The Sitz im Leben of the Apocalypse with Particular Reference to the Role of the Church's Enemies [Reprint 2013 ed.] 3110108305, 9783110108309

Table of contents :
FOREWORD
ABBREVIATIONS
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 1: MARTYRDOM AND SUFFERING
A. Introduction
B. The Doctrine of Suffering in the Pre-Hellenistic Era
C. Judaism vs. Hellenism
D. The Response to Hellenization
E. Persecution under the Romans
F. Martyrdom by Suicide
G. Discouragement of Martyrdom
H. The Origin of the Concept of Martyrdom
I. Doctrinal Development
J. Conclusion
CHAPTER 2: THE ENEMIES OF THE CHURCH IN THE APOCALYPSE
A. Introduction
B. The Structure of Revelation
C. ACT I: The Church on Earth (1:9-3:22)
D. ACT II: The Preservation of the Church (4:1-8:6)
E. ACT III: Judgment upon the Earth (8:7-11:19)
F. ACT IV: The Salvation of the Saints (12:1-16:1)
G. ACT V: Judgment upon the Earth (16:2-17:3a)
H. ACT VI: The Judgment of the Harlot (17:3b-19:21)
I. ACT VII: The Church Triumphant (20:11-22:5)
J. Conclusion
CHAPTER 3: THE PROPHETIC VIEW OF JERUSALEM
A. Introduction
B. Geographical Considerations
C. Jerusalem’s History
D. Cities in Old Testament Thought
E. Jerusalem’s Moral and Spiritual Status
F. The Fate of Jerusalem
G The Restoration of Jerusalem
H. Conclusion
CHAPTER 4: JERUSALEM IN THE NEW TESTAMENT
A. Introduction
B. Mark
C. Matthew
D. Luke-Acts
E. Paul
F. Conclusion
CONCLUSION
APPENDIX: PROPOSED STRUCTURE OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION
INDEX OF SUBJECTS
INDEX OF AUTHORS
INDEX OF REFERENCES
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Citation preview

Alan James Beagley

The 'Sitz im Leben' of the Apocalypse with Particular Reference to the Role of the Church's Enemies

W DE G Walter de Gruyter · Berlin · New York

1987

Beiheft zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche Herausgegeben von Erich Gräßer 50

Library of Congress Cataloging-in- Publication

Data

Beagley, Alan James, 1940— The "Sitz im Leben" of the Apocalypse with particular reference to the role of the Church's enemies. (Beiheft zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche ; 50) Revision of thesis (Ph. D.) —Fuller Theological Seminary, 1983. Bibliography: p. Includes indexes. 1. Bible. N.T. Revelation—Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Title. II. Series: Beiheft zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche ; Beiheft 50. BS2825.2.B4 1987 228'.06 87-6894 ISBN 0-89925-404-7 (U.S.)

CIP-Kur^titelaufnähme

der Deutschen

Bibliothek

Beagley, Alan James: The "Sitz im Leben" of the Apocalypse with particular reference to the role of the church's enemies / Alan James Beagley. — Berlin ; New York : de Gruyter, 1987. (Beiheft zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche ; 50) ISBN 3-11-010830-5 NE: Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche / Beiheft

Printed on acid free paper (pH 7, neutral)

© Copyright 1987 by Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin 30 Alle Rechte des Nachdrucks, der photomechanischen Wiedergabe, der Übersetzung, der Herstellung von Mikrofilmen und Photokopien, auch auszugsweise, vorbehalten. Printed in Germany. Druck: Werner Hildebrand, Berlin 65 Bindearbeiten: Lüderitz & Bauer, Berlin 61

To Jan and Jeanette

FOHEWOKD

This work was accepted by the School of Theology of Fuller Theological Seminary as a Ph.D. dissertation in 1983. Minor revisions have been carried out in preparation for publication in its present form. My thanks are due to Professors Ralph P. Martin and Donald A. Hagner of Fuller Theological Seminary for their helpful suggestions and comments; to Dr. Michael Lattke, of the Department of Studies in Religion, University of Queensland, Australia, for encouraging me seek publication of this work; and to Professor Dr. Erich Crasser, for accepting this study as part of the series "Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fur die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft." Tamsui, Taiwan, Republic of China, December 1986

Alan James Beagley

TAKf.it OF commrts

FOREWORD

VII

ABBREVIATIONS

XIII

INTRODUCTION

1

CHAPTER 1: MARTYRDOM AND SUFFERING

3

A. Introduction

3

1. A Note Concerning Terminology B. The Doctrine of Suffering in the Pre-Hellenistic Era C. Judaism vs. Hellenism 1. Alexander the Great

3 ....

4 6 6

2. The Ptolemies

7

3. The Seleucids

7

4. Persecution under Antiochus Epiphanes D. The Response to Hellenization

10 12

E. Persecution under the Romans

17

F. Martyrdom by Suicide

19

G. Discouragement of Martyrdom

19

H. The Origin of the Concept of Martyrdom

20

I. Doctrinal Development

21

J. Conclusion

24

CHAPTER 2: THE ENEMIES OF THE CHURCH IN THE APOCALYPSE A. Introduction

27 27

B. The Structure of Revelation

28

C. ACT I: The Church on Earth (1:9-3:22)

31

D. ACT II: The Preservation of the Church (4:1-8:6)

36

1. The First Seal

38

2. The Second Seal

39

3. The Third Seal

39

X

Table of Contents 4. The Fourth Seal

40

5. The Fifth Seal

43

6. The Sixth Seal

44

7. The Sealing of the 144,000

46

8. The Seventh Seal

48

E. ACT III: Judgment upon the Earth (8:7-11:19)

48

1. The First Trumpet

48

2. The Second Trumpet

50

3. The Third Trumpet

50

4. The Fourth Trumpet

51

5. The Eagle with the Three Woes

52

6. The Fifth Trumpet

53

7. The Sixth Trumpet

54

8. The Mighty Angel and His Message

56

9. The Little Scroll

57

10. The Temple and the Witnesses

59

11. The Two Witnesses

64

12. The Seventh Trumpet

70

F. ACT IV: The Salvation of the Saints (12:1-16:1)

72

1. The Woman and the Dragon

72

2. The Beast from the Sea

73

3. The Beast from the Earth

78

4. The Lamb and his Followers on Mount Zion

81

5. The Messages of the Three Angels

81

6. The Winepress of God's Wrath G. ACT V: Judgment upon the Earth (16:2-17:3a)

82 84

1. The First Three Bowls

85

2. The Fourth Bowl

86

3. The Fifth Bowl

86

4. The Sixth Bowl

87

5. The Seventh Bowl

90

H. ACT VI: The Judgment of the Harlot (17:3b-19:21)

92

1. The Harlot and the Beast

102

2. The Ten Horns

107

3. The Merchants' Lament

108

4. The Banquet

110

5. The Attack on the Holy City

Ill

Table of Contents

XI

I. ACT VII: The Church Triumphant (20:11-22:5)

Ill

J. Conclusion

112

CHAPTER 3: THE PROPHETIC VIEW OF JERUSALEM

113

A. Introduction

113

B. Geographical Considerations

113

C. Jerusalem's History

114

D. Cities in Old Testament Thought

116

E. Jerusalem's Moral and Spiritual Status

118

1. Isaiah 1-39

119

2. Micah

119

3. Jeremiah

120

4. Lamentations

121

5. Ezekiel

121

6. Zephaniah F. The Fate of Jerusalem

125 126

1. Isaiah 1-39

127

2. Micah

132

3. Jeremiah

134

4. Ezekiel

136

G. The Restoration of Jerusalem 1. Isaiah 1-39

138 138

2. Deutero-Isaiah

140

3. Micah

142

4. Amos

143

5. Jeremiah

144

6. Ezekiel

145

7. Obadiah and Joel

146

8. Zephaniah

146

9. Zechariah 1-8

147

10. Zechariah 9-14

148

H. Concilie ion

CHAPTER 4: JERUSALEM IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

149

151

A. Introduction

151

B. Mark

151

C. Matthew

158

D. Luke-Acts

162

XII

Table of Contents

E. Paul

171

F. Conclusion

177

CONCLUSION

179

APPENDIX: PROPOSED STRUCTURE OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION

181

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

183

INDEX OF AUTHORS

186

INDEX OF REFERENCES

189

BIBLIOGRAPHY

195

ABBREVIATIONS

As far as possible, I have followed the style of citation adopted by the Journal of Biblical Literature. I.e., the full title and publication details of a work are given the first tine it is referred to; in subsequent references to that work, only the author's name and an abbreviated title are given.

AB Anchor Bible Adv. Baer. Irenaeua, Against Heresies ANF Ante-Nicene Fathers Ant. Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews As. Mos. The Assumption of Moses AUSS Andrews University Seminary Studies BETL Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensis BJRL Bulletin of the John Rylands Library BR Biblical Research BZ Biblische Zeitschrift BZAW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft BZ NW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft ο. Ap. Josephus, Against Apion CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly EKKNT Evangelischkatholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament EvQ Evangelical Quarterly ExpTim The Expository Times FRLANT Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments HDR Harvard Dissertations in Religion HNT Handbuch zum Neuen Testament Hiet. Nat. The Elder Ρliny, Natural History HNTC Harper's New Testament Commentaries HUCA Hebrew Union College Annual IB The Interpreter's Bible ICC International Critical Commentary IDB The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible JBL Journal of Biblical Literature JEH Journal of Ecclesiastical History JQR Jewish Quarterly Review JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old Testament J TS Journal of Theological Studies J.W. Josephus, The Jewish War KNT Kommentar zum Neuen Testament LXX Septuagint MNTC Moffatt New Testmaent Commentary MT Masoretic Text NCB New Century Bible

XIV NEB η. F. NICNT NICOT NIV NKZ NRT NovT NovTSupp NT NTS OT OTL RevExp RSV SBT Sib. Or. TD NT TNTC TOTC TS VT UMANI Ζ NW

Abbreviations New English Bible neue Forschung New International Commentary on the New Testament New International Commentary on the Old Testament New International Version Neue kirchliche Zeitschrift Nouvelle Revue Theologique Novum Teetamentum Supplements to Novum Teetamentum New Testament New Testament Studies Old Testament Old Testament Library Review and Expositor Revised Standard Version Studies in Biblical Theology Sybilline Oracles Theological Dictionary of the New Testament Tyndale Commentary on the New Testament Tyndale Commentary on the Old Testament Theological Studies Vêtus Teetamentum Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament Zeitschrift fUr die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft

INTRODUCTION

This study has grown out of a long-standing interest in the Book of Revelation. More than twenty years ago I became a member of a church where this book was a major focus of attention, and in fact my earliest involvement in any regular and systematic study of the Bible was as a member of a Bible Class which was painstakingly dissecting the Revelation. It was some years before I discovered that there were other Christians who read it differently. Over the years I became convinced that a satisfactory understanding of this last book of the Bible would have to take into consideration the use made of the Old Testament, and this investigation was, in fact, originally intended to deal specifically with that topic. There has been, over the last few decades, a great revival of interest in apocalyptic in general and in the New Testament Apocalypse in particular. There has been a flurry of commentaries of many different kinds, from the popular writings of Hal Lindsey to more technically-oriented commentaries, such as those of George Beasley-Murray, Robert Mounce and Josephine Massyngberde Ford. Other commentaries are in preparation. With very few exceptions, the commentaries which have appeared so far have sought to understand the Book of Revelation against the background of the supposed violent persecution of Christians by Rome, in the person of Domitian. Our aim here is to show that this is not the primary focus of the book. That is not to say that the Seer is not concerned with the Roman Empire at all, but, rather, that his main concern lies elsewhere. We will commence by investigating how suffering and martyrdom were understood in Judaism. Then, with this as a background, Chapter 2 will deal in some detail with the Johannine Apocalypse itself. In this chapter we will be paying close attention to the use the Seer makes of the Old Testament and, in particular, we aim to show that the way he uses this material leaves little doubt that he has in mind above all judgments which are to come (or which have come) upon the nation of Israel, and especially upon the city of Jerusalem. The following chapters will then show that the Seer's perspective on Judaism is not greatly different from that found elsewhere in the Bible. Chapter 3 will deal with the Old Testament and will demonstrate the predominantly negative stance of the prophets towards the nation of Israel and its capital city. Chapter 4 will then consider the New Testament evidence and will show that Christian writers

2

Introduction

are also, for the most part, hostile towards the unbelieving Jewish nation and the city of Jerusalem because of the Jesw' refusal to accept Jesus as the promised Messiah.

CHAPTER 1 MARTYRDOM AND SUFFERING

A. Introduction

In this opening chapter we purpose to investigate the Jewish concepts of suffering and martyrdom, particularly in relation to the conflict between Judaian and Hellenism. This study will provide background material against which to examine the Sitz im Leben of the Book of Revelation, particularly in relation to the conflicts between the Church and Judaism. Our aim in this chapter is twofold. First, we want to show that martyrdom and suffering were experienced by the pious Jews, to a large extent, at the hands of their own fellow-countrymen, and not solely, nor even primarily, at the hands of non-Jews. Our second aim is to show that the conflict with Hellenism did much to shape the future direction of Judaism, both in its thought and in its practices.

1. A Note Concerning Terminology Although we will be using the term "martyr" throughout this chapter in its now-common sense, i.e., one who dies for his or her faith, it must be borne in mind that it is anachronistic to do SO. The Greek words μάρτυς, μαρτυρεΤν and « ι α μ α ρ τ υ ρ ε ι ν did not acquire this signification until after the New Testament period.l These words are not used of the Maccabean "martyrs" in the Books of Maccabees, except in 4 Macc 12:16; 16:16, and even there have simply the original sense of "witness."2 And although Epictetus does use μάρτυς for the "philosopher-

1 R. C. Casey, " μ ά ρ τ υ ς " in The Beginninge of Christianity (ed. F. J. Foakes Jackson and Kirsopp Lake; London: Macmillan, 1920) Fart 1, v o l . V . , 36; Henry Barclay Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John ( r e p r i n t ; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1968) 35. 2 H. Strathmann, "μάρτυς," TDNT A.513; c f . Norbert Brox, Zeuge und Märtyrer; Untersuchungen zur frühchristlichen Zeugnis-Terminologie (Mlinich: Kösel, 1961) 173.

4

Martyrdom and Suffering

martyrs," an examination of the work shows that they are called μ ά ρ τ υ ρ ε 5 not because they suffer or die f o r their convictions—although some do indeed do so— but because they bear witness to their beliefs.3

B. The Doctrine of Suffering in the Pre-Hellenistic Era

Several d i f f e r e n t views concerning suffering may be discerned in the Old Testament. One prominent view is that the righteous may expect to enjoy health and prosperity, while suffering and adversity are the lot of the ungodly. This may be seen in the account of the punishment of Adam and Eve and Cain f o r their disobedience. The Flood also is attributed to the wickedness of humanity, while Noah and his family are preserved because of his uprightness. Similarly, Sodoin and Gomorrah are destroyed because of the wickedness of their inhabitants, while Lot is preserved. This same relationship between righteousness and blessing, on the one hand, and between sin and suffering, on the other hand, may be seen in the prescriptive sections of the Pentateuch also, e.g., Exod 20:5-6; 23:25-26.4 This view of misfortune as the punishment f o r sin was also maintained strongly by the pre-Exilic prophets, and was confirmed in the minds of the people through the f a l l , f i r s t of the Northern Kingdom, and then of the Southern Kingdom. The same view is found in the Wisdom Literature, particularly in Proverbs.5 This idea is also found in Chronicles and, in Williams's words, "colors the Chronicler's view to such a degroe that he finds it necessary to explain every historical misfortune by some underlying sin ( c f . , e.g., 2Chron. 35:20ff. and compare 2 Kings 23:29)." He goes on to describe Chronicles as "the high water mark f o r the retributive view of suffering and misfortune."6 This view of rewards and punishments did not go unquestioned, however. There were many instances in which the one who had suffered had done no wrong,

3 Brox, Zeuge, 178. 4 E. B a l l a , "Das Problem des Leides in der israelitisch-jUdischen R e l i g i o n , " ETXARlrrHRION. Studien zur Religion icnd Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments. Herrmann Gurikel zum 60. Geburtstage, dem 23. Mai 1922 dargebracht (ed. H. Schmidt; Göttingen. Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1923) 21. 5 Sam Κ. Williams, Jesus' Death as Saving Event; The Background and Origin of A Concept (HDR 2\ Missoula: Scholars« for H&PVCLVCI TheöVoQ%COX Review, cl975) 91-92. 6 Williams, Jesus' Death, 92-93.

The Doctrine of Suffering in the Pre-Hellenietic Era

5

whether in the opinion of an onlooker or as judged by his or her own conscience. This latter situation is found not only in Job but also in several of the Psalms. In many Psalms, one who is suffering despite his innocence cries out to the righteous God not to withhold justice and prosperity from him any longer (e.g. Ps 17). Yet, despite all his sufferings, he retains his confidence in God and has an assurance that his appeal for help will not go unanswered and that his present sufferings will not persist for ever.7 Although he acknowledges that suffering is normally the punishment for sin, he is confident that it is not so in his case, as he is unconscious of any sin. Yet even this does not lead him to doubt God's just control of all things; he still trusts in God alone.8 A further significant exception to the idea of suffering as retribution is found in the suffering experienced by a true prophet. Jeremiah, for example, sometimes suffers with his people (Jer 4:19-22; 8:18-23; 13:17-19), but at other times suffers at the hands of his own people (Jer 11:19, 21; 20:1-2, 10; 36:26; 37:15; 38:6). In neither case, then, is the prophet suffering because of his own wrong-doing.9 Sometimes appeal was made to the idea of corporate solidarity to explain adversity, as was done in the time of Jeremiah and Ezekiel, with the recital of the proverb: "The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge" (Jer 31:29; Ezek 18:2). There is a sense of "mutual responsibility and the punishment of one generation for the sins of its predecessors."10 While Jeremiah seems to accept the validity of the popular proverb (at least for the time being, cf. 31:30), Ezekiel sharply criticizes the use of this principle to avoid facing up to one's own failures (18:19-20). But Ezekiel still acknowledges that some of the wicked will be preserved and brought to Babylonia—in order that their wickedness may testify to the justice of Yahweh's judgment on Jerusalem (14:22-23).H The outstanding example of the righteous sufferer was, of course, the "martyr," the person who was suffering specifically because of his or her fidelity to God and his commandments. This situation arose especially during the confrontation between Judaism and Hellenism, to a consideration of which we now turn.

7 Balla, "Problem dee Leides," 242. 8 Balla, "Problem des Leides," 242-243. 9 Williams, Jesue' Death, 92. 10 A. S. Peake, The Problem of Suffering in the Old Testament (London: Bryant, 1904) 19-20. 11 E. F. Sutcliffe, Providence and Suffering in the Old and New Testamente (London: Nelson, 1953) 94.

6

Martyrdom and Suffering C. Judaism vs. Hellenism

1. Alexander the Great

We must not make the mistake of assuming- that contacts between Judaism and Hellenism resulted in immediate mutual hostility. The Hellenistic period commenced, as f a r as Israel is concerned, with the invasion of the land of Judea by Alexander the Great in 323 B.C. In f a c t , there had been contacts between Jews and Greeks outside the land of Judea e a r l i e r than this, and there is no e v i d e n c e that they met on unfriendly terms as f a r as the Greeks were concerned. The Greeks seem to have had a certain respect f o r the Jewish r e l i g i o n and its ethic.

Alexander

even visited Jerusalem and, a c c o r d i n g to Josephus, improbable as it seems to us, prostrated himself before the High Priest and o f f e r e d s a c r i f i c e s in the Temple in a c c o r d a n c e with the letter's instructions (Ant. xi.329-336). Hellenism did make some impact on Judaism during Alexander's reign, since many, particularly among the upper classes, saw Alexander's military successes as evidence of the superiority of the culture he represented. Many therefore adopted Greek ways.12 Nevertheless, the inroads of Hellenism were mainly in such external matters as language, but without, in most cases, any significant effect on essential matters such as r e l i g i o n . The Greek Olympian r e l i g i o n itself was in a state of decline at that period, and although in the newly-conquered territories gods were given Greek names and the Greek architectural style was adopted f o r temples, "the tendency," Gowan contends, "was f o r westerners to adopt oriental religions, rather than v i c e versa." 13 whatever the attitudes of the conquered peoples may have been, there was little expressed hostility, except among the Jews, f o r whom culture was so intimately bound up with religion that even cultural syncretism was a crucial issue.14 But the Jews were quite f r e e to resist Hellenization, as there was no o f f i c i a l attempt at this stage to c o e r c e them into adopting alien ways. Nevertheless, although the c o n f l i c t s between Judaism and Hellenism may not have been unduly serious at this period, it was A l e x a n d e r ' s conquests which prepared the way f o r the much more intense c o n f l i c t s which were to d e v e l o p later. It was through A l e x a n d e r ' s victories, Frend writes, that "Jew and Greek eventually became

12 D. E. Gowan, Bridge Between the Testaments. A Reappraisal of Judaism from the Exile to the Birth of Christianity (Pittsburgh Theological Monograph Series 14; Pittsburgh: Pickwick, 1976) 71. 13 Gowan, Bridge, 71. 14 Gowan, Bridge, 72.

Judaism vs. Hellenism

7

as much neighbours and adversaries as Jew and Philistine had been in the era of Saul and David." 15

2. The Ptolemies

During the third century B.C., under the Ptolemies, there does not yet seem to have been any serious c o n f l i c t between Jews and Hellenists. The Ptolemies did not interfere in Jewish religious matters. There were economic pressures on the country because of the heavy taxation, and there were problems arising from the political unrest in the r e g i o n , but there was freedom from c o e r c i o n in religious matters.16 o n the other hand, however, it was during this period that there was some manifestation of anti-Jewish f e e l i n g in Alexandria, although this may have been due, as Frend suggests, to the Jewish observance of the Passover, which may well—and understandably—have aroused the hostility of the Egyptians. 17 There is in 3 Maccabees a purported description of a persecution of Jews by Ptolemy IV Philopater, during which they were compelled to o f f e r s a c r i f i c e to Dionysius (although in exchange they would receive full citizenship rights); those who refused would be denied admission to their own Temple.18 Gowan, although r e f e r r i n g to "some picaresque and obviously fictitious stories," nevertheless thinks that the work may r e f l e c t an actual situation during the third century B.C., or may, alternatively, r e f l e c t a c o n f l i c t between Egyptian Jews and the Ptolemaic dynasty during the f i r s t century B.C., much c l o s e r to the time when the book was written.19

3. The Seleucids

It was during the Seleucid period that the enmity between Judaism and Hellenism became f a r more severe. But still the c o n f l i c t did not commence as soon as the Seleucids came to power in 198 B.C. through the victory at Panium. Josephus r e c o r d s that the Jews r e c e i v e d Antiochus III gladly when he marched into Judea

15 W. H. C. Frend, Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church; A Study of Conflict from the Maccabees to Donatus (Oxford: Blackwell, 1965) 36. 16 Gowan, Bridge, 81. 17 Frend, Martyrdom, 36. 18 M. Hadas, The Third and Fourth Books of Maccabees (New York: Harper, 1953) 17-18. 19 Gowan, Bridge, 81.

8

Martyrdom and S u f f e r i n g

and that the conqueror in turn even reaffirmed the privileges which the Ptolemies had granted the Jews, including the right to live "according to their ancestral laws" (Ant. xii.3). Antiochus also provided help for the reconstruction of Jerusalem and granted several tax-concessions.

Gowan is of the opinion that

This probably formalized what had been the practice since the Persians sent Ezra to administer the Law of Moses; that is, the custom of allowing subject peoples to govern their own internal affairs according to their traditional laws and by means of their own courts. The same practice was followed later by the Romans; . . . in the next generation . . . Antiochus IV will represent the conspicuous exception to this tolerant and convenient way of dealing with subject peoples.20 Even the following Seleucid ruler, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, during whose reign a serious confrontation occurred between the Jews and the Hellenizers, did not immediately set out to stamp out Judaism. His coins show that he did not pursue a thorough Hellenization of the various religions within his domain: even though all the coins have the ruler's head on the front, the coins of the various territories have different designs on the reverse, including the representations of their various gods.21 Moreover, he seems not to have harassed the Jews living outside Judea,22 and did not interfere with the Jewish religion within Judea until 169 B.C., some six years after his accession. All this suggests that Antiochus was not motivated by any driving force to elevate Hellenistic religion to a position of supremacy. When Antiochus IV came to the throne, some of the Jewish leaders sought to have the then High Priest, Onias, removed from office—by bribing Antiochus— and the ruler obliged by appointing Jason, Onias1 brother, as High Priest instead. Onias was later killed in exile at Antioch (2 iViacc 4:33) by Menelaus, who had replaced Jason as High Priest by paying Antiochus an even larger bribe. Frend comments: "The roll of martyrs for the Law had been opened."23 g u t this is no evidence of particular hostility by the ruler towards the Jews or their religion. This was not at all an unusual sequence of events, since the Hellenistic kings already claimed the power to appoint and depose priests in their own territories, but it was a radical departure from Jewish custom and therefore aroused hostility by the more strict Jews.24 For the first part of his reign Antiochus was far more concerned with military than with religious matters. He sought to conquer Egypt and Bactria, and he also had to be on his guard against possible invasion

20 Gowan, Bridge,

85-86.

21 Elias Bicker mann. Der Gott der Makkabäer: Untersuchungen über Sinn und Ursprung der makkabäisahen Erhebung (Berlin: Schocken/Jüdischer Buchverlag, 1937) 47. 22 Frend, Martyrdom, 43. 23 Frend, Martyrdom, 41.

24 Gowan, Bridge,

93.

Judaism vs. Hellenism by the Parthians.

9

It was during his second foray into Egypt that Rome inter-

vened, and Antiochus was ordered, in no uncertain manner, to leave Egypt alone. Antiochus came to the conclusion that he needed to unify his own kingdom and that this necessitated a unified culture and religion.25 τ ο make matters worse (for the Jews, at least), while Antiochus had been conducting his abortive campaign in Egypt, a rumor had swept throughout Judea to the e f f e c t that he had met his death. Thereupon, Jason invaded Jerusalem, so that Menelaus was forced to beat a retreat to the citadel. So Antiochus returned to Judea to find Jerusalem in a state of rebellion. This, coming so soon after his humiliating defeat by the Romans, would hardly have induced in him a favorable disposition towards the Jews. He crushed the revolt, killing many Jews, reduced Jerusalem's status to that of a village, and reinstated Menelaus as High Priest. A further revolt took place a short while afterwards, but this was also put down, and Syrian troops were garrisoned in the city. These Syrian occupiers not only plundered and raped, but also brought with them their religious objects and practices and apparently even carried out their idolatrous rites in the Temple precincts, which then became unclean and unfit f o r use by any pious Jew. Opposition to Antiochus 1 policies thus took on a specifically religious form and was probably often led by those who were learned in the Law of Moses and who had formerly held positions of authority in the Jewish community until their ejection by Antiochus.26 Thus Antiochus' motivation for suppressing the Jewish religion was primarily political. Even his plundering of the Temple, which struck horror into the hearts of the Jews, was not religiously motivated and was not unique, since he plundered other shrines also, spurred on by economic necessity.27 judea, moreover, lay on an important route to the East, so Antiochus needed to have firm control over this area. Further, those who opposed his policies were suspected of sympathizing with the Ptolemies and so f e l l into even greater disfavor.28 f o r the Jews, on the other hand, the struggle was of a fundamentally religious nature; there is no indication that any of the religious leaders at this stage was concerned about political freedom. Gowan's comment is correct insofar as it reflects the Jews' own perspective: "And so, for the first time in recorded history a people was

25 W. W. Tarn and G. T. Griffith, Hellenistic Civilisation (3rd ed.; London: Arnold, 1952) 215. 26 Gowan, Bridge, 97-99; Frend, Martyrdom, 42-43. 27 Frend, Martyrdom, 40; Solomon Zeitlin, The Riee and Fall of the Jewish State. A Politicai, Social and Religious History of the Second Corrmonwealth (3 vols.; Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1978) 1.88-89. 28 Zeitlin, Rise and Fall, 1.89-90.

10

Martyrdom and Suffering

persecuted because of its religion and a concerted effort was made to stamp out a faith by means of torture and death."29

4. Persecution under Antiochus Epiphanes As has been noted already, since the Jewish opposition to Hellenization was based on the Jewish religion, and especially on strict observance of the Torah, Antiochus' efforts to enforce unity concentrated on this issue. Approximately one year after the Syrian garrison had been stationed in Jerusalem, Antiochus "proscribed the standards which those who called themselves 'the faithful' (the Hasidim) had raised: the Scriptures, sacrifice to Yahweh, circumcision, observance of the Sabbath and the other festivals."30 Anyone found with a copy of the book of the covenant in his or her possession or found living in accordance with the Law was required to be killed (1 Macc 1:57), and the books of the Law themselves were torn to pieces and burned (1 Macc 1:56). The traditional sacrifices and offerings were prohibited (1 Macc 1:45) and the Jews were compelled to participate in idolatry and in offering unclean animals such as pigs (1 Macc 1:47). On at least one occasion, Jews were forced to partake of heathen sacrifices (2 Macc 6:7). They were also "compelled to walk in the procession in honor of Dionysius, wearing wreaths of ivy" (2 Macc 6:7; cf. As. Mos. 8:4). These laws seem to have been enforced initially in Jerusalem, but were later extended to other cities as well (2 Macc 6:8). Orders were given that children were to remaii: uncircumcised (1 Macc 1:48), and parents who continued to observe the Jewish custom in this regard were dealt with severely. Mothers who had their sons circumcised were put to death, together with their families and those who had carried out the circumcision, and the infants were hung around their necks (1 Macc 1:60-61). According to 2 Macc 6:10, two women who had had their children circumcised were paraded publicly through the city with their infants hanging at their breasts and then were hurled headlong down from the city walL According to A s . Mos., those who confessed to having been circumcised were crucified (8:1) while those who had carried out the circumcision were tortured and imprisoned (8:2), while male children were sometimes operated on to reverse the circumcision (8:4).

29 Gowan, Bridge, 100; cf. Frend, Martyrdom, 30 Gowan, Bridge, 99.

43.

Judaism vs. Hellenism

11

The observance of the Sabbath was prohibited (1 Macc 1:45). On one occasion, one of Antiochus' commanders, after feigning good will towards the Jews, put to death large numbers of the inhabitants of Jerusalem who came out to see his army on parade on the Sabbath; their offense was that they were absent from their work (2 Macc 5:24-26). One group of pious Jews went out into the wilderness to dwell in caves in an attempt to escape the restrictions imposed by Antiochus, but even there they were not secure: they were pursued by Antiochus' troops who attacked them on the Sabbath day. These pious Jews, numbering one thousand, refused to defend themselves or even to barricade their hiding places, and so they perished rather than profane the Sabbath (1 Macc 2:29-38). 2 Macc 6:11 records another incident concerning a group of Jews who had gathered together in caves near Jerusalem to observe the Sabbath secretly; they were discovered, and were burned alive because they refused to defend themselves. A further line of attack on Jewish customs and principles was the attempt to f o r c e Jews to eat foods which they considered unclean, notably swine's flesh. 1 Macc 1:62-63 records that many of the Jews chose to die rather than eat unclean foods. It was his refusal to eat swine's flesh, or even to pretend to do so, which cost the l i f e of Eleazar, the aged scribe (2 Macc 6:18-31). Similarly, the seven brothers and their mother were prepared to suffer great torments, then death, in preference to defiling themselves by eating swine's flesh (2 Macc 7:1-42). Bickermann notes that the pig was unclean not only for the Jews, but also f o r the Syrians, Phoenicians and Arabians. Yet the Greeks, f o r whom the pig was sacred, had never tried to f o r c e their view on these other peoples; only the Jews were forced to eat swine's flesh.31 This is additional evidence that Antiochus' policy was not primarily religiously motivated, but was pursued simply for political ends. Yet another move towards the Hellenization of the Jews, although not strictly speaking an act of persecution, was the abolition of the daily Temple-sacrifices in 168 B.C. Then towards the end of that year a pagan altar was set up on the site of the Jewish altar, a pig was sacrificed there, and the Temple was consecrated to Zeus Olympus.32 This may have been simply a manifestation of the Hellenistic syncretistic belief that all peoples really worshiped the same god, but under different names. But now perhaps Antiochus wished "to identify each of the provincial gods with the deity of his House." 33 Although the Jews themselves believed that there was in reality only one God, they could not accept the view that their God

31 Bickermann, Gott der Makkabäer, 32 Zeitlin, Rise and Fall, 1.89. 33 Frend, Martyrdom, 40.

134.

12

Martyrdom and Suffering

could be worshiped in many d i f f e r e n t ways or under a variety of names. Yahweh had revealed himself to them, told them his name, and given them instructions concerning the way in which he was to be worshiped. No compromise was possible in such a matter. It must be kept in mind that the situation was not uniform throughout Antiochus' realm. The c o n f l i c t was severe in Jerusalem itself because the Hellenizers had great influence there: not only the High Priest, but also many other members of the aristocracy were ardent Hellenizers. The rural Jews, on the other hand, still speaking Aramaic, were probably largely insulated from Hellenistic influences.34 It is impossible to be certain of the number of those who met their death f o r their faith during the Seleucid period. Apart from the incident of the slaughter of some one thousand people on the Sabbath, the Books of Maccabees record only individual cases of martyrdom.

Nevertheless, few though they may have been,

these martyrdoms l e f t an indelible impression on the minds of the Jewish people.35

D. The Response to Hellenization

The Jews were now f a c e d more sharply than ever b e f o r e with the problem of the relationship between their religion and cultural changes.36 There was a variety of responses to Antiochus' program of Hellenization. We have already observed the approach of passive, non-violent acceptance of death. Another possible reaction was that of the separatists who withdrew into the wilderness, the forerunners of the Qumran Community. A t the other extreme from either of these groups were those who welcomed the changes. In f a c t , to some extent the ground had already been prepared f o r the Hellenization of Judaism through the Septuagint, which had been produced during the preceding century. This certainly provided the means f o r Judaism to spread beyond the Jewish people themselves, but the interchange worked in both directions.37

34 Frend, Martyrdom, 39; Gowan, Bridge, 71. 35 Martin Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism (2 v o l s . ; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974) 1.292; Die Zeloten; Untersuchungen zur jüdischen Freiheitebewegung in der Zeit von Berodes I . bis 70 N. Chr. (Arbeiten zur Geschichte des SpätJudentums und Urchristentums 1; Leiden: B r i l l , 1961) 262. 36 Gowan, Bridge, 72. 37 Frend, Martyrdom, 37.

The Response to H e l l e n i z a t i o n

13

According to 1 Macc 1:11-15, there were those among the Jews in the early years of Antiochus' reign who contended that the troubles which the nation had experienced were the result of its isolation from the Gentiles. They believe that this separation would have to be broken down if they were to make any progress at all. They therefore, with the approval of Antiochus, set up a Greek-style gymnasium in Jerusalem, "removed the marks of circumcision," and forsook the covenant. The author of 1 Maccabees sums up their actions in the words: "They joined with the Gentiles and sold themselves to do evil" (1:15). Hengel suggests that it was these Hellenized Jews who were the main cause of trouble for the pious Jews; it was they, he contends, who urged Antiochus to proscribe the traditional Jewish practices: Presumably, by furnishing appropriate information, they caused the king to prepare the decree f o r the extermination of the Jewish religion by force in the summer of 167 BC. . . . Possibly this decree was part of the constitution of the newly established polis with Jewish-Gentile citizenship.38 Certainly, according to 2 Macc 13:3-5, when Menelaus besought Antiochus V Eupator to reinstate him as High Priest, Lysias told the king that Menelaus was the cause of the persecution and the consequent Jewish rebellion, and the king had Menelaus killed. Josephus charges that Menelaus made his own people transgress the Law so that he could rule (Ant. xii.385). These Hellenizing Jews would also, no doubt, have been only too ready to denounce to the Seleucid authorities those who continued to live in accordance with the Torah. Bickermann contrasts the duo of Antiochus and Menelaus with the earlier duo of Ezra and Artaxerxes: Menelaus was an Ezra with reversed characteristics . . . Ezra and Nehemiah isolated Judaism in o r d e r to maintain monotheism. Jason and Menelaus gave up monotheism in o r d e r to deliver Judaism from its isolation. . . . The reformation placed the nation under the command of its God. The counterreformation dethroned God for the sake of the people.39 A third response to Antiochus 1 policy was what we may perhaps call "compromise without apostasy." This was the policy pursued by Matthias and his sons: although they refused to comply with the king's orders to o f f e r unlawful s a c r i f i c e s and refused to disobey the Torah in other ways, they also refused to stand by and see the Law broken by their less conservative fellow-Jews or simply to be slaughtered themselves. Thus 1 Maccabees tells how, at Modein, Mattathias utterly refused to o f f e r the required pagan s a c r i f i c e and then not only killed a fellow-Jew who was about to o f f e r the s a c r i f i c e but also destroyed the altar and killed the official of Antiochus who was seeking to e n f o r c e the king's order. Then, following the slaughter of a large group of Jews on the Sabbath, Mattathias and his companions 38 Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1.289. 39 B i c k e r m a n n , Gott der Makkabäer,

138.

