The Violence of the Lamb: Martyrs as Agents of Divine Judgement in the Book of Revelation 9780567257123, 9780567661609, 9780567467225

Table of contents :
Cover
Title
Copyright
Contents
Preface
Abbreviations
Introduction: Violence and Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation
Reading the Violence of the Apocalypse
Martyrdom in Revelation
Plan of the Book
Chapter 1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation
Introduction
The Literary World of the Apocalypse
Persecution and Suffering in Revelation
The Imperial Cult in Revelation
Social Reality and the Apocalypse
Persecution and Suffering in the New Testament
Persecution in Early Christian Writings
The Emperor Cult
The Image of the Beast: The Sacrifice Test
Josephus
Early Christianity
Mark
Q 12.2–9
Hebrews
The Shepherd of Hermas
2 Timothy
1 John
Conclusion
Chapter 2. Not a Tame Lamb: Christology in the Apocalypse
The Lion/Lamb Dichotomy
The Lion
The Lamb
‘Standing as if Slain’ (Revelation 5.6)
Sacrificial Lamb
Paschal Lamb
Isaiah 53
Behold the ‘Ram’ of God
The Lion/Lamb: Beyond Incongruity
Chapter 3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr
The Revelation of Jesus Christ (Revelation 1–8)
The Testimony of Jesus (Revelation 1.2)
The First and the Last (Revelation 1.4)
The Faithful Witness (Revelation 1.5–6)
Coming on the Clouds (Revelation 1.7)
Christophanies in the Apocalypse
The Son of Man/Ancient of Days (Revelation 1.12–20)
Christological Oracles (Revelation 2–3)
The Rider on the White Horse (Revelation 19.11–16)
The Lion and the Lamb (Revelation 4–5)
Chapter 4. The Lamb as Divine Judge
Violence and Judgement in the Apocalypse
Judgement in the Oracles to the Seven Churches (Revelation 1–3)
The Seven Seals and Trumpets (Revelation 6–7)
The Sealed Scroll
The First Four Seals (Revelation 6.1–8)
The Sixth Seal: The Day of the Lord (Revelation 6.12–17)
Plagues and Torments on the Damned (Revelation 8–16)
The Seven Trumpets (Revelation 8.2–9.21; 11.15–19)
Two Last Judgements (Revelation 11.15–19; 14.6–20)
The Seven Bowls of Wrath (Revelation 15.7–16.21)
The Fall of Babylon, the Final Battle, and the Last Judgement (Revelation 17–22)
The Fall of Babylon (Revelation 17–18)
The Final Battle (Revelation 16.12–16; 17.12–14; 19.11–21)
The Last Final Judgement and the New Jerusalem (Revelation 20–22)
Conclusion
Chapter 5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation
Martyrdom and Judgement
Judgement Delayed (Revelation 6.10)
God’s Judgement for the Martyrs
The Call to Martyrdom
Revelation 6.11
Revelation 12.7–17
Revelation 13
Revelation 14
Revelation 7
The Call to Conquer
Conquering in the Seven Churches
Martyrs as Agents of Divine Judgement
Vindication of The Martyrs
The Noble Army of Martyrs
Martyrs as Rulers: Revelation 20.4–6
Martyrs as Agents of Judgement: Revelation 18.4–8
Conclusion
Bibliography
Index of References
Index of Authors

Citation preview

LIBRARY OF NEW TESTAMENT STUDIES

586 Formerly Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series

Editor Chris Keith

Editorial Board Dale C. Allison, John M.G. Barclay, Lynn H. Cohick, R. Alan Culpepper, Craig A. Evans, Robert Fowler, Simon J. Gathercole, John S. Kloppenborg, Michael Labahn, Love L. Sechrest, Robert Wall, Steve Walton, Catrin H. Williams

THE VIOLENCE OF THE LAMB

Martyrs as Agents of Divine Judgement in the Book of Revelation

Paul Middleton

T&T Clark Bloomsbury Publishing Plc 50 Bedford Square, London, WC1B 3DP, UK 1385 Broadway, New York, NY 10018, USA BLOOMSBURY, T&T CLARK and the T&T CLARK logo are trademarks of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc First published in Great Britain 2018 This paperback edition published 2020 Copyright © Paul Middleton, 2018 Paul Middleton has asserted their right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as Author of this work. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publishers. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc does not have any control over, or responsibility for, any third-party websites referred to or in this book. All internet addresses given in this book were correct at the time of going to press. The author and publisher regret any inconvenience caused if addresses have changed or sites have ceased to exist, but can accept no responsibility for any such changes. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress. ISBN: HB: 978-0-5672-5712-3 PB: 978-0-5676-9259-7 ePDF: 978-0-5674-6722-5 Series: Library of New Testament Studies, ISSN 2513-8790, volume 586 Typeset by Forthcoming Publications (www.forthpub.com) To find out more about our authors and books visit www.bloomsbury.com and sign up for our newsletters.

C on t en t s

Preface ix Abbreviations xiii Introduction: Violence and Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation Reading the Violence of the Apocalypse Martyrdom in Revelation Plan of the Book

1 1 8 14

Chapter 1 Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation 16 Introduction 16 The Literary World of the Apocalypse 19 Persecution and Suffering in Revelation 21 The Imperial Cult in Revelation 25 Social Reality and the Apocalypse 29 Persecution and Suffering in the New Testament 29 Persecution in Early Christian Writings 32 The Emperor Cult 35 The Image of the Beast: The Sacrifice Test 39 Josephus 44 Early Christianity 45 Mark 49 Q 12.2–9 54 Hebrews 55 The Shepherd of Hermas 57 2 Timothy 61 1 John 62 Conclusion 63 Chapter 2 Not a Tame Lamb: Christology in the Apocalypse The Lion/Lamb Dichotomy The Lion

65 65 68

vi Contents

The Lamb ‘Standing as if Slain’ (Revelation 5.6) Sacrificial Lamb Paschal Lamb Isaiah 53 Behold the ‘Ram’ of God The Lion/Lamb: Beyond Incongruity Chapter 3 The Lamb as Proto-Martyr The Revelation of Jesus Christ (Revelation 1–8) The Testimony of Jesus (Revelation 1.2) The First and the Last (Revelation 1.4) The Faithful Witness (Revelation 1.5–6) Coming on the Clouds (Revelation 1.7) Christophanies in the Apocalypse The Son of Man/Ancient of Days (Revelation 1.12–20) Christological Oracles (Revelation 2–3) The Rider on the White Horse (Revelation 19.11–16) The Lion and the Lamb (Revelation 4–5)

69 70 71 79 83 84 92 97 97 101 105 109 113 116 116 119 121 125

Chapter 4 The Lamb as Divine Judge 132 Violence and Judgement in the Apocalypse 132 Judgement in the Oracles to the Seven Churches (Revelation 1–3) 133 The Seven Seals and Trumpets (Revelation 6–7) 144 The Sealed Scroll 144 The First Four Seals (Revelation 6.1–8) 147 The Sixth Seal: The Day of the Lord (Revelation 6.12–17) 151 Plagues and Torments on the Damned (Revelation 8–16) 158 The Seven Trumpets (Revelation 8.2–9.21; 11.15–19) 159 Two Last Judgements (Revelation 11.15–19; 14.6–20) 165 The Seven Bowls of Wrath (Revelation 15.7–16.21) 173 The Fall of Babylon, the Final Battle, and the Last Judgement (Revelation 17–22) 177 The Fall of Babylon (Revelation 17–18) 177 The Final Battle (Revelation 16.12–16; 17.12–14; 19.11–21) 180 The Last Final Judgement and the New Jerusalem (Revelation 20–22) 184 Conclusion 187 Chapter 5 A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation Martyrdom and Judgement Judgement Delayed (Revelation 6.10) God’s Judgement for the Martyrs

188 188 188 193

Contents

The Call to Martyrdom Revelation 6.11 Revelation 12.7–17 Revelation 13 Revelation 14 Revelation 7 The Call to Conquer Conquering in the Seven Churches Martyrs as Agents of Divine Judgement Vindication of The Martyrs The Noble Army of Martyrs Martyrs as Rulers: Revelation 20.4–6 Martyrs as Agents of Judgement: Revelation 18.4–8 Conclusion

vii

197 200 204 208 211 215 220 221 224 225 227 228 231 236

Bibliography 239 Index of References 254 Index of Authors 280

P refa ce

It seems to me that one of the most interesting parts of a book is the Preface. For often it is here, hidden in plain sight, that the author of even the most worthy or technical monograph may let their carefully constructed mask slip to reveal something of what drives or motivates their research. In the preface, we may catch a glimpse of an ideological agenda that is otherwise buried beneath the bricks and mortar of higher criticism and lengthy footnotes, but nonetheless remain foundational for a project’s conclusions. Or, to murder another metaphor, as St Paul puts it, ‘a little leaven leavens the whole lump’ (1 Cor. 5.6; Gal 5.9)! Of course, knowing this, I have resolved not to write anything of interest in this preface! I have had an interest in the book of Revelation and all things apocalyptic for a very long time. As far as I recall, this may have started in Primary School. My best friend through much of school, Grant Pollock, was a Jehovah’s Witness, a group known for its robust ‘End-Times’ theology. At the time, Jehovah’s Witnesses had pinpointed 1914 as the return of Christ, and predicted that the end would come before the generation that had witnessed the First World War had died out. For obvious reasons, this belief is no longer held. I was a member of our school’s Scripture Union, and, when we were not playing Subbuteo, Grant and I would engage in robust exchange on the end of the world, at least to the extent that nine-year-olds are able. It was only some years later I learned that many other Christian groups engaged in fantastical end-time calculus with the books of Daniel and Revelation. ‘When I was a child…’ While I have certainly retained an interest in modern preoccupations with the End, my academic work has primarily focussed on the beliefs and practices of early Christian communities, particularly in relation to ideas and attitudes to martyrdom. My PhD dissertation, ‘Radical Martyrdom and Cosmic Conflict in Early Christianity’ (published under the same title by T&T Clark International in 2006), written under Larry Hurtado at the University of Edinburgh, examined the development of Christian theologies of martyrdom to the pre-Decian persecutions. Martyrdom represents

x Preface

the practice of religion at the extremes. Despite my primary interest in the ancient world, I explored how dying (and sometimes, killing) for God manifests itself in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam in my Martyrdom: A Guide for the Perplexed (T&T Clark International, 2011). In this volume, I return to the world of early Christianity, and in particular, the book of Revelation. In writing this book, I do not approach the Apocalypse as Christian scripture, but as a document that grants the modern reader at least one Christian perspective of life in the Roman empire at the end of the first century. It is customary to issue a long list of thanks in a preface, which invariably causes anxiety in authors. After all, no-one would wish to offend a colleague or friend by omitting them in what is the closest academics come to an Oscar acceptance speech! So to anyone who is offended by their name not appearing here, I am flattered that you bothered to read my Preface, and I am genuinely sorry. I am, of course, grateful to the team at Bloomsbury and T&T Clark for continuing to publish my books. Dominic Mattos has demonstrated an apparently inexhaustible supply of patience as various deadlines slipped past. One consequence of my tardiness is Miriam Cantwell, who had also been very supportive, has not seen the fruition of this work, having moved to Anthropology and Food Studies, a series to which, alas, I do not anticipate contributing! I would also like to acknowledge the sterling work of the copy editor, Duncan Burns. His keen eye, and his painstaking work on turning my text into this volume has been much appreciated. I am particularly grateful for his work on what has turned out to be a very long set of indices. I am fortunate to have very supportive colleagues in the Department of Theology and Religious Studies at the University of Chester, and I hope the others will not be offended if I particularly mention Matthew Collins, Ben Fulford, Jessica Keady, Steve Knowles, and Dawn Llewellyn, who have contributed in various ways to my thinking on this project. I am particularly grateful to Dawn, who read through the manuscript. Many passive sentences have been removed by her judicious red pen! I first gave a paper on this theme at a Society of Biblical Literature Conference back in 2008. In the intervening time, I have delivered many papers on martyrdom, some of which have fed directly into this present volume. I have often found conferences both stimulating and energising, and I am genuinely grateful to chairs, fellow-panellists, and questioners, who have engaged with my presentations. At the real risk of omitting folk who have contributed to my thinking, I would particularly like to thank colleagues and friends, who have frequented the Violence and Representations of Violence in Antiquity Section of SBL, including:

Preface

xi

Stephanie Cobb, David Eastman, David Frankfurter, Jan Willem van Henten, Candida Moss, Judith Perkins, Danny Praet, Rob Seesengood, and Kimberly Stratton. Closer to home, members of the Revelation Seminar of the British New Testament Society have been a huge source of inspiration, especially Garrick Allen, Gordon Campbell, Michelle Fletcher, Ian Paul, and Simon Woodman. Finally, as the task of scholarship is made worthwhile by friends and colleagues, so it is made infinitely easier by those who have ploughed the field before us. In writing this book, I have engaged with some people I know well, others whom I have never met, and some no longer with us. I consider myself fortunate to have been academically trained by some of the finest scholars in New Testament Studies: John Barclay, Joel Marcus, and John Riches at Glasgow University; Brian Blount and Beverly Gaventa at Princeton Theological Seminary; and Larry Hurtado in Edinburgh. Indeed, it was in an independent study module with Brian Blount in Princeton that my academic interest in the book of Revelation took off. He had, as I recall, just signed a contract for his Revelation commentary with Westminster John Knox Press, which has been of great assistance in writing this book. Ultimately, as all prefaces end, although grateful for the training and input from friends, colleagues, and mentors, the arguments in the following pages, whatever strengths and weaknesses, are my own. While I believe them to be correct, others will no doubt wish to dispute them. For as I advise my own students, don’t believe something is true just because it is written in a book!

A b b rev i at i ons

AB ABD

Anchor Bible Commentary Series Anchor Bible Dictionary (ed. David Freedman; 6 vols; Garden City: Doubleday, 1992) Abr. Philo, De Abrahamo (On the Life of Abraham) Adv. Haer. Irenaeus, Adversus haereses (Against Heresies) Adv. Marc. Tertullian, Adversus Marcionem (Against Marcion) ANRW Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt Ant. Josephus, Jewish Antiquities Josephus, Against Apion Apion Apoc. Bar. Apocalypse of Baruch Apoc. Pet. Apocalypse of Peter Apol. Apology Asc. Isa. Ascension of Isaiah The Assumption of Moses Ass. Moses AYBC Anchor Yale Bible Commentary Series BBC Blackwell Bible Commentaries BECNT Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament BETL Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium Bib Biblica BJRL Bulletin of the John Rylands Library BNTC Black’s New Testament Commentary Series BR Biblical Research BT The Bible Translator BWANT Beiträge zur Wissenschaft vom Alten und Neuen Testament Carm. Horace, Carmen seculare CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly CBR Currents in Biblical Research Victorinus, Commentary on the Apocalypse Comm. Apoc. Comm. Dan. Hippolytus, Commentary on Daniel Comm. John Origen, Commentary on John De Spec. Tertullian, On the Games Det. Pot. Ins. Philo, Quod deterius potiori insidiari soleat (That the Worse Attacks the Better) Deus Imm. Philo, Quod Deus sit immutabilis (The God is Unchangeable) Dial. Justin, Dialogue with Trypho Ep. Arist. Epistle of Aristobulus Ep. Barn. The Epistle of Barnabas

xiv Abbreviations Eph. Ignatius, Epistle to the Ephesians ET Expository Times Exhortatio Origen, Exhortatio ad martyrium (Exhortation to Martyrdom) FRLANT Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments Gos. Pet. The Gospel of Peter H. E. Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica (Church History) Hab. Virg. Cyprian, De habitu virginum (The Dress of Virgins) Hippolytus, Refutatio omnium haeresium (On the Refutation of Haer. All Heresies) HDR Harvard Dissertations in Religion Helv. Seneca, Ad Helvium (To Helvia) Hist. Tacitus, Historiae (Histories) HNT Handbuch zum Neuen Testament Hom. Lev. Origen, Homilies on Leviticus HTR Harvard Theological Review ICC International Critical Commentary Series Int Interpretation JBL Journal of Biblical Literature JECS Journal of Early Christian Studies Jos. Asen. Joseph and Aseneth JR Journal of Religion Journal of Roman Studies JRS JSNT Journal for the Study of the New Testament JSNTSS Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplementary Series JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Journal of Theological Studies new series JTS ns KAV Kommentar zu den apostolischen Vätern LNTS Library of New Testament Studies Library of Second Temple Studies LSTS Magn. Ignatius, Epistle to the Magnesians Mart. Carpus The Martyrdom of Carpus Mart. Lyons The Martyrs of Lyons Mart. Poly. The Martyrdom of Polycarp Philo, De mutatione nominum (On the Change of Names) Mut. Nom. Nat. Hist. Pliny the Elder, Naturalis historia (Natural History) New Cambridge Bible Commentary NCBC New International Commentary on the New Testament NICNT NIGTC New International Greek Testament Commentary NLC New London Commentary NovT Novum Testamentum NTC New Testament Commentaries NTCS New Testament Commentary Series NTL New Testament Library NTR Nouvelle Revue Théologique NTS New Testament Studies

Abbreviations NTT Op. Mund. OTP

New Testament Theology Philo, De opificon mundi (On the Creation of the World) The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (ed. James H. Charlesworth; 2 vols; Peabody: Hendrickson, 1983) Passion of Perpetua Pass. Perp. Poly. Ignatius, Epistle to Polycarp Ignatius, Epistle to the Romans Rom. Scorp. Tertullian, Scorpiace (Antidote to the Scorpion’s Sting) Sibylline Oracles Sib. Or. Shepherd of Hermas, Similitude Sim. Scottish Journal of Theology SJT Ignatius, Epistle to the Smyrnaeans Smyr. SNTSM Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series Philo, De somniis (On Dreams) Somn. Philo, De specialibus legibus (On the Special Laws) Spec. Leg. Strom. Clement, Stromata The Testament of Job Test. Job The Testament of Joseph Test. Jos. Test. Levi The Testament of Levi The Testament of Naphtali Test. Naph. Test. Truth The Testament of Truth Tyndale New Testament Commentary Series TNTC Trall. Ignatius, Epistle to the Trallians Tyndale Bulletin TynBul Shepherd of Hermas Vision Vis. Philo, De vita Mosis (On the Life of Moses) Vit. Mos. Philostratus, Vita Sophistratum (Lives of the Sophists) Vit. Soph. Josephus, Jewish War War World Biblical Commentary Series WBC Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament WUNT Zeitschrift fur die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die ZNW Kunde des Urchristentums

xv

I n t rod uct i on : V i ol en c e a n d M a rt y r dom i n t h e B ook of R eve lat i on

Reading the Violence of the Apocalypse While it is conventional to describe the long, arduous book-writing process in a Preface rather than the Introduction, I wish to begin by recounting an experience I had at an annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL) in 2008. This was, in fact, the year I first delivered a paper directly related to this current project. It was presented in the Violence and Representations of Violence among Jews and Christians section, and bore the rather provocative title: ‘Violent Martyrs: On Dispensing with Nonviolent Readings of John’s Apocalypse’. In that paper, I sketched out what is now the thesis of this book. In the book of Revelation, martyrdom is not an act of non-violent resistance. In the literary world created by the Apocalypse, John imagined that martyrs would become agents of divine wrath. Therefore, I argued, non-violent readings that sought to hold up the martyr as a paradigm of non-violent resistance, especially as a counterpoint to violent judgement in the rest of the Apocalypse, were fundamentally flawed. Since martyrs could enjoy participation in divine violence against the wicked, martyrdom is presented as a positive choice. In consequence, John encouraged all his readers to seek martyrdom. I have very little recollection of the paper or its general reception. However, I do remember the very first question: ‘Are you saying we should all get ourselves killed?’ I was completely thrown. In my view, the question was inappropriate for an academic conference, and the thought process that brought about that question so thoroughly left-field that, not wishing to be rude, I simply stumbled my way towards a non-answer to the question: I am not even sure I said that I was not recommending martyrdom today! It had genuinely not occurred to me that anyone at an SBL conference would make such a direct link from an argument about what John may or may not have thought when writing his Apocalypse to seven first-century churches in Asia Minor, to hearing an instruction

2

The Violence of the Lamb

about the behaviour of a twenty-first-century audience at an academic conference in North America. Had my paper been on the cult of Artemis, I am not convinced anyone would have thought to wonder about the implications for contemporary religious practice. Although my interlocutor posed his question in a disarmingly forthright way, it is undoubtedly the case that the conviction that drove his question is shared, or at least partly shared, by many scholarly readers of the Apocalypse. The book of Revelation is not just one among many ancient documents; it eventually found its way into the Canon.1 Although it is not obvious why it should be the case, for many readers, interpretations of what John of Patmos intended by Revelation must operate within particular parameters expected of a document currently located within the canon of Christian Scripture. This is especially true when considering the theme of violence in Revelation, and whether the Apocalypse can be called an ‘ethical’ text.2 Of course, many who have read Revelation have recoiled at what they see as its violent and judgemental rhetoric. Novelist Will Self does not pull his punches: Revelation is a sick text! Perhaps it’s the occlusion of judgemental types, and the congruent occlusion of psyches, but there’s something not quite right about Revelation… The riot of violent, imagistic occurrences; the cabalistic emphasis on numbers; the visceral repulsion expressed towards the bodily, the sensual and the sexual. It deranges in and of itself… In its vile obscurantism is its baneful effect… The text is a guignol of tedium, a portentous horror film.3

Other writers, such as Harold Bloom4 and Carl Jung,5 have similarly worried about the ethical vision of the Apocalypse; it is not only the 1.  For a recent discussion of the troubled history of the Apocalypse in the early Church on the way to canonisation, see Michael J. Kruger, ‘The Reception of the Book of Revelation in the Early Church’, in Thomas J. Kraus and Michael Sommer (eds.), Book of Seven Seals: The Peculiarity of Revelation, Its Manuscripts, Attestation, and Transmission (WUNT, 363; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016), 159–74. 2.  See Greg Carey, ‘The Apocalypse and Its Ambiguous Ethos’, in Steve Moyise (ed.), Studies in the Book of Revelation (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 2001), 163–80. 3.  Will Self, Revelation (Pocket Canons; Edinburgh: Canongate, 1998), xii–xiii. 4.  Harold Bloom, The Revelation of St John the Divine (London: Chelsea House, 1988). 5.  Carl H. Jung, Answer to Job (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984; orig. 1959). Jung describes the Apocalypse as an ‘orgy of hatred, wrath, vindictiveness, and blind destructive fury’ (125).

 Introduction

3

violent judgement that is problematic, but the attitude of the saved. D. H. Lawrence’s assessment is damning: The sainted Christians gloat over fallen Rome: and then the Victorious Rider appears, his shirt bloody with the blood of dead kings. After this, a New Jerusalem descends to be his Bride, and those precious martyrs all get their thrones, and for a thousand years…the Lamb reigns over the earth, assisted by all the risen martyrs. And if the martyrs in the Millennium are going to be as bloodthirsty and ferocious as John the Divine in the Apocalypse… then somebody’s going to get it hot during the thousand years of the rule of Saints.6

For Lawrence, there is nothing beatific about the final vision of the New Jerusalem. Even the faithful martyrs, who should enjoy resting from their labours (cf. Rev. 14.13), are transformed into the type of harsh rulers, from whom they had met their death. Some scholarly assessment has been similarly negative, if not quite so blunt. Revelation has been attacked for its violence, its misogyny,7 for departing from Jesus’ teaching to love one’s enemies,8 and for offering ‘a poor vision of future justice’.9 Perhaps it is its ‘vile obscurantism’ (to use Will Self’s words) that has helped forge Revelation’s negative reputation. Arguably its very opaqueness makes it the ‘least distant’ book of the New Testament; its lack of firm historical referent means any generation who wishes to ‘decode’ its message can read themselves and their enemies into its narrative of angels, beasts, whores, and heroes.10 Perhaps the most famous and tragic modern example of this phenomenon was the siege in Waco, in which 80 members of the Branch Davidian sect and four FBI agents were killed. Their sect leader, David Koresh, who himself wrote a commentary on Revelation, 6.  D. H. Lawrence, Apocalypse and the Writings on Revelation (ed. Mara Kalnins; The Cambridge Edition of the Worlds of D. H. Lawrence; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002; orig. 1931), 143. 7.  Tina Pippin, ‘The Heroine and the Whore: Fantasy and the Female in the Apocalypse of John’, Semeia 60 (1992): 67–82. 8.  Walter Wink, Engaging the Powers: Discernment and Resistance in a World of Domination (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992), 99–100; Judith Kovaks and Christopher Rowland, Revelation: The Apocalypse of Jesus Christ (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004), 248. 9.  Tina Pippin and J. Michael Clark, ‘Revelation/Apocalypse’, in Deryn Guest, Robert E. Goss, Mona West, and Thomas Bohache (eds.), The Queer Bible Commentary (London: SCM, 2006), 753–68 (754). 10.  On ‘othering’ in the Apocalypse, see, for example, Adela Yarbro Collins, ‘Vilification and Self-Definition in the Book of Revelation’, HTR 79 (1986): 308–20.

4

The Violence of the Lamb

saw himself and his sect within the prophecies of the Apocalypse with fatal consequences.11 Not without justification, Loren Johns suggests the Apocalypse is ‘arguably the most dangerous book in the history of Christendom in terms of the history of its effects’.12 However, just as some readers contrast the message of Revelation with that of Jesus, others insist that the Apocalypse can only be understood in light of the Gospel message.13 As Childs notes, of all the books in the Bible, Revelation has inspired the widest range of interpretation, engaging ‘many of the most brilliant minds (e.g. Isaac Newton; J. A. Bengel, Jonathan Edwards), often with disastrous results’.14 One way of winnowing competing interpretations of the Apocalypse is to read it through the lens of the canon. Indeed, for Revelation, Childs insists: There is a larger canonical unity to the church’s scriptures which is an important guideline to its correct theological understanding. For the last book of the Bible such a canonical control is especially needful.15

Dana Harris provides an example of how a canonical reading might look in practice. In a volume specifically dealing with the ‘problem’ of violence in the Bible, she argues the 11.  See James D. Tabor and Eugene V. Gallacher, Why Waco? Cults and the Battle for Religious Freedom in America (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995); Kenneth G. C. Newport, Apocalypse and Millennium: Studies in Biblical Eisegesis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 197–235. 12.  Loren L. Johns, The Lamb Christology of the Apocalypse of John (WUNT, II/167; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003), 5. On the reception history of Revelation, see for example, Rowland and Kovaks, Revelation; Ian Boxall, Patmos in the Reception History of the Apocalypse (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013); and three essays on reception history in Garrick V. Allen, Ian Paul, and Simon P. Woodman (eds.), The Book of Revelation: Currents in British Research on the Apocalypse (WUNT, II/411; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015): Christopher Rowland, ‘British Interpretation of the Apocalypse: A Historical Perspective’, 225–43; Ian Boxall, ‘The Mighty Angel with the Little Scroll: British Perspective on the Reception History of Revelation 10’, 245–63; Jonathan Downing, ‘The Woman Clothed in the Sun: The Reception of Revelation 12 Among Female British Prophets 1780–1814’, 265–80. 13.  Although Kovaks and Rowland (Revelation, 14–15) note that Revelation is not read in the services of the Eastern Orthodox Churches. 14.  Brevard S. Childs, The New Testament as Canon: An Introduction (London: SCM, 1988), 502. It is not clear whether or not Childs thinks Newton, Bengel, and Edwards have been responsible for disastrous interpretations! See also his Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979). 15.  Childs, New Testament, 517.

 Introduction

5

violence in Revelation must be understood in the Bible’s overall context as the culmination of an overarching narrative of God’s ultimate purposes. These purposes are first revealed in Genesis 1–2, which describes perfect peace (or shalom), expressed in flourishing relationships between human beings and God, each other and the rest of creation. Humanity’s rejection of God’s provision (Gen 3) ruptures this perfect shalom. Hence the Bible’s ‘plot’ concerns what God is doing to restore creation and humanity’s intended purpose within it. The NT presents this in terms of reconciliation through Jesus Christ (Col 1.20). Violence in Revelation is God’s final response to human sin and effects his ultimate purposes of restoration and eradication of evil. This canonical context as well as the historical context of Revelation, is essential for understanding its violent images.16

The claims Harris makes for her approach are not modest. Reading Revelation in light not just of Genesis 1–3, but a particular reading of primordial history, is, she claims, ‘essential’ for understanding Revelation’s violence. But it is not clear Harris’s reading is particularly moral. Under her schema, the human causalities in Revelation are simply branded as evil. God, as the ultimate authority, casually eradicates them. Harris turns the violent imagery in the Apocalypse into divinely sanctioned pest-control.17 Moreover, Canonical Criticism is a problematic approach. Moyise makes three telling points against it: he rightly questions the desirability of forcing the diversity within the canon into an interpretative straight jacket; he undermines the particular canonical narrative Childs plots through the canon to reach the Apocalypse; and, finally, if the Bible is interpreted solely as the property of the Christian community, then ‘it might be said that this is enacting precisely the interpretation of Revelation (silencing

16.  Dana M. Harris, ‘Understanding Images of Violence in the Book of Revelation’, in Markus Zehnder and Hallvard Hagelia (eds.), Encountering Violence in the Bible (The Bible in the Modern World, 55; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2013), 148–64 (149). 17.  Several readers reach the same conclusion by different means, although they all rest on the theological assertion that any action taken by God, no matter how violent, must be moral. So, for example, Paul Decock, ‘Images of War and Creation: Of Violence and Non-Violence in the Revelation of John’, in Pieter G. R. de Villiers and Jan Willem van Henten (eds.), Coping with Violence in the New Testament (Leiden: Brill, 2012), 185–200; Matthew J. Streett, Here Comes the Judge: Violent Pacifism in the Book of Revelation (LNTS, 462; London: T&T Clark International, 2012), 231–35.

6

The Violence of the Lamb

outsiders) that it is actually seeking to counter’.18 However, one may well wonder if advocates of Canonical Criticism are more up front about their confessional agenda than other readers. But why should the historical contingency of the Canon control historical inquiry into an early Christian text? It can only be deemed a valid exercise if one takes the view that the canon is no accident.19 Childs concedes as much in responding to critics of his work: In my judgement, the acceptance of the canon as normative does not function initially as a derivative of reasoned argument. The canon is the deposit of the religious community’s sacred tradition which one receives as a member of that body. The acknowledgement of a normative rule functions confessionally as a testimony to one’s beliefs… The testimony of faith and not reason establishes the canon.20

It is one thing to advocate readings through particular confessional hermeneutical lenses. It is quite another to claim normativity or superiority for that vantage point; it is important to be clear what kind of question is being asked and answered. It is certainly legitimate to consider the implications of exegesis for the contemporary Christian. However, that is quite different from reading the text with a lens that will only permit a range of possible results that are predetermined by a confessional, or for that matter, political or ethical stance. Returning to the question of violence in the Apocalypse. While some readers believe Revelation departs from Jesus’ essential message of love for enemies,21 this would be an impossible conclusion for the canonical 18.  Steve Moyise, ‘Does the Lion Lie Down with the Lamb?’, in Moyise (ed.), Studies in the Book of Revelation, 181–94 (191). See also the criticism by Robert P. Carroll, ‘Canonical Criticism: A Recent Trend in Biblical Studies?’, ET 92 (1981): 73–78. 19.  In fairness, Harris (‘Understanding Images of Violence’, 150 n. 8) is explicit: ‘By canonical approach, I am also assuming that the Bible is divinely inspired and thus represents a unified narrative… I assume that a given text’s meaning is the one intended by the divine and human authors, which can be understood (adequately, if not absolutely) by careful exegesis that seeks to locate a passage in its historical, literary, linguistic, and canonical context.’ 20.  Brevard S. Childs, ‘Response to Reviewers of Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture’, JSOT 16 (1980): 52–60 (56). 21.  Wink, Engaging, 99–100; Charles H. Dodd, Apostolic Preaching and Its Developments (London: Harper & Row, 1964), 40–41; Robert H. Charles, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St John (ICC; 2 vols.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1920), 1:176. However, both Dodd and Charles simply put the

 Introduction

7

critic. It would be a category error, since the text could only be read in light of Jesus’ non-violent gospel (assuming for now it was so). For the historical-critic, the question is open. One would then be free to consider any consequences for canonical readings of Revelation, but the initial investigation cannot be governed by it. I am not suggesting that all historical-critical non-violent readings of the Apocalypse are somehow ‘infected’ by prior theological commitments. However, to take the conclusion of Mennonite scholar, Richard Hays, on violence in the New Testament as an example: With regard to the issue of violence, the New Testament bears a powerful witness that is both univocal and pervasive, for it is integrally related to the heart of the kerygma and to God’s fundamental elective purpose.22

It is surely not illegitimate to at least question the extent to which the conclusion that the New Testament is univocal on non-violence is reached by fair exegetical reading or driven by a prior theological commitment that non-violence is integrally related to the heart of God’s purpose. By ‘God’, I assume Hays means more than simply the character in the New Testament narrative. Like my SBL questioner, if one is committed to a robust sense of continuity between early and contemporary Christian community readings, then it would be hard to avoid a predisposition to readings which can be accommodated by contemporary Christian praxis. Of course, I am not saying the New Testament, Revelation, or in fact any text, cannot or indeed should not be read with a hermeneutical lens with a preference for non-violence,23 but this is a different exercise ‘un-Christian’ nature of the Apocalypse down to the adoption of ‘Jewish’ apocalyptic tradition. This is, of course, also problematic. In any case, 4 Ezra does not in fact display the same militarism of the apocalyptic genre. Stephen S. Smalley (The Revelation to John: A Commentary on the Greek Text [London: SPCK, 2005], 162–63) suggests the sub-Christian elements are from John’s range of sources. 22.  Richard B. Hays, The Moral Vision of the New Testament (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1997), 314 (emphasis added). 23.  For a recent non-violent reading explicitly framed in critical dialogue with a non-violent religious tradition, see Simon P. Woodman, ‘Fire from Heaven: Divine Judgment in the Book of Revelation’, in Allan, Paul, and Woodman (eds.), Book of Revelation, 175–91. Woodman writes (181): ‘the following analysis will use the tradition on nonviolence as a hermeneutical key to explore how these images [judgement and the lake of fire] can help shape a nonviolent understanding of divine judgement’.

