I have sent my book manuscript off to my editor. She will work it over, ask for edits, and we’ll go from there. The preface to the book, as it now stands, explains what the book is about and what I try to argue for in it. I thought I’d pass it by you to see what you think.
******************************
Preface
Many of the early Christians had serious doubts about the book of Revelation and did not think it should be included in the New Testament. The author, they argued, was not an apostle and the book presented views that were clearly unacceptable. In the end, of course, they lost the argument. But once the book came to be widely accepted as Scripture, the followers of Jesus had to figure out how to make sense of it. Over the long course of Christian history, many readers of the Bible have widely opted not to delve into its mysteries at all. Even today, most find it bizarre and unapproachable.
Those who do read it fall into various camps of interpretation. Starting toward the end of the nineteenth century, most evangelical Christians began to take the book as a blueprint for what is to happen in the near future, a description of events soon to come. These readers are convinced that the prophecies are now, at last, being fulfilled. God is about to intervene in history through a series of fore-ordained disasters. At a final confrontation of the powers of good and evil, the Battle of Armageddon, Christ will appear from heaven to destroy his enemies and those who persecute his followers. But the true believers in Jesus will survive and in fact thrive for all time, in a glorious utopia – a city of gold with gates of pearl, from which they will rule the world.
On the other side of the interpretive spectrum, liberal Christian scholars argue the book does not provide a literal description of divinely ordained catastrophes soon to transpire. It is instead a metaphorical narrative meant to provide a message of hope for those who suffer now, much as Christ himself, the innocent “lamb of God,” suffered when he was among us. In this view, Revelation seeks to show that, despite all appearances, God is ultimately sovereign. Evil is pervasive and misery rampant, but the Ruler of All will eventually make right everything that is wrong. The book therefore does not describe the imminent end of history as we know it; it instead celebrates God as the ultimate source of hope for all who follow him.
I have held both these views at different times of my life, and I now think they are both wrong.
I began my study of Revelation as a late teenager in the mid 1970s. As a committed evangelical Christian, I considered every word of the Bible to be inspired and true. Along with everyone else in my immediate evangelical context, I heartily embraced a literal reading of the prophecies of Revelation, convinced that it showed beyond any doubt that Jesus was about to return from heaven and start the proceedings. Soon there would be hell to pay. At least for those who, unlike me, were not true believers.
After some years, as I engaged in a more rigorous study of the Bible, I came to see the difficulties with this view and began to explore the book of Revelation from a more historical perspective. I realized it was important to understand the work in its own context in relationship to other Jewish and Christian books that, like it, that are collectively called “apocalypses.” And I recognized the importance of studying such books — like all ancient books — in light of their own historical contexts and cultural assumptions. These books may not be well known to most non-scholars, but they are endlessly fascinating. They regularly narrate visions of heaven and of things to come in order to show how the awful realities of earth can be explained by the ultimate truths of heaven, with the goal of providing comfort and support for readers who are experiencing pain and misery now.
This is how I taught the book when I began my university career and continued doing so for years: Revelation is a graphic but non-literal proclamation of hope for those who are suffering. It will all be well in the end. Good will triumph. God will prevail. And he will “wipe away every tear.”
It was difficult for me to abandon this understanding of the book – just as earlier in life it was hard to give on the idea that it was predicting our future. In this book I will show why I think both views are irretrievably flawed. In the first part a “futuristic” understanding of the book as a blueprint for what is yet to come is almost certainly wrong – even though it continues to be the view of evangelical Christians and probably of the reading public at large, few of whom are familiar with the scholarly alternative. It’s talking about the future, right? Nope. I don’t think so, and I’ll show why.
If you don’t need to be convinced about that, I do hope you’ll go on to read final chapters of the book. There show why I also don’t think Revelation provides a comforting message for those who suffer in this life. At least not most of them. The overwhelming emphasis of Revelation is not about hope but about the wrath and vengeance of God against those who have incurred his displeasure. For the author of Revelation, that entails the vast majority of people who have ever lived, including, perhaps surprisingly, a number of committed Christians. The book repeatedly indicates that God is angry and that Christ seeks to avenge his own unjust death, not just on those who were responsible for it; his vengeance falls on the “inhabitants of earth.” His followers too want revenge and are told to go out and get it. The largest section of the narrative thus describes God and his “Lamb” inflicting horrible suffering on the planet; war, starvation, horrid disease, drought, earthquake, torture, and death. The catastrophes end with the Battle of Armageddon, where Christ destroys all the armies of earth and calls on the scavengers of the sky to gorge themselves on their flesh. This, then, is the climax of the history of earth.
But it is not the end of all things. After that there will be a final judgment. God’s faithful followers, his “slaves,” will be saved; everyone else who has ever lived will be brought back to life, judged for their wickedness, and then thrown, while still alive, into a lake of burning sulfur. Afterward, God will reward his obedient slaves by giving them a glorious new city of gold with gates of pearl. They then, the followers of Jesus, will rule the earth forever.
