming up at that very hour she gave thanks to God, and spoke of him to all who were looking for the redemption of Jerusalem.

With Certainty, this is Queen Salome. When you get to Josephus, you read of Demetrius Eucerus* destroying Alexander Jannaeus and Jannaeus retreating into the mountains for 6 years. This is the Tribulation. Those who came through with Jannaeus are given the citadels by Salome.

Revelation 8: 1 (RSV):

[1] When the Lamb opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour.

Salome.

With this, we move to Revelation 10. This tells of Mithridates and the poisoning of Aristobulus by Pompey. Mithridates poisoned a number of Pompey's troops with poisoned honey, probably Rhododendron honey. Pompey remembers and deprives Julius Caesar of an Ally. NOTE: Many apply a Symbolism here of the small scroll representing the perils of signing agreements with Rome. I'm OK with that so long as the Primary Symbolism is realized.

Which bring us Chapter 11. With Order and Sequence, this must be the Story of Aristobulus 2 and his son. Aristobulus is preserved in honey (A Natural Preservative!) and the Irony is great. Poisoned by honey and preserved in honey.

A Final Note: These Stories were known in the area but the rewrite shows "...the advantage of theft over honest toil". The Original links the Jannaeus/Salome Line to the Mishmarot Service Group Immer. It is the Priesthood that provides the Anti-Herodian, Anti-Roman Resistance. The Hasmoneans are held in esteem. The Leading Group, Jehoiarib, claims the Hasmoneans. Immer claims the Hasmoneans as well. Jehoiarib to Immer is "The House of Eleazar". The Romans will resurrect "Lazarus" (Eleazar) and make a Priest of Immer into the savior/god "Jesus".

This is what was rewritten.

So these middle chapters of Revelation are taken and only lightly changed. "The Prophets lasted until John...". In the NT, yes. Not in the Original.

CW

* Note: It is Demetrius Eucerus who is/performs the Abomination of Desolation, "standing where he ought not".
klewis
Posts: 175
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:39 am

Re: Is Middle Revelation Historical, Mythical or Other?

Post by klewis »

It is all of the above and more. First, it is the stitching together of the Hebrew Scriptures via Hebrew Poetry / Parallel formations. The selections of the text are connected with a historical reality that the author wants to convey. Personally, I see it all referring to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE, where the author is recreating the conquering of the promised land by Joshua / Jesus. This is used as a backdrop for the eventual conquering of Rome (see Revelation 10:6 in which the mighty angel declares that the time is really really soon). There will be many who do not see it that way, but as everyone who talks about Revelation should know, the opinions are more plentiful than the letters that it contains.

Image

The author of Revelation wrapped up chapter 11 and 12 as a single entity within the 42 month, 1260 day, 3 1/2 day parallel. The origin of the parallel came from the book of Ezekiel used to depict how long the siege of Jerusalem would take.

Image

When John added Zechariah into the book of Revelation we get Joshua and Zerubbabel, and Satan makes his debut into the book of Revelation.

Image
Image

When John added Joshua and Deuteronomy into the book of Revelation, chapter 11 grew as well. It is where we get the trumpets and the earthquake and the ark of the covenant.
Image

The addition of Deuteronomy-Joshua material created the imagery of Joshua marching on Jericho. Since Jericho was depicted as an evil city and the Hebrews came from Egypt. It is not much of a stretch to the author to use Egypt and Sodom in the description.

Image
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2100
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Is Middle Revelation Historical, Mythical or Other?

Post by Charles Wilson »

klewis wrote: Fri May 01, 2020 4:38 am This is used as a backdrop for the eventual conquering of Rome (see Revelation 10:6 in which the mighty angel declares that the time is really really soon).
SO...

1.Who is the Strong Angel?'
2. Whose POV is given here? Judaic Sympathizers or Roman Sympathizers?

I've stated my belief that this is Pompey, based on the story of Mithridates and Pompey and the use of Honey as a Weapon of War.
I also agree with you Klewis that it makes sense that this Passage - verse 6 especially - is calling for the destruction of Rome. However, It would make sense that if the Subject is Pompey, he would desire the End of Rome since he was just run outa' town by Mr. Julius Kick-Ass Caesar.

It also makes sense that this Section came from a Judaic POV. The next Chapter tells, IMHO, of Aristobulus 2 and his son, finishing the Story of Honey begun earlier.

Pompey did enough to Judea to earn the hatred of Judea for Eternity.
Yet, there is a certain sense in which Pompey would demand the End of Roman Hegemony - for his ends not Judea's.