8

The Violence of the Lamb

from the attempt to read John within his own context. This hardly needs saying, but perhaps Crossan was guilty of only mild overstatement when he quipped of one particular branch of New Testament Studies: ‘It is impossible to avoid the suspicion that historical Jesus research is a very safe place to do theology and call it history’.24 While no reading of biblical texts is innocent, my aim in this book is to identify, so far as is possible, John’s theology of martyrdom. My particular concern in this volume is how martyrology and Christology intersect, and the way in which violence both endured and inflicted creates Christian identity. These two aspects of the Apocalypse, the slain Lamb and the slaughtered martyrs, also happen to be the pegs on which non-violent readings of the Apocalypse often hang. Martyrdom in Revelation There are a variety of approaches to violence in the Apocalypse.25 Most commentators who argue John does not have a violent outlook on this or the next world tend to focus their energies on John’s central depiction for Jesus, the Lamb, or else on the group who most experience violence, the martyrs. I will deal in detail with the martyrs (Chapters 1 and 5) and John’s Christology (Chapters 2–4) in the course of this volume. For now, it is sufficient to note that when Christ makes his appearance in the throne room of heaven, it is as ‘a Lamb standing, as though it had been slain’ (ἀρνίον ἑστηκὸς ὡς ἐσφαγμένον; Rev. 5.6). The Lamb is John’s most common image for Jesus in the Apocalypse, and it is therefore reasonable to refract his Christology through this image. For many commentators, the slain-ness of the Lamb is its most distinctive feature. Christ conquers evil through his act of self-giving love on the cross, as Rossing concludes:

24.  John Dominic Crossan, The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1991), xxviii. Cf. N. T. Wright, ‘Knowing Jesus: Faith and History’, in Marcus J. Borg and N. T. Wright, The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1999), 15–27. 25.  For excellent surveys of various scholarly approaches to violence in the Apocalypse, see Rebecca Skaggs and Thomas Doyle, ‘Violence in the Apocalypse of John’, CBR 5 (2007): 220–34; W. Gordon Campbell, ‘Facing Fire and Fury: One Reading of Revelation’s Violence in the Context of Recent Interpretation’, in Allen, Paul, and Woodman (eds.), Book of Revelation, 147–73, especially 147–62; Streett, Here Comes the Judge, 1–25.

 Introduction

9

The slain Lamb’s victory through suffering love is the heart of the Revelation story… We need the vision of ‘Lamb power’ to remind us that true victory comes in our world not through military might but through selfgiving love… Jesus conquers not by inflicting violence but by accepting the violence inflicted upon him in crucifixion.26

Rossing is particularly concerned to address what she calls the ‘hijacking’ of Revelation by right-wing Dispensationalist groups, most famously expressed in Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins’s Left Behind Series.27 Nonetheless, her basic move, stressing that Jesus is the victim rather than the aggressor, is common in scholarly readings of John’s Christology. So, for Barr, it is ‘absolutely fundamental to the Apocalypse that the violence through which Jesus is said to conquer evil is the violence done to him. The character of Jesus, his ethos, is the Lamb slain.’28 Of course, there is a great deal of violence in the text, but what is most problematic for those readings that refract the Apocalypse through the lens of the slaughtered Lamb is the role he then takes in judging the wicked. Humanity seeks to be delivered from the ‘Wrath of the Lamb’ (Rev. 6.16–17), and while the Lamb may be the dominant image for Christ, it is not the only one; he will later appear as a triumphant rider on a white horse, who slays the wicked with a sword that comes from his mouth (19.11–21). However, for Bredin, when the Lamb judges, it does not constitute violent wrath, but rather it represents the self-defeating 26.  Barbara R. Rossing, The Rapture Exposed: The Message of Hope in the Book of Revelation (New York: Basic Books, 2001), 135. 27.  See also the critique by Loren L. Johns, ‘Conceiving Violence: The Apocalypse of John and the Left Behind Series.’ Direction 34 (2005): 194–214. 28.  David L. Barr, ‘The Lamb Who Looks Like a Dragon? Characterizing Jesus in John’s Apocalypse’, in David L. Barr (ed.), The Reality of the Apocalypse: Rhetoric and Politics in the Book of Revelation (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006), 205–20 (209). Barr has consistently made this point throughout his writing on the Lamb. So elsewhere (Tales of the End: A Narrative Commentary on the Book of Revelation [Santa Rosa: Polebridge, 1998], 70) he writes: ‘Jesus is the torn lamb’; and the violence is ‘endured not inflicted’. Similarly, among many others, Stephen Finnamore, God, Order, and Chaos: René Girard and the Apocalypse (Paternoster Biblical Monographs; Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2009), 153; Brian K. Blount, Can I get a Witness? Reading Revelation Through African American Culture (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2005), 82; John L. Resseguie, Revelation Unsealed: A Narrative Critical Approach to John’s Apocalypse (Leiden: Brill, 1998), 134; Catherine Keller, Apocalypse Then and Now: A Feminist Guide to the End of the World (Boston: Beacon, 1996), 195; Anthony T. Hanson, The Wrath of the Lamb (London: SCM, 1957).

10

The Violence of the Lamb

destruction of sin.29 Wrath is not an attribute of God, but the impersonal and natural consequences of human violence.30 Rome, not God, is the real cause of violence in the Apocalypse,31 which John rejects. Even when Christ makes war on the enemies of God, Bredin notes God’s enemies are slain by a sword not held in his hand, but from his mouth (19.15). Therefore, it is testimony by which this Word of God (19.13) is victorious; he fights a battle without killing.32 Bredin argues, ‘this does not suggest a military warrior, but a warrior who has carried out his war against idolatry and violence in his obedience to God by testifying to the word of God’.33 As always, the image of the slain Lamb is the controlling interpretative key: Wrath no longer depicts a military conquering God on the battlefield. God is not one who slays with a sword. Suffering love is the essence of wrath, and therefore suffering love is that which brings about God’s judgement and kingdom.34

Therefore, it is non-violent resistance that conquers the power of evil in the Apocalypse. However, the slain Lamb is not the only conqueror in the Apocalypse; John’s Christians are also called to conquer. As Streett correctly observes ‘the Lamb is the blueprint for martyrdom’.35 29.  Mark Bredin, Jesus, a Revolutionary of Peace: A Nonviolent Christology in the Book of Revelation (Paternoster Biblical Monographs; Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2003), 193. 30.  Compare Christopher Rowland, The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity (New York: Crossroads), 83. However, Rowland suggests the unfolding of destruction is in some sense humanity’s own doing along the lines of Rom. 1. 31.  So for Bauckham (The Theology of the Book of Revelation [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993], 16–22), the oppressive system judges itself. See also Decock, ‘Images of War’, 185–200; Pieter G. R. de Villiers, ‘Unmasking and Challenging Evil: Exegetical Perspectives on Violence in Revelation 18’, in de Villiers and van Henten (eds.), Coping with Violence, 200–225. 32.  Bredin, Jesus, 205. Similarly, William Klassen, ‘Vengeance in the Apocalypse of John’, CBQ 28 (1966): 300–311 (308). 33.  Bredin, Jesus, 206. 34.  Bredin, Jesus, 195 35.  Streett, Here Comes the Judge, 180; Paul Middleton, ‘Christology, Martyrdom, and Vindication in the Gospel of Mark and the Apocalypse: Two New Testament Views’, in Chris Keith and Dieter T. Roth, Mark, Manuscripts, and Monotheism: Essays in Honour of Larry W. Hurtado (LNTS, 528; London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2015), 219–37, especially 232–36; Klassen, ‘Vengeance’, 306.

 Introduction

11

As I will demonstrate in Chapter 5, martyrdom is a major theme in the Apocalypse. For those who read Revelation non-violently, the martyrs perhaps provide the clearest indication that the cosmic war between God and the forces of evil must be won by shedding one’s own rather than one’s enemies’ blood. Crossan describes martyrdom as ‘the ultimate act of non-violent resistance’,36 and Bredin warns that in the Apocalypse ‘martyrdom is considered something a non-violent activist must be ready to endure’.37 While Bauckham argues that the martyrs are likened to an army in Revelation (7.1–8),38 it is ‘by sacrificial death’ that they share in the Messiah’s victory.39 This means that the overall strategy of the Apocalypse for Christians in the struggle against evil is patient endurance. So Yoder concludes that ‘suffering and not brute power determines the meaning of history’ and the ‘patience of God’s people is key’.40 However, not all God’s people are particularly patient. When the Lamb opens the fifth seal of the scroll, John sees martyrs under the altar in heaven (Rev. 6.9–11) who cry out to God, asking how much longer he is going to delay avenging their blood on the inhabitants of the earth (6.10). While some deny that John depicts even divine violence as good,41 others recognise the Apocalypse is a violent text, but seek to mitigate it by positioning the Apocalypse in the midst of persecution.42 So Decock recently argued that in John’s experience, ‘God perseveres in sending

36.  John Dominic Crossan (The Birth of Christianity: Discovering What Happened in the Years Immediately After the Execution of Jesus [San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1998], 289) describes martyrdom as ‘the final act of ethical eschatology’. See also the ‘active resistance’ outlined in Blount’s important study (Witness?) of the themes of Revelation and African American worship. 37.  Bredin, Jesus, 53. 38.  Richard Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy: Studies in the Book of Revelation (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1993), 210–37. 39.  Bauckham, Theology of the Book of Revelation, 77; Barr, Tales, 110. Blount (Witness?, 70) quips that for defeating the supernatural Beast, ‘weakness is the silver bullet’. 40.  John H. Yoder, The Politics of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 232. 41.  David L. Barr (‘Doing Violence: Moral Issues in Reading John’s Apocalypse’, in Barr [ed.], Reading the Book of Revelation: A Resource for Students [Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003], 97–108) writes: ‘It is wrong to read John’s story as if it were about divinely sanctioned violence’ (97). 42.  Elizabeth Schüssler-Fiorenza, The Book of Revelation: Vision of a Just World (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1993), 124–29; Adela Yarbro Collins, ‘Persecution and Vengeance in the Book of Revelation’, in David Hellholm (ed.), Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr/Paul Siebeck, 1983), 729–49.

12

The Violence of the Lamb

his prophets in spite of the fact that they are being violently rejected’.43 Nevertheless, the idea that early Christians suffered sustained persecution by imperial authorities, or that Domitian demanded special honours, is no longer held.44 Therefore, a persecution paradigm loses its force as an explanation for violent judgement and renders the cry of the martyrs for vengeance problematic. Smalley responds that one must not confuse a cry for vengeance with a desire for justice.45 Another approach to violence in the Apocalypse is to acknowledge and explain it. Without a social setting of persecution, some see crisis in Revelation as John’s creation, either as a cathartic release for feelings of aggression or frustration,46 to attack the alternative prophetic schools active in the churches to which he writes,47 or to keep his readers away from the seduction of Rome. Barr argues that John’s literary world 43.  Decock, ‘Images of War’, 196. See also Greg Carey, ‘Early Christian Apocalyptic Rhetoric’, in John J. Collins (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Apocalyptic Literature (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 218–34. 44.  See Chapter 1 below. 45.  Smalley, Revelation, 160–61. See also George B. Caird, The Revelation of Saint John (BNTC; London: A. & C. Black, 1966), 85; Schüssler-Fiorenza, Revelation, 8. Blount (Revelation: A Commentary [NTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2009], 1) argues John is angry at injustice in the Roman system, insisting: ‘Revelation is a mean book; it is not, however, mean-spirited’. I take very seriously the claim that the violent language is important for readers in contemporary situations of oppression. The Apocalypse has fuelled full-blooded, but non-violent critiques of the South African apartheid system (Alan A. Boesack, Comfort and Protest: The Apocalypse from a South African Perspective [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1997]), racism in America (Blount, Witness?), and Balkanisation (Miroslav Volf, Exclusion and Embrace: A Theological Embrace of Identity, Otherness, and Reconciliation [Nashville: Abingdon, 1996]). Of course, the Apocalypse has also added fuel to already tense situations; so see Joshua T. Searle, The Scarlet Woman and the Red Hand: Evangelical Apocalyptic Belief in the Northern Ireland Troubles (Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 2014). 46.  Adela Yarbro Collins, Crisis and Catharsis: The Power of the Apocalypse (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1984), 141–63. 47.  David Frankfurter, ‘The Legacy of Sectarian Rage: Vengeance Fantasies in the New Testament’, in David A. Bernat and Jonathan Klawans (eds.), Religion and Violence: The Biblical Heritage (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2007), 114–28; John W. Marshall, ‘Collateral Damage: Jesus and Jezebel in the Jewish War’, in Shelley Matthews and E. Leigh Gibson (eds.), Violence in the New Testament (London: T&T Clark International, 2005), 35–50 (35); Paul Duff, Who Rides the Beast? Prophetic Rivalry and the Rhetoric of Crisis in the Churches of the Apocalypse (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 111–12.

 Introduction

13

transforms reality.48 Indeed, he astutely notes: ‘That so many have been persuaded that Rome is the persecutor is testimony only to the effectiveness of John’s symbolic recreation of the world’.49 Some scholars simply cannot see past the violence. For Pippin, there is no way the book can be salvaged because the martyrs enjoy the fantasy violence, and God is ‘the leader of the ultimate massacre’.50 However, these perspectives, like those influenced by a concern to interpret the Apocalypse as Christian Scripture, judge the book on its perceived (in this case, lack of) usefulness for contemporary readers. As Moyise notes: If the goal of interpretation is to promote the Christian faith, empower oppressed people or some other ideological purpose, then certain interpretations need to be resisted. They are not necessarily inferior readings if judged by historical or literary criteria alone.51

My intention in writing this book is neither to promote the Christian faith nor forward any other particular ideological agenda. Indeed, it may be that those who are concerned about such things may wish to resist at least part of my reading, just like my questioner at the Boston conference in 2008. This is, of course, not to say that my reading can say nothing to those who wish to read the text to address contemporary concerns. I am primarily interested in what John may have been saying to his first readers, rather than to those who have followed them. In this regard, I share deSilva’s assumption ‘that John cared most about the readers he actually addressed, and that he wrote Revelation for them rather than any future generations of readers’.52

48.  This is a theme throughout much of Barr’s work, but, as far as I am aware, was first expressed in ‘The Apocalypse as a Symbolic Transformation of the World: A Literary Analysis’, Int 38 (1984): 39–50. 49.  Barr, ‘Lamb’, 206. Similarly Campbell (‘Fire and Fury’, 149): ‘[Revelation] equips its reader to make sense of its descriptions of apocalyptic violence and vengeance’. See further, Campbell, Revelation: A Thematic Approach (Cambridge: James Clarke, 2012). 50.  Tina Pippin, Death and Desire: Rhetoric of Gender in the Apocalypse of John (Philadelphia: Westminster John Knox, 1992). See also Tina Pippin, Apocalyptic Bodies: The Biblical End of the World in Text and Image (London: Routledge, 1999), 85, 92; Susan Hylen, ‘Metaphor Matters: Violence and Ethics in Revelation’, CBQ 23 (2011): 777–96. 51.  Moyise, ‘Does the Lion Lie Down?’, 193. 52.  David A. deSilva, Seeing Things John’s Way: The Rhetoric of the Book of Revelation (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2009), 6.

14

The Violence of the Lamb

Plan of the Book In this book I argue that in the literary world created by John, all faithful Christians must bear testimony to Jesus. This will inevitably result in martyrdom. As Jesus is announced as ‘the faithful witness/martyr’ (ὁ μάρτυς ὁ πιστός; Rev. 1.5), so all who follow him will also be called to be faithful to death (2.10). However, Jesus also appears as the Lamb who was slain (5.6), but which through his death conquered evil (5.5). Those who follow the Lamb wherever he goes (14.4) will also conquer the forces of the Beast through the blood of the Lamb and through shedding their own blood (12.11). John divides the world into two clear camps: the inhabitants of the earth, who receive the mark of the Beast and worship him, and the martyrs, the followers of the Lamb, who bear faithful testimony, refuse to worship the image of the Beast, and who in consequence will be slain. John also outlines the respective fates of these two groups. Beast-worshippers, that is, all humanity outside the church, will be judged. As they have slaughtered the saints, so they will be slain, and suffer eternally before the Lamb (Rev. 14.10). Faithful Christian martyrs will escape judgement, and will live forever in the celestial city in the presence of the Lamb. Significantly, the purpose of violence in the Apocalypse is not redemptive, nor is it designed to encourage the nations to repent. Rather, the violence acts as a warning to those to whom John writes. John is concerned that his readers are not creating sufficient distance between themselves and the Harlot who represents Rome. John warns his churches that, like Jezebel and her followers (2.22–24), if they do not repent, they will become outsiders, and legitimate targets of divine wrath. In the first chapter, ‘Christian “Persecution” and the Dating of Revelation’, I reconstruct the social world of the Apocalypse. John’s literary world imagines the certainty of persecution, with a demand to worship the ‘image of the Beast’, which I take as a reference to the imperial cult. However, as evidence of persecution or promotion of the emperor cult is lacking, to what extent do the social and literary worlds overlap? While I see no reason to overturn the current consensus that persecution where it occurred was local and sporadic, it would not take much in the way of local pressure for Christians to feel persecuted. Moreover, I argue that the court room of Pliny, with the demand to offer sacrifice to an image of the emperor, fits the context of Revelation perfectly. However, rather than date Revelation to the time of Pliny, many New Testament texts could also reflect Pliny’s test. Therefore, I conclude that Pliny did not in fact invent the sacrifice test, and that it had been used

 Introduction

15

far earlier and more widely as a means of identifying Christians. While Pliny had never been present at any Christian trials, he had heard that the sacrifice test was one way of identifying those whose denials were real. This means we are able to take seriously John’s references to the imperial cult, without having to find a precise date and location where it may have been more vigorously pursued. It also means we need not imagine ‘persecution’ was all in John’s mind. The second, third, and fourth chapters deal with Christology in the Apocalypse. Chapter 2, ‘Not a Tame Lion: Christology in the Apocalypse’, tackles the central apparently incongruent Christological image of the Lion/Lamb (Rev. 5.5–6). After offering a survey of possible antecedents, I conclude that there is in fact no incongruently in the image. Christians knew that in dying and rising, Christ had conquered death and evil. The slaughtered Lamb goes on to fulfil precisely the functions of the messianic lion. The images of Lion and Lamb are complementary rather than contradictory. The third chapter, ‘The Lamb as Proto-Martyr’, focusses on Christ’s role as the model martyr, and argues Jesus’ death in no way detracts from the high Christology of the Apocalypse. In each of the major Christological images for Jesus, whether slain Lamb, Ancient of Days/Son of Man (Rev. 1.12–20), or warring Rider (19.11–21), the death of Christ is central. Therefore, the slain Lamb imagery does not uniquely depict the death of Jesus; his death is explicitly linked to his vindication and victory. Chapter 4, ‘The Lamb as Divine Judge’, deals with the third part of the Lamb’s story. He died, he was raised, and now reigns and judges the nations. This completes John’s concept of martyrdom as modelled by the Lamb, the proto-martyr. In the final chapter, ‘A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation’, I apply this model to the followers of the Lamb, and demonstrate their connection with divine judgement: God judges the world for them to avenge their blood. I defend the thesis that John imagines all faithful Christians to be martyred, at least in the literary world created by the Revelation. Finally, I demonstrate that faithful Christians follow the model of Jesus’ martyrdom precisely. Like him, they conquer through martyrdom, but they are vindicated, glorified, reign, and participate in judging those who persecuted them; martyrs become agents of divine judgement.

Chapter 1 C hr i s t i a n ‘P ers ecut i on ’ and t he D at i ng of R evel at i on

Introduction For much of the last two thousand years, most readers of Revelation have concluded the book was written either during or just after the Neronic persecutions, or towards the end of the reign of ‘the second Nero’,1 Domitian. While scholarship up to the end of the nineteenth century favoured a Neronic date, from the beginning of the twentieth century, the later date of composition became favoured.2 Most scholars opt for a date of around 95 CE, but generally admit the evidence for this judgement is scant, and amounts to a solitary reference by Irenaeus: ‘[Revelation] was seen not long ago, but almost in our generation, at the end of the reign of Domitian’.3 Irenaeus also believed the disciple John authored the Apocalypse, who was also responsible for the fourth gospel and the three epistles. While a small minority of scholars still advocate apostolic authorship,4 there is little in Revelation to support this conclusion.5

1.  Eusebius, H.E. 3.17; 4.26.9 2.  This change is reflected in the important commentaries of Henry B. Swete, The Apocalypse of John (London: Macmillan, 1917), xcix–cvi; Isbon T. Beckwith, The Apocalypse of St John: Studies in Introduction with a Critical and Exegetical Commentary (New York: Macmillan, 1919), 197–208; and especially the influential Charles, Revelation, xci–xcvii. 3.  Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 5.30.3. 4.  Most recently, Smalley, Revelation, 4–5; Grant R. Osborne, Revelation (BECNT; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002), 2–6. 5.  The heavenly city (Rev. 21.14) is built upon the foundation of the Apostles, and there is nothing to indicate the author sees himself as one of that group. Apostolic authorship was questioned as early as the third century by Dionysus of Alexandria (Eusebius, H.E. 7.25). For discussion, see Schüssler-Fiorenza, Book of Revelation, 85–113.

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

17

It is important for Irenaeus to link himself with the Apostle through his connection with Polycarp, so claims for apostolic authorship may owe at least something to his own claims to authority. In any case, even giving Irenaeus the benefit of the doubt, he is writing a long time after the event, and so his testimony must be judged somewhat unreliable.6 Justin Martyr’s awareness of the Apocalypse provides a terminus ad quem of the middle of the second century, but in the absence of any other external evidence, the dating according to Irenaeus’s testimony persists. Examination of the internal evidence reaches a scholarly impasse as it is somewhat contradictory. There even appears to be a precise clue in John’s vision of the seven-headed Beast, which John interprets as seven kings, ‘five of whom are fallen, one is, the other is not yet come, and when he comes he must remain for only a little while’ (Rev. 17.10). Taken at face value, John wrote during the reign of the sixth king. However, attempts to count the kings have resulted in very little consensus. Proponents of various dates start counting at different emperors, and even those who start with Julius Caesar or Octavian reach Nero (54–68 CE), Galba (68–69) or Vespasian (69–79), depending whether or not Galba, Otho, and Vitellius, the short-lived rulers from the ‘year of four emperors’, are counted.7 However, it is not obvious the heads should be taken so literally, for the seven heads also represent seven hills, and may therefore signify the totality of the tyranny of Rome. In any case, if a beast is going to have multiple heads in the Apocalypse, it would be a fair bet there would be seven! Those who advocate an earlier date often point to the instruction to John to measure the temple (Rev. 11.1–2), which they say indicates the Jerusalem temple is still standing, which would date the Apocalypse before 70 CE.8 While the Gentiles trample the outer courts, which may indicate knowledge of its destruction (11.2), Wilson argues that this cannot be vaticinium ex eventu since the siege lasted far less than the 42 months mentioned in the Apocalypse, and a tenth of it was not destroyed in an

6.  Thomas B. Slater, ‘Dating the Apocalypse to John’, Bib 84 (2003): 252–58 (253); Yarbro Collins, Crisis, 55–56. 7.  For the view that the Apocalypse was composed in the turmoil caused by the year of four emperors, see George H. van Kooten, ‘The Year of the Four Emperors and the Revelation of John: The “Pro-Neronian” Emperors Otho and Vitellius, and the Images and Colossus of Nero in Rome’, JSNT 30 (2007): 205–48. Smalley (Revelation, 3) offers a similar date. 8.  Gonzalo Rojas-Flores, ‘The Book of Revelation and the First Years of Nero’s Reign’, Bib 85 (2004): 375–92 (377–78).

18

The Violence of the Lamb

earthquake (11.13).9 However, this is not conclusive. An earthquake may signal that the destruction of the city was divine judgement, and in any case, the literary unity of Rev. 11.1–2 and 11.3–13 is problematic.10 While linked by the location, ‘the holy city’ (11.2) is referred to as ‘Sodom’ in the second section (11.8), and the Temple is not mentioned at all after 11.2,11 almost certainly indicating the use of two different sources.12 There is some internal evidence for a post-70 CE date. That Rome is called Babylon (Rev. 14.6; 16.19; 17.4; 18.2, 10, 21) echoes its Jewish sobriquet after it had destroyed Jerusalem.13 Perhaps most persuasive is the presence of the Nero redivivus legend. Nero killed himself in June 68 CE having been deposed by the Senate and branded an enemy of the State. However, the lack of witnesses to his death led to the belief he had not died, but fled to Parthia, and there was some anxiety he would return with an army to retake Rome. The myth clearly explains the Beast with seven heads: ‘One of its heads seemed to have a mortal wound, but its mortal wound was healed’ (Rev. 13.3).14 The interest in Nero also extends to both the majority and minority readings of the number of the 9.  Wilson cleverly captures this idea in his question: ‘How do you tell a genuine prophecy from a vaticinium ex eventu?’ The answer being ‘Vaticinia ex eventu always come true!’ J. Christian Wilson, ‘The Problem of the Domitianic Date of Revelation’, NTS 39 (1993): 587–605 (602). See also A. A. Bell, ‘The Date of John’s Apocalypse: The Evidence of Some Roman Historians Reconsidered’, NTS 25 (1979): 93–102; John A. T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament (London: SCM, 1976), 224–25; Robert B. Moberly, ‘When Was Revelation Conceived?’, Bib 73 (1992): 376–93. For a date at the beginning of Nero’s reign, see Rojas-Flores, ‘Book of Revelation’, 375–92. 10.  For discussion, see especially Yarbro Collins, Crisis, 64–69, and David E. Aune, Revelation (WBC, 52A–C; 3 vols.; Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1997–98), 2:575–98. 11.  If John really has the earthly temple in view, it would be the only reference to it in the Apocalypse. In every other case, the heavenly temple is in view. See Rev. 7.15; 14.15, 17; 15.5, 6, 8; 16.1, 17. 12.  Yarbro Collins (Crisis, 67) notes that it is the heavenly Jerusalem which is the ‘holy city’ for John (Rev. 21.2, 10). Measuring the Temple occurs in Ezekiel 40–43, and Stephen J. Friesen (Imperial Cults and the Apocalypse of John: Reading Revelation in the Ruins [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001], 143) notes the extensive reworking of themes from Ezekiel in Rev. 10–11. Of course, the first temple had been destroyed when the measuring took place in Ezekiel, so the reuse of this material by John cannot be taken as conclusive evidence the temple was still standing. 13.  See 4 Ezra 3.1–2, 28–34; 2 Apoc. Bar. 10.1–3; 11.1; 67.7; Sib. Or. 5.143, 159. Friesen (Imperial Cults, 139–40) further argues that the judgement oracles against the metaphorical Babylon in Rev. 18 are modelled on the oracles on the historical of Jer. 50–51 which were made in response to the original destruction of the temple. 14.  Also Rev. 13.12, 14.

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

19

Beast (13.18).15 While Aune argues the legend would have needed some time to circulate, suggesting a late first-century date,16 there were already appearances of false Neros as early as 69 CE,17 with others following in 79/80 CE and 88 CE.18 However, it does not help narrow the dating of the Apocalypse much further as it was still causing anxiety as late as Trajan’s reign,19 and so, there remains little consensus. However, it is perhaps time to relieve Irenaeus of the burden of supporting the 95 CE date. While not impossible, advocates cannot rely on what is nothing more than a default setting on very little supportive data. The Literary World of the Apocalypse One of the more significant factors in recent disagreements on the dating of the Apocalypse is the attempt to set the internal depiction of the social environment against an external context. The dominant internal interpretation of the social world of Revelation is one in which the readers are enduring or will soon face persecution and martyrdom. It is obvious that Revelation was written in a time when the Christians of Asia Minor, and probably other places as well, were being persecuted by the Roman officials for their refusal to worship the emperors.20 15.  The Hebrew transliteration of kaisar neron gives 666, while transliteration from the Latin version provides the number 616. Aune, Revelation, 2:770, and for discussion, 2:770–73. 16.  Aune, Revelation, 1:lxi. 17.  Tacitus, Hist. 2.8–9. This supports Bell (‘Date’), who argues the legend would have been current only in the few years after Nero’s death. 18.  Dio Cassius, Historia 66.19.3; Suetonius, Nero 57.2. 19.  The legend is well represented in the early second century Sib. Or. 4.119–122, 137–139; 5.137–154, 214–227; 8.68–72; 12.78–94. In fact, Henk J. de Jonge (‘The Apocalypse of John and the Imperial Cult’, in H. F. H. Horstmanshoff, H. W. Signot, F. T. van Straten, and J. H. M. Strubbe [eds.], Kykeon: Studies in Honour of H. S, Versnel [Leiden: Brill, 2002], 127–42) dates the Apocalypse in the reign of Trajan (98–117 CE), while even Hadrian’s reign (117–138 CE) has advocates: Thomas Witulski, Johannesoffenbarung und Kaiser Hadrian: Studien zur Datierung der neutestamentlichen Apocalypse (FRLANT, 221: Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2007). However, James A. Kelhoffer (Conceptions of ‘Gospel’ and Legitimacy in Early Christianity [WUNT, 324; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014], 244 n. 41) notes that while strong apocalyptic expectation remained in at least some Christian groups, this was not generally the case, and so the eschatology in Revelation suggests a date earlier than de Jonge and Kelhoffer suggest. 20.  Martin Rist, ‘Revelation: Introduction and Exegesis’, in George A. Buttrick (ed.), The Interpreter’s Bible (New York: Abingdon, 1957), 12:345–613 (354).

20

The Violence of the Lamb

While the reigns of Nero and Domitian were once thought to provide the context for specific severe repression of Christians,21 the reign of Domitian has been read largely through the lens of the Apocalypse. Jones provides an excellent example of this tendency: Domitian insisted on being addressed, by letter or in person, as ‘Lord and God’ (dominus et deus) and all who refused were punished. That his persecution extended to Christians is clearly reflected in the book of Revelation. Emperor deification, including offering of incense, prayers, and vows, was now obligatory and used as a means to identify the followers of Christ.22

For Jones, the Apocalypse is used as evidence that Domitian enforced the imperial cult. However, there is little to corroborate these claims.23 To be sure, Pliny the Younger, Tacitus, and Suetonius judged Domitian’s reign negatively.24 The three Roman historians portray Domitian as cunning and devious,25 insane and tyrannical,26 and an unstable despot who murdered those who opposed him, and who brought the empire to the brink of financial ruin.27 However, there has been a full-scale reappraisal of Domitian’s reign.28 Thompson argues Pliny, Suetonius, and Tacitus all had friends or relatives exiled or executed under Domitian, and each thought 21.  See, for example, the second-century Christian, Melito of Sardis, who wrote, ‘The only emperors who were ever persuaded by malicious men to slander our teaching were Nero and Domitian’ (in Eusebius, H.E. 4.26.9). Tertullian (Apol. 5) makes the same claim. 22.  Donald L. Jones, ‘Roman Imperial Cult’, ABD 5:806–9 (807). For the same position, see also Allen Brent, The Imperial Cult and the Development of Church Order: Concepts and Images of Authority in Paganism and Early Christianity Before the Age of Cyprian (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 164–209. 23.  Wilson (‘Problem’, 587–88) attributes the rapid adoption of this view of Domitian to the earlier work of Joseph B. Lightfoot’s The Apostolic Fathers: Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp: Revised Tests with Introduction, Notes, Dissertations, and Translations (London: Macmillan, 1890). 24.  So, for example, G. R. Beasley-Murray (Revelation [NCBC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974], 38) writes, ‘Christian tradition unanimously represents Domitian to be the first persecutor of Christians after Nero’. 25.  Tacitus, Germanica 39, 43; Pliny, Panegyric 90.5–7; Epistles 1.12.6–8. 26.  Pliny, Panegyric 48.3–5; Suetonius, Domitian 1.3. 27.  Tacitus, Germanica 37; Pliny, Panegyric 11.4; 76.5; 82.4; Suetonius, Domitian 4.1, 4; 5; 12.1; 14.1. Just for good measure, they accuse him of possessing an insatiable sexual appetite (Tacitus, Hist. 4.2, 68; Suetonius, Domitian 1.1, 3; 22.1). 28.  Brian W. Jones, The Emperor Domitian (London/New York: Routledge, 1992), 114–25; Leonard L. Thompson, The Book of Revelation: Apocalypse and Empire (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), 95–115.

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

21

the emperor inhibited their promotion.29 Moreover, all three were writing under a new dynasty when anti-Flavian sentiment was encouraged.30 Indeed, other contemporaneous writers, such as Quintilian and Martial, are more positive about the emperor.31 Moreover, confidence in the early Christians’ presentation of themselves as a suffering persecuted church has also eroded. In what follows, I will re-examine the evidence in Revelation that suggests the author is speaking to communities who have at least some direct experience of persecution, suffering, or martyrdom. I then assess the extent to which the early Church faced persecution in the early centuries, particularly in relation to non-observance of the emperor or other local cults. I argue, contrary to the direction of current scholarship, that the Apocalypse does indeed reflect an actual rather than a perceived crisis that was at least in part informed by experiences of persecution. The dismissal of the persecution paradigm with respect of the first and early second centuries has distorted the social reality in which the Christians were living; the combination of persecution in the text can be matched with general experiences of suffering, such that no particular narrow period or instance of persecution or repression need be sought for dating the Apocalypse. Revelation could have been written at any point towards the end of the first, or beginning of the second century. Persecution and Suffering in Revelation The themes of persecution and suffering pervade the Apocalypse. The Seer divides humanity into two groups: the followers of the Lamb, and the followers of the Beast. Those who follow the Lamb will experience persecution and ultimately martyrdom at the hands of Beast-worshippers, but in the end they will be vindicated. Right from the outset, John indicates that both he and his readers have or are suffering tribulation (θλῖψις). Patient endurance (ὑπομονή) is therefore required (Rev. 1.9). John says he was on Patmos ‘on account of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus’ (διὰ τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τὴν μαρτυρίαν Ἰησοῦ). Although this is a similar phrase to that used of those who have been killed (διὰ τὴν μαρτυρίαν Ἰησοῦ, καὶ διὰ τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ; 20.4), it is not clear if John has been exiled, that is, he has been punished for bearing witness to Jesus, or if 29.  Pliny, Epistles 3.11.3–4; 4.24.4–5; 7.27.14; Panegyric 95.3–4; Tacitus, Agricola 2–3, 44–45. 30.  Thompson, Revelation, 115. 31.  Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria 10.1.91; Martial 2.2; 8.15, 78; see also Statius, Silvae 3.3.171; 4.1.34–39; 4.3.159; Silius Italicus, Punica 3.607.

