Remember the nature of apocalyptic literature: 1) This literature is analogical-- that is that it draws analogies between two otherwise unlike things that

Remember the nature of apocalyptic literature:

1) This literature is analogical-- that is that it draws analogies between two otherwise unlike things that in some particular respect are similar e.g. ‘I saw one LIKE a Son of Man’

Background to RevelationBackground to RevelationBackground to RevelationBackground to Revelation

2) We are dealing with a disclosure rather than a descriptive model of reality. They are not meant to be literal pictures or replicas of the reality described.

3) we are dealing with an aspectiveaspective approach to truth--it reveals an aspect of the truth or character of the subject in order to make a valid point about a particular character trait-- e.g. the Empire is beastly, the people of God is like a fleeing woman


4) Many of the symbols, metaphors and images in apocalyptic literature are universal or widely known, and so can serve as multivalent symbols, applying to many similar subjects in many ages-- e.g. both Nero and Hitler are anti-Christ figures or types of the ultimate Anti-Christ.


There is obviously a great fascination with numbers in all of apocalyptic literature. especially symbolic numbers--4, 7, 12 and its multiples, 666 etc. There is also a tendency to speak of times allusively or elliptically such as Daniel's “a time, a time, and time and a half” or Daniel’s interpretation of Jeremiah's 70 weeks.


Yet it is extremely rare to find any sort of exact calculations in apocalyptic literature. Notice how in Dan. 12.11 & 12:12 we have two very different numbers that appear to be meant to cover the same period of time

It becomes clear that while many of the authors are conjuring with the possible nearness of the End, they are for the most part not interested in timetables.


What these numbers signal is two things: 1) That matters are fixed or determined

already by God. He is still in control, however long he chooses to wait or delay judgment.


2) Since God is in control he will in due course put an end to this present evil age. We are not call to theological weather forecasting and timetables but reassurance that God is on His throne in heaven. All will be right with the world seems to be the function of these numbers.


Answering the question of “audience” is easiest to address. The book was sent as a sort of circular letter to the seven churches in Asia Minor on the main road out of Ephesus, which he mentions in order of their location on the route. Their purpose was partly paraenetic and partly consolation and partly exhortation and partly information-- giving them a divine perspective on what was happening.

Revelation: Audience, Date, AuthorRevelation: Audience, Date, AuthorRevelation: Audience, Date, AuthorRevelation: Audience, Date, Author

Regarding the issue of date, there are really only two major periods in first century history that fit the descriptions of persecution and suffering we find in this book and the antagonistic attitude toward the secular government (cf. 13.1ff; 17.1ff. 2.3,10; 3.8; 2.13; 6.9,11). Compared to Paul, a very different attitude than we find in the 50s (see Romans 13).


The attempt to suggest there was little such persecution in the 90s by Collins does not explain either (1) why the dominant images for Christ in this book are the slain lamb and the bloody warrior or (2) why the Christian heroes in this book are portrayed as those who have already been martyred and are now under the altar in heaven.


Revelation was not just a voicing of John's fears of possiblepossible persecution. Indeed he himself seems to have suffered such punishment ending in his banishment to a God-forsaken island (deportatio in insulam was a normal Roman punishment).

The two periods in which this book might well have been written is (1) during the latter part of Nero's reign--- after the fire of 64 and up to A.D. 68 or (2) during the reign of Domitian A.D. 81-96.


Against the early date are the following factors: 1) The Neroian persecution seems to have been

confined to Rome, although provincial officials may have followed his lead;

2) The Emperor cult was more fully developed by Domitian's time and he liked to call himself Dominus et Deus noster– “Our Lord and our God”, a title reflected in Revelation but applied to Christ;


3) The possible allusions to Nero risen again from the dead like a spook to haunt Rome are more plausible sometime after his death;

4) This document was written at a time when churches had been in existence long enough to become luke-warm or undergo considerable transformation. This suits the later date better.


5) The authority of John the seer, who does not claim to be an apostle, over these churches, is better explained if it is written at a time after the apostolic or eyewitness founder of the community was deceased;

6) Laodicea was destroyed by earthquake in A.D. 60-61 yet in Revelation it is called rich. This too better suits a later date than the 60s.


The issue of authorship seems on the surface simple. It is written by one John, a seer, from Patmos. But the question is whichwhich John is this, and what is his relationship to the authorship or substance of the other Johannine documents. Very early on in church history it was realized by the Greek experts such as Dionysius of Alexandria that there were severe problems grammatically, vocabulary wise, syntactically in saying all the Johannine corpus was by one person, and yet one had to account for the similarities between the documents as well.

Revelation: Question of AuthorRevelation: Question of AuthorRevelation: Question of AuthorRevelation: Question of Author

On similarities cf. Rev 2.2 to John 16.2; Rev 20.6 to John 13.8; Rev 22.15 to John 3.21; Rev 22.17 to John 7.37. There is a major problem with suggesting that one document represents early John and the others later John because while style does develop over time, it does not change as radically as the differences we find here.


Indeed one out of every 8 words in Revelation are not found anywhere else in the NT, and this is only partly because of the different subject matter.


1) In Rev ‘axios’ is followed by the infinitive, in the Gospel by ‘hina’

2) the author of Rev often uses different words for the same thing than we find in John. For example, in the Gospel the author frequently uses ‘mn’ plus the participle (11 times) but the author of Rev never does and he had plenty of occasions where he could have.

Revelation and the Fourth GospelRevelation and the Fourth GospelRevelation and the Fourth GospelRevelation and the Fourth Gospel

3) ‘Arnion’ is used for lamb 29 times in Rev. but not at all in the Gospel. In the Gospel ‘amnos’ is used instead

4) In Revelation, Jerusalem is spelled ‘Ierosalem’ while in the Gospel it is spelled ‘Ierosalema’

5) For exclamations (behold) Rev uses ‘idou’ 26 times, but the Gospel uses ‘Ide’


6) Rev always uses the Greek word “kaleo” “to call” while the Fourth Gospel always has ‘lego’

7) even more striking is how the same word is used two very different ways in these two works-- e.g. ‘laos’ means Gentiles or Christians in Rev


but in John it always means Jews with one possible exception; ‘alnthinos’ means true as opposed to false in Rev. but in John it means genuine as opposed to phony.

8) ‘proskunein’ plus the dative means to worship in Rev. and with the accusative object it means to do hommage, but just the opposite is the case in the Fourth Gospel.


John 21 and other editorial remarks may indicate that the Beloved Disciple, while being the source of the material may not have been the Gospel’s final editor. (see John 19:35; 21:24)

Revelation: Authorship ConclusionsRevelation: Authorship ConclusionsRevelation: Authorship ConclusionsRevelation: Authorship Conclusions

Many persons may have been involved in the composition of these five documents. (John, 1-3 John, Revelation) They were all likely part of the Johannine community in and around Ephesus.

Revelation: Authorship ConclusionsRevelation: Authorship ConclusionsRevelation: Authorship ConclusionsRevelation: Authorship Conclusions

Documents

Remember the nature of apocalyptic literature: 1) This literature is analogical-- that is that it draws analogies between two otherwise unlike things that