Plutarch, Pompey:

"Then, as they drew near the shore, Cornelia, together with his friends, stood on the trireme watching with great anxiety for the outcome, and began to take heart when she saw many of the king's people assembling at the landing as if to give him an honourable welcome. But at this point, while Pompey was clasping the hand of Philip that he might rise to his feet more easily, Septimius, from behind, ran him through the body with his sword, then Salvius next, and then Achillas, drew their daggers and stabbed him. And Pompey, drawing his toga down over his face with both hands, without an act or a word that was unworthy of himself, but with a groan merely, submitted to their blows, being sixty years of age less one, and ending his life only one day after his birth-day
***
"This was the end of Pompey. But not long afterwards Caesar came to Egypt, and found it filled with this great deed of abomination. From the man who brought him Pompey's head he turned away with loathing, as from an assassin; and on receiving Pompey's seal-ring, he burst into tears; the device was a lion holding a sword in his paws..."

Who is the Strong Angel?
Whose POV is given?

CW
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Is Middle Revelation Historical, Mythical or Other?

Post by Joseph D. L. »

To answer your question, Charles, the entire books of Revelation would be allegorical history, a la Daniel.

What the authors of the book of Daniel did was use history to foretell future events. To them history occurred in cycles, and so by learning from what had transpired, they could prepare for the future.

So I would it place it under "other", with the caveat being "allegorical history".

As clever as klewis's analysis maybe, he fails to take into account that Revelation is a book of emerging properties, i.e. written and added to by various authors and editors throughout a long time frame. Indeed, his use of the word "author," singular, proves as much. However, understanding Revelation as allegorical history renders almost his entire model superfluous, as his reason doesn't explain why such a book was written to begin with, while my model provides a historical basis for everything in it, and by extension when what parts were written.
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2100
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Is Middle Revelation Historical, Mythical or Other?

Post by Charles Wilson »

Joseph D. L. wrote: Fri May 01, 2020 3:11 pm To answer your question, Charles, the entire books of Revelation would be allegorical history, a la Daniel.

What the authors of the book of Daniel did was use history to foretell future events. To them history occurred in cycles, and so by learning from what had transpired, they could prepare for the future.

So I would it place it under "other", with the caveat being "allegorical history".
I agree, I agree, I agree and yet there is more.

What is the point of using these Cycles if you do not have a Reference Point to apply the Current Cycle to what is happening NOW? Yes, Daniel was used in Revelation but where was the "Appalling Abomination"? If the Original was given in the events surrounding Antiochus Epiphanes sacrificing a pig on the Altar, where was the Greek who sacrificed in Herod's time? We can't find it.

In fact, by that time the Hatred against the Greeks was very well established. Jannaeus, Salome (not the Salome "...who was called 'Alexandra' by the Greeks..." ) were lied about as "impure" and the term was used as a vicious racial slur.

Then where was the "Abomination of Desolation" found?

Here is something to your point: Josephus hides the truth. If his story was the Truth then it was rewritten and hidden. Josephus won't even tell you who performed Sacrifices in the Temple. It was all rewritten - and is now seen as "Allegorical".

"Jesus", as Giuseppe states, did not exist. His character was created and once the argument is about "The Existence of Jesus", it's over. Or is it "Other"?

That's why it's more important to find out what happened.

BTW, it was Demetrius Eucerus who performed the "Abomination of Desolation" and it was at the Temple at Gerizim. Josephus tells us that Eucerus camped at Shechem before handing Jannaeus' ass to him on a platter. Shechem is very near Gerizim. Josephus hides this.

"How would you know?"

Probably not allegorically. Probably not through a celestial crucifixion, although if you could reason to that, I would be VERY interested in seeing the Proof.

We have different Assignments of Symbolic Meaning, JDL and klewis and Giuseppe. At the end of the day, the reasons for any alternative may be equally weighted.

CW
User avatar
Joseph D. L.
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am

Re: Is Middle Revelation Historical, Mythical or Other?

Post by Joseph D. L. »

What is the point of using these Cycles if you do not have a Reference Point to apply the Current Cycle to what is happening NOW? Yes, Daniel was used in Revelation but where was the "Appalling Abomination"? If the Original was given in the events surrounding Antiochus Epiphanes sacrificing a pig on the Altar, where was the Greek who sacrificed in Herod's time? We can't find it.
They do have a reference point. The reference point is known to those whom the text is written for at the time.

Okay, for example, chapter 14. As I've discussed at length elsewhere, this is almost for sure a reference to the bar Kochba revolt. Even though it uses imagery indicative of numerous other texts, that they're all converged into this means that 1) the author is only loosely using language common at the time, inspired by Biblical stories, 2) that the author has something specific he wants to address in his account. And when I say author I mean the single author for this particular portion. (Chapters 11, 13 and 14 are probably the same person, with ch. 12 being sandwiched in there by a latter editor as it has nothing to do with the surrounding passages, as in how can the Lord be crucified before he had even been born?)