22

The Violence of the Lamb

he is on Patmos to receive the revelatory experience (1.10).32 John notes that he shares the tribulation, the kingdom, and endurance ‘in Jesus’ (ἐν Ἰησοῦ; 1.9). The concept of endurance (ὑπομονή) is important throughout the Apocalypse. John praises the churches for their endurance on four occasions (2.9, 10, 19; 3.10), and later says that the endurance of the saints (ἡ ὑπομονὴ τῶν ἁγίων) is required in the face of martyrdom (13.10; 14.12). In common with much reflection of suffering in the New Testament, Jesus provides a model, not only of faithful witness (ὁ μάρτυς, ὁ πιστός; 1.5), but subsequent vindication.33 In the letters to the seven churches (Rev. 2.1–3.22), John commends those who have been suffering. He acknowledges the endurance of the Christians in Ephesus (2.2, 3), Thyatira (2.19), and Philadelphia (3.10), and encourages the churches of Smyrna (2.9) and Philadelphia (3.9) who contend with the slander (βλασφημία) of the synagogue of Satan (συναγωγὴ τοῦ σατανᾶ); according to John, ‘those who say they are Jews but are not’ (2.9).34 John also warns the church in Smyrna that they are about to suffer (πάσχω), as the devil (ὁ διάβολος) will throw some of them into prison, causing them to be tested (πειράζω) and experience tribulation (θλῖψις) for a short time (2.10). Given that the action of the Devil/Satan is linked to slander and imprisonment, it is likely that John envisages the 32.  John’s exile in Patmos is the traditional view by the third century: e.g. Clement, Quis dives salvetur 42; Tertullian, Adv. Marc. 4.2; 5.16; and the earliest extant commentary, Victorinus, Comm. Apoc. 10.11. For discussion, see Boxall, Patmos, 28–55. Many commentators have just taken the exilic reading of Rev. 1.9 at face value: e.g. Swete, Apocalypse, 12; Charles, Revelation, 1.21; Heinrich Kraft, Die Offenbarung des Johannes (HNT, 16a; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1974), 40. However, Aune (Revelation, 1:78) notes there is scant evidence that Patmos was used as a prison, or that anyone else was ever exiled there. Of course, strictly speaking, John does not actually say he has been exiled; διὰ τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τὴν μαρτυρίαν Ἰησοῦ could simply mean he was on Patmos to preach the gospel. See Thompson, Revelation, 172–73. 33.  In the first visual appearance of Jesus (Rev. 1.12–20), he says ‘I died, and behold, I am alive for evermore’ (1.18). 34.  Paul B. Duff (‘ “The Synagogue of Satan”: Crisis Mongering and the Apocalypse of John’, in Barr [ed.], Reality of the Apocalypse, 147–68) argues that John is in fact in sympathy with the synagogue, and is concerned that his more conservative members may defect on account of the ‘liberalizing’ tendencies of the Jezebel sect. Therefore, John creates a crisis with the synagogue that was not really there. For a diametrically opposite reading see deSilva (Seeing, 55–57), who argues John would have interpreted the payment of the Fiscus Judaicus as buying tolerance at the price of colluding with the Beast. More likely, John imagines some hostility to be coming from the synagogue (see below, n. 35).

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

23

trouble facing the church of Smyrna as coming principally from the Jews,35 who may have been accusing them of some misdemeanor to the Roman authorities.36 Crucially, John expects this conflict and imprisonment to result in trials at which Christians may lose their lives. He tells them to ‘be faithful to death (γίνου πιστὸς ἄχρι θανάτου), and I will give you the crown of life’ (2.10). The anticipated persecution at Smyrna appears to have already taken place in Pergamum, which is, according to the Seer, the place where 35.  Yarbro Collins, Crisis, 85–86; Colin J. Hemer, The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia in Their Local Setting (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1986), 65–70. Given clear evidence of some hostility between Church and Synagogue, reflected in parts of the New Testament, it is likely Jews rather than Judaizers are the source of the conflict here; so Yarbro Collins, ‘Vilification’; Jean Lambrecht, ‘ “Synagogues of Satan” (Rev. 2.9 and 3.9): Anti-Judaism in the Book of Revelation’, in Reimund Bieringer, Didier Pollefeyt, and Frederique Vandecasteele-Vanneuville (eds.), Anti-Judaism and the Fourth Gospel (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001), 279–92. For discussion on the general hostility to Christians by Jews, see Larry W. Hurtado, ‘Pre-70 CE Jewish Opposition to Christ-Devotion’, JTS ns 50 (1999): 35–58. Nonetheless, Kraft (Offenbarung, 60–61) and Aune (Revelation, 1:166) advance the view this dispute may be intra-Christian rather than a dispute between Synagogue and Church. However, given the connection between the blasphemy of the Synagogue of Satan (2.9) and the responsibility of the devil (διάβολος) for suffering and imprisonment the Christians are about to endure, Jan Willem van Henten’s assessment (‘The Concept of Martyrdom in Revelation’, in Jörg Frey, James A. Kelhoffer, and Franz Tóth [eds.], Die Johannesapokalypse: Kontexte—Konzepte— Rezeption [WUNT, 287; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012], 587–618 [590]), that ‘the decree remains rather vague about who is responsible for the suffering of the faithful in Smyrna’, is overly cautious. For a recent book-length treatment of John’s relationship with Jews throughout Revelation, see Philip L. Mayo, ‘Those Who Call Themselves Jews’: The Church and Judaism in the Apocalypse of John (Princeton Theological Monograph Series; Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2006). 36.  It is highly unlikely anyone was accused of simply being a Christian. According to Hemer’s reconstruction (Letters, 7–12), following the forced continua­ tion of the Jewish Temple Tax in order to fund the Jupiter Capitolinus, the Jews accused the Christians of Smyrna of attempting to dodge the tax, forcing them into the insidious position of either having to prove they were not Jews by offering a sacrifice, or being revealed as tax dodgers. To be sure, Suetonius suggests Domitian enforced the fiscus Iudaicus with ‘extreme rigour’, especially against those who ‘concealing their origin, avoided paying the tribute’ (Dom. 12.2). However, Hemer’s reconstruction, while not impossible, is unnecessarily elaborate. Moreover, Suetonius describes an instance of a trial of a 90-year-old man accused of hiding his Judaism. Sacrifice is not offered as a method of demonstration. Rather, he was stripped to check if he was circumcised.

24

The Violence of the Lamb

Satan lives (ὅπου ὁ σατανᾶς κατοικεῖ) and has his throne (ὅπου ὁ θρόνος τοῦ σατανᾶ; Rev. 2.13).37 Members of the church have already found themselves in a situation where they had been pressured to deny Jesus’ name. However, they appear to have remained resolute, even though it cost the life of at least one member of the Church, Antipas, who, like Jesus earlier (1.5), is described as the faithful witness (Ἀντιπᾶς, ὁ μάρτυς μου ὁ πιστός μου; 2.13). The church in Philadelphia also seems to have been in a similar position. The Philadelphian Christians are commended for keeping Jesus’ word and not denying his name (ἐτήρησάς μου τὸν λόγον, καὶ οὐκ ἠρνήσω τὸ ὄνομά μου; 3.8), although, unlike in Pergamum, John does not name anyone who lost their life. Antipas is the only named martyr in the letters to the churches. This does not preclude the possibility that there have been other martyrs unknown by name to John. Nonetheless, in the remainder of the Apocalypse, persecution, suffering, and martyrdom are present realities. When the fifth seal is opened, John sees ‘under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God (διὰ τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ) and for the witness (διὰ τὴν μαρτυρίαν) they had borne (Rev. 6.9).38 John clearly expects more martyrs. When the souls cry out for their deaths to be avenged they are ‘each given a white robe and told to rest a little longer (ἔτι χρόνον μικρόν), until the number of their fellow servants and their brothers should be complete, who were to be killed as they themselves had been’ (6.11). 37.  The reference to Satan’s throne in 2.13 has been interpreted as the altar to Zeus (Adela Yarbro Collins, ‘Pergamum in Early Christian Literature’, in Helmut Koester [ed.], Pergamon, Citadel of the Gods: Archaeological Record, Literary Description, and Religious Development [Harvard Theological Studies, 46; Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1998], 164–84) or that Pergamum was the centre of the imperial cult (Hemer, Letters, 84–85). However, Friesen (Imperial Cults, 25–131) argues there was no centre of the emperor cult here. As the Synagogue of Satan language was used where there appeared to be particular friction between Christians and Jews, Satan’s throne and Satan having his dwelling (Rev. 2.9, 10, 13; 3.8) may reflect that the situation for Christians in this city has been particularly tough, evidenced by the martyrdom of Antipas. 38.  That the testimony of the martyrs is not specified as ἡ μαρτυρία Ἰησοῦ (as in Rev. 1.2, 9; 12.17; 19.10; 20.4) has led to some scholars identifying the group as pre-Christian martyrs who have been slain for religious truth (cf. Mt. 23.31–35; Heb. 11.4; 12.24). See, e.g., Kraft, Offenbarung, 119–20, and A. Feuillet, ‘Les martyrs de l’humanité et l’Agneau égorgé: une interpretation nouvelle de la prière des égorgés en Ap 6,9–11’, NTR 99 (1977): 189–207 (194–96). However, precisely the same construction is used in Rev. 12.11, and the martyrs there are unambiguously Christian. Furthermore, another crowd of unnamed martyrs in Rev. 7 are also Christian. There is no evidence that John takes any interest in pre-Christian martyrdom.

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

25

Therefore, for the Seer, the time of judgement on those who persecute the church is ‘inextricably linked to the number of future martyrs’.39 That the souls under the altar are asked to wait only a little time suggests John expects their number to be augmented very soon. Indeed, martyrs will have to conquer the Beast through the blood of the Lamb (διὰ τὸ αἷμα τοῦ ἀρνίου), and by the word of their testimony (διὰ τὸν λόγον τῆς μαρτυρίας αὐτῶν; 12.11). The call for faithfulness to death is reinforced in the four central chapters of Revelation (11–14). There are two dramatic calls for the endurance of the saints (Rev. 13.10; 14.12), where Christians will be called to remain faithful and lose their lives. The cosmological context for the battle between those loyal to God and to the Beast is set in chs. 11–12. The two witnesses who stand before God are sent to earth and perform miraculous signs, including drought and plagues (11.4–6), but when they finish their testimony (μαρτυρία), the Beast makes war on them, conquers (νικάω), and kills them (11.7). The ‘earth dwellers’ (οἱ κατοικοῦντες ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς) refuse them burial and rejoice over them (11.9–10), but after three and a half days, they come back to life (11.11). They are then taken into heaven (11.12), and the earth is punished by a great earthquake (11.13). In ch. 12, the forces of evil are represented by a great red dragon with ten horns, who seeks to devour the child of the woman clothed with the sun (12.1). When the child is taken to God, war breaks out in heaven, and the dragon is cast out by Michael (12.7–8). The furious dragon goes off to make war on her children; the church (12.17). This is the point at which John’s readers find themselves in the story. The Imperial Cult in Revelation A prominent feature of scholarship on the social context of Revelation is the presence or otherwise of the imperial cult in Asia Minor. An important question concerns the extent to which the situation in the first century aligns with the text of the Apocalypse, particularly ch. 13. At the end of ch. 12 the dragon has gone off to make war on the offspring of the woman saved by divine intervention (Rev. 12.13–17). That her children are ‘those who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus’ (τῶν τηρούντων τὰς ἐντολὰς τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἐχόντων τὴν μαρτυρίαν Ἰησοῦ; 12.17) is not only a designation for the Church. It is this faithfulness and testimony that is the casus belli; the dragon makes war on the saints because of their testimony. Christians are executed because of their testimony to Jesus 39.  Paul Middleton, Radical Martyrdom and Cosmic Conflict in Early Christianity (LNTS, 306; London T&T Clark International, 2006), 159.

26

The Violence of the Lamb

(διὰ τὴν μαρτυρίαν Ἰησοῦ) and for the word of God (διὰ τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεου)’ (20.4),40 and it is this same testimony by which they will conquer the dragon (12.11).41 Chapter 13 spells out the arena in which this war against the Church will be played out, and the imperial cult is clearly recognisable. The Beast that comes out the sea is given both the dragon’s power and throne (Rev. 13.2). The healed mortal wound references the Nero redivivus myth,42 and therefore, the Beast represents the power of Rome. The whole earth went after the Beast, worshipping (προσκυνέω) both it and the dragon (13.3–4). For John, participation in the imperial cult is in effect to engage in satanic worship. However, for the people on the earth, the Beast’s power is unrivalled; it is seemingly invincible: ‘Who is like the Beast, and who can make war (πολεμέω) against it?’ (13.4). The reader knows that the Dragon, the source of the Beast’s power and authority, has already been at war with the angels and lost. However, the answer to the people of earth’s question—who can take on the Beast?—is not only the angels in heaven, but the Christians on earth. The Beast will make war (ποιῆσαι πόλεμον) on the saints, and apparently conquer (νικάω) them (13.7). The context of this war is then narrated (13.7–10). The Beast is given authority over ‘every tribe, people, tongue, and nation’ (ἐπὶ πᾶσαν φυλὴν καὶ λαὸν καὶ γλῶσσαν καὶ ἔθνος; 13.7), such that everyone who dwells on the earth (πάντες οἱ κατοικοῦντες ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς) will worship the Beast (13.8), that is, all except those whose name is in the Lamb’s book of life. John warns his readers (‘If anyone has an ear, let him hear’; 13.9) that this will result in those who remain faithful being slain (ἀποκτείνω). To reinforce the solemn warning, John issues ‘a call for the endurance and faith of the saints’ (ἡ ὑπομονὴ καὶ ἡ πίστις τῶν ἁγίων; 13.10). John’s readers are, therefore, called to follow the model of the two witnesses of ch. 11. They witnessed (μαρτυρία), and the Beast from the pit made war on them (ποιήσει μετ᾽ αὐτῶν πόλεμον), conquered (νικάω), and killed (ἀποκτείνω) them (11.7). They too were distinguished from the ‘peoples and tribes and tongues and nations’ (ὁ λαός καὶ φυλή καὶ γλῶσσα καὶ ἔθνοι), who refused to allow their bodies to be buried (11.9; cf. 13.7), and the inhabitants of the earth (οἱ κατοικοῦντες ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς), who rejoiced over their dead bodies (11.10; cf. 13.8). 40.  Compare Rev. 6.9, where the souls under the altar are slain διὰ τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ διὰ τὴν μαρτυρίαν τοῦ ἀρνίου ἣν εἶχον. 41.  They conquer by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony (διὰ τὸ αἷμα τοῦ ἀρνίου καὶ διὰ τὸν λόγον τῆς μαρτυρίας αὐτῶν; Rev. 12.11). 42.  See n. 19, above.

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

27

The second half of the chapter (Rev. 13.11–18) essentially repeats the warning in 13.1–10. A further beast, with horns like a lamb yet speaking like a dragon, exercises the authority of the first Beast, ‘making the earth and its inhabitants worship the first Beast’ (13.12). By miraculous signs it deceives people into making an image (εἰκών) for the Beast (13.14). Once again, humanity is divided in two: the inhabitants on the earth who worship the image of the Beast and receive a mark on their hand or forehead; and those who do not worship the image, who will be executed as a result (13.15). In this central chapter in the Apocalypse, the Dragon declared war on the Church. This is a battle in which the two sides appear to be unevenly matched; the Dragon is joined by two beasts and all the inhabitants of the earth, and they battle against the beleaguered communities of Christians. In this war, Christians must endure and lose their lives by remaining faithful to their testimony. This means refusing to receive the mark of the Beast or worship its image. John clearly brings centre stage the anticipated conflict that might take place before an image of the emperor or the gods, in which a demand would be made to the Christian to sacrifice or die. In the Apocalypse, then, John presents an unremittingly negative assessment of the situation facing, or about to face, his readers. Their experience of living alongside their Jewish and Roman neighbours will be characterised by persecution and suffering, leading to almost inevitable martyrdom. To be sure, the timeframe of Revelation is fluid, and contains flashbacks and anticipation rather than necessarily reflecting a current experience of suffering.43 Nonetheless, in attempting to locate the Apocalypse, John’s presentation or anticipation of the dire context in which Christians find themselves needs to be taken seriously, or decisively dismissed. For Robinson, the Christians were either engaged in a mortal battle with the forces of paganism, or John is disturbed.44 Therefore, in terms of the situation as presented in the Apocalypse, there are two key elements; suffering and the imperial cult. John presents a picture in which Christians may be called upon to maintain faithful witness in the face of persecution. More precisely, this Christian witness would take place in a confrontation with Roman authorities before an image of the emperor. Christians would have to choose between sacrificing, which John interprets as Beast worship, or certain execution. 43.  Van Henten, ‘Concept’, 589–90. 44.  Robinson (Redating, 230) writes: ‘The Apocalypse, unless the product of a perfervid and psychotic imagination, was written out of an intense experience of the Christian suffering at the hands of the imperial authorities, represented by the “Beast of Babylon” ’.

28

The Violence of the Lamb

Persecution and the imperial cult appear to be central concerns for John, and he presents them as a reality in the present or very near future for his readers. However, the evidence to support John’s presentation of suffering, persecution, and enforcement of the emperor cult is simply lacking.45 The scholarly consensus for the last fifty or so years has been that any maltreatment experienced by Christians was local, sporadic, and random.46 Indeed, Barnes has warned that much early Christian reflection on persecution is so tainted by hagiography that it is ‘to a large degree worthless!’47 Even when imperial religion or sacrifice was enforced, such as under Decius, these edicts were made in times of crisis to promote traditional religion, and were not specifically aimed at Christians. So Moss calculates that in the first three centuries Christians faced imperial action in ‘fewer than ten years’.48 Therefore, the twin concerns of persecution and the enforcement of the imperial cult, so prominent in the Apocalypse, are difficult to locate in the first or second centuries. Kelhoffer agrees that the imperial cult and suffering are both key to Revelation. However, he acknowledges that it is difficult to find a date where this situation could reflect anything we know of the empire in the first century. He concludes ‘what could have been John’s perception, or trepidation, is not supported by any credible assessment of the actual threat to Christians at that time’.49 Therefore, we now turn to the social reality behind the Apocalypse. 45.  See van Kooten (‘Year of the Four Emperors’), who points to the alleged silence on the imperial cult in the letters (234–37). For general discussion, see Middleton, Radical Martyrdom, 31–48. 46.  Timothy D. Barnes, ‘Legislation Against the Christians’, JRS 58 (1968): 32–50. Other early influential interventions making this case include Geoffrey E. M. de Ste. Croix, ‘Why Were the Early Christians Persecuted?’, Past and Present 26 (1963): 5–23; Adrian N. Sherwin-White, Roman Law in the New Testament (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1963). 47.  Barnes, ‘Legislation’, 32. 48.  Candida R. Moss, The Myth of Persecution: How Early Christians Invented the Story of Martyrdom (San Francisco: HarperOne, 2013), 129. Keith Hopkins (‘Christian Number and Its Implications’, Journal of Early Christian Studies 6 [1998]: 185–226 [198]) similarly suggests Christians ‘invented’ stories of persecution. 49.  Kelhoffer, Conceptions, 251. Moss (Myth, 160) also focusses on Christian experience, even though she maintains it did not match with ‘reality’: ‘There’s no doubt that Christians thought they were persecuted; they ruminate on it, theologize about it, bewail, lament, protest, and complain’. However, while Moss and others offer an important corrective to writing history based on early Christian perception, there is no reason to replace this with a Roman perspective that Christians were not persecuted unless Romans thought they were persecuting the church (Myth, 150).

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

29

Social Reality and the Apocalypse Persecution and Suffering in the New Testament Turning first to persecution, John is by no means unique among early Christian writers in presenting a situation in which the church faced hostility from its neighbours. Throughout the New Testament, there is a relatively consistent trope that belief in Jesus as the Christ will attract persecution, hardship, suffering, with the possibility of martyrdom. Indeed, in the earliest extant Christian writing, 1 Thessalonians, Paul notes that the new Christians came to faith ‘in much affliction’ (ἐν θλίψει πολλῇ; 1 Thess. 1.6), sharing in the suffering experienced by other Christians (2.14). The themes of suffering and persecution are found throughout Paul’s letters. He stresses that he is a model for his churches (2 Cor. 1.3–8), and claims for the sake of the gospel he has been imprisoned, beaten, lashed, and stoned.50 Nonetheless, for Paul, these experiences are ones in which he can boast,51 for suffering is a sign of faithfulness,52 demonstrating the legitimacy of the church.53 So, for Paul, although believers will suffer for their faith, they should rejoice.54 The experience of Christian suffering is reflected throughout the New Testament. Matthew’s Beatitudes are in the third person throughout until the final saying, which he switches to the second person: ‘Blessed are you (μακάριοί ἐστε) when men revile you and persecute you and say all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account’ (Mt. 5.11). As in Paul, Christians should rejoice in this suffering, for this experience is a sign of See Paul Middleton, ‘Christology, Martyrdom, and Vindication’, 219–20, and ‘Were the Early Christians Really Persecuted?’, in O. Lehtipuu and Michael Labahn (eds.), Models of (In)Tolerance in the Early Christian Age: Encountering Others in Early Judaism and Christianity (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, forthcoming). 50.  ‘Catalogues’ of Paul’s suffering are found at Rom. 8.35–36; 1 Cor. 4.9–13; 2 Cor. 4.8–9; 6.4–5; 11.23–29; 12.10. On Paul and suffering, see, e.g.: David E. Fredrickson, ‘Paul, Hardships, and Suffering’, in J. Paul Sampley (ed.), Paul in the Greco-Roman World: A Handbook (2 vols.; 2nd ed.; London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2016), 2:1–25; Kar Yong Lim, ‘The Sufferings of Christ are Abundant in Us’: A Narrative Dynamics Investigation of Paul’s Sufferings in 2 Corinthians (LNTS, 399; London: T&T Clark International, 2009); Paul Middleton, ‘ “Dying we Live” (2 Cor. 6.9): Discipleship and Martyrdom in Paul’, in Paul Middleton, Angus Paddison, and Karen Wenell (eds.), Paul, Grace, and Freedom: Essays in Honour of John K. Riches (London: T&T Clark International, 2009), 79–89. 51.  2 Cor. 11.21–30; 12.10; Phil. 1.19–26. 52.  Rom. 8.17; Phil. 1.29–30; 1 Cor. 4.9–13; 2 Cor. 6.4–10. 53.  Gal. 4.12–15; Phil. 1.3–7; 4.14–15; 1 Thess. 1.6; 3.1–5. 54.  Rom. 12.2; 2 Cor. 6.10; 8.2; 13.9; Phil. 2.17; 4.4–6.

30

The Violence of the Lamb

a greater reward to come (Mt. 5.12; cf. Rom. 8.18). Similarly, in the letter of James, Christians are enjoined to joyfulness in the face of various trials (πειρασμοί; Jas 1.2), although in this case it is because of the resulting endurance (1.3). The book of Acts also presents the Church as a persecuted body, in which the death of Stephen, ‘the first martyr’, is recorded (Acts 6.8–8.1). Luke suggests that from the outset, the Christian gospel attracted hostility. When the disciples preached before the Council, the members were outraged and wanted to kill them (5.33), but beat them instead (5.40), leaving the apostles ‘rejoicing (χαίροντες) that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonour for the name’ (ὑπὲρ τοῦ ὀνόματος; 5.41).55 After the death of Stephen, the church experienced such persecution (διωγμὸς μέγας) that it was scattered throughout Judah and Samaria (Acts 8.1). Luke makes Paul one of the ringleaders of the pogrom, accusing him of ‘ravaging the church’, and dragging both men and woman to prison (8.3), a fact that Paul himself corroborates (1 Cor. 15.9; Gal. 1.13; Phil. 3.6). Indeed, it is during one of his concerted actions against the Church (Acts 9.1–2) that Luke places his ‘conversion’ experience. Paul’s experience of Jesus is also framed in terms of persecution. Suddenly a light from heaven flashed about him. And he fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, ‘Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me (τί με διώκεις)?’ And he said, ‘Who are you, Lord?’ And he said, ‘I am Jesus whom you are persecuting (ὃν σὺ διώκεις)’. (Acts 9.3–5)

In the context of Acts, Paul is transformed from persecutor to persecuted. Hostility marks his missionary activity, beginning in Damascus (9.23–25), and continuing through the rest of the book.56 Finally, as with Stephen and James (12.2), Paul is ready to suffer and die for the name (21.13). All 55.  There may be an echo of Lk. 6.22–23, in which believers are to rejoice (χάρητε) when their name is cast out as evil for the sake of the Son of Man. In Acts, Paul will suffer (Acts 9.16; 15.26 with Barnabas) and die (21.13) for the Name. 56.  It is important to note that in his presentation of opposition to Paul in particular, Luke follows a standard pattern. In general, when Paul visits a new place, the Jews tend to oppose him, and so he then moves to the Gentiles, from whom he receives, on the whole, a more positive response. Luke has ‘the Jews’ plot against Christians in Acts 9.23; 12.3; 13.45; 17.5; 22.30; 23.2, and creates a fairly standard pattern of mob violence (7.56–58; 14.4–5, 19–20; 16.19–23; 17.1–7, 13; 18.12–17; 19.21–40; 21.26–22.24; 23.7–10; 25.24. For a classic statement of the problem of the

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

31

the hostility against the Christians is summed up at the end of Acts, when Luke has the leaders of the Roman Jews say of the church, ‘we know that it is spoken against everywhere’ (Acts 28.22; cf. 2 Tim. 3.12). Persecution and suffering also forms the backdrop to 1 Peter. From the outset, in common with other New Testament writings, the author enjoins his readers to rejoice while they have to suffer ‘various trials’ (1 Pet. 1.6), for through the testing of their faith they will obtain the salvation of their souls (1.9). The author later encourages slaves to be submissive to their masters, so that when they suffer it is not due punishment (2.19). Given the link between the suffering slave and the suffering of Christ (2.21), it is possible, if not likely, that it is the Christian status of the slaves in the Church that is at least partly responsible for their experiences of suffering (2.18–25). The author connects a zealousness for what is right with suffering for righteousness’ sake (3.13–14), which means being prepared to account for their Christian hope (3.15). It is clear that the recipients are suffering (3.16), but the author impresses on them that they must, by their actions, ensure they are suffering for doing right (3.17). The context of persecution and suffering has never been far from the surface in 1 Peter. However, it becomes clear that they are experiencing a ‘fiery ordeal’ as a present reality (4.12). Once again, the author instructs his readers to ensure that no-one can legitimately punish them for wrong doing; instead, they should suffer as a Christian (4.16). Through suffering they should rejoice (4.13) and glorify God (4.16), for judgement will soon come upon their persecutors (4.17–19). Finally, the Christians are warned that the devil ‘prowls around like a roaring lion’ (5.8). They are to resist him, ‘knowing that the same experience of suffering is required’ by all Christians (5.9). Nonetheless, this suffering will be for a short time only, before God will restore, establish, and strengthen them (5.10). It is striking in 1 Peter how often Jesus’ Passion is commended as a model for the Christians’ experience of suffering: For it is a credit to you if, being aware of God, you endure pain while suffering (πάσχων) unjustly. If you endure when you are beaten for doing wrong, what credit is that? But if you endure when you do right and suffer presentation of the Jews in Acts, see Ernst Haenchen, ‘Judentum und Chirstentum in der Apostelgeschichte’, ZNW 54 (1963): 155–89. More recently, two different perspectives on Luke’s presentation can be found in Jack T. Sanders, The Jews in Luke–Acts (London: SCM, 1987), and Robert, L. Brawley, Luke–Acts and the Jews: Conflict, Apology, and Conciliation (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987). Sanders argues the Jews are presented negatively, whereas Brawley argues for a more positive presentation.

32

The Violence of the Lamb (πάσχοντες) for it, you have God’s approval. For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered (ἔπαθεν) for you, leaving you an example (ὑπογραμμόν), so that you should follow in his steps (ἵνα ἐπακολουθήσητε τοῖς ἴχνεσιν αὐτοῦ)… When he was abused, he did not return abuse; when he suffered (πάσχων), he did not threaten; but he entrusted himself to the one who judges justly. (1 Pet. 2.19–23)

As Christ suffered, so the Christians should follow his example and suffer also. Indeed, the sixteen occurrences of πάθημα or πάσχω are evenly distributed in 1 Peter between the experiences of Jesus and Christians.57 However, as Jesus was raised from death, those who follow his lead will also be vindicated.58 This imitatio Christi theme is found throughout the New Testament and other early Christian writing, but perhaps finds fullest expression in the gospel stories themselves.59 Jesus warns his disciples they will be persecuted (Mk 13.9–13//Mt. 10.17– 22), and those who wish to follow him must first take up their cross (Mk 8.34//Mt. 10.38//Lk. 9.27; cf. Q 14.27). As Jesus will drink from the cup of suffering (Mk 14.36), so his followers may also be called to share in that cup (Mk 10.38–39). However, persecution will test would-be disciples, and many will fall away (Mk 4.17). Indeed, the time of suffering will be so great, that God will shorten the days for the sake of the elect (Mk 13.20). In John’s Gospel, Jesus tells his followers that they will be hated and persecuted in the same way he was (Jn 15.18, 20; cf. 17.14–16), which may even result in death (16.2). Persecution in Early Christian Writings The paradigm of Jesus’ suffering and death undoubtedly shaped the way in which Christians reflected on suffering and martyrdom. Stephen’s death in Acts, and the martyrdom of Polycarp, are clearly modelled on Christ’s Passion.60 Ignatius of Antioch writes that in order to be a disciple, 57.  So πάσχω is used of Christ at 1 Pet. 2.21, 23; 3.18; 4.1; and of believers in 2.19, 20; 3.14, 17; 4.1, 15, 19; 5.10; while πάθημα represents Christ’s sufferings in 1.11; 4.13; 5.1; and the believers’ at 5.9. There is further reference to Jesus’ death (1.19–21) and rejection (2.4–7). 58.  1 Pet. 1.3, 7, 21; 3.18–22; 4.5, 13, 17–19; 5.1, 10. 59.  See Larry W. Hurtado, ‘Jesus’ Death as Paradigmatic in the New Testament’, SJT 57 (2004): 413–33; and the collection of essays in Richard N. Longenecker (ed.), Patterns of Discipleship in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996). 60.  For a list of parallels, see Middleton, ‘Christology, Martyrdom, and Vindication’, 222–23. On Stephen, see particularly, Shelley Matthews, Perfect Martyr: The Stoning of Stephen and the Construction of Christian Identity (New York:

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

33

Christians must imitate Jesus (Rom. 6.3) and ‘voluntarily choose to die into his suffering’ (Magn. 5.2). In fact, Ignatius dramatically enacts Jesus’ call for the true follower to take up his cross (Mk 8.34) by insisting that it is only through martyrdom that a Christian finally becomes a true disciple: Let me be food for the wild beasts, through whom I can reach God. Better yet. Coax the wild beasts, so that they may become my tomb and leave nothing behind… Then I will truly be a disciple of Jesus Christ, when the world will no longer see my body. (Rom. 4.1–2)61

Ignatius longs to be ‘an imitator of the suffering of…God’ (Rom. 6.3), and encourages Christians to do likewise (Poly. 6.1; Smyr. 4.2; Eph. 1.1; 10.3). That the death of Christ was deployed as a model to shape accounts of early Christian persecution and martyrdom does not of course mean these experiences were not real. Indeed, early Christian writers reinforce the New Testament impression that the Church lived in the midst of hostility. Clement recounts the traditions of Peter and Paul’s deaths, who were among ‘the most righteous pillars [who] were persecuted and fought to the death’ (1 Clem. 5.2). Peter faced many trials (5.3), while Paul had endured imprisonment, exile, stoning, and was finally killed (5.4–7). Justin complains to the emperor that Christians in his own day are condemned for merely being Christians, rather than for any specific crime. If any of the accused deny the name, and say that he is not a Christian, you acquit him, as having no evidence against him as a wrongdoer; but if anyone acknowledge that he is a Christian, you punish him on account of this acknowledgment.62

This, Justin contends, is clearly unjust. Tertullian, in his famous quip, paints a picture in which at the slightest misfortune, the Romans were ready to turn on the Christians:

Oxford University Press, 2010); and for the imitatio Christi theme in early Christian martyrdom, see Candida R. Moss, The Other Christs: Imitating Jesus in Ancient Christian Ideologies of Martyrdom (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010). 61.  The same idea is found in Eph. 3.1, where in chains, Ignatius says he is ‘only beginning to be a disciple’. See also Rom. 5.3; Poly. 7.1. 62.  Justin, 1 Apol. 4. This is also the thrust of Tertullian’s complaint in Apol. 2.4–5.