That is indeed a happy ending for some people. But it not because God loves them deeply – at least the book never says so. The saved are God’s enslaved minions who do what he demands. The love of God – for anyone or anything – is never mentioned in the book, not once. The book is instead about the “wrath of God” — as stated repeatedly — as well as the wrath of Christ, and the violent vengeance wreaked on the inhabitants of earth leading up to the appearance of the glorious city from which God’s slaves will rule the planet.
At first glance this summary may seem slanted and implausible. I will try to show, however, that it is exactly what the book itself repeatedly emphasizes. Its troubling emphases have been seen by other modern readers, of course, including, rather unexpectedly, D. H. Lawrence, who described Revelation as the “dark side of Christianity.” I could not agree more.
At the end of my book I will consider why the Revelation was nearly excluded from the New Testament and ponder whether the ancient Christian opponents of the book may in fact have had some valid insights. In particular, I will compare the views of the author, John of Patmos, with the teachings of the Jesus. John certainly considered himself a follower of Jesus — a particularly ardent follower. But are his views actually consistent with those of his Lord? Would Jesus have accepted John’s perspectives and considered him one of his true followers? To put the matter concretely, can John’s celebration of violence, quest for vengeance, passion for glory, and hope for world domination be reconciled with the teachings of Jesus, who urged his followers to pursue love, non-retaliation, poverty, and service?
Different readers, of course, will answer the question differently. I would simply urge anyone who wants to consider the matter seriously to read, or re-read, Revelation with unflinching honesty, and see what it actually says. That is what I have tried to do in this book.
Hey Bart,
Love your work and will read the new book when it comes out. I caught a couple of typos:
“There show why I also don’t think Revelation provides a comforting message for those who suffer in this life.” Shouldn’t that by “They”?
“In particular, I will compare the views of the author, John of Patmos, with the teachings of the Jesus.” I don’t think you meant to say “the” Jesus.
I will reserve judgement till I see the whole book but I think you are overstating your case a bit.
‘The love of God – for anyone or anything – is never mentioned in the book, not once.’
Chapter 1 v 5 says god ‘loves us’. Plus God wiping away every tear is certainly a very personal, tender image.
Whilst Revelation is more graphic in its depiction of the suffering of the ‘wicked’ is it really very different from the thinking behind the historical Jesus’ teachings? After all you yourself have argued that Jesus’ ethical teachings need to be read through the lens of his apocalyptic world view, which involved the destruction of Gods enemies?
Yup, I do try to make the case! But I’m pretty sure about the text never mentioning God’s love. Christ is said to love people in 1:5, but Christ and God are not identical in this text. God himself is never said to love anyone, not even his “slaves.” I’d also say the wiping away of tears has a different function. It certainly does show that his slaves do not need to worry about suffering any more, since all of God’s enemies have been destroyed. In any event, I certainly talk about both points in the book.
Sounds great. Revelation has always held a special place in my mind due to its bizarre nature. I look forward to reading.
Revelation is an atrocity, reading it thoroughly as a young man planted a seed of doubt. What sort of people figured it should belong in something called The Good Book? That was my question at the time. Naturally the Catholic priest discouraged attempting to interpret the Bible. Only clergy were qualified to do that.
Very excited about the new book. Sounds fascinating to me.
The Revelation basically scared the hell “out”! of me,,,,,,,til how I currently read and understand the book as a book taling about our self, our inner structure and way.
I’ve been through the book from different angles, including the famous preteristic view that it was about a book for encouragement for the opressed and young judeo-christian congreagation against Nero and the Roman empire. I studied that view over many years but after a long time lost belief in that view.
I’ve gradually been more and more convinced that it is all an inner process, and it is all about ourself. Carl Gustav Jung talked about the symbology in some gnostic creation views as a pattern of the psyche as he understood it. I will claim that the book of Revelation is much more a pattern of his view, both the pattern, structure and even the symbols are so similar.
I thought I would never come to this situation and opinion, but now the book is for me actually very beautiful and for the first time it really gives me sensible meaning when i now carefully read every verse, every chapter and the whole book.
I will claim that the book is a book which very easily could been out of C.G. Jungs cosmology, and it is familiar to other comparative structures from ancient “inward” religions (like some patterns shown in for example Hinduism). The book talks about ourself, including the understanding of the “Self”, the “Ego” , levels of counciousnesses using symbols which many of the most famous psycological scholars are familiar with and also claim are archtypical symbols and structures where Christ is the way, and the end to the world is up to us and not foreordained as some have believed.
You should write something about that, KT perhaps a book or perhaps a blog post somewhere to give us a taste?
As a psychotherapist myself, I would come consider that usually we read things into texts more often than out of them.
For sure one can apply C.G.Jung to the book of revelation and it might or might not be insightful for oneself, stimulating self-reflection.