14

Martyrdom and Suffering

resolved to defend themselves even on the Sabbath, if need be, in order that they might not be completely destroyed: If we do as our brethren have done and refuse to fight with the Gentiles f o r our lives and our ordinances, they will quickly destroy us from the earth. . . . Let us fight against every man who comes to attack us on the sabbath day; let us not a l l die as our brethren died in their hiding places. (1 Macc 2:39-41) It may well be that "we" and "us" here r e f e r not merely to Mattathias and his companions but to the Jewish people as a whole.40 j ^ e fundamental dilemma was, Gowan suggests: Would they all die, even to the last person if need be, in o r d e r to remain faithful to the law? Or should they break the law to defend themselves in o r d e r to preserve alive a people who could keep it in the future? Mattathias1 group took it upon themselves to f o l l o w the latter course, to break the Torah f o r the Torah's sake.41 W. R. Farmer also believes that Mattathias' decision was not merely—though it was partly, no doubt—motivated by the desire f o r self-preservation. It was rather, he suggests, a case of " T o r a h - e x p e d i e n c y , " which he defines as the principle of compromising one part of the Torah in o r d e r that the whole might be preserved. . . . What is of paramount importance is to r e c o g n i z e that to compromise the Torah is not necessarily to abandon it, and that in the case of the Maccabees it was their zeal f o r the Law which sustained them even in fighting those battles when they were transgressing the Law by fighting on the sabbath.42 Nevertheless, we shall have to disagree with this unduly favorable opinion of the Maccabees, at least as f a r as the later stages of their activities are concerned. The zeal of the Maccabees is frequently said to be " f o r the Torah" (1 Macc 2:26, 2V, 42, 48, 50, 64) rather than " f o r Yahweh." Hengel suggests that this indicates that the Law has now become, as it were, an intermediary between the individual and God. 43 He also notes that the words cñ^os, cnXoüvand νό μ os occur less and less frequently as one reads further in 1 Maccabees.44 it seems that the Maccabean movement becomes more and more a campaign f o r political independence, rather than a situation in which the Maccabees are suffering f o r their faith. It may be, of course, that they believed that it was not s u f f i c i e n t merely to remain faithful to the Law themselves, but that the cause of the problem should be rooted out as well, namely the political domination of the Jewish nation by the Gentiles. But the Maccabees do not even seem to have had the support of all their pious

40 I am unfortunately no longer able to trace the source of this suggestion. 41 Gowan, Bridge, 101. 42 William R. Farmer, Maaaabees, Zealote and Josephus (Columbia, S . C . : Columbia University Press, 1956) 77. 43 Hengel, Zeloten, 159. 44 Hengel, Zeloten, 157.

The Response to Hellenization

15

fellow-Jews, so perhaps their motives were suspect. Dan 11:33-34 is generally held to refer to the Maccabees, who are said to have provided only "a little help," suggesting that the author was on the side, not of the Maccabees, but of the "passive" martyrs. Similarly, Nickelsburg argues that the Maccabees are viewed less favorably in 2Maccabees than in 1 Maccabees. The Hasidic martyrs are the heroes, according to 2 M a c c a b e e s . 4 5 Gowan also points out that the Psalms of Solomon are not merely anti-Roman but also anti-Hasmonean (cf. Ps. SoL 17:5-11).46 Gowan summarizes the place of the Maccabees in Israel's history in the following words: [They] arose like the charismatic leaders of early Israel, like Gideon and Saul, in a time when the very physical existence of Israel was threatened, and their military prowess brought physical deliverance to their people. But . . . their course then began to diverge from that preferred by most Jews. After their experience of blood and glory nothing less than full political independence and a restoration of the boundaries of David's kingdom would satisfy. But the nature of the Jewish people as a whole was different; they would fight to the death for the integrity of their religion but empire-building was another matter. And so it happened that although the Maccabees became great heroes to some . . . they played no prominent place at all in Jewish tradition until the rise of the modern state of Israel.47 What we now have is, for all practical purposes, then, a civil war between two groups of Jews. The apostate Jews, who had compromised with Hellenism and now wanted to abolish traditional Jewish beliefs and practices so that they themselves might gain control, knew that this could be achieved only by force, since the faithful Jews would never willingly compromise. The pious Jews, on the other hand, were fighting, or suffering at the hands of, not the Seleucids themselves, but fellow-Jews who sided with the Seleucids and who were no longer living in accordance with the Law of Moses. Thus the Maccabean struggle, although recalled by later generations as a battle against the Seleucids, was really only a civil war between the more orthodox and the less orthodox. Thus it was for the individual to decide whether to obey Antiochus' decrees or to obey the Torah, and Frend argues that this played an important part in the development of the doctrine of individual salvation or condemnation alongside the older view of the salvation of the whole nation.48 We have, then, two different concepts of martyrdom among the Jews at this period. First, there were the rigorists, who are determined to obey the letter of the Law and, if necessary, be killed without a fight, for their obedience. Then 45 G. W. E. Nickelsburg, "1 and 2 Maccabees; Meaning," CTM 42 (1971) 525. 46 Gowan, Bridge, 119. 47 Gowan, Bridge, 107. 48 Frend, Martyrdom, 43.

Same Story,

Different

16

Martyrdom and Suffering

t h e r e were the followers of Mattathias, the Maccabees, who, although prepared to die f o r the sake of the Torah if necessary, would go down fighting. The Jewish u n d e r s t a n d i n g of martyrdom was also c o l o r e d by the growing belief that the p r o p h e t s had s u f f e r e d martyrdom f o r their f a i t h f u l proclamation of the message of Yahweh. Many of the works in which t h i s idea is found are later than the period which we are c o n s i d e r i n g , but there is ample evidence that it was already in existence during the Graeco-Roman period or even e a r l i e r : Already in Nehemiah (Neh. 926) t h e slaying of the p r o p h e t s who witnessed against d i s o b e d i e n t Israel had been lamented, and as time went on the r o l e of the victims was increased in f o l k l o r e and literary tradition. Isaiah, Zechariah and even Moses were added to Daniel and the "Three Holy Children," as victims of ungodly rulers and their a c c o m p l i c e s . 4 9 The list of martyrs eventually grew to the point where it included even "Adam, most of the antediluvians, the P a t r i a r c h s , the Matriarchs and their sons, Moses 1 family, all the authors of biblical books, and also a number of women. . . . " 5 0 All this helped to strengthen the belief that martyrdom was an inescapable concomitant of loyalty to Yahweh. And t h i s in turn, especially when combined with the view of the apocalyptists that all the Gentiles were to be d e s t r o y e d , fuelled the f i e r c e opposition of the Jews to the Gentiles and to the Hellenizers within their own ranks.51 Then again, t h i s attitude of hostility, expressed sometimes in violent a c t i o n , provoked even s t r o n g e r opposition to Judaism from Gentile rulers. Just as the (putative) martyrs of the past served as a model f o r the f a i t h f u l of the present generation, so the c o n c e p t of "example" c a r r i e d considerable weight f o r those who had to f a c e martyrdom in the present. Each one f a c e d with the demand to apostatize had to c o n s i d e r the e f f e c t of his or her a c t i o n s on those to come. For example, E l e a z a r e x p r e s s e s his unwillingness to lead the young astray by setting a bad example in eating the swine's flesh (2 Macc 6:24-25), and desires, on the c o n t r a r y , to "leave a noble example to the young of how to die on behalf of the laws" (6:28).

This seems to be a new emphasis in 2

Maccabees.

5 2

A f u r t h e r new feature in 2 Maccabees is the emphasis on the s p e e c h e s which the f a i t h f u l make b e f o r e their death. It is these s p e e c h e s , Williams argues, which enshrine the theology of martyrdom which the author wished to express. 5 3 And it is because of t h e i r speeches, probably, that these martyrs were esteemed more

49 Frend, Martyrdom, 57. 50 H. A. Fischel, "Martyr and Prophet," JQR 37 (1946-47) 274. 51 H. H. C. Frend, "The Persecutions: Some Links between Judaism and the Early Church," JEH 9 (1958) 145.

52 Williams, Jesus' Death, 78. 53 Williams, Jesus' Death, 78.

The Response to Hellenization

17

highly than those depicted in 1 Maccabees. They not merely died for their faith, but also "made a public profession of their faith in the presence of the pagan ruler before they died. That is, they testified with their lips before they sealed their testimony with their lives."®4 it is these who approach more closely to the later, Christian concept of martyrdom: μάρ-njs and μαρτυρεϊν were used of the witness par excellence,

the one who bore testimony even when it cost his life.

E. Persecution under the Romans

The passing of the Seleucid era did not see the end of persecution, suffering and martyrdom. This continued into the Roman period. For example, whenPompey captured Jerusalem in 63 B.C. after a siege lasting three months, some of the inhabitants, rather than allow themselves to be captured or killed by either the invaders or their fellow-citizens, "hurled themselves down the precipices" or set fire to their houses, with themselves still inside (Josephus, Ant. xiv.70; cf. J.W. i.150-151). When the Romans invaded the Temple the priests were found still in their places offering the appointed sacrifices, even though many of the Jews in the Temple had already been slaughtered. Josephus reports that they were not deterred by fear for their lives, "but thought it better to endure whatever they might have to suffer there beside the altars than to neglect any of the ordinances" (Ant. xiv.67). Later in the Roman period (ca. 4 B.C.) we find a group of young men willing to face death by pulling down from the gate of the Temple a golden eagle which had been put there by Herod. They were arrested and brought before the king. On being questioned, they said that the law of their fathers had ordered them to carry out this deed and they expressed exultation in the face of death because they would enjoy much greater happiness after their death (Josephus, J.W. i.651653; cf. Ant. xvii. 150-160). Thus it is clear that the attitude of the Jews did not undergo any significant change with the passage of time.

It is true that Judaism was, up to a point,

tolerated by the Romans, provided that it did not take too extreme a form. But this relationship did not satisfy all Jews, and many were eager to gain independence for their nation. Yet at the same time, Frend argues, "the official friendship

54 T. W. Maneon, "Martyrs and Martyrdom," BJRL

39 (1956-57) 484.

18

Martyrdom and Suffering

between Rome and the Jews was breaking down."55 This was partly because the Greeks were becoming less rebellious and the Jews were therefore less necessary as allies f o r Rome. Furthermore, Rome and Hellenism were becoming more closely linked together, through the Imperial Cult, against the Jews. Then the r i o t s in Alexandria in A.D. 38 and 39 led to Claudius 1 e d i c t in 41 which, on the one hand confirmed Jewish p r i v i l e g e s , but, on the other hand, warned against introducing more Jews from other parts. 56 During the dispute f o l l o w i n g the events in Alexandria in A.D. 38, Gaius ordered his legate, Petronius, to g o to Judea to set up (by f o r c e if necessary) an image of the emperor in the Temple at Jerusalem.

While Petronius was wintering at

Ptolemais a deputation of Jews came and petitioned him not to f o r c e them to transgress their traditional laws. They urged him rather to kill them before carrying out such a desecration, if he was indeed determined to do as he had been commanded, and they even threw themselves down before him and bared their throats, ready to die rather than tolerate such a flagrant transgression of their law (Josephus, Ant.

xviii.263-272).

There is also an account from this period of an incident in which a Roman soldier desecrated a copy of the Law (Josephus, Ant. xx.115; J.W. ii.229). Farmer points out, however, that on this occasion the perpetrator was executed by his own commander, unlike the situation during the Seleucid era, when copies of the Torah were destroyed in accordance with a royal command.57

¡jut later, it is

r e c o r d e d , Titus carried o f f with him to Rome, among the spoils seized from the Temple, a copy of the Jewish Law. Immediately f o l l o w i n g in the triumphal procession was a large party bearing images of Nike, the goddess of victory (Josephus, J.W. vii. 150-151). Farmer comments: "The suggested symbolism was, we may assume, the conquest by the champions of Hellenism of the last great vestige of barbarous particularism.1158 Thus we see a gradual erosion of the special privileges which the Jews had been granted by the Romans.

By A.D. 67, Josephus r e c o r d s , the authorities in

Antioch were applying the test of s a c r i f i c e " a f t e r the manner of the Greeks" to identify Jews and proselytes (J.VC. vii.51): "The Jews, it was believed, had forfeited their special status."59

55 56 57 58 59

Frend, "Persecutions," 147. Frend, "Persecutions," 147. Farmer, Maoaabees, 52-53. Farmer, Maoaabees, 54. Frend, "Persecutions," 146.

Discouragement of Martyrdom

19

F. Martyrdom by Suicide

One special category of "martyrdom"—or, at least, of death for the sake of the Law—was the religiously-motivated suicide. It was better, in the view of many, to commit suicide than to break the Law or to be taken captive; in such circumstances, also, it would be impossible to remain true to the Law. If the faithful Jews allowed themselves to be taken captive, the women might be given over to prostitution and their children would be in danger of growing up as heathen or idol-worshipers. Moreover, their own bodies might be d e s e c r a t e d , which was an intolerable thought for the pious. Thus we find the Books of Maccabees d e s c r i b ing the s e l f - s a c r i f i c e of Mattathias 1 son, Eleazar, while he was killing one of the enemy's war-elephants (1 Macc 6:44-46) and the suicide of Razis, an elder of Jerusalem, so that he would not be captured by the heathen (2 Macc 14:37-42). Josephus r e c o r d s the suicide of one anti-Roman rebel after he had killed his own family at the caves of Arbela (J.W. i.313; Ant. xiv.429). He also r e c o r d s that, at the capture of Gamala, even whole families committed suicide as the only option remaining (J.W. iv.78-79). Again, Hengel r e f e r s to Dio Cassius' report of the capture of the Temple at Jerusalem: on that occasion, many of the defenders committed suicide in the belief that they would gain "victory, salvation and blessedness" if they perished along with the Temple (66,6).60 Farmer believes, however, that the Jews' rejection of Titus' surrender terms in favor of "a suicidal effort to break through the Roman lines" is best understood as an indication that they believed that Yahweh was still with his people, even if he had abandoned the Temple.61 ¡ n a sense, then, this may not really have been a case of suicide: they expected that their God would intervene and deliver them from the Romans.

G. Discouragement of Martyrdom

Following the fall of Jerusalem to Titus, the Jewish religious leaders tried, in an effort to "discourage fanatical voluntary martyrdom which could damage the

60 Hengel, Zeloten, 269. 61 Farmer, Maoaabeee, 119.

20

Martyrdom and S u f f e r i n g

nation,"62 to define precisely the circumstances in which death was required. Opinions varied. Rabbi Akiba, for example, suggested that any of the commandments might be broken to save one's life, except the three elements of the Noachian code, which were binding even on the Gentiles: those forbidding idolworship, murder and adultery. Rabbi Ishmael was more lenient, arguing that even sacrifice to idols was permissible, provided that it was witnessed by not more than ten Jews. A synod at Lydda some time after A.D. 130 agreed with Rabbi Akiba's more conservative view (cf. Sanh. 74a). Rabbi Akiba himself is reported to have suffered a noble martyrdom. It was the hour for the recital of the Shemd when he was led out to execution. As his flesh was being raked with iron combs, he was reciting the Shemcf, and when his disciples urged him to stop, he said: "All my days I have been troubled by this verse, 'with all thy soul,' [which I interpret,] 'even if he takes thy soul.' I said: When shall I have the opportunity of fulfilling this? Now that I have the opportunity shall I not fulfill it?" (Be r akhoth 61b).

H. The Origin of the Concept of Martyrdom

It is not clear where the concept of martyrdom originated. Hengel refers to the martyrdoms which are recorded in Josephus' Jewish War and says that such examples of the disdain of death were unique in antiquity and would have seemed foolish to the Romans.63 Frend, however, argues that Josephus is wrong in claiming that Greek philosophers would be unwilling to die for their philosophies. He refers to Geffcken's argument that the idea of martyrdom is largely derived from Epictetus, and suggests that "the Stoics were also prepared to suffer and if necessary die for their beliefs in defiance of what they esteemed to be tyranny"; nevertheless, pagan martyrdom was more often than not for the sake of political causes, with no idea of "calling on the name of God" and "no idea of expiatory sacrifice and atonement nor even in general terms of bringing divine relief to the community as a whole."64

62 Frend, Martyrdom, 56. 63 Hengel, Zeloten, 266. 64 F r e n d , Martyrdom, 65-66; c f . J . Geffcken, M a r t y r i e n , " Hermee 45 (1910) 496.

"Die

christlichen

Doctrinal Development

21

I. Doctrinal Development

Many of the new ideas found in later Judaism may be attributed to the conflict with Hellenism.

One way of explaining the suffering of the righteous was to

appeal to the idea of a disciplinary action of Yahweh. This concept had already been used in connection with Israel's wrongdoing: God punished the nation to bring his people to repentance. In the case of the other nations, however, God allowed them to continue in their evil ways unpunished, but then they would be suddenly cut o f f . Thus the fact that the whole Jewish nation or individual Jews suffered was an expression of the grace of Yahweh: minor punishments were inflicted so that the ultimate punishment would not have to be imposed (2 Macc 6:12-17).65 AS time went on, however, there arose the belief that Yahweh disciplined not merely those who transgressed his commandments but also those who served him faithfully, to draw them still closer to himself, just as a father disciplines his child. This kind of discipline was designated as the "discipline of love."66 Thus, according to 4 Ezra 4:29-30, the reason for Israel's suffering at the hands of the godless is to purge her of evil; and according to 2 Baruch 13:3-10, suffering is f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f

sanctification.67

As time went on, a further variation on the concept of suffering and punishment became more prominent. This was the idea of a final judgment when rewards and punishments would be meted out. Except in Isa 26:19, there is no clear evidence before the Maccabean period of a belief in the resurrection of the dead. Hengel suggests that it was the death of the martyrs which led to a greater emphasis on this concept, as well as on judgment and on the destiny of individuals after death. This emphasis was motivated by the conviction that "if the God of Israel really was the omnipotent and just Lord of the world, his power could not be limited even by death."68 At first, the concept of resurrection and future judgment took the form of a belief that only the righteous would receive eternal life, while the unrighteous would be punished with eternal death. Later it was held that all would be raised, but to different fates, dependent on the character of their earthly lives (cf. Dan 12:2). Still later there developed the idea that the judgment takes place at death, 65 J. A. Sanders, Suffering as Divine Discipline in the Old Testament and Post-Biblioal Judaism (Colgate Rochester Divinity School Bulletin 28; Rochester: Colgate Rochester Divinity School, 1955) 107-108. 66 Sanders, Suffering, 116. 67 Sanders, Suffering, 107, 109. 68 Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1.196.

Martyrdom and Suffering

22

as in 4 Maccabees (which does not, however, mention the idea of bodily resurrection).69 Nevertheless, as Bousset notes, "[The] dogma that the sufferings of the earthly life were the punishments of God retained its deep roots in the Israelite popular consciousness."?!) In extra-canonical Jewish literature a further development of the idea of suffering may be found. This is the idea that suffering has an atoning value. At first, this atoning value was thought of as effective only for the one who suffered. According to 2 Macc 7:18-19, 32-36, the righteous suffer to purge their own sins, while the wicked will be punished in God's judgment.71 Later, in 4 Maccabees, there appears the view that the suffering and death of the righteous accomplish atonement for others or for the community as a whole. This certainly seems to be the case in 4 Macc 6:29; 17:22, as Frend points out.72 Hengel claims that this view is expressed in 4 Macc 1:11; 9:23 as well, but this does not seem to be justified.73 The former of these texts refers not to atonement by suffering or death, but to the purification of the land through the defeat of the tyrant as a result of the perseverance of the Maccabees. The latter text seems to refer to the example of righteousness to be set by the martyrs: if righteousness prevails among the people, then God may show mercy on the nation and deliver it from the oppressors. Frend also cites 4 Macc 18:4 as evidence for the belief that the nation achieves peace through the death of the innocent,74 but this text appears to be referring not to vicarious atonement but to the efforts of the Maccabees in turning the oppressors aside from their evil purposes. Surkau has claimed to find the idea of expiatory suffering in 2 Maccabees also. He refers particularly to 2 Macc 7:6.75 gut Williams has argued against this understanding.

First, he says, Surkau has assumed wrongly that because the

author of 2 Maccabees has quoted from Deuteronomy 32 he must have had the whole chapter in mind, or at least verses other than those he actually cites: only

69 Balla, "Problem des Leides," 257; cf. R. H. Charles (ed.). The Apocrypha and Peeudepigrapha of the Old Testament (2 vols.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1913) 2.662. 70 W. Bousset, Die Religion dee Judentums im epäthellenistischen Zeitalter (4th. revised ed., ed. H. Gr e s smani) ; Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 1966) 391. 71 Eduard Schweizer, Erniedrigung und Erhöhung bei Jesus und seinen Nachfolgern (2nd ed.; Zürich: Zwingli, 1962) 25. 72 Frend, Martyrdom, 57. 73 Hengel, Zeloten, 273; cf. Williams, Jesus' Death, 168. 74 Frend, Martyrdom, 57. 75 H.-W. Surkau, Märtyrien in jüdischer und frühchristlicher Zeit (FRLANT 54; Güttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1938) 59, cited by Williams, Jesus' Death, 81-82.

Doctrinal Development

23

v. 36b is cited, but Surkau assumes that vv. 35 and 43 are also in mind. Second, it is not at all clear that 2 Maccabees views martyrdom as an inducement for God to act to overcome his people's enemies: Deut 32:35-36 merely implies that "the plight of God's servants is a sign of the impending destruction of Israel's enemies," and even if martyrdom did induce God to act, that does not necessarily imply expiation.76

Third, in any case, even if the writer of 2 Maccabees did have

Deut 32:43 in mind, the Septuagint version of this text clearly has in mind purification of the land by the removal of the enemies of Israel, not by expiation.77 Lohse also claims to find the idea of vicarious expiation through suffering and death in 2 Maccabees, particularly in 7:38.78 Again Williams argues against this understanding of the text. First, although in the text the dying martyr Eleazar appeals to God himself for the wrath of the Almighty to cease, "the idea of God using an external instrument (ίν £μοι . . . ) to stay his own wrath is incongruous. More literally, êv is intended by the author to mark a fixed point: let the anger of the Almighty end at this point, i.e., with the death of me and my brothers."79 Second, the ones who died on this occasion were only a few of many; many other actions of the enemy are mentioned: these also demand vengeance. Here Yahweh is simply being begged to have mercy on his people and to avenge them on their enemies. 80 The Rabbinic literature also gives evidence of the belief that an individual's sufferings could benefit the whole nation. According to Exod. R. 21:7, Job, who is there described as an advisor to Pharaoh, was given up as a sacrifice on behalf of the people of God in order that they might be delivered from Egypt. Later in that same work, in 35:4, it is said that once the Tabernacle or Temple is no longer standing to be taken as a pledge, then God will take one of Israel's righteous men as a pledge on their behalf in order that he may pardon all their sins. Again, Sanhédrin 39a maintains thatEzekiel was afflicted by God to purge Israel of its evil.

Shabbath 33b records the opinion that when there is no righteous

person in Israel, then school-children may be seized—by death—for that generation. W. D. Davies says, concerning the Rabbinic literature as a whole, that the Rabbis "inculcated the acceptance of suffering because it was sent by God to purge away

76 Williame, Jeeue' Death, 82. 77 Williams, Jeeue' Death, 84. 78 Eduard Lohse, Märtyrer und Gotteekneaht; Untereuehungen zur urahristliohen Verkündigung vom Sühntod Jesu Christi (FRLANT, n.F. 46; Güttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1955) 67. 79 Williams, Jesus' Death, 88. 80 Williams, Jesus' Death, 88.

24

Martyrdom and Suffering

sin; suffering had atoning efficacy."81 it must be borne in mind, however, that there are dangers in using the later Rabbinic literature as evidence f o r Jewish beliefs in the pre-Christian centuries or even in the first century A.D.82 The idea of vicarious suffering is found only in the Jewish literature, before the Christian era, so that Frend says: "It seems as though expiatory suffering through the willing death of individuals belongs at this period [i.e. the first century B.C.] to the Semitic rather than the Greco-Roman world."83

J. Conclusion

The present writer would agree with Bousset when he describes the Jewish religion—at least in its developed form—as a religion of martyrdom. It was born of the martyrdom and suffering of the pious ones of the Maccabean time. At the close of our epoch stands the figure of the martyr Akiba who rejoices because only with his death by martyrdom does he truly f u l f i l l the word: "You shall love God with all your soul."84 The accuracy of this assessment can be confirmed by reference to the writings of Jewish authors of the period under consideration. Josephus, f o r example, refers to the reverence which his people have f o r the Scriptures, and says: It is an instinct with every Jew, from the day of his birth, to regard them as the decrees of God, to abide by them, and, if need be, cheerfully to die for them. Time and again ere now the sight has been witnessed of prisoners enduring death in every form in the theatres, rather than utter a single word against the laws and the allied documents. (Against Api on 1.42-43) Although there were d i f f e r i n g opinions concerning the detailed interpretation of the Law and its application in particular circumstances, there was fundamental agreement among the Jews on at least one point: that which God commands in the Scriptures must be obeyed implicitly, even at the cost of one's l i f e . This attitude, it is suggested, was one which was inherited by the Christian community from Judaism and lived out, in the face of severe persecution, whether by Gentiles or by non-Christian Jews.

81 W. D. Davies, Paul and Rabbinic Judaism; Some Rabbinic

Elements in

Pauline Theology (2nd. ed.; London: SPCK, 1955) 263. 82 J. Downing, "Jesus and Martyrdom," JTS n.s. 14 (1963) 279. 83 Frend, Martyrdom, 66. 84 Bousset, Religion des Judentums, 374.

Conclusion

25

We might summarize by saying that the struggle between Judaism and Hellenism was a struggle between the traditionalists and the innovators. tVe shall find a parallel situation in the relationship between the Christian Church and the Jewish community. In this case, however, the traditionalists (non-Christian Jews) took the offensive and instigated attacks on the innovators (the Christians). But in both cases the attacks were only rarely carried out by the Hellenizers or the traditional Jews directly: they usually relied on the secular power to take action. In the following chapter we shall examine the New Testament Apocalypse in some detail to see how this situation is reflected there.

CHAPTER 2 THE ENEMIES OF THE CHURCH IN THE APOCALYPSE

A . Introduction

In this chapter we come to the central part of our study of the Sitz im Leben of the Apocalypse, in which particular attention will be given to the question of the relationship of the Christian community to the Jewish and the Roman authorities. Most previous studies of this topic, it seems to the present writer, have taken external considerations too much into account and have paid insufficient attention to the internal e v i d e n c e , particularly the Old Testament background of many of the images used in the visions of this book. Most commentators on the Apocalypse assume that the book is written against the background of severe persecution of the Church at the hands of the Romans, irrespective of which Emperor was then in power. (Although Nero was the favorite during the 19th Century, most modern writers believe that the Apocalypse was written during the reign of Domitian, as indeed many Patristic writers held.) The present study is intended to show that, although the controversy with Rome can in no way be e f f a c e d from the book, it is not the author's main concern. The book is f a r more concerned with the controversy between Christianity and Judaism. Before we g o on to deal with the Book of Revelation in detail, it will be necessary to look b r i e f l y at some of the passages which have suggested the hypothesis which we want to examine. In an e a r l i e r study, 1 the present writer investigated the use of the Exodus motif in the Apocalypse, and the conclusion was reached that this motif constitutes the overall theological framework in which the Seer presents his message. Only a brief outline of that e v i d e n c e can be given here, of course. The Christian community is depicted as the counterpart of the Israelites

1 "The Exodus Motif in the Book of Revelation," Paper presented at New Testament Seminar, Fuller Theological Seminary, 5 March 1979.

28

The Enemies of the Church in Che Apocalypse

who were preserved from judgment, while the Egyptians themselves suffered fearful torments.

Jesus Christ is presented as the Passover Lamb.

But who or what in

Revelation is the counterpart of Egypt, on whom the judgments fell?

Who is the

new Pharaoh, the new oppressor of the people of God? The author himself provides his readers with a clue: there is one e x p l i c i t mention of the name " E g y p t , " and it is applied to "the great city . . . where their Lord was c r u c i f i e d " (11:8). This final phrase seems to leave no room f o r doubt that the author has in mind the city of Jerusalem. We thus have prima facie e v i d e n c e that the plagues of Revelation are to f a l l upon Jerusalem. Again, at whose hands are John's readers suffering (or in danger of suffering)? There is one indication in plain language: the Christians at Smyrna are the victims of slander by "those who say that they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan" (2:9). Again the implication is that the Church's enemies are not the Romans but the Jews—though perhaps unorthodox ones. These two hints that the Jews are the real enemies of the people of God demand further examination. Do these texts mean what they appear to mean at f i r s t sight, or tire they aberrations, with the rest of the book pointing in another direction?

B. The Structure of Revelation

Yet one more aspect of the book needs to be considered before we can deal with its individual episodes: what is the structure of the Book of Revelation? This is by no means easy to determine, and numerous suggestions have been offered. The problem may be approached from two d i f f e r e n t perspectives: on the one hand we may attempt to divide the book according to its content and conclude that d i f f e r e n t sections are concerned with d i f f e r e n t issues—this seems to be the older approach; on the other hand we may look at the book from a literary point of view and try to discover how the author has presented his message. Those who used the former approach not uncommonly divided the book at the end of chapter 11, it being assumed often that only in chapters 1-11 is the author concerned with the struggle between the Church and Israel, whereas in the latter part of the book the main concern is the Church's relationship to pagan Rome.2

2 Andre F e u i l l e t , The Apocalypse (Staten Island, New York: Alba House, 1965) 56, 58. John M. Court (.Myth and History -in the Book of Revela-

The Structure of Revelation

29

Feuillet refers in this connection to "these almost universally accepted generalities," but finds it extremely difficult to divide the book in greater detail.3 Hopkins elaborates on this twofold division, designating chapters 1-3 as Introduction, and chapters 4-11 as "HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE: God's visitation on Israel." He sees a climax attained in chapter 11 and a transition in chapter 12, then designates chapters 12-20 as "APOCALYPTIC VISION: God's impending judgment on 'Babylon' (=Rome)," and chapters 21-22 as "THE HEAVENLY JERUSALEM." He explains further: the burden of [chs. 4-11] is to recall the triumph of Christianity over Judaism (already accomplished) as the historical "springboard" from which to launch the assurance that Rome, too, will fail to stamp out the infant Church.4 Hopkins sees such a schema, with denunciations of Israel preceding denunciations of the Gentiles, as quite in line with the approach of the Hebrew prophets.5 He also presents a table of purported similarities between the two halves of the Apocalypse,6 but these do not seem at all convincing. Fiorenza rejects even such a general analysis of the book, on the grounds that "for the author of [the Apocalypse] Israel is identical with the Church, whereby he no longer knows of the distinction between Jewish-Christian and Pagan-Christian communities."? Such reasoning is fallacious, however: it is one thing to refuse to make a distinction between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians; it is quite another thing to refuse to distinguish between non-Christian Jews and non-Christian Gentiles. Sweet presents a far more cogent argument against dividing Revelation at the end of chapter lis the events of 12:12-13:18 constitute the "third woe" (cf. 11:14) which concludes the series of seven trumpet-judgments commenced in 8:2, and moreover "the references to 'three and a half' bind 11-13 together (ll2f., 9, 11, 126, 14, i38)."8

He

goes on to argue that

The Jewish themes of 4-11 are better explained in terms of the need to give Christians theological reassurance, in face of Jewish polemic, that Jesus is God's Messiah and that they are God's people, and to remind them that as

3 4 5 6 7 8

tion; London: S.P.C.K., 1979; pp. 11-12) reports that Hentenius, in a preface to a 1547 edition of Arethas' commentary on Revelation, proposed that the prophetic section of Revelation should be divided as f o l l o w s : c h s . 6-11, "eynagogae obrogatio"·, chs. 12-19, "exaidium gentilismiHentenius dated the Apocalypse during the reign of Nero. F e u i l l e t , Apocalypse, 56. M. Hopkins, "ihe Historical Perspective of Apocalypse 1-11," CBQ 27 (1965) 43. Hopkins, "Historical Perspective," 45. Hopkins, "Historical Perspective," 46. Elisabeth SchUssler Fiorenza, "Ihe Eschatology and Composition of the Apocalypse," CBQ 30 (1968) 565 n. 41. John Sweet, Revelation (Westminster Pelican Commentaries; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1979) 46.

30

Hie Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse God's people they have a testimony to maintain before the world.9

A f a r more promising approach to determining the structure of the Apocalypse is the more recent literary one, although this has not prevented disagreements between the various scholars who use this method. Many investigations have been made in an attempt to analyze the book in light of the various series of "sevens" which appear, i.e. seven letters to the churches, seven seals, seven trumpets, seven bowls. Since the number seven obviously has such an appeal f o r the author, it has often been suggested that the book may be divided into seven such series of seven. A major d i f f i c u l t y with such an approach, however, arises because the author himself gives no such numerical clues f o r so much of his material, and this has left abundant room f o r speculation concerning where the other divisions should be made.

John Bowman presents in tabular form some of the proposals which

have been made and then puts forward a suggested structure of his own. 10 Leroy Spinks has subsequently taken Bowman's proposal and modified it in accordance with suggestions made by L o e n e r t z . i l

Although John does not number all the

individual episodes in his book, both Bowman and Spinks argue that he has distinguished them sufficiently clearly by using the words καΓ εΐόον or some equivalent expression such as και έ δ ε ι ξ ε ν μοι (22:l).l 2 From Loenertz, Spinks derives the suggestion that the various series of visions " i n t e r l o c k , " in that the "setting" of each succeeding A c t of the drama is given in the preceding Act.13 Spinks thus concludes that the Apocalypse consists of seven Acts, each consisting of seven Scenes, but with some major Interludes. 14 He also points out some correspondences between certain scenes in d i f f e r e n t Acts, which suggest that some form of chiastic structure is present, although Spinks does not himself present his material in this form.15 The present writer has set out Spinks' proposed structure in a

9 Sweet, Revelation, 46-47. 10 John Wick Bowman, "Revelation, Book o f , " IDB 4.64-65. 11 Leroy C. Spinks, "A C r i t i c a l Examination of J. W. Bowman's Proposed S t r u c t u r e of the Revelation," EvQ 50 (1978) 211-222. C f . R. J. Loenertz, The Apocalypse of St. John (London: Sheed and Ward, 1947) xiii-xix. 12 Bowman, "Revelation." Spinks, " C r i t i c a l Examination," 214. Cf. H. W. Günther, Der Nah- und Enderwavtungshorizont in der Apocalypse des heiligen Johannes (Forschung der Bibel 41; n . p . : Echter, c. 1960) 44. 13 Spinks, " C r i t i c a l Examination," 215. 14 Spinks, " C r i t i c a l Examination," 216-217. James L. Blevins ("The Genre of Revelation," RevExp 77 [1980] 405-406) suggests that Revelation takes over the genre of Greek tragedy and in that framework presents "prophetic oracles, announcements of judgment, and proclamations of salvation drawn largely from the Old Testament." 15 Spinks, " C r i t i c a l Examination," 218-219.

31

ACT b The Church on Earth (1:9-3:22)

modified form in order to demonstrate more clearly the chiastic structure of the Book (see Appendix). We believe that this proposed structure, which has been arrived at solely because of literary considerations, will be seen to fit very well with our conclusions concerning the content of the Apocalypse.

C. ACT b The Church on Earth (1:9-3:22)

The first reference to any persecution because of the Gospel is found in the author's description of his own situation (1:9). Although there have sometimes been suggestions that his claim to be on the island of Patmos "on account of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus" could indicate merely that he had gone there to pursue his missionary endeavours, 16 the prevailing view is that these words show that the author was in exile on Patmos as a punishment f o r his witness to

Jesus.

17 There is evidence from other sources that the Roman authorities

did from time to time despatch undesirables to one or other of the Mediterranean islands to stop them from fomenting unrest among the people, and John!8 ¡s presumed to have fallen victim to this policy. Far more explicit, however, are the references in the letters to the churches in Revelation 2-3 dealing with the situation of the addressees. In both 2:9 and 3:9 there are mentions of των λεγόντων ' Iouóaíous efvai lavj-roùs καί ουκ είσίν. In both verses the falsity of their claim to be Jews is reinforced by the allegation that they are instead συναγωγή τοΰ σατανά, and 3:9 states in addition that they are lying (ψεύδονται). In 2:9 the church in Smyrna is said to have endured slander by these "false Jews," and in 3:9 it is said that these "pseudo-Jews" at Philadelphia will come and bow down at the feet of the church there. Who are these "pseudo-Jews" and what do these statements imply about the author's attitude to Jews?

Whom does he class as true Jews?

Is this an attack

16 F e u i l l e t , Apoealypee, 89. 17 See Adela Yarbro C o l l i n s , "Dating the Apocalypse of John," Biblical Research 26 ( 1 9 8 1 ) 39. I was unable to gain access to Yarbro C o l l i n s ' s more comprehensive treatment o f t h i s question in " P e r s e cution and Vengeance in the Book of R e v e l a t i o n , " now published in a volume o f proceedings o f the International Colloquium on Apocalypticism at Uppsala in August 1979, e d i t e d by D. Hellholm. 18 Our use of the name "John" simply follows the author's own s e l f designation. He do not think i t necessary to discuss the i d e n t i t y o f the author h e r e .

32

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

on all Jews?

We may eliminate immediately the suggestion of George Wesley

Buchanan that this attack is aimed at the Paulinists who permit the non-observance of the Law. 19 There are no grounds f o r driving such a wedge between the Seer and Paul. Nor can we accept Philip Carrington's contention that these enemies are Gnostics, s p e c i f i c a l l y the Ophites. This argument is based on assumptions which do not arise from the Apocalypse itself, such as the conviction that the Fourth Gospel and the Johannine Epistles are concerned with Gnosticism, and the tradition concerning the antipathy between John and the Gnostic, Cerinthus; but Carrington also notes that the Second Century Gnostics claimed an apostolic tradition—i.e. they would have claimed to be both apostolic and Jewish, as in Revelation ( c f . 2:2, 9; 3:9).20 John Koenig suggests that those to whom John was writing were themselves Jews, and that those whom he describes as "pseudo-Jews" are "all Jews who reject Jesus' messiahship"; he continues, however: but it is equally possible that he has in mind only particular groups of Jews, and perhaps even those Christian Jews whom he regards as heretics. One finds no developed polemic in Revelation against Jews or Judaisn as such.21 Although Koenig's f i n a l point may be endorsed heartily—John is not anti-Jewish in any racist sense—his initial suggestion is unconvincing. There is no evidence that the churches of Smyrna and Philadelphia were composed entirely of Jewish Christians, and Rev 7:9-10 suggests strongly that the churches to which John sent his Apocalypse may have already included Gentiles, perhaps in considerable numbers. There is every reason to suppose that John thought of a l l Christians, whether of Jewish or of Gentile o r i g i n , as comprising the true Israel, so that they could all be called genuine Jews. A non-Jew in John's sense, then, would be a person, whether Jewish or Gentile, who does not acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah. Fiorenza argues that these so-called "Jews" are outside the churches: they "do not seem to represent a Christian group, but the Jewish citizenship of these cities."22 Thus those to whom the accusation applies that they claim falsely to be Jews would be those who adhere to Judaism while denying that Jesus is the promised Messiah.

