KURUVACHIRA JOSE EOBIB-210 1 Student Name: KURUVACHIRA JOSE Student Country: ITALY Course Code or Name: EOBIB-210 This paper uses UK standards for spelling and punctuation THE BOOK OF REVELATION (APOCALYPSE) 1) Introduction Revelation1 or Apocalypse2 is a unique, complex and remarkable biblical text full of heavenly mysteries. Revelation is a long epistle addressed to seven Christian communities of the Roman province of Asia Minor, modern Turkey, wherein the author recounts what he has seen, heard and understood in the course of his prophetic ecstasies. Some commentators, such as Margaret Barker, suggest that the visions are those of Christ himself (1:1), which He in turn passed on to John.3 It is the only book in the New Testament canon that shares the literary genre of apocalyptic literature4, though there are short apocalyptic passages in various places in the 1 Revelation is the English translation of the Greek word apokalypsis (‘unveiling’ or ‘uncovering’ in order to disclose a hidden truth) and the Latin revelatio. According to Adela Yarbro Collins, it is likely that the author himself did not provide a title for the book. The title Apocalypse came into usage from the first word of the book in Greek apokalypsis Iesou Christon meaning “A revelation of Jesus Christ”. Cf. Adela Yarbro Collins, “Revelation, Book of”, pp. 694-695. 2 In Codex Sinaiticus (4th century), Codex Alexandrinus (5th century) and Codex Ephraemi (5th century) the title of the book is “Revelation of John”. Other manuscripts contain such titles as, “Revelation of John, the one who speaks about God”, “Revelation of Saint John, the one who speaks about God”, “Revelation of John, the one who speaks about God, [the] evangelist” and “The Revelation of the Apostle John, the Evangelist”. In the second century the work may simply have been known as “Revelation”. When the book was copied onto scrolls a brief title was added at the end of the work, probably “Revelation of John” and when the work began to be copied on book-like codices with pages, this title was placed at the beginning. In the course of transmission the older, brief title was expanded in various ways. Cf. Adela Yarbro Collins, “Revelation, Book of”, pp. 694-695. 3 Cf. Margaret Barker, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, pp. xi, 71, 78. The work of Barker referred to here, breaks new grounds in the study of Revelation and challenges many of the traditional views about the book. 4 Just as there exists historical writing, poetic writing, letter writing and novel writing, there exits apocalyptic literary style. This literary genre is marked by certain distinctive features, especially prediction of future events, KURUVACHIRA JOSE EOBIB-210 2 Gospels and the Epistles. It is also the most quoted work in extant second century Christian writings5, which is remarkable in view of the difficulty encountered during the canonization process. There are approximately 230 Greek manuscripts available for the reconstructing of the original reading of the Book of Revelation. But the major texts used are the uncial scripts found in Codex Sinaiticus (4th century), Codex Alexandrinus (5th century), and Codex Ephraemi (5th century).6 Revelation is missing in Codex Vaticanus.7 2) Language, purpose and style According to Margaret Barker, since the language of the Jerusalem Christians was Aramaic and their scriptures were in Hebrew, it is unlikely that the original language of Revelation was Greek.8 She prefers to believe that it was originally written in Aramaic or Hebrew and was later translated into Greek.9 The Greek manuscript contains the poorest Greek in the entire New Testament.10 The purpose of the book is to overcome the spiritual deterioration affecting the people of God, strengthen the resolve of the faithful enduring persecution, probably during the reign of the Roman emperor Domitian (81-96 AD)11, and instil hope in the final triumph of God and his saints over the forces of evil, just as the first offspring of the Woman, Christ, become victorious over evil, the rest of her offspring (Christians) will also become victorious like Him. narration of visionary experiences or journeys to heaven, often involving vivid symbolism. Apocalyptic literature was a vital part of the literary movement in the ancient Near East. The age of this style of writing covers approximately four hundred years, 200 BC to 200 AD. Such writings flourished when the Jews or the Christians were suffering for their faith. In the Bible we have two great works written in apocalyptic style, Revelation and Daniel. Outside the canonical books of the Bible there are many other extant apocalyptic works. Cf. Patrick J. Sena, The Apocalypse: Biblical Revelation Explained, pp. 7-8. 