Tuesday, December 25, 2012

19. WHAT JOHN RECORDED

19. WHAT JOHN RECORDED

1:2. Word of God: Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, (RSV).
            Or perhaps: “…to the word of God even to the testimony of Jesus Christ.”  That is, the Word of God is the testimony of Jesus Christ.[1]
            When John speaks of “the Word of God,” he not only has in mind the concepts of the Greek logos,[2] which has been so extensively discussed, but also the Hebrew ideas, not only of the creatively powerful Word, but also of the artistically beautiful Word of Light, of poetry and music. The Word, as logos, is:
For the Word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And before him no creature is hidden, but all are open and laid bare to the eyes of him with whom we have to do, (Hebrews 4:12-13, RSV).[3]
The Word reveals the innermost Man and exposes him. It also reveals the deep things of God to the very spirit of Man.
            Every word of God is literature in its highest and purest form. In Genesis 1:3 when God said: “Let there be Light,” He brought Light to light, bearing it forth. The New Testament writer must have had this in mind when he said:  “…hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel,” (2 Timothy 1:10. See also Rom. 2:7).
            When God forbade the use of the art forms of graven images, the effect was to divert the energy of this artistic expression into the only form allowed to the engravers, writing. Phonetic writing is the image of the spoken word, the spoken word made visible and durable. In order that writing might not violate the commandment not to make any graven images, the characters could not be like those of the Egyptians, (and other ancient writing systems), hieroglyphic pictures of their idol gods, but had to be abstract designs. In fact, this requirement for abstraction necessitated the development of a phonetic script, that is, a “picture” not of any creature in heaven, earth or sea, but an image of sound. It is therefore almost certain that Moses did indeed develop the principle of phonetic writing, as tradition would also have it, probably using the alphabet as a syllabary, which would have been phonetic for the Hebrew language of that time.
            Thus the “Word of God” in the Book of Revelation is a powerful and beautiful poem about the Loveliest Subject, Jesus Christ.
1:2. Testimony: Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.
            The original form of the Book of Revelation may have been a Hebrew Psalm, as indicated by the use of the word “testimony.”
            The word translated “bare record” and “testimony,” from the Greek word martureo, is found here and in 1:9; 6:9; 11:7; 12:11, 17; 19:10; 22:16 and 20. It is translated in 1:2 as “bare record,” (KJV), and in 22:16 and 20 as “testify.” A form of the word is also found in 15:5: “tabernacle of the testimony.”
            A possible Hebrew word corresponding to the Greek word martureo is ‘êdûth. From the same root we have ‘êd one sense of which is “a recorder, i.e. prince.” John was the official recorder with the authority of a prince.[4]
            Another meaning of ‘êdûth is: “Revelation, hence a revealed psalm, Psalm 60:l; 80:l….Others consider it to mean a lyric poem, one to be sung to the lyre” (ibid., 608).[5] If this was the word in the short title of the Book of Revelation, (i.e. “The [‘êdûth] “Revelation” of John”), it would then correspond to the title of Psalm 80, translated by the RSV as “A Testimony of Asaph.” The title of the Book could then be translated: “A Psalm (or Testimony) of John.”  If it were part of the long title of verses one and two, it would probably indicate that John was the recorder of “The Psalm, (or Testimony), of Jesus Christ.”
            If this were indeed the Hebrew word used in the title, it would indicate that the literary form of the Book is an inspired, prophetic Psalm. (It might be both a Psalm and a prophecy, for prophecy was often given in the form of a Psalm and the Psalms are often prophecies). If it is indeed a Psalm, we should expect to find traces of literary form and language characteristic of Hebrew poetry and indeed some of these are still discernable even in translation. R. H. Charles says that “The Seer, [i.e. John], wrote in poetic form, using parallelism and strophe and anti-strophe.” He says that the Book is a “Book of Songs, dirges and threnodies.”[6] (See Introductory Articles: “Genre: Poetry.“)
            One unique form of Hebrew poetry in the Old Testament is the alphabetic acrostics found in many Psalms, most notably Psalm 119. The entire Book of Lamentation as well as portions of the prophets are also written in this alphabetic form.[7]  Some indications that the Book of Revelation may have been written in this pattern may be found in the repeated phrase: “I Am Alpha and Omega,” (i.e. the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet, translating the Hebrew Aleph and Tau.)  There is also the equivalent phrase: “I am the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.”
            Another possible fossil trace of the alphabetic pattern may be found in the fact that the Book has twenty-two chapters, the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet. The original divisions into chapters and verses, however, has probably been altered considerably in transmission of the text and the alphabetic pattern has been impossible to preserve in translation just as it was in the Old Testament passages, and as many other features of poetry are impossible to translate adequately.
            While the foregoing is speculative, there is textual evidence for it and the cumulative evidence from other features of the Book adds to its credibility.
1:2. All He Saw: Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.
            This verse tells us that the message given to John the Revelator, to which he became a witness, was the Word of God. That is, the Scriptures are the testimony of Jesus Christ. The Scriptures are to be interpreted as the testimony to Jesus as the Messiah, the Anointed One.
            We are therefore, from the meaning of this verse, to expect that the Book of Revelation is to contain a verification of the Scriptures in their role as a testimony of Jesus Christ. The Book is to corroborate, substantiate, confirm, prove, make certain, and establish the Scriptures.
            The Book is also to contain an eye witness account. John has already stated in the Gospel of John and in the Book of 1 John, that he is an eyewitness to the life and ministry of Jesus Christ:
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; 2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen [it], and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;) 3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship [is] with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ, (1 John 1).
            Now in the Book of Revelation he is giving his eye witness account of the spiritual realities revealed to him while in the Spirit.
The Genizah:  The genizah, (translated “hiding place” or “treasury” see Ezra 6:1), is a closet or room in the synagogue where damaged or tattered scrolls were relegated and which served also as a storeroom for the sacred scrolls. One of the secrets of the Hebrew priesthood was the ways in which the starry heavens are the original genizah or storeroom for the Torah. “The Heavens declare the glory of God.”  Here, John is looking into the original, prototypic genizah, the heavens.


