Freethought & Rationalism Archive

rlogan · 01-23-2004, 04:59 PM

I was curious about the Book of Revelations. My first instinct was to go to early christian writings dot com. But the book isn't in there for some reason. So I went to Dr. Google and picked up a few things - that we don't know (surprise) who wrote it. It was problematic for canonization. But they did it.

I saw some efforts to link various roman authorities to the "cloaked" references in the text. But this is just such a whacky book that it seems scholars avoid it. In my church and gospel groups it was never discussed. The red-headed step child.

But it seems to me that we can't ignore this book and how it reflects upon the rest of the Bible. What got it canonized was the same process that got Gmark and 1 Thess. etc. canonized. It is on an equal footing in that respect.

It is obvious why the HJ school doesn't pull this book out as evidence. But I don't see why the myth school or skeptics in general don't pull this out and say "get a load of this stuff here".

I don't think it can be excused on the grounds that it is prophetic and therefore out of bounds for critical analysis. Instead, I think it is a primary piece of evidence. It assures us that these bizarre things are going to happen real soon (Rev 1:1).

Now what is it evidence of, exactly?

Doctor X · 01-23-2004, 05:01 PM

The polemic and beliefs of a particular author and, possibly, his intended audience.

--J.D.

Toto · 01-23-2004, 05:28 PM

Peter Kirby calls it The Apocalypse of John, but it's still Revelation.

Doherty on Revelation

Quote:

What form of Christianity is represented by Revelation? The book inhabits the fevered world of Jewish apocalyptic. John owes a huge debt to the Old Testament Book of Daniel, whose fantastic visions of the End-time he has borrowed and enlarged upon, reaching new horrific and punitive heights. John has also taken the famous figure from the vision of Daniel 7, the "one like a son of man," and if Revelation was written in 68 or 69 CE, as some suggest, this would be the earliest known adaptation of the Danielic figure in either Jewish or Christian writings (outside of the reconstructed Q, if the Q2 stratum of prophetic sayings were to be dated earlier). But Revelation also inhabits the world of Christ belief, for the figure of "Jesus Christ" is central, and to him have been attached a number of symbolic motifs and titles belonging to Jewish and Christian messianic expectation.

An Exclusively Heavenly Christ

Yet what sort of Christ is this? Revelation opens with these words:

"This is the revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him to show his servants what must soon take place, and he [i.e., Christ] sent it through his angel to his servant John who, telling everything he saw, has borne witness to the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ." (1:1-2)

God makes a revelation to Jesus, who in turn communicates it through an angel to the prophet John. John, in setting it all down in writing, bears witness to God's revelation and to the one transmitting it. This is as close as Revelation gets to any idea of a teaching Jesus�which is to say, not at all. The figure of Christ communicates entirely through spiritual channels, and with the exception of 3:3 (see below), nothing that this figure says bears any resemblance to the words of Jesus as spoken in the Gospels. For the author of Revelation, Christ is an entirely heavenly figure. As 1:1-2 makes clear, Christ is a spiritual intermediary between God and humanity.

rlogan · 01-23-2004, 05:59 PM

Thanks Toto. I'll dig into that now.

I'm trying to envision what kind of discussion would have taken place at one of these great councils:

"The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Antioch."

"Move to exclude"

"Second".

"Distinguished colleagues, on the basis of over-all silliness I object to the inclusion in canon. Moreover as the intepretable format is rife with potential abuses it may even be dangerous".

"Objection"

"The chair recognizes Mr. Montanus".

"God told me this stuff. I got two babes backin' me up on this"

"The Chair inquires if these be righteous babes?"

"Ten-four there Mr. Chair - Prisca made the July cover of Galilee Today and Maximilla is this month's centerfold in Buxom Bethlehemites"

"The chair rules the motion be dismissed."

Malachi151 · 01-23-2004, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by rlogan
I was curious about the Book of Revelations. My first instinct was to go to early christian writings dot com. But the book isn't in there for some reason. So I went to Dr. Google and picked up a few things - that we don't know (surprise) who wrote it. It was problematic for canonization. But they did it.

I saw some efforts to link various roman authorities to the "cloaked" references in the text. But this is just such a whacky book that it seems scholars avoid it. In my church and gospel groups it was never discussed. The red-headed step child.

But it seems to me that we can't ignore this book and how it reflects upon the rest of the Bible. What got it canonized was the same process that got Gmark and 1 Thess. etc. canonized. It is on an equal footing in that respect.