19 George Wesley Buchanan, in conversation with the w r i t e r . 20 P h i l i p C a r r i n g t o n , The Meaning of the Revelation (London: SPCK, 1931) 395-396. 21 John Koenig, Jewe and Christiane in Dialogue; Hew Testament Foundations (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1979) 171 n. 9. 22 Elisabeth SchUssler Fiorenza, "Apocalyptic and Gnosis in the Book of Revelation," JBL 92 (1973) 572. C f . Ernst Lohmeyer, Die Offenbarung des Johannes (HNT 16; 3d ed.; Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 1970) 24: "The Christian is the true Jew . . . and the Jew as representative of the h i s t o r i c a l people bears the name u n j u s t l y . . . . "

ACT I: The Church on Earth (1:9-3:22)

33

These people do not merely lie when they claim to be Jews. They are described as " a synagogue of Satan." This is probably to be linked with their active opposition to the Christian community, who are the "true Jews." Yarbro Collins sees here "opposition between the synagoge

tou satana

and the synagoge

of God (of

Israel or of the Poor) and the congregation of Belial."23 Farrer, commenting on 2:9, writes that the Jews here are Judaeans in every ordinary sense; only they are no true spiritual members of Messiah's tribe ( c f . v.5, vii.5). For they slander his people, and this is serious. By repudiating the Christians they deny them the legal protection extended to the synagogue, and expose them to Roman persecution as an unlawful society or " r e l i g i o n " ; even if their " s l a n d e r " does not go to the length of denunciation to the Roman authority. Indeed they are a synagogue of Satan, for "Satan" means "adversary" or "legal a c c u s e r " ; a point which becomes c l e a r e r for S t John's Greek audience when he translates the name in the next verse. "The Slanderer (Diabolos, Devil) will throw some of you into prison," through the action, no doubt, of his Jewish disciples.24 Other commentators argue, however, that the opposition to the Church was still more active and more d i r e c t . Sweet, for example, r e f e r s to "their alliance with Rome against Christians, as against Christ under Pilate."25 Both Lund and Mounce suggest that this took the form of the Smyrnaean Jews actually informing on the Christians to the Roman authorities.26 The influence of a sizeable Jewish community in Smyrna, a city having such close links to Rome, would have been considerable.27

771e Martyrdom

of Polycarp

gives ample testimony to the opposition to

the church by the Jews of Smyrna a few decades later, although xix.1 also makes it c l e a r that the persecution had only seldom proceeded to the point of murder.28 Moreover, Rev 2:10 mentions only imprisonment as an imminent c o n c r e t e danger facing the Christians in Smyrna.29

23 Adela Yarbro Collins, The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation (HDR 9; Missoula: Scholars Press, for Harvard Theological Review, 1976) 159. 24 Austin Marsden Farrer, The Revelation of St. John the Divine. Commentary on the Englieh Text (New York/London: Oxford University Press, 1964) 72; cf. Albert A. Bell, Jr., "The Date of John's Apocalypse. The Evidence of Some Roman Historians Reconsidered," NTS 25 (1978) 101. 25 Sweet, Revelation, 85. 26 Nils Wilhelm Lund, Studies in the Book of Revelation (n.p.: Covenant Press, 1955) 80; Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation (NICNT 17; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977) 93. 27 Mounce, Revelation, 93; George Eldon Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972) 42. 28 On the other hand, Josephine Massyngberde Ford (Revelation; Introduction, Translation and Commentary [AB 38; Garden City: Doubleday, 1975] 395) suggests that it was only after A.D. 70 that Jews settled in Smyrna in any great numbers. 29 The exhortation γίνου mo-ròs 5χρι θανάτου may be merely rhetorical, or may envisage martyrdom as a less imminent danger.

34

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

Raymond Brown thinks that it is significant that "the Apocalypse . . . , despite its massive concern about the beast of Rome and emperor worship, takes time out to attack the synagogues in Asia Minor and P h i l a d e l p h i a . " 3 0 grown finds here evidence for the theory that the Johannine community was located in Ephesus, but a much more far-reaching conclusion concerns the nature of the problems facing John's addressees. If, in the opening chapters of the book, there are two mentions by name of "pseudo-Jews" as enemies of the Church and no explicit references to the Imperial authorities, might we not with some justification conclude that the more serious or more immediate danger came from the former rather than from the latter? One might argue, against this position, that it is not until later that the author raises the issue of Roman persecution, but if the letters of chapters 2 and 3 serve as an introduction to the book as a whole it is strange that no clear reference appears here to what is claimed to be the book's primary concern. It is true that there are phrases and statements here which can be interpreted as references to persecution by the Roman authorities, but the latter are not mentioned explicitly and nothing requires

us to assume a Roman persecution.

It is in the letter to Philadelphia that we first encounter a phrase which will occur many more times in the Apocalypse as a designation of the enemies of God: [οι] κατοικοΰν[τε$] έτι xñs γηε (3slü). There is general agreement that these are the enemies of God and his people, but can we be any more specific than this? Some scholars see this as a rather general designation, referring to "the nonChristian world,"31 o r to those who are "at home in the present world order, men of earthbound vision, trusting in earthly security, unable to look beyond the things that are seen and temporal."32 Mounce interprets this phrase in a variety of different (though not contradictory) ways: "the enemies of the church,"33 "mankind in its hostility to God,"34 n m a n ¡ n his wickedness,"35 «the pagan world,"36 "the entire body of unregenerated mankind."37 Ladd, similarly, proposes several different meanings: "the pagan world ,"38 "the pagan world in its hostility to God," 39

30 Raymond E. Brown, The Community of the Beloved Disciple (New York: P a u l i s t , 1979) 66-67. 31 George R. Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation (New Century Bible; Rev. e d . ; London: Oliphants, 1978) 101. 32 George Bradford Caird, The Revelation of St. John the Divine (HNTC; New York/Evanston: Harper & Row, 1966) 88. 33 Mounce, Revelation, 120. 34 Mounce, Revelation, 159. 35 Mounce, Revelation, 189, n . 44. 36 Mounce, Revelation, 227. 37 Mounce, Revelation, 260. 38 Ladd, Revelation, 62. 39 Ladd, Revelation, 128.

ACT I : The Church on Earth (1:9-3:22)

35

unregenerate men,"40 ti u n g 0 dly men." 41 Must we be satisfied with such a general understanding of the phrase, or can we be more specific? Charles takes a step in the right direction, we believe, when he looks to the Old Testament and the intertestamental literature for a clue to the meaning of this phrase. Commenting on Revelation 11:10, he argues that ο* κατοικοΰντες I m xr¡s rñs corresponds to the Hebrew phrase\ίνπ

1

nei 1 , which he sees as having two meanings. Sometimes,

he contends, it means '"the inhabitants of the land1, i.e. Palestine" (cf. Hosea 4:1; Joel 1:2, 14; 2:1; Jer 6:12; 10:18, etc.) while in others it refers to "the inhabitants of the earth" (cf. Isa 24:6; 26:21, etc.; 1 Enoch 37:2, 5; 40:6, 7; 48;5, etc.). Only in Rev 11:10, Charles argues, does the author have in mind the former meaning (those who rejoice at the death of the "two witnesses" are Palestinian Jews); elsewhere in Revelation the term ο'ι κατοικοϋντε$ liu-nis rns refers to the inhabitants of the earth as a whole.42 Most commentators either ignore or reject Charles' suggestion concerning Rev 11:10,43 but to the present writer it seems that Charles may not have gone far enough. Even the two examples he cites from the Old Testament where \ i x n 'at/' allegedly indicates "the inhabitants of the whole earth" are not as ambiguous as Charles assumes: a good case may be made out for the view that here too χ IN refers to the land of Palestine.44 ¡ f t then, ox κατοκouvres έιτΐ xñs Yns are not simply those who dwell on the earth but specifically the inhabitants of Palestine, there is a clear connection with the statement in the preceding verse concerning the "pseudo-Jews." It is true that John describes the impending trial as one which will come "upon the whole world"

(ITIITÍS

oî»couuévns

όλης), but this is not necessarily in conflict with the idea that the purpose of the trial is to test a particular sub-group of the earth's inhabitants. Could it not even be that οι KaxoiKoûvxes έπί xris Yns here already has a somewhat extended meaning, referring not merely to Jews resident in Palestine but to Jews wherever they might be scattered? Was not one of the reasons for the rejection of Jesus as the Messiah by the Jewish leaders his failure to conform to their expectation

40 Ladd, Revelation, 184. 41 Ladd, Revelation, 222. 42 R. H. Charles, A Critical and Exegetioal Commentary on the Revelation of St. John (ICC; 2 vols.; Edinburgh: Clark, 1920) 1.289. See also Cornells van der Waal, Openbaring van Je SUB Chrietue. Inleiding en vertaling (Groningen: De Vuurbaak, 1971) 184, 191, 208. 43 Mounce (Revelation, 227, η. 33) is one of the few who even mentions Charles's suggestion, and then only to dismiss i t . 44 R. Β. Y. Scott (IS 5.298-300) argues that Isa 24:1-12 deals with the desolation of the land of Judáh: it is improbable that the inhabitants of the whole earth would be charged with transgression of "the laws, . . . the statutes and . . . the everlasting covenant"; the city in 24:7-12 is Jerusalem.

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

36

of a political leader who would f r e e them and their land from the Romans, so that they themselves again be in control of their own territory?

Were not the

Jewish leaders, at least those in Palestine, very much "earth-bound"? Whoever these "earth-dwellers" might be, we can note briefly at this point something about their activities and fate as described in the Apocalypse.

Rev

6:10 makes it clear that they have been involved in the persecution and slaughter of those who have preached the word of God and who have remained faithful in their witness, and it is against these persecutors in particular that the martyrs cry out to God f o r vengeance.

Then again, it is the "earth-dwellers" who are

named s p e c i f i c a l l y as the victims of the three "woes" which are associated with the f i f t h , sixth and seventh trumpets (8:13). The same term is also used of those who have in some way suffered through the ministry of the "two witnesses" and who r e j o i c e and exchange g i f t s at the death of the witnesses (Rev 11:10). It is this same group of people also who g i v e allegiance to the beast from the sea, and they are further characterized as those whose names were "not written before the foundation of the world in the book of l i f e of the lamb that was slain" (13:18). Finally, in chapter 17 the "earth-dwellers" are associated with the harlot, "Babylon," and with the scarlet beast on which she r i d e s : they have become drunk with the wine of the harlot's fornication (v 2) and they are overawed at the beast and its apparent permanence (v 8). Further information about these enemies of God will come to light as we deal in greater detail with the s p e c i f i c passages in which they figure.

D. ACT II: The Preservation of the Church (4:1-8:6)

In this A c t we f i n d , as the seven-sealed s c r o l l is opened, various clues to the nature of the enemies of the Church (6:1-8:1). tioned in 5:1?

What is this s c r o l l , f i r s t men-

Ladd lists several interpretations which have been suggested.

Some interpreters think of it as a w i l l , which thus symbolizes "the promise of the Kingdom of God which God's people are to inherit," but Ladd points out that, against this interpretation, "the seals as well as the trumpets do not have to do with the Christians' inheritance but with the plagues of judgment which God will pour out on a rebellious c i v i l i z a t i o n . " Another view mentioned by Ladd is that the S c r o l l is the Lamb's book of l i f e , mentioned in 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12, 15; 21,27; but the problem with this view is that the breaking of the seals reveals not the

ACT II: The Preservation of the Church (4:1-8:6)

37

names of the people of God but something quite different. A third view mentioned by Ladd is that the scroll is the Old Testament, whose true meaning is revealed in Jesus Christ.45 Mounce argues that the scroll is, more particularly, a "full account of what God in his sovereign will has determined as the destiny of the world", 4 ® while Ladd's suggestion is still more specific: The easiest identification of John's scroll is that it contains the prophecy of the end events, including both the salvation of God's people and the judgment of the wicked. It is God's redemptive plan for the denouement of human history, the overthrow of evil and the gathering of a redeemed people to enjoy the blessings of God's rule. 4 7 Sweet puts forward a suggestion which is attractive, since it takes into account that the background of this image in Revelation is Ezek 2:10, in which the prophet is given a scroll written both on the front and on the back and containing "words of lamentation and mourning." The context in Ezekiel suggests that the scroll contains the Torah, and Sweet suggests that the "heavenly synagogue," like the earthly one, may contain a Torah scroll. The rejoicing after the Lamb takes the scroll suggests that the scroll in Revelation also contains the prophets' interpretation of the law. The fulfillment, the revelation of God's righteousness, involves not only salvation but wrath, and it is the manifestations of this wrath which are seen as the seals are opened. 4 8 Josephine Ford has a further, a unique, suggestion concerning the nature of this seven-sealed scroll: it could perhaps be a get m'qussar,

a "folded deed," which rabbinic sources say was used as a document

of divorce (cf. Baba Bathra 160b; Gittin 81b).49 Ford finds such an understanding to be in accord with her interpretation of other passages in Revelation, and of the book as a whole. The present writer is not convinced of Ford's theory, but there is another Old Testament passage which may lie behind the image here in Revelation: in Isa 29:11-12 a sealed book is mentioned in the middle of a passage dealing partly with the judgment on, and partly with the deliverance of, Jerusalem. Although the identity of the seven-sealed book cannot be determined exactly, understanding the image against the background of the passage in Isaiah fits in well with the observations which we shall be making in our discussion of later portions of the book of Revelation.

45 Ladd, Revelation, 80-81. 46 Mounce, Revelation, 142. 47 Ladd, Revelation, 81. 48 Sweet, Revelation, 123.

49 Ford, Revelation, 93, 165

38

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse 1. The First Seal

We now turn to examine the content of the seal-visions.

In each of the first

four visions John sees a horse of a d i f f e r e n t c o l o r . In the first vision the horse is white, and its r i d e r holds a bow and r e c e i v e s a crown; he goes out "conquering and to conquer" (6:2). There is considerable dispute concerning the identity of this rider. Leivestad f o l l o w s Lohmeyer's opinion that since the r i d e r does not figure in "the traditional apocalyptic scheme (war, famine, death . . .)" this must symbolize "something more particular than the other riders, probably the Parthians";50 ¡t ¡ s generally r e c o g n i z e d that the Parthians were outstanding archers.

Rissi, however, sees here a parallel with "the mythical king in the Gog-

prophecy of Ezekiel 39" where the r i d e r carries a bow ( c f . ν 3). He concludes from this that the first horseman is the Antichrist.51 some other interpreters take a quite contrary view, and link this description of the r i d e r on the white horse with the passage later in Revelation (19:11-16), where Christ is depicted as riding on a white horse; these scholars therefore conclude that the horseman in the f i r s t of the seal-visions also represents Christ.

In Revelation 6, however,

Christ does not r i d e out in judgment at the end of the age but goes out to " c o n quer" through the Gospel. Stanislas Giet, for example, writes, "the preaching of the apostles commenced on the day a f t e r Pentecost, in the latter years of Tiberius' r e i g n : that is the departure of the white horseman."52 such an interpretation of course assumes that symbols have a more or less uniform significance, irrespective of their immediate context. A warning against such an assumption is given by Cambier, who points out that the desert, f o r example, can represent both the period of Israel's loyalty (as in Deuteronomy and Joshua) and the period of testing (as in Hosea); it is the failure to r e c o g n i z e this f l e x i b i l i t y of images which leads interpreters to i d e n t i f y these two r i d e r s on white horses.53 others have pointed out that the bow is nowhere else used as a symbol of Christ's victory. There is also a problem in understanding Christ as both the one who opens the

50 Ragnar Leivestad, Christ the Conqueror; Ideas of Conflict and Victory in the Hew Testament (London: SPCK, 1954) 213. 51 Matthias R i s s i , Time and History. A Study on the Revelation (Richmond: John Knox, 1966) 73. Günther (Nah- und Enderuartungshorizont, 174 η. 19) argues, however, that i t would be out of character for the Seer to introduce the Antichrist at the beginning of a sequence of v i s i o n s , since elsewhere in the Apocalypse this f i g u r e appears only immediately before the End. 52 S t a n i s l a s G i e t , L'Apocalypse et l'histoire: Etude historique sur l'Apocalypse Johannique ( P a r i s : University of P a r i s , 1957) 168-169. 53 J. Cambier, "Lee Images de l'Ancien Testament dans l'Apocalypse de Saint Jean," NRT 77 (1955) 120-121.

ACT II: The Preservation of the Church (4:1-8:6)

39

seal and the one who is revealed by the opening of the seal.54 p o r these reasons we find ourselves unable to accept the suggestion that the first r i d e r is Christ. Carrington, in f a c t , r e j e c t s the attempt to link this r i d e r with any s p e c i f i c person, and argues that this figure stands, rather, f o r the spirit of ambition and conquest, not specifically the Roman or the Parthian, as some commentators have supposed, but "the lust f o r gain in the spirit of Cain" wherever it may be found. . . . The name blazoned on his forehead is Cyrus or Alexander, Caesar or Napoleon, but the spirit is always recognisably the same. . . . It is, of course, the lust f o r power, the arrogant pride of the self-made man as opposed to the God-made man.55 Cornells van der Waal, on the other hand, thinks there is an allusion here to Deut 32:23, 42, where God is depicted as an archer punishing his enemies—even those of the nation of Israel who r e j e c t him—by f i r i n g arrows at them.56 Thus we are unable to identify this f i r s t horseman with any certainty; at this stage we will have to wait until we can consider the four horseman-visions as a whole.

2. The Second Seal

At the opening of the second seal, a r i d e r on a bright red horse appears; he is armed with a sword and is allowed "to take peace from the earth, so that men should slay one another" (6:3-4). Some commentators have seen here a reference to the unrest which occurred in many parts of the Roman Empire during the reign of Claudius in the middle years of the first century A.D. and followed by the Jewish War in 66, but Ford argues against this that the image of the sword suggests "a catastrophe which is more than human"; she sees here a similarity to the swords wielded by the Angel of the Lord in Num 22:23 (LXX) and by Yahweh against Jerusalem in Ezek 21:9-10.57 φ 0 the present writer, however, it seems that there is insufficient information to link this image unambiguously with any s p e c i f i c events of the first century.

3. The Third Seal

The opening of the third seal introduces a r i d e r on a black horse; he carries a balance, and when he appears a v o i c e is heard proclaiming, "A quart of wheat for

54 55 56 57

Sweet, Revelation, 137. Carrington, Meaning, 124. van der Waal, Openbaring, 189. Ford, Revelation, 106; Giet, Apoaalypee et Histoire,

69.

40

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

a denarius, and three quarts of barley f o r a denarius; but do not harm oil and wine!" (6:5-6). It has sometimes been suggested that we have here a r e f e r e n c e to one or more of the famines and f o o d shortages which occurred in various parts of the Empire during the f i f t h and sixth decades of the f i r s t century.58 The command to spare the oil and the wine could, on this theory, be either an indication that the poor are to s u f f e r more than the rich (who w i l l still have their luxuries) or a r e f e r e n c e to Titus' command that even during the siege of Jerusalem o l i v e trees and grape vines were to be spared.59 The context provides no grounds for seeing here a r e f e r e n c e to the sacraments. There could be a parallel here to Domitian's o r d e r in A.D. 92 prohibiting the planting of further vineyards in Italy and ordering the destruction of half the vineyards in other parts of the Empire; but what, in that case, would be the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the command to spare the oii?60 Both Mounce and Josephine Ford r e f e r here to Ezek 4:16, where the prophet declares that the inhabitants of Jerusalem are going to have to weigh out their f o o d and drink because of the scarcity of these necessities during the siege;61 if this is the text in the Seer's mind, then again we have the suggestion that this vision of calamity is directed towards Jerusalem.

4. The Fourth Seal

When the fourth seal is opened, John sees a pale horse, ridden by Death and f o l l o w e d by Hades (6:7-8a). The text goes on to say that they "were given power over a fourth of the earth, to kill with sword and with famine and with pestilence and by wild beasts of the earth" (6:8b), but it is not immediately clear whether the subject here is "Death and Hades," as in the f i r s t half of the verse, or whether it is intended as a summary of the activity of all four horsemen. Again some commentators have endeavoured to link this vision with particular events of the f i r s t century A.D., such as "the disastrous storms of 67, 68 and 69" and "the volcanic island of Thera,"62

but such

interpretations seem to be without

justification. Ford is on surer ground when she r e f e r s to epidemics mentioned by

58 Ford, Revelation, 107; Giet, Apocalypse et Histoire, 59 Ford, Revelation, 107. 60 S w e e t , Revelation, 140. Cf. Mounce, Revelation,

Morris, The Revelation

of St. John; An Introduction

169. 156;

Leon Lamb

and Commentary

(Tyndale New Testament Commentary; London: Tyndale, 1969) 106. 61 Mounce, Revelation, 155; Ford, Revelation, 107. 62 E. Renan, L'Antéchrist, η.p., cited by Court, Myth and History,

13.

ACT I I : The Preservation of the Church (4:1-8:6)

41

Josephus (Ant. 15.243, 299-300),63 but these had occurred some decades before the start of the Christian era. Carrington argues that the second, third and fourth riders symbolize the disasters which result from the human arrogance symbolized by the first rider,64 but these interpretations are not convincing, as Carrington has overlooked the Old Testament background of these images. We have already mentioned a few of the Old Testament passages which some commentators have thought to underlie these individual seal-visions, but the passages which mention a similar event or even an identical concatenation of images are still more important. One passage sometimes mentioned in this connection is Zech 6:1-8 where there is mention of horses of four different colors—red, black, white, and dappled—although in this case they are chariot-horses rather than horses to be ridden. The problem with this identification is that nothing said about the activities of these chariots and horses corresponds to the activities of the horsemen in Revelation 6. There are many other Old Testament passages whose content parallels that of these first four seal-visions. One of the most striking of these passages is Ezekiel 5-7, as may be seen from the following table: Ezekiel

Revelation

"pestilence . . . famine . . . sword" (5:12)

"sword . . . famine . . . pestilence" (6:8)

"arrows" (5:16)

"bow" (6:2)

"famine . . . wild beasts . . . pestilence . . . sword" (5:17)

"sword . . . famine . . . pestilence . . . wild beasts" (6:8)

"sword . . . pestilence . . . famine . . . pestilence . . . sword . . . famine" (6:11-12)

"sword . . . famine . . . pestilence" (6:8)

"sword . . . pestilence . . . famine . . . sword . . . famine . . . pestilence" (7:15)

"sword . . . famine . . . pestilence" (6:8)

Table 1. Comparison of Revelation 6 and Ezekiel 5-7 The context of these threats in Ezekiel is significant: they are uttered against Jerusalem (5:5), the house of Israel (6:11), the "inhabitant of the land" (\ΠΝΠ AUI 63 Ford, Revelation, 109. 64 Carrington, Meaning, 125; c f . p. 38 above.

42

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

7:7), because of their rebellion against and rejection of Yahweh's statutes and ordinances (5:6-7), their abominations (5:9; 6:11; 7:3, 4, 8, 9), their defilement of Yahweh's sanctuary (5:11), their "wanton heart which has departed from [Yahweh]" (6:9), injustice, pride and violence (7:10-11), and their use of silver and gold to make "abominable images" and "detestable things" (7:19-20). Again, in Ezek 14:21 Jerusalem is threatened with punishment by sword, famine, evil beasts and plague, the same "four sore acts of judgment" as mentioned in Rev 6:8. But the Old Testament parallels to these first four seals are not confined to Ezekiel; Jer 6:22-26 is addressed to "the daughter of [Yahweh's] people" (v 26) and threatens an invasion of horsemen (v 23) armed with bows (v 23) and sword (v 25). Jer 14:11-12; 15:1-2 further threaten "this people" (i.e. Judah) with consumption by sword, famine, pestilence and beasts of the earth, and Jer 16:4-5 warns that the people of Israel will "perish by the sword and by famine" and proclaims that Yahweh has "taken away . . . peace" from the nation (cf. Rev 6:4). Again, in Jer 18:21 the prophet calls on Yahweh to punish "the men of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem" (v 11) by giving them and/or their children up to the famine, sword and pestilence because of their rejection of his message and because of their plots against the prophet's l i f e (v 20). Sword, famine and pestilence are also named as the means of punishing both the people who remain in Jerusalem (Jer 21:8-10; 38:2) and the remnant of Judah in Egypt (Jer 44:11-14). Hosea 2:16-23 serves as a useful contrast; here Yahweh proclaims a coming day of deliverance f o r his people in which there will no longer be any "bow . . . sword, and war" in the land (v 18), and in which "the earth shall answer the grain, the wine and the o i l " (v 22). Sweet points out yet another passage which may have been in the mind of the Seer: Hab 3:5-9 depicts Yahweh as riding on horses and a "chariot of victory" (v 8) and armed with bow and arrows (vv 9, 11) and accompanied by pestilence and plague (v 5).65 Finally, it is not only the image of the bow in the first seal-vision which is connected with Deuteronomy 32; following on the mention of "arrows" in 32:23 there is a reference to "hunger," "pestilence," and "beasts" in verse 24 and "sword" in verse 25. We cannot help noticing that all these passages, except Hab 3:5-9, are concerned with warnings from Yahweh to his covenant people: these terrible judgments will coinè on them because of apostasy. We therefore find ourselves obliged to agree with van der Waal when he sees here an example of "covenant judgment" ("verbondsgericht") upon Israel in accordance with Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy

65 Sweet, Revelation,

139 n.

ACT II: the Preservation of the Church (4:1-8:6)

43

28.66 Thus, whatever the s p e c i f i c events of the f i r s t century A.D. (if any) to which these visions r e f e r , we believe that they signify, f o r the Seer, judgments upon Israel. This is not to rule out the possibility of a wider application, although that a p p l i c a t i o n may be r a t h e r nonspecific—perhaps simply the lesson that even God's covenant people are not exempt from responsibility and punishment, so how much more p r e c a r i o u s is the situation of others

(cf. 1 Pet 4:17).

5. The Fifth Seal In the case of the f i f t h seal (6:9-11), the only clue to the identity of the o p p r e s s o r s against whom the martyrs cry f o r vengeance is the description of them as "earth-dwellers"; the context here provides no clues to e n a b l e us to identify them any more precisely than in our g e n e r a l discussion of this phrase.67 Nevertheless Carrington sees here an indication that the Seer is thinking of a judgment which is to f a l l on Jerusalem, since there is in the martyrs' cry the f i r s t c l e a r e c h o of the words of Jesus; f o r he says that there shall come upon you all the Righteous Blood which is being shed upon the Land from the Blood of Righteous Abel to the Blood of Z a c h a r i a s son of Barachias, whom ye murdered between the Naos and the Altar: verily, I say unto you all these shall come upon this g e n e r a t i o n (Matt xxiii. 35). Not only is the symbol of blood revenge the same; but it points out what l a t e r study will confirm; it is the land of Israel, and in p a r t i c u l a r the Temple at Jerusalem which is to s u f f e r . And we must remember that there is a hint of the same idea in the Four Seals; f o r the Four Judgments i n E z e k i e l , to which they c o r r e s p o n d , were all to come upon Jerusalem. 68 Yet we must not jump to the conclusion that Carrington sees these martyrs as martyrs f o r Jesus Christ. He believes that the Apocalypse p r o c e e d s in c h r o n o logical sequence a n d , since the birth of the Messiah is not described until chapter 12, these martyrs are unlikely to be Christians. C a r r i n g t o n f i n d s f u r t h e r support f o r this contention in the f a c t that the martyrs are not said to have been killed f o r t h e i r witness to Jesus, but r a t h e r because of "the witness which they bore," which he d e s c r i b e s as "an awkward p h r a s e which purposely avoids making them Christian."69

we

are not convinced of C a r r i n g t o n ' s basic assumption that

there is a c h r o n o l o g i c a l progression in the Apocalypse: there are many other ways of organizing a literary production.

66 67 68 69

van der Waal, Openbaring, 143. See pp. 34-6, above. Carrington, Meaning, 131-132. Carrington, Meaning, 132.

44

The Enemies o f the Church in the Apocalypse 6. The Sixth Seal

The opening of the sixth seal (6:12-17) introduces several spectacular physical phenomena which strike terror into people of every social rank, so that they seek to hide from God and the Lamb. Giet believes that this too is a reference to events of the first century. There were various earthquakes at this period, three being referred to by Tacitus (Ann. XII, 43, 58; XIV, 27)—in A.D. 51, 53 and 60— and others during the seventh decade being mentioned by Seneca {Nat. Quaest. VI, 1; VII, 28). The darkening of the sun is thought to be a reference to the solar eclipses which occurred between A.D. 49 and 52, or perhaps to phenomena associated with the eruption of Vesuvius in A.D. 79. Giet also suggests that the r e f e r ence to islands being moved from their places (6:14) is connected with "the sudden formation of new islands," e.g. Thera and Terasia (cf. Seneca, Nat. Quaest. VI, 2, 6).70 j j e r e too, however, we believe that it is important to consider the Old Testament background of these images. Language like this is found in such passages as Isa 2:10, 19, 21; Hosea 10:8. Van der Waal refers also to Jer 4:29 in this connection;?! this verse refers to horsemen and archers (cf. the first four seals, and verse 2 in particular), and this would have special significance if we could interpret the desire of the people to hide as a reaction to the whole complex of events connected with the six seals, rather than being a response to the events of the sixth seal alone. It should be noted here too, of course, that Jer 4:29 is concerned primarily with the inhabitants of the cities of Judah, as the context makes clear (cf. 4:11, 16,27, 31; 5:1). Carrington finds further evidence here that this vision concerns Israel in particular in that the Seer refers to "the kings of the earth" (οί Βασίλειε xñs rñs, ν 15), which could alternatively be translated: "the rulers of the land [i.e. Palestine]."

Furthermore,

it is only the rulers of Israel who would fear the Great Glory on his Throne and the Lamb who symbolises the Warrior Messiah in Maccabean Apocalypse, a Warrior Messiah of Zechariah's type, who will execute vengeance on the "wicked shepherds," defend the poor and fatherless, and see that such as are in need and necessity have right (Ps. lxxxii.3).72 The background of Revelation 6 is not confined to the Old Testament, however. It has been pointed out many times that the series of seal visions has its parallels in the Synoptic Gospels. In the opinion of Louis Vos, Rev 6:4 is connected with Matt 10:34, although he thinks that whereas Matthew seems to use "sword" in a figurative sense (referring to " s t r i f e " or "division") Revelation refers to actual

70 G i e t , Apocalypse et Histoire, 171. 71 van der Waal, Openbaving, 191. 72 Carrington, Meaning, 137-138.

ACT I I : The Preservation of the Church ( 4 : 1 - 8 : 6 )

45

warfare.73 But this resemblance is somewhat superficial. A more probable connection pointed out by Vos is that between Rev 6:16 and Luke 23:30. The wording is derived from Hosea 10:8, but both Revelation and Luke have the same order of verbs ( " f a l l . . . cover"), which d i f f e r s from that found in Hosea. In both passages the reason f o r the people's calling on the rocks and mountains is that a particular "day" is (or "days" are) coming. Vos's claim that whereas Luke is talking about the destruction of Jerusalem, Revelation is dealing with apocalyptic events, is not justified, however: it is by no means obvious that Rev 6:15-17 does r e f e r t o apocalyptic events.74

Matt 24:6, 7, 9*, 29

Mark 13:7-9«, 24-25

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Wars. International strife. Famines. Earthquakes. Persecutions. Eclipses of the sun and moon; falling of the stars; shaking of the powers of heaven.

Wars. International strife. Earthquakes. Famines. Persecutions. (As in Matt)

Luke 21:9-12«, 25-26

Rev 6:2-17, 7:1

1. 2. 3. 4.

Seal 1. Wars. " 2. International strife. " 3. Famine. 11 4. Pestilence. (Death and Hades) " 5. Persecutions. " 6. (6:12-7:3) Earthquakes, eclipse of the sun, ensanguining of the moon . . .

Wars. International strife. Earthquakes. Famines.

5. Pestilence. 6. Persecutions.

7. Signs in the sun, moon, and stars . . .

Table 2. Comparison of Revelation 6 and the Synoptic Apocalypse (after R. H. Charles)

The resemblance between the whole series of seal-visions and the Synoptic Apocalypse is even more striking. As Charles expresses it: "the more closely we study the Seals in connection with Mark xiii., Matt xxiv., Luke xxi., the more

73 Louis A. Vos, The Synoptic Traditions 1965) 113-116. 74 Vos, Synoptic Traditions, 119-120.

in the Apocalypse (Kämpen: Kok,

46

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

strongly we shall be convinced that our author finds his chief and controlling authority in the eschatological scheme there set forth."75 Table 2 shows Charles' suggested relationship between Revelation 6 and the three versions of the Synoptic Apocalypse.76 It is generally agreed that this section of John's Apocalypse is dependent on the tradition which underlies the Synoptic Apocalypse, but there are some notable d i f f e r e n c e s . Attention is often drawn to John's omission of the references to the Fall of Jerusalem and the instructions to f l e e from the city, and it is usually contended that he does so because the city has already fallen by the time the Book of Revelation was written.77 Nevertheless, from what we have already seen, we may conclude that John is, rather, r e f e r r i n g to the Fall of Jerusalem by other means—namely, by drawing f o r his elaboration of the Synoptic Apocalyptic schema on Old Testament passages which r e f e r unambiguously to Jerusalem's doom. Be as ley-Murray comments on John's displacement of the earthquakes from the middle to the end of the sequence of events and suggests that this is "not merely f o r the purpose of combining it with the cosmic signs, but still more to preserve it as one of the signs which immediately herald the conclusion of this age."78

7. The Sealing of the 144,000

Although Revelation 7, with its description of the sealing of the servants of God before the execution of the trumpet-plagues, does not g i v e any specific indication of the identity of the enemies of the Church, its message would be particularly significant if the c o n f l i c t with Judaism formed a significant part of the background against which the Apocalypse was written. The important point here is the relationship between Rev 7:4-8 and Rev 7:9-14. In the former passage John hears the number of those sealed: twelve thousand out of each of the twelve tribes of Israel (although the list of tribes is unusual—especially the omission of the tribe of Dan and the inclusion of both Joseph and Manasseh—and has itself given rise to various proposals f o r emendation). In the latter passage John sees an innumerable multitude of people from every tribe, people and tongue and is told that they are the ones who have been preserved through "the great tribula-

75 CSiarles, Commentary, 1.158. 76 Charles, Commentary, 1.158. 77 Beasley-Murray,

Revelation,

130; Vos, Synoptic

Gttnther, Nah- und Endevwartungehorizont, 78 Beasley-Murray. Revelation, 130.

197.

Traditions,

186-187;

ACT I I : The Preservation of the Church (4:1-8:6) tion."

47

Do we have here descriptions of two distinct groups of people?

Some

have argued that the first group represents Jews or Jewish Christians, while the second represents Gentile followers of Christ.79 This proposal is unsatisfactory for, as Beasley-Murray points out, this would imply that Jews alone receive the seal of God, and that Gentile Christians have to get along without it. In view of the significance of the seal— the preservation of the people of God from the dangers of the last times f o r their participation in the kingdom of God—that idea is hardly feasible.80 Beasley-Murray also expresses his agreement with R. H. Charles, who says that since the "great tribulation" was to a f f e c t the whole world (Rev 3:10) and the purpose of the sealing was to protect the people of God, "it follows inevitably that the sealing must be coextensive with the peril, and must therefore embrace the entire Christian community, alike Jewish and Gentile."81 vve conclude, therefore, that both sections of this chapter concern the same group of people. This group plainly consists of Christians, as the description of them as having "washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb" (7:14) shows.82 it seems clear that John is thinking of the Christian community, irrespective of racial or national origins, as the true "Israel of God"; he hears the description of a particular group as Israel, and then he looks and sees that it consists of people from all nations and from all racial groups. As Sweet says: "John heard the counting of the sealed (the theological truth); he saw a countless multitude (the outward reality)."83 This would be a great comfort and encouragement to a church which is suffering at the hands of unbelieving Jews who claim that they, and they alone, are Israel, the people of God. We should not overlook the Old Testament background of the imagery in this chapter either. Many commentators have pointed out that in Ezek 9:4-6 there is a description of Yahweh's command to a man to go through the city of Jerusalem, marking on the forehead those who grieve over all the abominations which are committed there; only those so marked are to be spared in the slaughter which is

79 Carrington (.Meaning, 141), because of his conviction that the Apocalypse follows a chronological progression and that in this chapter we have not yet arrived at the birth of the Messiah, argues that Revelation 7:9-15 is a later interpolation; in Revelation 14:1, on the other hand, the 144,000 include both Jews and Gentiles. 80 Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 139-140. 81 Cf. Charles, Commentary, 1.200. 82 Ford's argument that this language is not s p e c i f i c a l l y Christian must be rejected; c f . Revelation, 124. Cf. Christopher Rowland, The

Open Heaven; A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early

(New York: Crossroads, 1982) 516, n. 71. 83 Ford, Revelation, 122; Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 148; Mounce, Revelation, 167.

Revelation,

Christianity

143;

Sweet,

48

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

to commence at the sanctuary itself and extend throughout the whole c i t y . 8 4 Our consideration of Revelation 6 has already suggested strongly that the Seer has the coming Fall of Jerusalem in mind, and it is therefore quite possible that the seal· ing r e f e r r e d to in Rev 7:3-8 also has in mind a calamity which is to come on that city, or, more accurately, perhaps (since the judgment is depicted as the blowing of the four winds against earth, sea and trees, c f . 7:1, 3), a worldwide judgment in which Jerusalem is especially a f f l i c t e d .

8. The Seventh Seal

The opening of the seventh seal is f o l l o w e d immediately by a silence lasting half an hour (8:1), then by an episode which culminates in the casting down on the earth of f i r e from the golden altar b e f o r e the throne of God (8:2-5).