[1] John 5:39. (‘Word’ = Greek logos.’ Used also in Revelation 1: 9; 3:8, 10; 6:9; 12:11; 17:17; 19:13; 20:4; 21:5; 22:18, 19.
[2] Strong's computer based lexicon says:  ‘A Greek philosopher named Heraclitus first used the term Logos around 600 BC to designate the divine reason or plan which coordinates a changing universe. This word was well suited to John's purpose in John 1.’
[3] The ‘living and active’ Word is spoken of in Psalm 107:20; 147:15, 18; Heb. 1:2-3; 1 Corinthians. 8:6; Colossians 1:15-17.
[4] Ges.Lexicon, 607.
[5] The word ‘êdûth is in the Psalm titles of Ps. 60:1 and 80:1 in the Hebrew Bible. Psalm titles are not usually given a verse number in the English translations. This results in a difference in numbering verses between the Hebrew and English versions.
[6] Stroph – (l) the movement of the classical Greek chorus while turning from one side to the other of the orchestra; (2)a: a rhythmic system composed of two or more lines repeated as a unit; esp. such a unit recurring in a series of strophic units. b: stanza... ántistroph – a returning movement in Greek choral dance exactly answering to a previous strophe... threnody:  a song of lamentation for the dead; elegy. (ICC v. 44, p. xiv.).
[7]  The alphabetic pattern is dealt with at length in my Commentary at 1:8 ‘Alpha and Omega.’
For further discussion of the Poetic elements in the Book of Revelation, see pages 34-50 in my book, Revelation In Context, available at the Living Word Bookstore in Shawnee, Oklahoma and online at www.Amazon.com or www.xulonpress.com. For free downloads go to www.revelationincontext.sermon.net .