Nevertheless I would state it probably has never been written into the text to begin with and I sincerely doubt this for scripture in other religions.
The cultural difference between then & there and here & now are so sculpting to our mindset, that I doubt it’s even possible to really deeply understand what people meant and what that meanings meant to them.
Nevertheless, the surface still seems obvious.
I agree and am very aware of your reflections. Nevertheless, I find it interesting from a comparative perspective to find such spiritual-psychological patterns in different ancient worldviews. On this limited platform, and with my limited Norwegian-English, I can summarize my position based on various ancient traditions and clearly find messages that talk about inner worlds often expressed in symbols. A few (of several) examples can be taken from ancient Greek, Egyptian, ancient Sumerian, partly from Gnostic views that Jungs relates to, but also some Vedic traditions that Jung apparently also partly fascinated by. An example from the latter example is the Kundalini traditions of the process of awakening our own “Self” by opening the 7 partially closed centers, as potentially you can read into other traditions.
For me, it is an exciting approach to look at ancient and often more mysterious texts / ideas in ancient traditions and at the same time wear more modern scientific glasses. For this I need not only reflect it through C.G. Jung’s psycho-spiritual theories, but there are many others in different fields like quantum physics (like David Hohm and many others) and neurophysics (like Marjorie Woollacott and many others) and others that relate modern science of being / consciousness / consciousness like Fritjof Capra – “The Tao of Physics”, etc.
For me, the “inner” path seems just more and more compelling.
I think your great talent, Dr Ehrman, is to be able to ‘infect’ others with your enthusiasm for a particular topic. The book of Revelation was pretty low down my list of interests within the field of early Christian history, but now I’m hooked and can’t wait to read your book.
Bart, this post reminds me of something I’ve been meaning to ask you.
Could you say something about how this book will differ from Elaine Pagels’ 2012 book on Revelations? I assume the underlying scholarship will be similar. Do you come to different conclusions?
Thanks.
Ah, they’re actually not at all alike. Elaine does talk about the book of Revelation and its historical context and gives her interpretations; but three of her five chapters are actually about Christianity afterward. My book goes into considerably more depth and it focuses n different issues.
“just as earlier in life it was hard to give on the idea” change to “give up on the idea”? Perhaps another typo, on the premise this has been copy/pasted from the manuscript.
Thanks.
Bart, in case you or our fellow bloggers were not aware, Microsoft Word has a “Speak” function that will read the document text aloud. I have caught many typos this way with my ears that my eyes have wandered past on the page. The book seems very interesting and I look forward to reading it.
Thanks.
I look forward to reading your book. I hope it explores in depth the theological (or political) reasons for why this baffling book was included in the NT.
Yup!
Sheep and goats
Based on what you said here, it does seem to reflect the basic Christian message. God is going to intervene in history and only those who accept a certain idea as true are going to be rescued from the mayhem that ensues.
Some people might claim that God saves people out of love for them but that doesn’t account for the wrath he and Jesus are willing to inflict on everyone else.
Yup, I agree; that is a common view; and yup, it’s not the view of Revelatin.
In 1 Corinthians 3:15 Paul seems to cut believers some slack, saying, “If anyone’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet only so as through fire.” John of Revelation doesn’t seem to give them such grace when you read the letters to the 7 churches: If your work doesn’t measure up you go into the fire, not through it!
Yup, John of Patmos was no slacker.
> But the true believers in Jesus will survive and in fact thrive for all time, in a glorious utopia – a city of gold with gates of pearl, from which they will rule the world.
Who is going to be left in the world for the true believers to rule? I thought that everyone who wasn’t a true believer was going to be shrieking in God’s supernatural torture chamber from then on.
Also, assuming there was someone left for the believers to rule, just what form would that rule take? Police forces and criminal courts to ensure compliance with Scripture?
It’s one of the delicious ironies of the book; I talk about it in my analysis. It’s very peculiar but clerly there.
I interpreted this a bit differently than jscheller. I think you meant to put an “I” after there and before show (?)
“There (I) show why I also don’t think Revelation provides a comforting message for those who suffer in this life.”
Thanks.
Wow!
Do you think that John thought that the unrighteous would be tortured forever? It doesn’t sound like you think other New Testament authors thought this way. Do you think that John is the first one who thought of a literal fiery torture, AND that this punishment would last forever?
I definitely think not. He thought they would be destroyed in the lake of fire. I talke about that in some length, btw, in my book Heaven and Hell.
Re: the love of God not really being mentioned in Revelation. Off the top of my head I would have thought “he will wipe every tear from their eyes” (Rev. 21:4) would imply love, would be a description of a loving gesture but — maybe not?!
I deal with it in the book, and argue … not!