Only

then does the series of seven trumpet-blasts commence.

E. ACT III: Judgment upon the Earth (8:7-11:19)

The judgments associated with the seven trumpet-blasts draw much of their imagery from the Old Testament account of the plagues on Egypt, and, since Rev 11:8 applies the name "Egypt" to Jerusalem, we may suppose that these trumpetjudgments are to f a l l on the city of Jerusalem. An examination of the details of this series of visions provides further evidence in support of our thesis.

1. The First Trumpet

We have already noted that the sealing of the faithful in Revelation 7 is based on Ezekiel 9, which concerns a judgment to f a l l upon Jerusalem. The opening vision of Revelation 8 (vv 2-5) f o l l o w s on from this by utilizing an image which appears in Ezek 10:1-2, where Yahweh orders a man to take burning coals from

84 Sweet, Revelation,

150.

ACT I I I : Judgment upon the Earth (8:7-11:19)

49

between the cherubim and to scatter them over the city of Jerusalem.85 van der Waal finds further evidence here that Jerusalem is the city on which the judgment falls, in that the angel is said to throw his censer of fire "upon the earth" Uts την γην); here too, he argues, γη is to be translated as "land," i.e. the land of Israel.86 in favor of van der Waal's suggestion, we may note that others have pointed out that γη does not necessarily refer to the whole universe, and that the Seer frequently uses the word in a more limited sense; in Kev 13:13, f o r example, Giet argues, the phrase "the whole earth" (όλη η γη) may well refer solely to the region of Asia Minor from which the Beast arises.87 Nevertheless, there does not seem to be any compelling reason to take such a narrow view of the meaning of the word in this context: even though judgment may commence at Jerusalem, this does not mean that it is confined to the land of Palestine. Moreover, this vision seems to constitute an introduction and may well refer to the whole universe, particular aspects of which are then dealt with specifically in the individual trumpet-visions. There is a stronger case to be made for interpreting the word γη in this narrower sense in the first of the trumpet-visions, in which hail, fire and blood fall on the earth, one third of which is burnt up. Van der Waal believes that the background of this image is Amos 7:4, which records the prophet's vision of a fire burning up the land of Israel.88 Even here, however, it is difficult to understand this as referring to Palestine alone, since subsequent visions in this series deal with disasters affecting t|ie sea (8:8-9), the rivers and springs (8:10-11), and the heavenly bodies (8:12). This suggests that γη in the first trumpet-vision refers not to the land of Palestine but to the dry land, the surface of the earth, in contrast to other parts of the physical universe.

But the author may have

alluded to the passage in Amos to direct the attention of his readers to a judgment which would be particularly concerned with Palestine and its inhabitants. Josephine Ford suggests that the constant reference in the first four trumpetvisions to judgments affecting only one third of the earth, one third of the sea, etc., has in mind Ezek 5:1-5, in which the prophet is told to shave his head and beard and divide the hair into three parts; one part is to be burned in the midst of Jerusalem, one third is to be struck with the sword round about the city, and

85 Both Isbon T. Beckwith {The Apocalypse of John; Studies in Introduction with a Critical and Exegetiaal Commentary, n.p.: Macmillan, 1919; Reprint; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979; 553) and Sweet (Revelation, 160) suggest this as the background for John's vision. 86 van der Waal, Openbaring, 195. 87 Giet, Apocalypse et Histoire, 153. 88 van der Waal, Openbaring, 195.

50

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

the remaining third is to be scattered to the wind.89 The major problem with this suggestion is that the manner of judgment on Jerusalem in Ezekiel 5 (pestilence, sword, and scattering to the winds) has far more in common with the content of the seal-visions of Revelation 6 than with the trumpet-visions of Revelation 8-9.

2. The Second Trumpet In the second trumpet-vision the Seer is shown what looks like a burning mountain plunging into the sea, and one third of the marine life dies and one third of the ships are destroyed (8:8-9). This has some times been seen as a reference to the eruption of Vesuvius in A.D. 79, and this may indeed be the case, but again we believe that it is important to consider the Old Testament background of the image. Sweet sees here a parallel between the fall of the burning mountain and Amos

(the passage which van der Waal saw as underlying the first vision of

this series) but this does not seem likely: the only element common to both passages is the fire, and there are many other Old Testament passages which could have supplied this image. Sweet's suggestion of Jer 51:25 as the source of the image is far more likely: 9 1 here Babylon is depicted as a mountain, fallen to earth and burnt. Since the name "Babylon" is applied in Revelation 17-18 to a major enemy of God and his people, it seems likely that the Seer is already beginning to use "Babylon imagery" in his picture of the divine judgments.

3. The Third Trumpet At the sounding of the third trumpet, a great blazing star named "Wormwood" falls from heaven "on a third of the rivers and on the fountains of water." The result is that "a third of the waters became wormwood, and many men died because of the water, because it was made bitter" (8:10-11). It has been pointed out that this is, in effect, a reversal of the miracle at Marah during the wilderness wanderings, when bitter and undrinkable water was rendered fit to drink (Exod 15:25).92 Beckwith argues that the "wormwood" is introduced here merely as a common

89 90 91 92

Ford, Revelation, 132. Sweet, Revelation, 163. Sweet, Revelation, 163. Mounce, Revelation, 187.

ACT III: Judgment upon the Earth (8:7-11:19)

51

symbol of divine judgment,93 but we must not overlook some important Old Testament passages where this symbol is used. In J e r 9:15, for example, Yahweh says that he will feed "this people" (i.e. Judah) with wormwood and give them poisonous water to drink because they have forsaken him and engaged in idolatrous practices (cf. ν 14). 9 4 Then, according to J e r 23:15, the same fate is in store for the false prophets, whose specific sins are adultery and encouragement of evildoers (v 14), claiming that no harm will befall the inhabitants of Jerusalem (vv 16-17), and failure to warn the people to turn from their evil ways (v 22). Again, John's use of images drawn from prophetic denunciations of Jerusalem and her inhabitants suggests that he is concerned primarily with the fate of that city.

4. The Fourth Trumpet When the fourth trumpet sounds, the sun, moon and stars are affected so that their light is reduced by one third (8:12). This seems to be a variation on Isa 49:10—what was to be a blessing for the returning exiles now becomes a curse instead.

Sweet refers here to Amos 8:9, where Yahweh announces that he will

"make the sun go down at noon, and darken the earth in broad daylight,'"95 where the context is one of judgment on Israel for its injustice and religious formalism. Ford believes that a theophany is involved here and, referring to Hab 3:11, suggests that the darkening of the heavenly bodies results from "the brightness of the theophany."96 There is nothing in the context of the passage in Revelation to suggest a theophany, however. Ford's further suggestion, that we have here a reversal of Yahweh's favor towards Joshua (Josh 10:12-14) is more probable,97 especially as the darkness was a significant factor in the ability of Israel to defeat her enemies under Joshua's leadership: perhaps the Apocalypse intends to indicate that the situation will now be reversed, and that Israel is now to be overcome by her enemies. Ford's other suggestion, that this is a reversal of the favor shown to Hezekiah (2 Kgs 20:8-11),98 seems less likely.

93 94 95 96 97 98

Beckwith, Apocalypse, 557. Ford, Revelation, 139. Sweet, Revelation, 161. Ford, Revelation, 139. Ford, Revelation, 139. Ford, Revelation, 139.

52

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

5. The Eagle with the Three Woes Between the first four trumpet-judgments and the last three there is another interlude, in which the author hears an "eagle" (so RSV) proclaiming three further "woes" which are to come upon the "earth-dwellers." These three woes are clearly to be identified with the fifth, sixth and seventh trumpet-judgments themselves, as is evident from 9:12 and 11:14. Who are the "earth-dwellers" here? We have already suggested that in 8:5 γη refers to the whole earth, whereas in 8:7 the same word may have the more limited significance of "dry land." What does it mean here? It is at least possible that it has an even more limited meaning here and refers to the inhabitants of "the land" (i.e. Palestine), as we postulated in our consideration of Rev 3:10, but it will be necessary to examine the content of these final three trumpet-judgments before we can come to any firm conclusion. Before we leave the consideration of this interlude it is worth investigating whether the mention of the "eagle" is significant. Caird suggests that this may be a reference to Exod 19:4, to which John makes an even clearer reference in 12:14.99 ¡f this is in the author's mind, it is plainly intended as a contrast rather than as a parallel: in the Old Testament passage and in Rev 12:14 the eagle's wings symbolize sustenance and protection, whereas here the eagle introduces a prophecy of doom. Caird further suggests, however, that i e T ó s is to be interpreted here not as "eagle" but as "vulture," and thus as a sign of impending doom, as in Hosea 8:1.100 we should note that in this Old Testament passage the hovering of the vulture "over the house of Yahweh" is mentioned in the same breath as a command to blow a trumpet, and is a sign of impending judgment because the people have broken the covenant and transgressed the Law. Although we must not overlook the fact that, as Beasley-Murray points out, in Hosea it is the trumpet which warns about the eagle, rather than vice versa as in Revelation, 101 nevertheless it seems probable that Hosea 8:1 provides the background for the Seer's vision. John may also have intended a reference to the Roman "eagles," the device on their standards, and may, therefore, have wished to point to the Roman occupation of Jerusalem (cf. Matt 24:28; Luke 17:37). 99 Caird, Revelation,

117.

100 Caird, Revelation, 117. Luke 17:37 seems to use ic-rós with the meaning of " v u l t u r e , " and this meaning i s a l s o found in A r i s t o t l e ,

Hist. An. 9, 32 and Pliny, Hist. Nat. 10, 3 ( c f . W. Bauer, W. F. Arndt and F. W. Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the Sew Testament and. Other Early Christian Literature [2nd. ed., revised and augmented by F. W. Gingrich and Frederick University of Chicago P r e s s , 1979], 19).

101 Beasley-Murray, Revelation,

159.

Danker;

Chicago:

ACT III: Judgment upon the Earth (8:7-11:19)

53

6. The Fifth Trumpet The sounding of the fifth trumpet introduces a long vision which commences with the fall of a star from heaven to earth. He unlocks the shaft of the abyss, releasing a cloud of smoke which darkens the sun and the air, and from which comes a swarm of locusts with stings like scorpions; these attack not vegetation but only people, namely those who do not have the seal of God, and they torture them for five months (9:1-6). The locusts look like war-horses, yet their faces appear human and they have hair like that of women; they are commanded by the angel of the abyss, his Greek name being "Apollyon" (9:7-11). The fall of the star to the earth is reminiscent of the lament for the Day Star in Isa 14:12-21, but a more important passage is Joel 1-2, which refers explicitly to a plague of locusts. Giet sees the five-month duration of the torment as an allusion to the length of Gessius Florus 1 reign of terror over Palestine, and thinks that it is quite possible that Florus 1 soldiers wore breastplates (cf. Rev 9:9d). He also notes that some of Florus 1 auxiliaries (particularly the Syrians, Greeks and Samaritans) had long hair, as may be seen on the Arch of Titus (cf. Rev 9:8a). Giet also claims that some of the Roman soldiers received crowns of gold among their other rewards (cf. Rev 9:7b).102 it j s this assumed reference to Florus 1 cavalry which leads Giet to argue that whereas Joel likens the locusts to horses, the Seer compares the horses to locusts.103

W hen

we look at the text of Revelation, however,

we find that the author commences by referring to the locusts and only a f t e r wards compares them to horses. Nevertheless there is a significant difference from Joel's description in that there it was the vegetation which the locusts attacked, whereas here they attack only

humans.

104

T^US

perhaps Giet is correct

and John has taken the presence of Gessius Florus 1 cavalry in Judea as a fulfillment of Joel's prophecy of horse-like locusts invading Palestine. There may be a further allusion here to Jeremiah's denunciation of Babylon. Jer 51:25 has already been alluded to in Rev 8:8, and it seems probable that John's picture of locusts like horses (or vice versa) has in mind Jer 51:27, which threatens that "horses like bristling locusts" will be brought up against Babylon. Furthermore, according to J e r 51:14, Babylon is to be filled with "men, as many as locusts, and they shall raise the shout of victory over [her]." Again, it seems as though John is already preparing the way for his more detailed description of the fate of "Babylon" in chapters 17-18. Ford follows Giet's suggestion concerning the signifi102 Giet, Apocalypse et Histoire, 34. 103 Giet, Apocalypse et Histoire, 20.

104 Mounce, Revelation, 194.

54

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

cance of the " f i v e months" and, in addition, considers this to be "consonant with the eagle symbolism (suggesting the Roman army) and with the image of locusts as invading hordes."105 Carrington considers but rejects the suggestion that this episode refers to a Parthian invasion on the grounds that "We have not yet got to the future; we are still in a stage before the call of the prophet." He interprets the passage in completely ahistorical terms, arguing that it presents a picture of demonic activity. 106 It has also been suggested that the Greek name given to the leader of this locust-plague, Apollyon, is a reference to the claims of Nero and Domitian to be an incarnation of Apollo.107 But no matter how many points of contact there may be between this passage and events affecting Palestine during the first century, we can hardly restrict the application of this vision to the land of Palestine and its inhabitants. Those affected by the sting of the locust-scorpions are specifically designated as "those of mankind who have not the seal of God upon their foreheads," which can hardly be confined to Palestinian Jews. But even if this designation cannot be confined to Palestinian Jews, the reminiscences of Joel's prophecy might lead John's readers to think first of all of judgment affecting their Jewish persecutors.

7. The Sixth Trumpet After a brief interlude (Rev 9:12), which serves as a link between the first and second "woes" (the fifth and sixth trumpet-blasts and the events associated with them), the sixth trumpet sounds, whereupon the four angels at the river Euphrates are released from their bonds and one-third of mankind is killed by the plagues of fire, smoke and sulfur which issue from the mouths of an army of two hundred million horses. These horses have power to injure humans not only with their mouths but also with their tails, which are like serpents, with heads. A possible clue to the understanding of this vision is found in the mention of the river Euphrates. This is often understood in terms of its significance as the Eastern border of the Roman Empire—Rome stood in fear of an invasion from that quarter by the Parthians. Thus this is thought by many commentators to be a reference to the Seer's concern with Rome as the enemy of the Church. So Adela Yarbro Collins, f o r example, argues that this mention of the Euphrates "would call to mind the expectation that Nero would return from Parthia with an army. The

105 Ford, Revelation, 149. 106 Carrington, Meaning, 161-162. 107 Caird, Revelation, 120; Sweet, Revelation,

170.

ACT III: Judgment upon the Earth (8:7-11:19)

55

sixth trumpet thus reveals proleptically the appearance of Nero as Antichrist, and so functions as Threat (for the elect) in a veiled manner." 108 g u t the Euphrates was also the Northern frontier of Israel, and Caird therefore links this detail of the vision also with prophecies concerning the invasion of Israel by a foe from the North (e.g., Isa 14:31; Jer 1:14-15; 13:20: 47:2; Ezek 38:6, 15).109 Beckwith points out that the prophets also sometimes refer specifically to the river Euphrates to signify Assyria and Babylon, since that was the area from which punishment would come (cf. Isa 7:20; 8:7; Jer 46:10),HO so Carrington may well be justified in arguing that "by now the Euphrates has become a mere symbol for the quarter from which judgment has come on Jerusalem."m Caird considers that the description of the "horses" as able to wound both with their mouths and with their tails (9:19) may have some connection with the Parthians, since their bowmen were renowned for their skill in shooting arrows both ahead of and behind them, but he continues: "but John is not here concerned with the possibility of a literal Parthian invasion—he has already covered that under the symbol of the r i d e r on the white horse. This is an army straight from the jaws of hell."112 There seems to be no reason to assume, however, that John cannot r e f e r more than once to the same event, yet Beckwith makes a pertinent observation that if this were intended as a reference to the Parthian invasion then the emphasis would be on the horsemen rather than on the horses—it is only the reference to the Euphrates which has any connection with the fear of a Parthian invasion at all.H3 Giet sees here a reference to the invasion of Palestine by Cestius with his four contingents of troops, some of whom came from the region of the Euphrates.114

But

,f

o n i y p a r t 0f

Cestius' army, and not the whole

of it, came from the Euphrates region the connection with John's sixth trumpetvision is indeed tenuous. In short, it is extremely difficult to determine with what concrete historical events (if any) the author may have associated this vision, and it is also difficult to be sure who are the victims of this judgment There is some disagreement among commentators concerning the extent of the account of the sixth trumpet-vision. Not until 11:14 is there an explicit statement that "the second woe has passed." Accordingly, some commentators have

108 109 110 111 112 113 114

Collins, Combat Myth, 218. Caird, Revelation, 122; GUnther, Nah- und Endemxivtungehorizont, Beckwith, Apocalypse, 566. Carrington, Meaning, 165. Caird, Revelation, 122. Beckwith, Apocalypse, 565. Giet, Apocalypse et Histoire, 84; cf. Ford, Revelation, 154.

189.

56

The Enemies of the Church in Che Apocalypse

concluded that Rev 10:1-11:13 is all part of t h i s same vision.H5 Beckwith argues against this view because "the aim and outcome of God 's dealings with Jerusalem in l l l " 1 3 . . . make it impossible to class these with the "woes' sent upon the world at large as d e s c r i b e d in 813. vVe cannot be wrong in making the second woe end with 921.»116

h a v e already noticed, however, that it is at least

possible that these latter trumpet-visions are especially concerned with judgments which a f f e c t the Jewish people, and if this is the case then there is no major objection to seeing Rev 10:1-11:13 as included in the sixth trumpet-vision. Nevertheless, since the angel r e f e r r e d to in 10:1-7 looks ahead to the seventh trumpetvision (cf. vv 5-6), it is more likely that 10:1-11:13 is an interlude (as already indicated in our outline of the book—see Appendix), that the main purpose of 11:14 is to introduce the third "woe" (seventh trumpet-vision), and that the second "woe" c o n c l u d e s in 9:21. In any case, our u n d e r s t a n d i n g of this section is not a f f e c t e d significantly by the question of its relationship to the individual trumpetvisions.

8. The Mighty Angel and His Message Revelation 10 serves as an introduction to the vision of 11:1-13 which, to anticipate our conclusions somewhat, and despite arguments to the contrary, deals with the d e s e c r a t i o n of the Temple and the fall of Jerusalem.

We believe that the

nature of this introduction r e i n f o r c e s this conclusion. First of all, Sweet points out that the d e s c r i p t i o n of the a p p e a r a n c e of the "mighty angel" (v. 1) is reminiscent of various aspects of Yahweh's dealings with his people in former times. The r e f e r e n c e to the cloud reminds us of events at Sinai (Exod 19:16), and the rainbow r e c a l l s the promise made following the Noachic Flood (Gen 9:12-16). The d e s c r i p t i o n of the angel's legs as "like pillars of f i r e " r e c a l l s the pillar of fire by which Israel was guided in the wilderness (Exod 13:21),117 and the cloud may perhaps also r e f e r to the cloud which guided the people at that time. Austin F a r r e r sees the d e s c r i p t i o n of the angel's c a l l as like a lion's roar (v 3) as a reminiscence of Amos 1:2, 34-38: "the influence of Amos's text on St. John cannot be doubted; it a s s o c i a t e s the voice of the lion with the sound of the truiu115 So, f o r example, Jan Lambrecht, "A S t r u c t u r a t i o n of R e v e l a t i o n 4 , 1 - 2 2 , 5 , " L'Apocalypse jokannique et l'Apocalyptique dans le Nouveau Testament ( e d . J . Lambrecht; BETL 53; Gembloux: Duculot/Leuven: Leuven U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1980) 93. 116 Beckwith, Apocalypse, 607. 117 Sweet, Revelation, 177; Mounce, Revelation, 170.

ACT III: Judgment upon the Earth (8:7-11:19)

57

pet, and with God's revelation of his secret purpose to his servants the prophets (cf. verse 7 in the passage before us)."118 since a major feature of Amos' message is his proclamation of doom for Israel, this description of the angel's appearance prepares us f o r the possibility that his message—even before we hear it—concerns Israel. His actual utterance does nothing to dispel this idea. The description of his action in raising his right hand to heaven and swearing "by him who lives for ever and ever . . . that there should be no more delay" is clearly based on Dan 12:6-7, in which a man clothed in linen raises his hand and swears in similar terms, specifying that the visions are to find their fulfillment "when the shattering of the power of the holy people comes to an end."H9 This underlies our text far more clearly than the passage suggested by Sweet, namely Deut 32:40, where Yahweh himself swears to take vengeance on his adversaries and to deliver his own people.120 y a n d e r vvaal thinks that this declaration that there is to be no more delay has in mind Yahweh's word through Ezekiel that the prophecy of judgment and exile for the nation is not for some far distant time but is to be fulfilled shortly.121 If this was indeed in the Seer's mind, then it is consonant with the many other allusions we have already discovered to Old Testament announcements of judgment on Israel, many of them having been spoken by Ezekiel.

9. The Little Scroll

Another speaker, unidentified, but whose voice is heard from heaven, now demands the Seer's attention and orders him to go and take an open scroll from the hand of the angel. This the Seer does and then, following the angel's instructions, eats it and finds that, though it is sweet to the taste, it makes the stomach bitter (1U:8-11). What is the significance of this?

Again our thoughts turn to

Ezekiel to find the Old Testament background of this vision. In Ezek 2:8-3:3 the prophet is instructed to take and eat a scroll written on both front and back with "words of lamentation and mourning and woe" and then deliver his message to Israel. The prophet does as he is bidden and then, like John after him, finds that it tasted like honey, although there is nothing said in the Old Testament passage about it being bitter to the stomach. The context in Ezekiel shows that the message which the prophet was to proclaim was one of impending judgment

118 119 120 121

Farrer, Revelation, 124. Cf. Beas ley-Murray, Revelation, 170. Sweet, Revelation, 178. van der Waal, Openbaring, 200.

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

58

on the rebellious house of Israel, and yet the people would not hear (Ezek 3:7). A similar idea is found in the c a l l of Jeremiah also (1:10, 18-19), and Carrington comments, "The prophesying against peoples and kings . . . r e f e r s to opposition and prejudice on the part of their [i.e. Ezekiel's and Jeremiah's] own countrymen, the Jews." 1 2 2 The precise nature of the wording on the "little scroll" is uncertain. Beckwith r e j e c t s the idea that this " l i t t l e s c r o l l " is included within the sevensealed s c r o l l of chapters 5-7 as a kind of "book within a book." He argues as follows: While the contents of the seventh trumpet-visions are . . . introduced in a way to show connection with the great r o l l , there is no intimation of a relation to the l i t t l e r o l l ; this r o l l is not mentioned afterwards. The revelations of the later parts of the book are introduced in the same way as those of the e a r l i e r parts; and there is nothing to indicate that they are thought of as a giving forth on the Prophet's part of revelations imparted to him by eating the r o l l . In fact the figure of eating the r o l l is itself not appropriate to such a representation. It is to be noted that in Ezek's case the r o l l does not contain the messages which he is to d e l i v e r . These are to be given to him in the future, c f . 310, 17ff., 27. . . . w e i n f e r then that the contents of the little s c r o l l given to the Apocalyptist is the command of God urging him on with intensified f o r c e to his prophetic work in f a c e of the momentous issues now to follow.123 Josephine Ford has a very d i f f e r e n t view of the scroll and its contents, believing that the key to understanding both s c r o l l s (Ezek 2:8-3:3 and Rev 10:8-11) may be found in Num 5:12-31 as interpreted in the rabbinic tractate Sotah,

dealing with

the procedure to be f o l l o w e d by a man who suspected his w i f e of adultery. The aggrieved husband was to d e l i v e r to his w i f e , in the presence of two witnesses, a written command to cease her meetings with the (named) suspected partner in adultery. If the woman was then suspected of disobeying this command, the e v i dence of two witnesses was again required in o r d e r to prove the charge. Evidence of continued meetings even after the command to desist did not in itself prove adultery, however; this could be established only through the ordeal of the bitter water.124 ^ ¡ g ¡ s

an

ingenious suggestion, but it is not really convincing. The

woman accused of adultery was not required to eat a s c r o l l on which her misdemeanors were detailed, but was required to drink water with which the list of curses had been washed o f f a scroll. Again, why should it be the prophet who eats the s c r o l l and suffers bitterness in his stomach?

Furthermore, nothing is

said in Revelation 11 concerning the content of the message of the "two witnesses" whose ministry is r e f e r r e d to there—there is no mention of a charge of adultery. Collins suggests that the content of the s c r o l l is not found in chapter 11, but

122 Carrington, Meaning, 175. 123 Beckwith, Apocalypse, 578-579. 124 Ford, Revelation, 164.

ACT III: Judgment upon the Earth (8:7-11:19)

59

rather "begins in 12:1, a f t e r the completion of the trumpet series. This theory is supported by the wording of the commission in 10:11, whose r e f e r e n c e to many kings seems to allude to chs. 13 and 17." 1 2 5

10. The Temple and the Witnesses

We come now to Revelation 11, which has been described as "one of the most mysterious sections, which resists all attempts at an explanation from contemporary events." 126 It has also been argued that the chapter is made up of two originally separate units (vv. 1-2 and vv. 3-13), because, it is held, there is little in common between the two sections except that they are set in Jerusalem: whereas the first section focuses on the Temple, there is nothing of this in the second part of the chapter. The two sections are linked by the repetition of the time period, in d i f f e r e n t forms. 127 This chapter opens with the Seer being given a measuring rod and being told to g o and "measure the temple of God and the altar and those who worship there" but to cast out (£κΒαλε) the outer court " f o r it is given over to the nations, and they will trample over the holy city f o r forty-two months" (11:1-2). The immediate impression is that this concerns the capture of the city of Jerusalem and its Temple,128 yet

¡,jea ¡ s often r e j e c t e d .

The predominant reason given f o r

r e j e c t i n g this interpretation is the belief that the Apocalypse is a product of the Domitianic period: in that case the Temple would have been in ruins f o r more than a score of years already when the book was written, and a r e f e r e n c e to the desecration of the Temple and the city would have been meaningless. Space does not permit a full treatment of the question of the dating of the Apocalypse, but it must be said that there are some grounds f o r doubting the accuracy of the modern consensus which dates the book in the reign of Domitian. On the other hand, even if the book had been written a f t e r the Temple had been destroyed, it could still have been intended to show the theological significance of that event Many commentators believe that John has used here an earlier document which dealt with Jerusalem and the Temple; this is an admission that the internal evidence

125 C o l l i n s , Combat Myth, 27. 126 L e i v e s t a d , Christ the Conqueror, 228. 127 So Adela Yarbro C o l l i n s , "Myth and H i s t o r y in the Book of R e v e l a t i o n : The Problem o f i t s D a t e , " Traditions in Traneformation: Turning Points in Biblical Faith ( e d . Baruch Halpern and Jon D. Levenson; Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1981) 390. 128 So C o l l i n s , "Myth and H i s t o r y , " 390-391, 394.

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

60

reveals a connection with Jerusalem's holy place. Collins, f o r example, believes that the use of the term "holy city" indicates that John was using some e a r l i e r document which r e f e r r e d to Jerusalem in that way: John himself uses the term "holy city" exclusively of the "new Jerusalem" which descends to earth from heaven (21:2, 10) and calls the present earthly Jerusalem "Sodom" and "Egypt" (11:8). 129 R. H. Charles is more s p e c i f i c , and describes Rev 11:1-2 as a fragment . . . of an oracle written before 70 A.D. by one of the prophets of the Zealot party in Jerusalem, who predicted that, though the outer court of the Temple and the city would f a l l , the Temple and the Zealots who had taken up their abode within it would be preserved from destruction. 130 Nevertheless, Charles believes, the final author of Revelation has reinterpreted this Zealot prophecy, so that now the temple of God is . . . the spiritual temple of which all the faithful are constituent parts; the outer court is the body of believers who are given over to the sway of the Antichrist, and the measuring, like the sealing in vii.4sqq., denotes the preservation of the faithful, not from physical evil, but from the spiritual assaults of the Antichrist and his demonic following during the reign of the Antichrist.131 Court admits the possibility that John inay have used a Zealot pamphlet, but he suggests that John may alternatively have composed "a verbal picture with recognizable allusions.

And so he introduces an historical 'flash-back' to the tem-

porally distant, but undoubtedly very significant, situation of the siege and fall of Jerusalem." 132 What does the Seer have in mind when he r e f e r s to "the temple of God and the altar and those who worship there," on the one hand, and "the court outside the temple" and the "holy c i t y , " on the other?

There are d i f f i c u l t i e s in interpreting

these geographical terms literally, as Feuillet points out First, there is the contradiction of Jesus' words, as reported in the Synoptic Apocalypse, that the Temple would be utterly destroyed: not one stone would be l e f t standing (Matt 24:2; Mark 13:2; Luke 21:6). Second, worshipers cannot be measured with a reed. Third, the Seer seems to have, elsewhere in the Apocalypse, little positive interest in, and regard f o r , the Jews. 133 ^s we have already seen in 2:9 and 3:9, unbelieving Jews are described in extremely unfavorable terms, while chapter 7 appropriates language which was previously applied to the Jews, but uses it now of the Christian community.134

129 130 131 132 133 134

Many interpreters therefore adopt some form of symbolic

C o l l i n s , "Myth and H i s t o r y , " 392. Charles, Commentary, 1.274. Charles, Commentary, 1.274. Court, Myth and Hietory, 86. F e u i l l e t , " I n t e r p r e t a t i o n , " 235-236. See above, pp. 31-33, 47-48.

ACT I I I : Judgment upon the Earth (8:7-11:19)

61

interpretation of the passage. There is widespread agreement that the first term is a designation of the faithful, the true worshipers of God. In the overall context of the Apocalypse, there can be little doubt that these are the Christians.I 3 5 To the objection that, since only priests were allowed into the sanctuary, these worshipers cannot symbolize the whole believing community, Mounce replies by appealing to the idea found elsewhere in the New Testament (including Revelation itself) that all who believe are members of a royal priesthood (cf. Rev 1:6; 5:10). The more serious problem is to discover the significance of the "outer court" and the "city." Mounce believes that the "outer court" also refers to the Church, but the Church looked at from a different perspective: although preserved from spiritual harm, the Church is nevertheless "given over to persecution in the last days."136 The same writer sees "the holy city" as yet another way of referring to the Church: "In John's imagery the holy city is yet another designation for the church. The faithful are to be trodden under foot by paganism for a period of forty-two inonths."137 This does not seem to be a satisfactory solution.

More attention needs to be paid, we

believe, to the meaning of the instruction given to John to "cast out" (εκβαλε) the outer court. Milligan argues that John "is thinking of excommunication from the synagogue," although he then proceeds to take this as a symbol of the rejection of a "degenerate and faithless portion" of the Church.138 This was a step in the right direction, but the mistake was to depart from the primary meaning of the text. To understand the passage it is helpful to compare it with John 9:22; 16:22; Luke 21:24. Concerning the last of these texts, Vos observes that "the affinities in terminology, word order and thought are obvious,"139 e .g. ^αχεΓν is used in both passages, and in both τα ?βνη are the force which will trample the holy city. Nevertheless Vos points out two alterations which he finds significant: first, Revelation uses the term "the holy city" instead of the name "Jerusalem" (the latter

135 Sweet, Revelation, 182; H. L i l j e , The Last Book of the Bible ( P h i l a delphia: Muhlenberg, 1955) 160-161; Henry Barclay Swete, The Apocalypse of St. John; the Greek Text with Introduction, Notée and Indices (3rd. e d . ; η . p . : Macmillan, n . d . ; Reprint; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1968) 132-133; Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 37; Leon Lamb Morris, The Revelation of St. John; An Introduction and Commentary (Tyndale New Testament Commentary; London: Tyndale, 1969) 146. Contra Beckwith, Apocalypse, 598-599. 136 Mounce, Revelation, 220. 137 Mounce, Revelation, 221. 138 William Milligan, The Revelation of St. John (The G i f f o r d Lecture, 1885; London: Macmillan, 1886) 180-181. 139 Vos, Synoptic Traditions, 121; c f . F e u i l l e t , " I n t e r p r e t a t i o n , " 237.

62

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

name being reserved in Revelation f o r the heavenly city); this, he believes, may i n d i c a t e that the passage is to be i n t e r p r e t e d symbolically.140 Second, whereas in Luke the time period is "until the times of the Gentiles are f u l f i l l e d , " the d u r a tion in Revelation is "forty-two months," which Vos sees as signifying the whole period from the Ascension to the Return of Christ. He c o n c l u d e s that whereas Luke r e f e r r e d to the literal Jerusalem, Revelation r e f e r s to that of which the earthly Jerusalem was a picture—the Christian Church—and τα ?θνη in Revelation 1 1 : 2 are not now non-Jews but non-Christians.141 j n t h i s way a n o t h e r valuable observation is used as the basis f o r a f a l s e conclusion. Why cannot the Seer use somewhat d i f f e r e n t terminology to convey the same message as Luke? Why is it concluded that he has in mind something d i f f e r e n t from Luke? We believe that J o h n , in the same way as Luke, is r e f e r r i n g to the trampling down of the literal city of Jerusalem by the Gentiles (Romans) in A. D. 70. Collins is unjustified in r e j e c t i n g verses 1 - 2 as a p r o d u c t of the f i n a l author of Revelation: it is true that there is "no positive interest in the h i s t o r i c a l , earthly temple elsewhere in the book," that "in the visions of the body of the book, a p a r t from 11:1-2, the temple of God r e f e r s to the temple in heaven," and that the absence of a temple from the New Jerusalem implies that "no r e s t o r a t i o n of the temple is necessary."142 But that does not mean that the Seer cannot have a "negative interest" in the temple: he could well be c o n c e r n e d with the temple and its destruction for apologetic purposes—he could believe that the destruction of the temple has the additional s i g n i f i c a n c e that Judaism, unbelieving Judaism which refuses to acknowledge that Jesus is the Messiah, is r e j e c t e d , excommunicated, 1 4 3 just as the synagogue authorities had sought to excommunicate J e s u s ' followers. As van der Waal points out, Paul uses similar language in Gal 4:30: the command to "cast out (εκ βαλε) the slave and her son" is taken as a r e f e r e n c e to the r e j e c t i o n of "the present Jerusalem" (Gal 4:25). 144 This scene in the Apocalypse also has its Old Testament b a c k g r o u n d : in Isa 63:18-19 the t r e a d i n g down of the sanctuary by Israel's enemies is taken as a demonstration of the r e j e c t i o n of the nation. 145 Collins believes that John could not have r e f e r r e d to the earthly Jerusalem as "the holy city," that he r e s e r v e s this designation f o r the heavenly city;146 but the term could be

140 141 142 143 144

Vos, Synoptic Traditions, 122-123. Vos, Synoptic Traditions, 123-124. Collins, "Myth and History," 392. Carrington, Meaning, 182, 185-186. van der Waal, Openbaring, 201; cf. Morris, Revelation, 146; Swete, Apocalypse, 133. 145 van der Waal, Openbaring, 202. 146 Collins, "Myth and History," 392.

ACT I I I : Judgment upon the Earth (8:7-11:19)

63

used simply because that is how the Jews referred to it—and its rejection and destruction show just how much that claim is worth. We conclude, then, that in these first two verses of chapter 11, the Seer is describing in symbolic language the preservation of Christians, the true worshipers of God, and the rejection of unbelieving Judaism, as demonstrated by the capture of the city and the destruction of the Temple. The measuring of the altar and the worshipers in this scene thus corresponds to the sealing of the 144,000 in chapter 7.147 Again it seems clear that the conflict between Church and Synagogue underlies this passage. What is the significance of the period of "forty-two months" (=three and a half years) during which the outer court of the Temple and the city are to be trodden down? The origin of the symbolism is undoubtedly Daniel's references to various periods defined in "weeks" (normally taken as "weeks" of years) and to events which are to occur "in the midst of the week." This, however, does not make it immediately clear what John understands by the symbolism. Carrington, who believes that the reference to the trampling of the city for forty-two months is a later interpolation by John, eschews all attempts to link this time period with any historical events at all, and argues that it is simply a means of indicating persecution,148 but other commentators have attempted to find some real period of time to which this passage refers. Ford, for example, thinks that this is an allusion to the period of three and a half months during which the Zealots held the Temple during the siege by Titus, 149 but there seems to be no reason for taking months as corresponding to years. Moreover, the period of forty-two months in Revelation refers to the period of desecration of the outer court and the city, not to a time during which the sanctuary was preserved. Court suggests that the reference is to "the period of the Flavian war, from the spring of A. D. 67 to 29 August 70, during which time Jerusalem was 'profaned', but in the sanctuary the sacrifices continued uninterrupted, until at the end the sanctuary was destroyed by fire." 150 it is usually assumed that the period of "one thousand two hundred and sixty days" during which the "two witnesses" prophesy, is identical with the period when the city is trodden down by the Gentiles. Although, as Giet points out, the two periods are not said to be coterminous, 151 there seems to be no good reason to differentiate them.

147 148 149 150 151

F e u i l l e t , " I n t e r p r e t a t i o n , " 237-238. Carrington, Meaning, 186-187. Ford, Revelation, 177. Court, Myth and History, 87. Giet, Apocalypse et Histoire, 28.

64

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

We find ourselves unable to establish a clear link between this three-and-ahalf-year time-period and any particular events connected with the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

11. The Two Witnesses The identity of the "two witnesses" (Rev 11:3-12) is also extremely difficult to determine. They are able to destroy their opponents with the fire which comes from their mouths and to bring about a drought and to turn the waters to blood. When their work is complete, they are killed by "the beast from the bottomless pit," but after their bodies have lain for three and a half days "in the street of the great city" they are raised from death and carried up to heaven in a cloud. The fire which comes from their mouths reminds the reader of Elijah (2 Kgs 1:10; Sirach 48:1—"the prophet Elijah arose like a fire, and his word burned like a torch"), as does the power to cause drought (1 Kgs 17:1), while the power to turn the waters to blood recalls the similar plague which Moses brought upon Egypt (Exod 7:20). Some commentators therefore think of these two witnesses as Moses and Elijah revived, appealing to contemporary Jewish expectations in support of this suggestion (cf., for example, Babbi Jocharían ben Zakkai's quotation in Deut. Rab. ii of God's promise to Moses: "When I bring Elijah the prophet unto them the two I

of you shall come together").! 5 2 Many then see these two figures as symbolizing the Law and the Prophets.

