Freethought & Rationalism Archive

burlo · 02-19-2007, 07:48 AM

Perhaps there is a distinction between Their Lord and Our Lord.

jakejonesiv · 02-19-2007, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Yes. Revelation 11.8. The scene (11.1-13), however, far from being set in Rome, appears to be set wherever the temple of God is (11.1), with its court of the gentiles (11.2). That would be Jerusalem.

The difficulty, one which should not be artificially diminished, is not the setting of this pericope in Jerusalem, but rather the fact that this pericope calls Jerusalem the great city, whereas this label appears to be attached to Rome later in the book. Several solutions have been offered, including (A) that Revelation is a composite book cobbled together from various sources and (B) that the great city is actually Jerusalem all throughout the book. (Doubtless other solutions have been proposed, as well.)

Ben.

Jerusalem is mentioned three times in Revelation (3:12, 21:2, 21:10). Each time it is a heavenly city that descends to earth. It is never an earthly Jerusalem.

The writer is told to measure the heavenly temple (11:1), wherein is the altar and the throne, and the prayers of the saints. "John" had not descended to any earthly temple since chapter 8. Besides which, according to the standard chronology, the earthly temple was destroyed at the time of the writing of the Revelation. Since all this is set in heaven, one must conclude that Jesus was crucified in heaven.

Jake Jones IV

gstafleu · 02-19-2007, 09:08 AM

Sodom and Egypt are analogies for "bad places" or "places where bad things happen." To John Jerusalem could be such a place, given that it was destroyed by the Romans. And possibly, just the simple fact that Jesus was crucified there could turn it into a "place where bad things happen."

Having said that, the word "prophetically" is an instance of (and I'm sure everyone was just waiting for this) the infamous kata sarka / kata pneuma dichotomy. The word used is πνευματικως (pneumatikos), "spiritually" if you will. Now that could just indicate a spiritual analogy (bad place = Sodom or Egypt), but it could also indicate that we are now talking about the heavenly realm instead of the earthly one, as Jake indicates.

The bodies from 8 are those of believers that have been slain by some beast from the abyss. In 12 we then have "Then they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, "Come up here." And they went up to heaven in a cloud, while their enemies looked on." So they went to heaven, indicating that at that point they were not in heaven yet. That might be a contraindication to the heavenly location, but remember that there were multiple heavens in those days.

8-13 is an interesting parallel to the scene of Jesus' death in Matthew: dead bodies rise and there is an earthquake. The bodies rise after a resurrection, which takes place after three (and a half) days. They then go to heaven on a cloud. A bit of intermingling between the object of belief (Jesus) and the believers here, but that is not all that strange (gnostically speaking

). To come back to the original question, this would indicate Jerusalem as the place of crucifixion.

Gerard Stafleu

Clivedurdle · 02-19-2007, 09:30 AM

Quote:

To come back to the original question, this would indicate Jerusalem as the place of crucifixion.

The heavenly Jerusalem? A place where bad things happen?

Is a timeline for these ideas

Paul, Hebrews Revelation, Gospels Acts other epistles?

gstafleu · 02-19-2007, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

The heavenly Jerusalem? A place where bad things happen?

No, the earthly one, given the parallel with Matthew.

Quote:

Is a timeline for these ideas Paul, Hebrews Revelation, Gospels Acts other epistles?

Rev looks very early to me. Or a different branch altogether. As fas as I can tell 11:8 is the only place in Rev where crucifixion is mentioned; cross is never mentioned. That is strange all by itself. I would expect it either not to be mentioned (the author wasn't interested in that aspect or didn't know it) or it should be mentioned frequently, given that it is such a central piece. Maybe the idea of crucifixion was just starting to arise at the time Rev was written?

Gerard Stafleu

jakejonesiv · 02-19-2007, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gstafleu

No, the earthly one, given the parallel with Matthew.