John of Patmos is probably the first, or at least the most famous, early Evangelical fundamentalist. Today’s evangelicals also consider themselves ardent followers of the big JC, yet IMO miss the point by miles. I find it interesting that evangelicals almost always get attracted to the violent, vengeful aspects of scripture. I’ve yet to come across a compassion evangelical, or a love evangelical, or a Sermon On The Mount evangelical. It’s always the same crap – Revelation, bits of Levitcus, bits of Exodus, blah blah blah.
It’s a shame that Armageddon is used in conjunction with such an unhappy, violent ending, I could well imagine a party drug called “Armageddon Happy.” Not quite as good as “No fun, too much damn, not enough mental”, but a worthy runner up IMO lol.
Love your work Bart. Don’t let Sarah or Dale Martin or anyone else try and get you to re enter the faith. We need you.
Ah, neither of them ever has, nor has any interest in doing so. Not the least!
Thanks Bart. I recall reading somewhere that Martin Luther was so disturbed by Revelation, that in his version of the Bible, he included it at the very end in an appendix.
Yup, that’s right. I’ll be dealing with Luther’s views in my book.
Thank you Bart.
Really excited to get my hands on this when it comes out. I’m writing my senior thesis right now about the social implications of being so expectant of a divine apocalypse. Seems to me like it’s so often the fundamentalist Christians who care the least about modern issues like climate change, as it can just be written off as the “end times.” If there’s anything you’ve noticed interacting with this sort of people, I’d love to hear about it.
I’m looking forward to reading this book. Back when I was an evangelical Christian, I thought the Book of Revelation was out of character with the the rest of the New Testament in tone and I wondered why it ever made it into the canon. I, of course, kept this doubt to myself and didn’t share it with other evangelicals. It’s gratifying to see now my instincts about the book had company.
So Jesus thought his death was “unjust” and needed to be avenged. But his apostles tell us Jesus said his death was necessary for salvation. Which is it?
Great insight… I never thought of the inverse!!
Bart, interesting preface. My question is this.
Is your interpretation of Revelation, literal, historical facts like “666” means a Roman Emperor and not some bogey man in our future?
Or is it allegorical with the many weird symbols such as the serpent. The symbol of a serpent played important roles in religious and cultural life of ancient Egypt, Canaan Mesopotamia, and Greece The serpent was a symbol of evil power and chaos from the underworld as well as a symbol of fertility, life and healing.
Or is it mystical interpretation such as that in Rev 3:12 “Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: This is where mystics and the spiritual yoga tradition points to the reference of reincarnation in “and he shall go no more out”
Or perhaps all three?
Right — there is obviously a huge amount of symbolism but it’s not an “allegory” that requires a constant point by point correspondence between image and reality. Some of the symbols do have real-live correspnodencts (Whore of Babylon), others not (“ten” kings doesn’t necessarily mean you can start counting them); there is certainly a mystical aspect to it as well. The symbols in other words can function in a number of ways and are usually but not always polyvalent.
Bart has a very good lecture on YT that discusses this. It’s a long lecture, and around the 60 minute mark (from memory) he makes the point that 666 and 616 refer to Nero, who was the first emperor to persecute Christians (they used letters for numbers in those days, so if you work back from 666 and 616 in their respective languages, you get Neron Kaiser). The serpents heads, whore of Babylon etc. refer to Rome and the Roman Empire.
Even though John of Patmos is really OTT, the target of his ire is completely correct IMO.
Below is Bart’s YT video, and another article on the topic you may find useful.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_L4_LmqImY
https://isthatinthebible.wordpress.com/2014/05/25/the-mark-of-the-beast-demystified-or-ive-got-666-problems-but-the-rapture-aint-one-of-them/
616, as I recall, comes from an alternate version of “Caesar Nero” in Hebrew: “Kaysar Nero” which drops the final nun, which is 50, hence the difference.
Yes, I believe the 666 is the Greek version. According to the article above, 616 is the Latin version.
616 is actually a variant found in a couple of Greek manuscripts, one of them discovered relatively recently.
I can share your observation about your reference to a kind of yoga tradition, and in particular the Revelation chapter 1-11. If you read carefully, from a broader perspective, with insight in, or at least aquainted with modern phsyco-spiritual theories like Carl Gustav Jung and his life long studies, in additon to some ancient spiritual views(predating even judaisim ) in the vedic schriptures, the Revelation resembles our own being and our own evolvement. Even several symbols and even these 7 spiritual centers which needs to be awakened to return to basically where it came from. In a yoga tradition it is a very spiritual monk which would be able to guide you to open these 7 spiritual centers, but according to the Revelation chapter 5 it is the “Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David” who could open it. And still, I don’t have problem to read it as a Christian text,,,and I do.
Revelation is indeed a christian schripture but the pattern and theme seems to me to be more ancient. In modern psycho-spiritual perspective, like for example C.G.Jung, the chapter 12-22 would be recognizable, and still forces and symbols working from within. I’m not saying it is a deliberate correlation between psyhco-spiritual science and christian theology, but I have to say it matches. In my mind it draws the theology become close to what we consider psyco spiritual science.