5 Cf. Columba Graham Flegg, An Introduction to Reading Apocalypse, p. 44. 6 Cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Revelation Accessed on 14 June 2012; Adela Yarbro Collins, “Revelation, Book of”, p. 694. 7 Cf. Lee M. McDonald, The Formation of the Christian Biblical Canon, p. 225. 8 Cf. Margaret Barker, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, p. xii. 9 Cf. Margaret Barker, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, 73: See also The Eastern-Greek Orthodox Bible. New Testament, p. 518. 10 Cf. Patrick J. Sena, The Apocalypse: Biblical Revelation Explained, p. 27. 11 Cf. Ibid. 5, 7; E.F. Siegman and J. Winkler, “Revelation, Book of”, pp. 183-184. KURUVACHIRA JOSE EOBIB-210 3 Revelation can be described as a kind of ‘pastoral letter’ meant to be read publically in a liturgical setting in the Churches of Asia Minor.12 The text is also written in prophetic and apocalyptic style.13 Thus the book shares, in varying degrees, three literary forms, namely, apocalyptic, prophetic and epistolary.14 Most scholars are convinced that there is unity both in form and content of the book.15 3) Sources The most obvious source of the ideas and images in the Book of Revelation is the Old Testament. The author draws much from the books of Ezekiel and Daniel, and in a lesser degree from Zechariah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Joel, Genesis, Exodus, Deuteronomy, Numbers and Psalms.16 Some speak of as many as 24 canonical books of the Septuagint as the source of Revelation.17 It has been discovered that the influence of the Old Testament on Revelation is so great that out of 404 verses in the entire book there are only 126 which contain no allusion to the Old Testament. But the author does not quote the Old Testament anywhere.18 Some say that the writer may have been familiar with the Jewish apocalyptic literature.19 Others argue that he may have also used the Gospels of Mathew and Luke.20 Some have proposed ‘compilation theories’21, ‘revision 12 Cf. Roland J. Faley, Apocalypse Then and Now. A Companion to the Book of Revelation, p. 6. 13 Cf. Patrick J. Sena, The Apocalypse: Biblical Revelation Explained, pp. 7-8, 18. 14 Cf. Jean-Louis D’ Aragon “The Apocalypse”, p. 467. 15 Cf. E.F. Siegman and J. Winkler, “Revelation, Book of”, p. 185. 16 Cf. Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, New Testament Introduction, pp. 965-966; Patrick J. Sena, The Apocalypse: Biblical Revelation Explained, p. 15; Columba Graham Flegg, An Introduction to Reading Apocalypse, p. 4. 17 Cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Revelation Accessed on 15 June 2012. 18 Cf. Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, p. 966. 19 Cf. Ibid. But there are some major differences between Jewish apocalyptic literature and Revelation: a) the author of the latter does not use a pseudonym but writes in his own name; b) he does not focus attention on past history but concentrates on the present and future; c) he is well aligned with the Old Testament prophets in the denunciation of evil and in the moral exhortations to noble living; d) the spiritual grasp of the writer is far removed from the pedestrian and often gloomy approach of the Jewish apocalyptic literature; e) the book has a Christological concept of history. Cf. Ibid, p. 967; Jean-Louis D’ Aragon “The Apocalypse”, p. 468. 20 Cf. Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, p. 955. KURUVACHIRA JOSE EOBIB-210 4 theories’22 and ‘incorporation theories’23 in order to explain the source of Revelation. There are also many other theories proposed to explain the source of the book.24 But the traditional view denies these theories and supposes that the author was directly responsible for all the material in the book.25 But contrary to the traditional position, Margaret Barker argues that the secret teachings of Jesus to His disciples based on His visions, which are not recorded in the Gospels, form the main source of the Book of Revelation. His visions were not entrusted to John alone, but to a group called “his brethren” (19:10) who were to be the “keepers” of this secret knowledge. Later, an angel spirit was sent to John to make known the revelation which Jesus had seen, and to interpret them for his own time. This was the second stage in the formation of the book, which is indicated by the second command to write (1:19). The third and the final stage in the formation of the book was after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD. At this stage, while at Patmos, John was commanded to write what he had seen, and send it to the Churches (1:9), and it was no longer restricted to an exclusive group but for all to read and hear. It was this final form of the book that was translated into Greek.26 21 The compilation theories say that an editor (or editors) has taken over some independent sources and welded them into a unity. Under the compilation theory there are ‘two-source theory’ and ‘three-source theory’. Cf. Ibid., pp. 968-969. 22 The revision theories suppose that the basic source has been worked over. The original was a Jewish apocalypse which was revised by an editor for Christian purpose. Cf. Ibid., p. 969. 23 The incorporation theory holds that there must have been an original apocalypse in which are incorporated various fragments of Jewish apocalyptic writing. Cf. Ibid., p. 970. 24 Some of them are: the patchwork theory, poetic theory, symbolism theory, drama theory, sevenfold design theory, transposition theories, liturgical pattern theory, concentric theory, historical-prophetic theory, etc. Although some element of truth may be found in all these theories, it is difficult to be certain which theory is correct for a complete understanding of the book. For a detailed discussion on these theories see Ibid., pp. 970-977. 25 Cf. Ibid., p. 970. 26 Cf. Margaret Barker, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, pp. 67, 71-72, 74-76,90-91. Barker says that the third stage of the book which incorporated the letters to be sent to the Churches of Asia was during the 50s, the first crisis caused by Paul’s Gentile mission. Cf. Ibid., p. 91. KURUVACHIRA JOSE EOBIB-210 5 4) Date and place Different hypotheses have been proposed in an effort to provide a satisfactory solution to the problem of the date of the Book of Revelation. A few authors have proposed a date as early as the reign of Claudius (41-54 AD) and as late as the reign of Nerva (96-98) or of Trajan (98-117 AD).27 Today the majority of scholars follow the lead given by Irenaeus of Lyons (died 202 AD) and other Fathers of the Church in placing the date of the book in the last decade of the first century AD in the reign of Domitian (ca.81-96 AD).28 But there is a body of opinion which argues that internal evidence suggest in the reign of Nero (ca. 68 or 69 AD).29 There is a proposal of a Vespasian date (ca. 70-80 AD) owing to the identification of him as the sixth emperor.30 There is also a suggestion of a ‘very late date’ during the reign of Trajan (ca.98-117 AD) because John was exiled under him.31 Another view is that the present Book of Revelation resulted from the fusion of two earlier apocalypses or John resorted to the popular apocalyptic device of antedating his work, i.e, writing under Domitian he adopted the standpoint of the time of Nero or Vespasian.32 But the most widely held view is that the book was written during the reign of Domitian, more precisely towards the end of his reign, ca. 90-95 AD.33 The earliest and the 27 Cf. Jean-Louis D’ Aragon “The Apocalypse”, p. 469; John Sweet, Revelation, p. 21. 28 Cf. Columba Graham Flegg, An Introduction to Reading Apocalypse, p. 48. This date is attested by Irenaeus who had personal acquaintance with Polycarp bishop of Smyrna, the disciple of John the Apostle. Hence his testimony has a special weight of its own. Jerome ascribed Revelation to the fourteenth year of Domitian’s reign, which would mean 95 AD. Cf. Francis Gigot, The News Testament, p. xiii. See also John Sweet, Revelation, pp. 21- 22. 