Ben C Smith

Ancient apocalypses are usually pseudonymous, purporting to have been written by an ancient figure (Enoch, Abraham, Moses), but concerning events that would happen in later times (confer Daniel 12.4; 1 Enoch 108.1-2).

But what about the book of Revelation? It names its author as John in four verses (1.1, 4, 9; 22.8), but gives few details about him beyond his exile on Patmos. (The church fathers were somewhat split between viewing this John as the son of Zebedee and viewing this John as a different figure with the same name.) Also note that this John is given instructions not to seal up the prophecy (contrast 22.10 with Daniel 12.4).

So is Revelation the first apocalypse not to be pseudonymous? If not, who is this John to whom it is attributed? If so, does its lack of pseudonymity have something to do with its refusal to seal up its prophecies (since the time was supposedly near)?

Ben.

andrewcriddle

Apocalypses were usually written in the name of figures from the past because prophecy (of which apocalyptic writings are a sub-category) was seen as belonging to a past age.

Revelation is written as an explicitly contemporary work because with the coming of Jesus Christ the age of prophecy is back again.

Andrew Criddle

spin

I don't know how you can separate the John of Rev 22:10 from the Daniel of Dan 7:2, 15, 8:15, etc. You need your Virgil to take Dante by the hand. Isn't "John" just such a hand holder? You'd probably had a bit of trouble if it were "Wendy".


spin

Ben C Smith

Great point. Thanks, Andrew.

Ben.

Ben C Smith

Maybe so, but then who is this John supposed to be? Is it just a name? Why were so many other apocalypses written in the name of a famous person? Or were Abraham, Enoch, and Moses just names in their respective apocalypses, too?

Ben.

spin

As I pointed out with "You'd probably had a bit of trouble if it were "Wendy"", you needed a reasonable guide. The name thus needed to allude to knowledge, so if the guide were called Hadraphel would you have had any problems over the character? What about "Wayne"?

Chili

I have no problem with it being the son of Mary introduced at the foot of the cross.

mountainman

Dear Andrew,

You are aware of course that in his work "Life of Constantine" Eusebius recalls at least two of the prophecies of Revelation being fulfilled by Constantine, in the fourth century. Additionally, although the book of Revelations mentions John, we have for some reason another work entitled "The History of John" preserved with the following attribution:

Best wishes,


Pete

DCHindley

It may be something as simple as the author really being some guy named John, who was living in exile on the island of Patmos, and who felt truly inspired by Jesus to create his apocalypse. If it was meant to describe, however cryptically, events he believed would immediately come to pass, why bother with the convention of pseudonymous authorship and claiming the work was "sealed up" until present times?

There are a number of issues to sort out, though, to get to this author's motivations.

1) Who exiled him and for what reason? Exile would seem to be punishment for Roman citizens or citizens of Greek cities or Roman colonies. Jews could be Roman citizens for a variety of reasons, and Jews were NOT citizens of Greek cities, nor I believe of Roman colonies. Was he a Herodian or a Herodian freedman? Was he a member of a prominent Jewish-Roman family such as that of Philo, a devout although thoroughly Hellenized Jew, whose cousin was Tiberius Alexander, a lapsed Jew who was a Roman prefect over Egypt and Judaea at one point or another? This could be important when trying to match historical events with events that seem to be alluded to in the apocalypse (e.g., the smoke rising from Babylon/Jerusalem), beasts with many heads (the sons of Herod's sons Alexander & Aristobulus, called "Hydra (heads)" in Jos War 1:586) and horns (signifying kings in Daniel), etc.

2) Why Patmos? In other words, is this "fact" supposed to signify something to the reader/hearer? Patmos is a tiny island off the coast of "Asia" (Epheus was the closest large city, although Miletus was a bit closer). Patmos was said to be a present from Zeus to his daughter Artemis, goddess of hunting and young women, and She was worshipped there. Patmos receives passing mention by Thucydides, Strabo, Pliny the Elder and Tacitus. In the Hellenistic period, the islands of Patmos, Lipsos and Leros, were part of the territory controlled by Miletus, serving as "buffers" to protect Miletus from attack.
I cannot find any ancient citations that might confirm the often made assertion that the Romans banished criminals there. One source says that Tacitus names three other Aegean islands (Donusa, Gyarus & Amorgus) as places of banishment, he does not so name Patmos.
http://books.google.com/books?id=G4c...um=1&ct=result

3) He claims this was a "revelation of Jesus Christ" dispatched by an angel "to his servant (literally "slave") John." Why is John describing himself as a slave of Jesus? Was he actually or formerly a slave of someone else (again the freedman idea)? Jesus gave him the revelation through an "angel" (or "messenger"), but in what form. He describes it as a vision with lots of psychadelic color and racket, but there are clues that tell us that he actually edited together several apocalyptic sources to get it into its present form. Does this have any significance as to why he decided to dispense with pseudonymity?

DCH

Clivedurdle

What difference does it make if Revelation is a Jewish book that was very slightly amended?

http://www.geocities.com/b_d_muller/rjohn.html