Feuillet, for example, writes:

The two witnesses seem . . . to be allegorical personages; they clearly suggest Moses and Elias; they are the incarnation of the ceaseless witness rendered in the Church, to Christ by the Law (Moses) and the Prophet (Elias), in the face of a Judaism which remains obstinate in its refusal to believe.^ Hadorn sees these witnesses as modeled on Moses and Elijah, but considers them to be, not contemporary figures, or symbols of institutions such as the apostolic and prophetic offices, or Church and State, but eschatological figures.154 Others believe that the Seer has in mind, not Moses and Elijah, but Enoch and Elijah (presumably as the two Old Testament characters caught up to heaven without experiencing death). Jeremias has claimed that the picture of the two

152 Quoted by William Sanford LaSor, "The Messianic Idea in Qumran" in Studies and Essaye in Honor of Abraham A. Neuman (ed. Meir BenHorin et al.χ Leiden: B r i l l [for The Dropsie College], 1962) 353 n. 1. 153 F e u i l l e t , Apocalypse, 61; F e u i l l e t , " I n t e r p r e t a t i o n , " 244; c f . Leivestad, Christ the Conqueror, 229 n. 154 Hadorn, Offenbarung, 124.

ACT III: Judgment upon the Earth (8:7-11:19)

65

witnesses is based on the Coptic Apocalypse of Elijah, 155 b u t Richard Bauckharn has argued that, on the contrary, the latter work has derived its view of the return and martyrdom of Enoch and Elijah from this chapter of Revelation, rather than v i c e vers a. 156 The Seer actually gives his own "identification" of the witnesses when he tells his readers that they are "the two olive trees and the two lampstands which stand before the Lord of the earth" (11:4), but that by no means clears up the difficulties. The reference here is obviously to Zech 4:3, which refers to Zerubbabel the prince and Joshua the High Priest in terms similar to those used by John. Sweet therefore comes to the conclusion that these are "prototypes both of Jesus and of his church which he has made a kingdom and priests (1^, 5l0)."157 f a r r e r also believes that these two witnesses symbolize the Church, and sees evidence of this in John's addition to the quotation from Zechariah of the words "and the two lampstands"; he comments: In Zechariah the two anointed stocks feed the seven-branched lampstand with the oil of their anointing—that is, they maintain the temple-worship. Now that the teinple-lampstand is removed, they stand in its place; they are the living lampstands, the twofold prophetic voice of the lampstand churches (i.20).158 Some writers attempt to identify the "two witnesses" with historical persons who suffered martyrdom during the first century A.D. Johannes Munck assumes that the "great city" in which the bodies of the witnesses lie (11:8) is Rome, and finds here a reference to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul in Rome. 159 Apart, however, from the difficulty of understanding "the great city" as Rome, there are other problems involved in this identification of the "witnesses"; as Leivestad remarks: "the characterization of their appearance and activity is too fantastic, and, above all, there is no tradition to explain the unique idea of their resurrection and ascension."160 Further, as Court comments: "While it is true that the Apostles, in both the narrowest and the broader senses of the term, are described as martures, the converse does not hold true, even f o r Revelation itself."161 Giet suggests that underlying John's description of the two witnesses and their minis-

155 Joachim Jeremias, '"HX(e)ías," TDNT 2.940. 156 Richard Bauckharn, "The Martyrdom of Enoch and Elijah: Jewish or Christian?" JBL 95 (1968) 447-458. 157 Sweet, Revelation, 185. 158 Farrer, Revelation, 133; cf. Morris, Revelation, 144. 159 Johannes Munck, Petrus und Paulue in der Offenbarung Johannis: Ein Beitrag zur Auslegung der Apokalypse (Theologiske Skrifter 1; Copenhagen: Rosenkilde og Bagger, 1950), cited by Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 183. 160 Leivestad, Christ the Conqueror, 229. 161 Court, Myth and History, 90.

66

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

try may be the murder by the rebels in Jerusalem of the two High Priests, Ananus and Jesus, and the leaving of their bodies out in the open in the outer court of the Temple (Josephus, J.W. IV, V, 5 [317]). Nevertheless Giet recognizes that there are striking differences between the actual event and the picture given in the Apocalypse: first of all, far from being the messenger of God, Ananus had been responsible f o r the death of James, the brother of Jesus Christ; second, those High Priests wore, not penitential garb, but the sacred garments; third, they were killed not by the Beast, but by the Jews and their allies. Giet thus concludes that John has modified the historical account drastically. 1 6 2 We therefore find ourselves unable to identify with any certainty the actual historical events (if any) on which the Seer has based his account. We must, however, disagree with the contention that these "witnesses" symbolize only certain individual Christians, such as "Christian prophets," whether their ministry is viewed as directed only to First-Century

Judaism,163 o r a s

continuing throughout the age of the

Church.

Even though we cannot be sure what historical situation John may have had in mind when he wrote his account of the mission and fate of the two witnesses, we get some clues from the significant parallels between Revelation 8-11 and Jeremiah 4-6. Throughout that section of Jeremiah there are mentions of a trumpet sounding (4:5, 19, 21; 6:1, 17; c f . the seven trumpets in the Book of Revelation); the heavens are to become black (Jer 4:28 c f . Rev 8:12; 9:2); the prophet's words are to become a fire which will destroy the people of Judah because of their harlotry and their complacent confidence that Yahweh will take no action against them. Because of all this the nation is to be conquered and taken captive (Jer 5:7-17, especially ν 14; cf. Rev 11:5). Jer 6:1-8 warns specifically of the siege and destruction of Jerusalem. All this suggests that John's description of the ministry of the witnesses may well be intended to signify that their message was one of judgment on Jerusalem and the nation of Israel. This conclusion is reinforced by the statement in Rev 11:8 that the place where the witnesses' bodies are left unburied is "the street of the great city which is allegorically ( π ν ε υ μ α τ ι κ ή ) called Sodom and Egypt, where their Lord was crucif i e d . " Notwithstanding this final clause, which seems to leave no room for doubt that Jerusalem is the place intended, a significant number of scholars reject this conclusion.

The usual contention is that since elsewhere in the Apocalypse

162 Giet, Apocalypse et Histoire, 38-39. 163 Allan McNicol, "Revelation 11:1-14 and the Structure of the Apocalypse," Restoration Quarterly 22 (1979) 193-202. 164 Alan Johnson, "Revelation," The Expositor's Bible Commentary with the Sew International Version of the Holy Bible (12 vols.; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976- ) 12.504.

ACT III: Judgment upon the Earth (8:7-11:19)

67

"Babylon" is referred to as "the great," Rev 11:8 must also refer to "Babylon"—end since "Babylon" in Revelation 17-18 is clearly (so it is claimed) a symbol for Home, the city in which the bodies of the witnesses lie must also be Rome. Those who hold this view then have to interpret the phrase "where their Lord was crucified" in some non-geographical sense.

Mounce expresses his view as follows:

In view of the consistent use of the term elsewhere in the book as a r e f e r ence to Rome (as well as such verses as 18:24, "In her was found the blood of prophets and saints") it seems best to conclude that the witnesses meet their death at the hands of the Antichrist, whose universal dominion was in John's day epitomized by the power of Rome. The inclusion of a reference to the crucifixion is not to identify a geographical location but to illustrate the response of paganism to righteousness. 16"> Court suggests that it is not merely the names "Sodom" and "Egypt" which are to be understood "spiritually" (ιτνευμ emeus), but also the phrase "where their Lord was crucified": "These three names, each in their [sic] way symbolic of an evil, are applied to Rome, which, in the personification of Babylon as the great harlot, epitomizes evil for the author."!®'' Giet simply argues that the words "where their Lord was crucified" must be a gloss, and that the verse really refers to Rome.167 These interpretations of the passage overlook not only the plain meaning of the final phrase in verse 8, but also the other indications that Jerusalem is the city in the mind of the Seer as he writes. Rome had no monopoly on the term "the great city." Charles points out that this term is applied to Jerusalem itself in Sib. Or. V.154, 226, 413; Jos., c. Ap. i.197, 209; Appian, Syr. 50; Pliny, Nat. Hist. v. 14. 70.168 jn Jeremiah, too, Jerusalem is called "this great city" (22:8), and that in a context dealing with Yahweh's forsaking of the city because of the people's idolatry and departure from the covenant (cf. Jer 22:9).169 Further, the Jewish nation had already been likened to Sodom (Isa 1:10) and had been accused of bringing its harlotry "from the land of Egypt" (Ezek 23:27).170 In fact, Court points out, Amos had brought these two ideas together already by linking together the punishment of Sodom and a punishment like the plagues which fell on Egypt (Amos 4:10-11).171 Although Feuillet believes that elsewhere in Revelation "the great city" is Rome, he finds that "the entire context shows that

165 166 167 168 169

Mounce, Revelation, 226. Court, Myth and History, 102. Giet, Apocalypse et Histoire, 130. Charles, Commentary, 1.287. Cf. Beckwith, Apocalypse, 601-602; Feuillet, "Interpretation," 241 η. 14. 170 Douglas Ezell, Revelations ση Revelation; New Sounds from Old Symbole (Waco: Word, 1977) 73; cf. Hadorn, Offenbarung, 122. 171 Court, Myth and History, 101-102.

68

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

in Chapter XI it is Jerusalem," 172 a n ( j

van

der Waal argues that Jerusalem is so

clearly indicated here that to interpret Rev 11:18 as a reference to Rome because of the connection with Revelation 17-18 is to interpret the plain by the obscure.173 Caird objects that the city here cannot be the literal Jerusalem because the bodies are seen not merely by Jews from various parts of the world but by all nations: "the ancient world had no Cook's Tours capable of assembling in Jerusalem the international audience John here envisages."174 jn response to an argument like this one can only say that there were no Cook's Tours capable of taking such an international audience to Rome either. All John says is that people from the various "peoples and tribes and tongues and nations" gaze at the corpses; he does not say that there was a large number of these or that they traveled any great distance to do so. Nor was there any need f o r such travel: Jerusalem was then under Gentile domination, and at any given moment there could have been present in the city quite enough Gentiles from various parts of the known world to satisfy John's somewhat indefinite description. It is true that "Rome was central in a way Jerusalem never could be,"175 but this in itself does not require us to understand John's words as a reference to Rome. If, then, we are intended to think of some particular city, there is no reason to reject its identification as Jerusalem in favor of Rome. Yet another indication that the city in view in this chapter is Jerusalem rather than Rome is found in the size of the city. Rev 11:13 refers to an earthquake during which "a tenth of the city fell; seven thousand people were killed.. . ." Even if the first statement referred to the area of the city which was affected, it is reasonable to assume that the number of dead is proportional to the area destroyed. We car therefore conclude that the city's total population was seventy thousand. It has often been pointed out, however, that this is far less than the population of Rome at that time (possibly half a million or so), whereas estimates of the population of Jerusalem are much closer to seventy thousand. 176 Even if the figure is not exactly one-tenth of the population of Jerusalem, it may simply be an approximation utilizing the Seer's predilection for the number "seven." This

172 173 174 175 176

Feuillet, "Interpretation," 241 n. 14. van der Waal, Operibaring, 22. Caird, Revelation, 138. Ralph P. Martin, commenting on an earlier presentation of this argument. Sweet, Revelation, 189; D. Haugg, Die Zwei Zeugen: Eine exegetieohe Studie über Apok 11,1-13 (Münster: Aschendorff, 1936) 33; Feuillet, "Interpretation," 249; Charles, Commentary, 1.291; Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 187; Hadorn, Offenbarung, 122. Hecataeus (apud Josephus, Againet Apion 1.197) puts the population of Jerusalem at one hundred and twenty thousand. But cp. Court, Myth and Hietory, 103.

ACT III: Judgment upon the Earth (8:7-11:19)

69

is not to deny that numbers in the Apocalypse have a symbolic purpose, but there seems to be no reason to deny the Seer the right to use symbolic numbers which are not totally inappropriate to the reality to which they r e f e r . It is not certain whether there is any historical basis f o r this report of an earthquake; Schlatter suggests that underlying this picture is Ezek 38:19, which prophesies a great earthquake in the land of Israel. 1 The death of the "witnesses" is greeted with r e j o i c i n g by the "earth-dwellers" (11:10).

It is possible that these are identical with the representatives of the

"peoples and tribes and tongues and nations" already mentioned, but in any case they seem to be particularly associated with the city of Jerusalem, where the bodies of the witnesses lie. They r e j o i c e at the death of the witnesses because the latter "had been a torment" to them; since the ministry of the witnesses seems to have taken place in "the great city" (Jerusalem) also, this is a further indication of the connection of the "earth-dwellers" with Jerusalem—at least in this passage. Charles believes that the phrase "those who dwell on the earth" r e f e r s in this verse to the inhabitants of Palestine; he writes: The city which is mentioned in xi.8,13 is clearly Jerusalem, and, lest there should be any mistake on this head our author adds the damning clause in xi.8. The KorroiKoüvTes επί xñs rñs are Palestinians—likewise Jews; and though they r e j o i c e over the martyrdom of the Witnesses, they are not painted in such dark colours as the inhabitants of Jerusalem, xi.8bc.178 Feuillet also believes that the phrase here r e f e r s to Jews, but he thinks particularly of the church's Jewish p e r s e c u t o r s . C a r r i n g t o n

concludes:

There are two Jerusalems: the inner spiritual Jerusalem, the Jerusalem of the Witnesses; and the outer o f f i c i a l Jerusalem, which is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was c r u c i f i e d . In this outward o f f i c i a l Jerusalem, which is merely a world-civilisation, the powers of e v i l are concentrated in persecution, the Witnesses are concentrated in s u f f e r i n g . One further detail of this vision remains to be considered. The responsibility f o r the actual death of the witnesses is attributed to "the beast that ascends from the bottomless pit" (11:7). The wording suggests that this is a well-known figure, but up to this point in the book no such figure has been mentioned. Most commentators, however, take the beast in Revelation 11 to be the Antichrist who is known from contemporary Jewish writings.

It is not until chapter 13 that

there is any explicit mention of a beast (θηριον) and neither of the two beasts

177 Adolf Schlatter, Dae Alte Testament in dev johanneiechen Apokalypse (BFCX 16,6; Gütersloh: Mohn, 1912) 83. 178 Charles, Commentary, 1.289-290. 179 Andre Feuillet, "Essai d'interpretation du chapitre XI de l'Apocalypse," NTS 4 (1958) 194. 180 Carrington, Meaning, 192.

70

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

there is said to ascend from the abyss: one rises out of the sea (13:1) and the other from the earth (13:11). Collins believes that chapter 11, with its " c r y p t i c r e f e r e n c e to the beast from the abyss," is placed here deliberately in order to link the series of trumpet-visions with the f o l l o w i n g visions in which the beast is mentioned (Revelation 13 and 17-18)· 181 Feuillet sees here a parallel with the picture found in chapter 20. The attack on the witnesses by the beast (11:7) corresponds to the attack on "the camp of the saints and the beloved c i t y " by Satan and his cohorts (20:8). The interruption by an earthquake of the r e j o i c i n g of the earth-dwellers over the death of the witnesses (11:10) corresponds to the interruption of Satan's attack on "the camp of the saints" by f i r e falling from heaven (20:10). Both of these episodes, Feuillet believes, are f o l l o w e d by a picture of the final judgment. 182 There does seem to be some analogy between the two attacks, but to the present writer it seems that Feuillet has exaggerated the parallels. The earthquake, f o r example, does not seem to be the main f a c t o r in cutting short the r e j o i c i n g of the earth-dwellers, but merely an accompaniment to the snatching away of the witnesses. Again, it does not seem so obvious that the concluding verses of chapter 11 are intended to depict the final judgment. Sweet f i n d s here a link with Revelation 13 and suggests that this beast in chapter 11 is identical with the f i r s t beast of chapter 13, since the "sea" from which it arises may be intended as "the primeval waters," which have the same s i g n i f i cance as the abyss in chapter 11.183 Because of the emphasis on Jerusalem in this chapter, van der Waal concludes that Jerusalem itself is "the throne of the Beast" ( c f . Rev 16:10),184 although most interpreters think of Rome as the beast's seat of power. It seems that we are not given sufficient information to ascertain this.

12. The Seventh Trumpet

A f t e r another brief statement concerning the completion of the "second woe" and introducing the "third woe" (Rev 11:14), the seventh trumpet-blast, which is presumably identified with the "third woe," is r e c o r d e d in 11:15. Following the sounding of the trumpet, loud v o i c e s are heard in heaven, proclaiming that "the kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and

181 182 183 184

C o l l i n s , Combat Myth, 27. F e u i l l e t , " I n t e r p r e t a t i o n , " 248. Sweet, Revelation, 209. van der Waal, Operibaring, 250.

ACT III: Judgment upon the Earth (8:7-11:19)

71

he shall reign f o r e v e r and e v e r , " to which the twenty-four e l d e r s respond by worshiping God.

This vision concludes with the opening of "God's temple in

heaven," revealing the ark of the covenant within his temple (11:15-19). One may wonder how such an occurrence can be described as a "woe," but comparison with the e a r l i e r part of the chapter shows that such a description is not so strange after alL

The key is found in the mention of the temple and the ark in heaven

(v 19). This is probably an allusion to the tradition that Jeremiah had hidden the Ark and the Altar of Burnt O f f e r i n g so that they would not f a l l into the hands of the Chaldeans. The Ark would not be restored, it was thought, until God regathered his people ( c f . 2 Macc 2:4-8).

The Seer may, therefore, wish to indicate

that the time of regathering has arrived and that the covenant between Yahweh and Israel is complete, and that the Ark is the witness. 185 it is probably s i g n i f i cant, too, that the Ark is seen, not in the earthly temple in Jerusalem, which has now been destroyed, but in the temple in heaven. This is c l e a r e v i d e n c e of the f a l l and superseding of the earthly Temple, which would certainly come as a serious blow to "those who dwell on the earth" if they are to be i d e n t i f i e d with the Jews, since they set a great deal of store by the Temple in Jerusalem. As Giet says: "not only is it not said that the Temple will be preserved later on, but the appearance of the heavenly sanctuary suggests that the Temple of Jerusalem will have disappeared in the meantime."186 f o summarize concerning Revelation 11, we can quote Rissi's words: Chapter 11 deals especially with the fate of Israel-Jerusalem, the town of the temple people. John sees Israel divided by the challenge of faith. The unbelievers are r e j e c t e d , and only a remnant still belongs to God's people ( l l . l f . ) . Through the crucifixion of Christ and through continuous unrepentance, Jerusalem is secularized like Sodom and Egypt.187

185 Feuillet, "Interpretation," 254. 186 Giet, Apocalypse et Histoire, 27. 187 Matthias Rissi, The Future of the World. An Exegetioal Revelation 19:11-22:15 (SBT 2/23; London: SCM, 1972) 16.

Study

of

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

72

F. ACT IVs The Salvation of the Saints (12:1-16:1)

1. The Woman and the Dragon

There are major problems connected with the interpretation of Revelation, not the least of which concerns the identity of the "woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her f e e t , and on her head a crown of twelve stars" (12:1), who gives birth to a male child. Nevertheless, the enemy of God and Christ and his people is i d e n t i f i e d plainly enough in this chapter as "a great red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems upon his heads" (v 3). The ident i f i c a t i o n is made even more explicit when he is called "that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, the d e c e i v e r of the whole world" (v 9). He also has an army of angels at his disposal (v 7), but even so is unable to harm the woman.

Collins has argued persuasively that the c o n f l i c t depicted here is an

adaptation of the

fython-Leto

myth, but with the assimilation of Leto to the

high-goddess Isis. 188 ß U t this does not help us to determine John's purpose in using this imagery. Mounce suggests that the picture of the dragon's attempt to sweep the woman away by a f l o o d of water could have its historical basis in "the attempt on the part of the Jewish authorities in Jerusalem to stamp out the early church," as we find in, f o r example, Acts β:!-! 1 ®® Carrington comes to a similar conclusion, but supported by the additional argument that there has not yet in the Apocalypse been any mention of Rome. 1 9 " Hanson makes some further suggestions concerning historical events of the first century A.D. which may be alluded to in this passage.

He " w o n d e r [ s ] " whether the snatching of the child up into

heaven could be connected with Domitian 's d e i f i c a t i o n of his son who died in infancy, and he also thinks it vaguely possible that the picture of the f l i g h t of the woman into the desert is an adaptation of an e a r l i e r source which referred to the f l i g h t of Jochanan ben Zakkai to Jainnia when Jerusalem came under siege; but this, of course, is not the meaning f o r the S e e r . 1 9 ! Having f a i l e d to crush the woman, the dragon then goes o f f to make war on those of her o f f s p r i n g who "keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus" (v 17). The practical implementation of this attack seems to be described

188 189 190 191

C o l l i n s , Combat Myth, 83-84. Mounce, Revelation, 246. Carrington, Meaning, 224. Anthony T. Hanson, Review of John M. Court, Myth and History in the Book of Revelation, JTS 32 (1981) 251.

ACT IV: The Salvation of the Saints (12:1-16:1)

73

symbolically in the following c h a p t e r , in the account of the activity of the two "beasts."

2. The Beast from the Sea The "beast from the sea" (13:1-10) has, like the d r a g o n , seven heads and ten horns (v 1; c f . 12:3); it also r e c e i v e s its power and authority from the dragon (vv 2, 4). Thus it seems as though the d r a g o n , although unable to attack the Christian community d i r e c t l y , is able to do so i n d i r e c t l y , through the instrumentality of the beast. The d e s c r i p t i o n of the beast as "like a l e o p a r d , its feet . . . like a b e a r ' s and its mouth . . . like a lion's mouth," t o g e t h e r with the mention of the seven heads and ten horns, makes it virtually certain that the Seer wishes to portray it as a composite of all f o u r of the beasts mentioned in Daniel's vision (Dan 7:2-7), 1 9 2 although Beasley-Murray thinks that the presence of d e t a i l s not found in Daniel suggests that John did not derive his picture d i r e c t l y from that s o u r c e but r a t h e r "drew on the living t r a d i t i o n about the monster, and he followed in the wake of the Old Testament p r o p h e t s and contemporary apocalyptists in applying the symbol to the o p p r e s s o r power of his day."193 The key to the identity of this beast is commonly seen in the a d d e d detail that it had "a blasphemous name upon its heads" (v 1) and "a mouth uttering haughty and blasphemous words" (v 5), and that it "opened its mouth to utter blasphemies against God" (v 6). These are seen as r e f e r e n c e s to the claims of some of the Roman emperors to deity and the associated einperor cult, and thus the Beast is thought to symbolize the Roman E m p i r e . l a 4

The statement that "one of its heads seemed to have a

mortal wound, but its mortal wound was healed" is seen as supporting evidence for this i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , as this is thought to be a r e f e r e n c e to the Nero redivivus myth. Un the o t h e r hand, Charles believes that the phrase fl πληγή τοϋ θανάτου probably r e f e r r e d originally to Caligula's extremely serious illness from which he r e c o v e r e d . 1 9 · · But, as Hadorn points out, the Seer's language implies more than a mere illness: it implies a near-fatal attack.l*"» Sweet questions the connection of this image with Nero, pointing out that "the beast and its head are at one with the d r a g o n (v 2): how could Nero's suicide be 192 193 194 195

So Collins, Combat Myth, 162. Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 17. Charles, Commentary, 1.345; Carrington, Meaning, 229. Charles, Commentary, 1.349-350; cf. Ford, Revelation, 211; Mounce, Revelation, 252; Suetonius, Caligula 14. 196 Hadoru, Offenbarung, 140.

74

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

a death-blow to him?" Sweet may be c o r r e c t in suggesting that the o r i g i n of this image must be, rather, Gen 3:15: when taken in conjunction with Rev 12:17, the beast " p e r s o n i f i e s all opposition to God and his people from the beginning, and apes the true Man's death

a n d r e s u r r e c t i o n . " 197

Mounce raises another d i f f i c u l t y f o r the interpretation of the beast and its wound as a r e f e r e n c e to N e r o , pointing out that [T]he text does not say that the head was r e s t o r e d . It was the beast who r e c o v e r e d from the death-stroke upon one of his heads. . . . Since the beast is the Roman Empire in its persecution of the church, its r e c o v e r y from a mortal wound could r e f e r to the re-establishment of o r d e r under Vespasian (AD 69-79) f o l l o w i n g the chaotic and bloody revolution which had begun less than two years b e f o r e with the death of Nero and extended through the abortive r e i g n s of Ualba, Otho and Vitellius. Or perhaps no h i s t o r i c a l allusion is intended and the purpose of the figure is to underscore the tremendous vitality of the b e a s t . l " 8 Another problem with the Nero

redivivus

interpretation is the failure of Irenaeus

and other early interpreters of the Book of Revelation to indicate in their commentaries that they know this myth,

although it must be admitted that such

arguments from silence are somewhat precarious. Collins, m o r e o v e r , points out that the e a r l i e r Greek and Latin authors d i d not suggest that Nero would return from the dead: rather, they believed that he had not died at a l l but was in hiding somewhere, preparing to return to Rome and s e i z e power again; from Dio Chrysostom ( D i s c o u r s e s 21.10) we learn that this belief was still held even as late as the time of T r a j a n . 2 0 0

If we are to rely on e x t r a - B i b l i c a l e v i d e n c e and not

read ideas into the A p o c a l y p s e , it would appear that the view that N e r o would actually return from the dead is of later o r i g i n , from the period f o l l o w i n g the death of T r a j a n , when Nero would have been close to 80 years old and could no l o n g e r easily be believed to be still a l i v e . 201 Yet Hadorn can argue that Revelation shows that such a tradition was already current in Christian c i r c l e s during the f i r s t century;202 but this is to a c c e p t f a r too r e a d i l y a popular but not indisputable interpretation of a d i f f i c u l t passage; and, a f t e r all, it is not impossible

197 Sweet, Revelation, 207-208, 210; c f . R i s s i , Time and History, 65-66. Sweet ( R e v e l a t i o n , 210) claims that this i n t e r p r e t a t i o n was held by Irenaeus, but he does not document this claim, and the present w r i t e r was unable to f i n d evidence for t h i s . 198 Mounce, Revelation, 253; c f . Paul S. Minear, I Saw Heaven Opened: An Introduetion to the Visione of the Apocalypse (Washington/Cleveland: Corpus, 1969) 250-251. 199 C o l l i n s , Combat Myth, 177. 200 Barclay Moon Newman, "The Fallacy of the Domitian Hypothesis," UTS 10 (1963-4) 136. 201 Zahn, Apokalypse, 491. 202 Hadorn, Offenbarung, 148.

ACT IV: The Salvation of the Saints (12:1-16:1)

75

that this passage (but not necessarily interpreted correctly) was influential in the rise of the belief in Nero's imminent return from the dead. Ford abandons the theory that the wounded head is Nero, and opts instead for Vespasian, who had incurred Nero's displeasure but was later restored to favor: "It might seem . . . that the beast is the Roman empire, the wounded head is Vespasian, and the healed wound represents Vespasian's being brought back into favor and thus able to restore the empire."203 gut this does not fit: the reference to a mortal wound surely implies something more serious than mere banishment All in all, it seems more likely that the reference is to the death of Nero and the survival of the Empire despite the ensuing chaos. A further pointer to the Roman Empire, and to Nero in particular, is usually seen in the reference to "the number of [the Beast's] name," which is said to be "a human number, its number is six hundred and sixty-six" (Revelation 13:17-18). This is viewed as an example of gematria, and a name is sought, the numerical value of whose letters totals 666. The commonest solution is to take the variant Hebrew spelling of Nero's name, "idp ι n j , " which is attested at Qumran, and which does yield a total of 666. This interpretation also provides a superficially attractive explanation of the textual variant "616," which is first attested in Irenaeus, A d v . Haer. 5.30.1. Irenaeus himself believed that this variant was the result of a scribal error, but many others have held that this is a deliberate "correction," intended to improve on the original and to remove, or at least to minimize, the ambiguities in the more common text. The most frequent interpretation is that "616" is another way of pointing to Nero, this time using the Latin form (without the final "n") of his name, transliterated into Hebrew. But this is not the only possibility: RUhle believes that the "correction" was intended to point to Gaius Caesar (Caligula), using the Greek form of his name, although the Apocalypse can hardly be that early.2U4 vVeyland and Manchot preferred to seek a solution which depended on the use of Hebrew characters, and pointed out that • > n n id'¡7 has a value of 666, while o n iü'¡7 yields the alternative, 616.205 Stauffer suggested, on the other hand, that 666 is the numerical value, not of Nero's name, but of the abbreviated title of Domitian on his coins: the full title was, in Greek, Autokrator Kaisar Dometianos Sebastos Germanikos, which could be abbreviated to Α. ΚΑΙ. ΔΟΜΕΤ. ΣΕΒ. ΓΕ.206 Caird notes, however, concerning this theory: "Apart from its complexity it has only one flaw: although each of these

203 204 205 206

Ford, Revelation, 221. Oskar Rühle. TDNT 1.463. Cf. Hadorn, Offenbarung, Noted by Charles, Commentary, 1.368 n. 1. apud. Caird, Revelation, 175.

147.

76

The Enemies of t h e Church i n t h e A p o c a l y p s e

abbreviations by itself is well attested, there is no single coin on which all five occur together."207 It is clear from these few examples that scholars are far from agreed even concerning the language to be used in trying to solve the puzzle, Hebrew or Greek. Ladd questions whether John would have based his numerical symbolism on the Hebrew form of the

name,208

t>ut as Beckwith points out, there must have

been many Hebrew-speakers in the churches to which John was sending his Apocalypse, so it is not impossible that he used a Hebrew form of the

name.209

If we find ourselves frustrated by the difficulty of ascertaining what or whom the Seer had in mind, we may be able to take some small comfort from the knowledge that the earliest interpreters faced the same problem. Irenaeus, for example, refers to several suggested solutions, such as "euanthas," "lateinos," and "teitan," of which Irenaeus prefers the last, although he refrains from dogmatism (Adv. Haer.

5.30.3).210

a

work attributed to Hippolytus, on the other hand, sug-

gested that "666" means "I deny,"211 but it has been pointed out that one would have to adopt the unusual spelling "άρνοΰμε" in order to obtain the desired figure. A more serious difficulty concerning all these attempts to decode this mysterious number as a reference to an individual Roman emperor is that the number is that of the beast, not merely of one of its heads. Furthermore, it has even been questioned whether John was using geinatria: he says that the solution to the problem requires "divine discernment and not mathematical ingenuity."212 Again, Revelation as a whole seems to use numbers as symbols, rather than as mathematical puzzles. Thus we should probably abandon the translation "it is the number of a man" (as though it referred to an individual person) in favor of "it is a human number," as in RSV.213 The significance of the number would then most likely be that in each digit (hundreds, tens and units) it comes short of 777, which could symbolize perfection: 2 ! 4 for all the Beast's claims, it remains merely—

207 C a i r d , Revelation, 175. 208 L a d d , Revelation, 186-187; c f . Mounce, Revelation, 265; M o r r i s , Revelation, 174. 209 B e c k w i t h , Apoaalypee, 405. 210 " T e i t a n " a l s o h a s t h e p o s s i b l e a d v a n t a g e t h a t i t i s one of t h e few p r o p o s e d s o l u t i o n s i n which each column of t h e sum t o t a l s 6; c f . C h a r l e s , Commentary, 1 . 3 6 6 . 211 "A D i s c o u r s e by t h e most b l e s s e d H i p p o l y t u s , Bishop and M a r t y r , on t h e End of t h e World, and on A n t i c h r i s t , and on t h e Second Coming of our Lord J e s u s C h r i s t , " 28, r e p r o d u c e d i n ANF 5 : 2 4 9 . 212 Alan J o h n s o n , " R e v e l a t i o n , " 5 3 4 . 213 C o n t r a C o l l i n s , Combat Myth, 200 n . 16. 214 Sweet, Revelation, 215, 218; c f . M o r r i s , Revelation, 174, and Rudolf H a l v e r (Der Mythos im letzten Buch der Bibel, 4 0 ) : "The number of

ACT IV: The Salvation of the Saints

(12:1-16:1)

77

indeed, all too—human. There may be an intentional contrast, Skehan suggests, with the titles given to Jesus in Rev 19:16, "King of Kings" and "Lord of Lords," which, when written in Aramaic, have a value of 777.215 n may be significant, too, that the name "Jesus" has a numerical value in Greek of 888, which could be taken to signify an advance even on perfection,216 and this numerical value of the name "Jesus" is, indeed, pointed out in Sib. Or. 1:326-330. The Seer could well have been familiar with such an example of gematria. The report of the boasting of this first beast and its blasphemy against God, his name, his tabernacle (σκηνη), and those who dwell in heaven (13:5b-6) plainly draws on Dan 8:10-14, although now, as Collins points out, there is no explicit reference to the earthly temple: even the σκηνη is "a heavenly entity" rather than an earthly one.

Collins continues:

This lack of interest in the earthly t e m p l e , . . . is probably to be explained as a result of alienation from the historical Jerusalem (cf. 11:8) and the possibly related lack of interest in the continuation or reestablishment of the temple cult (cf. 21:22). 217 Here, then, is another feature of the book which would fit well with our thesis that John is concerned with the demise and rejection of Jerusalem and Judaism. It is interesting to note, however, that there is no explicit statement that the beast froin the sea demands to be worshiped. All that is said is that "those who dwell on earth," those whose names are not written in the Lamb's book of life, will worship the beast. This worship could easily be entirely voluntary, motivated by the impression of the beast's perpetuity and invincibility. In this passage the phrase "earth-dwellers" does not seem to be capable of interpretation as a reference solely to inhabitants of Palestine or to Jews, but is more likely to designate non-Christians in general (v 8).

the Beast, 666, is the attempt to attain the holy number, 777, but without success." 215 P. W. Skehan, "King of Kings, Lord of Lords (Apoc 19:16)," CBQ 10 (1948) 398. 216 Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 220; Farrer, Revelation, 158. I t is true that, as Martin has commented, the name "Jesus" is " a 'human' name par excellence" (comment on an e a r l i e r presentation of this argument), but there is surely a d i f f e r e n c e between " a human name par excellence" and "a merely human name," which is what we are suggesting that the author of Revelation has in mind.

217 Collins, Combat Myth, 163.

78

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse 3. The Beast from the Earth

Following the vision of the seven-headed, ten-horned beast from the sea, John sees a beast arise from the earth. This second beast has two horns like a lamb but speaks like a dragon, performs impressive signs to deceive the "earth-dwellers," whom it compels to worship an image of the first beast, and forces all to be marked with the name or number of the beast as a prerequisite for buying or selling. Continuing his argument that John's readers are in conflict with Gnosticism, Carrington argues that this second beast represents primarily the Ophites, but also, in a wider sense, "every influence which might seduce Christians into worshipping the power of evil in any of its incamations."218 we are not convinced, however, that the conflict with Gnosticism is a major concern of the Apocalypse. Some scholars see a geographical significance in the places from which the two beasts are said to emerge—the first "from the sea," and the second "from the earth."

Sweet, for example, comments: "The first arose out of the sea across

which lay Rome; this one represents Rome's local enthusiasts."219 But who are these "local enthusiasts?" It is usually held that they are the priests who promoted emperor-worship in Asia Minor,220 but Charles thinks that the original of this picture of the beast from the earth was either a Jewish or a Christian false prophet. 221 Van der Waal argues that it is still Judaism which is intended by this picture in the final form of the book, and he contends that εκ xr¡s rñs here means "out of the land [i.e., the land of Palestine]."222 Josephine Ford also believes that this second beast represents some Jewish figure or institution, although she thinks of some heterodox form of apostate Judaism which urged submission to Rome; thus, by using the visions of the two beasts, "the author shows the merging of the two forces, the Roman empire and the apostate Jews."223 g u t Ford is not satisfied with such a vague identification, so she looks for a particular individual who fits John's picture and settles on Josephus, the pro-Roman Jewish historian!

218 Carrington, Meaning, 580-581.

She writes:

232-233; c f . Fiorenza, "Apocalypsis and G n o s i s , "

219 Sweet, Revelation, 215. 220 Charles, Commentary

1.357; Beasley-Murray, Revelation,

Revelation, 259; Ladd, Revelation, 182.

216; Mounce,

221 Charles, Commentary 1.357; Hadorn ( O f f e n b a r u n g , 139, 144) suggests that the second beast represents opposition of the type encountered by Paul during h i s ministry in A s i a : opposition by impostors ("Gauakler"). 222 van der Waal, Openbaring, 84; so a l s o Ford, Revelation, 213.

223 Ford, Revelation, 223.

ACT IV: The Salvation of the Saints (12:1-16:1)

79

One may ask who at the time of the Jewish war would be most aptly associated with this second beast, the prophet from Palestine. It must be a prophet who served Kome, i.e. the first beast. If the first beast is identified with Vespasian, the most obvious choice for the second beast is Flavius Josephus. 224 This suggestion is highly ingenious, but improbable in the extreme. In the first place, it is based on Ford's unfounded theory that the Apocalypse is basically a Jewish work, but with some Christian interpolations. But when we view the book as intrinsically Christian and concerned, at least in part, with the conflict between the Church and Rome, there is no way of finding any reference to Josephus in the book. Moreover, we have already rejected the suggestion that the beast from the sea is Vespasian. The attempt to identify the beast from the earth as connected with Judaism is in itself attractive, but it is difficult to attribute to any Jewish person or institution the characteristics which the Seer describes. In particular, even though there were Jews who were willing to acclaim the Roman Emperor as their only king (John 19:15), it is difficult to envisage first-century Jews erecting an image representing the Roman Empire and demanding that people worship it on pain of death. It could be argued, perhaps, that the synagogue, by excommunicating the followers of Jesus, was forcing them to participate in the Imperial cult if they were to avoid incurring the suspicion and hostility of the Roman authorities, but John's picture seems to demand a situation in which there was more positive support of Rome than this. For the same reason we must also reject the suggestion that the forbidding of buying and selling is connected with the "synagogal practice of forbidding all dealings with the excommunicate."225 jt seems more likely, therefore, that the second beast is intended to represent the officials of the Roman state religion in Asia Minor. The Seer may have particularly in mind, as Beasley-Murray suggests, the "commune of Asia," a body representing the principal cities of the province, under the presidency of an "Asiarch."226 Caird believes that it would have been through the coinage, for which it was responsible, that the commune would have forced people to bear the mark of the beast.227 β ¡ s true that the word χάραγμα may be used of "money,"228 but the problem with this interpretation is that, while it may perhaps explain the necessity of having the mark in one's hand, it offers no explanation of the picture of having the mark on one's forehead. A further argument against interpreting this passage as a reference to the coinage is advanced by Hadorn, who points out that

224 225 226 227 228

Ford, Revelation, 227-228. So Farrer, Revelation, 157; cf. Sweet, Revelation, 217. Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 216; cf. Mart. Polyoarp. Caird, Revelation, 173. Ulrich Wilckens, TDNF 9.416, who refers to Anth. Gvaea. 5.30, 3-4.