You can also use Daniel as an example. It contains a VERY loose historical narrative, with the conquest of Babylon by the Persians, the Persians by the Greeks, and the Greeks splitting off into numerous other Kingdoms. Daniel is primarily an apocalyptic text of the Hasmonean period, with them being the rock that destroys the statute.

Image

So you could ask, What is the point of using these Cycles if you do not have a Reference Point to apply the Current Cycle to what is happening NOW?, for this as well.

But then you could ask, why is the Torah written at all? Why were the Gospels written at all? Such questions are ontologically incorrect. The point isn't WHY they were written, but what is written. What is the meaning behind them. That is a better question. If you discover the what, you inadvertently discover the why.

That's the problem with trying to understand these texts. People are asking the wrong questions about them and so never get close to their true meaning, and thus argue in circles.

Image

Which way is the cube facing? Is it facing down left, or is it facing up right That's Biblical scholarship in a nutshell.
klewis
Posts: 175
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:39 am

Re: Is Middle Revelation Historical, Mythical or Other?

Post by klewis »

Charles Wilson wrote: Fri May 01, 2020 2:29 pm
klewis wrote: Fri May 01, 2020 4:38 am This is used as a backdrop for the eventual conquering of Rome (see Revelation 10:6 in which the mighty angel declares that the time is really really soon).
SO...

1.Who is the Strong Angel?'
2. Whose POV is given here? Judaic Sympathizers or Roman Sympathizers?

CW
I think the Strong angel is a product of parallel formation and not anchored in a historical figure. In the original source that John used it was God (Ezek 2:9 - 3:3). However in later drafts there was a chain of custody of a message / scroll. In which, God gave Jesus the scroll, and Jesus gave an Angle the scroll, and finally it came to John (Rev 1:1).
The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant
This is how the Mighty Angel story got into Revelation.

In the first draft of Revelation, John took the whole of Ezekiel and chapters 6 to 29 of Isaiah and formed a parallel with them. The content in both sections contained many of the same items in the same order. The result was two sets of wax tablets, one set from Ezekiel, the other from Isaiah

https://drive.google.com/file/d/12JZcor ... sp=sharing

On page 40, you can see how the content from Ezekiel 2:9 - 3:3 became the source of the scroll that contained honey. In Ezekiel, it is God that has the scroll and hands it to Ezekiel.

Image

On page 41, The Isaiah side of the wax tablet has the interaction with Isaiah and the Seraphim. When page 40 and 41 are conflated we get the genesis of Chapter 5 of Revelation.

In the next draft, John integrated Zechariah into the book of Revelation by organizing the two stacks of wax tablets by reverse order of the the content found in Zechariah 1:1 to 12:10. He also sprinkled a lot of the content of Zechariah into the second draft. However John had a problem and that was that Zechariah had a flying scroll (Zech 5:1-4) and the order was in a different place than Revelation 5. So John split the Ezekiel scroll, literary and place half of it where the Zechariah scroll was. He then added two of the elements of destruction from Zechariah 5:3-5 into the text.

Image

Before John split the scroll, he created the chain of custody of the scroll found in Revelation 1:1 where it went from God, to Jesus, to an Angel, and finally to John. However, for some reason he did not want to use the Seraphim found in Revelation, so he created a synonym for it known as the Mighty Angel. That is how the mighty angel got created.

When John split the scroll, he kept the Mighty angel in both Revelation 5 and 10. John does this type of thing several other places in Revelation.

Since the scroll was a judgment device, John included another scroll passage found in Jeremiah 51:49, 63-64. That is where we get the mill stone found in Revelation 18:21. Yes, you guessed it, when he moved that text there, he also carried the Mighty Angel to that location and that is how the Mighty Angel is found in three places in Revelation.

Image
Image

In the next draft, the Deuteronomy-Joshua draft, John took the last six chapters of Deuteronomy and the first six chapters of Joshua and inserted the text between the wax tablets. When he came to the Mighty Angel in Revelation 10:2, he placed one foot in the water, and one foot on the land just like the children of Israel did when they crossed the Jordan river (see page 9 of chapter 1 posted in this thread).

Image
Image

The last tinkering John did was in the Daniel Draft, where he integrated Daniel 12:3-11 into Revelation 10 and 11

Image
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2100
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Is Middle Revelation Historical, Mythical or Other?

