As many of you know, my next book is on the Revelation of John, to be written not for scholars but for a general audience. I decided I wanted to write the book maybe four years ago, and my ideas about it have changed significantly since I began to think about it. Part of that is because the book is, as Bob Dylan says, “a slow train coming.”
My original plan was to have the book finished by now. In fact, that was the publisher’s plan too. This is the first time in my mortal existence that I’ve been seriously behind on a book deadline. Usually, I finish way ahead of time. Not with this one.
There are several reasons for that and I won’t bore you with them since virtually everyone I know has had the same problems: Covid burnout, too much work, and too little time. BUT the positive side of it all is that with this book I’m allowing myself time to think and reflect without a definite plan. It’s a new experience.
Normally when I write a book for a general audience, I know well in advance exactly what I want to say and it is relatively simple to organize my preliminary thoughts about how to say it. It’s not that I ever have an exact game plan that I follow precisely throughout the entire process of conceptualizing, imagining, researching, and writing a book. It is never like that. But when I start I almost always know how I want to approach the reading and writing, mainly because I know the topic well already from having read, thought, and taught about it for so many years. Typically I pretty much know what my thesis is going to be and I know what I need to read in order to get caught up to speed, and I have a pretty good idea how the book will be structured.
In the course of doing the work, of course, my ideas change. I realize there are whole bunches of things I’ve never heard of I have to read; I read things that persuade me that I’ve long held views that just aren’t tenable or that are somewhat less tenable than alternative views; I realize I need to add an entirely new chapter that I hadn’t thought would be important; and so on. Even so, typically when I start, I have a pretty good idea of where I want to go and how I plan to get there.
And they always take about the same amount of time out of my life. My first two trade books were Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium and Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew. My next one set the stage for the ones to follow, Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code. With that book I realized how to write trade books (I’m not saying I don’t like the earlier two; quite the contrary, my wife Sarah still thinks Lost Christianities is the best one I’ve done). Since Truth and Fiction nearly all the trade books have taken two years.
And the way those two years works has been almost always the same. After I come up with the idea, propose it to a publisher, and then get a contract, I map out (in a file) how I imagine it going, listing all the most important stuff I need to read, putting down my most important thoughts about it, and then launching in to the research. I read and read and read. I take notes on everything I read. That’s the most important part of what I do. It is also the part I really DON’T enjoy. It’s a real burden to notate everything. But there’s no way around it. Some books you can summarize in a few sentences, but the important ones take pages. It’s hard work. But if I didn’t do it, I’d forget most of what I read!
The more I read the more I learn of other things I need to read – both authors generally and books/articles in particular. And over time I get a clearer sense of what the really interesting and important aspects of the topic are.
Once that happens I begin to make a broad outline of what I think the main points of the book need to be. These will later become chapter topics. I read more on each topic and realize what subpoints need to be covered. These become chapter sections. And I keep going, reading and outlining.
I usually know I’m “through” the research when I realize I’m not learning much of anything new as I keep reading. At that stage I review my notes on everything I have read, and continue to fill out my outlines. Now instead of a book outline in less than a page, I have outlines many pages long for each of the chapters. Sometimes I’ll have 30 pages of outline for a chapter that is supposed to be about … 30 pages. Yikes.
BUT, the upside is that doing all that outlining that means the actual writing is very different for me than for most people.
Most authors struggle to write. They sit and stare at a blank screen trying to think of the sensible thing to say next to continue the argument; once they come up with that, then they stare at the screen trying to imagine the best way to say it. It’s a slow, painful process. Not so much for me. For me it’s a fast, painful process. Making the first draft is indeed hugely stressful and anxiety producing, by far – without a comparison – the most stressful part of the entire book.
But for that reason, I work hard to get it over with quickly. I write most of my trade books – that is, actually *write* the things – in two weeks or so. So, I spend 23 months doing the reading and outlining and less than a month doing the writing. By “writing” in this case I mean writing the draft and revising it a couple of times. Since I have a full outline, the writing comes fast. I don’t have to think hard about what to say because I’ve thought about that, step-by-step, even before I start writing. And since I can type nearly as fast as I can think, all I basically need to do is to do it intensely with real focus for 4-6 hours a day and then boom, the draft is done in a couple of weeks. I try to get my graduate students to write this way, but so far I’ve never won a convert….