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

80

Jesus did not blame the Jews for using coins bearing the Emperor's image: it is not likely, therefore, that the Seer would have seen any danger in the practice.22® Ladd sums up the situation aptly when he writes: We know of no ancient practice which provides adequate background to explain the mark of the beast in historical terms. The word for "mark" was used for brands on animals. It was also a technical term f o r the imperial stamp on commercial documents and for the royal impression on Roman coins. Slaves were branded on their forehead, but this was a sign of servitude, not of loyalty. A few instances of branding captives have been known inGraecoRoman history, and Ptolemy Philopator compelled certain Alexandrian Jews to be branded with the mark of Dionysus.. . . However, the practice of branding was not a common one and is not known in connection with emperor worship. 230 Although certainty in such a complex problem is unattainable, the most probable solution seems to be that the beast from the earth and its activities represent some unknown aspect of the efforts of the local Roman cult-officials to enforce participation in the Emperor cult

Lund is correct, therefore, in arguing that

whereas the preceding chapters of the Apocalypse describe the Church's conflict with "hostile Judaism," we are now shown how the devil works through Rome.231 Lund's error, however, is in thinking that the conflict with Rome is the sole concern from here on and that the controversy with Judaism now fades from the book. There is one further possible reference in this chapter to thé Seer's desire to distinguish the Christian community from Judaism. Hadorn believes that 11:9-10, with its call for endurance and faith and its rejection of taking up the sword, is an attack on the Jews' preferred method of escape from Rome's tyranny: "The Jews have taken up the sword against their oppressors, the Romans, and are in danger of being defeated. John shows the community another way: Siro μ ονη and irions."232

We cannot be certain that Hadorn's suggestion is what the Seer

intended, of course, but here too, if the conflict with unbelieving Jews was a major concern, this exhortation would undoubtedly make a great impression on his Christian readers.

229 Hadorn, Offenbarung, 145. 230 Ladd, Revelation, 185. Ralph P. Martin ("Mark, Brand," The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology [ed. Colin Brown; 3 v o l s . ; Exeter: Paternoster/Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975-78] 2.572), draws attention to such passages as Herodotus 2, 113, which refers to "sacred marks" (.stigmata hiera), and Lucían, Syr. Dea 59, which refers to the bearing of stigmata in honor of a deity. Betz (TDNT 7.660) cites further examples of branding as a sign of devotion to, and protection by, a god or goddess. But none of these texts refers to the use of a brand in connection with the emperor cult. 231 Lund, Studies in Revelation, 147. 232 Hadorn, Offenbarung, 141.

ACT XV: The Salvation of the Saints (12:1-16:1)

81

4. The Lamb and his Followers on Mount Zion

John's next vision (Rev 14:1-5) makes no mention of the Church's enemies, but, again, its overall thrust would have additional significance if those enemies are indeed unbelieving Jews. This vision is Scene 4 of Act IV, according to the structural analysis of the book which we have adopted, and is thus the central vision of the whole book.233 H e r e John sees the Lamb on Mount Zion, surrounded by the hundred and forty-four thousand who have on their foreheads, not the mark of the Beast, but the name of Christ and his Father (14:1). The following description of the voice from heaven suggests that it is the voice of "the hundred and forty-four thousand who had been redeemed from the earth" (14:3). This in turn suggests that the "Mount Zion" on which they and the lamb stand is in heaven, rather than on earth.234 According to Joel, Mount Zion was to be a place of refuge (Joel 2:32 [ΜΓ 3:5]), but John now seems to be indicating that the earthly Zion provides no such refuge. He has already described the desecration of the sanctuary and the trampling down of the city of Jerusalem, so this new message is in keeping with that: the place upon which the unbelieving Jews set their hopes is rejected, but the followers of the Lamb are preserved.

5. The Messages of the Three Angels The following scene (14:6-13) includes three angelic proclamations. The first and third angels call on all categories of people to worship God, the creator of all, and warn against worshiping the Beast and its image and against receiving its mark (14:6-7, 9-11), while the second angel announces the fall of "Babylon the great" (v 8). The references to the Beast and its image and mark are clearly parallel to the vision of the second beast and its advocacy of the worship of the first beast (13:11-18), thus providing some support for our presentation of this Act of the Apocalypse in a chiastic form. No explanation is given here of the term "Babylon," although this is the first time the name has appeared in this book. It may be that the term was already current among John's readers, who would have known, therefore, what he meant.

Most commentators think that it refers to

Rome, as (so they assume) in Revelation 17-18. Since we are going to argue that "Babylon" in those chapters is Jerusalem, the parallelism of these two scenes

233 See Appendix. 234 Mounce, Revelation,

267.

82

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

(13:11-18 and 14:6-13) would have been even clearer if we could have established that the second beast had peculiarly Jewish associations, but, as we have already seen, this is extremely difficult to do. Vve shall have to be content to let this "asymmetry" remain.

6. The Winepress of God's Wrath In the following vision (14:14-20) John sees a further series of angels who utter various calls employing harvest imagery. The initial picture is of a grain harvest (vv 15-16), which Carrington interprets as a reference not to judgment, as most scholars do, but to "the gathering of the elect," as in the preaching of John the Baptist according to the Gospels: The simplest explanation is that the Harvest in Revelation means the escape of the Christian community from the horrors of the siege of Jerusalem [by fleeing to Pella]. The Harvest, we may conclude, is the salvation of the elect from the judgment which is to fall on the wicked.235 But we are not persuaded by Carrington's argument. The vision culminates in the picture of a grape harvest: an angel "swung his sickle on the earth, and threw it into the great wine press of the wrath of God; and the wine press was trodden outside the city, and blood flowed from the wine press, as high as a horse's bridle, for one thousand six hundred stadia" (vv 19-20). This is plainly a picture of judgment, as even Carrington has to admit,236

an(j

¡t seems preferable to view

the grain-harvest image similarly. Van der Waal, thoroughly consistently with his own approach to the whole book, sees this passage as concerning Israel and translates γη by "land" rather than by "earth" throughout (vv 15, 16, 18, 19). He thinks the background of the image of the sickle lies in Zech 5:1-2, according to the LXX version of which the prophet sees a flying "sickle" (apparently reading Ίιη for MT ΓΪ7ΛΠ, "scroll").237 Sweet suggests that the expression "the vine of the earth" (v 18) may be based on Deut 32:32, which refers to "the vine of Sodom"238_ anc i

we

have already

noticed that "the great city . . . where [the] Lord was crucified" is called "Sodom"

235 Carrington, Meaning, 252-253. 236 Carrington, Meaning, 252; GUnther Bornkamm ("Die Komposition der apokalyptischen Visionen in der Offenbarling Johannis," Ζ NW 36 [1937] 140), »ho sees this passage as based on Joel 3:13, with its picture of the grain-harvest and the grape-harvest, also understands the former as a symbol of salvation and the latter as one of judgment. 237 van der Waal, Openbaring, 214-215. 238 Sweet, Revelation, 230.

ACT IV: The Salvation of the Saints (12:1-16:1)

83

(11:8). Ford also thinks of this vision as a picture of judgment against Palestine. She refers to Isaiah's depiction of Israel as a vineyard (Isa 5:1-7) and to the picture in Psalm 80, where the devastation of the land is pictured in terms of the cutting down of a vineyard. Furthermore, Ezek 15:6 likens the impending destruction of Jerusalem's inhabitants to the burning of the wood of the vine. Ford realizes, however, that the use of the symbol of the vine in these Old Testament passages does not prove conclusively that the Seer has Israel in mind. Nevertheless she continues: However, there are two striking points in vs. 20 which suggest that the author did have Israel in mind. First, the trampling of the winepress is performed outside the city.. . . Second, the amount of bloodshed is enormous. The measurement of one thousand six hundred stadia is approximately the distance from Tyre to El Arish, two hundred miles. . . . In A.D. 66 Vespasian (with Titus), after strengthening his forces, captured nearly all the cities in Galilee which were held by the Zealots. Then he marched to Caesarea and Jerusalem. It was at this time that the whole of Palestine suffered bloodshed, with the exception of the Holy City.239 Other writers, too, have thought that the details of John's picture refer to Jerusalem and the land of Palestine. Charles thinks of Jerusalem as "the city" referred to in 14:20, but his reason is that he sees the fall of Rome as having been described already in 14:8 ("Babylon"), an assumption with which the present writer cannot agree. But Charles then goes on to say that this is "most probably not the earthly Jerusalem but the heavenly Jerusalem which is to descend from heaven."240 g u t We are unable to accept this conclusion either: there is nothing in its favor. As Bornkamm points out, there is a parallel between this verse and Uev 19:20, in which the "lake of fire" probably indicates Gehenna, the gate of which, according to apocalyptic tradition, was at Jerusalem: thus "the winepress outside the city" is another way of referring to Gehenna. The reference in 14:18 to the angel who has power over fire also supports this identification. 24 ! Mounce believes that here John has two Old Testament passages in the back of his mind: first, Joel 3:12-14, referring to a judgment of the nations in the valley ofJehoshaphat, which Mounce thinks may be the same as the valley of Kidron, just outside Jerusalem; second, Zech 14:1-4, according to which the final battle takes place outside

Jerusalem.242

According to Vos, the very image of a harvest to depict a

judgment is used in the Old Testament only of national judgments, and it is primarily in the sayings of Jesus that the final judgment is figuratively depicted in

239 240 241 242

Ford, Revelation, 250. Charles, Commentary, 2.25; cf. Swete, Apocalypse, 192. Bornkamm, "Komposition," 142. Mounce, Revelation, 282; cf. Sweet, Revelation, 229.

84

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

the harvest terminology.243

sweet takes up the mention of 1600 stadia (v 20)

and, like F o r d , thinks of the length of Palestine, but he then turns his back on this insight by arguing that this has now become merely " a symbol of the (4 χ 4—four corners) just as Jerusalem has become a symbol of the city

world

(ll8)."244

Thus we find that there are, in this vision too, numerous hints at Jerusalem as the place on which the judgment of God falls.

As Carrington comments:

In A.D. 70 the Vine of Israel is cut down and trampled in the Winepress, but this destruction is the culmination of a process which has lasted o v e r forty years; it began Outside the City, when one whom they despised and rejected trod the Winepress alone, and of the People there was none with him. It was in that moment Jerusalem fell.245

G. ACT V: Judgment upon the Earth (16:2-17:3a)

The Fifth A c t of the Apocalypse recounts a further series of visions, in which "the seven bowls of the wrath of God" (16:1) are poured out on the earth. Already in 15:1, however, these judgments had been described as "seven plagues, which are the last, f o r with them the wrath of God is ended." Josephine Ford seizes on the word "plague" (τληγη) and notes that this word occurs in many texts in the Pentateuch (especially in Leviticus 17-26, Deuteronomy 28, and Exod 23:30-33). She suggests that Leviticus 26 is the most likely source of John's imagery here, as not only does it contain the warning against idolatry (vv 1-2), but also there are several mentions of " s e v e n - f o l d punishment" f o r "walking contrary" to Yahweh (vv 18 21, 23-24, 28). 246 Thus we could have here further evidence that John intends to depict a series of judgments which come upon the people of Israel because of their apostasy. Even the r e f e r e n c e s to "bowls" (φιάλαι) of God's wrath may also point in this direction; Sweet r e f e r s to Isa 51:17, 22, where the Targum uses "the Aramaic loan-word piyile=phialai."247

j n the f i r s t of these texts Jeru-

salem is said to have "drunk at the hand of Yahweh the cup of his wrath, drunk to the dregs the bowl of staggering"; in verses 22-23 Yahweh declares that the cup

243 Vos, Synoptic Traditions,

148.

244 Sweet, Revelation, 233; c f . Charles, Commentary, " R e v e l a t i o n , " Peake'e Commentary on the Bible Nelson, 1962) 1053. 245 Carrington, Meaning, 261. 246 Ford, Revelation, 225. 247 Sweet, Revelation, 241.

2.26; Nigel Turner, (London/New York:

ACT V: Judgment upon the Earth

(16:2-17:3a)

85

has been taken from his people and has instead been put into the hand of their tormentors. The question arises now: which of these two texts does John have in mind here? In other words: does John see these bowls as being given to Jerusalem or to her enemies? There may be a clue in Isa 51:19, which r e f e r s to Jerusalem's suffering through "famine and sword"—since this combination of punishments has already been depicted in the seal-visions, where we found reason to think of Jerusalem as the victim, it seems likely that here also John sees Jerusalem as the object of God's wrath.

Furthermore, the promise in the f o l l o w i n g oracle (Isa

52:1-2) that "Jerusalem, the holy city" will be purified and will no longer be entered by those who are unclean is taken up by the Seer and applied to the "New Jerusalem" which descends from heaven from God. Thus it seems that in the A p o c a lypse the Old Testament promises of blessing upon Jerusalem are reserved for the heavenly city, while the judgments are applied to the present earthly city. Here too, then, it may be Isaiah's prophecy which is in the author's mind: the bowls of God's wrath are poured out on Jerusalem. We shall see some further pointers in this direction when we examine the individual visions.

1. The First Three Bowls

The f i r s t of the bowls is poured out on the earth (or " l a n d , " e { s την γην) and results in " f o u l and evil sores" f o r those who worship the beast and bear its mark (16:2), but no information is given concerning these people beyond what we read in Revelation 13, so we are still unable to determine their identity precisely, although Carrington interprets γη here as a r e f e r e n c e to the land of Palestine.248 The pouring out of the second bowl causes the sea to turn to b l o o d , and this results in the death of all marine l i f e (16:3). When the third bowl is emptied into the r i v e r s and springs, they too turn into b l o o d , and an angel acclaims the justice and appropriateness of this judgment, f o r those who had spilled the blood of the saints and prophets will now be f o r c e d to drink blood themselves (16:4-6). This cry is echoed by "the altar" (v 7), which is apparently shorthand for "those under the altar," i.e. the martyrs of Rev 6:9-10, who called f o r vengeance on the "earthdwellers."

We have seen already that the seal-visions, by their c h o i c e of Old

Testament passages as a source of their symbolism, suggest strongly that the judgments depicted there were to come upon the Jewish p e o p l e , 2 ^ and so it is

248 Carrington, Meaning, 263. 249 See above, pp. 38-44.

86

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

not unreasonable to conclude that the persecutors r e f e r r e d to there were Jewish, especially as we have also found that the expression o'i kotoikoÛvtes

xñs yñs

may, in some cases, at least, r e f e r to the inhabitants of Palestine. It is therefore at least possible that those who have "shed the blood of saints and prophets" (16:6) are also Jewish persecutors of the Church, and this possibility is advanced to a probability when we notice that one of the major sins of "Babylon" is that she is "drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs of Jesus" (17:6) and that "in her was found the blood of prophets and saints, and of all who have been slain on earth" (18:24). Since, as we shall see later in this chapter, John uses "Babylon" as a symbol f o r Jerusalem, it seems that those to be punished at the pouring out of the third bowl are also (at least primarily) Jewish.

2. The Fourth Bowl

When the fourth bowl is poured out, there is an e f f e c t on the sun, as in the fourth trumpet-vision. But whereas there the sun was darkened, here the e f f e c t is opposite: the sun's intensity is increased so that people are scorched. This is a reversal of the promise given to the new people of God who are sealed in chapter 7 ( c f . ν 16) and of the promise given to the returning exiles (Isa 49:10). Josephine Ford sees here also a reversal of "the promise proclaimed in favor of the pilgrims going up to Jerusalem in Ps 121:5-6. . . . "

She continues, "These

verses from Ps 121 are particularly arresting in view of the liturgical context of this chapter and the burning of the harlot Jerusalem in ch. 17."250 This argument seems rather f o r c e d , however.

3. The Fifth Bowl

The f i f t h bowl is poured out on "the throne of the beast," which is commonly seen as a r e f e r e n c e to the city of Rome,251 although Sweet links this with "Satan's throne" at Pergamum, "the Roman provincial capital" ( c f . Rev 2:13) and thinks that there may be a s p e c i f i c r e f e r e n c e to "the chaos of the c i v i l wars of AD

250 Ford, Revelation, 272. 251 So Mounce, Revelation, 297; Frederick Fyvie Bruce, "The Revelation to J o h n , " A Neu Testament Commentary ( e d . G. C. D. Howley, F. F. Bruce, H. L. E l l i s o n ; London: Pickering & I n g l i s , 1969) 657.

ACT V: Judgment upon the Earth (16:2-17:3a)

87

68-69."252 g u t this reference is too vague: even if Pergamum was in the author's mind, there does not seem to be any way of ascertaining the particular events he had in mind.

4. The Sixth Bowl The pouring out of the sixth bowl results in the drying up of the river Euphrates "to prepare the way for the kings of the east," whereupon the spirits emanating from the mouths of the dragon, the beast, and the false prophet gather together "the kings of the whole world . . . for battle on the great day of God the Almighty . . . at the place which is called in Hebrew Armageddon" (16:14-16). Josephine Ford thinks that this picture is based on the capture of the literal Babylon of old, when Cyrus' army entered the city by diverting the Euphrates and walking under the walls along the river-bed.253 As we have already seen in considering Rev 9:14, the Euphrates was the region from which Palestine had been invaded, and Carrington interprets the reference to "the kings from the East" in conformity with this also: they are "the Sennacherib and the Nebuchadrezzar that were now to come upon Jerusalem—that is to say, the Roman Emperors."

He continues:

This surely represents nothing but the return of Titus to besiege Jerusalem with further reinforcements, and it is certainly odd that among them were three thousand men from the legions on the Euphrates frontier; it is possible that this irony of history suggested to the mind of St. John the parallel with Nebuchadrezzar. 254 When it comes to determining the significance of the name "Armageddon," opinions are sharply divided. There is even a difference of opinion concerning the meaning of the word(s). It is often thought to mean "Mount Megiddo" (ι ι ταπ in), but the problem with this interpretation is that there is no mountain of this name: the city of Megiddo was situated on a mound which was only some 20 meters high in John's day and therefore hardly warrants being called a "Mount"255 Some interpreters have therefore looked for a mountain near Megiddo and have opted for Mount Carmel. Beasley-Murray comments: "Carmel would be an attractive identification, since it witnessed Elijah's contest with the prophets of Baal, when the Lord gave a signal revelation of his presence and power, and the false prophets

252 253 254 255

Sweet, Revelation, 247; cf. Carrington, Meaning, 264. Ford, Revelation, 263. Carrington, Meaning, 265. Mounce, Revelation, 301.

88

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

were put to the sword."256 parrer sees a further advantage in this interpretation, since he refers to Ahab, who gathered the prophets of Baal at Carmel, as "a renegade Anointed, or Ant i christ. "257 Shea argues that Ahab is paralleled by the dragon, "the power of the evil state," and that there are parallels also between, on the one hand, Jezebel and the beast (signifying "apostate religious form") and, on the other hand, the 850 prophets of Baal and the false prophet.258 BeasleyMurray acknowledges the difficulty that Mount Carmel is never called "Mount Megiddo," however, and Caird argues that this identification "would have been more plausible if the contest at Armageddon had been between Home, the new Jezebel, and the martyr-witnesses who had inherited the mantle of Elijah (xi.4ff.), and not between Home and a horde of invaders from the east."259 As we shall see, however, Caird is unjustified in seeing Rome as the objective of the invasion, yet we believe that there are more appropriate solutions than to interpret "Armageddon" as Mount Carmel.

Others have suggested that the name should

rather be ι ι τ λ π tu, i.e. the "city of Megiddo,"260 n m

in, i.e., "his fruitful

mountain" (thus linked with Jerusalem), or m π π tu, i.e., "the desirable city," which again, by analogy with m η π \ ί ν ("the desirable land," i.e., Palestine), suggests the city of Jerusalem.261

Some

think that the Seer has in mind Ezekiel

38-39, which he uses elsewhere (cf. 20:7-9), and defining it more closely by using the name "Megiddo" because of its Old Testament associations with the defeat of Yahweh's enemies (cf. Judg 5 s l 9 ) . 2 6 2 Van der Waal adopts van der Woude's suggestion that the reference is to the mountains of Migron, a little to the north of Jerusalem; the basis of this interpretation is the LXX's representation of this name by such forms as Μαγ(γ)εδ(ί)ω, Μαγειών and Μακεδών. Van der Waal then seeks to link this with the traditional idea of an onslaught of the nations upon Jerusalem.263 Migron is some 10 kilometers froin Jerusalem, however, and this does not seem to be close enough to justify the identification of the two places. A suggestion considered by many is that the name is a variation of Har Mo ed (tu ι π in, i.e., "the Mount of Assembly," cf. Isa 14:13); this is then thought of as a demonic counterpart to Mount

256 Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 245; cf. also Lohmeyer, Offenbarung, 137. 257 Farrer, Revelation, 178. 258 William H. Shea, "The Location and Significance of Armageddon in Rev 16:16," AUSS 18 (1980) 161. 259 Caird, Revelation, 207. 260 Referred to by Bruce, "Revelation," 657. 261 Charles, Commentary, 2.50. 262 Beckwith, Apocalypse, 685; Charles, Commentary, 2.50. 263 van der Waal, Openbaring, 219.

ACT V: Judgment upon t h e E a r t h

(16:2-17:3a)

89

Zion.264 Nevertheless, this proposal is often r e j e c t e d ; Beasley-Murray says that there is no satisfactory explanation of the transformation of tij ι π in to in 1 ι Tin,265

an

d Sweet also thinks that this interpretation is "philologically dubi-

OUS."266 on the other hand, this interpretation does serve as an introduction to the f a l l of Jerusalem (under the symbol of "Babylon") in the following chapters. Moreover, the use of the name "Megiddo" for Jerusalem is quite appropriate, considering the Seer's use of the exodus and its associated events as a framework in which to present his message: Megiddo was the scene not only of a s i g n i f i c a n t victory f o r Israel in its conquest of the land of Canaan (Judg 5:19),267 t, u t also, later, of a major defeat for Judah, when King Josiah suffered a fatal blow at the hands of the army of Pharaoh Necho of Egypt (2 Kgs 23:29-30; 2 Chr 35:20-24).268 "Megiddo" thus conjures up ideas both of the exodus from Egypt and of a "reversal of the exodus," and the latter aspect therefore forms a parallel to John's presentation of Jerusalem as the "Egypt" on which the plagues now f a l l (cf. 11:8).269 Carrington finds in verse 15 a further indication that John has in mind Jerusalem and its Temple: the pronouncement of blessing for the one who stays awake and keeps his garments is seen as a r e f e r e n c e to the practice of the captain of the Temple, who would make his rounds during every watch, carrying lighted torches; if he found a guard asleep he would beat him with a stick and might even also set fire to his clothes, particularly if it was not the culprit's f i r s t offense.270 Thus there are many indications in this episode which point to the Seer's concern with the land of Palestine and the city of Jerusalem.

264 R i s s i , Future of the World, 15; F. Horamel, i n NKZ 1 (1890) 4 0 7 - 4 0 8 , c i t e d by Joachim J e r e m i a s , " ' Α ρ Μ α γ γ ε ί ω ν , " TOUT 1 . 4 6 8 ; F o r d , Revela-

tion,

274.

265 B e a s l e y - M u r r a y , Revelation, 245. 266 S w e e t , Revelation, 250. 267 F r i e d r i c h D t t s t e r d i e c k ' s argument ( C r i t i c a l and Exegetical Handbook to the Revelation of John·, Meyer-Kommentar; New York: Funk and W a g n a l l s , 1887; 4 2 2 - 4 2 3 ) a g a i n s t t h i s m i s s e s t h e p o i n t : an O l d T e s t a m e n t image c o n c e r n i n g t h e d e f e a t of t h e p e o p l e of God oan be u s e d t o d e s c r i b e t h e f a l l of an a n t i - C h r i s t i a n enemy i f t h a t enemy ueed to be t h e p e o p l e of God. 268 C f . Hadorn, Offenbarung, 166. 269 O t t o BBcher ( " D i e h e i l i g e S t a d t im V ö l k e r k r i e g . Handlungen e i n e s a p o k a l y p t i s c h e n S c h e m a s , " Joeephus-Studien; Unter Buchung en su

Josephus,

dem antiken Judentum und dem Heuen Testament.

Otto Michel

zum 70. Geburtetag gewidmet·, e d . O t t o B e t z , K. Haacker and M. H e n g e l ; G t t t t i n g e n : Vandenhoeck & R u p r e c h t , 1974; 55, 65 n . 4 7 , 75) a l s o thinks t h a t the r e f e r e n c e i s to Jerusalem. 270 C a r r i n g t o n , Meaning, 265; c f . Middoth 2 . 1 , r e f e r r e d t o by J o h n

Lightfoot, A Commentary on the Neu Testament Hebraica. Matthew-I Corinthians 1979) 3 . 2 0 0 (on Luke 2 2 : 4 ) .

(Reprint;

from the Talmud and Grand

Rapids:

Baker,

90

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse 5. The Seventh Bowl

At the pouring out into the air of the seventh bowl, the f i r s t result r e c o r d e d is that a loud v o i c e is heard from the temple (Rev 16:17, c f . also ν 1). Sweet and Mounce both believe this to be a r e f e r e n c e to Isa 66:6, where Yahweh's v o i c e is heard from the temple, rendering recompense to his enemies.271 ¡ n view of what we have already discovered concerning Revelation 11 and its r e f e r e n c e to the desecration of the temple at Jerusalem, it may be significant that, just a few verses previously, Isaiah spoke of the uselessness—even the abomination of—the temple and its s a c r i f i c e s (Isa 66:1-4). Following the " g r e a t v o i c e " there come thunder, lightning, loud noises, and an unprecedented earthquake which results in the splitting into three parts of "the great city" and the f a l l of "the cities of the nations"; it is then said that "God remembered great Babylon to make her drain the cup of the fury of his wrath" (16:18-19). Many see the description of the division of the city as a r e f e r e n c e to Zech 14:4, which r e f e r s to a splitting of the Mount of O l i v e s . 2 7 2 Kraft thinks this was originally (although no longer f o r the final author) a reference to Jerusalem's topography, since the city could be considered to consist of three parts: suburbs, lower city and upper city. 273 Nevertheless, some interpreters reject the view that John has the city of Jerusalem in mind, in f a v o r of the view that Rome is meant. Beckwith, Charles and Ladd all argue that Jerusalem cannot be intended here, on the grounds that the city has already been a f f e c t e d by an earthquake in chapter l l , 2 7 ^ but we cannot exclude the possibility that the Seer r e f e r s to the same event a number of times: the visions of the Apocalypse are not presented in c h r o n o l o g i c a l order. Carrington sees in verse 19 a reference to the three factions in Jerusalem (led by Simon, Eleazar and John) during the Jewish war (cf. Josephus, J.W. 5.1-4),275 but this is improbable.

A further clue that Jerusalem may be in

the mind of the Seer here lies in his choice of word o r d e r in verse 19; instead of the more usual Ξ, Ρ Γ Η

βυμοΰ

he writes [Ô] Θ Υ Μ [ Ο $ ] TT¡S & P Y Ö S ·

Β " 1 Charles can

point to one passage where the LXX uses this word o r d e r : Isaiah 9:18276—and this

271 Sweet, Revelation, 243; Mounce, Revelation, 293. 272 Swete, Apocalypse, 211; c f . Farrer, Revelation, 179-180; Sweet, Revelation, 250; Ford, Revelation, 264. 273 H. K r a f t , Die Offenbarung des Johannes (HNT 16a; Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 1974) 211, c i t e d by G ü n t h e r , Nahund Enderaartungshorizont, 213 n. 130. 274 Beckwith, Apocalypse, 686; C h a r l e s , Commentary, 2.52; Ladd, Revelation, 218. 275 Carrington, Meaning, 266. 276 Charles, Commentary, 2.52.

ACT V: Judgment upon the Earth (16:2-17:3a)

91

occurs in a passage dealing with the iniquities of the Jewish people. Van der Waal writes: A remarkable situation arises in connection with 16:19. The "great city" is either identified with Babylon (and then applied to Rome), or else it is distinguished from Babylon and identified with Jerusalem. But hardly anyone comes to the conclusion that, just as "Sodom" and "Egypt" are typological designations f o r Jerusalem, so Babylon can be too.277 A further indication that "the great city" is Jerusalem is its clear distinction from "the cities of the nations": this suggests strongly that "the great city" itself is not a "city of the nations" but a Jewish city.278 This also vitiates Lohmeyer's contention that the city here is not an actual historical city at all: he argues that the destruction of all cities has just been announced, 279 but this is not what the Seer says. More careful attention to the Seer's wording would have made it clear that "the great city" here still means what Lohmeyer admits it must have meant originally: Jerusalem. 280 There is in 16:21 additional evidence that Jerusalem is the object of these judgments: the mention of "great hail" is probably an allusion to Ezek 13:8-16, which prophesies that "great hailstones" will be a feature of the storm which will beat upon Jerusalem and break down its walls despite the "visions of peace" which the false prophets had proclaimed for the city.281 Josephine Ford sees several allusions in this vision to events associated with the siege and fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. She suggests that the mention of "flashes of lightning" and "peals of thunder" (v 18) refers to the storm which occurred when the Idumaeans were encamped in front of the city (cf. Josephus, J.W. 4.287), while concerning the "hailstones, heavy as a hundredweight" (v 21) she comments: "One might conjecture that the author had in mind not so much hail from heaven as the stones sent by the catapults and other army equipment" (cf. Josephus, J.W. 5.270-271)—especially if the stones were white.282 And indeed, according to Josephus, the missiles used at first were huge blocks of white stone weighing a talent—although later, when these white missiles proved to be too readily visible to the inhabitants of the city and could therefore be avoided, the stones were painted black (Josephus, J.W. 5.272-273). Carrington makes much of the fact that the watchmen on the walls of Jerusalem used to announce the launching of one of these missiles with a cry which Josephus translates into Greek as o

277 van der Waal, Openbaring, 250. 278 Cf. Carrington, Meaning, 266; so also Adolf S c h l a t t e r , Die Briefe und die Offenbarung dee Johannes (Erläuterung des Neuen Testaments 10; S t u t t g a r t : Calwer, 1950) 292. 279 Lohmeyer, Offenbarung, 138. 280 Lohmeyer, Offenbarung, 137. 281 C f . Carrington, Meaning, 65, 273. 282 Ford, Revelation, 264-265.

The Enemies of the Church in Che Apocalypse

92 u'os

|ρχεται;283

but Thackeray translates this by "Sonny's coming," and sees it as

a play on words in Hebrew: "ha-eben ("the

son")."284

T h u s

w e

f j

n d

("the storie") having been altered to habben

¡ t d i f f i c u l t to f o l l o w Carrington at this point. It

is also d i f f i c u l t to agree with Carrington that all the bowl-visions are "symbolic of the completeness and horror of the Roman

invasion."285

H. ACT Vis The Judgment of the Harlot (17:3b-19:21)

We come now to what is probably the most controversial part of our study. In this A c t the author depicts a r i c h l y - c l a d and bejewelled harlot by the name of "Babylon," riding upon a scarlet beast with seven heads and ten horns, but then we are told that the beast and its horns will turn on the woman (17:3b-18). There then f o l l o w s a long d i r g e o v e r the harlot (18:1-24), f o l l o w e d by shouts of praise to God f o r his judgment upon her (19:1-8). This picture is almost universally interpreted as symbolic of pagan Rome, supported by the Empire, and its subsequent f a l l , but there are good reasons f o r questioning this view. BeasleyMurray expresses the traditional understanding in the f o l l o w i n g words: The two figures of monster and woman are really alternative representations of a single entity, but in this context they y i e l d an appropriate means f o r depicting the antiChristian city in relation to the antiChristian empire. The beast is therefore the empire.286 And again: Since the woman represents the anti-christian city, it is natural to interpret the beast on which she sits, and which su[>ports her and shares her nature, as symbolic of the antichristian e m p i r e . ^ But in what sense can it be said that the Empire or one s p e c i f i c Emperor turns against the capital city and destroys it? How can Rome destroy Rome?288

As

Sickenberger points out, this image cannot be applied to Nero's alleged setting f i r e to Rome, f o r even if he did set the city ablaze (and even this is uncertain) it was not with the intention of destroying the whole city; he merely wanted to

283 Carrington, Meaning, 273. 284 H. S t . John Thackeray, t r a n s l a t o r and annotator, Josephus, The Jewish War, Books IV-VII (London: Heinemann/New York: Putnam, 1927) 285 note g. 285 Carrington, Meaning, 263-264. 286 Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 249. 287 Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 252. 288 Carrington, Meaning, 274.

ACT VI: The Judgment of the H a r l o t

(17:3b-19:21)

93

destroy one part of it to c l e a r the ground f o r a r e b u i l d i n g project.289 Moreover, Josephine Ford suggests, the mention of the "seven heads" on which the harlot is seated (17:9)—interpreted by the Seer himself as "seven hills"—suggests that the harlot is d i s t i n c t from the city of Home, even if associated with it.29D Another d i f f i c u l t y is pointed out by Minear, who notes that the judgment on Babylon is distinguished carefully from the judgment of the beast and the kings, which is not mentioned until 19:19-21. He says, "[T]his would be nonsense if all three (Babylon, beast, kings) stood f o r the same historical entity."291 T h j s cannot be explained simply as an instance of r e p e t i t i o n , in which the same incident is described under more than one figure:292 h e r e

we

dealing with successive s c e n e s within a

single Act of the drama: f i r s t the h a r l o t / c i t y is destroyed by the beast and the kings, then the beast and the kings are themselves d e s t r o y e d . We must look more closely at J o h n ' s d e s c r i p t i o n of "Babylon" in o r d e r to d i s cover what he has in mind. There is one c l e a r i n d i c a t i o n in the designation of the h a r l o t / c i t y as "great"—we have already found that "the g r e a t city" is the city "where [the] Lord was c r u c i f i e d " (11:8), which must r e f e r to Jerusalem. Another clue is found in tne term "harlot" (ιόρνη) which the author uses. There seems to be no reason to c o n f i n e the use of such a term to Rome. Although non-Jewish cities or nations are sometimes accused of harlotry, e.g. "tyre (Isa 23:15-18) and Nineveh (Nahum 3:4), the Old Testament f a r more frequently uses the term of the nation of Israel (or Judah) or the city of Jerusalem. A strong indication that Jerusalem is the harlot is the f a c t that John draws so much of his material from the prophecy of Ezekiel, in which there are two extended developments of the picture of Jerusalem as a harlot—a worse h a r l o t , in f a c t , than any o t h e r city (chaps. 16, 23).293 £ V e n many of those commentators who c o n c l u d e finally that John is talking about Home acknowledge the a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s of the designation "harlot" f o r Jerusalem o r the nation of Israel and r e f e r to such Old Testament passages as Isa 1:21; J e r 2:20; 3:1; üzek 16:15; 23:19, 3U; Hosea 2:5; 3:3; 4:15.294 Turner, f o r example, comments: One would think this more a p p r o p r i a t e of Jerusalem than of Koine. The Heb. p r o p h e t s constantly accused the holy city of the spiritual sin of fornication, namely religious syncretism and imprudent associations with foreign kings; in

289 Joseph S i c k e n b e r g e r , "Die Johannesapokalypse und Rom," BZ 17 (1926) 277. 290 Ford, Revelation, 285-28. 291 Minear, New Earth, 239. 292 Cf. page 47, above. 293 C a r r i n g t o n , Meaning, 276. 294 Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 251; Ladd, Revelation, 221; C h a r l e s , Commentary, 2 . 7 3 - 7 4 .

94

The Enemies of the Church i n the Apocalypse v. 2 t h i s c i t y , w h a t e v e r it is, is a c c u s e d of just that kind of a s s o c i a t i o n with the k i n g s of the earth. It is d i f f i c u l t to r e s i s t the c o n c l u s i o n that a l l this is v e r y f i t t i n g l y a p p l i e d t o Jerusalem.295

Further, J o s e p h i n e F o r d notes that e v e n the d e n u n c i a t i o n of N i n e v e h as a h a r l o t in Nahum 3:4 is a p p l i e d to Jerusalem in 4QpNah.296

g^e

concludes:

T h e s e texts [ i . e . 4QpNah and o t h e r Qumran t e x t s ] t o g e t h e r with the OT o n e s i n d i c a t e that the h a r l o t in K e v 17 is Jerusalem, not Rome. I n d e e d , if it is the c o v e n a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p with Yahweh w h i c h makes Israel his special people, his b r i d e , how c o u l d a n o n - I s r a e l i t e nation be c a l l e d " h a r l o t " e x c e p t in a much l e s s p r e c i s e sense? It is the c o v e n a n t w h i c h makes the bride, the breaking of it w h i c h makes the adulteress.297 We c o n c l u d e , then, that although the term " h a r l o t " is sometimes used in the Old Testament o t h e r than in c o n n e c t i o n with Yahweh's own p e o p l e , it is a term used f a r more a p p r o p r i a t e l y o f Jerusalem o r the Jewish

nation.