34

The Violence of the Lamb [Pagans] suppose that the Christians are the cause of every public disaster, every misfortune that happens to the people. If the Tiber overflows or the Nile does not, if there is a drought or an earthquake, a famine or a pestilence, at once the cry goes up, ‘The Christians to the lions’.63

The Martyr Acts also narrate persecutions of such ferocity that a devilish origin is ascribed to them. For example, in the Martyrs of Lyons: The Adversary [Satan] swooped down with full force, in this way anticipating his final coming which is sure to come. He went to all lengths to train and prepare his minions against God’s servants; the result was that we were not only shut out of our houses, the baths, and the public square, but they forbade any of us to be seen in any place whatsoever. Arrayed against him was God’s grace, which protected the weak, and raised up sturdy pillars that could by their endurance take on themselves all the attacks of the evil One. These then charged into battle, holding up under every sort of abuse and torment; indeed, they made light of their great burden as they sped on to Christ.64

Therefore, even a brief survey of early Christian literature gives the impression that Christians experienced persecution, suffering, possible arrest, and martyrdom. These texts span more than a century, from Paul writing in the late 40s or early 50s CE through the Gospels, James, Hebrews, 1 Peter, Revelation, Ignatius, Justin, the Martyrdom of Polycarp, and beyond. They also represent experiences of Christians in a variety of places in the empire. Cumulatively, they present the danger early Christians could face just about any time and any place in the first two centuries of the common era. But is this an accurate reflection of reality? It is of some significance that despite John imagining crowds of unnamed martyrs under the altar (Rev. 6.9–11) and elsewhere in heaven (e.g. 7.1–17; 14.1–5; 20.4–6), he is able to name only one martyr, Antipas. It is at least interesting that in the Apocalypse, a book so concerned about martyrdom, there is a noticeable lack of historical martyrs. In fact, Revelation shares this martyr shortage with the rest of the New Testament, where martyrdom is also a major concern. Paul never cites a martyr, despite repeatedly stressing the hardships he and other Christians face. He 63.  Tertullian, Apol. 40. 64.  Mart. Lyons 1.4–6. For the role of the Devil in Christian martyr texts, see Paul Middleton, ‘Overcoming Satan in the Acts of the Martyrs’, in Chris Keith and Loren Stuckenbruck (eds.), Evil in Second Temple Judaism and Early Christianity (WUNT, II/417; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016), 357–74.

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

35

mentions Prisca and Aquila, who ‘risked their necks’ for the gospel (Rom. 16.3–4), and the near-martyrdom of Epaphroditus (Phil. 2.30), but no-one who has actually lost their life for Christ.65 Similarly, the author of Hebrews encourages his readers to follow Jesus’ pattern of suffering (Heb. 13.12–13), but despite pointing to martyrs as heroes of the Faith (11.34–38), he acknowledges there have been none among his community: ‘In your struggle against sin you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood’ (12.4). Indeed, there are only three martyrs named in the whole New Testament: Antipas (Rev. 2.10), Stephen (Acts 7.54–8.1), and James (Acts 12.1–5). Despite the canvass of persecution painted by many New Testament authors (Acts 28.22), there are few martyrs to show for it. The Emperor Cult Despite de Ste. Croix’s dismissal of emperor worship as ‘a factor of almost no independent importance in the persecution of the Christians’,66 it enjoys near ubiquity throughout the Christian Martyr Acts. The Martyrdom of Polycarp sets up a confrontation between the Christian community and the Imperial power of Rome. The governor tried to persuade him to recant, saying…‘Swear by the Genius of the emperor. Recant… Swear and I will let you go. Curse Christ!’ But Polycarp answered, ‘For eighty-six years I have been his servant and he has done me no wrong. How can I blaspheme against my king and saviour?’ (Mart. Poly. 9.2–3)67

The narrative clearly sets Christian identity in opposition to the obligations to Caesar. Later, Polycarp explicitly relegates the power of the emperor by confessing it is God who is both κυριός and παντοκράτωρ (14.1). The 65.  The closest Paul comes is the anticipation of his own death. However, both Karl P. Donfried (‘The Cults of Thessalonica and the Thessalonian Correspondence’, NTS 31 [1985]: 336–56 [349]) and Frederick F. Bruce (The Acts of The Apostles [NLC: London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1954], 327–28) argue that those who have fallen asleep in 1 Thess. 4.13 have died as a result of persecution, since the verb κοιμάω is also used of Stephen’s death in Acts 7.60. However, as John M. G. Barclay (‘Conflict in Thessalonica’, CBQ 55 [1993]: 512–30) rightly notes, had Paul known about actual martyrs, he would almost certainly have deployed them in his letters (514 n. 6). 66.  De Ste. Croix, ‘Early Christians’, 10. 67.  Translations of early Christian martyr acts are largely drawn from Herbert Musurillo, The Acts of the Christian Martyrs (Oxford: Clarendon, 1972).

36

The Violence of the Lamb

author of the martyr act sets the confrontation between Polycarp and the representative of Rome in such a way as to makes the demands of the empire incompatible with the claim that God and Christ have on the Christian; Χριστιανός sums up resistance to the emperor and his demand for sacrifice to be offered to the gods. This confrontation is repeated in many of the martyr acts, where a demand is explicitly made to sacrifice to the image of emperor, or for the health of the emperor, or a demand to sacrifice to the gods is made on his command or authority. In response, Christians remain resolute in resisting such pressure to sacrifice or confess the Lordship of Caesar, often denigrating the gods in the process. Speratus in the Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs says: ‘I not recognise the imperium of this world; I acknowledge my Lord who is the emperor of kings and of all nations’ (domnum meum, imperatorem regnum et omnium gentium).68 In other words, the Christians’ Lord trumps the Lord of the persecutors. The pax romana depended on the pax deorum, explaining why a governor appears to be upset that he had let the martyr Carpus ‘babble on so long, I’ve led you to blaspheme the gods and the emperor’.69 Atheism was a serious concern. Since eschewing cultic worship risked bringing misfortune on a town or even the empire, Christians gained the reputation of odium humani generis, haters of the human race, which made them the targets of suspicion. If a group was suspected of hatred of humanity and of disloyalty to the emperor, there was an easy way to allay such fears: sacrifice to the gods and to the image of the emperor. Romans allowed the people of the empire freedom to follow their own customs and gods; all they asked in return was a modicum of civic loyalty. To refuse to engage in the imperial cult when asked to do so would be interpreted as an extraordinary act of disloyalty. This is not to say Christians were hostile to the State. Injunctions to ‘be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution’ (1 Pet. 2.13) or to pray for (1 Tim. 2.1–2) or honour (1 Pet. 2.17) the emperor are found in the New Testament. Tertullian argues that by praying to the true God for the safety of the emperor, Christians were doing far more for the emperor than those who offer sacrifice to gods that do not exist.70 Similarly, Justin and Irenaeus maintained that Christians obeyed or prayed for the emperor.71 Even Polycarp insists that in refusing to sacrifice to the emperor he was not 68.  Scillitan Martyrs 6. 69.  Mart. Carpus 21. 70.  Tertullian, Apol. 29–33. 71.  Justin, 1 Apol. 17; Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 24.

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

37

dishonouring him: ‘We have been taught to pay respect to the authorities and powers that God has assigned us’.72 Unfortunately for the Christians, although they took on what they thought to be an accommodating stand towards Rome, they could not be good Christians and good Romans at the same time. While Romans could tolerate Christian worship of their god on the same terms as other groups, who could worship their deities so long as they also took on cultic obligations towards Roman gods, Christians could not make such an accommodation to Rome.73 The demands of the empire were incompatible with the claim that God and Christ had on the Christian. Therefore, in the arena when forced to declare for Christ or the emperor, the confession ‘Χριστιανὸς εἰμι’ signalled the Christian’s allegiance to Christ and resistance to the demands of empire. In return, Christians lived with low level hostility that occasionally spilled over into mob violence. To be sure, this was not persecution in the sense that it was a premeditated, centralised, and sustained attack on Christianity and Christians. As far as the Romans were concerned, any action against the Christians was correction for anti-social un-Roman misdemeanour that threatened the State through the rejection of the gods. Therefore, so far as the Romans were concerned their action would have constituted prosecution rather than persecution. Nonetheless, while the imperial cult plays an important role in secondand third-century Christian martyrologies, the demand to sacrifice was not the result of any imperial edict or enforcement of the cult. Instead, it represented a means by which loyalty to the empire could be expressed. This was even more the case in the first century. If the Apocalypse does indeed reflect a time of persecution precipitated or aggravated by the demand to participate in the imperial cult, it is difficult to match the literary social-historical situation with the canvass of the late first and early second century.

72.  Mart. Poly. 10.2. 73.  Stephen Benko (‘Pagan Criticism of Christianity During the First Two Centuries AD’, ANRW II.23.2 [1980]: 1055–118 [1110]) concludes, ‘By and large the Roman state and its citizens showed tolerance towards Christianity which the church failed to reciprocate’. However, Benko’s charge of Christian intolerance is unfair. Christians offered what they thought was reasonable accommodation to Rome by praying for its rulers. However much they might have tried, Christians could not satisfy Roman expectations: ‘the standard for even the most nominal display of good citizenship was set far in excess of what the Christians could meet.’ See Middleton, Radical Martyrdom, 40.

38

The Violence of the Lamb

This lack of evidence has led scholars to conclude the crisis in Revelation is created. Perhaps most influentially, Yarbro Collins argued that John created a crisis in response to mutual antipathy between his community and both Jews and Gentiles.74 To be sure, the scar of Nero’s persecution is still felt. However, the crisis the Apocalypse reflects is the mismatch between John’s current social reality and what he thinks it ought to be. This discrepancy between the world as it is and the world as it should be creates a crisis in John’s mind, and, as a result, he feels the Christian church is under attack. Therefore, persecution in the Apocalypse is a result of imagined rather than social experience. Collins’ view has been influential, and takes seriously both the presence of persecution in the text and its absence in the first century context. While other scholars have followed this general line of interpretation,75 I am not convinced we need suggest that persecution was merely in the mind of John alone. Indeed, that the experience of persecution is found almost uniformly throughout the New Testament would demand that most early Christians experienced the same perceived crisis on a large scale. Others, faced with the mismatch of the literary image with social reality, have re-dated the Apocalypse to a point where there was clear State opposition to the church, either revisiting the older consensus for a Neronic dating, or pushing the date forward to the actions of Pliny or the second Jewish Revolt under Hadrian. In what follows I will not argue for any particular date for the Apocalypse. However, it seems to me that there is little value in clinging to a date late in Domitian’s reign. The testimony is already vague to begin with, and although scholars have been content to give Irenaeus’ testimony the benefit of the doubt, this is generally because there is no particular reason to assume he was being deliberately misleading, and perhaps more importantly, there is very little left to go on. Instead, I suggest we simply disregard Irenaeus. He is certainly wrong on authorship, and is reporting third-hand testimony, and so it would be kinder to release Irenaeus from the burden of the sole support for what has been a long, but ultimately unsustainable consensus. Instead, I will focus on the social situation from which and into which John is writing. The new non-persecution paradigm has, I will suggest, caused commentators to underplay the actual experience of persecution the early Christians believed they were enduring. For John, there was a real, rather than merely perceived crisis. While the confrontation with 74.  Yarbro Collins, Crisis, 84–110. 75.  For example, Thompson, Revelation, 24–34.

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

39

the imperial cult may not have been quite the ‘death battle’ he presents, I will argue that it may well have been the case that in virtually any place in the Roman empire, at any time from Nero onwards, Christians could have found themselves before an ‘image of the Beast’ and given a choice to offer sacrifice or face punishment. To be clear, I am not arguing, and need not argue, that the imperial cult was officially enforced anywhere in the empire in the first century, for that does not appear to be the case. However, a general suspicion or hostility towards Christians could have manifested itself in either a ‘reasonable’ demand to demonstrate loyalty to Rome or the well-being of a city or community through sacrifice to local cults,76 or a formal interrogation before an official on a charge of misdemeanour, in which a sacrifice test could have been deployed. The Image of the Beast: The Sacrifice Test Even if there was no State-sponsored persecution of Christians, there is sufficient evidence to conclude some measure of low-level hostility towards the Church existed. From a Christian perspective, Nero’s assault on the church in Rome would no doubt have left deep-seated scars that led to the continued view they suffered for their cause. After the fire in Rome, Nero, who was himself suspected of starting it, used Christians as a scapegoat to deflect suspicion from himself. Tacitus describes Nero’s relentless brutality: But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination,

76.  For discussion, see Middleton, Radical Martyrdom, 40–70.

40

The Violence of the Lamb when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man’s cruelty, that they were being destroyed.77

Tacitus clearly did not believe the Christians were responsible for the fire.78 However, in his passing reference to Christians, he reveals something of his negative attitude towards them. Although he believes them to be innocent of fire-raising, Tacitus nonetheless thinks they deserve ‘extreme and exemplary punishment’, and notes they are ‘hated for their abominations’, because of their ‘hatred of humankind’. Since he is writing around 50 years after the event, Tacitus’s testimony about general attitudes to Christians in the 60s CE must be treated with caution. However, it is likely he reflects attitudes to the Church in his own time. Significantly, this is corroborated by a contemporaneous first-hand account of Roman engagement with Christians. Pliny the Younger was governor of Bithynia-Pontus in Asia Minor. In roughly 111 CE he wrote to the emperor Trajan about a local legal problem. He had been in the middle of a series of trials involving Christians, and although some had confessed—who Pliny then had executed—others admitted while they once had been Christians, they were no longer. Moreover, a good deal more Christians had been denounced by anonymous pamphlets, which caused Pliny to suspend the trials and write to the emperor. Having never been present at any trials concerning those who profess Christianity, I am unacquainted not only with the nature of their crimes, or the measure of their punishment, but how far it is proper to enter into an examination concerning them. Whether, therefore, any difference is usually made with respect to ages, or no distinction is to be observed between the young and the adult; whether repentance entitles them to a pardon; or if a man has been once a Christian, it avails nothing to desist from his error; whether the very profession of Christianity, unattended with any criminal act, or only the crimes themselves inherent in the profession are punishable; on all these points I am in great doubt. (Ep. 10.96) 77.  Tacitus, Annals 15.44 (emphasis added). 78.  No other early writer links the conflagration with the Christians (cf. Pliny the Elder, Nat. Hist. 17.1, 5; Suetonius, Nero 38; Dio Cassius, Historia 76.6). Neither does any early Christian make a defence against fire-raising, which suggests they were unaware of such a charge.

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

41

At the point of writing, Pliny is clearly aware that Christians have been tried before, but as he has never been present, he is unclear what the basis of any charge should be. Crucially, he does not know if simply being a Christian is reason enough to merit conviction, or if their membership of a Christian group has to be accompanied by more specific criminal action. Although Pliny appears uncertain on this most basic legal principle, he had already dealt with a number of cases, which he outlines for Trajan’s approval. In the meanwhile, the method I have observed towards those who have been brought before me as Christians is this: I asked them whether they were Christians; if they admitted it, I repeated the question twice, and threatened them with punishment; if they persisted, I ordered them to be at once punished: for I was persuaded, whatever the nature of their opinions might be, a contumacious and inflexible obstinacy certainly deserved correction. There were others also brought before me possessed with the same infatuation, but being Roman citizens, I directed them to be sent to Rome. (Epistles 10.96)

Some scholars see in Pliny’s approach evidence that Christians were normally charged merely for being Christian.79 However, the uncertainty which causes Pliny to write to the emperor, and that he is sure some undisclosed crimes lie behind the name renders this conclusion insecure.80 Moreover, Pliny appears to be more offended by the inflexible obstinacy of the Christians rather than their identification.81 The number of Christians involved appears to be quite large, given those accused not only vary in age and current adherence, but the number of Roman citizens, who seem be in the minority, are significant enough to mention. Pliny’s action is clearly what scholars would designate ‘local prosecution’. However, from a Christian perspective, Pliny’s

79.  De Ste. Croix (‘Early Christians’, 9) judges the case to be ‘certain’. See also Paul Keresztes, Imperial Rome and the Christians: From Herod the Great to about 200 A.D. (Lanham: University Press of America, 1989), 122. 80.  Adrian N. Sherwin-White, The Letters of Pliny: A Social and Historical Commentary (Oxford: Clarendon, 1966), 780–81. 81.  Whether contumacia was a formal charge against the Christians is a point of dispute between de Ste. Croix and Sherwin-White. See Adrian N. Sherwin-White, ‘Why Were the Early Christians Persecuted?—An Amendment’, Past and Present 27 (1964): 23–27; and Geoffrey E. M. de Ste. Croix, ‘Why Were the Early Christians Persecuted?—A Rejoinder’, Past and Present 27 (1964): 28–33.

42

The Violence of the Lamb

prosecutions may have developed into a relatively major persecution.82 For a reasonably sustained period, they would have lived with the insecurity of being tried, tortured, and executed if they remained faithful Christians. Furthermore, they ran the risk of being ‘outed’ by their neighbours through anonymous pamphlets, which Pliny had clearly acted upon, though Trajan eventually put a stop to the practice.83 This indicates that in Bythinia-Pontus, the distain for Christians seen in Tacitus and other writers was shared by at least some residents of the city. Indeed, since some who had been accused said they had given it up twenty years previously, it is significant that the stain of having been a Christian was held against these individuals by members of their community for so long.84 The kind of action taken by Pliny against the Church represents the sort of social setting that would sufficiently explain both the presence of persecution and the prominence of the emperor cult in the Apocalypse. Members of the church were being brought before Roman officials and given a choice between execution or cursing Christ and offering sacrifice to the emperor.85 Those who denied they were, or had ever been Christians repeated after me an invocation to the gods, and offered religious rites with wine and incense before your statue (which for that purpose I had ordered to be brought, 82.  Compare Fergus Millar (‘The Imperial Cult in the Persecutions’, in Willem den Boer [ed.], Le culte des souverains dans L’Empire Romain [Geneva: Vandoeuvres, 1972], 145–75), who concludes that the imperial cult played a ‘minor part’ in Pliny’s inquiry (153). 83.  Trajan affirms Pliny’s general approach, but orders that anonymous accusations should be disregarded: ‘You observed proper procedure, my dear Pliny, in sifting the cases of those who had been denounced to you as Christians. For it is not possible to lay down any general rule to serve as a kind of fixed standard. They are not to be sought out; if they are denounced and proved guilty, they are to be punished, with this reservation, that whoever denies that he is a Christian and really proves it—that is, by worshiping our gods—even though he was under suspicion in the past, shall obtain pardon through repentance. But anonymously posted accusations ought to have no place in any prosecution. For this is both a dangerous kind of precedent and out of keeping with the spirit of our age’ (Epistles 10.97). 84.  Interestingly, Keresztes (Imperial Rome, 97) argues that the fact so many abandoned Christianity at the same time in the past reflects mass apostasy at the time of persecution under Domitian. However, this is speculative. 85.  Pliny (Epistles 10.96) explains to Trajan that he has freed those accused of being Christian who subsequently offer worship to the emperor’s image or curse Christ.

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

43

together with those of the gods), and even cursed the name of Christ: whereas there is no forcing, it is said, those who are really Christians into any of these compliances: I thought it proper, therefore, to discharge them.

In fact, some scholars, such as Downing, set Revelation against the backdrop of Pliny’s prosecution: If the Revelation to John and 1 Peter in particular are occasioned by some crisis in Asia Minor then this is it, and it is the first in that part of the world, very likely the first anywhere since Nero’s action in Rome. The Beast is waking up.86

Downing contends that Pliny’s innovation of the sacrifice test makes his action against the Christians the first plausible setting since Nero’s pogrom for the persecution that is apparent in Revelation (and 1 Peter).87 Downing stresses the innovative nature of the sacrifice test: ‘Pliny’s own actions to date against Christians brought before him have been made up out of his own head’.88 While Downing is no doubt correct that Pliny is not following an established procedure, it is important to note that the Christians are not being tried for refusing to sacrifice. As Downing, following SherwinWhite and Last, points out, ‘it is only a test’.89 However, is it really the case that Pliny ‘invents’ the sacrifice test? How would our readings of early Christian accounts of persecution be affected if the sacrifice test was more widespread and found earlier than generally supposed? To be sure, the process Pliny employs mirrors that which is found in the later martyr acts: questioning and torture with a desired outcome that the accused will renounce Christianity, curse Christ, sacrifice to the gods and to the image of the emperor, and in consequence be released. In other words, the two options open to Christians are confess Christ and die, deny Christ and live. If Pliny was responsible for the test, he unwittingly provided the Christians with the materials out of which they created the cosmological 86.  F. Gerald Downing, ‘Pliny’s Prosecutions of Christians: Revelation and 1 Peter’, JSNT 34 (1988): 105–23 (113). 87.  For further discussion on the possible relevance for Pliny’s prosecution on interpreting 1 Peter, see Frank W. Beare, The First Epistle of Peter: The Greek Text with Introduction and Notes (Oxford: Blackwell, 1947); David G. Horrell, ‘The Label Χριστιανός: 1 Peter 4:16 and the Formation of Christian Identity’, JBL 126 (2007): 361–81. 88.  Downing, ‘Pliny’s Prosecutions’, 108–9. 89.  Downing, ‘Pliny’s Prosecutions’, 109; Adrian N. Sherwin-White, ‘The Early Persecutions and Roman Law Again’, JTS ns 3 (1952): 199–213 (208–9); Hugh Last, ‘The Study of the Persecutions’, JRS 27 (1937): 80–92.

44

The Violence of the Lamb

conflict found throughout their martyrologies. However, I will argue that traces of earlier application of the sacrifice test can be detected throughout Christian writing, which will in turn impact the way in which John’s account of persecution in relation to the imperial cult is read. In the first instance, although Pliny tells Trajan that he has never been present at the trials of Christians, he is aware that they have taken place before.90 Indeed, had this been the first time Christians had been examined since Nero, it is not obvious why Pliny would have thought there was anything to investigate, and it would be difficult to explain why he sent some to Rome for further questioning. He must have been aware that Christians had not only been previously tried, but also convicted, even if he was unsure precisely on what basis that conviction was made. Secondly, if they were not sure action would be taken, it is not obvious why those who denounced the Christians would have done so.91 Thirdly, he had the statues of the gods and the emperor brought out because he had heard that Christians were unlikely to offer sacrifice. Finally, the offer of sacrifice is accompanied by a demand to curse Christ, which again, he had heard those who are really Christians cannot be forced to do. From where did he hear this? It is more likely that of the little he knew of Christian trials, he had heard that sacrificing and cursing are effective means by which to distinguish between true and false denials of guilt. But is there any evidence for this proposal? Josephus Two incidents recorded by Josephus serve as evidence of a test akin to Pliny’s, although the context in both are quite different. Not long after the outbreak of the Jewish War, a Jewish apostate, Antiochus, the son of the Jewish governor of Antioch, exploited the ill feeling toward the Jews on account of the war. He spread rumours that the Jews were plotting to burn down the city. The people moved against the Jews, and in a further act of provocation, Antiochus…aggravated the rage they were in, and thought to give them a demonstration of his own conversion, and of his hatred of the Jewish customs, by sacrificing after the manner of the Greeks; he persuaded the rest also to compel them to do the same, because they would by that means discover who they were that had plotted against them, since they would not do so; and when the people of Antioch tried the experiment, some few complied, but those that would not do so were slain. (Josephus, War 7.3.3) 90.  Barnes, ‘Legislation’, 37. 91.  De Ste. Croix, ‘Early Christians’, 9.

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

45

Sacrifice was therefore used to distinguish between Jews and non-Jews. Although the parallel is by no means precise, it is noteworthy that the sacrifice is merely the means of identifying members of a group who would not ordinarily carry out the activity, rather than the cause of offence itself. Secondly, after the fall of Masada, the Sicarii fled to Alexandria where they caused disturbances by inflaming some of the Jews to assert that God was their only Lord and Master. Anticipating the disaster this would bring on the Jews of Alexandria, an assembly of the people decided to hand over the Sicarii to the Romans. Nonetheless, under torture, there arose some feelings of admiration of them. For when all sorts of torments and vexations of their bodies that could be devised were made use of to them, they could not get any one of them to comply so far as to confess, or seem to confess, that Caesar was their lord: but they preserved their own opinion, in spite of all the distress they were brought to; as if they received these torments, and the fire itself, with bodies insensible of pain, and with a soul that in a manner rejoiced under them. But what was most of all astonishing to the beholders, was the courage of the children. For not one of these children was so far overcome by these torments, as to name Caesar for their lord. So far does the strength of the courage [of the soul] prevail over the weakness of the body. (Josephus, War 7.10.1)

Again, the parallel with Pliny’s prosecution is not exact, and here there is no sacrifice test. Nonetheless, this scene anticipates many of the Christian trials in which members of the Church can save their lives by confessing Caesar as lord. It is not clear that this would have been the case with regards to the sicarii; it is more likely the torture and demand to call Caesar ‘lord’ was an attempt to break their spirits prior to execution. While the two instances in Josephus do not provide concrete antecedents of Pliny’s sacrifice test, they do, nonetheless, demonstrate that Romans (and Greeks) did deploy secondary criteria in order to convict a first-order offence: sacrifice or confess Caesar as lord. While it is not clear in the second example of the sicarii, it is more obvious that conforming to the second-order demand to sacrifice by the populous of Antioch could save the life of a Jew who was prepared to offer it. This is also the case with Pliny’s demand. Early Christianity Theoretically, there would be nothing preventing a Christian from simply denying she was one and save her life. Indeed, this is the point Tertullian, reflecting back on the situation, finds so objectionable:

46

The Violence of the Lamb So that with all the greater perversity you act, when, holding our crimes proved by our confession of the name of Christ, you drive us by torture to fall from our confession, that, repudiating the name, we may in like manner repudiate also the crimes with which, from that same confession, you had assumed that we were chargeable. I suppose, though you believe us to be the worst of mankind, you do not wish us to perish. For thus, no doubt, you are in the habit of bidding the murderer deny, and of ordering the man guilty of sacrilege to the rack if he persevere in his acknowledgment! Is that the way of it? But if thus you do not, deal with us as criminals, you declare us thereby innocent, when as innocent you are anxious that we do not persevere in a confession which you know will bring on us a condemnation of necessity, not of justice, at your hands. ‘I am a Christian’, the man cries out. He tells you what he is; you wish to hear from him what he is not. Occupying your place of authority to extort the truth, you do your utmost to get lies from us. ‘I am’, he says, ‘that which you ask me if I am’. Why do you torture me to sin? I confess, and you put me to the rack. What would you do if I denied? Certainly you give no ready credence to others when they deny. When we deny, you believe at once.92

Tertullian’s argument has some force. If someone is accused of murder, the authorities are hardly going to take a denial at face value. Yet even after a confession of guilt, if a Christian changes his plea, he is immediately released. Tertullian wonders how the system would prevent someone pretending not to be Christian: You play fast and loose with the laws. You wish him to deny his guilt, that you may, even against his will, bring him out blameless and free from all guilt in reference to the past! Whence is this strange perversity on your part? How is it you do not reflect that a spontaneous confession is greatly more worthy of credit than a compelled denial; or consider whether, when compelled to deny, a man’s denial may not be in good faith, and whether acquitted, he may not, then and there, as soon as the trial is over, laugh at your hostility, a Christian as much as ever?93

However, attitudes to martyrdom in the early Church varied, and denial in the face of questioning was adopted by some Christians. Anyone who denied they were Christian would have been released by Pliny and, as Tertullian notes, would have been free to continue to practise Christianity. However, although he mentions this course of action as a possibility, Tertullian is strongly critical of any who choose to deny. 92.  Tertullian, Apol. 2. 93.  Tertullian, Apol. 2.

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

47

Now we are in the midst of an intense heat, the very dog star of persecution…the fire and the sword have tried some Christians, and the beasts have tried others; others are in prison longing for martyrdom which they have tasted already, having been beaten by clubs and tortured… We ourselves, having been appointed for pursuit, are like hares being hemmed in from a distance—and the heretics go about as usual.94

The central drama of the Christian martyr act is precisely the moment at which the Christian is invited through torture to curse Christ, sacrifice and live, or continue to confess Christ and die. In this moment, one’s Christian identity—not to mention salvation—is at stake.95 The psychological effect of failed martyrdom on a small community could be devastating, and so it is not surprising that much Christian invective is reserved not so much for persecutors, but those who deny under pressure. This is seen quite clearly in The Martyrs of Lyons: Those that were left fell into two groups. Some were clearly ready to become our first martyrs, making a full confession of their faith with the greatest enthusiasm. Yet others were shown to be still untrained, unprepared, and weak, unable to bear the strain of a great conflict. Of these about ten in all were stillborn, causing us great grief and measureless distress.96

94.  Tertullian, Scorp. 1, 5. 7. Justin similarly regarded groups who did not contribute to the number of the martyrs to be heretics (1 Apol. 26). 95.  As I have written before, once a martyr story has begun, ‘To fail to be martyred is to fail to be Christian’. Paul Middleton, ‘Suffering and the Creation of Christian Identity in the Gospel of Mark’, in C. Baker and B. Tucker (eds.), The T&T Clark Handbook to Social Identity in the New Testament (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2014), 173–89 (175). For other recent studies that focus on martyrdom and identity, see L. Stephanie Cobb, Dying to Be Men: Gender and Language in Early Christian Martyr Texts (New York: Columbia University Press, 2008); Elizabeth A. Castelli, Martyrdom and Memory: Early Christian Culture Making (New York: Columbia University Press, 2004); Judith Lieu, ‘ “I am a Christian”: Martyrdom and the Beginning of “Christian Identity”?’, in Neither Jew nor Greek? Constructing Early Christianity (Studies of the New Testament and Its World; London: T&T Clark International, 2002), 211–31; Matthews, Perfect Martyr; Daniel Boyarin, Dying for God: Martyrdom and the Making of Christianity and Judaism (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1999); Judith Perkins, The Suffering Self: Pain and Narrative Representation in the Early Christian Era (London: Routledge, 1994). 96.  Mart. Lyons 1.11.

48

The Violence of the Lamb

In the text, to be stillborn is to fail to be martyred; the categories of life and death collapse in this martyr act.97 The threat of apostasy was real under torture, and much Christian reflection on martyrdom spends time outlining why apparently saving one’s life through denial was in fact a worse choice than going through with confession and execution.98 While some Christians did consciously lie about their affiliation under pressure,99 it appears the majority would have intended to remain faithful, but denied to escape or halt the tortures. Indeed many lapsed Christians sought re-entry after a particular period of persecution was over.100 Therefore, we see quite clearly that Pliny’s method of interrogation became standard procedure in proceeding martyr acts. This alone lessens the case for Pliny’s technique being an innovation. If Pliny is simply combining a standard interrogation with a test he has heard from others that worked in the case of Christians, might the sacrifice test, or something close to it, have been used earlier? 97.  For discussion, see Middleton, Radical Martyrdom, 93–95. 98.  This point is pressed in The Martyrs of Lyons, where those who deny do not in fact gain any benefit, but are returned to the arena as criminals rather than as Christians, and are subjected to the taunts of the crowds for being ‘ignoble cowards’ (1.33–34). Nonetheless, by and large, it would be reasonable to assume that the offer made by the Romans to the Christians to deny and save their lives was genuine. 99.  This appears to be recommended in Test. Truth 31.21–32.21, in which Christians who confess ‘by world only’ (by which the author means those who are arrested and executed) do not confess in power. Confession in spirit, even if that means denying ‘by word’, appears to be ‘true’ confession. On so-called gnostic views on martyrdom, see Elaine Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels (New York: Random House, 1979); Karen L. King, ‘Martyrdom and its Discontents in the Tchacos Codex’, in April D. DeConick (ed.), Codex Judas Papers: Proceedings of the International Congress on the Tchacos Codex Held at Rice University, Houston Texas, March 13–16, 2008 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2009), 23–42; Jesper Hyldahl, ‘Gnostic Critique of Martyrdom’, in Jakob Engberg, Uffe H. Erikson, and Anders K. Petersen (eds.), Contextualising Early Christian Martyrdom (Early Christianity in the Context of Antiquity; New York: Lang, 2011), 119–38; Philip L. Tite, ‘Voluntary Martyrdom and Gnosticism’, JECS 23 (2015): 27–54. 100.  See the following important studies on the Donatist conflicts: Maureen A. Tilley, The Bible in Christian North Africa: The Donatist World (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997); William H. C. Frend, The Donatist Church: A Movement of Protest in Roman North Africa (Oxford: Clarendon, 1952). On the problems created by the readmission of the lapsed reflected in Cyprian’s On the Lapsed, see Frederick C. Klawiter, ‘The Role of Martyrdom and Persecution in Developing the Priestly Authority of Women in Early Christianity: A Case Study of Montanism’, Church History 49 (1980): 251–61; Middleton, ‘Enemies of the (Church) and State: Martyrdom as a Problem for Early Christianity’, Annali di Storia dell’Esegesi 29, no. 2 (2012): 161–81.

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

49

Mark Many scholars have noted in passing that the interrogation of Peter in Mk 14.66–72 has parallels with Pliny’s trials.101 Yet, commentators tend to pass this off as an interesting anticipation of later Christian experience, rather than considering whether in fact it may reflect the contemporaneous experience of Christians in Mark’s own day.102 This is all the more curious since some have interpreted the whole Gospel as providing comfort to followers of Jesus who have failed to confess in the context of the Neronic persecution.103 However, in considering the possibility that Peter’s denial reflects an ongoing contemporary situation, then other New Testament texts support the contention that the most compelling Sitz im Leben for them and Peter’s denial might well be a trial not unlike those that took place in Pliny’s courtroom. Peter’s denial is found in all the canonical Gospels,104 and although some details are fluid, in each, Peter is questioned and denies Jesus three times.105 This threefold questioning clearly mirrors the experience of the Christians questioned by Pliny. A similar structure is found in The Martyrdom of Polycarp, in which a herald announces, ‘Three times Polycarp has proclaimed himself to be a Christian’.106 Moreover, the accusations put to Peter sit uncomfortably in their current literary context: 101.  Joel Marcus, Mark (ABYC, 27–A; 2 vols.; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000, 2009), 2:1024; Eugene M. Boring, Mark: A Commentary (NTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2006), 415–16; W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Matthew (ICC; 3 vols.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1988, 1991, 1997), 3:548. 102.  Geoffrey W. H. Lampe probably comes closest, though again, the suggestion that it may have reflected a past Neronic age is made only in passing: ‘St Peter’s Denial’, BJRL 55 (1973): 346–68. Lampe goes on to examine the various ways Patristic exegetes exculpated Peter. For a more recent survey, see A. Edward Siecienski, The Papacy and the Orthodox: Sources and History of a Debate (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017), 107–15. 103.  Timothy Radcliffe, ‘ “The Coming of the Son of Man”: Mark’s Gospel and the Subversion of the Apocalyptic Imagination’, in Brian Davies (ed.), Language, Meaning and God: Essays in Honour of Herbert McCabe O. P. (London: Chapman, 1987), 167–89; Bastiaan M. F. van Iersel, ‘Failed Followers in Mark: Mark 13.12 as a Key for the Identification of the Intended Readers’, CBQ 58 (1996): 244–63. A similar argument was earlier advanced by Max Wilcox, ‘The Denial-Sequence in Mark XIV.26–31, 66–72’, NTS 17 (1971): 426–36. 104.  Mk 14.66–72//Mt. 26.69–75//Lk. 22.55–62; Jn 18.13–18, 25–27. 105.  Lampe (‘Peter’s Denial’, 347–49) offers a fairly comprehensive list of the minor variations. 106.  Mart. Poly. 12.1.