Post by Charles Wilson »

klewis wrote: Fri May 01, 2020 10:16 pm
Charles Wilson wrote: Fri May 01, 2020 2:29 pm
klewis wrote: Fri May 01, 2020 4:38 am This is used as a backdrop for the eventual conquering of Rome (see Revelation 10:6 in which the mighty angel declares that the time is really really soon).
1.Who is the Strong Angel?'
2. Whose POV is given here? Judaic Sympathizers or Roman Sympathizers?
I think the Strong angel is a product of parallel formation and not anchored in a historical figure.
Then this is where we part ways.

You have put together a magnificent Document. However, as with Daniel, time and Transvaluation change the Outlook. There are many Televangelists who unwittingly testify to that. I can accept your Analysis. FORM reigns almighty for much of this. I'm big on Form. You are to be commended for your hard work.

However, I ask again: "Who is the Strong Angel"?

Part of this goes back to whether Revelation was a Judaic Document or a Christian Document, whatever its path to that point. If it was Judaic - and I believe it was - what were the items that would let the READERS at the time what was the "Real Story". "How many readers were there - and where?"

It's a difficult thing to accomplish. I've attempted for well over a decade that much of the NT was written around the Temple Slaughter of 4 BCE. The idea has not gained much traction and part of the reason is the "Allegorical Version" trumps the Historical. Hell, the Metaphysical trumps everything - "...because JESUS!" It's frustrating.

The idea that Demetrius Eucerus was responsible for the Abomination of Desolation is positively radioactive around here. The number of responses to THAT idea still hovers around Zero. That one appears dead. So it goes.

Nonetheless, I press forward and I still ask the Historical questions. Allegory without an anchor is Metaphysics by another name.

Who was the Strong Angel? I say "Pompey". WHO do you say it is?

CW
klewis
Posts: 175
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:39 am

Re: Is Middle Revelation Historical, Mythical or Other?

Post by klewis »

Charles Wilson wrote: Sat May 02, 2020 9:00 am
klewis wrote: Fri May 01, 2020 10:16 pm
Charles Wilson wrote: Fri May 01, 2020 2:29 pm
klewis wrote: Fri May 01, 2020 4:38 am This is used as a backdrop for the eventual conquering of Rome (see Revelation 10:6 in which the mighty angel declares that the time is really really soon).
1.Who is the Strong Angel?'
2. Whose POV is given here? Judaic Sympathizers or Roman Sympathizers?
I think the Strong angel is a product of parallel formation and not anchored in a historical figure.
Then this is where we part ways.

You have put together a magnificent Document. However, as with Daniel, time and Transvaluation change the Outlook. There are many Televangelists who unwittingly testify to that. I can accept your Analysis. FORM reigns almighty for much of this. I'm big on Form. You are to be commended for your hard work.

However, I ask again: "Who is the Strong Angel"?

CW
For me, and I did not articulate this in my book. The Strong Angel is not a person, but a synonym used for the Seriph. However, to do that I will need to show you an example of John tweaking the Hebrew Scriptures that may not be connected to physical earthly people.

First lets see how Ezekiel and Isaiah appearance before the throne of God is used by John's appearance before God in Revelation chapter 4. He takes both Ezekiel's experience and places and forms a chiasmus in Revelation thereby making John's encounter in reverse order of Revelation. From Isaiah, he takes elements of the Seraphim and adjusts Ezekiel's account. Doing this, John conflates the living creatures and the seraphim into a single being.

Image
Image

As discussed earlier, John takes Ezekiel's account of God handing him a two sided scroll and places it into Revelation:

Image

Sometimes later, John creates a chain of custody of the vision, from God, to Jesus, to an angel, and finally to John (Rev 1:1). John wanted the angel to be something like the Ezekiel and Isaiah account, but for some reason (which I think that he was so procedural, that he could not use a Seraph) so created a synonym, "the Strong Angel".

The Strong Angel, is found in Revelation 18:21-22 and John uses texts from Jeremiah to elaborate a little more about who is the Strong Angel. When we examine the text that he leaves out, it is clear that he used the imagery of the scroll in Jeremiah 51:63 as the link to the scroll scenes from Ezekiel 2:8 - 3:3 and Zechariah 5.

Image
Image

For me, there would need to be more of a connection between a historical figure and the Mighty Angel through text not connected with the source text. A good example of this is how John uses Daniel and interjects it into Revelation. What he changes reflects what he is thinking about in the context of his time (see page 225 - Daniel 7:17, 22-23 with Revelation 17:9-12).

Image
Image
Image
lsayre
Posts: 769
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Is Middle Revelation Historical, Mythical or Other?

Post by lsayre »

The 1901 Jewish Encyclopedia has some interesting things to say about the book of Revelation.

https://www.studylight.org/encyclopedia ... ok-of.html
Post Reply