T h e r e a r e o t h e r e v e n more s p e c i f i c i n d i c a t i o n s in these chapters that Jerusalem is the h a r l o t / c i t y in the S e e r ' s mind. We may o v e r l o o k the s u g g e s t i o n that John's r e f e r e n c e t o the cup, o u t w a r d l y beautiful but " f u l l o f abominations and the impurit i e s o f her f o r n i c a t i o n " (17:4) is i n f l u e n c e d by Jesus' d e n u n c i a t i o n o f the scribes and P h a r i s e e s (Matt 23:25; Luke 11:39); 2 9 8 the r e s e m b l a n c e is quite s u p e r f i c i a l · A more c o g e n t argument is that the d e s c r i p t i o n of the woman as " d r u n k with the b l o o d of the saints and the b l o o d of the martyrs o f Jesus" (17:16) and as having " i n her . . . the b l o o d of p r o p h e t s and of saints and of a l l who have been slain on e a r t h " (18:24) a p p l i e s to Jerusalem more than to Rome.

Sweet b e l i e v e s that

John must be r e f e r r i n g t o Rome, and more s p e c i f i c a l l y to the Neronian persecution, y e t he can say, "But, f i r s t , the passages mentioned a l s o owe much to OT f u l m i nations, a g a i n s t N i n e v e h , Babylon and T y r e . . ., and t o Jesus' scribes

and Pharisees

and of Jerusalem

which muraers

denunciation

the prophets

of

(Matt.

2329-38).ti299 T u r n e r l i n k s R e v e l a t i o n 18:24 a l s o with Jesus' w o r d s c o n c e r n i n g Jerusalem and says, " S o o n c e more the question a r i s e s w h e t h e r Rev[elation] is not r e a l l y d i r e c t e d against militant and p e r s e c u t i n g non-Christian Judaism, w h i c h a r r e s t e d the spread of the G o s p e l in its e a r l i e s t days, rather than secular Rome."3U0 T u r n e r a l s o says, "Rome was not r e s p o n s i b l e f o r many o f the deaths of OT martyrs,

295 296 297 298

Turner, " R e v e l a t i o n , " 1054. Ford, Revelation, 284. Ford, Revelation, 285. So K a r l Georg Kuhn, "Βαβυλων," TDNT 1.516; V o s , Synoptic Traditions, 159. 299 Sweet, Revelation, 26, emphasis added; c f . p . 276, where he makes a s i m i l a r comment c o n c e r n i n g R e v e l a t i o n 1 8 : 2 4 ; c f . a l s o F o r d , Revelation, 288; V o s , Synoptic Traditions, 162-163. 300 Turner, " R e v e l a t i o n , " 1054.

ACT VI: The Judgment of the Harlot (17:3b-19:21)

95

and al I is a very inclusive word."301 some commentators have even suggested that the Synoptic denunciation of Jerusalem corresponds to the passage in Kevelation, rather than vice

versa.302

Josephine Ford sees a further connection with the words of Jesus concerning Jerusalem in the reference to "apostles" as one category of those who were sent (ίπτεσταλμενο^) to her¡303 but the connection seems rather tenuous. Ladd, too, argues that what is said here concerning the involvement of "Babylon" in killing the followers of Jesus does not apply to first-century Rome: A short persecution had been waged in the time of Nero. . . . But after this one outburst of hatred, Christians were comparatively untroubled in Rome. . . . It was only under Domitian that we have evidence of the pepsecution of Christians on religious grounds. However the persecution by Domitian was of a minor sort.304 It is not only the harlot's crimes which point to her identification as Jerusalem. Many of the details of her judgment also point in the same direction. She is to be made "desolate and naked"; and her flesh is to be devoured and she is to be burned with fire (17:6; cf. 18:8). As Beasley-Murray says: "The language takes up phrase by phrase Ezekiel's prophecy of the destruction of a faithless Jerusalem through the Babylonians and Assyrians (Ezek. 23:25ff.)."305 Through the same prophet Yahweh says that he will gather the harlot Jerusalem's lovers against her to strip her of her clothing and jewels and burn her houses (Ezek 16:35-41). There is a further parallel to the punishment of being stripped naked in Hosea 2:3, 9-10, where Yahweh warns that he will cease to provide clothing for his adulterous wife, Israel, thus leaving her naked. Although Tyre is also threatened with nakedness and consumption by fire (cf. Ezek 28:17-18), the verbal parallels are far closer to Ezekiel's descriptions of Jerusalem's impending fate. The laments over the fallen city also include features which apply most appropriately to Jerusalem. It must be admitted, of course, that the broad outline of the lamentations is drawn from Old Testament passages concerning the fate of Tyre and ancient Babylon, but there are details which could be applied, and which

301 Turner, "Revelation," 1056; cf. Ford, Revelation, 286, 300. Cf. Lohmeyer (Offenbarung, 153), vàio also argues that what is said here cannot be said of Rome. Lohmeyer is not, of course, arguing that "Babylon" symbolizes Jerusalem, but simply that it is not appropriate to refer it to Rome. 302 Cf. BBcher, "Heilige Stadt," 74, η. 94. 303 Ford, Revelation, 299. 304 Ladd, Revelation, 225. He is arguing that John is referring not to a contemporary situation—and certainly not to persecution by Rome— but to "an eschatological Babylon"; c f . p. 243. 305 Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 259-260; c f . Ford, Revelation, 292; Charles, Commentary, 2.73.

96

The Enemies o f the Church in the Apocalypse

were sometimes in the Old Testament applied, to Jerusalem. Even the description of the angel who announces the fall of the city (18:1) has affinities with an Old Testament passage concerning Jerusalem. Sweet suggests that the description of the earth as being "made bright by [the angel's] glory" is reminiscent of Ezekiel's vision of the restoration of Jerusalem, in which the prophet sees the earth shining with the glory of the God of Israel (Ezek 43:2). This vision was like the one which the prophet had seen when the Lord came to destroy the city (v 3). Ezekiel then sees the glory of the Lord re-entering the restored Temple and is told that this is where the Lord will dwell in the midst of his people for ever, but that the people tire to put away their harlotry

and other evils (vv 4-9). Ezekiel's vision

of a restored city and temple clearly forms the basis of John's vision of "the holy city, new Jerusalem" (Rev 21:2-22:5), and so Sweet concludes that the allusion here to Ezek 43:2-9 "may suggest that the desolation of Babylon . . .

is to be

seen in the light of God's scouring Jerusalem to prepare it for his everlasting presence."306 But whereas Sweet believes that "Babylon" here is not merely Jerusalem (although it includes it), we would argue that this use of Ezekiel's vision is additional evidence that John's Apocalypse is very much concerned with the fall of Jerusalem. The angel's announcement of the fall of "Babylon" (Kev 18:2) commences with a description of the city as "a dwelling-place (κατοικητηριον) of demons, a haunt of every foul s p i r i t , " which is reminiscent of pronouncements about many c i t i e s or peoples in the Old Testament, e.g. Babylon (Isa 13:21-22; J e r 50:39), Edom (Isa 34:14-15) and Nineveh (Zeph 2:14).307 Josephine Ford points out, however, that the word κατοικητηριον is used in the LXX of the dwelling-place of Yahweh (cf., for example, Exod 15:17), and she suggests that a Jew reading this part of the Apocalypse would have thought immediately of the Temple—and we may suppose that a Jewish Christian would have been struck similarly. Now, however, Jerusalem is no longer the sanctuary of Yahweh but the dwelling-place of evil and uncleanness.308 Ford r e f e r s also to Jeremiah's prediction that Jerusalem would become "a lair of j a c k a l s " ( J e r 9:11) and to the description of Jerusalem in 4QpNah (on Nahum 2:12) as having become a dwelling-place for the wicked of the nations,309 but the parallel is not obvious.

306 Sweet, Revelation, 266; c f . Ford, Revelation, 300. 307 Swete, Apocalypse, 227. 308 Ford, Revelation, 300. Ford i s i n c o r r e c t in a s s e r t i n g that t h i s i s the only NT occurrence o f κατοικητηριον (p. 2 9 6 ) : i t i s used in Ephesians 2 : 2 2 a l s o . 309 Ford, Revelation, 301.

ACT V I : The Judgment of the Harlot

(17î3b-19:21)

97

There is a further connection with Jerusalem in the cry from heaven to "my [whether God's or Christ's is not made clear] people" to "come out of her . . . lest you take part in her sins, lest you share in her plagues" (18:14). There is plainly a close connection with Jer 50:8; 51:6, 9, 45, which calls on the people of God to flee from Babylon in view of her impending destruction; and also in Isa 48:20; 52:11 the people are called out of Babylon in a "new exodus" at the conclusion of the Exile.310 Swete has also suggested that there is an allusion here to the calling of Abraham to leave Ur (Gen 12:1), of Lot to leave Sodom (Gen 19:12-14), and of the whole congregation of Israel to depart from the camp lest they be destroyed along withKorah and his partners in rebellion (Num 16:26); but he cannot find any historical fulfillment of the call (which he assumes to be a call to leave Rome)

and thinks that "such a precept is sufficiently obeyed by

aloofness of spirit maintained in the very heart of the world's traffic."311 Van der Waal argues that if the "Babylon" from which John's readers are urged to flee were Rome, there would be a conflict with other New Testament passages which describe, f o r example, Paul's eagerness to visit Rome (Rom 1:11-12; 15:22-23),312 but of course the passage of only a few years could have altered the situation drastically; if Paul had been writing at the time of the Apocalypse he too might well have exhorted Christians to f l e e from Rome. There is, however, another New Testament exhortation to believers to flee from a city in the face of its imminent fall, and that city is Jerusalem (Luke 21:20-22; Matt 24:15-18; Mark 13:14-16);313 van der Waal suggests that in his eschatological discourse Jesus was in fact specifically applying Jer 51:45 (which concerns Babylon) to Jerusalem.314 When we take this command to leave "Babylon" (^Jerusalem) in conjunction with the earlier report that the woman fled "into the wilderness" (Rev 12:6, 14), it seems that John may be following that stream of Judaism which adopted the nomadic ideal, over against the stream which looked for a return to the land (the "quintessence" of which was the city of Jerusalem).315 For John, in other words, the destiny of the people of God is no longer tied to any geographical center.

310 Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 265; Mounce, Revelation, 324; P i e r r e P r i g e n t , "Apocalypse et Apocalyptique," Exegeee Biblique et Judaïsme ( e d . J . - E . Menard; Strasbourg: Faculte de Theologie C a t h o l i q u e , 1973) 140. 311 Swete, Apoaalypee, 229. 312 van der Waal, Openbaring, 14-15.

313 Vos, Synoptic Traditions,

161; Charles, Commentary, 2.97.

314 van der Waal, Openbaring, 36 η . 52. 315 William David Davies, The Gospel and the Land (Berkeley: University o f C a l i f o r n i a Press, 1974) 44 n. 15.

98

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

The further description of the sins of "Babylon" as "heaped high as heaven" is reminiscent of Jeremiah's word concerning Babylon of old (Jer 51:19), but Beckwith draws attention to Ezra's confession that the iniquities of the nation of Israel "have risen higher than our heads, and our guilt has mounted up to the heavens" (Ezra 9:6).316 -phe command (to whom it is addressed is not stated) to "render to ['Babylon'] as she herself has rendered" (Rev 18:6a) reproduces the thought of Jer 50:15, 29 and Ps 137:8 concerning the punishment of Babylon, but the voice from heaven continues with the command to "repay her double for her deeds; mix a double draught for her in the cup she mixed" (18:6bc), which has no parallel in the Old Testament passages dealing with Babylon. The idea of double recompense does appear, however, in connection with Jerusalem and the people of Israel. According to Jer 16:18, Yahweh will "doubly recompense" Israel's iniquity and sin, and in Jer 17:18 the prophet calls for "double destruction" on his persecutors, while in Isa 40:2 Jerusalem is said to have "received from Yahweh's hand double for all her sins." In Hosea 10:10, however, Israel is charged with "double iniquity," so it may be, that, as Josephine Ford suggests, the double punishment is because of the particularly heinous nature of the sins, not that the harlot is to be punished twice as much as she deserves.317 gut the essential point to note here is that such language is used in the Old Testament only in connection with God's chosen nation of Israel.

We cannot agree with Vos's assessment that the inclusion of

this idea here "indicates the freedom with which the Old Testament passages were employed." 318 Again, the idea of punishment as being given a cup to drink occurs in the Old Testament in connection with Jerusalem: Jeremiah is given a cup of the wine of wrath and sent to make various nations drink of it, but Jerusalem is the first place named (Jer 25:15-18); later it is said that all nations are to drink of this cup and that Yahweh begins to work evil at "the city which is called by [his] name" (25:28). Isaiah also uses this imagery, and here too it is Jerusalem which drinks first of the cup of Yahweh's wrath, and only afterwards is it given to her tormentors (Isa 51:17, 22-23).

The same picture of judgment on Jerusalem is

found in Ezekiel also (23:32-34). The acted parable concerning the fate of the city (18:21) may also contain a pointer to Jerusalem as the focus of the Seer's attention. It is commonly thought that this is based on Jer 51:63, where the prophet is instructed to take the book

316 Beckwith, Apocalypse, 714. 317 Ford, Revelation, 297-298; c t . Revelation, 269. 318 Vos, Synoptic Traditions, 33.

Beckwith, Apocalypse,

715;

Sweet,

ACT VI: The Judgment of the Harlot

(17:3b-19:21)

99

in which are r e c o r d e d all the e v i l s which are to b e f a l l Babylon, tie a stone to it, and throw it into the Euphrates,319 w h i l e the angel's word that the city will be "found no more" is clearly linked with Yahweh's word throughEzekiel concerning Tyre (Ezek 26:21).320

But why has the writer changed Jeremiah's picture by

adding that the stone was " l i k e a great millstone" and by replacing "the Euphrates" by "the sea?"

Vos argues that these alterations "appear to be due to John's

acquaintance with the words of Jesus, which have apparently influenced the manner in which this passage was expressed"; he r e f e r s s p e c i f i c a l l y to Luke 17:2; Matt 18:6 and Mark 9:42.321

We

believe that Vos is c o r r e c t on this point, but there is

still more to be said. When we look at Luke's account we find that the preceding pericope describes the fate of the rich man, who is said to have been "clothed in purple and fine linen" (Luke 16:19).

The clothing of the harlot "Babylon" is

described similarly, although in reverse o r d e r and with the addition of the word " s c a r l e t " (Rev 18:16); this r e i n f o r c e s the conclusion that the Seer has Luke's Gospel (or the tradition underlying Luke) in mind when he writes 18:21. Now it is true that Luke 17:1-2 and parallels are not obviously directed s p e c i f i c a l l y at Jewish opponents of the Gospel, but the warning could certainly be applied to such. Moreover, the preceding pericope concerning the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31) is thought by many commentators to be an attack on the Sadducees.322 Thus we have further indications that John may be thinking of the fate of the nation of Israel in his description of the f a l l of the harlot/city, "Babylon." There are other pointers towards this conclusion in this proclamation by the angel: the image of being cast into the sea had already been used of the defeat of the Egyptians at the Sea of Reeds (Exod 15:5; Neh 9:11)323 and, as we have seen already, f o r the Seer, Jerusalem is the "Egypt" on which the plagues come (Rev 11:8).

319 Ford, Revelation, 306; Swete, Apoaalypse, 239. 320 Charles, Commentary, 2.107. 321 Vos, Synoptic Traditions, 157-158; c f . also Lohmeyer, (.Offenbarung, 152), who points out that these are the only NT passages where the word is used. 322 C f . for example, George Bradford Caird, The Gospel of St Luke ( P e l i can NT Commentaries; Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1963) 191; Lloyd Gaston,

No Stone on Another: Studies in the Significance

of the Fall

of

Jerusalem in the Synoptic Gospels (NovTSup 23; Leiden: B r i l l , 1970) 328. 323 Beckwith, Apocalypse, 719; Ford, Revelation, 306; A. Pohl, Die Offenbarung des Johannes (2 v o l s . ; W u p p e r t a l e r Studienbibel; Wuppertal: Brockhause, 1969) 2.237 n. 806; van der Waal, Openbaring, 226-227.

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

100

The angel's words continue the thought of the "millstone," although now the idea is that the cessation of the sound of the millstone is one of the evidences of the utter desolation of the city. But this idea, too, comes from Old Testament passages concerning judgments on Jerusalem, as do many of the other images employed in verses 22-23. Lamplight and the voice of bridegroom and bride are to be eliminated from Jerusalem or Judah (or both) in many prophetic denunciations (cf. Jer 7:34). Jer 25:10 adds the idea of the elimination of the sound of the millstone from Judah, while Jer 16:9-13 again refers to the absence of the voices of bridegroom and bride from the land because of the idolatry of the people.324 The angel's proclamation also includes an announcement concerning the cessation of the sounds of various kinds of musical instrument. Concerning the trumpet, Swete argues that this would be more relevant to Rome than to Jerusalem, since this instrument was in much wider use in the former city, whereas among the Jews it was used almost exclusively in religious

services.325

¡f t however, John is

concerned mainly with the rejection of apostate Judaism on religious grounds, it would be fitting for him to focus on things which are characteristic of Jerusalem's religious life. We cannot leave these chapters concerning "Babylon" without considering those features which are held by the majority of scholars to suggest that the city in question is Rome. We may commence with the name itself. Most commentators appeal to Jewish apocalyptic writings such as 2 Apoc. Bar. 67:7; Sib. Or. 5:143 and to 1 Pet 5:13 where (it is claimed) "Babylon" is employed as a symbol for Rome.326 Questions need to be asked, however, concerning the origin of this symbolian and concerning its date. Hunzinger (who takes Revelation 17-18, especially 17:9, as evidence for the identification of "Babylon" as Rome)327 argues that Judaism and Christianity probably did not come to adopt this identification independently; rather, one must have come taken the term over from the other, and it is more likely that Christianity borrowed the term from Judaism. "Babylon" was not an immediate and unavoidable choice, as is evident from the use in late Jewish writings of many other names as code-words for the world-power opposed to God, e.g. "Assyria," "Nineveh," "Egypt," "Edom," or (among the Qumran community) "Kittim"

324 325 326 327

Charles, Commentary, 2.110-111; Sweet, Revelation, 274. Swete, Apocalypse, 239. Cf. Charles, Commentary, 2.62; R i s s i , Time and History, 79. C. H. Hunzinger, "Babylon a l s Deckname f ü r Rom und die Datierung des I P t , " Gottes Wort und Gottes Land; Festschrift W. Hertzberg ( e d . Henning Graf Reventlow; Göttingen: Vanderihoeck & Ruprecht, 1965) 67.

ACT VI: The Judgment of the Harlot (17:3b-19:21)

101

(cf. 4QpNah 1:3).328 Hunzinger notes that all the Jewish examples of the use of "Babylon" f o r Rome post-date the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, and he concludes that Judaism adopted the name specifically because, just as Babylon destroyed the Temple the first time, Rome was the perpetrator of this evil on the second occasion.3 29

Hunzinger's main point is that, since the use of "Babylon" as a

code-word for Rome began only after A.D. 70,1 Peter, which uses this symbolian, must have been written after A.D. 70 and therefore could not have been written by the Apostle Peter. But it is not even certain that "Babylon" in 1 Pet 5:13 is a symbol for Rome: C. F. D. Moule argues that the epistle contains nothing which would require the use of such a code, "so there were no security reasons for the term"; he concludes that the term is used simply to designate "the place of exile."330 in either case, then, 1 Peter may be eliminated as evidence from the period before A.D. 70 f o r the use of the name "Babylon" to refer to Rome. Thus if (and we are not necessarily assuming this to be the case) John's Apocalypse comes from the Neronic period, we cannot automatically assume that the name "Babylon" was intended as, or would have been understood by John's readers as, a cryptic reference to Rome. Of course we cannot be sure that the Apocalypse does come from Nero's reign, but even if its date is Domitianic, can we necessarily assume that the reference is to Rome?

Were Christians so loyal to Jerusalem at this time that they would

have seen its fall as such a catastrophe as it was to the Jews?331 Later Christian writers do apply the name "Babylon" to Rome, but this may be a later development: they may have taken the term over from the Jews, as Hunzinger suggests, or they may have been applying Revelation 17-18 to Rome, even though that was not its primary intention—just as modern writers and preachers sometimes designate present-day nations as "Babylon." The description of the woman as "arrayed in purple and scarlet, and bedecked with gold and jewels and pearls" (17:4) is frequently seen as a reference to "the

328 Hunzinger, "Babylon als Deckname," 68-69. 329 Hunzinger, "Babylon als Deckname," 71; c f . Collins, "Myth and History," 382. 330 Charles F. D. Moule, "The Nature and Purpose of I Peter," NTS 3 (1956-7) 9. 331 I have argued elsewhere ("The Plan and Purpose of Acts" [Research paper presented to Fr. Alan Sheldrick, Department of Studies in Religion, University of Queensland, 1975]) that one of the purposes of Acts is to explain how the Church was transformed from a Jewish group centered on Jerusalem to a largely Gentile group spread over a wide area.

102

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

luxury and splendour of imperial Rome,"332 but Josephine Ford reminds us that the furnishings of the sanctuary and the clothing of the (high-) priests also included such materials ( c f . Exod 28:5, 15, 23; Josephus, J.W. i212).333 Nor should we overlook Jeremiah's description of Jerusalem as clad in scarlet and adorned with golden j e w e l r y (Jer 4:30). The mention of the name written upon the woman's forehead (17:5) is usually thought of as a r e f e r e n c e to the custom of Roman prostitutes, who used (it is claimed) to wear their names on their head bands.334 Appeal is usually made to Seneca, Rhet. 1.2.7, and Juvenal, Satires

VI.122-123, but it is

noteworthy that in neither of these passages do modern standard translations give any hint that the women in question wore their names on their headbands or foreheads. The former text is interpreted as meaning that Claudius' w i f e played the harlot "under the f e i g n e d name of Lycisca,"335 while the latter text is translated: "Your name hung at the door."336 gome commentators have also expressed doubts about the validity of interpreting this passage as a reference to this alleged Roman custom. 337 Even if this were the practice of Roman prostitutes, however, this would not preclude the Seer's use of it as the basis for a figurative description of Jerusalem's evils.

But we must also take note of Jeremiah's charge against

Jerusalem that, because of her shamelessness, she has "a harlot's brow" (3:3), which again suggests that the Seer may have Jerusalem in mind, especially when Jeremiah soon afterwards warns faithless Judah that, dressed in scarlet as she was, her lovers have turned upon her and are now seeking to kill her.338

1. The Harlot and the Beast

We have already touched on the question of the relationship of the harlot to the beast on which she rides,339

more remains to be said. That the seven

heads of the beast (17:3, 7) are interpreted by the Seer himself as "seven hills on which the woman is seated" (17:9) is usually taken as an indication that the woman

332 333 334 335

336

337 338 339

Charles, Commentary, 2.64. Ford, Revelation, 278, 287. Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 253; Charles, Commentary, 2.65. Juvenal and. Persius ( t r . G. G. Ramsay; Loeb C l a s s i c a l Library; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press/London: Heinemann, 1950) 93. The Elder Seneca, Declamations (2 v o l s . ; t r . M. Winterbottom; Loeb C l a s s i c a l Library; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press/London: Heinemann, 1974) 1.69. Swete, Apocalypse, 217; Ford, Revelation, 279. Cf. Court, Myth, and History, 141. See above, pp. 91-2.

ACT VI: The Judgment of the Harlot

(17:3b-19:21)

103

is the city of Rome,340 but this has been questioned by some writers. Sickenberger notes that the description of the harlot as "seated upon many waters" (17:1) is not literally true of Rome, but has simply been taken over from the description of the literal Babylon ( c f . Jer 51:13); he t h e r e f o r e asks why the "seven hills" could not have been employed a l l e g o r i c a l l y as well.341 Ladd, in fact, draws attention to Old Testament passages in which "a hill or a mountain is a symbol of power or rule" ( c f . Dan 2:35; Jer 51:25; Isa 2:2; 41:15; Ps 68:15-16; Hab 3:6) and argues that the seven hills stand f o r seven empires and their rulers.342 Minear appeals to John's love of the number "seven" as an indication that the number need not be taken literally here. He concedes that Roman writers had frequently r e f e r r e d to Rome's seven hills iurbs septicollis),

but wonders whether such literature would

have been known to John and his intended recipients.343

¡f j 0 h n and his

Asian readers were familiar with the idea of Rome as the city of seven hills, it is obvious that a Roman reader would have been much more familiar with such imagery ( c f . Horace, Carm. Saec. 7; V i r g i l , Aeneid vi.5; Propertius, iii.10; Ovid, Trist. gained by this device?

vi.782; Martial, iv.64; C i c e r o ,

i.5.69).344

But

AdAtt.

j n that case what is to be

If the description is so obviously that of Rome and its

f a l l , what security would be a f f o r d e d the writer or recipients of the Revelation? Those found with a copy of the document in their possession would immediately be suspected of advocating—if not actually conspiring to procure—the overthrow of the capital of the Empire.

But the essential point to be kept in mind is that

it is the beast, not the woman, who has the seven hills,345

ancj

the fate of the

beast is described only later and in f a r less lurid terms (19:20). We are prepared to accept the identification of the beast with seven heads and ten horns as a symbol of Rome and the Empire, although there are enormous d i f f i c u l t i e s in discovering the author's intention in his "interpretation" of the heads and horns.

340 C f . , for example. Court, Myth and History, 125; C o l l i n s , "Myth and H i s t o r y , " 381. 341 Sickenberger, "Johannesapokalypse und Rom," 276-277; c f . P. Gaechter, "The Role of Memory in the Making of the Apocalypse," TS 9 (1948) 449. 342 Ladd, Revelation, 227. 343 Minear, New Earth, 238; c f . Lohmeyer (.Offenbarung, 143), who notes that the references to Rome as "the city of seven h i l l s " come from the Western Mediterranean area; we cannot be certain about i t s use in the East. 344 C f . Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 256; Bruce, "Revelation," 658; Caird, Revelation, 216; L i l j e , Last Book, 225; Mounce, Revelation, 313-314; Swete, Apocalypse, 220. 345 C f . Minear, New Earth, 237.

104

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

Almost all commentators agree that this is a r e f e r e n c e to a series of Roman emperors, but there is little agreement concerning the identity of the first of the seven kings, and there is also great uncertainty about how many of the three pretenders (Galba, Otho and Vitellius) are to be included in the computation. Many commentators have already made up their minds, on the basis of the external e v i d e n c e , that Domitian is the ruler during whose reign the Apocalypse was written; he ought, t h e r e f o r e , to be the "sixth king," the one who now " i s " ; but, if we commence with Julius Caesar, the only way to arrive at this solution is to count only two of the three pretenders, a procedure which Court condemns as "impossibly arbitrary." 346 i n f a c t , however, many writers believe that Domitian is "the beast," who is also described as "an eighth [who] belongs to the seven."

But to make

Domitian the eighth of the series necessitates commencing the series with Augustus and omitting Galba, Otho and Vitellius. Carrington argues that these last three may be omitted because they " d o not count. They never received the worship of the whole Empire, 'the world'."347 But Roman historians, clearly, did not see the matter in this light: even Suetonius, who calls Galba, Otho and Vitellius " r e b e l lious princes" (Vespasian, 1), nevertheless included them in his Lives of the Caesars. Thus there is no good reason to exclude them from the series of emperors in Revelation.348 Furthermore, it is not satisfactory to start counting emperors only with Augustus: he was not the f i r s t , and " a l l the comparable extracanonical counts, Jewish or Christian, start at the beginning."349

But even those who do f o l l o w

these unusual methods of computation do not escape from d i f f i c u l t i e s : in this case, the one who " i s , " the sixth ruler, would be Vespasian, and various d e v i c e s are resorted to in an attempt to explain this discrepancy.

Some suggest that

John has taken over a source dating from Vespasian's reign but has not integrated it properly into his own work. Others suggest that the author has deliberately ante-dated his writing after the manner of some Jewish apocalyptic works.350 The f i r s t proposal does riot seem satisfactory, and the second is c r i t i c i z e d by Beckwith, who points out that the apocalyptic practice of ante-dating is employed

346 Court, Myth and History, 127; Farrer, Revelation, 34. Neverthel e s s , Günther (.Nah- und Endericavtung, 135) has argued that V i t e l l i u s may be omitted, since he did not have the support of the army. 347 Carrington, Meaning, 283. 348 John A. T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1976) 243-244. 349 Robinson, Redating, 244; c f . Collins ("Myth and H i s t o r y , " 385-386), who points out that Tacitus (Hist. 1.1) omits any discussion of Julius Caesar, not because of any antipathy to Caesar, but because he believes that the e a r l i e r period has already been s u f f i c i e n t l y described by competent h i s t o r i a n s . 350 Swete, Apocalypse, 221.

ACT VI: The Judgment of t h e H a r l o t

(17:3b-19:21)

105

only when a prophecy is put into the mouth of a notable figure from a previous generation; this is not the case with the New Testament Apocalypse.Moreover, we are told explicitly three times that "the beast" "is not" (vv 8, 10, 11). If we commence with Julius Caesar, however, the sixth ruler is Nero, but very few present-day scholars accept a Neronic dating of the book, if for no other reason than that the imagery of the dying and returning ruler is believed to presuppose Nero's death.352 Furthermore, we are then faced with the problem of determining whom John had in mind as (a) the seventh king who "has not yet come," and is to "remain only a little while" (v 10) and (b) the beast (or eighth king). Court gives consideration also to a totally different starting point from which to count the seven rulers.

He suggests that John may have been thinking of

specific Emperors who could be counted as "antichrists" because of their opposition to the Church. Court therefore proposes to commence the series with Nero, the notable example of such opposition, especially because "he started a fashion in hostility, whether persecution of the Christians was then established on a legal basis or not." Then each of the Emperors who succeeded Nero would also be included in the sequence, irrespective of his own attitude to Christianity.353 But there are still difficulties: if one commences with Nero and includes the three "pretenders," the sixth would be Titus, whereas if, taking the same starting-point, one omits the three "pretenders," the sixth would be Trajan. But the only way to make Domitian the sixth ruler of the series would again be to count only two of the three, which, as we have already seen, Court rejects.354 i n

an

effort to

solve this problem, Court even wonders whether Irenaeus might have been in error and whether the Apocalypse might have been written under Trajan rather than at the end of Domitian's reign. He finally hesitates, however, to adopt such a conclusion without supporting evidence.355 Nevertheless, he still seems to be determined to commence the series with Nero, and suggests that, in the statement that one of the heads of the beast was wounded, "one" (ô els) is to be taken as

351 Beckwith, Apocalypse, 705. Although J o h n ' s Apocalypse i s d e s c r i b e d as ' A H O K 0 X U I | H S του ' ΐ η σ ο ΰ Χρίστου, J e s u s i s n o t t h e one who h a s t h e v i s i o n s . T h e r e f o r e B e c k w i t h ' s argument s t i l l h o l d s : t h e v i s i o n s of R e v e l a t i o n p u r p o r t t o have been seen n o t by some a n c i e n t n o t a b l e b u t by a contemporary of t h e a d d r e s s e e s . There i s t h e r e f o r e no p o i n t in a n t e d a t i n g the v i s i o n s . 352 Mounce, Revelation, 316. 353 C o u r t , Myth and History, 126. 354 C o u r t , Myth and History, 127. 355 C o u r t , Myth and History, 128.

106

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

"the f i r s t , " as (so Court a l l e g e s ) in 6:1^®—this in spite of the Seer's statement that f i v e of the series have already fallen. Some writers have abandoned altogether the attempt to identify the individual "heads" of the beast.357

Beasley-Murray says that it is

likely that this whole procedure should be viewed as misguided. The symbolism of the beast's seven heads was not created by John to suit the Koman historical situation, but was an eschatological dogma with roots reaching into past millennia. That Rome was situated on seven hills was a happy c o i n c i dence of which John gladly availed himself. It was, however, too much to expect that the Roman empire would conveniently have seven emperors only; nor was any such limitation necessary. When apocalyptic traditions are applied to history, precision is not to be looked for.358 Some look f o r a wholly a l l e g o r i c a l interpretation of John's vision here. Sweet writes that "John's history . . . is spiritual . . .; his hearers needed to be told not who was reigning but his spiritual a f f i l i a t i o n s . The number seven is symbolic."359 He continues by arguing that the statement "one is": is not meant to tell the hearers who is reigning—they know. John is presenting the emperors as a symbolic seven, and placing himself and his readers at the sixth f o r symbolic reasons: at the sixth trumpet and sixth bowl f o r c e s are gathered f o r the final showdown, while the seventh each depict a short but crucial moment of crisis leading into it. . . . John's churches are not yet at the moment of crisis, but in the approach to it on which the outcome depends.360 Ladd seeks to solve the problem by suggesting that the heads of the beast are not to be interpreted as a succession of individual rulers, but as a series of kingdoms, the sixth being Rome; but a seventh kingdom is to succeed Rome and c o n tinue f o r a short time before the advent of the Antichrist. 361 Hendriksen takes a similar view, holding that the seventh kingdom is " a l l antichristian governments between the f a l l of Rome and the final empire of a n t i c h r i s t . " 3 6 2

356 Court, Myth and History, 128. 357 So C o l l i n s , "Myth and H i s t o r y , " 385; c f . Farrer, Revelation, 33; Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 256-257. 358 Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 257. 359 Sweet, Revelation, 257. 360 Sweet, Revelation, 259. 361 Ladd, Revelation, 229. 362 William Hendriksen, Move than Conquerors; An Interpretation of the Book of Revelation (London: Tyndale, 1962) 171.

ACT VI: The Judgment of the Harlot (17:3b-19:21)

107

2. The Ten Horns There is a problem also in interpreting the "ten horns/kings" (v 12). They are often thought to represent the Parthian satraps.363

Even though there were

actually fourteen of these, Beasley-Murray thinks that "the eschatological tradition of ten horns was sufficiently close to represent them."364 Some have thought of them as ten Roman rulers, perhaps including the three short-lived ones, or perhaps continuing to a later date, but this overlooks the express statement that these kings have not yet received their power: their power is still future, as is that of the beast. 365 We find ourselves unable to come to any final decision concerning the precise identification of the heads and horns of the beast, but it seems likely that there is some additional eschatological dimension which is not exhausted by Rome. But again we must make it clear that we believe that the harlot, "Babylon," though associated with Rome, is not to be identified with it. What shall we say concerning the Seer's words in 17:14, according to which the harlot is seated on "many waters?" This detail has obviously been taken over from the description of Babylon of old, but it was not literally true of Rome, and so Revelation itself interprets this image as a reference to the "peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues" which the harlot controls (17:15). Court wonders, however, whether the image might not refer to "Rome's mercantile empire" or even to "the waters of evil and chaos, especially as the woman . . . is also sitting on a scarlet beast—the seven-headed beast from the sea."366 Commentators usually see great significance in the Seer's reference to the "peoples and multitudes and nations and tongues," together with the description of the harlot's "dominion over the kings of the earth." Is this not a clear indication that the harlot is Rome, not Jerusalem? The former statement refers, according to Swete, to "the teeming and mixed populations of the Empire . . . —the polyglott [sic] races of the Empire, her [i.e. Rome's] support and strength.. . . "367 The same writer says concerning verse 18, "The words leave no doubt that Rome is meant, even if doubt could have remained after v. 9."368 But it is possible that John is here simply echoing Jerusalem's own claims. Ford draws our attention to such Old Testament passages as

363 Charles, Commentary, 2.72; Turner, "Revelation," 1055. 364 Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 258. 365 Caird, Revelation, 219; Ladd, Revelation, 231; Morris, Revelation, 211; Mounce, Revelation, 317. 366 Court, Myth and. History, 146. 367 Swete, Apocalypse, 224, cf. p. 220. 368 Swete, Apocalypse, 226.

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

108

Ezek 16:13-14 (and we have already found that John has a number of allusions to this passage), where Yahweh reminds the city of Jerusalem that she had come to "regal estate" and that her "renown went forth among the nations because of [her] beauty,"369 and Lam 1:1 which describes Jerusalem as "great among the n a t i o n s . . . a princess among the cities." Josephine Ford refers also to Isa 2:2-4; Mie 4:1-3; Ps 48:1-2; 50:2, and to Kabbinic passages such as Gen R. 59:5, which describes Jerusalem as the "navel" of the earth, and Exod R. 23:10, which claims that the city was "destined to become the metropolis of all countries." She concludes that Rev 17:18 "is probably a similar hyperbole; cf. 4QLam which describes [Jerusalem] as 'princess of all nationsV'370 Carrington thinks that we have here a reference to the Diaspora Jews, who contributed to Jerusalem's wealth and power,371 but this does not do justice to the text, which seems to require influence over Gentiles and foreign rulers also.

And in fact, even among the Romans,

Jerusalem had a remarkable reputation. Pliny could call it "by far the most famous city of the East, and not of Judea only" {"longe clarissima

urbium orientis, non

Iudaeae modo," Nat. Hist. V.xv.70), and, according to Tacitus, one city specifically promised to Nero through some of the astrologers was Jerusalem (Nero xl.2).372 We conclude, therefore, that John is simply describing Jerusalem in terms of contemporary Jewish or Roman opinion concerning it, its presumed status in the eyes of Yahweh, its anticipated future political situation, or even a combination of all these.

3. The Merchants' Lament Finally, in our consideration of chapters 17-18, we must turn our attention to the lament of the merchants and the list of goods mentioned there (18:11-15, 17b-19). Again, this is usually seen as applicable to Rome in particular. There is no reason, of course, to deny that Rome would have traded in such goods, but that does not mean that she was the only city to do so. But Lohmeyer even argues that such goods, although appropriate for an oriental city, are not appropriate f o r Rome, which was not, in any case, a major trading city or sea-port: her fame was due,

369 370 371 372

Ford, Revelation, 283. Ford, Revelation, 285. Carrington, Meaning, 280. Cf. S. Safrai and M. Stern (eds., in co-operation with D. Flusser and W. C. van Unnik), The Jewish People in the First Century; .'Hetorioal Geography, Political History, Soaial, Cultural and Religious Instil tutions (2 vols.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976) 1.344.