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

18. THE WRITER AND DATE OF WRITING

18. THE WRITER AND DATE OF THE WRITING


Revelation 1:1. 
I, John:  And he made it known by sending his angel to his servant John.”
            The “I” and the “me” of the Book of Revelation is John, the writer of the Book of Revelation, not the Church or any other entity, but John the writer except when it is Christ speaking.
            The internal testimony of the Book is that “John“ wrote it. Who was this “John”? The only reason for questioning the authorship of the Apostle John, disciple of Christ and author of the Epistles and Gospel of John, is the proposed date of the writingIf the Book were not written until Domitian’s reign, (AD 81-96), it would be unlikely that John lived to write it. However, if the date is placed in the reign of Nero, some twenty-eight years earlier, then it is more probable that the Apostle John wrote it. Even so, it would seem that there was a tradition that the Apostle John lived to a great age as indicated by the saying in John 21:23:
Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what [is that] to thee?
            One reason for assigning the authorship to John the apostle is that there was a rumor that he would live to the coming of Christ, (John 21:22-23). Christ also taught that some of His disciples would “see the Son of man coming in his kingdom,” (Matt. 16:28; Mark 9:1; Luke 9:27). He also said that some of those living when He uttered His prophecy of the fall of Jerusalem would be alive to see the fulfillment, (Matt. 23:36; 24:34; Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32). The fact that John lived to write the Book of Revelation is proof of the truth of Christ’s words.
            Eusebius believed that there were two “Johns” named in his source, (the historian Papias): one the apostle, and the other a presbyter in Asia in later years. However, it can be demonstrated that Eusebius’ reasoning concerning this is faulty. The source does not clearly determine that there were two separate “Johns.”[1]
            Eusebius also quotes Justin, (100-165?): “He refers to the Revelation of John, stating explicitly that it was the work of the Apostle.” (ibid. 4.18.7)
          In the true tradition of the Old Testament, God revealed what He was doing through His true prophet, John. Consistent with Amos 3:7: “Surely the Lord does nothing, without revealing His secret to His servants the prophets.” The Book of Revelation is the revealing of the secret to John.
 Historical context requires knowledge of the time factor. If we are to understand the Historical Context of the Book, we must identify the approximate date of its writing. 
 Those who favor a date in the reign of Domitian, (AD 81-96), do so on the basis that Mystery Babylon depicts the Roman empire and that this date more accurately depicts the conditions of the empire at that time than at the time of Nero and that the later date gives more time for the decline of the churches shown in the letters in chapters two and three.[2]  It is clear from these facts that the dating of the Book, as well as the attribution of authorship, depend upon the interpretation of the symbols of the Book; and the interpretation of the symbols depend upon the dating of the writing, a circular process.[3] 