29 Cf. Columba Graham Flegg, An Introduction to Reading Apocalypse, pp. 48-49. Some of the arguments in favour of a Neronian date is based on such evidences as, the identification of the sixth king (Rev.17:8) and the number 666 (Rev13:18) as Nero, the argument that at the time of writing the book the temple of Jerusalem as still standing (Rev.11:1ff), etc. Cf. Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, pp. 957-961. 30 This is a weak argument since Vespasian did not take seriously the idea of kingly divinity, and as far as known was not a real persecutor of the Church. Cf. Ibid., pp. 961-562. 31 Cf. The Eastern-Greek Orthodox Bible. New Testament, p. 519. 32 Cf. E.F. Siegman and J. Winkler, “Revelation, Book of”, p. 184. 33 Cf. Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, p. 948. The demand for universal emperor worship, bearing the ‘mark’ of the emperor, the idea that the persecution has either just commenced or is immediately impending evident in the book, allusion to the myth of the ‘reincarnation’ of Nero in Domitian, etc., are some of the arguments KURUVACHIRA JOSE EOBIB-210 6 weightiest external witnesses attest to it, especially the early Fathers of the Church. Attempts have been made to reconcile the early and late date theories by placing the writing at a very early date (41-60 AD) in Aramaic or Hebrew, and then widely published in Greek to the end of the first century AD. This is the position of Eastern Orthodox Bible,34 and it appears to be a strong possibility. The general consensus among the scholars is that Revelation was composed in the west coast of Asia Minor. But there are some who argue that it was written in the island of Patmos, while others think that it was produced at Ephesus35 or its first form in Palestine at a very early period.36 5) Authorship The author of the Book of Revelation calls himself John four times (1:1,4,9; 22;8) and presents himself as part of a group persecuted for its faith (1:9), and at Patmos, a Roman penal colony.37 But we have no indication whatsoever that this is John the Apostle. He seems to have known Aramaic and Hebrew better than Greek, and his writing is rough and full of semitisms.38 In the early centuries of Christianity there was an almost unanimous agreement among the Fathers of the Church that the author of Revelation is John the evangelist, the writer of the for a Domitian date. The fact that considerable interval of time is expected between the founding of the Churches and their internal deterioration, the non-existence of the Church of Smyrna until 60-64 AD, the presence of certain heretical sects, the probability of the author having used the Gospels of Mathew and Luke, also would favour the Domitian dating. For a detailed discussion on these issues see Ibid., pp. 948-956. 34 Cf. The Eastern-Greek Orthodox Bible. New Testament, p. 519. An early date and the composition of Revelation in Aramaic or Hebrew, can better account for the evidence of Semitic words, phrases, images and symbols used in the text. 35 Cf. Adela Yarbro Collins, “Revelation, Book of”, p. 701. 36 Cf. Raymond E. Brown, Introduzione al Nuovo Testamento, p. 1049. 37 Cf. Roland J. Faley, Apocalypse Then and Now, p. 5. But Barker argues that there is no evidence that Patmos was used as a penal settlement in the first century AD: Cf. Margaret Barker, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, p. xii. 38 Cf. Roland J. Faley, Apocalypse Then and Now, p. 6. KURUVACHIRA JOSE EOBIB-210 7 fourth Gospel and the three Epistles. Justin Martyr (c.100-165)39, Melito the bishop of Sardis (died c.180), Theophilus of Antioch (died c.183), Irenaeus of Lyons (died 202)40, Clement of Alexandria (c.150-215), Tertullian of Carthage (c.155-230),41 Hippolytus of Rome (c.170-235), Origen of Alexandria (c.185-253), Cyprian of Carthage (died 258), Methodius of Olympus (died 311), Lactantius (c.240 -320), Athanasius of Alexandria (c.296-373), Ephrem the Syrian (c. 306- 373), Epiphanius (c.315-403), Gregory of Nazianzus (c.329-390), Basil the Great (c.330-379), Hilary of Poitiers (c.300-368), Ambrose of Milan (c.337-397), Quodvultdeus of Carthage (died c.450)42, to mention a few, strongly upheld the apostolic authorship of the book. Thus there is a remarkable convergence of patristic witness to the apostolic authorship of Revelation.43 The Muratorian Canon (end of 2nd century) also showed that there was no doubt about the