50

The Violence of the Lamb 14.67: You also were with Jesus the Nazarene (καὶ σὺ μετὰ τοῦ Ναζαρηνοῦ ἦσθα). 14.69: This man is one of them (οὗτος ἐξ αὐτῶν ἐστιν). 14.70: Certainly you are one of them (ἀληθῶς ἐξ αὐτῶν εἶ).

In each case, Peter is identified with a group that is not apparent in the text. As Marcus notes, in Mk 14.67 no-one else has been accused of being with Jesus,107 and although in the other verses, ἐξ αὐτῶν refers to the followers of Jesus, they have not been identified in this scene. Readers, therefore, have to look beyond the text to find the referent. The second striking connection with Pliny’s trials is the demand that the accused Christians curse Christ (maledicerent Christo). When the third accusation is put to him, ‘he began to curse (ἀναθεματίζω) and to swear (ὄμνυμι), “I do not know this man that you are talking about!” ’ (Mk 14.71). While older commentators, no doubt influenced by pietistic respect for Peter, tended to assume his curse was reflexive—‘he began to invoke a curse on himself’ (RSV)—this construction is not well attested in Greek literature.108 While it may be that Mark has deliberately left the object of the curse ambiguous, given that Peter also swears, which is in itself a self-curse,109 and is at the time vehemently denying that he knows Jesus, it is far more likely that Peter here is cursing Jesus.110 Peter’s denial and cursing of Jesus, therefore, follows almost precisely the experience of the Christians accused by Pliny. Obviously, the mechanism to offer sacrifice is absent, but the denial and the curse likens Peter to the apostates of Bythinia-Pontus. However, this pattern of apostasy does not come out of the blue in Mark. Throughout his gospel, the Evangelist has laid out both the conditions of what it means to be a faithful follower of Jesus, and the consequences of failing to confess. In the grammar of the gospel, it is significant that Mark has Peter ‘deny’

107.  Marcus, Mark, 2:1018. 108.  For a comprehensive survey, see Helmut Merkel, ‘Peter’s Curse’, in Ernst Bammel (ed.), The Trial of Jesus: Cambridge Studies in Honour of C. F. D. Moule (Studies in Biblical Theology, 2nd Series, 13; London: SCM, 1970), 66–71. 109.  Merkel, ‘Peter’s Curse’, 68. 110.  Marcus, Mark, 2:1020, 1024–25. Marcus suggests Jesus’ name is ‘omitted for reverential reasons’. Early exponents of this view include Lampe, ‘Peter’s Denial’; and Merkel, ‘Peter’s Curse’. As far as I am aware, the first to suggest this reading was Günther Bornkamm, Jesus of Nazareth (trans. Irene and Fraser McLuskey with James M. Robinson; London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1960; orig. 1957), 212 n. 20.

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

51

(ἀρνέομαι) Jesus (Mk 14.68), for in a pivotal scene on the way to Jerusalem, in which Jesus has been revealed as both the Messiah and the one who is to suffer (8.27–33), the conditions of discipleship are then outlined: If anyone would come after me (ὀπίσω μου ἀκολουθεῖν), let him deny himself (ἀπαρνησάσθω ἑαυτόν) and take up his cross and follow (ἀκολουθείτω) me. For whoever would save his life (ψυχήν) will lose it; and whoever loses his life (ψυχήν) for my sake and the gospel’s will save it. For what does it profit a man, to gain the whole world and forfeit his life (ψυχήν)? For what can a man give in return for his life (ψυχῆς)? For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of man also be ashamed, when he comes in the glory of his Father with his holy angels. (Mk 8.34–38)

Mark has probably constructed this passage from individual or pairs of sayings,111 but from them, he has created a clear and logical treatise on discipleship. The desire to follow Jesus is not sufficient. Those who wish to be followers of Jesus must first take up their cross, and only then will they be able to follow. While in isolation, and possibly in its original context, this saying could certainly have been understood metaphorically,112 Mark, by expanding on what ‘taking up the cross’ might mean, gives the saying a more literal orientation. Discipleship for Mark may well cause followers of Jesus to face a decision whether to save or lose their own lives. The context is clear. The decision to lose one’s life would be for the sake of Jesus and the gospel (Mk 8.35). However, Jesus states that to die for his sake is the better option, for in reality to die is to live. Conversely, those who choose to save their lives will lose it by forfeiting their soul (ψυχή; 8.36). Crucially, once would-be disciples have chosen this path, there is nothing they can give to get it back (8.37). Finally, Mark makes clear that those who are ashamed of Jesus in this generation, who have made the disastrous choice to ‘save’ their lives, have, in reality, lost them (8.38). They in turn will be rejected by Jesus when he returns in glory and judgement (8.38–9.1).

111.  See Marcus (Mark, 2:623) for the chiastic structure of 8.34–9.1: εἶπεν αὐτοῖς– ὃς γάρ–τί γάρ–τί γάρ–ὃς γάρ–ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς. 112.  Luke’s addition of καθ᾽ ἡμέραν (9.27) makes anything other than a metaphorical reading impossible.

52

The Violence of the Lamb

The most obvious context in which the series of sayings makes most sense is a trial, such as conducted by Pliny, in which Christians could save their lives by cursing and being ashamed of Jesus, or lose it by faithfully confessing Jesus and face execution. The slightly expanded Q version of the saying makes the meaning more explicit: Whoever confesses me (ὁμολογήσει ἐν ἐμοί) before people, I will also confess him (ὁμολογήσω κἀγὼ ἐν αὐτω) before my Father who is in heaven; but whoever denies (ἀρνήσηταί με) me before people, I will also deny him (ἀρνήσομαι κἀγὼ αὐτόν) before my Father who is in heaven. (Mt. 10.32–33)113

This is precisely the context in which Mark places Peter. He was given an opportunity to demonstrate that he was a true follower of Jesus, but instead of denying himself (ἀπαρνησάσθω ἑαυτόν; Mk 8.38), he denied (ἠρνήσατο) Jesus (14.68, 70). Instead of taking up his cross and following after Jesus, as he insisted he would—‘Even if I have to die with you, I will not deny (οὐ μή σε ἀπαρνήσομαι) you’ (14.31)—Peter follows instead the model of an apostate, who like those who offered sacrifice when Pliny demanded, failed to confess Jesus, choosing instead to save (but lose) his own life.114

113.  Lk. 12.8–9: ‘Everyone who shall confess me (ὁμολογήσῃ ἐν ἐμοί) before people, the Son of Man shall also confess him (ὁμολογήσει ἐν αὐτῷ) before the angels of God; but everyone who denies me (ἀρνησάμενός με) before people shall be denied (ἀπαρνηθήσεται) before the angels of God’. 114.  Mark’s treatment of the disciples is so harsh that some have wondered if they represent a particular view that Mark wishes to counter. Classically, Theodore J. Weeden, ‘The Heresy That Necessitated Mark’s Gospel’, ZNW 59 (1968): 145–58; idem, Mark: Traditions in Conflict (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971); see also Joseph B. Tyson, ‘The Blindness of the Disciples in Mark’, JBL 80 (1961): 261–66; Étienne Trocmé, The Formation of the Gospel According to Mark (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975); Werner H. Kelber, Mark’s Story of Jesus (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979). However, others see them as fallible followers who are restored in the end, so especially Robert C. Tannehill, ‘The Disciples in Mark: The Function of a Narrative Role’, JR 57 (1977): 386–405; idem, ‘The Gospel of Mark as Narrative Christology’, Semeia 16 (1979): 68–76; Ernest Best, Following Jesus: Discipleship in the Gospel of Mark (JSNTSup, 4; Sheffield: University of Sheffield, 1981); Elizabeth S. Malbon, ‘Fallible Followers: Women and Men in the Gospel of Mark’, Semeia 28 (1983): 29–48; idem, ‘Texts and Contexts: Interpreting the Disciples in Mark’, Semeia 62 (1992): 81–102. For a restatement of the view that the disciples do represent outsiders, see Middleton, ‘Suffering’.

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

53

Moreover, we do not need to look beyond the gospel to find explicit reference to just the sort of judicial scene in which Christians would be called to model Jesus rather than Peter. Mark warns his readers: Take heed to yourselves; for they will deliver you up to councils; and you will be beaten in synagogues; and you will stand before governors and kings for my sake, to bear testimony before them. And the gospel must first be preached to all nations. And when they bring you to trial and deliver you up, do not be anxious beforehand what you are to say; but say whatever is given you in that hour, for it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit. And brother will deliver up brother to death, and the father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death; and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved. (Mk 13.9–13)

Mark puts a prophecy of coming persecution in the mouth of Jesus that is almost certainly coming to pass in his own time. While, as we have noted, some commentators see the prophecy fulfilled in the Neronic persecutions that have passed, suffering and persecution appear to be present and future realities rather than in a period that is now over (Mk 10.29–30; 13.9–13). Christians may be called to give testimony before both Jewish and Gentile authorities, although in the case of the former, it would appear that the extent of the punishment might be a beating rather than death.115 However, that death is a possibility at the hands of Roman authorities is made explicit (13.12). Mark assures his readers that the Holy Spirit will speak through them under trial, which is most probably the content of the testimony they are to bear, connected to preaching the gospel. This Spirit-inspired testimony will almost certainly lead to martyrdom for the sake of Jesus. The only way in which to remain alive would be to deny Jesus before the authorities, and refuse to say what the Spirit directs. This may help identify the otherwise opaque unpardonable sin of blaspheming against the Holy Spirit (3.19).116

115.  Compare Paul’s experience: ‘five times I received the thirty-nine lashes’ (1 Cor. 11.23–24). It is possible that as with Jesus, an appearance at a Jewish trial was followed by a Roman one (so Acts 18.12–17; 19.35–41; 21.37–22.29; 23.23–26.32). 116.  In context, suggesting Jesus has a demon is related to the unpardonable sin. The Holy Spirit does not feature prominently in Mark, and therefore that it is mentioned both here and in the context of a trial may suggest slandering Jesus is that unpardonable sin.

54

The Violence of the Lamb

I have previously argued that in Mark, in common with second- and third-century Christian martyr acts, the sole arbiter of Christian identity is the way in which one responds to persecution.117 Mark not only divides humanity into followers of Jesus and the sinful generation, he further distinguishes would-be disciples of Jesus. It is important to note that in Mk 8.34–38 those who already wish to follow Jesus are addressed. The warning about confessing and denying, and saving and losing life is made to those who consider themselves to be insiders. In the parable of the sower, the seed that falls on the path and are scorched by the sun for lack of roots (4.5–6) represent those who receive the word with joy (4.16). However, they endure, not to the end (cf. 13.13), but only for a little while, and fall away when they face tribulation or persecution because of the Word (4.17). That followers of Jesus will prove to be unfaithful and apostates is not only anticipated in the Gospels, it is modelled by Peter and the other disciples, who instead of following after Jesus with their crosses, flee (14.70). It is noteworthy that Mark offers no obvious way back for apostates. It appears that there is but one opportunity to make the decision to confess or deny, to live or to die. Q 12.2–9 The context for the Q version of the confessing and denying saying (Mt. 10.26//Lk. 12.8–9) provides further evidence that Christians in various places might have found themselves in a situation in which they would have to make a choice whether or not to publicly declare their allegiance to Christ: Do not fear those who kill the body (σῶμα) but cannot kill the soul (ψυχήν); rather fear him who can destroy both the soul (ψυχήν) and body (σῶμα) in Gehenna. (Mt. 10.28)118

While words of comfort and reassurance are then offered (Mt. 10.29–30// Lk. 12.6–7), the warning is stark. As with Mk 8.35–36, the Q saying contrasts what might appear to be death in this world with ‘real’ death in the next. So, while a Christian in a trial situation may believe he is saving his life by denying Christ, in fact, he will find that although he has temporarily saved his body (σῶμα), he has forfeited his soul (ψυχή). This

117.  Middleton, ‘Suffering’, 173–76. 118.  Cf. Lk. 12.4: ‘I tell you, my friends, do not fear those who kill the body (σῶμα), and after that can do nothing more. But I will warn you whom to fear; fear him who, after he has killed, has authority to cast into Gehenna.’

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

55

connection is then explicitly drawn out with the promise and warning that confessing Christ means being confessed by Christ on Judgement Day, while denying Christ will result in being denied before God and the angels (Mt. 10.33//Lk. 12.8–9), resulting in the destruction of the soul, and punishment in Gehenna (Mt. 10.28//Lk. 12.5). While Luke, arguably, dampens the prospect of persecution for his readers, Matthew moves the material on the trials of a disciple in Mk 13.9–13 (cf. Mt. 10.17–25) from the ‘Little Apocalypse’ to his Mission Discourse (Mk 9.35–11.1), making an explicit link between Christian missionary activity and persecution.119 In a section dominated by themes of persecution and suffering,120 Mark’s apocalypticism has nonetheless been retained.121 These sayings, as Davies and Allison note: serve to hearten and to cheer the missionary whose experience is so bad that it can be interpreted as belonging to the messianic birth pangs. In sum, [Mt.] 10.26–31, with its gemaric thrust, reveals both the reality of the Christian suffering in Matthew’s world and the pastoral concern generated by that suffering.122

By the time Christians come to trial, they essentially have a choice between being destroyed by the authorities or by God. The traditions found in Mk 8.34–38 and Q 12.4–9 encourage Christians to make the right choice. Hebrews There appears to be no restitution for apostates in Mark’s Gospel, and this may explain what was so unpardonable about blaspheming the Holy Spirit. In Hebrews, a trial setting may also account for a similar idea: It is impossible (ἀδύνατον) to restore again to repentance those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come and then have fallen away (παραπεσόντας), since they crucify the Son of God on their own account and hold him up to contempt. (Heb. 6.4–6)

119.  Davies and Allison, Matthew, 2:182. 120.  Mt. 10.14–23, 25, 26, 28, 31, 35–36. 121.  Jesus says that the disciples will not have time to go through the towns of Israel before the End comes (Mt. 10.22–23). 122.  Davies and Allison, Matthew, 2:210.

56

The Violence of the Lamb

Commentators have found this uncompromising position difficult as it appears contrary to natural justice, or to limit the graciousness of God. Those who do not accept the meaning of this warning at face value tend to opt for one of two ‘solutions’. The first is that the author is employing hyperbole. So Lindars sees only ‘apparent rigorism’ in the warning,123 boldly claiming for an imagined repentant back-slider: I suspect that, in spite of what he says here, he would welcome them with open arms! It is unsound to assume that in a work of such marked rhetorical character the writer should never allow himself some element of exaggeration.124

The second way of avoiding the full force of the impossibility of restoration is to psychologise the errant Christian, so that while God theoretically could restore such a person were he to repent, the sin of the former believer has made it psychologically impossible for him to return to the fold.125 Bruce is representative of this view: ‘God has pledged Himself to pardon all who truly repent, but Scripture and experience alike suggest that it is possible for human beings to arrive at a state of heart and life where they can no longer repent’. However, although it cannot be decisive for the interpretation of the passage in its first context, it is at least noteworthy that Heb. 6.4–6 became a proof text for rigorists, who insisted that the lapsed of the third-century persecutions could not be readmitted into church fellowship.126 Modern theological concerns aside, the warning is clear enough, and so the issue is identifying a sufficiently serious misdemeanour that would warrant such a harsh sentence. If apostasy in a time of trial is in view,127

123.  Barnabas Lindars, The Theology of the Letter to the Hebrews (NTT; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 68–71. Lindars interprets the falling back as reverting to Jewish practices, rather than public denial in a trial setting, which would be more difficult for his line of interpretation. 124.  Lindars, Hebrews, 70. See also Andrew T. Lincoln, Hebrews: A Guide (London: T&T Clark International, 2006), 21. 125.  So Frederick F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews (New London Commentaries; London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1965), 118–25. 126.  See Tertullian, De Pudicitia 20. See William Tabernee, ‘To Pardon or Not To Pardon? North African Montanism and the Forgiveness of Sins’, Studia Patristica 35 (2001): 375–86. 127.  William L. Lane (Hebrews 1–8 [WBC, 47A; Waco: Word, 1991], 142), while not necessarily imagining a trial setting, suggests that ‘a single calculated rejection of Jesus’ is in view here.

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

57

then (if my reading of Mark is correct), it would not be without precedent in the New Testament. In Hebrews, the Christians have experienced a measure of persecution (Heb. 10.32–35), and the author fully expects more to follow, and using Jesus as a model urges his recipients to ‘go forth to him outside the camp and bear the abuse he endured’ (13.13). However, despite this experience of persecution, as yet, the community has not produced any martyrs (12.4). The verb used for apostasy, παραπίπτω (Heb. 6.6), is not found elsewhere in the New Testament, but in the Septuagint is used of unfaithfulness to the covenant,128 and appears to envisage a deliberative act. It is not entirely certain that apostasy in the context of persecution is in view here. However, that this act of unfaithfulness is also said to hold Christ up to public contempt (παραδειγματίζω) is suggestive of a public denial under questioning.129 Moreover, there is a parallel passage in Hebrews relating to deliberate sin (10.26–31), which warns of fearful judgement which will consume enemies of God. The author sets this warning in the context of their previous experience of suffering (10.32–35), and gives notice that the church is in need of endurance, which anticipates further suffering to come (10.36). However, this is offset by a promise that Christ is coming soon (10.37; cf. Mk 13.26–27). The warning and promise is summed up with the author stating confidently, ‘But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who have faith and keep their souls’ (Heb. 10.39). This then leads into the treatise on exemplars of faith (11.1–40), which, of course, famously culminates in the naming of a number of martyrs (11.35–38). Furthermore, with the cloud of witnesses, the church is urged to consider Jesus’ suffering (12.1–3), and warned that although they have not yet shed their blood, this may be the future consequence (12.4). Implicitly, the danger of deliberate sinning is set in a context of witness, persecution, and martyrdom. The Shepherd of Hermas The readmission of former believers is also dealt with in The Shepherd of Hermas. The Visionary does not always share Hebrews’ absolute rigorist stance on the rejection of those who have committed post-baptismal sin. In fact, the position is directly contradicted: ‘all the sins that they have previously committed will be forgiven them. Indeed, all the saints who 128.  Ezek. 14.13; 15.8; 18.24; 20.27; Wis. 6.9. 129.  That the act also negates an action of the Holy Spirit (6.4) may suggest a further parallel with the unpardonable sin of Markan tradition. However, this is admittedly speculative.

58

The Violence of the Lamb

have sinned up to this day will be forgiven, if they repent with all their heart’ (Vis. 2.2.4 [6.4]).130 While this ‘lack of rigour’ caused Tertullian to reject the book,131 it is in fact more nuanced in places. For these then there is repentance, unless they are found to have denied from the heart. But if someone is found to have denied from the heart, I do not know if it is possible for that person to live. And I do not say this regarding these days, that someone who denies may receive repentance, for it is impossible for anyone who denies the Lord (ἀρνεῖσθαι τὸν κύριον) from now on to be saved; but for those who denied him long ago repentance seems to be a possibility. (Sim. 9.26.5–6 [103.5–6])132

While certainly not as rigorous as the author to the Hebrews, the Seer here divides apostates into two groups: those who have denied in the past, for whom repentance is possible; and those who deny from now on, for whom there can be no restitution. However, in Sim. 9.18.1–5 (95.1–5), the seriousness of post-baptismal sin is explained along the same lines as Heb. 6.4–6; those who have known God should know better than to sin, so their disobedience is worse than those who are unbelievers. Therefore, the punishment for former believers will be twice as severe as for those who have never been Christians. While elsewhere, the Seer has indicated that saints can be restored, he then goes on to state that there is a kind of sin that cannot be forgiven: From the first mountain, the black one, are believers such as these: apostates and blasphemers against the Lord (ἀποστάται καὶ βλάσφημοι εἰς τὸν κύριον), and betrayers of God’s servants (προδόται τῶν δουλῶν τοῦ θεοῦ). For these there is no repentance (μετάνοια οὐκ), but there is death (θάνατος), and this is why they are black, for their kind is lawless (ἄνομος). (Sim. 9.19.1 [96.1])

However, another group, ‘hypocrites and teachers of evil’, although like the first group, ‘do not have the fruit of righteousness’, are offered forgiveness so long as they ‘repent quickly’ (Sim. 9.19.2 [96.2]). The Seer, confused by the different treatment of the two groups, asks why this is so. He is answered:

130.  Translation: Michael W. Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations (3rd ed.; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007; orig. 1992). 131.  Tertullian, De Pudicitia 20. See Luke T. Johnson, Hebrews: A Commentary (NTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2006), 163. 132.  The same position is found in Sim. 8.8.2 (74.2).

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

59

This is why repentance is offered to them: they have not blasphemed their Lord, nor have they become betrayers of God’s servants. Yet because of the desire for gain they acted hypocritically, and each one taught to suit the desires of sinful people. But they will pay a penalty; yet repentance is offered to them, because they did not become blasphemers or betrayers. (Sim. 9.19.3 [96.3])

Here, the author further divides believers who have fallen away into two groups. As stated elsewhere, those who have sinned can be welcomed back, even those who have committed apparently grievous sins, such as teaching evil, or acting hypocritically for gain. However, those who have blasphemed against Jesus or betrayed God’s servants are outside the sphere of repentance, forgiveness, and restoration. The same contrast is drawn in Sim. 6.2.2–4 (62.2–4), where blasphemers against the Lord’s name (κατὰ ὄνομα τοῦ κυρίου βλασφημίαν) cannot be restored, while those who ‘handed themselves over to acts of luxury and deception’ can be restored because ‘they have not spoken any blasphemy against the Lord’. A context of persecution, or at least a period of former persecution, would make most sense of why what appears to be relatively gratuitous sinning is forgivable, while another similar-sounding sin is not. It is easily imaginable that those who publicly denied Jesus would be labelled ‘apostates and blasphemers against the Lord’.133 The link between blaspheming the Lord and denying him is made explicit in Sim. 8.8.2 [74.2], where again it is stressed that there is no possibility of repentance for those who have taken this course of action: These, therefore, have no repentance, for on account of their business affairs they blasphemed the Lord (ἐβλασφήμησαν τὸν κύριον) and denied him (καὶ ἀπηρνήσαντο αὐτόν). So they lost their life because of the evil they did.

A context of persecution may also account for the charge of betraying the servants of God. In his account of the Neronic trials, Tacitus mentions in passing that those who were first arrested gave the authorities information that led to the arrest, conviction, and execution of ‘an immense multitude’ of Christians (Ann. 15.44). It is not clear whether or not those who gave the names of the other Christians saved their own lives by doing so, but in any case, if Tacitus’ information is correct, we have an instance

133.  This would be even more the case if apostates and blasphemers constituted a single group rather than two.

60

The Violence of the Lamb

that matches the charge of ‘betraying the servants of God’ (Sim. 9.19.1 [96.1]).134 This precise model of betrayal is found in the Martyrdom of Polycarp; those searching for Polycarp failed to find him because he had moved location. However, they seized two young slaves, one of whom confessed under torture. For it really was impossible for him to remain hidden, since the very persons who betrayed him were members of his own household… Those who betrayed him received the punishment of Judas himself. (Mart. Poly. 6.1–2)

It is not immediately clear that the slaves are Christians,135 but because the author makes a point of stressing they were from Polycarp’s own household, and since he makes a comparison with Judas, indicates this is how he probably understands them.136 It is therefore likely the sin that the Shepherd of Hermas singles out as unforgiveable is either denying Jesus or betraying other Christians to the authorities, or indeed both. If this is the case, Hermas is not as far away from Hebrews as might first appear. To be sure, the author is willing to overlook a whole series of serious sins if repentance is made quickly. However, he also makes clear that the time for forgiveness of sin is over. Any repetition from now on will not be forgiven. This in itself is quite close to the sense in Hebrews. However, for the sin of apostasy and denial, as with Heb. 6.4–6, it is impossible for there to be forgiveness. The seriousness with which apostasy in a time of trial is viewed is clear. This helps with reading Mark’s careful crafting of the route to becoming an apostate, and the lack of clear opportunity to find one’s way back.137 134.  Van Iersel (‘Failed Followers’) argues this betrayal is the context for the Gospel of Mark. He argues that some in the Markan community had provided information that had led to the arrest of fellow Christians, and this is reflected in Mk 13.12 (‘Brother will betray brother to death, and the father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death’). A similar argument has also been advanced by Radcliffe, ‘Coming of the Son of Man’; and Wilcox, ‘Denial Sequence’. I have recently argued against this position in Middleton, ‘Suffering’, 180–83. 135.  Paul Hartog, Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians and the Martyrdom of Polycarp: Introduction, Text and Commentary (Oxford Apostolic Fathers; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 287 n. 128. 136.  See Gerd Buschmann, Das Martyrium des Polykarp (KAV; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998), 145. There are similar instances of household betrayal in Mart. Lyons 1.14, although here, the servants are explicitly pagan. They are frightened by the threat of torture into betrayal. 137.  Interestingly, this rigorous position in respect to denial is not found in the Martyrs of Lyons. To be sure, the author is scathing of those who remain apostates,

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

61

2 Timothy That Christians may have found themselves before a magistrate having to make a decision whether to confess or deny Jesus, which could then result in punishment or even execution, is found in other texts in the New Testament beyond Mark and Hebrews. In 2 Timothy, readers are warned: The saying is sure (πιστὸς ὁ λόγος): If we have died with him, we shall also live with him; if we endure (ὑπομένομεν), we shall also reign with him; if we deny him (εἰ ἀρνησόμεθα), he will also deny us (κἀκεῖνος ἀρνήσεται ἡμᾶς); if we are faithless, he remains faithful—for he cannot deny himself. (2 Tim. 2.11–13)

The introductory ‘The saying is sure’ may indicate what follows is already a well-known saying, perhaps a hymn.138 The first three sayings balance three actions—dying, endure, denying—with their consequences—living, reigning, being denied. While dying with Christ might be understood metaphorically in a baptismal context (cf. Rom. 6.4),139 the connection with endurance and denying certainly makes it applicable to a more literal martyrological context. The theme of persecution is certainly present in the letter. Earlier, the author instructed his readers that they should not be ashamed (ἐπαισχύνομαι) of the testimony about Jesus (τὸ μαρτύριον τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν). Instead, they should join Paul in suffering for the gospel (ἀλλὰ συγκακοπάθησον τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ; 2 Tim. 1.8). Being ashamed of the gospel is contrasted with suffering, and so suffering in this context is a mark of faithful witness. Similarly, the author contrasts suffering and shame in 2 Tim. 1.12, promising suffering will lead to salvation.

denying they were ever truly Christian. However, he provides a way back for both deniers and betrayers, so long as they come to their senses and re-confess Christ. Remarkably, this process is described as those stillborn coming back to life and being reborn through the inspiration of the living, that is, those who have already been martyred (Mart. Lyons 1.45–46). 138.  For example, John N. D. Kelly, A Commentary on The Pastoral Epistles: I & II Timothy, Titus (BNTC; London: A. & C. Black, 1963), 179; Raymond F. Collins, 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus: A Commentary (NTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002), 223–24; cf. James L. Houlden, Pastoral Epistles: I and II Timothy, Titus (NTC; London: SCM, 1976), 119. The phrase πιστὸς ὁ λόγος appears five times in the Pastorals (1 Tim. 1.15; 3.1; 4.9; 2 Tim. 2.11; Tit. 3.8). For discussion, see Dibelius and Conzelmann, Pastoral Epistles, 28–29. If the saying is a quotation, this would be yet another independent attestation for the trial experience. 139.  So Kelly, Pastoral Epistles, 179–80.

62

The Violence of the Lamb

He also tells the church that being a good soldier of Christ Jesus (καλὸς στρατιώτης Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ) will result in the Christians suffering together (συγκακοπαθέω; 2.3), and indeed that ‘all who desire to live a godly life will be persecuted’ (3.12). That a more literal understanding of ‘the faithful saying’ is intended is reinforced by what immediately precedes it, which seems to offer some parallels. The author invites the reader to ‘remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead’ (2 Tim. 2.8; cf. 2.11), a gospel for which Paul suffers (2.9; cf. 2.11, 12), yet endures everything (2.10; cf. 2.12) for the salvation of the elect. ‘The faithful saying’, reinforces what has gone before: believers must endure, not deny, and if necessary die for the gospel, in order to win salvation. The Pastor later invokes the tradition of Paul’s death to press home his point (4.6–8). Houlden140 suggests 2 Tim. 2.12 is contradicted by 2.13 (‘If we are faithless, he remains faithful’), but resolves the problem by interpreting the latter as general covenant faithfulness, and 2.12 as referring only to the last day. However, there is no need to supply ‘to us’ in 2.13. Rather, this is a contrast between the faithful model of Jesus and the apostate, rather like the contrast between Jesus’ faithful witness and Peter’s denials in the Gospels. Therefore, 2 Tim. 2.11–13 reflect the same meaning, and probably the same situation as Mk 8.34–38. Christians are warned that to deny Jesus will mean being denied when Christ comes as judge. 1 John A sharp contrast between confession and denial also appears in 1 Jn 2.22–24, in which a believer’s relationship with the Father depends on confessing or denying Jesus. The epistle is strongly dualistic, making a sharp distinction between insiders and outsiders, who are said to be ‘children of the devil’ (3.10). The evidence whether the confession/denial is in the context of trial or internal doctrinal dispute is balanced. However, there are echoes of Mk 8.38 in the affirmation that those who confess Jesus have life, while those who deny will ‘be put to shame’ when Jesus comes (2.28). Later, the author stresses that believers may have to lay down their lives for the brothers (3.16), and it is not obvious what context other than martyrological that this may find fulfilment.141 Moreover, in the final chapter, as we have seen elsewhere, the author distinguishes between sins that can be forgiven and a ‘sin leading to death’ (5.16). 140.  Houlden, Pastoral Epistles, 119. 141.  Raymond E. Brown, The Epistles of John (AB, 30; New York: Doubleday, 1982), 449.

1. Christian ‘Persecution’ and the Dating of Revelation

63

That the single unpardonable sin may refer to failure in a Pliny-like trial in which the sacrifice test is set is given some weight by the final, and otherwise rather out of place, warning to ‘keep yourselves from idols’ (5.21).142 Instead of consorting with idols, Christians are enjoined to confess (ὁμολογέω) that Jesus is the son of God (4.2, 15; cf. 4.3). Conclusion The demise of the old persecution paradigm has left interpreters of Revelation with a conundrum. How can it be that John depicts an all-out apocalyptic war between the Christians and the Beast that would result in martyrdom when the new consensus is that there was very little in the way of persecution? Also problematic is the idea that the world would be divided between Christians and those who worship the image of the Beast. John’s conception of Beast worship neatly fits the confrontation martyrs would face when forced to choose between loyalty to the emperor or to Jesus, but those texts appear to reflect a confrontation well beyond the timeframe of Revelation’s composition. However, while accepting the consensus that persecution where it occurred was localised rather than State-inspired, I have argued that scholars’ embrace of this new paradigm has caused a needless turn from how Christians experienced that localised pressure. John did not need to invent a crisis because even local pressure, if it employs the apparatus of the imperial cult, can be framed in imperial terms. Moreover, I have argued that the sort of ‘localised’ persecution, such as that instigated by Pliny, could have been legitimately interpreted as a major experience of persecution. Christians were confronted with precisely the choice between witnessing to Christ or offering sacrifice to ‘the image of the Beast’. Furthermore, I have advanced the case that Pliny did not invent the sacrifice test, for its almost perfect imprint is found in first-century Christian writers. The authors of Mark, some Q tradition, Hebrews, 2 Timothy, Hermas, and possibly 1 John, are clearly concerned with the possibility, or indeed the reality, of Christians committing apostasy when given an opportunity to confess or deny Christ. This suggests that the sort of action undertaken by Pliny was found far earlier and was relatively widespread. This begins to undermine the notion that we must identify particular known periods of persecution in order to accept at face value that Christians were, or at least felt they were, being persecuted. 142.  The martyrological interpretation of 1 John is argued most forcibly by M. J. Edwards, ‘Martyrdom and the First Epistle of John’, NovT 31 (1989): 164–71.

64

The Violence of the Lamb

These experiences of ‘persecution’ have implications for the interpretation of the Apocalypse. To be sure, John may be exaggerating the crisis. Indeed, as I will argue, it is the lack of persecution in some of the communities to which he writes that is his main concern. However, there is no need to conclude that there was little opportunity for Christians to experience persecution if they were faithful. Nor is there any need to reject the notion that John’s Christian readers would have little opportunity of ever finding themselves before an image of the Beast with the prospect of martyrdom if they remained faithful to Christ. John’s task, therefore, not unlike much martyrological literature, was to persuade his readers that embracing suffering and persecution, and choosing martyrdom was always the better option. He does this, as we will see, negatively, by warning his readers to disassociate themselves from the culture outside the church, represented by the Beast and Babylon. Those who are not sufficiently divorced from Rome will share in the brutal, graphic, and relentless punishment that will be revealed at the judgement coming upon all the dwellers of the earth. However, he also offers a positive model of martyrdom, Jesus Christ, the faithful witness (Rev. 1.5); the Lamb who was slain (5.6). Jesus, I will argue, stands as the proto-martyr for all faithful Christians. As Christ laid down his life, so too should the Christians remain faithful and embrace martyrdom. However, while commentators have read weakness (albeit voluntary) into the image of the Lamb, this is to fundamentally misunderstand John’s presentation of Christ. In the next three chapters, I examine John’s martyr-Christology, and I will demonstrate that although the Lamb is slain, he is, so far as John is concerned, no tame Lamb!