So that’s how I normally do a book. And this book? I’m doing it differently. Several years after deciding to write it, I’m still considering how to approach it.
I’ll say something more about why this has happened in posts to come. For now I’ll just say that I don’t think it’s such a bad thing in this case…..
The first thought that comes to my mind is that writing about Revelation has to be at least as difficult as reading it!
In the course of your research for a book, I am sure that you have been surprised by something that you read. Something that gave you a whole new perspective on the early Christian religion. What has surprised you the most?
BTW good choice for a book. Revelation is one of my favorite books of the Bible.
I’ll be explaining that as I get into the thread. I’ve come to see the “dark side” of the book much more clearly than ever before.
The articles you read in your research, how do you access them? I assume you use the library but is there a special repository like JSTOR or ACADEMIA.EDU that you have access to? I’m subscribed to them. Is there something else? If so could a non-specialist get access?
Thanks
I don’t know! I have full access to a research library. If the library doesn’t have an electronic copy it can acquire one for me and just send it to me. I suppose if I didn’t have that kind of access, I would simply google the title of an article to see if there is a copy available anywhere.
I await your next posts with interest. Revelations seems to be much more OTish than the rest of the NT, and I wonder how that happened.
Perhaps not related, but I’ve begun to wonder how much Aramaic -> Koine translation figures in problems with understanding some things in the NT. Everything Jesus is reported to have said was, one supposes, said in 1st Century Palestinian Aramaic, but we have it in Greek. And even that has its own problems with ambiguities and other problems of understanding.
Yes, for the sayings of Jesus the translation from Aramaic to Greek to English can present some problems. Not so much for other parts in of the NT, even the narratives of the Gospels (just the sayings, since whatever Jesus originally said would have been in Aramaic)
Do you think the writer of revelation wasn’t a native greek speaker?
I”ve changed my view on that. I think he was a native Greek speaker, but not highly skilled in writing the language. (Like a lot of English speakers!)
Would that not suggest then that literacy levels were quite diverse and it wasn’t just the elite that were taught to read and write?
One can be elite and still not know how to write well. Think of, well, America.
“Not highly skilled” interesting. Revelation (in English) has always seemed to have a constructed cadence … which along with its visions reminds me of Poe to the extent I’ve wondered if the poppy didn’t grow on Patmos! Does it not come across that way in Greek?
The Greek is very bad, but it’s more likely because the author was not well trained than that he was high….
Be sure to cover Rev. 5:8, as at least one Catholic apologist has claimed the verse supports “why we pray to saints.” Thanks!
I shared your preterist view (Rome, the Roman Empire, Nero and all that) of the Revelation for a decade or so, but I must admit that I struggled with the idea that a writer would waste his time writing a text so complicated that we are not able to decipher the symbols through 2000 years ,,,,,,,,,,,, and for which audience ,,,,, illiterate and uneducated.
Then I see it elsewhere, in many traditions, in many religions, including Christianity (among the Gnostics, ie 5 seal rituals) which used all kinds of ecstatic rituals, deep meditations, centered prayers and other, which have caused visionary dreams or other experienced spiritual journeys. We even see this happening to this day.
Even Dr. Carl Gustav Jung experienced this type of event over several years, and came in contact with his own “self”, and the symbols that evoke were nothing but personal and showed patterns using the language of the soul that often gave bizarre symbology that is very difficult to interpret. He even wrote the “Red Book”, published after his death, about this experience that lasted for a long time through many sessions. He, too, attributed it as a relationship in our own Self.
In my mind, I think the interpretations for these visionary journeys are of inward conditions and patterns. In addition, I find many recognizable symbols used, including tallology that even Gnostics used (although I do not think it is Gnostic in nature).