Dating the Book of Revelation
            The date of the writing of the Book of Revelation is crucial to its interpretation. There are two main views of the date of the writing: (1) in the time of Nero, before the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD, and (2) in the time of the reign of Domitian during the persecution of 96 AD. My view is that the Book was written in 68 AD during the brief reign of Galba, immediately following the death of Nero. (See my commentary at 17:10 “Roman Appointed Kings of Judea.“) Some of the evidence that favors this earlier date for the writing of the Book of Revelation is that the temple is mentioned as if it were literally extant in 11:1-2 which favors a date in Nero’s reign. The numerical value of Nero’s name, Neron Caesar, can be calculated to equal the cryptic number of the Beast, 666.[4]
Following is the evidence for dating the Book before 70 AD:
Internal Evidence: Apostolicity: 
     One of the criteria for canonization of a writing in the early Church was apostolicity, that is, that it was written by or was based upon the witness of an apostle.[5] The fact that it was accepted into the canon is evidence that the early Church believed it to be the work of John the Beloved Apostle, (ibid.).[6]
     The internal evidence of the Book itself, if we take it to be the inspired Word of God, should be determinative. The witness of the inspired writing itself is that it was written by the Apostle John, the writer of the Gospel and the Epistles of John
Blood Guilt:
The internal evidence is also that Babylon the Great was not Rome but rather the wicked city of Jerusalem which had been persecuting the Church of Jesus Christ and whose destruction had been predicted by Christ to be within the generation that heard Him. (See Commentary at 1:1 “Must.”) The identity of Babylon must be seen in relationship to the referent in Matthew 23:34-35. In the context of His condemnation of the scribes and Pharisees and His description of the predicted destruction of Jerusalem, Christ said:
(34)Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them you shall kill and crucify, and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: (35) that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zecharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar (emphasis added).
The fact that it was the fallen Jerusalem who was to bear the guilt of “all the righteous blood shed on earth,” and the fact that it is Mystery Babylon in whom is found the blood of “all who have been slain on earth,” conclusively shows that Mystery Babylon symbolizes the fallen Jerusalem. Mystery Babylon is clearly said to have slain “the saints and martyrs of Jesus,” (Revelation 17:6). In the context of the Scriptures, this can be none other than the fallen Jerusalem under the rule of that division of “Jews” who followed the Pharisaical religion. If Mystery Babylon is Jerusalem, then the Book would have been written prior to70 AD.
Jewish Persecution:
The entire New Testament witnesses to the fact that it was the Pharisaical sect of the Jews that persecuted and killed Christ and His Church, the Christian branch of the Jewish race. [7] On the other hand, there are no references in the Scriptures to Roman persecution of Christians as such. Although the Romans did get involved in the legal disputes, that should not be called persecution. Secular historians show that the Roman government did not recognize that there was a difference between the Christians and other “Jews” until after the great fire in approximately 64 AD.[8]
The Jewish nation as a politico/religious state was ruled by a class of priests, Pharisees and scribes who curried the favor of Roman power in a love/hate relationship. On one hand, they coveted the power and economic gain from Rome; on the other hand, their conscience forbad them to neglect halakhah, their religious law. Therefore, the people who observed their traditional religion, the Pharisees, were in rebellion, either overtly or covertly, against Rome throughout the New Testament era. Although the Pharisaic Jews considered themselves persecuted by Rome, they were not persecuted as followers of Christ. Neither were the Christians persecuted by Rome as followers of Christ. Persecution of Christians by Rome was because they were perceived to be Jews who were in rebellion against Rome, not because they were followers of Christ. If the persecutor of the saints was Jerusalem, not Rome, then the Book of Revelation was written prior to 70 AD.
External Evidence:
The Book of 2 Esdras has many parallels to the Book of Revelation and is believed to have been written very near the same time, i.e., near the close of the first century AD.[9] In 2 Esdras 12:18, Metzger believes a reference is made to the time following the death of Nero, 68 AD, (ibid., n. 18, p. 52). The writer of 2 Esdras, however, is recounting a vision he has seen revealing events which were to come. If this is indeed a reference to the time following Nero’s death, then 2 Esdras would have been written before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. The parallels to the Book of Revelation would serve as a second witness that the Revelation was written prior to 70 AD.