Chapter 2 N ot a T a m e L amb : C h r i s tol og y i n t h e A pocaly pse

The Lion/Lamb Dichotomy Any discussion of Christology in the Apocalypse will sooner or later have to confront the apparently jarring image of the lion-like Lamb of ch. 5. At the beginning of Revelation 4, the action shifts from earth to heaven. John sees an open door, and is summoned by a voice to ‘Come up here’ to see what must take place (Rev. 4.1). The Seer is immediately transported, and sees God seated on his throne surrounded by 24 elders (4.4), and four ‘living creatures’ (4.6). As they all offer praise, John sees a scroll sealed with seven seals in the right hand of the one seated on the throne (5.1). An angel asks who is worthy to break the seals, but no-one in heaven or earth is found who is able to open the scroll (5.3). This news causes John to weep. However, one of the elders tells John that there is in fact one who is worthy, explaining that ‘the Lion of the tribe of Judah (ὁ λέων ὁ ἐκ τῆς φυλπῆς Ἰούδα), the Root of David (ἡ ῥιζα Δαυίδ), has conquered (ἐνίκησεν)’ so that he can open the scroll and its seals (5.5). When John looks,1 he sees ‘a Lamb standing, as though it had been slain’ (ἀρνίον ἑστηκὸς ὡς ἐσφαγμένον), with seven horns and seven eyes (5.6). The apparent discontinuity of the images of the lion and the Lamb has been the subject of much scholarly comment. Boring calls the scene ‘one of the most mind-wrenching and theologically pregnant transformations 1.  There is no suggestion in the text that John ‘turns’ to look. The Lamb is simply now there in the scene described in Rev. 5.1–5. There is little point in wondering where the Lamb was from 4.1–5.5 or why John had not noticed it earlier. The Lamb makes a dramatic ‘textual appearance’ at 5.6; cf. Aune (Revelation, 1:351), who regards the sudden appearance of the lamb as ‘an important interpretative issue’, although he does entertain the, probably correct, possibility that ‘it could simply be for dramatic purposes’.

66

The Violence of the Lamb

of imagery in literature’,2 while Laws sees the fulfilment of the expectation of seeing a Lion with a Lamb, ‘a violent wrenching of the visual image’,3 as, in the words of Kraybill, ‘expecting to see a ferocious carnivore, John instead sees…a Lamb!’4 For Barr, ‘there could not be a more stark symbolic contrast between the figure announced by the angel and the character actually seen by John: conquering lion/slaughtered lamb’.5 While scholars see a clash of these ‘incongruent’ images, it is precisely the relationship between the two that is held to contain the key to unlock successfully John’s theological world. As Bauckham argues: The key to John’s visions of the slaughtered Lamb (5.6) is to recognize the contrast between what he hears (5.5) and what he sees (5.6). He hears that ‘The Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered’. The two messianic titles evoke a strong militaristic and nationalistic image of the Messiah of David as conqueror of the nations, destroying the enemies of God’s people… But this image is reinterpreted by what John sees: the Lamb whose sacrificial death (5.6) has redeemed people from all nations.6

The apparent contrast between a powerful lion and a lamb that ‘communicates a sense of defenceless submission to a superior power’7 may constitute a puzzle, but for interpreters who wish to play down the violence of the Apocalypse, this juxtaposition provides an opportunity. Mark Bredin, whose volume, Jesus, Revolutionary of Peace is perhaps the most thoroughgoing attempt at non-violent revisionism, claims that John deliberately confronts the militaristic Jewish apocalyptic expectations of the messiah with a slain lamb.8 The violent, militarist conquering lion is critiqued by, and should therefore be interpreted through, the subverting lens of the slain Lamb. For advocates of a non-violent Christology, the

2.  Eugene M. Boring, ‘Narrative Christology in the Apocalypse’, CBQ 54 (1992): 702–23 (708). 3.  Sophie Laws, In the Light of the Lamb: Imagery, Parody, and Theology in the Apocalypse of John (Wilmington: Glazier, 1988), 29. 4.  J. Nelson Kraybill, Imperial Cult and Commerce in John’s Apocalypse (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1996), 98. Melodramatic punctuation and emphasis original! 5.  Barr, ‘Doing Violence’, 100. David Guthrie (‘The Lamb in the Structure of the Book of Revelation’, Vox Evangelica 12 [1987]: 64–71) writes: ‘there could hardly be a more striking or unexpected contrast’ (64). 6.  Bauckham, Theology, 74. 7.  Johns, Lamb Christology, 147. 8.  Bredin, Jesus, 181–99.

2. Not a Tame Lamb

67

lion is subsumed or even obliterated by the lamb imagery, in what Moyise terms a ‘hermeneutic of replacement’.9 So Johns, who advocates a reading of Revelation’s Lamb Christology as signalling a call to ‘an ethic of faithful, nonviolent resistance’ that is ‘characterized and impelled by his own unique development of Lamb symbolism’,10 maintains that ‘the lamb does not coexist with the lion in some ongoing peaceful juxtaposition. Rather, the lamb replaces the lion as a symbol of the nature of Christ’s victory despite his murder.’11 Similarly, Kraybill argues that ‘God’s fullest revelation has not come with brawn and bluster to match the muscle of Rome, but with seeming weakness and vulnerability of a Lamb’.12 Caird goes even further. He suggests that not only is the Lamb the controlling metaphor in this image, but that the whole Old Testament witness should be reinterpreted by John’s slain Lamb: It is almost as if John were saying to us at one point after another: Wherever the Old Testament says ‘Lion’, read ‘Lamb’. Wherever the Old Testament speaks of the victory of the Messiah or the overthrow of the enemies of God, we are to remember that the gospel recognises no other way of achieving those ends than the way of the cross.13

Boring makes a similar move, arguing that John completely reverses the imagery: ‘wherever the tradition says “lion,” read “Lamb” ’. He makes his point more explicitly with an appeal to a mathematical analogy: ‘it is like putting a minus sign before the parenthesis of a complicated formula—the old materials are retained, but their values are all reversed’.14 The most common position held by exegetes is that the Lamb to a greater or lesser extent ‘reinterprets’ the image of the Lion. While advocates of this interpretative strategy tend to distinguish it from Caird’s thoroughgoing replacement model,15 in effect, most readings going down this route tend similarly tend to emphasise lamb-like features while the leonine characteristics are substantially downplayed. So, while the Lamb conquers, the victory is not won in the traditional militaristic 9.  Moyise, ‘Does the Lion?’, 129. 10.  Johns, Lamb Christology, 127. 11.  Johns, Lamb Christology, 195. A similar statement of his thesis is also found at 187 n. 110. 12.  Kraybill, Imperial Cult, 98. 13.  Caird, Revelation, 75. 14.  Revelation (Interpretation; Louisville: John Knox, 1989), 110. 15.  For example, see the helpful discussions by Rebecca Skaggs and Thomas Doyle, ‘Lion/Lamb in Revelation’, CBR 7 (2009): 362–75.

68

The Violence of the Lamb

method of Jewish eschatological expectation.16 Instead, power is demonstrated and victory is achieved through sacrifice and suffering love.17 The victorious lion wins through becoming the sacrificial lamb; ‘The Lion is the Lamb: the ultimate power of God (“Lion”) is manifest on the Cross (“Lamb”)’.18 The Lion The ‘Lion of the tribe of Judah’ (Rev. 5.5) is clearly a symbol of power. Not only has he conquered, but the image of the lion itself is suggestive of royal strength. In the Hebrew Bible, lions are associated with kings,19 warriors20 (including Judas Maccabeus [1 Macc. 3.4] and Israel as conquerors [Num. 23.24; 24.9]), nobility,21 and with general power and danger.22 Moreover, the clear allusion to Gen. 49.8–10 invokes Davidic messianic expectation: Judah, your brothers shall praise you; your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies; your father’s sons shall bow down before you. Judah is a lion’s whelp; from the prey, my son, you have gone up. He crouches down, he stretches out like a lion, like a lioness – who dares rouse him up? The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet until tribute comes to him; and the obedience of the peoples is his.23

16.  So Aune (Revelation, 1:373): ‘The striking contrast between the two images suggests the contrast between the type of warrior messiah expected by first-century Judaism and the earthly ministry of Jesus as a suffering servant of God’. 17.  Bredin, Jesus, 195; John P. M. Sweet, Revelation (Pelican Commentaries; London: SCM, 1979), 125; Craig R. Koester, Revelation: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AYBC, 38A; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2014), 388–89. 18.  Wilfred J. Harrington, Revelation (Sacra Pagina; Minnesota: Liturgical Press, 1993), 87; see also Barr, Tales, 70. 19.  1 Kgs 10.19–20; 2 Chr. 9.18–19; Prov. 19.12; 20.2; 28.15; 30.30–31; Jer. 2.15, 30; Ezek. 32.2. 20.  2 Sam. 1.23; 17.10. 21.  Prov. 28.1; 30.30. 22.  For example: Pss. 7.2; 10.9; 17.12; 22.13, 31; 35.17; 57.4; Prov. 22.13; 26.13; 30.30. See also Judg. 14.18; 1 Sam. 17.37; 2 Sam. 17.10; 1 Kgs 13.24–25; Job 10.16; Isa. 5.29; 31.4; 38.13; Jer. 4.7; 25.38; 49.19; 50.17, 44; Ezek. 19.1–6; 22.25–27; Hos. 5.14; 13.7–8; Joel 1.6; Mic. 5.8; Nah. 2.13. 23.  The tribes of Gad and Dan are also likened to lions in Deut. 33.20, 22 respectively.

2. Not a Tame Lamb

69

The Messiah is also likened to a lion in 4 Ezra, where the Seer has a vision of a lion vanquishing an eagle (4 Ezra 11.36–46), which is later interpreted as ‘the Messiah whom the Most High has kept until the end of days, who will arise from the posterity of David’ (12.32). While Johns sees no evidence ‘the Messiah was ever called a lion prior to the first century CE’,24 a messianic interpretation of Gen. 49.9–10 is found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, including a reference to the Messiah as a lion (1QSb 5.27–29).25 In any case, the Messianic credentials of the Lion are secured by his identification with Judah, and the Root of David (ἡ ῥίζα Δαυίδ), alluding to the Isaianic ‘root of Jesse’ (ἡ ῥίζα τοῦ Ἰεσσαί; Isa. 11.1, 10). There is ample evidence that contemporaneous Jews expected a Davidic Messiah.26 From Nathan’s prophecy that God would establish his throne forever from his offspring (2 Sam. 7.5–16//Ps. 89.20–37), resonances of this covenant are found throughout the Hebrew Bible (Ps. 132.10–12, 17; Isa. 9.2–7; Hos. 3.5; Amos 9.11; Mic. 4.13–5.5). The root and branch of David fed into eschatological expectations, in which God would ‘raise up for David a righteous branch’ (Jer. 23.5; 33.15), until the terminology of ‘the Branch’ itself became a messianic title (Zech. 3.8; 6.12). So, in the Qumran writings, ‘the Branch of David’ (‫ )צמח דויד‬will arise in the last days (4QFlor = 4Q174 1.1.11–12).27 The Lamb If the slain Lamb is in any sense designed to control the leonine image, then what is it John is trying to communicate by it? From what well of resources or bank of images is John drawing? Virtually all commentators 24.  Johns, Lamb Christology, 166. 25.  See Koester, Revelation, 375; Gottfried Schimanowski, Die himmlische Liturgie in der Apokalypse des Johannes: Die früjüdischen Tradition in Offenbarung 4–5 unter Einschluss der Hekhalotliteratur (WUNT, II/154; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002), 197–202. 26.  For a useful discussion, see Mark L. Strauss, The Davidic Messiah in Luke– Acts: The Promise and Its Fulfilment in Lukan Christology (JSNTSup, 110; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1995), 35–76. 27.  4QFlor here interprets 2 Sam. 11–14. The ‘Messiah of righteousness, the branch of David’ (‫ )משיח הצדק צמח דויד‬appears in 4Q252 5.3–4. See also Pss. Sol. 17.21, in which God raises up a warrior son of David. Of course, early Christians applied the expectations of a Davidic Messiah to Jesus, claiming he was of the line of David (Mt. 1.1, 6; Lk. 1.32, 69; 2.4; 3.31; Acts 2.30–32; 13.22–23; Rom. 1.3; 2 Tim. 2.8; cf. Ignatius, Eph. 18.2; 20.2; Rom. 17.3; Smyr. 1.1), and the ‘Son of David’ (Mt. 1.1; 9.27; 12.23; 15.22; 20.30; Mk 10.47–48; 12.35; Lk 18.38–39.

70

The Violence of the Lamb

see Hebrew Bible or other Jewish antecedents behind the slain lamb metaphor. Nonetheless, there is a good deal of diversity in the traditions they see reflected. In the main, interpreters fall largely into two distinct camps, which also relates to the extent to which they see a contrast between the two images of the lion and lamb. Those who see a striking contrast tend to favour a background that stresses vulnerability or sacrifice, while those less surprised by the appearance of the slain Lamb argue it ought to be understood as either leadership or fulfilling Jewish eschatological expectations. Before considering these two possibilities, we turn to John’s lamb language. ‘Standing as if Slain’ (Revelation 5.6) John uses the term ἀρνίον 29 times in Revelation. In all but one occurrence (Rev. 13.11, where it refers to the Beast that has two horns like a lamb; ὅμοια ἀρνίῳ) it is used with reference to Jesus, making it the title used most frequently of Christ in the Apocalypse.28 While other words for sheep/ lamb are found in the New Testament, the only other occurrence of ἀρνίον outside Revelation is Jn 21.15, where in the plural (ἀρνία) it represents the community over which Peter is given pastoral charge (Jn 21.15–17). It is worth noting at this point that ἀρνία is used interchangeably with πρόβατα to refer to the church in John’s threefold sequence: βόσκε τὰ ἀρνία μου (21.15). ποίμαινε τὰ πρόβατά μου (21.16). βόσκε τὰ πρόβατά μου (21.17).29

John also uses πρόβατα in relation to the Christian community throughout ch. 10, but deploys ἀμνός when he refers to Jesus as the ‘Lamb of God’ (ὁ ἀμνὸς τοῦ θεοῦ; 1.29, 36). However, with Aune, there is not enough data to press the idea that John has a particular preference for ἀμνός.30 The related term ἀρνήν, of which ἀρνίον is the diminutive, is found in Lk. 10.3, where Jesus sends his disciples out as lambs in the midst of wolves (ὠς ἄρνας ἐν μέσῳ λύκων). Once again, πρόβατα is used as an alternative 28.  Bauckham (Theology, 67) notes that it is used 28 (i.e. 7×4) times, symbolising complete power. While John certainly uses numbers in a significant way, this conclusion seems rather speculative. 29.  The textual variant πρόβατια is found in both Jn 21.16 and 21.17, and in 21.15 in some cases. 30.  Aune, Revelation, 1:368.

2. Not a Tame Lamb

71

word in Matthew (10.16a).31 Significantly, in the version preserved in 2 Clem. 5.2, ἀρνίον is used (ὠς ἀρνία ἐν μέσῳ λύκων) instead of πρόβατον or ἀρνήν, depending on whether the author was using Matthew or an earlier version relating to Q. While strictly speaking ἀρνίον is a ‘little lamb’, it had probably lost its diminutive force by the first century.32 Even in this cursory glance at early Christian literature we have already noted that John, Matthew or Luke or both, and the author of 2 Clement use the terms ἀρνήν, ἀρνίον, and πρόβατον more or less interchangeably. Therefore, as we proceed to examine the possible backgrounds to the use of ἀρνίον, we may note at the outset that it would be unwise to insist upon a singular purity of meaning of any particular term for lamb. Sacrificial Lamb Given John sees not just a lamb, but a slain lamb, the most obvious place to begin searching for resonances in the Hebrew Bible is the Old Testament sacrificial system,33 in which lambs were an integral part. Two lambs were sacrificed daily, one in the morning and the other in the evening (Exod. 29.38–41; Num. 28.1–8), with another two offered every Sabbath (Num. 28.9–10). On the first day of the month, a male sheep and seven one-year-old lambs were sacrificed along with two young bulls (28.11–14), and the same again on the Passover with the addition of a goat (28.16–21), the Feast of Weeks (28.26–29), Feast of Trumpets (29.1–4), and the Day of Cleansing (29.7–10). On the Feast of Shelters, two male sheep and fourteen male lambs were to be sacrificed on each of the first seven days, along with a decreasing number of bulls from thirteen to seven, with a further sheep, seven lambs, and a bull on the eighth day (29.12–38). Each of these festal offerings was in addition to the daily offerings already prescribed (29.39). In the Apocalypse, the blood of the Lamb has expiatory force. In a hymn addressed to the Lamb, the elders sing: You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slaughtered (ὅτι ἐσφάγμενον) and by your blood (ἐν τῷ αἵματί σου) you ransomed for God (ἠγόρασας τῷ θεῷ) saints from every tribe and language and people and nation; you have made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God (τῷ θεῷ ἡμῶν…ἱερεῖς), and they will reign on earth. (Rev. 5.9–10)

31.  Davies and Allison (Matthew, 2:180) judge it more likely that ἄρνας was found in Q. 32.  Joachim Jeremias, ‘ἀμνός, ἀρνήν, ἀρνίον’, TDNT 1:338–41. 33.  Smalley (Revelation, 131–32) says the sacrificial motif is ‘clearly present’.

72

The Violence of the Lamb

The Lamb is, therefore, not only slain, but his blood has a cultic expiatory function in ransoming the saints for God. This cultic force is reinforced by the juxtaposition of the blood of the Lamb transforming the saints into priests. Cultic imagery is even more explicit in a near exact parallel section in Revelation’s opening scene. Jesus Christ is introduced as: The faithful witness (ὁ μάρτυς ὁ πιστός), the firstborn of the dead (ὁ πρωτότοκος τῶν νεκρῶν), and…has freed us from our sins by his blood (λύσαντι ἡμας ἐκ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν), and made us to be a kingdom, priests serving his God (ἱερεῖς τῷ θεῷ…ἡμᾶς) and Father. (Rev. 1.5–6)

Clearly in John’s mind ransoming the saints for God is established by means of freeing people from their sins, effected by the shedding of the Lamb’s blood. Later in the narrative John sees a multitude clothed in white (7.13) who are said to have ‘come out of the great tribulation and washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb (ἐν τῷ αἵματι τοῦ ἀρνιοῦ)’ (7.14). Once again, a ‘priestly’ function of the redeemed results from this atonement; they ‘serve him day and night within his temple’ (7.15). Finally, in Revelation’s other occurrence of the phrase τὸ αἷμα τοῦ ἀρνιοῦ, the saints ‘conquer him [the dragon] by the blood of the Lamb (διὰ τὸ αἷμα τοῦ ἀρνιοῦ) and by the word of their testimony (καὶ διὰ τὸν λόγον τῆς μαρτυρίας αὐτῶν), for they loved not their lives to death’ (12.11). While one aspect of the saints conquering the dragon is clearly through martyrdom,34 some have seen a cultic force in conquering through the blood of the Lamb.35 However, Johns presents a number of lexical problems with the sacri­ ficial connection between the slain Lamb of Revelation and the Hebrew sacrificial system, arguing ἀγοράζω, ἀρνίον, and σφάζω do not resonate with the Old Testament cultic tradition.36 First, Johns claims ἀγοράζω ‘belongs to the vocabulary of liberation from bondage as much as it does to the vocabulary of sacrifice and atonement’.37 To be sure, it and the intensive form ἐξαγοράζω are used in terms of the manumission of slaves outside and within the rest of the New Testament.38 However, it is not 34.  See also Paul Middleton, ‘Male Virgins, Male Martyrs, Male Brides: A Reconsideration of the 144,000 who have not Dirtied Themselves with Women (Rev. 14.4)’, in Allen, Paul, and Woodman (eds.), Book of Revelation, 193–208 (198–202); and Bauckham, Theology, 76–77. 35.  Koester, Revelation, 564–65. 36.  Johns, Lamb Christology, 129–30. 37.  Johns, Lamb Christology, 129. 38.  F. Büchsel, TDNT 1:124–28.

2. Not a Tame Lamb

73

obvious that the word’s relatively rare appearances in the New Testament are not without cultic significance. Twice Paul reminds the Corinthians that they were bought for a price (ἠγοράσθητε γὰρ τιμῆς; 1 Cor. 6.20; τιμῆς ἠγοράσθητε; 7.23), once to urge them not to make themselves slaves (7.23), but in the other to stress that they do not belong to themselves but to God (6.19–20).39 While Paul does not state what this price is, in Galatians, where he uses ἐξαγοράζω of the divine transaction (Gal. 3.13; 4.4–5), it is clear Paul understands human ‘redemption’ to have been bought by Christ’s crucifixion. Moreover, Paul also affirms as ‘first importance’ that ‘Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures (Χριστὸς ἀπέθανεν ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν κατὰ τὰς γραφάς)’ (1 Cor. 15.3). Paul, therefore, implies what Revelation makes explicit; the price of redemption is the blood of Christ. John is clear from what the saints are redeemed; they are freed from their sins through the blood of Christ (Rev. 1.5). John uses ἀγοράζω on five other occasions, twice in relation to the 144,000 ‘who have been redeemed from the earth (οἱ ἠγορασμένοι ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς)’ (Rev. 14.3), and ‘redeemed from humankind (ἠγοράσθησαν ἀπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων) as first fruits (ἀπαρχή) for God and the Lamb’ (14.4).40 The crowd of 144,000 are clearly linked to the multitude John saw in ch. 7, who had washed their robes in the blood of the Lamb (7.14). However, as well as being redeemed by the sacrificial death of the Lamb, the 144,000 are also sacrificial offerings. They are first fruits (ἀπαρχή), undefiled (οὐκ ἐμολύνθησαν), without guile, and spotless (ἄμωμοι; 14.5). This use of ἄμωμος for members of the Christian community deals with Johns’ second objection to there being sacrificial resonances with the Lamb in Revelation. Johns argues that if it were John’s intention to make this sacrificial link, he would have used the most common word for Lamb in a sacrificial context, namely ἀμνός.41 He explains that Revelation’s term for the Lamb, ἀρνίον, ‘is never applied to the sacrificial lamb in the Old Testament’,42 and further observes that also absent from John’s description of the Lamb is ‘one of the most important qualifiers used for the lamb

39.  Dale B. Martin (The Corinthian Body [New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995], 178) perhaps overstates the point: ‘His body has been “bought”; Christ was the buyer, something like a sōmatemporos, a slave-dealer, a dealer in “bodies” (6.19–20). The individual Christian body, like that of a slave in Roman law, has no ontological status of its own.’ 40.  Aside from Rev. 5.9; 14.3, 5, ἀγοράζω simply means ‘to buy’ with no particular religious significance (3.18; 13.17; 18.11). 41.  Johns, Lamb Christology, 129. 42.  Johns, Lamb Christology, 129.

74

The Violence of the Lamb

in sacrificial contexts’: ἄμωμος;43 the term used not of Christ, but of the saints (14.5). However, we have already noted that to insist upon the lexical purity of any given term for lamb is unwise. In fact, ἀρνίον is an infrequent term in the Septuagint. In any case, although ἀμνός is by far the most frequent term for a lamb in a sacrificial sense, most often translating ‫ּכ ֶבׂש‬, ֶ the Hebrew term is also translated by ἀμνάς, ἀρήν, and πρόβατον,44 each in sacrificial contexts.45 Indeed, in Jer. 11.19, where a lamb is led to the slaughter, ἀρνίον is used. Moreover, the use of ἀμνός is by no means restricted to lambs in a sacrificial sense, and translates a range of Hebrew words. Indeed, in the Jacob and Laban story (Gen. 30.32–40), ἀμνός, ἀρήν, and πρόβατον each translate at least two of the Hebrew words ‫כ ֶׂשב‬, ֶ ‫ׂשה‬, ֶ and ‫צֹאן‬. The absence of a sacrificial background to Revelation’s slain Lamb on this basis places too much weight on the lexical significance of specific words that seem to be used inconsistently. Finally, Johns argues σφάζω does not usually carry the sense of sacrifice that the verb θύω might. He notes that while Christ is most often the subject of the verb, it is also applied to people in general (Rev. 6.4), one of the heads of the Beast that, like the Lamb was ὡς ἐσφαγμένην (13.3), and to the slaughter of the martyrs (6.9; 18.24). Johns concludes that as σφάζω is used in a non-expiatory context in relation to some of the others who are killed in Revelation, this has a knock-on effect when employed as a qualifier to the figure of the Lamb, thereby ‘reducing the possibility that the rhetorical force of the “slaughter” of the Lamb in 5.6 is primarily expiatory’.46 It is not obvious why this should be so. The imagery employed of the slain Lamb is quite different from the others who are killed in Revelation, aside from the head of the Beast (13.4), and John surely intends a relationship of parody between the two figures. As I will argue below, the deaths of the saints should not interpret the death of the Lamb; rather the reverse. In any case, as Johns himself concedes, σφάζω is in fact used in a sacrificial contexts in the Septuagint.47 43.  Johns, Lamb Christology, 129. 44.  Sacrificial contexts for ἀμνάς are all in Num. 7 (7.17, 23, 29, 35, 41, 47, 53, 59, 65, 71, 77, 83, 88); ἀρήν at 1 Chr. 29.21; Isa. 1.11 (quoted in Ep. Barn. 2.5); and for πρόβατον: Lev. 4.32; 23.12; Num. 15.11. 45.  Johns has very helpful tables outlining the semantic domain of the terms for lamb in the Old Testament (Lamb Christology, 207–15). 46.  Johns, Lamb Christology, 129. 47.  Johns (Lamb Christology, 129) cites Exod. 29.16, 20; and Lev. 1.5, 11. Aune (Revelation, 1:353) notes that σφάζω twice translates ‫( זָ ַבח‬Lev. 17.5; Ezek. 34.3), which is the ‘basic term for sacrifice in the OT’.

2. Not a Tame Lamb

75

In Rev. 5.6 the reader is confronted with a literary image: a slain Lamb, whose blood has the effect of redeeming people for God (5.9). Readers would clearly be expected to recognise the crucified Christ in this image. They could not help but recall the effects of his death, which is redemptive, frees the people of God from their sins (1.5), and in whose blood saints are able to wash their robes and make them white (7.14). Furthermore, the scene takes place in the throne room of heaven, in which souls will appear under an altar (6.9), and an angel will stand next to the altar with a golden censer in which he will mingle incense with the prayers of the saints (8.3; cf. 5.8).48 Six-winged creatures sing ‘Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty’ (5.8), obviously invoking the Temple vision of Isaiah 6. It is difficult to imagine how John could have made the scene any more cultic. Moreover, the rather incongruent image of the faithful washing their robes in the Lamb’s blood, which has the ‘cleansing’ effect of making their robes white (Rev. 7.14), further suggests a cultic function of his blood, which resonates with the Old Testament sacrifice tradition. The images of washing, blood, and the colours red and white combine in the judgement oracle of Isaiah 1: When you stretch out your hands, I will hide my eyes from you…your hands are full of blood. Wash yourselves; make yourselves clean; remove the evil of your doings from before my eyes; cease to do evil… Come now, let us argue it out, says the Lord: though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be like snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool. (Isa. 1.15, 16, 18)

To be sure, in this oracle, God declares the insufficiency of ritual offerings and sacrifice (Isa. 1.11–14) in favour of repentance and doing acts of justice (1.17). Nonetheless the resonance between washing robes in blood to make them white (ἔλυναν…καὶ ἐλεύκαναν), and the people washing themselves causing God to make their scarlet sins as ‘white as snow’ (λούσασθε…λευκανῶ; 1.16, 18LXX), is compelling. Furthermore, Clement of Rome makes the link between Isa. 1.16–20 and the crucifixion of Jesus. In a section calling for repentance, he reviews the opportunities God gave the people of Israel to repent, but bookends the discussion with references to Jesus’ blood. Clement exhorts his readers:

48.  The altar also appears in Rev. 8.5; 9.13; 11.1; 14.18; 16.7.

76

The Violence of the Lamb Let us fix our eyes on the blood of Christ (τὸ αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ) and understand how precious it is to his Father, because, being poured out for our salvation (διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν σωτηρίαν ἐκχυθέν), it won for the whole world the grace of repentance. (1 Clem. 7.4)49

Clement then recounts a number of Old Testament episodes where God called people to repentance, citing as examples Noah (1 Clem. 7.7) and Jonah (7.8), and later Enoch (9.3), Noah (9.4), Abraham (10.1–11.2), and Rahab (12.1–7) as exemplars of good behaviour. Clement cites Isa. 1.16–20 in this context, calling the people to ‘Wash and be clean (λούσασθε καὶ καθαροὶ γένεσθε); remove the wickedness from your souls out of my sight’ (1 Clem. 8.4). Clement reinforces this point by immediately preceding the Isaiah quotation with a parallel citation he associates with Ezekiel,50 similarly calling the people of Israel to repentance, and assuring them of grace even if their ‘sins reach from earth to heaven, and though they be redder than scarlet (πυρρότεραι κόκκου) and blacker than sackcloth’.51 Clement interprets these episodes in Israel’s history through the lens of Christ’s atoning blood sacrifice, as is made clear when he recounts Rahab’s story (12.1–7). He also weaves together the scarlet motif of Isaiah and Apocryphon of Ezekiel: And in addition they [the Hebrew spies] gave her a sign, that she should hang from her house something scarlet (κόκκινος)—making it clear that through the blood of the Lord (διὰ τοῦ αἷματος τοῦ κυρίου) redemption will come to all who believe and hope in God. (1 Clem. 12.7)

For Clement, writing close to the time of Revelation, the blood of Christ is the agent by which God transforms the scarlet nature of even Israel’s sins to the purity of wool or snow. Of course, the cleansing or purifying nature of blood is in any case rooted in the Temple cult of the Hebrew Bible. The Hebrew prophets scolding the people that God rejects sacrifice and desires true repentance works rhetorically because sacrifice was the normal means by which sins were removed; blood is given by God ‘for making atonement on the altar…it is the blood that makes atonement’ (Lev. 17.11). Blood is used 49.  Translation, Holmes, Apostolic Fathers. 50.  Clement, Paidagogos 1.10. 51.  1 Clem. 8.3 = Apocryphon of Ezekiel frag. 2. This fragment of text is also found Clement of Alexandria, Paidagogos 1.10 and Exegesis of the Soul from the Nag Hammadi collection. Josephus also mentions a second book by Ezekiel (Ant. 10.5.1). For discussion, see J. R. Mueller and S. E. Robinson in OTP 1:487–90.

2. Not a Tame Lamb

77

for the forgiveness of sins in Leviticus 4, where, depending on who sins, the blood of a bull, goat, or sheep is to be poured on the altar to effect forgiveness. Similarly, an animal is offered instead of the death penalty for a man who has sex with a slave (Lev. 19.22). As well as cleansing sins, blood can also be used to clean the sanctuary (Ezek. 45.18–19), or a house after it has been affected by disease (Lev. 14.48–53). We have already observed that the blood of Christ in Revelation not only purifies the faithful, but transforms them into priests (Rev. 1.5; 5.9–10; 20.6). Indeed, in some sense, the martyred faithful—the first fruits who are without blemish (ἄμωμοι; 14.5)—become both sacrifice and priests, a role not unlike Christ in Hebrews.52 Similarly, the blood of sheep is sprinkled on Aaron and his sons to consecrate them for priestly service: Then you shall take some of the blood that is on the altar, and some of the anointing-oil, and sprinkle it on Aaron and his vestments and on his sons and his sons’ vestments with him; then he and his vestments shall be holy, as well as his sons and his sons’ vestments. (Exod. 29.21)

Blood in the Old Testament is therefore a means through which sins are atoned. However, when it is spilled, poured out, or sprinkled on people or clothes, it can also carry the cultic force of cleansing or even consecrating. In Revelation, the blood of the Lamb appears to reflect or at least resonate with all these cultic uses. Jesus’ blood frees the people from their sins (1.5), but washing in the Lamb’s blood seems to bestow on the saints not only forgiveness, but a special status as heavenly priests. There is little doubt that the slain Lamb resonates with a range of cultic sacrificial Old Testament imagery. Indeed, this is not a particularly novel development in early Christianity. As blood of various animals is poured out on the altar to effect forgiveness, so in Matthew, Jesus says, ‘this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins’ (Τοῦτο…ἐστιν τὸ αἷμα μου τῆς διαθήκης τὸ περὶ πολλῶν ἐκχυννόμενον εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν; Mt. 26.28). While links between Matthew’s words and the new covenant of Jeremiah 31 have been suggested, Exod. 24.1–8 provides a more fruitful background, where Moses pours half of the blood

52.  The idea that martyrs share this priestly/sacrifice dual function with Christ develops in Christian thought, finding fullest expression in Origen, Exhortation 30. For discussion, see Paul Middleton, ‘ “Unlock Paradise with Your Own Blood”: Martyrdom and Salvation in Islam and Christianity’, in Hannah Bacon, Wendy Dossett, and Steve Knowles (eds.), Alternative Salvations: Engaging the Sacred and the Secular (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2015), 109–20.