ACT VI: The Judgment of the Harlot (17:3b-19:21)

109

rather, to her political significance.373 L.add notes that "most of these items are found in the dirge over Tyre in Ezek. 27:5-24," but he refers also to Ezek 16:9-13,374 w hich is a description of Jerusalem's finery. Josephine Ford suggests that most of the items listed were used in the temple,375 b u t this may be an exaggeration. Suffice it to say that there is evidence that many of these items were among Judea's imports during the first century A.D., and it is reasonable to assume that a significant portion of such goods would have been destined for the capital.

Safrai and Stern mention among Judea's imports items such as metals

(excluding copper);376 mar ble; 377 incense for the Temple services (the ingredients included frankincense, aloe wood and cinnamon);378 precious stones, pearls from Arabia, and fine linens fromPelusia f o r the high-priestly garments;379 cattle and sheep for the Temple sacrifices;380 a n ( j (especially during the sabbatical years and during the famines of 25 B.C. and A.D. 46-47) grain and other foodstuffs.381 Safrai and Stern refer also to the practice of slavery among the Jews: "Gentile slaves were certainly not absent from Jewish society"; they add, "To judge from Jos. War IV, 508, 510, their number may have been considerable on the eve of the Destruction."382 E v e n items which were not imported into the land as a whole (such as oil and wine, which figured among Judea's exports383) might still have to be transported to the capital—John says nothing which indicates that the merchants who saw the fall of "Babylon" as such a blow to their trade (v 15) were Gentiles: they could well have included merchants from other parts of Palestine. On the other hand, the seamen and shipowners who lamented the city's fall are undoubtedly those who had gained their wealth through imports to Palestine as a whole (although Josephine Ford wishes, improbably, to include here "sailors from the Sea of Galilee and men employed in the brisk trade involving the salt industry at Qumran in the Dead Sea area").384 carrington refers to a statement (which he does not document) by Joseph Klausner concerning Jerusalem's extensive mercantile interests and the striking by Titus of a medal bearing the words Victoria Navalis.

373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384

Carrington concludes: "No doubt in Roman eyes she was a second

Lohmeyer, Offenbarung, 151. Ladd, Revelation, 240; cf. Turner, "Revelation," 1055. Ford, Revelation, 304-305. Safrai and Stern, Jewish People, 2.673, 679. Safrai and Stern, Jewish People, 2.673-674. Safrai and Stern, Jewish People, 2.674. Safrai and Stern, Jewish People, 2.671. Safrai and Stern, Jewish People, 2.670. Safrai and Stern, Jewish People, 2.669-670. Safrai and Stern, Jewish People, 2.677. Safrai and Stern, Jewish People, 2.674. Ford, Revelation, 306.

110

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

Carthage, Semitic, commercial, naval, compassing sea and land, as our Lord said."385 Thus none of what is said here concerning "Babylon" is at variance with what is known about Jerusalem.

We believe that the description of the beast and the

harlot and her fate presupposes an alliance (albeit an informal one) between Jerusalem and the Roman Empire, whereby Home acted as "the executive arm" for Jewishinspired attacks on the followers of Jesus. It is worth recording here the words of William Milligan, who, although he went on to interpret "Babylon" as "the degenerate Church . . . the great body of merely nominal Christians . . . ,"386 could nevertheless write concerning Revelation 17-18: [I]t is difficult not to think that there was one great drama present to the mind of the Seer and suggestive of the picture of the harlot's ruin, that of the life and death of Jesus. The degenerate Jewish Church had then called in the assistance of the world-power of Rome, had stirred it up, and had persuaded it to do its bidding against its true Bridegroom and King. An alliance had been formed between them; and; as a result of it, they crucified the Lord of glory. But the alliance was soon broken; and, in the fall of Jerusalem by the hands of her guilty paramour, the harlot was left desolate and named, her flesh was eaten, and she was burned utterly with fire. 3 8 ?

4. The Banquet The only remaining picture in the Apocalypse of the enemies of the Church is found in chapters 19 and 20. Kev 19:17-21 depicts a banquet to which the birds of the air are summoned to eat the flesh of people of various classes and also the flesh of horses. No specific information is given concerning these, however, and it is not even said that they have attacked God's people, but verses 19-20 describe briefly their attack, under the leadership of the beast, on the Word of God and his armies. The upshot is that the beast and the false prophet (the second beast of Revelation 13) are cast into the lake of fire, while their followers are killed by the Word of God and are consumed by the birds of the air. It must be admitted that the impression given in this passage is of some great event of the end-time, and we have no intention of claiming that it refers instead to some event of the first century. Günther argues that here the Seer has let his gaze go beyond the fall of Rome to the greater event of which that was only a

385 Carrington, Meaning, 291. 386 William Milligan, The Revelation of St. John (The Baird Lecture, 1885; London: Macmillan, 1886) 182; c f . p. 181. 387 Milligan, Revelation, 68. Cf. p. 185 n. 1, where he agrees with Canon Medd that "the old Jerusalem undoubtedly lies at the bottom of the description given of Babylon."

ACT VX: The Judgment of the Harlot (17:3b-19:21)

111

type, namely, the end of the world. Mark has done a similar thing with the fall of Jerusalem (Mark 13).388 \Ve would argue, however, that the similarity to Mark's procedure is even closer than Günther suggests: just as Mark has done, the Seer has seen the fall of Jerusalem

as a type of the end of the age and of the triumph

of the Word of God over all God-opposing world powers.

5. The Attack on the Holy City In the final scene of Act VI we have the last description of (probably) enemies of the Church (20:7-10). Here we find that following the "thousand years" (the meaning of which we have no desire to consider here), "the camp of the saints and the holy city" are besieged by "the nations which are at the four corners of the earth, that is Gog and Magog," under the leadership of Satan. This picture is clearly based on Ezekiel 38-39, and in fact Beasley-Murray considers Revelation 20-22 as a whole to be substantially influenced by Ezekiel 36-48.389 30th Beckwith and Ladd think here of an attack on the literal earthly city of Jerusalem,390 but Beasley-Murray understands the picture as an allegorical representation of "an attack on the manifestation of the divine rule in the world, comparable to the attack on the Church in the present age,"391 while Swete sees here "two aspects of one body, the Universal Church."392 Regardless of the detailed interpretation, however, it is clear that the victims of the attack are the people of God. We are unable to determine any more precisely the identity of the opponents, but it seems that the Seer probably has in mind a universal rebellion against God and his people by all who do not follow the Lamb.

I. ACT VII: The Church Triumphant (20:11-22:5)

The final Act of the apocalyptic drama contains no information concerning the enemies of the Church. Nevertheless there are features here which f i t very well

388 389 390 391 392

GUnther, Nah- und Enderuartungshorisont, 214. Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 289; cf. Ladd, Revelation, Beckwith, Apocalypse, 746; Ladd, Revelation, 270. Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 298, cf. p. 316. Swete, Apocalypse, 269.

269-270.

112

The Enemies of the Church in the Apocalypse

with some of the conclusions we have reached through a consideration of the preceding sections of the book. The major part of this Act concerns "the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God" (21:2), a Jerusalem without a temple (21:22). But what has happened to the original, earthly Jerusalem and its temple? If we adopt the usual interpretation of the earlier parts of the Book of Revelation, we are totally in the dark concerning this. But if what we have argued here is correct, the way has already been prepared for this scene: the fall of the earthly Jerusalem and the temple has already been described symbolically in chapters 11 and 17-18.

J. Conclusion

We believe that we have provided adequate evidence here for our contention that John's Apocalypse is greatly concerned with the Church's conflict with unbelieving and persecuting anti-Christian Judaism as an immediate problem. We have not sought to eliminate Imperial Rome altogether as an opponent of God and his people, as van der Waal has done, and yet we do not believe that the conflict with Rome was the most pressing problem facing John's readers. He was writing to demonstrate that "Israel according to the flesh" (to use a Pauline term) is not the people of God but has become the enemy of God and his Church and that the fall of Jerusalem is an evidence of the rejection of the nation of Israel. We have not given much attention here to the question of the date of the book, since it seems to the present writer that John's message is equally relevant whether it is viewed as a prediction of Jerusalem's impending destruction or as a post eventum theological reflection on, and interpretation of, the fall of Jerusalem. This conclusion will no doubt seem surprising, since it is so out of line with the opinion of the majority of scholars. Yet we propose to show in the following chapters that such a conclusion is not totally out of accord with the prophetic view of Jerusalem or even with the views expressed in other New Testament books.

CHAPTER 3 THE PROPHETIC VIEW OF JERUSALEM

A. Introduction

In the preceding chapter we have seen that careful study of the Book of Revelation, taking into account the Seer's use of the Old Testament, points to the conclusion that he was concerned with the situation of the Church and its conflict with Judaism and with the Roman government, and particularly with the alliance between these two powers which sought to crush the growing Christian movement We concluded that the book depicts primarily judgments which come upon the Jewish people because of their rejection of Jesus' Messiahship and their persecution of the Christian community, the climax being reached in the description of the f a l l of Jerusalem (symbolized by the harlot/city, "Babylon" [Revelation 17-18]). Since this conclusion is contrary to the view of most interpreters of Revelation, it is proposed to show in this chapter that such a conclusion is not at all in disharmony with the message of the Old Testament prophets. We shall find that the prophets have already prepared the way f o r such a negative evaluation of Judaism's most sacred site.

B. Geographical Considerations

Jerusalem was not the most suitable place for Israel's capital, in terms of purely physical geography. It was not geographically central, nor was it on the major traffic routes; on this basis Gibeah would have been a much more appropriate choice. 1 Nor did Jerusalem's location in the mountains, some 800 meters above

1 Albrecht A l t , "Jerusalems A u f s t i e g , " Kleine Schriften zur Geschichte dee Volkee Israel v o l . 3 (ed. Martin Noth; Munich: Beck, 1959) 247.

114

The Prophetic View of Jerusalem

sea level and almost 1200 meters above the bottom of the Jordan Valley, make it the most ideal site f o r the nation's capital. Noth suggests that even if a site in the mountains had been desirable f o r some reason, Sychem would have been preferable to Jerusalem since it is more centrally located and is, moreover, "the uncrowned queen of Palestine." 2 Nevertheless other geographical considerations made Jerusalem a very suitable c h o i c e , but these have to do with political g e o g raphy rather than with physical geography. Since it had never belonged to either the Northern or the Southern tribes, Jerusalem was neutral in terms of the incipient division between North and South. Although this tension did not develop into an open split until after the reigns of David and Solomon, the city was well suited to be the capital of the United Monarchy.3

C. Jerusalem's History

Although Jerusalem became Israel's religious and political center only during the reign of David, we must not make the mistake of assuming that the city was founded only then. Jerusalem had already been in existence for centuries and had continued as a Jebusite stronghold in the midst of Hebrew territory until David succeeded in capturing it and bringing it under Israelite control. It seems probable, in f a c t , that this is the same city which is called simply "Salem" in Genesis 14:18; t h e r e f o r e , if this is the case, Jerusalem's history can be traced back at least as f a r as the time of Abraham. The city had not merely been in existence prior to its capture by the Israelites. It is thought that it was also already a holy city—not to Yahweh, however, as it was to become under the Israelites—but to the Canaanite g o d , Shalem, since the name "Jerusalem" could well s i g n i f y "foundation of Shalem."4 perhaps this status as a holy city under the Jebusites was a f a c t o r in its establishment as Israel's holy city and as Yahweh's dwelling-place among his people. (Some read the name "Uruel" in place of " A r i e l " in Isa 29:1, apparently in r e f e r e n c e to Jerusalem, and

( O r i g i n a l l y published in Zeitschrift der Deutsahen Movgenländischen Gesellschaft 79 [1925] 1 - 1 9 . ) 2 A l t , "Jerusalems A u f s t i e g , " 245-246. 3 Kathleen Mary Kenyon, Royal Cities of the Old Testament (London: Barrie and Jenkins, 1971) 13, 16. 4 D. C. P e l l e t t , "Jerusalem the Golden; From the earthly city to the heavenly holy c i t y , " Encounter 34 (1973) 273.

Jerusalem's History

115

argue that this is derived from the name "Jerusalem", "Shalem" having been replaced by "El."5) Jerusalem's status in Israel grew along with the increasing importance of the Davidic dynasty. Porteous aligns himself with Alt in arguing that, in consequence of David's choice of the city, "its fortunes became inextricably interwoven with those of the Davidic house and, even beyond that, we might add, with the strange hopes which eventual disappointment with the Davidic rulers awakened."·» A further factor in the developing status of Jerusalem was the belief that the city was the special dwelling-place of Yahweh. This was associated first of all with the Ark of the Covenant, which David had brought from Shiloh to his new capital city (2 Sam 6:12-17), and later with the Temple which was built there. Clements notes that Shiloh is the only other terrestrial site to be described as Yahweh's dwelling-place, although he thinks it possible that other places may once have been viewed in the same way until they became overshadowed by Jerusalem and then rejected even more decisively in the seventh century B.C. at the time of the Deuteronomic Reform.7 Clements rejects the view that it was because of the location of the Ark there that Jerusalem came to be viewed as Yahweh's dwelling-place;8 rather it was the other way round, he believes: the Ark was brought to Jerusalem because it was already viewed as Yahweh's chosen dwelling, a conviction which came about under the influence of the Canaanite cult of El Elyon, Mount Zion being identified with Mount Zaphon, which figured prominently in Canaanite tradition.9 it was this conviction that Yahweh dwelt on Mount Zion which undoubtedly played a large part in the popular belief in the inviolability of Jerusalem, a belief which we will encounter again later in this chapter.10 This belief that Jerusalem was the special dwelling-place of Yahweh occurs in the preaching of the prophets also, and is found in such passages as Amos 1:2;

5 Mentioned by Edward J. Young, The Book of Isaiah; the English Text, with Introduction, Exposition, and Notes (3 v o l s . ; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965-1972) 2.304. 6 N. W. Porteous, "Jerusalem-Zion: the Growth of a Symbol," Living the Mystery; oolleoted essays (Oxford: Blackwell, 1967) 94. 7 Ronald E. Clements, God and Temple ( P h i l a d e l p h i a : F o r t r e s s , 1965), 55. 8 Clements, God and Temple, 55. Ct. Martin Noth, "Jerusalem and the I s r a e l i t e T r a d i t i o n , " The Laws in the Pentateuch and Other Studies (Edinburgh/London: O l i v e r and Boyd, 1966) 141. 9 Clements, God and Temple, 55, 137. Cf. James Calvin De Young,

Jerusalem in the Sew Testament; the Significance

History of Redemption and in Eschatology 10 See below, pages 1 2 6 f f .

of the City in the

(Kampen: Kok, 1960), 50-51.

116

The Prophetic View of Jerusalem

Isa 2:2-3; 8:18; and Micah 4:1-2.11

D. Cities in Old Testament Thought

Before we turn to investigate the prophetic view of Jerusalem in particular, it would be helpful to consider the nature and functions of cities in Old Testament times and the Old Testament view of cities in general. We are indebted to Frick for the reminder that cities at this period were not primarily places where people lived, but rather "fortified placets] of refuge" where people from surrounding villages would gather in time of danger. We have a picture in the KRT text from Ras Shamra of a situation which was probably typical of Palestine as well: at the approach of an enemy, those at work around the village

%Udm

would be alerted

by the sound of an alarm from the city walls and would run to the city for safety.12 We also need to keep in mind the Old Testament picture of the origin of cities. Both Frick and Ellul refer to the account in Genesis 4 of the building of the first city by Cain. The implication is that this is Cain's response to God's condemnation of him to be "a fugitive and wanderer on the earth." Frick refers to the "antiurban" element which occurs frequently in the Old Testament and sees it here in the fact that "the first city was built as man's attempt to provide security for himself apart from the provisions of God, and, indeed, 'away from the presence of Yaiiweh.' Cain builds his own 'city of refuge' in order to escape from the divinely ordained blood revenge."13 The story of the Tower of Babel (Gen 11:1-9) gives another insight into the Old Testament view of the city. Frick describes this incident as an example of "man's futile attempt to gain security apart from God through city-building, even when the city purports to be a holy city, protected by a deity." He also sees here opposition to "the city which represents the center of an empire," in that Yahweh's judgment "from there . . . scattered them abroad over the face of all the earth"

11 R. de Vaux, "Jerusalem and the Prophets," Interpreting the Prophetic Tradition (ed. H. M. Orlinsky; Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1969) 287. 12 Frank S. Frick, The City in Ancient Israel (Missoula: Scholars, for the Society of Biblical Literature, 1977) 11, 93. 13 Frick, City in Ancient Israel, 207; cf. Jacques Ellul, The Meaning of the City (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970) 5.

Cities in Old Testament Thought

117

(Gen 11:9). 14 Ellul considers the matter of Solomon's construction p r o j e c t at Jerusalem and the consequences of that project (1 Kgs 11:26-36), and gives his opinion that it may not be merely c o i n c i d e n c e that it was exactly when he [Solomon] began the foundations f o r a city that he was accused of having abandoned Yahweh f o r Ishtar, Chemosh, and Milcom! . . . [T]he spiritual quality in the construction of a city is undeniable here. Solomon's f i r s t act of disobedience to God is the establishment of cities. The present point where Solomon abandons Yahweh and stops making use of his miraculous wisdom is that point where he d e c i d e s on a politics of power materialized in cities.15 El lui's suggestion is attractive, yet it is only f a i r to point out that other commentators on the passage have not understood it in this way. Ellul sees a similar negative evaluation of cities as implicit in the account of Rehoboam's building activities as well: he builds c i t i e s in an attempt to restore his security a f t e r Yahweh has stripped him of the major part of his kingdoin.16 Yet another such negative evaluation appears, a c c o r d i n g to Ellul, in the books of Chronicles, which, although so stylized and devoid of unnecessary details, nevertheless contain so many r e f e r e n c e s to the building of cities. He continues: "And since this f a c t is connected directly with betrayal and punishment, there can be no doubt that in the writer's thoughts, the construction of c i t i e s is itself an expression of separation from God."17 The establishment of c i t i e s may well have played a major part in the rise of the prophetic movement. Von Rad has suggested four major factors in the rise of prophetism: 1) "The degeneracy of Jahwisrn because of syncretism"; 2) "The systematic emancipation from Jahweh and the protection which he o f f e r e d , due to the formation of the state. Through her armaments and her allies—in a word, through her political tactics—Israel had thrown off Jahweh's guiding hand and become politically autonomous"; 3) "The economic and social development which both kingdoms had undergone. The state with its taxation and its c i v i l service had brought about a further disintegration of the social o r d e r within the clans. In this connexion the transference of dominant economic importance to the towns was detrimental. The patricians of the towns . . . gained control over the country people, and crying social grievances resulted"; 4) "The rise of Assyria to the summit of her power and the threat which she directed against Palestine from the eighth century onwards."18

14 15 16 17 18

Frick, City in Ancient Israel, 208. E l l u l , Meaning of the City, 32. E l l u l , Meaning of the City, 33, 35. E l l u l , Meaning of the City, 39. Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology Row, 1962-1965) 1.64-65.

(2 v o l s . ; New York: Harper &

118

The Prophetic View of Jerusalem

The first three of these factors are, as Frick points out, clearly connected with the growing urbanization of Israelite society, and the accompanying "religious, social and economic developments." Thus it is not surprising that the prophets directed so many of their tirades against cities.

It was the cities, moreover,

which provided both the audiences and those who were capable of preserving the prophets' messages. 19 To some extent, then, the prophets were opposed to cities in general, whether Israelite or non-Israelite, friend or foe.20 Yet this rejection of the city is not inspired by any "nomadic ideal." The few favorable references to the wandering of Israel in the wilderness are historically, not geographically or physically, motivated: at that period Israel was more faithful to Yahweh than it now was during the prophet's own day. When the concept of "desert" is used in a physical sense it is a negative term: f o r a city to become a desert is a great disaster, just as in Ancient Near Eastern treaty-curses.21 Further evidence that the prophets were not simply pro-rural and anti-urban is found in the fact that they denounced the rural "high places" (πίπα) as well as the cities.22

E. Jerusalem's Moral and Spiritual Status

The messages of the prophets are normally responses to some crisis or other. Sometimes there is an external threat to the nation as an attack by some foreign power looms upon the horizon. Frequently, however, the crisis is an internal one, a crisis of morality and commitment to Yahweh; and in such situations accusations of evil and apostasy are hurled not simply at the nation as a whole, but frequently at the city of Jerusalem in particular, or at its inhabitants, or at both. Fohrer denies that there is any implication that the city is any worse than the land as a whole; the point is that Jerusalem is the center and is therefore responsible f o r what goes on in the land.23 This may be seen also in Ezek 5:5, where the description of Jerusalem as the center is "a religious affirmation more than a geographical

19 20 21 22 23

Frick, City in Ancient Israel, 209. Frick, City in Ancient Israel, 221; Ellul, Meaning of the City, 48. Frick, City in Ancient Israel, 220, 222. Frick, City in Ancient Israel, 230. Georg Fohrer, "Zion-Jerusalem im Alten Testament," Studien zur alttestamentlichen Theologie und Geschichte (1949-1966) (BZAW 115; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1969) 225.

Jerusalem's Moral and S p i r i t u a l

Statue

119

fact. For Ezekiel, Jerusalem is the equivalent of the nation Israel."24 ¡t is no exaggeration to say that nowhere in the prophetic corpus is Jerusalem e v e r commended f o r its present purity and f i d e l i t y to Yahweh. The nation's past is sometimes compared favorably with the present situation, and an ethical and cultic renewal is sometimes envisaged in the future, but the prophetic evaluation of the city's contemporary situation is described in anything but favorable terms.

1. Isaiah 1-39

Isaiah has a particular concern f o r Jerusalem, probably because it was in the Temple in Jerusalem that he r e c e i v e d his call to prophesy,25 y e t his accusations are directed more frequently at the whole nation and its leaders than specifically at the city. Nevertheless the book opens with a description of the present sorry state of Jerusalem, shattered and desolate (Isa 1:8),26 and the city is d e s c r i b e d , both on account of its sinfulness and because of the imminence of judgment, as "Sodom" (Isa 1:9-10).

As De Young points out, however, (on his assumption of

the substantially Mosaic authorship of Deuteronomy) Moses had already likened apostate Israel to Sodom and Gomorrah (Deut 32:32),27 striking as it appears, is not totally new.

so

Isaiah's denunciation,

But, on the other hand, the prophet

can also say that Zion was " f o u n d e d " by Yahweh (Isaiah 14:32), which, de Vaux contends, is tantamount to saying that Yahweh " c r e a t e d " Zion.28

2. Micah

Isaiah's younger contemporary, Micah, had a similarly negative evaluation of Jerusalem.

The second couplet of Micah 1:5 implies that the prophet viewed

Samaria as "the starting place of the moral infection which had spread as a plague over Palestine," but the final couplet suggests that Jerusalem is now no better

24 P e l l e t t , ("Jerusalem the Golden," 276) says, ''This was a r e l i g i o u s a f f i r m a t i o n more than a g e o g r a p h i c a l f a c t . For E z e k i e l , Jerusalem i s the e q u i v a l e n t of the nation I s r a e l . He accuses Jerusalem, not Judah, o f grave sins and a p o s t a s y . " 25 Clements, God and Temple, 80. 26 W i l l i a m F. S t i n e s p r i n g ("No Daughter o f Z i o n , " Encounter 26 [1965] 133-141) p o i n t s out that in the phrase "Daughter of Jerusalem" the construct i s to be taken as an a p p o s i t i o n a l g e n i t i v e . 27 De Young, Jerusalem in the NT, 100-101. 28 De Vaux, "Jerusalem and the P r o p h e t s , " 286.

120

The Prophetic View of Jerusalem

than the Northern capital had been: "Instead of Samaria and Jerusalem dispensing law, o r d e r , and wholesome influences upon their respective nations, these two capitals had become centers of corruption."29 The s p e c i f i c form of corruption envisaged by the prophet is not clear from this verse, however, since we are faced with a significant divergence between the MT ( m ι rv πι πα ·π ι iJwi ν "What are the high places of Judah?

«I'm,

Is it not Jerusalem?") and the LXX and

Targum (which both read "What is the sin of Judah?

Is it not Jerusalem?").

Wolfe considers the reading of the MT ("high places of . . . " ) to result from the incorporation into the text of a gloss in place of the original which would have read "sin of the house of . . . " : "By making this marginal note the glossator meant to indicate that the high places (semipagan hilltop shrines) constituted the sin of Jerusalem."30 The NEB, however, f o l l o w s the MT, translating: "What is the hill-shrine of Judah? Is it not Jerusalem?" Good comments: "The prophet implies that Jerusalem is a center of idolatrous worship."31 it is impossible to ascertain which was the original reading, but there can be no doubt that Micah considered Jerusalem as the source of the nation's evils. The prophet later charges that the national capital has been built with " b l o o d " / " w r o n g " through the perversion both of justice and the cultus f o r financial reward (3:9-11), and his subsequent proclamation that the city is therefore to be devastated (3:12) shows that, as Mays expresses it, "Micah regarded Jerusalem as the urban incarnation of the crime he was commissioned to indict. . . . [T]he city had come to be an institution of injustice."32

3. Jeremiah Jeremiah compares Jerusalem's present circumstances with the history of the nation.

He reminds the city that there had been in the past a time when the

people had been loyal to Yahweh (Jer 2:2-3), but they are now charged with abandoning Yahweh and turning to other g o d s (2:8, 11-13, 27-28), murder of the prophets (2:30) and the innocent poor (2:34), and adultery (5:7-8). Concerning Jer 4:4, Bright says, "Jerusalem is here depicted as a streetwalker who decks herself out to attract clients (i.e., allies); these, however, loathe her and accost her only to

29 Rolland E. Wolfe, "The Book of Micah; Introduction and Exegesis," IB 6.904. 30 Wolfe, "Micah," IB 6.904. 31 Edwin M. Good, Notes to the Twelve Prophets in The Sew English Bible with Apocrypha: Oxford Study Edition (New York: Oxford, 1972) 997. 32 James Luther Mays, Micah; A Commentary (London: SCM, 1976) 20.

Jerusalem's Moral and S p i r i t u a l

Status

121

kill her."33 go appalling are the e v i l s of the nation that in Jerusalem there can be found not even one person f o r whose sake the city can be spared (5:1). The characteristics of the city in the prophet's day are oppression, wickedness, violence and destruction (6:6-7), and also (following the LXX in p r e f e r e n c e to the MT's "This is the city to be punished") she is described as "the city of f a l s e h o o d " (6:6d).34 -phe prophet also denounces the city because the cult of the Queen of Heaven (whom Thompson i d e n t i f i e s with Astarte35) is being practiced even in the streets of Jerusalem (7:17-18).

The city is further charged with breaking the

covenant and committing idolatry (11:1-17). Then, f o l l o w i n g the exile of some of the people to Egypt, Jeremiah is represented as telling them that the calamity which has come upon Jerusalem is the result of their r e j e c t i o n of the representatives of Yahweh (44:2-6).36 y e t , in spite of all these evils, the people had thought themselves immune from disaster because of their observance of the cultus and their possession of the Temple (7:1-15).

The prophet will have none of this,

however, and there may be a further indication of his low estimate of Jerusalem in his frequent r e f e r e n c e s to it as "this c i t y " ( c f . 21:1-10, etc.), a phrase sometimes used by Ezekiel also ( c f . e.g., Ezek 11:2, 6).37

4. Lamentations

The Book of Lamentations goes a stage even further than Isaiah when it describes Jerusalem's iniquity as even greater than the sin of Sodom (Lam 4:6, following the KSVmg. and NEBmg. renderings of l lu and κπυ; cp. Isa 1:9-11).

5. Ezekiel

Ezekiel has some of the sharpest criticisms to make of Jerusalem. The idolatry of the people has become so widespread and so blatant that even in the precincts of the Temple itself, at the north gate, through which the king would normally

33 John Bright, Jeremiah (AB 21; Garden City: Doubleday, 1965) 33. 34 So John A. Thompson, the Book of Jeremiah (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980) 252. 35 Thompson, Jeremiah, 284. 36 Although James Philip Hyatt ("The Book of Jeremiah; Introduction and Exegesis," IB 5.1096) asserts that this passage is "repetitious and p r o l i x and f i l l e d with phraseology and ideas c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the Deuteronomic e d i t o r . " 37 So Fohrer, "Zion-Jerusalem," 226.

The Prophetic View of Jerusalem

122

have entered to worship,38 w a s

an

image (Ezek 8:5). The identity of the image is

uncertain. May suggests that it was of Tammuz, or perhaps of Marduk,39 whereas Eichrodt takes up Hermann's suggestion that the phrase πν Jpn Ihd is to be translated "image of passionate l o v e " rather than "image of jealousy" (as, e.g., RSV), and therefore sees this as a r e f e r e n c e to Asherah, the goddess of love (cf. 2 Kgs 21:7; 2 Chr 33:7).40 Thus a false impression is given: the placing of an image of the goddess of love at the entrance to the sanctuary of Yahweh, with the implicit invitation to worship her, distorts the picture of Yahweh which is presented. The uniqueness of his deity is impugned and a sexual element is introduced: "Yahweh is thus degraded to the level of a nature-god, with an ambivalent moral will, inclusive of e v i l as well as good."41 In Ezekiel's f o l l o w i n g vision (8:7-13) he sees what Yahweh's messenger describes as " s t i l l greater abominations" (8:6): seventy influential members of Jerusalem society—if not actually " e l d e r s " in the o f f i c i a l sense—are secretly engaged in the worship of various kinds of creeping things, unclean animals, and idols. This probably represents some form of Egyptian cult, rather than a Babylonian one, since there was no necessity f o r Babylonian worship to be carried on in secretai this stage in Jerusalem's history.42 At this time, moreover, Zedekiah was trying to make a political alliance with Egypt, so the motivation for engaging in Egyptian rituals was probably as much political as religious, a c c o r d i n g to Carley.43 In Ezekiel's next vision, he sees, a c c o r d i n g to the description given by his guide, a still greater e v i l : women are weeping f o r Tammuz right at the gate of the Temple (8:14-15). The final vision of the quartet is described as one of an even greater evil (8:16-18). Here the prophet sees a group of some twenty-five men, not merely at the gate, but now within the Temple itself, between the porch and the altar. Whether or not they are priests is not made clear, but their worship is being o f f e r e d not to Yahweh but to the sun in the East.

In worshiping the

sun-god, their backs are towards the ark, Yahweh's throne. "It is an expression of their utter contempt f o r the holy God of Israel; it amounts to saying that they

38 John B. Taylor, Ezekiel; An Introduction and Commentary (TOTC; Downers Grove: I n t e r v a r s i t y , 1969) 98. 39 Herbert 6. May, "The Book of Ezekiel; Introduction and Exegesis," IB

6.106. 40 Walther Eichrodt, Ezekiel; A Commentary (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1970) 122. 41 Eichrodt, Ezekiel, 122-123. 42 Eichrodt, Ezekiel, 124. 43 Keith W. Carley, The Book of the Prophet Ezekiel (The Cambridge Bible Commentary, NEB; London/New York: Cambridge, 1974) 55; c f . Taylor, Ezekiel, 99.

123

Jerusalem's Moral and S p i r i t u a l Status

have actually dethroned him from being Lord of his people, to set up instead a f o r e i g n g o d , the mighty sun-god of the Babylonian empire."44 The meaning of the final sentence of 8:17, in which Yahweh describes the ultimate insult flung in his f a c e , is unclear: some commentators believe that the r e f e r e n c e is to some form of pagan worship, as represented by the translation "they put the branch to their nose" (so RSV);45 others have suggested that Yahweh is complaining that this alien ritual is like a foul o d o r which assaults his nostrils,46 an odor which Eichrodt ( f o l l o w i n g the medieval Jewish exegetes) d e f i n e s more explicitly as "the stench of farting."47 Such are the abominations with which Ezekiel charges Jerusalem initially, although one cannot help wondering, with Zimmerli, whether all these took place at the same time, or whether the prophet has drawn upon "notorious offenses from various periods of the temple's history."48

There is still more to come, however.

In

ch. 16 Ezekiel denounces Jerusalem by means of an extended allegory in which he traces the city's career, commencing with its origin in Canaan, as the r e j e c t e d infant daughter of an Amorite father and a Hittite mother (vv. 3-5). This reference to Jerusalem's Canaanite origins was true enough to f a c t , since Jerusalem was indeed a Canaanite (or, more specifically, Jebusite) city before becoming an Israelite city, but, in addition, as T a y l o r points out, "The statement is heavy with sarcasm, . . . f o r the term 'Canaanite' was a by-word f o r moral d e c a d e n c e . " 4 9

Fohrer

notes here a sharp contrast with the Deuteronomic view, in that Jerusalem is now counted as part of the heathen world.50

Yahweh had seen that child in her

infancy, and then later, when she had matured and reached the age f o r marriage, he had taken her f o r his bride and lavished g i f t s upon her (16:6-14). Yet, in spite of all this, she had not been faithful to him but had run a f t e r other lovers, engaging in prostitution with all and sundry, o f f e r i n g as s a c r i f i c e s to other gods the g o o d things which she had r e c e i v e d from Yahweh, even including her own children (16:15-29). Jerusalem's harlotry was, in f a c t , f a r worse than any normal prostitution, f o r an ordinary harlot might perhaps be able to justify her actions on the ground of financial necessity, whereas Jerusalem had herself given gifts to those who had shared her bed (16:30-34). In the latter part of the chapter Ezekiel

44 Eichrodt, Ezekiel, 127; c f . Carley, Ezekiel, 56. 45 C f . Taylor, Ezekiel, 100; Carley, Ezekiel, 56. 46 Referred to by Walther Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1; A Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Ezekiel, Chapters 1-24 (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979) 244-245. 47 Eichrodt, Ezekiel, 128. 48 Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1 , 58. 49 Taylor, Ezekiel, 133. 50 Fohrer, "Zion-Jerusalem," 226.

124

The Prophetic V i e w of Jerusalem

elaborates the allegory f u r t h e r by introducing Samaria and Sodom as s i s t e r s of Jerusalem, but s i s t e r s who, evil as they were, were righteous in comparison with Jerusalem (16:45-52). Concerning t h i s c h a p t e r , Zimmerli comments that Jerusalem "here becomes the proper r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of sinful Israel,"51 and again: "The prophet is speaking of Jerusalem, the place of the ' c e n t e r ' (5:5), which contains within it the whole history of Israel's election."52 Again, in c h a p t e r 22, Ezekiel d e p i c t s Jerusalem as the "city of blood" (vv. 2-4), partly on the ground of her perpetration of the crime of human s a c r i f i c e as part of idolatrous worship, no doubt, but also, perhaps, as May suggests, because of "the violence and extortions of the l e a d e r s " (cf. 7:23; 11:6-7; 18:10; 23:27, 45; 24:6-9; 33:25; 36:18), and the perversion of justice in the courts (22:9a, 12).53 In the following c h a p t e r (Ezekiel 23), the prophet uses a f u r t h e r extended allegory, t h i s time c o n c e r n i n g the two s i s t e r s , Oholah (identified as Samaria) and Oholibah (identified as Jerusalem), whose origin was in Egypt, where they engaged in prostitution (23:1-4). Here, Carley suggests, the prophet is more c o n c e r n e d with the political a l l i a n c e s of the two peoples (Israel and Judah), whereas in c h a p t e r 16 he was dealing with apostasy.54 ¡ s it really a p p r o p r i a t e to make such a d i s t i n c t i o n , however?—to the present writer it seems that to r e s o r t to political a l l i a n c e s was itself a manifestation of the apostasy of the people. Moreover Ezek 23:37-39 deals with such evils as idolatry (undoubtedly this is what is signified by the "adultery"), c h i l d - s a c r i f i c e , defilement of the Temple, and profanation of the Sabbaths. Zimmerli sees E z e k i e l ' s picture of the two women as having originated with Hosea's prophecy, but developed u n d e r the i n f l u e n c e of J e r 3:6-11 also.55 Again, as in c h a p t e r 16, Oholibah (Jerusalem) is held to be even more guilty than Oholah (Samaria)—this time because she did not learn her lesson from her sister's fate (i.e. the fall of Samaria), but sought an a l l i a n c e with the very nation which had destroyed her sister (23:11-21)—a r e f e r e n c e , no doubt, to Ahaz's approach to Tiglath-Pileser at the time of the Syro-Ephraimite war (2 Kgs 16:8).56

51 Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1 , 58. 52 Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1, 348. 53 May, "Ezekiel," IB

6.182-183.

54 Carley, Ezekiel, 153. 55 Zimmerli, Ezekiel 1, 58. 56 Taylor, Ezekiel, 173.

Jerusalem's Moral and Spiritual Status

125

6. Zephaniah Zephaniah also charges Jerusalem with gross evils. Zeph 3:1-5 does not name the city explicitly, but it is plainly Jerusalem which the prophet has in mind. He has already denounced a number of other nations and now, just as Amos did, he turns to attack those people who claimed to have a special relationship with Yahweh.57 Jerusalem is denounced as "rebellious and defiled" and as "the oppressing city" (3:1). She was still as guilty of tyranny as she had been when Isaiah had prophesied some 100 years previously (Isa l:21-23).58 The city is also accused of having refused to listen to any "voice" (3:2), which Keil interprets as "the voice . . . of God in the law and in the words of the prophets."59 The city has also rejected any kind of correction. This obstinacy leads in turn to the situation which is dealt with next: Zephaniah goes even further than Isaiah in his accusation that Jerusalem has neither worshiped nor trusted Yahweh (3:2): in Isaiah's time the people had at least gone through the motions of worshiping Yahweh, even though their convictions were quite otherwise.60 Now there was neither inward nor outward commitment to Yahweh, and Smith comments: The implication is that Jerusalem has had recourse to everything and everybody but Yahweh. Horses and chariots, foreign powers and foreign gods have been her reliance rather than Yahweh, who alone can help her. . . . This lack of faith was the inevitable result of Jerusalem's refusal to hearken to the instruction of the prophets, her religious teachers.61 But as we continue to listen to Zephaniah's denunciation of the city, we are driven to wonder whether any improvement would have resulted from heeding the words of the prophets and the priests. In Zeph 3:4 the prophets are described as "boastful"62 and "faithless" (KSV) or, as Keil expresses it: Men of treacheries, bqge