I have changed my mind (perhaps it has more than one layer ), and the more I read in my non sclolar approach, the text seems to speak of a kind of spiritual development (ascension), into this home state, or “The New Jerusalem” or/and into oneness. Then this story is about our spiritual self, and the symbols are all forces and tendencies and relationships in our own self.
Then again, for me it is also a risk that this book is only a book within a genre and not a visionary journey, but concepts only out from the author’s head.
In such a “symbolic” context, the book of Revelation makes sense to me. The story is definitely close to how I can understand my understanding of symbolism in the Hebrew Bible, among the Gnostic ,,,,,,, and even Hindu thoughts with their visions of an ascending soul or spirit.
I look forward to see if you adresses these thoughts in your future book.
I’d say it’s more complicated for us in part precisely because we *are* 2000 years removed, and he wasn’t writing it for us!
Sorry ,,,,,, this preterist view no longer resonates with me, but my life is full of mistakes, (and I am a non scholar) so I choose to be humble towards this. Since I still see that there are many links that will undeniably correspond to this “Roman- Nero etc. preteristic view, I am still open for that this can have a double layer.
My “problem” is perhaps an inherent desire for apokatastasis solution, on a level that I actually “see” when I read Gnostic stories, when I read many of the stories in the Hebrew Bible. And if you symbolize any of the Isralistic families, the people, Babylon, Egypt, nations Israel and the New Jerusalem ,, the story become a spiritual story which I can relate to , and to a story which is found in other spiritual tales, even the story in the of Vedas (Hinduism). Yes, it really does. This for me apocastase stories that I find in either Gnosticism, the stories and among the prophets in the Hebrew Bible becomes for me stories of restoration.
I don’t even talk about of Carl Jung which indeed studied this internal realm called “Self”, who was deeply interested in the symbology of Hinduism and Gnosticism which he thought correlated with his psycological study and view. Beside this,,,and to put is simpel,,,,,,,,, the seven spiritual realms, stages, charcas (spiritual centers), or whatever, is a common theme that we must master and still not work proparbly. There are levels to pass, master or spiritualize before we are able to enter a higher level, higher conciousness, or perhaps using more Gnostic concepts and imagins, perhaps the original spirital perfect pattern symbolized with the lady in Chapter 12, with the crown and 12 stars, before struggle through forces which caused the seperation before entering a unification (Bridal chamber) and entering back to our destiny, the state of “New Jerusalem” (for example using Judaistic terms)
,, That is how I read it, understand the stories,,,,but it could very well just be my minds apocastase desires.
Bart ( June 21, 2021 at 8:43 am), Are you sure that John the Revelator did not write Revelation for both his original audience and posterity?
Pretty much, yup. He was convinced the end was coming soon, as he repeatedly says.
Any idea as to when this book will be released?
My book? Not really. I haven’t started writing it yet! My hope is to finish it by the Fall, which would mean it would be out probably before Christmas 2022. But who knows?!
That was really interesting and fascinating! Many times I have wondered about the writing process of my favorite authors (you, Brian Greene, Nietzsche et al.).
I would like to ask you, Mr. Ehrman, who are your top 3 writers? And if you don’t mind, maybe you could recommend one book of each! 😊
Me and Nietzsche?! OK then! I maybe could do a post on that down the line. Fiction or non fiction? Current or past?
I know, it’s a *highly exalted* ranking! 🤣🤣
Your top 3 any genre any time – it can be Homer, Herodotus and Leonard Susskind, for example, or Plato, ‘Mark’ and Shakespeare.
For me, it’s Nietzsche, Brian Greene and you.
Nietzsche is by far the most inspirational thinker and writer for me. He has pretty much shaped my way of thinking (especially on matters of morality). – Brian Greene has taught me so much about the physical world (and in the most eloquent way possible). – You have been immensely valuable (and immensely entertaining too due to your unbelievable sense of humor) for me in understanding the New Testament, Paul and (early) Christianity in general (and I deeply thank you for that).
For me I’d probably have Dickens, George Elliott, and … pick a modern novelist. (Ishiguro? John Irving? )
Thank you for the inside story on writing your books.
