Reminding me of an old Comment from a Commentator: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
Hence, This is another answer for the question: why crucifixion?
- spatial: the Messiah has crossed the cosmic border between upper heavens and lower heavens: i.e. he is just entered in Outer Space
Because the crucifixion represented the go beyond the LIMIT, both spatial and temporal, and hence the best sign of the coming of the Messiah.
"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:
He references his first Post: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.
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: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]:
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.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 death of the brothers by Quietus, who makes war against them, here transposed as the beast.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.
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:
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.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.
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:
The closing verses also reflects a similar description of the earthquake:"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
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.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.
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:
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:Ben C. Smith wrote: ↑Mon Apr 27, 2020 9:28 pmHave you read Adrienne Mayor's biographical treatment of Mithradates? He was all about the poison, the trickery, and the intrigue.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.
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".