apostolic authorship.44 The major dissident view regarding the apostolic authorship of Revelation goes back to Dionysius of Alexandria (died c. 264/265). He questioned the apostolic authorship on the basis of a comparison of the book with the Gospel of John, and concluded that both could not have been written by the same author.45 After him Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 263-339) shared his view. Marcion of Sinope (c 85-160) rejected the claim of apostolic authorship. There was doubt about the authorship in the Council of Laodicea (ca.360). Jerome (347-420) doubted the book and 39 Justin is credited with the honour of being the first among the early Fathers of the Church to witness to the apostolic authorship of Revelation. He was born shortly after the death of John and lived for some time in Ephesus, the city in which the Apostle is believed to have spent the latter part of his life. Cf. Francis Gigot, The News Testament, p. x. See also Austin Farrer, The Revelation of St. John the Divine, pp. 1-3. 40 Irenaeus is considered as the most important witness among the early Fathers of the Church to the apostolic authorship of Revelation. Cf. Francis Gigot, The News Testament, p. xiii; John Sweet, Revelation, pp. 21, 36. 41 Cf. Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, pp. 930-931; Columba Graham Flegg, An Introduction to Reading Apocalypse, p. 46. 42 Cf. Columba Graham Flegg, An Introduction to Reading Apocalypse, 46; Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, pp. 930-931. 43 Cf. Columba Graham Flegg, An Introduction to Reading Apocalypse, p. 46. 44 Cf. Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, 931. 45 Cf. Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, 932: Columba Graham Flegg, An Introduction to Reading Apocalypse, 46 KURUVACHIRA JOSE EOBIB-210 8 relegated it to second class, but even he showed vacillation about his own position.46 It was also argued that there were two Ephesian Johns who could easily be mixed up or that John of Ephesus was the Elder (Presbyter) who was later mistaken for John the Apostle.47 Hence names such as John the Elder (Presbyter), John the Prophet and John Mark were proposed as authors of Revelation. Some have argued that John was simply an intentional pseudonym. Others have suggested a Johannine school or an ‘unidentified John’ as responsible for the book.48 The Alogi49 and Gaius (Caius) of Rome (third century) attributed the Book of Revelation to Cerinthus.50 There are some scholars who argue that the entire book originated from the circle of John the Baptist and reflect his ideas.51 Barker holds that since the book was written over many years, there was no one author, and that the name ‘John’ refers to his status as the chief of the prophets and authorised interpreter of the tradition and compiler of the final form of the book.52 In the sixteenth century Erasmus (c.1466-1536) questioned the apostolic authorship.53 Since the end of the eighteenth century many biblical scholars increasingly tend to deny the apostolic origin of the book.54 A powerful internal argument in favour apostolic authorship is the pastoral authority with which the author addresses the Churches. The author definitely is a man of considerable authority who can expect the Churches to receive what he has written as a revelation from 46 Cf. Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, p. 931. 47 Cf. Ibid., p. 933. 48 Cf. Ibid., pp. 945-947. 49 A group of Christian heretics who flourished in Asia Minor around 170 AD. They were also known as ‘alogans’. It was Epiphanius of Salamis who coined the name ‘Alogi’ as a word play suggesting that they were both illogical (anti-logikos) and against the Christian doctrine of the Logos. Cf. Ibid., p. 931; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alogi Accessed on 14 June 2012. 50 Cf. Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, p. 931. For a discussion on the arguments against apostolic authorship, both external and internal see Ibid., pp. 938-945. 51 Cf. J. Massyngberde Ford, Revelation. Introduction, Translation and Commentary, p. 3. 52 Cf. Margaret Barker, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, p. 76. 53 Cf. Jean-Louis D’ Aragon “The Apocalypse”, p. 468. 