I found your description of your work process quite interesting. Before I retired, I wrote computer software, and I see some similarities, although to me, writing a book would be much more difficult. For one thing, my job required a lot less research!
Do you save your old outlines? I can understand if you did not want to do it, but it would be interesting to compare one of your chapter outlines with the actual chapter of one of your books.
I save them. But I don’t show them! I sometimes make snide comments in them…. 🙂
Please Bart, send this book to Brazil.
Have you ever changed your overall thesis due to your research? Or at least revised it?
Yup. On this book! As I’ll be explaining.
I’m really looking forward to your book Dr Ehrman as Revelation is a great subject. Up until now, the best popular book I’ve read on it is Revelation Road by Nick Page. It’s a light-hearted book (if that’s possible given the subject matter – Armageddon :-), part travelogue, part history, part theology. Nick is a Christian and not an academic but his attempt to make the book of Revelation at least partly comprehensible was admirable I felt. Btw, I hadn’t realised that Patmos is a regular tourist island (as opposed to religious tourism) today. PS. I agree with your wife. Lost Christianities is definitely your best book, despite all the stiff competition.
Will there be a chapter on the Christology of the Book of Revelation?
Nope, not directly.
So how are you organizing this book? “Chronologically” – starting with the first revelation and going through them all in order? Or by topic – with one chapter on the origins of the book, then one on debates on how it affected the early church, then one on later-day influence, and so on? Or some other way?
Don’t know yet!
A really interesting post! Are you able to share more about your note-taking practices? Do you do full summaries, or brief prompt words? Can you always read your notes? How do you stop note-taking interring with your understanding of the flow of the author’s thought? Who taught you how to note-take.
I think I posted on that once. I’ll see if I can find it….
How I Do My Research (9/3/20) – Especially the last three major paragraphs.
How a Book Gets Written (5/17/18))
And for the sheer pleasure and astonishment while reading it…My Role in Editing My Most Important Book that No One Has Heard of (6/25/17)
I’m excited about this one. I think so much bologna has been said about the apocalyptic genre over the decades and I hope this book can have real use in bible study in churches and mitigate some of the hysteria.
Dr Bart what do you think when Jesus come to this world and see what Christian do ? Do you think it’s already too far from his teaching ?
I think it was far from his teaching within years after his death.
You should make it six hundred and sixty six pages.
Or 616….
Thank you for your description of your writing workflow. It was very helpful. I’m wondering if you could say a few words about your note-taking methodology. Index cards? A separate Word doc for each book you read? Basically, how do you take the notes, then manage the mountain of info? Thank you in advance!
I’ll be explaining that in a future post: others have asked!
I’ve enjoyed Elaine Pagels recent book on Revelation. I’ll be interested to see if you have a substantially different take on the book and its history than her’s.
Oh yes, my book will be nothing like hers. Good thing! She’s hard to compete with….
My “Conditional Futurism” (2012) proposes that Revelation indicates the possibility of postmortem conversions. (If you ever read it, please pardon my gaffes in historical criticism, which I plan to correct in a 2nd edition, one day.) Anyway, Do you think that the open gates in the New Jerusalem suggest the possibility of postmortem conversions?
No. The gates are open because there is no need to fear enemy attacks.
Hi Bart, I understand how closed city gates in the Old Testament were for protection from enemies, and perpetual open gates indicate no fear of attack. However, Revelation 19 describes the gruesome destruction of the kings of the earth, and Revelation 21:24 says that the kings of the earth will bring their glory into the New Jerusalem. How do you explain this juxtaposition?
I’ve never understood it. Rev. 21:24: WHAT kings? It appears they were not entirely destroyed.
Bart (June 23, 2021 at 6:40 am), I strongly doubt that Rev. 21:24 refers to a righteous remnant of kings but refers to postmortem conversions.
Can you share the estimated / revised pub date for this book?
Also: do you see any anti Semitic intent on the part of the author of Revelation (references to “Synagogue of Satan”)?