Rev looks very early to me. Or a different branch altogether. As fas as I can tell 11:8 is the only place in Rev where crucifixion is mentioned; cross is never mentioned. That is strange all by itself. I would expect it either not to be mentioned (the author wasn't interested in that aspect or didn't know it) or it should be mentioned frequently, given that it is such a central piece. Maybe the idea of crucifixion was just starting to arise at the time Rev was written?

Gerard Stafleu

Hi Gerard,

You are correct, crucifxtion is mentioned only once in Revelation, 11:8.

But then we have the ambiguous passage in 13:8 where we find the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.* This makes perfect sense grammatically and asto-theologically. Every spring, at the vernal equinox, the Aires Lamb is crucified on the cross of the celestial equator and the ecliptic.

Jake Jones IV
*It could also be the book, cf 17:8

jakejonesiv · 02-19-2007, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

The heavenly Jerusalem? A place where bad things happen?

Is a timeline for these ideas

Paul, Hebrews Revelation, Gospels Acts other epistles?

All sorts of bad things are imagined to happen in the heavens, including war.

Clivedurdle · 02-19-2007, 10:55 AM

On the reference to Egypt, Barbarians p 207 notes

Quote:

The most fundamental pagan icon of the Roman Empire was Victory...at the far end of the Roman Senate House. It was placed there in 29BC by the first Emperor Augustus to celebrate Rome's victory over Anthony and Cleopatra and decorated with spoils from Egypt....And this is where Senators took oaths, including the oath of loyalty to an emperor on his accession.

neilgodfrey · 02-19-2007, 11:49 AM

Quote:

and their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city that is prophetically called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified.

Some might say it's nitpicking but some might say its valid attention to detail to point out that Jesus in the gospels was not crucified in a city at all, let alone in a street of city where these two bodies lay, but outside the city on a hill.

Besides, I think the Galatians and Paul had a different idea entirely. Paul reminded the Galatians that they saw Jesus crucified before their very eyes -- Galatians 3:1 (before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified). This has been argued as a demonstration from scriptures that Jesus was crucified but I can't help but wonder then why the reference to them seeing this portrayal and not hearing it. Who knows. Another one of god's little mysteries?

Neil Godfrey
http://vridar.wordpress.com

Clivedurdle · 02-19-2007, 02:02 PM

Isn't that thought to be a reference to a scene of a play?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-19-2007, 07:48 AM	#11
burlo Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Earth Posts: 318	Perhaps there is a distinction between Their Lord and Our Lord.

02-19-2007, 09:08 AM	#13
gstafleu Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: London, Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,719	Sodom and Egypt are analogies for "bad places" or "places where bad things happen." To John Jerusalem could be such a place, given that it was destroyed by the Romans. And possibly, just the simple fact that Jesus was crucified there could turn it into a "place where bad things happen." Having said that, the word "prophetically" is an instance of (and I'm sure everyone was just waiting for this) the infamous kata sarka / kata pneuma dichotomy. The word used is πνευματικως (pneumatikos), "spiritually" if you will. Now that could just indicate a spiritual analogy (bad place = Sodom or Egypt), but it could also indicate that we are now talking about the heavenly realm instead of the earthly one, as Jake indicates. The bodies from 8 are those of believers that have been slain by some beast from the abyss. In 12 we then have "Then they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, "Come up here." And they went up to heaven in a cloud, while their enemies looked on." So they went to heaven, indicating that at that point they were not in heaven yet. That might be a contraindication to the heavenly location, but remember that there were multiple heavens in those days. 8-13 is an interesting parallel to the scene of Jesus' death in Matthew: dead bodies rise and there is an earthquake. The bodies rise after a resurrection, which takes place after three (and a half) days. They then go to heaven on a cloud. A bit of intermingling between the object of belief (Jesus) and the believers here, but that is not all that strange (gnostically speaking ). To come back to the original question, this would indicate Jerusalem as the place of crucifixion. Gerard Stafleu

02-19-2007, 02:02 PM	#20
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	Isn't that thought to be a reference to a scene of a play?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.