78

The Violence of the Lamb

of sacrificed animals on the altar, then takes the other half and sprinkled it on the people making the ‘blood of the covenant (τὸ αἷμα τῆς διαθήκης)’ between God and the people (Exod. 24.8).53 Although the purification motif found elsewhere in the Old Testament is not explicit in the creation of the covenant in Exodus, the author of Hebrews understands Moses’ actions this way, comparing Christ’s blood with the blood of animals in the ‘old covenant’: For if the blood of goats and bulls, with the sprinkling of the ashes of a heifer, sanctifies those who have been defiled so that their flesh is purified (καθαρότητα), how much more will the blood of Christ (τὸ αἷμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ), who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God (προσήωεγκεν ἄμωμον εἰς τῷ θεῷ), purify (καθαριεῖ) our conscience from dead works to worship the living God. (Heb. 9.13–14)

The author of Hebrews then turns to the establishment of the covenant, quoting Moses’ words, ‘This is the blood of the covenant that God has ordained for you’ (Heb. 9.20 = Exod. 24.8), and noting that he also sprinkled the tent and the worship vessels with blood: ‘Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood (σκεδὸν ἐν αἵματι πάντα καθαρίζεται), and without the shedding of blood there is no removal [of sins] (χωρὶς αἱματεκχυσίας οὐ γίνεται ἄφεσις)’ (Heb. 9.22). For the author, blood was necessary for purification in the Old Testament cult. Similarly, the new covenant God has created with his people also requires the shedding of Jesus’ blood, which both cleanses and effects forgiveness of sins. This conviction is, of course, shared with other New Testament authors. For John, ‘the blood of Jesus (τὸ αἵμα Ἰησοῦ)… cleanses us from all sin (καθαρίζει ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ πάσης ἁμαρτίας)’ (1 Jn 1.7), while other cultic metaphors are found in the Petrine correspondence: believers are sprinkled with his blood (1 Pet. 1.2), ransomed by the blood of Christ (1 Pet. 1.19), and cleansed from their sins (2 Pet. 1.9). Paul similarly finds expiation (Rom. 3.25; cf. 1 Cor. 6.11), justification or redemption (Rom. 5.9; cf. Eph. 1.7; 2.13; Col. 1.14; 1.20) in Christ’s blood, and through his death, sins are forgiven (Rom. 11.26–27; 1 Cor. 15.3; cf. Col. 3.13). Famously, in John’s Gospel, Jesus is ‘the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world’ (ὁ ἀμνός τοῦ θεοῦ ὁ αἴρων τὴν ἁμαρτίαν τοῦ κόσμου; Jn 1.29; cf. 1.36). Lamb imagery for Christ is also found in Paul (1 Cor. 5.7), where Christ is the paschal lamb (τὸ πάσχα) who has been sacrificed (ἐτύθη), and in 1 Pet. 1.19, where Christ is compared to an unblemished lamb (ἀμνοῦ ἀμώμου). 53.  See Davies and Allison, Matthew, 3:475.

2. Not a Tame Lamb

79

The force of Johns’ argument is that because John did not use ἀμνός or θύω, the noun that normally stands for the sacrificial lamb in the Old Testament, and the verb that normally carries the force of sacrificing rather than any other kind of killing, readers of Revelation would not see Old Testament sacrificial imagery in John’s ἀρνίον ἑστηκὸς ὡς ἐσφαγμένον. Not only would this demand for John’s communities a semantic purity that cannot be assumed, it would require readers of the Apocalypse to have been hermetically sealed from virtually all Christian reflection on the death of Jesus. As soon as the Lamb is recognised as Christ, then readers would apply their pre-existing Christology to the image. John has already labelled the whole work as ‘Α revelation of Jesus Christ’ (Ἀποκάλυψις Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ; Rev. 1.1), and introduced Christ as ‘the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of kings on earth…[who] has freed us from our sins by his blood’ (1.5). The sacrificial death of Christ was already made explicit in the first few verses of the Apocalypse. John further reinforces the importance of the death and resurrection of Jesus by having the Christophanic figure (1.12–20) declare ‘I am the first and the last, and the living one; I died, and behold I am alive for evermore’ (1.17–18). In the first 18 verses, the death and resurrection of Jesus has already been mentioned twice, so by the time the Lamb is encountered in 5.6, the cultic sacrificial background has been firmly established. That the Lamb is Jesus, and it has been slain, invites readers to access their theological knowledge of the crucifixion, which, as we have already noted (pace Johns), unambiguously resonates with the sacrificial cult of the Old Testament. Paschal Lamb While readers of the Apocalypse could hardly have helped noticing general resonances with the Old Testament cultic tradition, some commentators attempt to pin down the origin of the lamb image more precisely. Many turn to the paschal lamb (Exod. 12.1–13) as the most likely source of John’s presentation of the slain lamb.54 As we have already noted, Jesus was clearly associated with the paschal lamb across a range of early Christian theological traditions. Paul employs the Exodus tradition of eating unleavened bread at Passover (Exod. 12.15) to argue for the need to excommunicate a sinful member from the Corinthian church, arguing that even a little leaven will affect the whole loaf. Paul suggests the wrong-doer is leaven, but the church should be unleavened (ἐστε ἄζυμοι), and reinforces his argument with the claim, ‘Christ, our paschal lamb 54.  Smalley, Revelation, 132; Bauckham, Climax, 184.

80

The Violence of the Lamb

has been sacrificed for us (τό πάσχα ἡμῶν ἐτύθη Χριστός)’ (1 Cor. 5.7). As he then moves back to the unleavened motif,55 the image of Christ as the paschal lamb is not strictly speaking necessary for his argument. It may be that this is already a traditional Christian image by the time Paul writes. The Passover is prominent in the Gospels, providing the setting for the Passion (Mk 14.1; cf. Mt. 26.2; Lk. 22.1).56 That the crucifixion of Jesus took place around the Passover probably explains why paschal significance became attached to Jesus’ death. It is unlikely Mark and Luke intend their note that the lambs were sacrificed (Mk 14.12; Lk. 22.7) to interpret their account of Jesus’ death. However, it is significant that John moves the date of the crucifixion to coincide with the slaughtering of the lambs in the temple (Jn 19.14, 31), which becomes a lens through which to view John’s picture of the crucifixion. This connection is further strengthened when John has the soldiers break the legs of the crucifixion victims at the behest of the Jews to prevent the bodies from hanging on the cross during the Passover (Jn 19.32–33). However, as Jesus is already dead they need not break his legs, enabling John to say, ‘For these things took place that the scripture might be fulfilled, “Not a bone of him shall be broken” ’ (Jn 19.36). In the Passover narrative of both Exodus and Numbers, it is stressed that the lamb’s bones should not be broken (Exod. 12.46; Num. 9.12).57 While the leg-breaking scene is not historically implausible,58 it is a Johannine innovation, introduced almost certainly for the purpose of being able to deploy this Passover motif. As Passover lamb imagery is present at the crucifixion, so John’s 55.  ‘Let us, therefore, celebrate the festival not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth’ (1 Cor. 5.8). 56.  While Matthew and Luke simply use the term τὸ πάσχα without explanation, Luke explains that Passover is the name for the feast of unleavened bread (Lk. 22.1). 57.  Charles H. Dodd (The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1958], 233–34) denies there is any Passover imagery in the crucifixion scene. 58.  While many commentators simply state crurifragium was a well-known coup de grâce to hasten death by asphyxiation (e.g. Raymond E. Brown, The Gospel According to John [AB, 29–29A; 2 vols.; New York: Doubleday, 1966, 1970], 2:934), clear evidence is lacking. Barnabas Lindars (The Gospel of John [NCBC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972], 585) suggests it could have been cruel treatment to cause further pain and cause death through blood loss. The Roman soldiers decide not to break the legs of the ‘good thief’ in Gos. Pet. 4.14 so that he should die more painfully. Even if this passage is dependent on John, the author interprets the practice as quickening death. This is the point of breaking the legs of the victims in John, lest

2. Not a Tame Lamb

81

Gospel introduces Jesus as the ‘Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world’ (Jn 1.29; cf. 1.36), which has also been interpreted as a reference to the Passover lamb.59 The Passover tradition is also present in 1 Pet. 1.18–19, and offers a reasonably close parallel to the elders’ hymn to the Lamb in Rev. 5.9:60 ‘You were ransomed (ἐλυτρώθητε)…with the precious blood of an unblemished and spotless lamb (τιμίῳ αἵματι ὡς ἀμνοῦ ἀμώμου καὶ ἀσπίλου) Christ (Χριστοῦ)’. In Rev. 5.9 the elders address the Lamb, praising him because he has ransomed (ἠγόρασας) people by his blood (ἐν τῷ αἵματι). Revelation itself draws substantially on Exodus which may support a specific paschal lamb background. The conquerors gather in heaven and ‘sing the song of Moses, the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb’ (Rev. 15.3), although as Aune notes, the song that follows (15.3–4) has no obvious literary relationship with either of the songs of Moses in Exod. 15.1–8 or Deut. 31.30–32.43.61 Nonetheless, that the song is one of a celebration of conquest, sung by a sea, and is named explicitly as the song of Moses, makes the link with the deliverance from Egypt and the celebrations by the Red Sea certain. The Exodus connection is further cemented in this section by the infliction of seven plagues on the earth, which parallel some of the plagues visited on Egypt.62 Nonetheless, several objections to the paschal theme have been raised. First, the Passover could also be celebrated with a goat; Exod. 12.5 explicitly allows either a sheep or a goat.63 Johns notes that the term πάσχα is not found in Revelation, and neither is any specific reference to the bodies be left on the cross during Passover (cf. Deut. 21.22–23). For a fascinating short study, see Erkki Koskenniemi, Kirsi Nisula, and Jorma Toppari, ‘Wine Mixed with Myrrh (Mark 15.23) and Crurifragium (John 19.31–32): Two Details of the Passion Narratives’, JSNT 27 (2005): 379–91. 59.  Charles K. Barrett, The Gospel According to Saint John (London: SCM, 1965), 146–47. See also the discussion by Brown, John, 1:58–63. Brown is overly constrained by what the historical John the Baptist could have envisaged about Jesus. His objection that ‘we look in vain, however, in the Synoptics for any indication that John the Baptist thought that the one to come after him would suffer and die’ (60) is hardly relevant in determining the Evangelist’s intention. 60.  Aune, Revelation, 1:361; see also Traugott Holtz, Die Christologie der Apokalypse des Johannes (Berlin: Akedemie-Verlag, 1971), 44–47. 61.  Aune, Revelation, 2:863. 62.  Johns, Lamb Christology, 132; Boring, Revelation, 137. 63.  Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971), 127.

82

The Violence of the Lamb

the Passover festival. Moreover, ἀρνίον is never used in a Passover context in the Old Testament.64 Finally, the Passover lamb is not an expiatory sacrifice, nor does it achieve atonement.65 None of these objections rule out resonance with the paschal lamb. As we noted in John, Peter, and Paul, Passover imagery was clearly established for the death of Jesus in early Christianity, and so its potential as an interpretative lens for the crucifixion is present. Furthermore, John’s repetition of the ‘blood of the Lamb’ clearly invokes the central element of the Passover story— smearing the lambs’ blood on the doorways. Finally, the precise details of contemporaneous Jewish Passover theology cannot override the clear evidence of early Christian theologising of Christ’s death. Whether or not the Passover lamb was ‘sacrificed’ is less relevant than Paul’s affirmation that Christ, the Passover lamb for the Christian community, was sacrificed (θύω) for them (1 Cor. 5.7). One further defence of the Passover link might be offered. As we noted, in John’s Gospel, the evangelist deliberately shapes his crucifixion narrative to make Jesus fulfil a Passover scriptural citation. There are a number of such fulfilments in the crucifixion scene in John, of which this was the penultimate.66 The final citation in the following verse relates to the soldier checking Jesus was dead: When they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water. He who saw it has borne witness—his testimony is true, and he knows that he tells the truth—that you may believe. For these things took place that the scripture might be fulfilled, ‘Not a bone of him shall be broken’. And again another scripture says, ‘They shall look on him whom they have pierced’. (Jn 19.33–37)

John has arranged this scene so that the two fulfilment scriptures are linked. In the narrative, the piercing of Jesus’ side appears to be an attempt to confirm that Jesus is in fact dead and that the soldiers need not break his legs. However, for the author of the Fourth Gospel, the piercing and the non-breaking of Jesus’ bones are redolent with theological significance, in that they both fulfil two scriptures, which he links together (Jn 19.36–37). The second fulfilment—the piercing citation—is from Zech. 12.10: ‘when they look upon the one whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a firstborn’. 64.  Johns, Lamb Christology, 132. 65.  Koester, Revelation, 376–77. 66.  Jn 19.24, 28, 36, 37.

2. Not a Tame Lamb

83

Significantly, the only other allusion to Zech. 12.10 in the New Testament is found in Rev. 1.7: ‘See, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, everyone who pierced him, and all the tribes of the earth will wail on account of him’. This means that the author of Revelation may in fact be aware of John’s crucifixion scene, in which the Lamb of God is crucified in the context of a Passover sacrifice. The slain/pierced lamb may then have a Passover resonance so that Johns certainly overstates his case when he claims that ‘appeals to the Passover background of the Lamb symbolism of the Apocalypse seem to be mistaken’.67 Isaiah 53 The lamb of Isa. 53.7 has also been cited as a possible source for Revelation’s slain Lamb.68 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; like a lamb (‫ׂשה‬/πρόβατον) ֶ that is led to the slaughter (σφαγήν), and like a sheep (‫ר ַחל‬/ἀμνός) ָ that before its shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.

The silence of Jesus before his accusers may be at least partly constructed on this verse,69 and we may also note in passing that though Christ speaks in the Apocalypse, in his manifestation as the Lamb, he never says anything.70 In any case, the identification of Jesus with Isaiah’s suffering servant was well established in early Christianity. Isaiah 53.7–8 is quoted in Acts 8.32–33, and then explicitly applied to Jesus (Acts 8.35), while Clement quotes Isa. 53.1–12 with reference to Jesus’ humility (1 Clem. 16). Moreover, Barnabas links a sacrificial interpretation of the crucifixion of Jesus with his identification as the suffering servant: The Lord endured the deliverance of his flesh to corruption so that we might be cleansed by the forgiveness of sins, that is, by the sprinkled blood. For the scripture concerning him relates partly to Israel and partly to us, and speaks as follows: ‘He was wounded because of our transgressions, and has been afflicted because of our sins; by his wounds we were healed. Like a sheep he was led to slaughter, and like a lamb he was silent before his shearer’. (Ep. Barn. 5.1–2)71

67.  Johns, Lamb Christology, 133. 68.  Kraft, Offenbarung, 109. 69.  See Mt. 26.63; 27.14; Mk 14.64; 15.51; Jn 19.9. 70.  Aune, Revelation, 1:373. 71.  Cf. Isa. 53.5, 7.

84

The Violence of the Lamb

A number of early Christian themes come together in Barnabas: Christ’s death, sacrifice, the suffering servant, cleansing and forgiveness of sins, and a merging with lamb imagery. In early Christian thought, the mechanism by which Jesus takes away the world’s sins is by bearing them. In Isaiah 53, ‘the servant bears our sins’ (τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν φέρει; Isa. 53.4), ‘the Lord delivers him for our sins’ (κύριος παρέδνκεν αὐτὸν ταῖς ἡμων; 53.6), and ‘he bore the sins of many’ (ἁραμτίας πολλῶν ἀνήνεγκε; 53.12). These themes are reflected in early Christian reflection on Jesus’ death: he was offered ‘to bear the sins of many’ (πολλῶν ανενεγκεῖν ἁραμτίας; Heb. 9.28; cf. Mk 10.45), ‘bore our sins in his body’ (ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν αὐτὸς ἀνήνεγκεν), bringing ‘healing by his wounds’ (μώλωπι ἰάθητε; 1 Pet. 2.24). This combination of images is not explicitly found in the Apocalypse, but the death of Jesus and the shedding of his blood is what frees people from their sins (Rev. 1.5); his blood ransoms for God people from every nation (5.9). In the context of the myriad of Christian reflection on the death of Jesus, there is not much theological difference between freeing, bearing, and removing the sins of the people of God. The fact that the principal image in the Apocalypse for Christ is a slain lamb may indeed call the established link between Jesus and the suffering servant to mind. However, we should also note that the sheep/lamb is only one image of the suffering servant of Isaiah, and so this should not be pressed too strongly. In examining the main contenders for the Old Testament background for John’s image of the slain Lamb, we find that although none fit absolutely precisely, the development of early Christological lamb imagery was sufficiently strong that it is likely that merely invoking the image of Christ as a lamb would trigger a set of Christological suppositions relating to sacrifice and atonement. That the Lamb in the Apocalypse is slain encourages John’s readers to recall what they already know about Christ’s death, which included the fact he was resurrected. Although the juxtaposition of the images of the Lion of Judah and the slain Lamb appear incongruent, early Christian readers would know that, on the cross, Christ achieved the salvation of peoples from every nation, ransoming them for God. We will return to this theme in due course, but as many scholars have pointed to the surprising imagery of the lion and Lamb, others have de-emphasised the conceptual shift between the two pictures. Behold the ‘Ram’ of God It could not have escaped any reader or hearer of the Apocalypse that the Lamb described in Rev. 5.6 is no ordinary lamb. Not only is the Lamb declared to be the Lion of Judah and the Root of David who has

2. Not a Tame Lamb

85

conquered, it carries on its body symbols of power; it has seven horns and seven eyes. The horn (‫)ק ֶרן‬ ֶ is a familiar metaphor in the Hebrew Bible 72 for power, especially military might,73 or royal power.74 It is used of God, who is called the ‘horn of my salvation (‫’)ק ֶרן יִ ְׁש ִעי‬ ֶ (2 Sam. 22.3 = Ps. 18.2), or those whom God exalts,75 or casts down.76 It also can have messianic connotations: For the LORD has chosen Zion… Her priests I will clothe with salvation, and her saints will shout for joy. There I will make to sprout a horn for David (‫ק ֶרן ְל ָדוִ ד‬/κέρας ֶ τῷ Δαυίδ; Ps 131.17LXX); I have prepared a lamp for my anointed. His enemies I will clothe with shame, but upon himself his crown will shed its lustre. (Ps. 132.13, 16–18)77

In Mic. 4.13, God promises ‘the daughter of Zion’ that he will make her horn iron and hooves bronze so she can ‘grind down many nations’. This image of an iron horn and bronze hooves is given a Messianic interpretation in 1QSb 5.26: With your sceptre may you lay waste the earth. With your breath of your lips may you kill the wicked… May he make your horns of iron and your hoofs of bronze. May you gore like a bu[ll…and may you trample the nation]s like mud in the streets. For God has raised you to a sceptre for the rulers before you…all the na]tions will serve you, and he will make you strong by his holy Name, so that you will be like a li[on…]. (1QSb 5.24–29)78

Notably, several of the themes associated with horns are appropriated by Luke in the messianic words given to Zechariah: ‘Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, for he has visited and redeemed his people, and has raised up a horn of salvation (κέρας σωτηρίας) for us in the house of his servant David’ (Lk. 1.68–69).

72.  Deut. 33.17; Ps. 75.4; Lam. 2.3, 17; Ezek. 34.21; Dan. 7.7–8; Mic. 4.13; Hab. 3.4. For discussion, see Gregory K. Beale, The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 352–55. 73.  Ps. 75.4, 10; Jer. 48.25; Lam. 2.17; Dan. 7.23–27; Zech. 1.18–21. 74.  1 Sam. 2.10; Ps. 148.14; Jer. 48.25; Zech. 1.18; Dan. 8.20. 75.  1 Sam. 2.1, 10; 1 Chr. 25.5; Pss. 75.10; 89.17, 24; 92.10; 112.9; 148.14; Lam. 2.17; Sir. 47.5. 76.  Job 16.15; Ps. 75.10. 77.  See also 1 Sam. 2.10; Ezek. 29.21; 1 En. 90.9. 78.  All DSS quotations are from Florentino G. Martínez and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar (eds.), The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition (2 vols.; Leiden: Brill, 1999).

86

The Violence of the Lamb

Similarly, ‘the seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent into all the earth’ (Rev. 5.6c), continue the theme of power.79 Caird is in no doubt that John ‘invests Christ with the attributes of deity’.80 Throughout the Old Testament the eyes of God represent omniscience (2 Chr. 16.9; Pss. 34.15; 139.16; Prov. 15.3; Sir. 17.15, 19; 23.19; 39.19).81 The image, like much of Revelation 4–5, is influenced by Zechariah 4, in which seven lamps (Zech. 4.2; cf. Rev. 1.14) are the ‘seven…eyes of the Lord, which run to and fro through the whole earth’ (Zech. 4.10). John has already introduced the seven spirits (Rev. 1.4; 3.1; 4.5). In Rev. 4.5, they are represented by the lampstands, but in 5.6, they are the eyes on the Lamb, a conflation that could also be explained by Zech. 4.6, where an angel identifies the lampstands with: ‘the word of the LORD to Zerubbabel: Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit says the LORD of hosts’.82 Though the Lamb might be slain, its horns and its eyes make clear that, for John, this is no tame lamb! Indeed, such is the power conveyed in this image that Beale suggests that the Lamb is ‘a substitute image for the Son of Man in Dan. 7.13’.83 However, despite the eyes and the horns suggesting omniscience or even omnipotence, others are drawn back to the slain-ness of the Lamb as the controlling image. Even while attributing omnipotence to the Lamb, Caird claims that John, redefines omnipotence. Omnipotence is not to be understood as the power of unlimited coercion, but as the power of infinite persuasion, the invincible power of self-negating, self-sacrificing love.84

For now, we simply note that it is a stretch of the imagination to describe some of the activities of the Lamb as persuasive love rather than unlimited coercion! Moreover, not only is the Lamb near the throne in heaven in the midst of power, the slain Lamb does what slain lambs do not normally do; it is standing (ἑστεκός). To be sure, the slain-ness of the Lamb is emphasised in this short scene; in two short hymns, the 24 elders draw attention to the 79.  Beale (Revelation, 355) takes the seven spirits to be a reference to the Holy Spirit. 80.  Caird, Revelation, 75. 81.  Aune, Revelation, 1:354. 82.  For discussion, see Garrick V. Allen, ‘Reusing Scripture in the Book of Revelation: Techniques of Reuse and Habits of Reading’, in Allen, Paul, and Wood­ man (eds.), Book of Revelation, 1–17. 83.  Beale, Revelation, 354. 84.  Caird, Revelation, 75.

2. Not a Tame Lamb

87

fact the Lamb had been slain (Rev. 5.9–10, 12). However, the Lamb is worthy to take the scroll precisely because of his death. Whatever presuppositions modern readers have about the non-aggressive state of lambs, in the narrative world of the Apocalypse, having been slain is no impediment to receiving ‘power and wealth, and wisdom, and might, and honour, and glory, and blessing’ (5.12). While a range of scholars see in the image of the slain Lamb a symbol of vulnerability, this is not a view shared by the heavenly elders! The manifestation of power redolent in the image of the Lamb has led some commentators to seek out Jewish traditions where lambs exercise power, authority, and judgement that might provide an antecedent for John’s powerful Lamb. First, some commentators have argued that ‘ram’ is a more appropriate translation that captures better the power exercised by the figure.85 The rather obvious point that rams have horns, whereas lambs do not, is perhaps less strong when it is considered that this particular lamb not only has seven horns but also seven eyes. Nonetheless, as Aune notes, many commentators are influenced by the sacrificial backdrop to the image in their choice of lamb over ram. However, there is ample evidence for the sacrificial use of rams in the Hebrew Bible. Rams were used for sin offerings (e.g. Lev. 5.14; 6.6), to mark festivals (e.g. Lev. 23.18), forming the covenant (Gen. 15.9), and in the consecration of priests (Exod. 29): so Aune is correct that ‘there is no reason that the sacrificial associations cannot be retained while using the translation “ram” ’.86 Moreover, in the iconic Aqeda narrative (Gen. 22), lamb and ram are used interchangeably as the appropriate subject of sacrifice. When Abraham agrees to God’s command to sacrifice Isaac, on the way Isaac asked his father, ‘The fire and the wood are here, but where is the lamb (‫)ׂשה‬ ֶ for a burnt-offering?’ Abraham replied ‘God himself will provide the lamb (‫)ׂשה‬ ֶ for a burnt-offering’ (Gen. 22.7–8). But it is only when Abraham had bound Isaac, laid him on the wood upon the altar, and had taken the knife, that God intervenes:

85.  Josephine M. Ford, Revelation (AB, 38: Garden City: Doubleday, 1975), 86; Charles, Revelation, 1:141. 86.  Aune, Revelation, 1:323. While Aune ultimately opts for ‘Lamb’ here, he does in fact render ἀρνίον as ‘ram’ in 13.11, where the other beast rose out of the earth and ‘had two horns like a lamb’ (εἶχεν κέρατα δύο ὅμοια ἀρνίῳ). He explains, ‘it must be translated “ram” since lambs do not have horns…referring to an adult male’ (Revelation 6–16, 719).

88

The Violence of the Lamb ‘Do not lay your hand on the boy…for now I know that your fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me’. And Abraham looked up and saw a ram (‫)איִ ל‬ ַ caught in a thicket by its horns. Abraham went and took the ram (‫)איִ ל‬ ַ and offered it up as a burnt-offering instead of his son. So Abraham called that place ‘The LORD will provide’. (Gen. 22.12–14)

The Aqeda is also a potential source for John’s slain lamb image. We note that the eventual sacrifice is a ram, which is provided precisely in the place in which the narrative suggests a lamb would be offered. Therefore, the distinction between a lamb and a ram should not be over-pressed. Similarly, κρίον and ἀρνίον are used in parallel in Ps. 113.4, 6LXX (MT 114.4, 6): The mountains skipped like rams (‫א ִילם‬/κριοί) ֵ The hills like lambs (‫בנֵ י־צֹאן‬/ἀρνία ְ προβάτων). Why is it…O mountains, that you skip like rams (‫א ִילם‬/κριοί)? ֵ O hills, like lambs (‫בנֵ י־צֹאן‬/άρνία ְ προβάτων)?

Malina interprets the lamb/ram imagery through the lens of ancient understandings of astrology.87 John as an ‘astral prophet’ would expect his hearers to immediately associate the Lamb in the heavenly throne room as the ‘well-known celestial Lamb, the constellation of Aries’.88 Both Greek and Latin names of the constellation mean ‘ram’ (Aries cf. ἄρης/κρίον). The constellation is a ram with a twisted head, looking back towards Taurus, which Malina argues could easily imply a ram with its neck broken, yet still standing despite having been slain.89 In Jewish zodiacs the constellation is also known as the ram (Taleh),90 and given Aries is the first sign of the zodiac, it is the head symbol standing in mid-heaven (μεσουράνημα). If John is drawing on astral imagery, it would help explain the ram-like qualities of John’s Lamb.91 Moreover, Malina argues Daniel’s vision of the battle between the ram and the goat (Dan. 8) can be interpreted through an astrological lens. Daniel interprets the two-horned ram as the kings of Media and Persia (Dan. 8.20) and the goat as Greece (8.21). Malina claims this maps onto early ‘zodiacal geography’ in which Persia is represented by Aries and the 87.  Bruce J. Malina, On the Genre and Message of Revelation: Star Visions and Sky Journeys (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995), 76–79, 101–4. 88.  Malina, Genre, 78–79. 89.  Malina, Genre, 79. 90.  See Epiphanius, Panarion 16.2.1; Malina, Genre, 101. 91.  Malina, Genre, 102

2. Not a Tame Lamb

89

Seleucid empire by Capricorn.92 At the very least, this may represent some continuing Jewish interest in astrology. It is not clear how much astrological lore would have been readily understood by John’s readers, and in any case, as Malina himself notes, such zodiacal geography was unstable in the first century.93 Nonetheless, the link with the ram of Daniel 8, and other instances of warring leaders, or eschatological rams/lambs have been advanced as alternative understandings of John’s vision that take seriously the more violent aspects of the Lamb’s activity. Opinion is divided whether or not such a warrior lamb can be found in first-century Jewish apocalyptic expectation. So while van der Horst judges it ‘very likely that…Jewish apocalyptic imagery forms the prototype of many lamb passages in Revelation’,94 Johns concludes, ‘there is no evidence…to establish the existence of anything like a recognizable redeemer-lamb figure in the apocalyptic traditions of early Judaism’.95 However, there are certainly a number of texts that could point in this direction. The clearest example of a warring eschatological lamb is found in Testament of Joseph 19, but it certainly has been affected by Christian interpolation, and is otherwise textually problematic. Joseph’s vision contains animal morphing, so twelve stags become twelve lambs (Test. Jos. 19.1–5). There are twelve bulls nursing from a single cow, who creates a ‘sea of milk’ from which innumerable herds drink. The fourth bull sprouts horns, which ascend to heaven, and another horn sprouts between them (19.6–7). The fourth bull is of course Judah. So far then, in a text preserved only in Armenian, there are several tangential links with the Apocalypse. From Test. Jos. 19.8 there are Greek and Armenian recensions, though with some textual variation: 92.  Malina, Genre, 103. 93.  Malina, Genre, 103. 94.  Pieter W. van der Horst, ‘Lamb’, in Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst (eds.), Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible (2nd ed.; Leiden: Brill, 1999), 502–4. Earlier commentators are generally the main advocates of this position, especially Friedrich Spitta, Streitfragen zur Geschichte Jesu (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1907), 172–223; Charles, Revelation, 1:141; Dodd, Interpreting, 231–32. However, among more recent scholars holding at least a modified version of this position are: Ernst Lohmeyer, Die Offenbarung des Johannes (HNT 16; Tübingen: Mohr, 1970), 51–55; Brown, John, 58–60; Ford, Revelation, 86–95; Charles H. Talbert, The Apocalypse: A Reading of The Revelation of John (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1994), 29; and Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 145. 95.  Johns, Lamb Christology, 106.

90

The Violence of the Lamb And I saw that a virgin was born from Judah, wearing a linen stole; and from her was a spotless lamb (ἀμνὸς ἄμωμος). At his left there was something like a lion, and all the wild animals (τὰ θηρία) rushed against him, but the lamb (ὁ ἀμνός) conquered (ἐκίκησεν) them, and destroyed them, trampling them underfoot. (Test. Jos. 19.8)96

As the text stands, the lamb who conquers the beasts (τὰ θηρία) mirrors the activity of the Lamb in Revelation. That a lion appears beside it makes the connection even more irresistible. While a Christian hand is certainly detectable here, it has been argued that an earlier tradition can be reconstructed,97 which reveals a pre-Christian apocalyptic lamb tradition, referring to Judas Maccabeus. However, in the section following, the Christian hand is extensive: You, therefore, my children, keep the Lord’s commandments; honour Levi and Judah, because from their seed will arise the Lamb of God who will take away the sin of the world, and will save all the nations, as well as Israel. For his kingdom is an everlasting kingdom which will not pass away. But my kingdom will come to an end among you, like a guard in an orchard who disappears at the end of the summer. (Test. Jos. 19.11–12)

For Dodd, the antecedent of Revelation’s Lamb is found in the apocalyptic symbolism of the Armenian version of the Testament of Joseph. While it must be admitted that to draw many conclusions from the Greek version is unsafe, it is noteworthy that the battle involving wild animals against a lamb who nonetheless conquers them is preserved in the Armenian, which does not repeat the more gratuitous interpolations found in the Greek text: And I saw in the midst of the horns a certain virgin wearing a multicolored stole; from her came forth a lamb. Rushing from the left were all sorts of wild animals and reptiles, and the lamb conquered them. Because of him the bull rejoiced and the cow and the stags were also glad with them. These things must take place in their appropriate time. And you, my children, honor Levi and Judah, because from them shall arise the salvation of Israel. For my kingdom shall have an end among you, like an orchard guard who disappears after the summer. (Test. Jos. 19.8–12, Armenian)98 96.  Trans. Howard C. Kee, OTP 1:775–828. 97.  See John C. O’Neill, ‘The Lamb of God in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs’, JSNT 2 (1979): 2–30; B. Murmelstein, ‘Das Lamm in Test. Jos. 19.8’, ZNW 58 (1967): 273–39. 98.  Klaus Koch (‘Das Lamm, das Agypten vernichtet: Ein Fragment aus Jannes und Jambres und sein Geschichtlicher Hintergrund’, ZNW 57 [1966]: 79–93) concludes that the Armenian recension is free from Christian interpolation. In contrast,

2. Not a Tame Lamb

91

It should be noted that in the Christian reworking of this text, like Revelation, there is no evidence of discomfort in fusing the ‘militant and conquering Messiah’ imagery with ‘the lamb of sacrifice’.99 The likelihood that John is not inventing a militant lamb de novo100 is strengthened by the presentation of both David and Judas Maccabeus as lambs in the so-called Animal Apocalypse (1 En. 85–90). Israel’s history is recounted, but the actors are represented by animals. Israel is in the main represented by sheep, so God on numerous occasions is presented as ‘the Lord of the sheep’ (ὁ κύριος τῶν προβάτων).101 When the narrative reaches the period of the monarchy, Saul is represented as a ram (κριός), who takes on with success the enemy nations who had been oppressing Israel: ‘And that ram began to butt on either side those dogs, foxes, and wild boars till he had destroyed them’ (1 En. 89.43). When Saul went astray, ‘The Lord of the sheep (ὁ κύριος τῶν προβάτων) sent the lamb (ἄρνα; Samuel) to another lamb (ἄρνα; David)…and raised it to being a ram (κριόν), and made it the prince and leader of the sheep (ἄρχοντα καί εἰς ἡγούμενον τὼν προβάτων)’ (1 En. 89.45–46). Granted, while David is initially called a lamb (ἄρνα), in his warring role, like Saul, he is transformed into a ram (κριόν). However, when the Animal Apocalypse comes to its own period, at the time of the Maccabean revolt,102 Judas Maccabeus is portrayed as a horned lamb: But behold lambs were borne by those white sheep, and they began to open their eyes and to see, and to cry to the sheep… And I saw in the vision how the ravens flew upon those lambs, and took one of those lambs, and dashed the sheep in pieces and devoured them. And I saw till horns grew upon those lambs, and the ravens cast down their horns; and I saw till there sprouted a great horn on one of those sheep, and their eyes were opened… And the ravens fought and battled with it and sought to lay low its horn, but they had no power over it… And I saw till a great sword was given to the sheep, and the sheep proceeded against all the beasts of the field to slay them, and all the birds of the heaven fled before their face. (1 En. 90.6, 8–9, 12, 19)

Johns (Lamb Christology, 87) agrees the Armenian version is closer to the original ‘while clearly containing Christian interpolations’. However, he does not say which elements are Christian. 99.  Dodd, Interpretation, 232. 100.  Against Laws, Light of the Lamb, 27. 101.  1 Enoch 89.16, 22, 26, 28, 29, 30, 33, 36, 42, 45, 50, 51, 52, 54, 57, 70, 71, 75, 76; 90.19, 20, 28, 33, 38. 102.  For discussion on the compositional history and date of 1 Enoch, see E. Isaac, OTP 1:6–7.