1. Don’t really know. End of 2022? 2. Certainly opposition to non-Christian Jews. I would not say they are opposed becuase of their ethnicity though (which is what anti-Semitism is)
The Book of Revelations is depressing to me. But I am looking forward to your spin on it.
Depressing (or at least offensive?) to me to. But increasingly so, for reasons I’ll be explaining in the book.
When you take notes on a book you’re reading, what are those notes like? Hand written? Typed? Like an outline? Paragraph form? Sounds like a dumb question but I read a lot too for the podcast and have so much trouble remembering what I read and so I’m trying to figure out a good method for note taking that will help me remember. Thanks!
I’ll be posting on that pretty soon — in the next wee or so.
Bart ( June 22, 2021 at 5:37 am),
By the time John somebody wrote Revelation, 60 years had passed since the death of Christ. Declarations of the soon return of Jesus had reached 60. The pseudonymous 2 Peter did not yet rationalize from the Psalms that a day is like a thousand years and a thousand years like a day while explaining eschatology. But perhaps the use of the word “soon” had become a little metaphoric by the time John wrote Revelation. Does that sound possible?
I’m not sure what you’re asking? The author of Revelation doesn’t say anything about how many years had passed since Jesus had died….
Bart ( June 23, 2021 at 6:59 am),
The historical context says that Revelation was written 60 to 70 years after the death of Jesus. For example, your (2020) “The New Testament” says Jesus died approximately 30, and Revelation was written 95-100. A few scholars give a much earlier date for Revelation, but I work with your chronology.
In that context, I restate my question:
“By the time John somebody wrote Revelation, 60 years had passed since the death of Christ. Declarations of the soon return of Jesus had reached 60. The pseudonymous 2 Peter did not yet rationalize from the Psalms that a day is like a thousand years and a thousand years like a day while explaining eschatology. But perhaps the use of the word “soon” had become a little metaphoric by the time John wrote Revelation. Does that sound possible?”
My sense is that people today still think the end is coming “soon,” and they really mean it; so I don’t have much of a problem with thinking that John really means it as well.
Bart,
Are you referring to believers in the imminent return of the Lord in the context of the pretribulation rapture?
I am very familiar with the theological circles that believe in the pretribulation rapture. In fact, I was a credentialed minister with the Assemblies of God that makes that a fundamental doctrine, but there is some leeway with it while I was among the tiny percent that rejected pretribulation rapture doctrine.
One point that is important for my hermeneutics is that we need to consider how much an apocalypse is meant to be taken literally.
I’d say any pre-millenialist believes this: pre-trib; mid-trib; post-trib. WHen I was in college I heard Jack van Impe say that he was so pre-trib he wouldn’t eat Post Toasties. (!)
Posttrib does not believe in the imminent return of Jesus. Also, Are you implying that contemporary Evangelical doctrine of the imminent return of Jesus is part of your historical method for understanding the original intent of Revelation, which is ancient apocalyptic literature? it sounds that way to me, but perhaps I misunderstand you.
That’s right. It’s pre-millennial — Jesus comes back before the millennium, but not till the trib is over. And NO, definitely not. I think the modern evangelical view of eschatology is precisely NOT what Revelation is teaching.
As a serious hobby musician for 43 years, there’s the specter of overthinking it from the musical perspective. Of course that isn’t exactly parallel. But, in music, it’s easy for things to become “baroque” with too much thought. With all of the various ideas that have been invented related to Revelation – I’m very much looking forward to your book. I’m interested in how it became a different kind of story for Christians, rather than an apocalypse for it’s time, and led to the … numerous “Jesus is coming next Tuesday” type predictions. I struggle to imagine how I might write about Revelation in modern times, without going down the rabbit hole of the psychology of belief. Have you determined how far you will venture into … if I can phrase this correctly, why people continue to believe that “their time is THE time?” I would find any ideas you find or have on that interesting.
I’m afraid I won’t be getting into the psychology of it, since that would be a whole other book that would probably need to be written by … a psychologist! I’ve decided to stick with what I can deal with given my expertise.