It is obvious why the HJ school doesn't pull this book out as evidence. But I don't see why the myth school or skeptics in general don't pull this out and say "get a load of this stuff here".

I don't think it can be excused on the grounds that it is prophetic and therefore out of bounds for critical analysis. Instead, I think it is a primary piece of evidence. It assures us that these bizarre things are going to happen real soon (Rev 1:1).

Now what is it evidence of, exactly?

It has been my contetion for years now that if I could make any movie, and only one, I would use CGI and make a literal translation of the book of Revelation.

MiddleMan · 01-23-2004, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Malachi151
It has been my contetion for years now that if I could make any movie, and only one, I would use CGI and make a literal translation of the book of Revelation.

God damn that would be cool!

Demigawd · 01-23-2004, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Malachi151
It has been my contetion for years now that if I could make any movie, and only one, I would use CGI and make a literal translation of the book of Revelation.

I believe it was Hunter S. Thompson who once said one of his favorite bits of literature while on drugs was Revelation. Talk about a crazy trip through fear and loathing.

Magus55 · 01-23-2004, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Malachi151
It has been my contetion for years now that if I could make any movie, and only one, I would use CGI and make a literal translation of the book of Revelation.

Lot of movies have already been made based on it. Where do you think the concept of the 4 Horseman of Apocolypse came from?

As to Toto.

First of all, I find it interesting how Doherty states that Revelation borrowed topics from Daniel. What themes (and verses) in particular does he state are borrowed?

As to Jesus being the mediator of humanity, that is stated outside Revelation. Its nothing special or unique within Revelation.

1Ti 2:5 For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Magus55 · 01-23-2004, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Demigawd
I believe it was Hunter S. Thompson who once said one of his favorite bits of literature while on drugs was Revelation. Talk about a crazy trip through fear and loathing.

Revelation is a fascinating piece of literature. Its also the most complicated and hard to understand book in the Bible.

GakuseiDon · 01-24-2004, 02:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Malachi151
It has been my contetion for years now that if I could make any movie, and only one, I would use CGI and make a literal translation of the book of Revelation.

There is a brilliant animated version (done in an anime Pokemon style) here: http://www.e-sheep.com/apocamon/

Highly recommended - definitely a 5 out of 5. (The first few chapters are free, but he nows seems to be charging for the last ones). Even better is following it along while reading the Book of Revelation itself.

My favorite bits: the question about the grass, and the running Score line.

01-23-2004, 04:59 PM	#1
rlogan Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Alaska Posts: 9,159	Book of Revelations I was curious about the Book of Revelations. My first instinct was to go to early christian writings dot com. But the book isn't in there for some reason. So I went to Dr. Google and picked up a few things - that we don't know (surprise) who wrote it. It was problematic for canonization. But they did it. I saw some efforts to link various roman authorities to the "cloaked" references in the text. But this is just such a whacky book that it seems scholars avoid it. In my church and gospel groups it was never discussed. The red-headed step child. But it seems to me that we can't ignore this book and how it reflects upon the rest of the Bible. What got it canonized was the same process that got Gmark and 1 Thess. etc. canonized. It is on an equal footing in that respect. It is obvious why the HJ school doesn't pull this book out as evidence. But I don't see why the myth school or skeptics in general don't pull this out and say "get a load of this stuff here". I don't think it can be excused on the grounds that it is prophetic and therefore out of bounds for critical analysis. Instead, I think it is a primary piece of evidence. It assures us that these bizarre things are going to happen real soon (Rev 1:1). Now what is it evidence of, exactly?

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

01-23-2004, 05:01 PM	#2
Doctor X Banned Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: USA Posts: 3,794	The polemic and beliefs of a particular author and, possibly, his intended audience. --J.D.

01-23-2004, 05:59 PM	#4
rlogan Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Alaska Posts: 9,159	Thanks Toto. I'll dig into that now. I'm trying to envision what kind of discussion would have taken place at one of these great councils: "The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Antioch." "Move to exclude" "Second". "Distinguished colleagues, on the basis of over-all silliness I object to the inclusion in canon. Moreover as the intepretable format is rife with potential abuses it may even be dangerous". "Objection" "The chair recognizes Mr. Montanus". "God told me this stuff. I got two babes backin' me up on this" "The Chair inquires if these be righteous babes?" "Ten-four there Mr. Chair - Prisca made the July cover of Galilee Today and Maximilla is this month's centerfold in Buxom Bethlehemites" "The chair rules the motion be dismissed."

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.