So, yes indeed, I can read the revelation, in particular from chapter 1-11 also from a mystical spiritual yoga tradition (not unlike the Kundalini yoga tradition), but still fully christian,, but it would be considered a mystical christian approach. Chapter 12-22 is more in line with the above referred psycho-spiritual science which is quite dominant today if you study it thorougly.
I look forward to reading it!
I look forward to reading the article and watching the video!
A bit tongue in cheek but…. Maybe John of Patmos was the first evangelical fundamentalist. After all, he seems to hate almost everybody and enjoyed all the ways he would have them beat up.
Is this your first trade book that advances your own thesis that is not generally held by scholars?
Actually there are a lot of scholars who hold very similar views. And I’d say that all my trade books have had scholarly objectors!
I think you should begin with the paragraph that starts “I began my study of Revelation…” Go from the personal to the historical.
Are you going to devote a lot of space to the reception history of the book? That was the most surprising thing about it to me (and I suspect will be to much of your popular audience), how controversial Revelation was among Christians and for how long.
Yup, I’ll be talking about the history of its interpretation as well as bout debates about whether it should belong in the canon.
This book would be most appropriate for the next book review club. Almost all of us will want to read and discuss it.
Unfortunately it won’t e out till next year!
Gotta get this book! If Revelation had been excluded from The Good Book, MIGHT there have been a whole lot less of the Blood and Thunder and Threat Churches, do you think? A less coercive approach all round?
Or are threats of “Do This Or Else!” a human thing which would have happened anyway? Especially with the rise of Islam “needing” a threatening response?
Religious believers very often — most of the time? at least with monotheisms) — need to have a threat to respond to.
Is there anything in Revelation to suggest that John had or knew someone who had experienced severe persecution for being a Christian? This might explain the emphasis on wrath. I know that you have said that there was rarely a general suppression of Christianity by the Romans but more limited persecutions by local authorities may have occurred.
Yes, it is one of his major themes; he seems to think large multitudes have been martryed and their souls are looking for vengeance. Historically, there would have been very few in his day. But sectarians ftenfeel far more persecuted than they actualy are.
Dr bart do you how many old testament quotation that were misused by Paul or gospel writer ? And is it true that there Will be dead and ressurected messiah in any version of hebrew bible , either ITS Masoratic or septuagint
I’m not sure what you mean by “misused.” Most of the time they were following accepted interpretive practices of the time. But you’re right, none of the authors of the Hebrew Bible anticipated a messiah who would die and then be raised.
“The catastrophes end with the Battle of Armageddon, where Christ destroys all the armies of earth and calls on the scavengers of the sky to gorge themselves on their flesh.” Rev 19,21
Jesus also had his bad days, for example, when he himself seems to have used this very image (Q 17,37): “Wherever the corpse is, there will the vultures gather.”
Yup — nicely illustrated by the Marriage Feast of the Lamb! (One difference is that we know with virtual certaintty what John of Patmos wrote, but not so much what Jesus himself actually said. but he certainly, imo, thought there was indeed a destruction comign and it wouldnt’ be pretty)
Wow! I understand so much better now why you write that your views of Revelation changed, from a book about love to a book about vengeance. You might want to consider quoting Martin Luther’s comments in his introduction to Revelation since he evidently did not think the book was apostolic nor prophetic. And considering his prominence in Protestant thinking, his view carries considerable weight.
Third paragraph, 6th line: “that, like it that” omit second “that.”
Ninth paragraph, first line: should be “These” rather than “There.”
Eleventh paragraph, first line, second sentence: “But it not”: Leave out “it” or insert “is” after “it.”
THanks! Yup, I do quote Luther’s views in the book. Thanks for the typos! Well, for noticing themmm….
I recall lo those many years ago in one of your TTC courses you discussed some methods scholars use for analyzing ancient works of prophecy. One of them involved determining when a text was actually written based on where in the text events it “predicts” begin to be infused with a certain level of detail, etc. Are these methods relevant to Revelations?
The reason I ask is that Revelations claims to be written by John on the island of Patmos, yet it advances certain Christian concepts that seem to have taken hold long after the historical John the Disciple would have been dead …
Yup, that’s a tried and true method for dating texts. It is used for Revelation, but not so much for knowing whether the son of Zebeee wrote it, since we ddon’t have solid evidence for his views; Revelation has been plausibly dated in the 60s or the mid-90s, with the vast majority of scholars opting for the latter. That itself makes it completely implausible of one of Jesus’ wn disciples from 70 years earlier to have written it, given life expectancies….
Ive been waiting with bated breath to see you kind of lay out your thesis for the new book. Not a bit disappointed.
Ive been finding myself meditating on Revelation more and more the past years, which is odd since it’s easily one of the books hardest to reconcile with my materialist/ humanist worldview. But there’s a bittersweet comfort in the idea that, yes the world is evil, yes god notices it too, no they aren’t going to get away with it. As someone who follows the news a little too closely for my own good, I have been starting to feel the appeal.