Sounds very sensible. Thank you
Bart—Have you read D.H. Lawrence’s “Apocalypse?” It was his final book and offers his final thoughts on Christianity. If so, what do you think of his idea that Revelation is an overwrite of a pagan original? Lawrence was obviously not a scholar but his intuition/mystical faculty is legendary and of course, as a writer—especially on religion—he’s untouchable.
Yup. I’ll be using it. Fantastic. His scholarship simply doesn’t work (Revelation is not based on a pagan book centered on astrology). BUT his insights into what Revelation is really doing and what it’s advocating are spectacular.
Wow. That’s awesome. Cannot wait.
I have read that the book of Revelation was originally a Jewish Apocalyptic book that was later Christianized with references to Jesus added later. What do you think of this theory?
I think it has nothing going for it. The Christology is deeply woven into the text, imo.
Since the Book of Revelation is the most influential source of the “culture of conspiracy” in America, your book would do a great service if it pointed out that some of the most vocal critics of end-time conspiracy theories come from within Christianity.
For example, religious studies scholar Richard T. Hughes argues that “New World Order” rhetoric libels the Christian faith, since the “New World Order” as defined by Christian conspiracy theorists has no basis in the Bible whatsoever. Furthermore, he argues that not only is this idea unbiblical, it is positively anti-biblical and fundamentally anti-Christian, because by misinterpreting key passages in the Book of Revelation, it turns a comforting message about the coming kingdom of God into one of fear, panic and despair in the face of an allegedly approaching “one-world government”. Preacher-theologian Peter J. Gomes cautions Christian fundamentalists that a “spirit of fear” can distort scripture and history through dangerously combining biblical literalism, apocalyptic timetables, demonization and oppressive prejudices, while Camp warns of the “very real danger that Christians could pick up some extra spiritual baggage” by credulously embracing conspiracy theories. He therefore calls on Christians who indulge in conspiracism to repent.
Dr. Ehrman,
Not long ago I studied the Book of Revelation under L. Michael White at UT Austin, and we covered recent scholarship by Collins, Caird, Beale, Friesen, Vogelgesang, Collins, Thompson, Barr, and Pagels.
Beale interested me with his citation of Josephine M. Ford and her Anchor Bible Commentary on Revelation (1975).
Among these heady writers, she alone proposed two writers of John, in two very different locations and time periods.
Her surprising argument was that it’s impossible to go through any two pages of NT text without seeing the words ‘Jesus’ or ‘Christ.’ Yet in the Book of Revelation, we can go from chapter 4 through chapter 17 without seeing those two words.
Astonishing.
Further, the tone of Revelation matches the tone of the speeches given by John the Baptist in the Gospel record.
Her proposal was stunning — the original Revelation of John was a “theology of the Lamb” from the school of John the Baptist. Jesus would have been among the first listeners of this — John’s criticism of the Jerusalem Temple leadership.
By contrast, our other studies on the Book of Revelation appear conservative and all-too-familiar. I say Josephine Ford’s work merits further attention.
I’m not sure they are all “conservative,” but none of them is persuaded by Ford’s claims. Until recently I had never known of any scholar who was, but as it turns out, NT scholar James Tabor will be doing a guest post for the blog in a week or two, and he too finds it a thesis worth taking seriously. I have never found it in the least convincing, and I’m pretty sure that it’s not because I’m a conservative. 🙂 (BTW: read the book of James. In the five chapters, Jesus shows up twice. 🙂 )
Dear former fellow fundamentist,
Your previous writing method and your next writing seem to coincide with mine. Maybe because we both started out as radical fundamentalist. My parents did not even celebrate Christmas. When you responded with, “Pretty much, yup. He was convinced the end was coming soon, as he repeatedly says.” This to me means the end of suffering and achieving the coming of Christ, (“the annointing”), which occurs after long effort. No one knows when this personal event will occurr, except the Spirit.
After researching the eleven major religions, I found that they all have three types of followers: those who understand everything as literal, those whose understand their scriptures as allegorical, and those who seek the mystical dimension.
I started out as a radical literalist, moved to allegorical, and eventually became a mystic, mainly in the KriyaYoga tradition of Yogananda.
I threw out Christianity as fables and fairy tales and wishful thinking, but because of my practice of Kriya yoga, I have embraced Jesus as a true Master.
Thank-you Jesus, I found out your mystical messages are like the great saint and sages of all religions.
Here is one of many interesting blogs
“Ye are gods”
https://thecosmicreligion.com/2018/06/03/ye-are-gods/
I am really looking forward to reading your book Bart.
But, will you be approaching Revelation entirely in the contexts of the New Testament, second-Temple Jewish apocalyptic, and the Dead Sea Scrolls?
Or, will you also be exploring the 1,900 year reception of Revelation within Christian traditions?
It is striking how readily Christians over the centuries have been able to read their own circumstances into the pages of Revelation. Indeed, I would propose that 16th century Reformation and Counter-reformation narratives are incomprehensible unless we appreciate that all the key actors understood themselves as simultaneously functioning within its pages.
Which prompts the question of how truly ‘prophetic’ Revelation has been understood as being? Not in setting out a timetable for future events; but in analysing the dynamic characteristics and reproductive strategies of oppressive power structures.
I recall reading the chapter on Revelation in a portmanteau Biblical commentary of the early 20th century; which broadly proposed that there was little, if anything, that ‘modern’ Christians could apply directly from its apocalyptic prophecies, as it was inconceivable that advanced 20th century European civilisation could ever again descend into deeds of barbaric slaughter, mass destruction or genocide.
YEs, I’ll be dealing with some “moments’ in the reception history, including, possibly, Joiachim of Fiore, John of Leiden, and some modern folk, not just Hal Lindsay (probalby Edgar Whisenant). I really haven’t decided yet. But I agree with 15-th and 16th c.s. Most peole don’t realize (going back much earlier in fact) that Luther was not “original” in claiming that the Pope was the Antichrist. Interesting stuff. I just reread N. Cohn, Pursuit of the Millennium. Terrific.
I’ve always felt that the book sounded like the ramblings of a person on LSD or psilocybin and here we sit, trying to make sense of it! I checked, and the climate and conditions of Patmos are ideal for growing “shrooms”.
I surprised Christians don’t recognize the racism in modern interpretations of Revelations. Chinese, Russians and Arabs/Muslims are the bad guys who will send their armies to destroy God’s chosen people.
I’d say it has a lot more to do with nationalities than races, though racism certainly feeds into some of it.
Prof Bart – I really enjoyed Dale Martin’s lecture on Revelation to Yale undergraduates. He speculates that John is “writing to Paul’s churches precisely because he thinks they’re too comfortable with Roman rule, and he wants to make them uncomfortable with Roman rule in order to turn them against Rome and to convert them to his own vision about this anti-Roman version of the Gospel.”
I’m keen to see if you’ll agree with your friend on this.
Btw, the lecture is worth watching if, for nothing else, Martin leading the kids in a three-part chorus (from 31:30) of:
-Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty, who was, and who is, and who is to come.
-Worthy is the lamb that was slain.
-Glory, honor, power to thee, oh Lord, most high.
It is brilliant. “Now LOUDER!”
https://oyc.yale.edu/religious-studies/rlst-152/lecture-23
Yup, he was a brilliant teacher. I’d say it’s very difficult to know if these are Paul’s churches or not. Two of them are associated with Paul after his death (Ephesus and Laodicea), but the others not so much. In any event, whether they originated with Paul or not, the author of Revelation definitely wants not simply to turn them against Rome but to convince them that Rome is the Satanic ENEMY of God.
I’m also keen to see how your own views have evolved from your 2000 Great Courses NT lectures, when you summarized that for Revelation, “the enemy of God was Rome and its emperor was the anti-Christ… responsible for the intense suffering that Christians were experiencing.” That John was writing “to assure his readers of the final sovereignty of God and of his Christ, who would soon bring their suffering to an end.”
I still agree with that. But now I’ve seen the dark side of that message much more clearly. God’s “triumph” is not a pretty picture and raises very disturbing questions for me.