54 Cf. Ibid., p. 469. KURUVACHIRA JOSE EOBIB-210 9 God.55 John addresses each of the seven Churches of Asia Minor as if he were their bishop. Columba Graham Flegg says: “A highly powerful argument confirming the apostolic authorship of the Apocalypse is the pastoral authority with which it is introduced and concluded. Surely, only an apostle would express such authority to the Seven Churches of Asia”.56 According to tradition, Apostle John was the greatest authority in Asia until about the end of the first century.57 Other internal evidences like, the use of word “Lamb” (Jn 1:29; Rev 5:6), “Word of God” (Jn 1:1; Rev 19:13) and “Shepherded” (Jn 10:11; Rev 7:17) to refer to Christ, the image of “the spouse” for the people of God, life symbolised by water, absence of a temple in the New Jerusalem and so on also indicate that the fourth Gospel and the Book of Revelation had a common origin.58 The Church formally accepted the traditional view of authorship and rejected the argument of Dionysius. The Council of Carthage (397 AD) explicitly ascribed the book to John the evangelist.59 Thus so strong is the evidence in favour of apostolic authorship of the Book of Revelation that it is difficult to believe that all the Fathers of the Church who supported this view made a mistake in confusing the John of Revelation with the Apostle. Here the argument of Donald Guthrie seems very apt. He says: “If all this evidence is due to a mistake it would be an extraordinarily widespread case of mistaken identity. It must be conceded that taken as a whole it points very strong to the probability that the John of the Apocalypse was, in fact, John the apostle”.60 55 Cf. Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, p. 935; Jean-Louis D’ Aragon “The Apocalypse”, p. 468. 56 Cf. Columba Graham Flegg, An Introduction to Reading Apocalypse, p. 49. For an elaborate discussion on the internal evidence for apostolic authorship of the Book of Revelation see Cf. Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, pp. 935-938. 57 Cf. Jean-Louis D’ Aragon “The Apocalypse”, p. 469. 58 Cf. Ibid., p. 469. 59 Cf. Columba Graham Flegg, An Introduction to Reading Apocalypse, p. 46. 60 Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, p. 933. KURUVACHIRA JOSE EOBIB-210 10 Therefore, the arguments and scholarship denying the authorship of John the Apostle is not strong enough to overthrow the orthodox tradition. 6) Canonical status The Book of Revelation was recognised from earliest days as having the stamp of inspiration upon it.61 It is significant that the Letter of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons cites Revelation in one place as Scripture.62 The Muratorian Canon shows that no doubts existed over the Book of Revelation in the Roman Church towards the ends of the second century.63 Clement of Alexandria accepted the apostolic authorship and cited the book as Scripture.64 The same goes for Origen65 and Tertullian.66 Athanasius of Alexandria (c.296-373) unhesitatingly accepted the book of Revelation as part of his biblical canon.67 The Book of Revelation was accepted into the canon at the Council of Carthage (397 AD). Papias of Hierapolis (2nd century) referred to Revelation, Melito of Sardis (died c.180) wrote a book on it, Theophilus of Antioch (died c.185) alluded to it, Appollonius of Hierapolis (2nd century) used its testimonies. Epiphanius of Salamis (end of 4th century) included it in his list of the New Testament books as did Jerome (c.347-420), Codex Alexandrinus68 and Codex Sinaiticus.69 The Codex Claromontanus (a Greek and Latin manuscript dating from the 5th to the 6th century) places Revelation before the Acts.70 The Trullan Synod (692) held by the Eastern bishops included the book of Revelation in its list of canonical 61 Cf. Ibid.,p. 967. 62 Cf. Ibid., p. 931. 63 Cf. Ibid., p. 931. 64 Cf. Ibid., p. 931; Lee M. McDonald, The Formation of the Christian Biblical Canon, pp. 199, 216. 65 Cf. Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction, p. 931; Lee M. McDonald, The Formation of the Christian Biblical Canon, pp. 201, 203, 216. 66 Cf. Ibid., p. 205. 67 Cf. Ibid., p. 222. 68 Cf. Ibid., pp. 216-217. 69 Cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Sinaiticus Accessed on 21 June 2012 70 Cf. Lee M. McDonald, The Formation of the Christian Biblical Canon, p. 224.