So, this thesis really passes the smell test for me. I look forward to reading any other snippets you care to drop, while we all wait to buy the thing 😁
Bart,
What did Albert Schweitzer get wrong to come to the conclusion Matthew was the first gospel?
Steve Campbell, author of Historical Accuracy
Dale Allison relayed to Paul Williams of Blogging Theology that Schweitzer had some Greek synopsis that he used to try to persuade a Methodist pastor that Matthew was the first gospel, not Mark.
I didn’t know that. But he mainly relied on both Matthew and Mark as the two earliest and based his reconstruction on a rather dubious attempt to harmonize what could be found in both.
This was very insightful, Dr. Ehrman. I had never thought of the Revelation as a book of vengeance, but now that you’ve mentioned it, I cannot see it otherwise. You’ve sparked a lot of thoughts that are buzzing around in my head right now. I’ve got this connected to Romans 1 (“the wrath of God is revealed from heaven…”) and Hebrews 10 (“a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire…”). You’ve given me plenty to think about here. I’m adding your book to my list of future reads. I hope you’ll keep us posted as to when it is released.
The artist, Nina Haley is working on an animation that I thought you might find interesting. Here is her announcement about her work.
About
The Book of Revelation text used here is the King James Version and is Public Domain.
The art and animation are by Nina Paley, licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. You do not need permission to copy, share, and re-use these Free Cultural works. Please attribute to “Nina Paley / apocalypseanimated.com”. If you would like to use this work in a proprietary project, such as a book or film, please contact the artist to negotiate a waiver.
Donations gladly accepted at Paypal or Patreon.
Apocalypse Animated, Proudly powered by WordPress.
https://apocalypseanimated.com/about/?fbclid=IwAR18FQoR9qP3-FCirgNdn2Zwh_8bYGWCV8qnA_yIk_vzfP6LBQQwQeb5W0Q
Thanks!
Bart – I found several minor errors, words that need to be deleted or added, which I have shown below in parentheses. The argument seems sound and the flow is good.
quotes follow below:
I realized it was important to understand the work in its own context in relationship to other Jewish and Christian books that, like it, (delete second ‘that’) are collectively called “apocalypses.”
It was difficult for me to abandon this understanding of the book – just as earlier in life it was hard to give (add ‘up’) on the idea that it was predicting our future.
There (add ‘I’) show why I also don’t think Revelation provides a comforting message for those who suffer in this life.
But it (add ‘is’) not because God loves them deeply – at least the book never says so.
In particular, I will compare the views of the author, John of Patmos, with the teachings of (delete ‘the’) Jesus.
THanks!
Can’t wait….so looking forward to the book!
Accepted scriptures are like Disney cartoons or Star Wars novels. Authorative institutions have accepted that some cartoons can be credited to Walt Disney and some scifi novels to George Lucas, regardless of the real pseudonymous authors.
Then arrives new a sect that opposes the original authoritative institution, but regardless supports their definition on what is authoritative scripture and what is not.
The only possibility the new sect has is to take literally the pseudonymous authors of the text without giving credit to the original institution that selected or more likely produced the texts from the beginning.
In response to Dankoh, Jesus is quoted as saying while on his way to the cross, “Don’t weep for me, weep for your children”. I think that indicates he thought the crucifixion was unjust and would be avenged.
He does have to die in order to fulfill his statement, “I go now to prepare a place for you” and thus offer salvation but He doesn’t have to die so utterly inhumanely.
Hi Bart, what is the difference between books intended for scholars and those intended for the general public? How do you decide which ideas are best suited for one versus the other? And if you could comment on your choice of medium for this particular book.
Thanks. Kameel
I’ll be discussing that on the blog in a week or so! This book is definitely for a popoular audience; I don’t presuppose scholarly knowledge or any real background and don’t use any jargon that I don’t explain. (I’ll illustrate the difference, in my posts, by showing samples from books on the same topic I’ve written for both audiences.
The Book of Revelation has some similarities with the Quran and its numerous references to hellfire and the dark fate of unbelievers.
Some modern (German and a few French) scholars in the Quran points to a multiple influenced Quran, and much from Judaism, some Gnostic views, Zoroastrianism, and even Hinduism.
I will say NO! It is NOT similar with the Quran!!
As a muslim I can testify, if there is the Quran summed up in one message, its accept Allah as your Master, who has no partner along with whatever He commanded you to do as His slave (not merely servant-slave.) Failure to surrender to the Master means everlasting blaze.
The entire book is replete with, believe and work rightious deeds, you make it to Paradise, reject and do whatever, good or bad its still unending torment in the fire.
One thing that they do share in common is reference to a beast from the earth. Not sure if the similarities start or end there. Theres no beast of the sea in our tradition. Also John of Patmos seems to be a Christian who considers Jesus the son of God so the two books are dissimilar even if they have a lot of common aspects.
Obviously, The Revelation of John is not a prophecy about the future in its purest form. As I understand it, many described events have already occurred before writing. But the author is trying hard to scare the reader. Most likely, the target audience was Christian communities during the persecutions. The author of the book tried to convince people that the worst time is ahead and the stakes are too high.
Bart.. as a Catholic Christian, I always got the vibe from my education that Revelation was weird and not to be taken seriously. In fact, until I took New Testament at Iliff, I had never read the NT (nor the HB) cover to cover, which might not be that unusual for Catholics (at least of a certain vintage). Mostly I’ve heard the Bible in readings at services on Sundays. SO I thought it was interesting that according to this author (SJ, Ph.D) that about 90% of Revelation is not in the Lectionary, that is, not read in services. “The Book of Revelation contains 22 chapters with a total of 404 verses. Of those, no more than 41 verses total are read on Sundays, and only every third year during the Easter Season (Year C) or on the Solemnity of Christ the King (Year B). “
https://catholic-resources.org/Lectionary/Overview-Revelation.htm. Are you going to talk about how other Christian denominations view Revelation in the book?
I won’t be talking about standard views from one denomination or anothr per se, but I will be talking about different ways it’s been interpreted over the centuries, especailly in modern times. 9The problem is that there is not a single way within one denomination or another.)
I am looking forward to this one! Until then, I have a question about canonicity. A colleague of mine recently told a story about how the eastern churches loved Revelation but hated the Gospel of John. The western churches loved John, but hated Revelation. The fact that both made it into the cannon was a tit for tat deal between the two factions.
I’ve never heard this before, and I’m not sure what to make of it. Is there any truth in the story?
No, I think they may have gotten things confused. It was the book of Hebrews, not John, that was favored in the East but not in the West, the mirror view of Revelation.
Bart, has the publisher chosen a title for the book yet? What would *you* choose for the title?
On another note, since a lot of scholars, including you, consider Revelation as symbolic of God and Jesus taking down Rome and the Kingdom of God prevailing – a message of hope – what does this book add to that historical narrative?
I do see it that way, but I discuss it as a very dark picture of hope (hope for only a very few people who have ever lived); and I ask whether its views of God and Christ are those of Jesus. Not sure of the title. I’m proposing Expecting Armageddon: What the Book of Revelation Really Reveals.
I’ll wait for the movie…seriously, can’t wait to read it. I did pick up a copy of your mentor Bruce Metzger’s “Breaking the Code: Understanding the Book of Revelation”. (1993) If you are familiar with it, are you on the same page?
I agree with a lot of his interpretations, but not at all with his over all (positive) evaluation of the book. I do recommend it though as a guide to some of the symbolism.
Just wanted to say: this was an intellectually honest text. A little piece of humanism at its finest.
A few comments:
Purely from a textual perspective, the Book of Revelation is so badly written text that its overall badness actually vaguely reminds me of the Book of Daniel (another very badly written text). Theologically both of these books are really bad, too.
However, my laywoman’s impression is that the early Christians who were responsible for the birth of the current New Testament canon had a pretty good literary taste overall.
For example, the often mentioned fact that the exact number of the texts in the New Testament happens to be 3 x 3 x 3 (i.e. “the trinity of trinities”) is a charming little poetic-theological detail IMHO (and as such, surely not an accident). And there are other, intellectually more profound examples of their taste as well.
I can thus only assume that the Book of Revelation, as bad as it is theologically, ethically and grammatically, was originally considered to have at least some (non-obvious) literary merits. (I have my own hypotheses of course, but I spare you from them.)
Nevertheless, looking forward to reading your book,
S_P
I look forward to your full explication of how the Saved are to be viewed as God’s Slaves 🙂 Should proof challenging and mind expanding
Bart,
Now that your book on Revelation is going to be published, I wanted to share my thought. I know that you accepted proposals for a new book and, because of my financial situation, I wasn’t able to participate until it was a bit too late. However, I have an idea for you to as far as *a* future book goes (not necessarily your next one). I was thinking about a book on visions and hallucinations. I recall a couple of threads about hallucinations and group visions. One participant, who claimed experience in the medical profession, argued against “group mass/hallucinations” and claimed that they were medically impossible, IIRC. I have no medical expertise or even any training, so I am not going to argue with that. His comments made sense although I would have to consult with medical professionals and mental health experts to come to my own conclusion.
So, my idea for a future book would be one on hallucinations, visions, and delusions. There are probably ancient accounts of divine beings, heroes, saints, and legendary characters appearing to people, and probably groups of people at a time. This would be an excellent sequel to “Jesus Before the Gospels”.
Thanks! I do deal with that issue of visions in How Jesus Became God, where I talk about visions and even group visions. It may be true that they are medically impossible (I assume they are, technically speaking). But they are *reported* all the time. Think of all those appearances of the Blessed Virgin Mary to large groups of people; they are extraordinarily well documented with loads of eyewitness testimony.
Hi,
I’m older than you and I was raised in a family that did believe the divine nature of the “good book.” My mother was the daughter of a missionary and lived her early years in China. Revelation was a very important book for this religious group. I can remember reading letters from relatives in which they would essentially prey for the end of the world to come swiftly. The end of the world was as described in Revelation. I couldn’t understand how intelligent human beings could wish for such a chain of bazar and gruesome events to come as soon as possible. I know that when I was very young, I bought into this nonsense. I was terrified that it was true. I had no other information that would contradict those teachings. I grew out of that quickly and I now believe if you wish to draw back the curtain of ignorance you should not ask an evangelical for help.
I’m curious about the stylistic aspects of Revelation and how it relates to OT mystical imagery. I was once approached about helping with some kind of unspecified corpus linguistics to aid in drawing some kind of parallels between OT prophetic imagery. I politely declined. There is a primitivism in some aspects of Revelation but it seems very different from other extant Near Eastern mythic traditions (say Baal cycles) or Indo-Aryan praise texts… likely because it is so late into the 1st millennium, but it seems different from Hellenistic or Roman ideas of the time too.
Looking forward to the book!
Dr. Ehrman, will your book evaluate the circumstances around the seven churches addressed in the writers message in Ch. 2&3? If you do not, are you aware of other writings that unpack the writing in this context? I’ve read many commentaries but most are from an evangelical slant. Just as a historical context provides a better understand of Paul’s letters in an occasional sense to the churches he wrote to, I would think context around the churches (or cities) could give a different glimpse in the writer’s motivation.
Yes, a bit. I argue tht “persecution” is not the main problem but false teachings and complacency are, based on Rev. 2-3. A good commentary for you to look at would be Craig Koester’s in the Anchor Bible Commentary series. He’s a Christian but not a conservative evangelical, and his commentary is very historically oriented with good discussions of such isues.
I remember being made to watch a film where U.N. vans picked up those who were left behind and took them to the Guillotine, complete with blood and gore! I was only 14 or 15 years old attending a radical church! This would happen to you if you weren’t saved. I was 14 or 15 years old. I am very thankful for your books and really looking forward to this one! Thank you!
Yup. Thief in the Night?
“The overwhelming emphasis of Revelation is not about hope but about the wrath and vengeance of God against those who have incurred his displeasure… The book is instead about the “wrath of God” — as stated repeatedly — as well as the wrath of Christ, and the violent vengeance wreaked on the inhabitants of earth”
I totally agree, I always saw Revelation this way…
My “theory” is that John was very bad treated back in Patmos,probably tortured , Reveletion is clearly the work of a disturbed man even considering it as an “apocalyptic” writting.
Modern scholarship considers the persecution of christians as a myth. I do not.
Tacitus,Suetonius and Pliny the Younger are our earliest Roman sources about the christians , always they speak about them in context of persecution,Pliny is very clear in that he ordered christians to be executed only for being christians ( he asked Trajan about that but only after killing them !!!).
There is little that we know about early christianity from Roman sources, except from the fact that they were severely persecuted.
Ezekiel 38:4
King James Version
4 And I will turn thee back, and put hooks into thy jaws, and I will bring thee forth, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of them clothed with all sorts of armour, even a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords:
Professor Ehrman,
Excited about your new book and can’t wait until it is in print.
I know you are very busy but if you have the time for my question, I wondered what your thoughts are concerning something I am noticing dealing with the Book of Revelation and the “End Times” I read or hear more about from certain Christian leaders.
I have noticed certain Evangelicals linking the verse above and that chapter of Ezekiel with the 20th Chapter in Revelation connecting Gog and Magog.
Of course, they are tying the Russian invasion of Ukraine to fulfill those chapters in Ezekial 38 and Revelation 20, which somehow they see as ending up in Israel fulfilling more Biblical “end times” scripture.
How do historical scholars view those scriptures?
Thanks,
Rob
Historical scholars see the passage in its own context, dealing with how God will save the nation of Israel from the military attacks of its opponents. Conservative evangelicals since the 19th century have opinted out that “Magog” sure sounds a lot like “Moscow”!! But every time they’ve attached it convincingly (to their followers) to a particular event, they’ve been spectacularly wrong. It’s worth noting that “Magog” is the empire, not the city. The key, in any event, is to recognize Ezekiel’s own situation in which he is saying this, as he begins to explain himself already in 1:1.
Thank you for your time and explanation.
Just today a relative sent my an article from the Christian Post where they are doing exactly what you mentioned in your response.
I smiled because I could see how they try to make their view of the Bible fit into beliefs connected to current events.
https://www.christianpost.com/news/russias-war-on-ukraine-are-we-living-in-the-end-times.html