[1] Eusebius, History of the Church, 3.39.11 (p. 150-151 with note 1).
[2] The Muratorian Fragment, dated at AD 170, which is the earliest extant list of books accepted as canonical by the Church, lists the Book of Revelation. As for the "decline of the churches," the Gospel message was new to the world in that era and the churches were in their infancy, not in decline.
[3] Kee, Young, Froehlich, Understanding the New Testament, 449. See also the discussion in Eusebius: The History of the Church from Christ to Constantine, trans. G. A. Williamson, ed Betty Radice, with an introduction by Williamson, Penguin Books, the Penguin Classics, ed. E.V. Rieu. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England, and New York. (Made and printed in Great Britain by Richard Clay, The Chaucer Press, Suffolk, 1965, 1981 Reprint).
   Justin Martyr (AD 135) believed the author of the Book of Revelation was the Apostle John. Dionysius of Alexandria (AD 231-65) questioned the authorship of the Apostle John on the basis of grammatical style and the fact that the author clearly states his name, whereas in the Gospel of John he never mentions his own name.
   Dionysius is quoted by Eusebius (Historia Ecclesiae, 7.25; 3.39), but Eusebius suggests that there were two 'Johns' in Ephesus, and one may have written the Gospel and another the Revelation. Eusebius, (3.39.1 and p. 150 n.1), gives reasons why Dionysius' reasoning concerning 'two Johns' is faulty.
[4] Merrill C. Tenny, ed., Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1968) 721. Hereafter referred to in text as ZPBD.
   “Grammatical mistakes are chiefly unidiomatic translations of Hebrew or Aramaic expressions which would be impossible to render literally into Greek. Even though Irenaeus (AD 180) named ‘John’ as the author, he yet favored the date of the writing as in the reign of Domitian, (AD 81-96). A second view, better substantiated by the early interpreters of the book, places it in the reign of Domitian (AD 81-96),...Irenaeus [AD 180]..., Victorinus..., Eusebius (c. AD 328), and Jerome (c. AD 370) all agree on this date” (ZPBD 721).
[5] Although Irenaeus dated it in the reign of Domitian, Irenaeus wrote more than one hundred years after the writing of the Revelation, (about AD 180),time enough for much confusion and loss of memory. Irenaeus may have been following the earlier historian Papias, bishop of Hierapolis in Asia Minor in the early second century. Papias' account actually differentiates between John the Elder who lived in Ephesus at the time of Domitian's reign, and the Apostle John, one of the twelve disciples of Jesus. We do not know when the Apostle John died. There is some evidence that he was martyred in AD 44 along with his brother James.* However, there is the tradition evidenced in John 21:22, 23 that the Apostle John lived to a great age. It is possible that he lived until the reign of Nero and was martyred along with many others during that time of persecution. Before his death, he may have seen the Revelation, or ‘the coming’ of Jesus in glory over the city of Jerusalem. The historical writings are, therefore, not conclusive as to who wrote the Book of Revelation, nor the date of its writing.
   The other early church writers, Eusebius (of Caesarea, historian, 260?-340?) and Jerome, (Eusebius Hieronymus, AD 340-420(?), Latin Church Father), may have been following Irenaeus either directly or indirectly on this point. The historical line, then, would have been Papias, who was misunderstood by Irenaeus, then Eusebius and Jerome, who followed Irenaeus’ mistaken interpretation. This could be a typical example of how errors come to be perpetuated.
   Eusebius quotes Papias:  “He says that after the resurrection of the dead there will be a period of a thousand years, when Christ's kingdom will be set up on this earth in material form. I suppose he got these notions by misinterpreting the apostolic accounts and failing to grasp what they had said in mystic and symbolic language. For he seems to have been a man of small intelligence to judge from his books. But it is partly due to him that the great majority of churchmen after him took the same view, relying on his early date; e.g. Irenaeus and several others, who clearly held the same opinion’ (3.39.11 and p. 152).
   Eusebius discounts Papias as “a man of small intelligence,” but the editor's note says: ‘We shall need more evidence before accepting this contemptuous dismissal of Papias.’
*See also Kee, Young, Froehlich, Understanding the New Testament, 70, 247-8.
[6] The Book is listed as part of the canon in the Muratorian Fragment circa AD 170 (ZPDB, 721).
[7] Before 70 AD there was an identifiable Jewish race. However, after 70 AD, so many were killed and others assimilated, and many became Christians, that those who identified themselves as “Jews” after that time did so on the basis of their religion not their race. The official genealogical records had been burned by Herod,
 [8] M. Cary, and H. H. Scullard, A History of Rome, (New York, St. Martin's Press, 1975, Third Edition reprint 1983), 359 and 364 notes 26 and 27. Hereafter cited in text. 

[9] Bruce M. Metzger, ed., The Oxford Annotated Apocrypha, Revised Standard Version, translated from the Greek and Latin tongues, being the version set forth AD 1611, revised AD 1894, compared with the most ancient authorities and revised AD 1957 with introductions, comments, cross references, tables of chronology, and index, (New York, N. Y., Oxford University Press 1965, and 1977), p. 23. Hereafter referred to in text as OAA, containing the following apocryphal books cited: 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees.