(14 votes, average: 4.86 out of 5)
Loading...From where I sit, the harshest most violent passage in Revelation is not one that dispenses with a third of the human race in one verse or describes a horde of locusts that will sting everyone on earth except God’s close followers and cause unbearable physical agony for five months that cannot be relieved and that they cannot escape even by dying – i.e., they are not allowed to end it all. OK, maybe that one is the worst. But in terms of awfulness, this for me is the one, as I discuss in the lecture I gave on Revelation recently. In the previous post I mentioned two of the worst. Here’s *the* worst.
******************************
The third passage shows that Christ directs his violence not only against pagans and Jews but also against his own followers, even active leaders and teachers in his church. The tenuous standing of Jesus’ followers is a leading theme of his letters to the seven churches of in chapters 2 and 3. Christ regularly threatens to remove his favor and protection from these churches and their members. It is easy to infer their fate from the rest of the book,.
And John does not always leave it up to the imagination. In the letter to Click here for membership options
If you’re interested in seeing how Revelation presents a view of Jesus you rarely hear articulated in (most) churches: join the blog and keep reading.
Hi Bart, here is a second Ephesians pseudepigraphy question:
My understanding of your position is that 1st Corinthians 15 teaches that only after the resurrection are believers glorified, unlike in Ephesians.
However, in Romans chapter 6, Paul would seem to teach that believers are not just dead to sin but also made alive unto God. He calls the believers in Rome more than conquerors in Christ and he tells the Corinthian Christians that they are always caused to triumph in Christ.
Romans 8:30 says that believers are presently glorified in Christ. 1 Corinthians 6:17 says that believers have union with Christ. In 1 Corinthians 12:12-31 Paul says that the Corinthians believers are members of the body of Christ. If Christ is seated in heavenly places, and Christians are the body of Christ, it could be argued that the head and body are located in the same place.
Given these arguments, why do you think Ephesians has a different understanding of when we are saved and what our status in Christ is than what Paul says in his uncontested letters?
Yes, good question. Romans 6 needs to be read very carefully. Believers have indeed been made alive after being dead, but the have NOT yet experienced the resurrection. We have *died* with Christ and we *will be* raised with him. Christians aree members of Christ’s body, but full salvation will not occur until the end, when Jesus returns and the resurrection occurs; then all will be given a glorified body like his. Ephesians undersands it differently.
Thanks for the great replies. Last question for now about Ephesians:
As I understand it, your position is that the writing style of Ephesians is not Paul’s. Paul usually writes in short, pointed sentences. The sentences in Ephesians are long and complex in Greek. The opening statement of thanksgiving, all 12 verses, is one sentence. This pleonastic style is abounding in prepositional phrases, relative clauses, participles and multiplying synonyms.
Scholars D. A Carson and Douglas Moo argue that this difference is somewhat exaggerated. The pleonastic style dominates only the first half of the letter. The style of the second half falls within the customary Pauline range unless one postulates two authors for the two halves and that is not seriously entertained.
Carson and Moo argue that the first half of Ephesians, in its substance and style, accords with its lofty doxologies, prayers and sweeping theological themes. When Paul tackles similar themes in his undisputed letters his style can become similarly florid – just think of Romans 8:28-39 or Romans 11:33-36.
Do you think this is a good argument for defending Pauline authorship, and if not, why?
The problem actually isn’t just the length of the sentences but the levels of complexity and a number of other factors involving aspects of Greek syntax. When you see the entire argument, it’s pretty darn convincing. Whoever wrote Ephesians was certainly trying to imitate Paul and the doxologies are an easy way to do that. The problem is that they theology is very different from Paul’s, especially in key passages such as 2:1-10, where “works” aree no longer a reference to Jewish legal practices but “doing good deeds.” If you’re interested in the fuller scoop, I have a lengthy discussion in my book Forgery and Counterforgery.
Bart, thank you so much for your replies regarding the authenticity of Ephesians. I purchased and read Forgery and Counterforgery and enjoyed it very much.
Dear Bart, Deutoronomy has YHWH warn unfaithful Israelites (His children) that they will eat the flesh of their children (His grandchildren). Now, Revelation in such a context would seem like a downgrade in cruelty. I personally believe that biblical passages which blame sons for the sins of their parents is in blatant contrast with the GOD of EZEKIEL 18 – I wonder if this book was there in the shelves of 1st century Christian biblical writers. The rabbis authorized its use only after the destruction of the Temple. What is your opinion about the reception of Ezekiel 18 in the NT (if there was one at all).
Ezek 18 is alluded to only twice in the NT (Matthew 25:35 and Heb 6:6) — neither time with references to the passage you’re interested in.
Sexualized violence is a theme elsewhere in the Bible as well. In Numbers 31, the surviving Midianite virgins are given to the soldiers, and it doesn’t take much of an imagination to know what that will mean to those women.
In the OT Israel is portrayed several times as the unfaithful fornicating bride of God. In Ezekiel 16 and 23 we have 2 depictions of the humiliation and, to be blunt, gang rape of the unfaithful bride. Ezekiel is not unique in these portrayals.
It’s a feature, not a bug.
This is just another example of how meaningless (at least for me) Revelation is when it is read literally.
Well, since I read Revelation as a symbolic book about human self-transcendence, it’s for me the story of the “prodigal son’s” return. It’s all about our Self from within, and the 7 churches in chapter 2and 3 are in my mind human nature symbolized by the 7 spiritual, or as Eastern traditions call the 7 chakras. It is in my mind also important to be aware of that in the time the Revelation was written, most people in Asia and the basically in the world was potentially religiously influenced about this 7 chakra system.
The fourth center (heart Chakra), closely related to the fourth thymus gland, appears (to me) to be the fourth church, the Thyatira. Ancient traditions considered this to be “the seat of the self”, and “the seat of the ego”. From this perspective, the figure of Jezebel would symbolically fit very well with the activity of the Ego and its selfish actions.
I’m not able to read the Revelation literally. It just makes no sense, but when I read it symbolically as an inner process, the message makes sense to me.
Dear Kt,
If the source of “INSPIRATION” supposedly a superpower (divine) and historically know as “God”, then that source suffers from cognition distortion, thinking pattern distortion and speech distortion because whatever message it delivers to (us) the general audience is so convoluted that it ALWAYS needs translators [interpretations] to decipher it.
If it meant Human instead of Church, it would have said something like the 7 humans.
If it meant Ego instead of Jezebel, it would have said it clearly that way.
If it is Omniscient, it wouldn’t have used a mythic concept to deliver its message.
Please adopt an objective STANDARDIZED literal meaning of the text in place of a varying subjective view.
It helps receiving the real message from the text.
The Beast and his false prophet and the antichrist
The false prophet (ψευδοπροφήτης) is also mentioned in 1 John 4:1but in plural “many false prophets have gone out into the world” in 4:3 those “ false prophets” are related with the antichrist (ἀντίχριστος) ,“This is the spirit of the antichrist”, also in John 2:7 we read again “Many deceivers .. have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver(πλάνος) and the antichrist.”
In my Spanish bible when the expression “false prophet” occurs in Revelation a footnote indicates “antichrist” even when the original Greek do not use that word (in Revelation).
It is the link right ? (between Revelation “false prophet” and John letters “antichrist”) .
If it is then we have 1 John 2:18-19 “now many antichrists have come. This is how we know it is the last hour They went out from us” so the “false prophet” with the beast was a former christian? John’s contenders for instance?
THe antiChrists in 1 John are not related to the beast in Revelation; they are members of the authors community who have developed their understandings of Christ in ways the author thinks are completely false and opposed to Christ. (the books were written by different authors)
Are there other Christian writers at this time who view Jesus and his retribution in these violent terms? Is there a certain “school of thought” were these views originate?
None of the writers whose work survives, no. Its a veiw that is certainly pouplar among some Christians in America today though!
Maybe 2 Thessalonians 1:7-9?
Sorry, I’m not sure which comment of mine you’re referring to. You’ll need to summarize my comment and then give your suggestion again.
I was replying to your answer to LawrenceG. He asked if there were other Christian writers of that time who viewed Jesus and his retribution in violent terms. I’m wondering if 2 Thes. 1:7-9 would indicate that at least one writer did.
Ah, yes indeed!! But Paul also — e.g., 1 Thess 5.
“Get f***ed by J***s and all your partners,” sounds very 2022. Interesting to see that socially isolated and politically opinionated men, writing messages about distant depersonalized characters, have been using the same language to bully women for thousands of years.
John the incel of Patmos.
Revelation 14 says those who worship the beast will be tormented in fire in front of the lamb. That the smoke of their torment will rise for ever and ever. That there will be no rest day or night for those who worship the beast.
Revelation 20 says the devil, beast and false prophet will be thrown into the lake of fire where they will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
Do you think the difference is intentional, that only the devil/beast and false prophet will be eternally tormented? Or is the same punishment meant in both cases? Or is the new heaven and earth supposed to do away with even the lake of fire?
Yes, I definitely think that. As immortal beings, they can’t die. The humans are killed in the fire. I argue this in my book Heaven and Hell.
When I read v. 22 & 23 I envision Jesus watching to see who follows this woman into immoral behavior, and “her children” are those who do, and they will be punished; not that these are literally children she bore as a result of her promiscuity. Do you think I’m being too symbolic, and the passage should be read more literally?
Yes, I agree. He’s not talking about her actual children.
Is there evidence that some church fathers interpreted Revelation symbolically, rather than a prediction of what would happen in the real world?
Oh yes, starting with Augustine that was the dominant explanation for most of Christian history (until the 19th century). The church is living in the millennial age now, in the present.
Ok, I think you make the point clear enough, any idea about why so much violence?
In a previous article you recommended me Candida Moss’s “The Myth of Persecution” , well I read it and get convinced more than ever that christians really were persecuted and I think Revelation reflects this , so much sense of revenge couldn’t be for free, I know you share Moss’ ideas about early chrsitians “feeling” they were persecuted even when it was not exactly the case , so, back to the first question,
any idea why there is so much violence in Revelation?
The issue is why there is such thin evidence for extensive persecutions…. As I said in subsequent posts, the violence of Revelation is reflecting the authors passionate desire for revenge on his enemies.
Was this kind of religious vitriol found in the pagan world? Or was it unique to early Christianity?
It is almost unheard of until we start getting an “exclusivist” religion that said it was right and therefore everything else was wrong. If wrong, God opposes it. If God opposes it — he will do so big time, and so should we.
Women who disagree with the author theologically are in league with the Devil…convenient belief, no? And puts punishment into Jesus’s mouth? Well OK, then.
Wish I had been a fly on the wall during the discussions about incorporating this book into the canon!
Have you ever considered that the author of Revelation may have been a messianic Egyptian Jew named Cerinthus as Caius of Rome alleged? That could explain the authors issue with eating meat sacrificed to idols.
Cerintthus lived before the Gospels, and he had a belief that Jesus would rise from the dead at the Last Day, when all men will rise with him. Cerinthus seems like a good fit as his beliefs mimic the Revelation.
Yes, like most NT scholars I’ve considered the various options on offer from our early sources; I don’t think there’s any evidence at all for the Cerinthus hypothesis. THe views of Cerinthus we know about otherwise from other church fathers are nothing at all like those found in Revelation.
Do some Christians interpret this passage of scripture as not literal, but instead spiritual/figurative? (Which makes it no less appalling.)
Yup! Sorry to reply to your question late, but it’s one I have taken up in the later posts as you’ve seen.
Seems from the quote that he’s saying she will be chucked onto a bed, and (in addition to her) whoever commits adultery with her will also suffer and her kids will be killed
So I’m not seeing where he is suggesting it would be correct for her to be raped as a punishment for her sins. Though it seems he’s saying killing her kids is.
I think the logic is that if he’s throwing her on a bed it means she’s going unwillingly.
Could you comment on why the text wouldn’t be indicating that the people in question are actually worshipping the idols? Could eating the food offered to idols be a sort of slang for the actual worship itself? Perhaps similar to how eating the Eucharist or communion would itself be part of worship?
We know from 1 Corinthians 8 and 10 that the issue was about eating practices, not the worship of idols.
Doesn’t Paul, somewhere, advocate tolerance toward those who eat meat offered to idols? Or at least that those who are strong enough to not eat such meat should not condemn those who do? My understanding is that most available meat was in fact offered to idols. It’s almost as if it was part of the butchering process.
Are there significant conflicts between Revelation and Paul–just as there are significant conflicts between Paul and other NT writers?
Yes, in 1 Cor. 8 and 10 he thoughtfully reflects on the issue and ends up saying htat it’s better not to eat the mean; much less clear cut and vitriolic than John of Patmos.
Are there many strong similarities between the ideas of the “John(s)” who authored the gospel and letters, on the one hand, and the ideas of the author of Revelation?
There are some — for example, the association of Christ with the “Word of God” and identifying him as the sacrificed lamb; there but there are also very significant differences. Their eschatologies are radically at odds (their views of when and how salvation comes)
Hi Bart,
What are your thoughts on the theory that John may have consumed hallucinogenic Morning Glory seeds native to the island of Patmos?
I think it makes sense to a lot of people who grew up in the 60s and later, but not a lot of sense for the ancient world….
Thanks!
It is not the first time in the bible that we are admonished to straighten up and fly right. Have a look at Matthew 25 14-28. We are not told these things so we have something to read. There are expectations involved here and consequences.
You recently gave a series of posts about Paul’s and Jesus’s differing views of how salvation worked. It seems to me that Paul puts a lot more emphasis on sin than Jesus. It’s definitely a problem for both. For Jesus though, it seems like past, personal sins are no longer a problem after a person undergoes a change of mind and heart and starts to follow God’s law in a loving way (which is what I think is meant by repentance). Though probably oversimplified, it’s as if the very act of personal change results in forgiveness of sins.
For Paul, past, personal sins would remain a problem even if a person could make the changes described above. To escape condemnation there would still need to be forgiveness, or satisfaction, or covering over of past sin. That’s what the crucifixion effectuates. Of course Paul doesn’t seem to think that people can change in that way–at least not without the crucifixion. This leaves one with the sense of past sin being an enormously heavy burden.
Is this a fair comparison? Of course I’ve left out consideration of sin as a powerful, independent force in the world that controls people.
I suppose this sounds more like exposition than a question but I am interested in whether you think my comparison is accurate.
2nd question this time about the symbolism of Clouds. Rev 1:7 is is the connection used for the Gospel passages of Jesus coming in the clouds. It is what most of Christianity after the 4th century has tied Revelation to a “future return and why the doctrine of “Now but Not Yet” (kingdom theology) was created by George Eldon Ladd (Fullerton Seminary) and used by Hal Lindsay . However, Jesus and the Author of Rev would know that it would be impossible for the whole world to visually witness a physical return from the heavens. Thus it must be a symbolic depliction both in the attibuted words of Jesus in the Gospels and Rev. To my knowege, a cloud was how (symbol) the hebrew scripture deplicted the devine presence. The Devine God was not directly visable thus shrouded within or by clouds. Mat 17:5 again a cloud envoloped them at the transfiguration. So would early generation of Jewish believers understood or expected a non visable return?
To me, Rev deplicts the events between 70 ce and appox 134 ce with the time in between as the Millennium (long time). The “End” was the erasure of Israel (Judea).
They appear to have though this, yes. Since they were not thinking the earth was enormous and round, it wasn’t that unreasonable.
dr bart i recall your old interview that if god inspire abook but didnt preserve the book becuase we lose the word ,we doesnt have the word, what does taht mean i mean, wasnt the original word actually inside the text but its just polluted with variation? so do you mean lost here is we just have so much hard time to choose the original word or in some of book we just dont have original word anymore it just lost
dr bart what are the differences that big beside mark ending or john woman, some that theologically significant because i heard you said theres more beside johanine comma but you didnt mention it
Tons of them. See my book Orthodox Corruption of Scripture. Examples: LUke 3:22; 22:19-20; 22:43-44; John 1:18; 1 John 5:7-8.
This bloody, violent revenge fantasy of John for Christ’s death, or warning to those who are chowing down on idol meat, or conflict of ideas with a rival prophetess….however you look at it, it’s no diffferent than the Apocalypse of Peter, the horrors youve recently discussed in detail, no? (And yes I’m using this post to plug your excellent new book on Heaven and Hell).
Why is it so surprising that John busts out the divine wrath and shocking torment when that’s the direction the writings go by the end of the first century? Or is it just shocking given that Revelation is canon (despite the many misgivings of the early Fathers)?
I’d say the Jezebel scene is more like the later Apocalypse of Paul, where *Christians* receive the worst punishments for not being the right kind of Christians. But yes, the punishments of Apocalypse of Peter are comparable in many ways; the big difference — here is what I argue in my book — in the original version of the Apocalypse of Peter Christ ends up saving everyone from their punishment and taking them to heaven. THat’s why the book was eventually left out of Scripture (so I argue)