92

The Violence of the Lamb

The scene is set in the Maccabean crisis. The ravens (the Seleucids) are persecuting the sheep (Israel), but the Maccabees, the horned lambs, enjoy varied success until the one lamb grows a great horn (Judas Maccabaeus). Dodd judges that ‘it is clear that we have here a prototype of the militant seven-horned “Lamb” of the Apocalypse of John’.103 However, the evidence to conclude that a militant Lamb was a standard image of the Jewish eschatological Messiah is still rather scant. That said, it is obviously not completely incongruous for the Jewish apocalyptic imagination to envisage the warrior kings or leaders in ovine terms. To draw too sharp a distinction between lambs and rams is to insist on a purity of image that is, as we have seen, unsustainable. In Jewish apocalyptic literature, lambs can grow powerful horns and conquer, and sheep can take possession of swords and slay their enemies. The claim that lambs always signify vulnerability in this period is unsustainable. Johns goes well beyond the evidence when he insists, ‘ “Lamb” was not used for or even considered appropriate as a symbol for a ruler or a powerful leader—whether eschatological or otherwise’.104 The Lion/Lamb: Beyond Incongruity Having reviewed possible antecedents in Jewish tradition, what can we now say about the so-called incongruity of the two images of the Lion and the Lamb? In the main, commentators who emphasise the inconsistency contrast the natural characteristics of lions and lambs. Lions are powerful and predatory, while lambs are vulnerable and the usual victims of predatory animals. Jewish sacrificial tradition is useful to make this contrast explicit, while taking account of the expiatory effects of the Lamb’s death in the Apocalypse. However, those who argue John is employing a pre-existing prototype of a Jewish eschatological trope of a warring and victorious lamb, see less disjuncture between the Messianic image of the Lion of Judah and the Lamb who has conquered. Proponents of the vulnerable lamb ideology have to explain its conquering might. Not only does it conquer, in the rest of the Apocalypse he undertakes activities that might be more appropriate to the lion image. It shares the Day of Wrath with God (Rev. 6.12–17), supervises the torment of the wicked (14.10), and conquers an army in war (17.14). This leads Blount to suggest a reinterpretation not of the lion through the lens

103.  Dodd, Interpretation, 232. 104.  Johns, Lamb Christology, 97.

2. Not a Tame Lamb

93

of the lamb, but the other way around: ‘Whenever hearers/readers see the Lamb in the remainder of the narrative, the staging of this character profile in chapter 5 suggests that they hear the footsteps of a lurking lion’.105 Osborne understands the images as cascading transformation: It is impossible to overstate the magnificent transformation in 5.5–6: the lion is transformed into a lamb that becomes a slain paschal lamb that is again transformed into a conquering ram (the seven horns)! There is even a certain chiasm: lion–lamb–slain lamb–conquering ram.106

Osborne therefore sees in these two verses not one image, but four. However, this does not do justice to John’s polyvalent image. Nonetheless, those who see little distinction on the grounds that the Lamb is a Jewish eschatological victor must take account of the fact that it is a slain Lamb. Both Johns and Schimanowski, who are each representative of the two main viewpoints, reach their diametrically opposite conclusions by the same means: they both situate the image of the slain Lamb in the past. For Schimanowski, the slain-ness of the Lamb is long over;107 while for Johns, the Lamb’s conquest was in the past in his slaughtered state: Essential to a proper understanding of the book’s rhetoric is the recognition that the lamb has triumphed in his death and resurrection, not that the lamb will triumph in the future, subsequent to his death and resurrection. A close reading of the text supports this important distinction.108

It is certainly the case that the death of the Lamb is a crucial factor in his triumph; it is because of his death that he is worthy to receive power and honour. As Klassen argues, the Lamb ‘is no weakling’ but ‘the strongest weapon he has appears to be his own authority which he has won through suffering’.109 Nonetheless, John’s readers also know that this slain Lamb was not only killed but resurrected. Those who stress the sacrificial lamb-like qualities in contrast or even opposition to the more traditional messianism of the lion underplay the Easter event. It is perhaps because Johns and others ultimately promote the Lamb as a figure of non-violent resistance to evil that ‘seems to communicate 105.  Blount, Revelation, 117. 106.  Osborne, Revelation, 255. 107.  Schimanowski, Himmlische Liturgie, 213. 108.  Johns, Lamb Christology, 161. 109.  Klassen, ‘Vengeance’, 305.

94

The Violence of the Lamb

something of defenceless vulnerability in the face of a violent power’,110 that he unnecessarily divorces Christ’s death from his subsequent resurrection and glorification. The scholarly tendency to emphasise the lion or the lamb at the expense of the other has led to an unhelpful impasse in attempts to interpret the slain Lamb. Even scholars who play down the contrast still nonetheless overemphasise the warring messianic image at the expense of the slainness of the Lamb. These strategies rest on the assumption that the ‘images’ of the Lion and the Lamb represent an interpretative puzzle that requires explaining. Even the way in which commentators narrate the scene betray their sense that the image represents a conundrum. So Koester describing the contents of the tableau writes, ‘John turns to see the lion but finds “a Lamb, standing as one who had been slain” (5.6)’.111 Of course, the text does not actually say John turned, only that John saw the Lamb. While it is undoubtedly true that there exists in the Apocalypse a rhetorical strategy of hearing and seeing, it is worth noting that in ch. 5, unlike the other instances when this device is deployed (cf. Rev. 1.10, 12; 7.4, 9), there is no verb for hearing.112 The elder merely urges John to look at the one who has conquered, and John sees the Lamb: And I wept much that no one was found worthy to open the scroll or to look into it. Then one of the elders said to me, ‘Weep not; see (ἰδού), the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that he can open the scroll and its seven seals’. And I saw (καὶ εἰδον) between the throne and the four living creatures and among the elders a Lamb standing, as though it had been slain, with seven horns and with seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent into all the earth. (Rev. 5.4–7)

Commentators largely ignore three factors when they see in the images of the lion and lamb a conundrum to be solved. First, the lion is only one of two metaphors used to describe the messianic qualities of the figure worthy to open the scrolls. Why does no one wonder why John might have been surprised to see a lamb because he expected to see a tree representing the Root of David? The Lamb is the primary image and title for Christ in the Apocalypse, and as we have already noted, John is not the first Christian writer to employ this image for Jesus. It seems 110.  Johns, Lamb Christology, 147. 111.  Koester, Revelation, 385. 112.  Among those who see in Rev. 5.5–6 the pattern of hearing one thing and seeing another are Smalley, Revelation, 131; Sweet, Revelation, 125; Resseguie, Revelation, 34.

2. Not a Tame Lamb

95

to me that commentators have needlessly connected and contrasted the fact that John happens to use an animal metaphor for the Messiah, in addition to a readily recognisable image for Christ. This leads to the second blind-spot in commentators’ readings of Rev. 5.5–6. The tableau says far more of Christ than he is a lion and a lamb. If for now we accept the diptych of Lion/Lamb, then on the first side two things are noted: the figure is the Lion from the tribe of Judah, and the root of David. Both images create the expectation of the powerful Jewish Messiah. On the other side of the diptych is the slain Lamb. However, this Lamb has four narrated characteristics: he is slain; he is standing; he has seven eyes; he has seven horns. We have noted already that the eyes and the horns are like the Lion, and the Root symbolic of royal messianic power. To be sure, if one reads no further than ‘slain’, there may appear to be some discontinuity between the two sides of the image.113 Indeed, in Ps. 132.17, the two sides of the picture are already linked: ‘There I will cause a horn to sprout for David; I have prepared a lamp for my anointed one’. The Lion of Judah, the Root of David, and what is clearly no tame lamb, are all connected in their royal Davidic eschatological messianism. No one could picture this Lamb and see nothing but than a weak, vulnerable lamb. Power is already built into the image before the narrative restarts. Thirdly, much puzzlement dissipates when one takes full account of the strong probability that John’s readers are conversant with the Christian proclamation. Christians believed that Jesus was the Messiah, the son of God, and they also knew that he had been crucified. A slain figure who had nonetheless conquered would hardly raise an eyebrow in early Christian communities. As Hurtado rightly notes: In Rev. 5 the Lamb is described as already slain and victorious, and hence able to open the sealed book of eschatological triumph. That is, Rev. 5 does not describe the Gospel events but presupposes them as having already happened.114

Christians knew that Jesus had been crucified, yet already acknowledged him as Messiah. They believed he had conquered through his death and resurrection. While it is the slain-ness of the Lamb that has caused commentators to temper, reinterpret, or even obliterate the clear allusions 113.  Moyise (‘Does the Lion?’, 181) does in fact cite Rev. 5.5–6 only as far as ‘slaughtered’. 114.  Larry W. Hurtado, ‘Revelation 4–5 in the Light of Jewish Apocalyptic Analogies’, JSNT 25 (1985): 105–24 (117).

96

The Violence of the Lamb

to power in the Lamb/Lion diptych, in the next chapter, I will argue that being slain in no way detracts from the high and powerful Christology of the Apocalypse. We now turn, therefore, to a consideration of John’s Christology where I will demonstrate that Jesus functions as a protomartyr, and that death is not vulnerability, but victory. The slain Lamb is in John’s Christological landscape an entirely unsurprising snapshot of victorious and conquering might.

Chapter 3 T h e L a m b a s P r oto - M arty r

The Revelation of Jesus Christ (Revelation 1–8) From the outset, Jesus Christ is centre stage of the Apocalypse. It is ‘a revelation of Jesus Christ’ (Ἀποκάλυψις Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ; Rev. 1.1).1 This is the revelation Jesus received from God to show his servants what must take place soon. For John, Jesus is the agent of God’s revelation. There is a striking parallel in the Fourth Gospel, in which Jesus also makes known to his disciples what God told him: ‘all that I have heard from my Father I have made known to you’ (Jn 15.15).2 In the Christological schema of the Fourth Gospel, the human Jesus3 is the sole agent of God’s revelation, replacing the role of angels in much Jewish apocalyptic tradition.4 A similar idea is found in the ‘Johannine’ Q saying (Mt. 11.27//Lk. 10.22),5 in which Jesus is the direct unmediated recipient of all things from his 1.  Although Jesus is certainly the focus of several visions (Rev. 1.9–20; 5.1–14; 19.11–16), the opening words most likely constitute a subjective rather than an objective genitive; it is a revelation from rather than about Jesus. This position is taken by, among many others, Koester, Revelation, 211; Aune, Revelation, 1:6; Smalley, Revelation, 27. 2.  See also Jn 8.28; 12.49–50; 14.10; 17.14. As well as passing on teaching that Jesus has heard from God in the Fourth Gospel, Jesus also manifests God (1.18; 14.7, 9). There is even a negative parallel with Rev. 1.1: Jesus no longer calls his disciples servants (δοῦλοι) in John, while in the Apocalypse, Christ shows what God has given to him to his servants (δοῦλοι). 3.  But see Ernst Käsemann’s claim (The Testament of Jesus: A Study of the Gospel of John in the Light of Chapter 17 [trans. Gerhard Krodel; London: SCM, 1968], 8–9), that in the Fourth Gospel Jesus is hardly human, but ‘God going about on earth’. For a response that reflects the current consensus, see Marianne M. Thompson, The Humanity of Jesus in the Fourth Gospel (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1988). 4.  For example: Ezek. 40.3–4; Zech. 1.7–6.15; Dan. 7.16; 8.15–26; 9.22–27; 10.18–12.4; 1 En. 1.2; 21.5; 22.3; 2 Bar. 55.3; 4 Ezra 4.1–5; 31–32. The idea that the law was delivered by angels is also found in the New Testament (Acts 7.53; Gal. 3.19). 5.  The saying is a ‘thunderbolt from the Johannine sky’ according to the famous saying attributed to Karl von Hase, Geschichte Jesu: nach akademischen Vorlesungen

98

The Violence of the Lamb

Father, and only those to whom Jesus chooses to reveal God can know him.6 Of course, in the synoptic traditions angels do continue to play a mediating role,7 and the Son shares their ignorance concerning the end (Mk. 13.32). There are several points of departure between the Christology of the Gospel tradition and the Apocalypse. Jesus’ intermediary role is further elevated in Revelation as his identification with God is enhanced. This is possible because although in the Gospels it is the earthly Jesus who is the messenger of God’s revelation, in the Apocalypse, the risen Christ is the revealer. While the Jewish mediator tradition was almost certainly the current on which exalted Christological claims were initially propelled and carried, Christians were careful to distinguish between angelic mediators and Christ, the unique Son of God. In Heb. 1.1–5, the author addresses this question directly: In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom he also created the world. He reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature, upholding the universe by his word of power. When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has obtained is more excellent than theirs. For to what angel did God ever say, ‘You are my Son, today I have begotten you’?

The author develops the Jewish tradition in which Wisdom is given a role in creation (Prov. 8.22–31; Sir. 24.1–12; Wis. 8.3–6), and reflects God’s character: ‘For she [Wisdom] is a reflection of eternal light, a spotless mirror of the working of God, and an image of his goodness’ (Wis. 7.26). In Christian theology, Jesus took over Wisdom’s role as the agent of creation (1 Cor. 8.6; Jn 1.3, 10) who reflects the glory of God (Col. 1.16). (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1876), 422. Davies and Allison (Matthew, 2:282 n. 218) instead suggest this saying was a ‘vital seed from which Johannine theology sprouted’. 6.  Davies and Allison (Matthew, 2:278–87) see the roots of this saying in Exod. 32.12–13, where God knows Moses, and Moses prays to know God. Moses is also said to have known God ‘face to face’ in Deut. 34.10. 7.  In Mark, outside an apocalyptic context, angels only interact with Jesus (Mk 1.13). In Matthew, angels communicate with Joseph (Mt. 1.20; 2.13, 19), the women at the tomb (Mt. 28.5; cf. Mk 16.5–7), and Jesus (Mt. 4.11). Luke has angels engage with Zechariah (Lk. 1.11–19), Mary (1.26–38), shepherds (2.9–15), and the women at the tomb (24.23; cf. 24.4). The verse in which an angel comforts Jesus in Gethsemane (22.43) is an interpolation.

3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr

99

Hebrews goes further. While Christ ‘bears the very stamp of his [God’s] nature (χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως)’, he is not merely the passive word through which God created (cf. Gen. 1.3, 6, 9, 11, 14; Ps. 33.6; Wis. 9.1; Sir. 42.15); Christ ‘upholds all things by his [i.e. Christ’s] word of power’ (φέρων τε τὰ πάντα τῷ ῥήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ; Heb. 1.3). Therefore, for the author of the Epistles to the Hebrews, Christ is not simply one mediator among many, but the uniquely exalted Son of God. Jesus enjoys a name and status far greater than any of the angels, and sits at the right hand of God (cf. Ps. 110.1/109.1LXX), an image found throughout the New Testament (Mt. 22.44; 26.24; Mk 12.36; 14.62; Lk. 20.42; 22.69; Acts 2.34; Rom. 8.34; 1 Cor. 15.25; Eph. 1.20; Col. 3.1). Significantly, it is his crucifixion that is the reason for Jesus’ exalted status. After purifying sins through his death, Christ takes his place in glory. The same idea is found later when Jesus ‘was made a little lower than the angels’, that is, became human (Heb. 2.9a; cf. Heb. 2.7 = Ps. 8.5), but then was ‘crowned with glory and honour because of the suffering of death (διὰ τὸ πάθημα τοῦ θανἀτου), so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone’ (Heb. 2.9). That said, it is not grammatically impossible to argue that it was the suffering death that caused Jesus’ temporarily lowered status rather than his exaltation. So Johnson, who supports this position,8 argues that merely the fact of becoming human would not lower Jesus’ status, since he would always remain the Son who sustains the world. However, several factors suggest this is the less secure exegetical reading. The author essentially employs Ps. 8.5–7 as the model for his Christological formulation, so what the psalmist says about humanity in general is applied specifically to Christ. Heb. 2.6–7 = Ps. 8.5–7 LXX What is man that you are mindful of him, or the son of man that you care for him? You made him for a little while lower than the angels (ἠλάττωσας αὐτὸν βραχύ τι παρ’ ἀγγέλους), You crowned him with glory and honour (δόχᾳ καὶ τιμῇ ἐστεφάνωσας αὐτόν) putting everything in subjection under his feet.

8.  Johnson, Hebrews, 91.

Heb. 2.9 But we see Jesus, who for a little while was made lower than the angels (τὸν δὲ βραχύ τι παρ’ ἀγγέλους ἠλαττωμένον) crowned with glory and honour (δόχᾳ καὶ τιμῇ ἐστεφανωμένον) because of the suffering of death.

100

The Violence of the Lamb

Humanity is made a little lower than the angels, and so when Christ enters into the human state, he then shares this position relative to the angels. The parallel with the opening verses, where Christ is present in creation, purifies sin, and then takes his position next to God, also suggest that the ‘little while’ in which he was lower than the angels refers to the years as a human being rather than the few hours spent specifically on the cross. Moreover, this position is not unknown in early Christianity, and is found in Paul’s famous Philippian hymn, a tradition which probably predates Paul.9 As in the thought world of Hebrews, Jesus enjoys the form of God, but empties himself, appearing in the likeness of humanity. After obediently dying on a cross (Phil. 2.6–8), God highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Phil. 2.9–11)

Both Paul and the author of Hebrews elevate Christ above the angels. All heavenly entities worship Christ in the Philippian hymn. In Hebrews, as well as clearly differentiating the relative status of Christ and angels, the author suggests angels offer worship to the Son by citing a saying, the precise origin of which is unclear: ‘when he brings the firstborn into the world, he [God] says “Let all God’s angels worship him (προσκυνησάτωσαν αὐτῷ πάντες ἄγγελοι θεοῦ)” ’ (Heb. 1.6).10 This hierarchy is reinforced in the Apocalypse. While Jesus Christ receives a revelation from God, he then makes it known by sending (ἀποστείλας) his angel (τοῦ ἀγγέλου αὐτοῦ) to John (Rev. 1.1). While it is just about possible αὐτοῦ refers to God’s angel, any doubt is removed at the end of the Apocalypse, where Christ says, ‘I, Jesus, have sent my angel to you (Ἐγὼ Ἰησοῦς ἔπεμψα τὸν ἄγγελόν μου) with this testimony for the churches’ (22.16). In Revelation’s scheme, Jesus commands angels to carry his message, reinforcing the clear distinction between the status of Christ and that of angels.

9.  Gerald F. Hawthorne (Philippians [WBC, 43; Waco: Word, 1987], 76) says practically the only aspect of Phil. 2.6–11 that finds near universal agreement is that at least part of it is a hymn of the earliest church. 10.  The author may be thinking of Deut. 32.43LXX: προσκυνησάτωσαν αὐτῷ πάντες υἱοὶ θεοῦ (‘Let all the sons of God worship him’); or Ps. 96.7LXX: προσκυνήσατε αὐτῷ πάντες οἱ ἄγγελοι αὐτοῦ (‘Worship him, all his angels’).

3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr

101

Even in the developing Jewish tradition of exalted intermediary agents, a clear separation is made between those agents and God. However, in early Christianity this distinction begins to break down. On a number of occasions in the New Testament, the worship of improper recipients is rejected (e.g. Acts 10.25–26; 14.15). In Revelation, an angel twice (Rev. 19.10; 22.9) rejects John’s worship (προσκυνέω), instead directing John to ‘worship God’ (τῷ θεῷ προσκύνησαν/τῷ θεῷ προσκύνησον). However, in Revelation, Jesus is not only placed in a different celestial order from the angels, he is also a legitimate recipient of worship alongside God (5.8–13). Clearly, ‘the monotheistic prohibition of the worship of angels does not prohibit the worship of Jesus’.11 The rationale given by the angel for refusing John’s worship is that he is a fellow-servant (σύνδουλος) of John and of the other Christians (19.10; 22.9) ‘who hold the testimony of Jesus’ (τῶν ἐχόντων τὴν μαρτυρίαν Ἰησοῦ; 19.10) and ‘keep the words in this book’ (τῶν τηρούντων τοὺς λόγους τοῦ βιβλίου τούτου; 22.9). Therefore, as John is a servant (δοῦλος) of Jesus (1.1) to whom the revelation is given, the angel sent by Jesus with the message (1.1; 22.16) shares the same status. On the other hand, in Revelation, the angel is said to have been sent not only by Jesus (1.1; 22.16), but also God: ‘The Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, has sent his angel to show his servants what must soon take place’ (22.6; cf. 1.1). Therefore, in the cosmic hierarchy of the Apocalypse, God and Jesus are clearly distinguished in type from angels and humans in the opening verse. The Testimony of Jesus (Revelation 1.2) This distinction continues in the second verse: John ‘bore witness to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ’ (ἐμαρτύρησεν τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τὴν μαρτυρίαν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ; Rev. 1.2). The two phrases appear together several times in the Apocalypse: John is on Patmos ‘on account of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus’ (διὰ τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τὴν μαρτυρίαν Ἰησοῦ; 1.9); and the souls of those beheaded for ‘the testimony of Jesus and the word of God’ (διὰ τὴν μαρτυρίαν Ἰησοῦ καὶ διὰ τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ) sit on thrones (20.4). These two closely related concepts are found in the scene where John sees the souls under the altar who had been slain ‘for the word of God and the witness which they held’ (διὰ τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ διὰ τὴν μαρτυρίαν ἣν εἶχον; 6.9), and when the dragon makes war on ‘those who keep the commandments of God and hold the testimony of Jesus’ (τῶν τηρούντων τὰς ἐντολὰς τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ

11.  Bauckham, Climax, 135.

102

The Violence of the Lamb

ἐχόντων τὴν μαρτυρίαν Ἰησοῦ; 12.17). Finally, both phrases morph slightly in Rev. 14.12, where there is a call for the endurance of the saints (ἅγιοι), who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus (οἱ τηροῦντες τὰς ἐντολὰς τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ πίστιν Ἰησοῦ). The plural term ‘words of God’ (οἱ λόγοι…τοῦ θεοῦ) appears in close proximity to the testimony of Jesus in Rev. 19.9–10, and without reference to Jesus at Rev. 17.17. However, in both cases, the referent appears to be a specific section of the immediately preceding text, rather than a more general term for the gospel, which is probably reflected in the other uses.12 This leaves only one occasion in Revelation where ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ is not found paired with ἡ μαρτυρία Ἱησοῦ or a closely related phrase, but is nonetheless explicitly linked with Christ: Then I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse! He who sat upon it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war. His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems; and he has a name inscribed which no one knows but himself. He is clad in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God (ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ). (Rev. 19.11–13)

The connection, then, between the word of God and the testimony of Jesus, or the figure of Jesus, is pronounced. God and Jesus are the source of revelation; humans and angels bear witness to it. There remains the question of the precise relationship between the ‘word of God’ and ‘testimony of Jesus’ in the Apocalypse. Most commentators take the second phrase to be epexegetical, that is, clarifying the meaning of the ‘word of God’.13 Nonetheless, it is not clear precisely what constitutes ‘the testimony of Jesus’. It can be read either as a subjective genitive (‘the testimony borne by Jesus’)14 or an objective genitive (‘the testimony about Jesus’).15 If it is read as ‘the testimony given by Jesus’ then it may refer to the witness the earthly Jesus gave to the word of God.16 However, such a restrictive meaning is less likely 12.  However, Aune (Revelation, 3:1058) suggests the plural form also represents the Gospel. 13.  See Aune, Revelation, 1:19. 14.  Alison A. Trites, The New Testament Concept of Witness (SNTSMS, 31; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977), 156–58; Boudewijn Dehandschutter, ‘The Meaning of Witness in the Apocalypse’, in L’Apocalyptique johannique et l’Apocalyptique dans de Nouveau Testament (BETL, 53; Gembloux: Leuven University Press, 1980), 283–88, 285. 15.  Aune, Revelation, 1:19. 16.  Bauckham, Climax, 161.

3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr

103

than the witness borne by the exalted Christ, who is the source of the revelation, whose words to John represent, or at least reflect, the word of God. A number of scholars identify ‘the testimony of Jesus’ precisely with the contents of the Apocalypse.17 To be sure, in Rev. 1.1–2 there does appear to be a strong connection between ‘the revelation of Jesus Christ’ given to John, and ‘the Word of God and testimony of Jesus’ to which John then bears witness, especially as the content of this witness is ‘that which he saw’ (ὅσα εἶδον; Rev. 1.2). Moreover, at the conclusion, ‘the revelation’ is linked with Jesus’ testimony: ‘I, Jesus have sent my angel to you with this testimony for the churches’ (22.16). Finally, Jesus is said to be ‘the one who testifies to these things’ (ὁ μαρτυρῶν ταῦτα; 22.2) immediately following several references to ‘this book’ (τὸ βιβλίον τοῦτο; four times in 20.18–19). However, this is not conclusive evidence that the term ‘testimony of Jesus’ is always coterminous with the Apocalypse. While there may indeed be a strong connection between them in the first and last chapters, when the other occurrences of ἡ μαρτυρία Ἱησοῦ or related phrases are considered, it is not clear the term should be understood as a subjective genitive, let alone specifically refer to the testimony contained in Revelation. Most of the occasions in which ‘the testimony of Jesus’ occurs appear to have martyrological significance or cause suffering (Rev. 1.9; 6.9; 12.17; 20.4; cf. 14.12). It is difficult to imagine the ‘testimony’ that leads to the deaths of the faithful in Rev. 6.9 and Rev. 20.4 should be specifically equated with the contents of the Apocalypse.18 It is more likely that it is the Christians’ testimony about Jesus (6.9; 12.17; 20.4), 17.  See, most recently, two contributions to Allen, Paul, and Woodman (eds.), Book of Revelation: Sean Ryan, ‘ “The Testimony of Jesus” and “The Testimony of Enoch”: An Emic Approach to the Genre of the Apocalypse’, 95–113; and Sarah Underwood Dixon, ‘ “The Testimony of Jesus” in Light of Internal Self-References in the Books of Daniel and 1 Enoch’, 81–93. See also Dehandschutter, ‘Witness’, 283–84; Frederick D. Mazzaferri, The Genre of the Book of Revelation from a SourceCritical Perspective (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1989). 18.  Against David Hill, ‘Prophecy and Prophets in the Revelation of St. John’, NTS 18 (1972): 401–18; Frederick D. Mazzaferri, ‘Martyria Iēsou Revisited’, BT 39 (1988): 114–22. Dixon (‘Testimony’) attempts to remove the objection that it would be difficult to imagine John’s vision already including those who have been killed for the ‘testimony of Jesus’ if it refers to the message of Revelation by pointing to possible self-referential parallels in Daniel and 1 Enoch. She does not, however, go on to argue those references beyond Rev. 1.2 should be understood as the contents of the book. Ryan (‘Testimony’) compares Revelation to Jubilees and 1 Enoch, but suggests the term is used differently in the prologue and epilogue (1.1–8; 22.6–21) from the main body of the text (1.9–22.5).

104

The Violence of the Lamb

or their faith in Jesus (14.12) that is the cause of their persecution and martyrdom.19 Reading ἡ μαρτυρία Ἱησοῦ as an objective genitive also helps explain its relationship to ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ. The ‘word of God’ is similarly identified as a reason for the persecution and martyrdom of the saints (Rev. 6.9; 20.4), making it unlikely that an understanding of this term is restricted to the text of the Apocalypse. Rather, John sees himself standing in the prophetic tradition of the Hebrew Bible, receiving the word of God, or the word of the Lord (ὁ λόγος κυρίου).20 John, of course, designates his revelation as words of prophecy (οἱ λόγοι τῆς προφητείας; 1.3). In New Testament tradition, while the word of God/word of the Lord can be used in a way similar to the prophetic calling in the Hebrew Bible (Lk. 3.2), and might on occasion refer to the written Old Testament (Mt. 15.6//Mk 7.13), it almost always refers to the Gospel rather than any particular written text.21 There is certainly no need to read ‘the word of God’ and the ‘testimony of Jesus’ in precisely the same way each time the phrases appear. Nonetheless, each repetition of ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ is consistent with the way in which it is normally used in the New Testament; a reference to the Christian gospel. If ἡ μαρτυρία Ἱησοῦ is best understood 19.  Elsewhere in the New Testament, persecution is understood to be the result of testifying to Jesus (Mk 13.9) or the gospel (Mk 8.35). 20.  For example: Jer. 1.2, 4, 11; Ezek. 1.3; Hos. 1.1; Jon. 1.1; 3.1; Mic. 1.1; Zeph. 1.1; Joel 1.1; Hag. 1.1, 3; Zech. 1.1, 7; Mal. 1.1. See Aune, Revelation, 1:19. 21.  The majority of the occurrences of the precise phrase ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ are found in Luke–Acts, referring to the preaching of Jesus (Lk. 5.1), the disciples (Acts 4.31; 6.2; 13.5, 7; 17.3; 18.11), or the gospel in general (Lk. 8.11, 21; 11.28; Acts 6.7; 11.1; 13.44, 46). Ὁ λόγος τοῦ κυρίου unambiguously refers to the gospel in Acts 8.25; 12.24; 13.48; 15.25; 16.32; 19.10, 20, while ὁ λόγος represents the gospel message in Lk. 1.2; Acts 2.41; 4.29; 6.4; 8.4; 14.25; 17.11. In the parable of the sower, ὁ λόγος stands for the gospel in both Mark (4.14, 15 [×2], 16, 17, 18, 19, 20; see also 2.2; 4.23) and Matthew (13.19 [ὁ λόγος τῆς βασιλείας], 20, 21, 22 [×2], 23). In John, Jesus is ὁ λόγος (1.1–14), but the word also stands for the gospel, either from Jesus (4.41, 50; 5.24; 8.31, 37, 51, 52) or God (5.38; 8.53, 55). Similarly, in the rest of the New Testament, the Gospel is variously represented by ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ (1 Cor. 14.36; 2 Cor. 2.17; 4.2; Col. 1.25 [cf. ὁ λόγος τοῦ Χριστοῦ; 3.16]; 1 Thess. 2.13; Eph. 6.17; 1 Tim. 4.5; 2 Tim. 2.9; Tit. 2.5; Heb. 4.12; 13.7; 1 Pet. 1.23; 2 Pet. 3.5; 1 Jn 2.14); ὁ λόγος τοῦ κυρίου (1 Thess. 1.8; 4.15; 2 Thess. 3.1); or ὁ λόγος (e.g. 1 Cor. 15.2; Gal. 6.6; Phil. 1.14; 2.16; Col. 4.3; 1 Thess. 1.6; 2.13; 2 Tim. 4.2; Tit. 1.3; Jas 1.21, 22, 23; 1 Pet. 2.8; 3.1; 1 Jn 1.10; 2.5, 7). Other formulations for the gospel are also found: πίστος λόγος (Tit. 1.9); ὁ λόγος τοῦ σταυροῦ (1 Cor. 1.18); ὁ λόγος τῆς ἀληθείας (Col. 1.5; 2 Tim. 2.15); ῥῆμα θεοῦ (Heb. 6.5; 11.3); ῥῆμα Χριστοῦ (Rom. 10.17); ῥῆμα κυρίου (1 Pet. 1.25); τὸ ῥῆμα τῆς πίστεως (Rom. 10.8); ῥῆμα (Eph. 5.26; 1 Pet. 1.25).

3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr

105

as standing in an epexegetical relationship to ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ, then it too may be best understood as a reference to the Gospel, perhaps more specifically those aspects that relate to Christological beliefs or claims, or actions that follow from those beliefs. Those who are beheaded for their testimony to Jesus and for the word of God (Rev. 20.4) are killed for not worshipping the Beast or its image (20.5; cf. 13.15). So, the testimony of Jesus, the word of God, and related phrases (keeping commandments of God, faith of Jesus) are consistent with faithfulness to the gospel message. Even in Rev. 1.2, where ἡ μαρτυρία Ἱησοῦ has a closer connection to the visions, and has the strongest claim to be read as a subjective genitive, John receives Ἀποκάλυψις Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ and bears witness to the word of God and testimony of Jesus. There is no need to equate precisely the ‘testimony’ and the ‘revelation’ of Jesus Christ, any more than supposing the ‘Word of God’ has precisely the same reference. Rather, the text of the Apocalypse is consistent with, and is an expression of, the Word of God and testimony from Jesus (subjective genitive), which is ultimately a testimony about Jesus (objective genitive) to which all Christians adhere. What John saw (ὅσα εἶδον), therefore, was a series of visions that came from, and carried the authority of God and Jesus Christ, that did not reveal a substantially new testimony or gospel, but constituted a new illustration of the gospel they had already heard, and a testimony about Jesus for which at least some Christians had already died. The First and the Last (Revelation 1.4) As God and Jesus are formally connected in the opening of the Apocalypse, they are similarly linked in the formal greeting that follows: Grace (χάρις) to you and peace (εἰρήνη) from him who is and who was and who is to come (ὁ ὤν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ἐρχόμενος), and from the seven spirits who are before his throne (ἀπὸ τῶν ἑπτὰ πνευμάτων ἃ ἐνώπιον τοῦ θρόνου αὐτοῦ), and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness (ὁ μάρτυς ὁ πιστός), the firstborn of the dead (ὁ πρωτότοκος τῶν νεκρῶν), and the ruler of kings of the earth (ὁ ἄρχων τῶν βασιλέων τῆς γῆς). (Rev. 1.4–5)

John’s grace follows the usual Christian deviation from the standard Graeco-Roman greeting, by both offering grace and peace to his readers, and by invoking God and Jesus as the source from whom grace and peace come.22 However, while the pattern of the opening greeting in most New 22.  Blount, Revelation, 13–14. Grace and peace from God and Jesus are found in the salutations of Rom. 1.7; 1 Cor. 1.3; 2 Cor. 1.2; Gal. 1.3; Eph. 1.2; Phil. 1.2; 2 Thess. 1.2; 1 Tim. 1.2; 2 Tim. 1.2; Tit. 1.4; Phlm 3; 2 Pet. 1.2; 2 Jn 3.

106

The Violence of the Lamb

Testament examples is to invoke ‘God the/our Father’,23 John instead uses a tripartite description: ‘the one who is, and who was, and who is to come’, which is not found in early Christian literature outside the Apocalypse.24 This is how God will describe himself just a few verses later: ‘ “I am the Alpha and the Omega”, says the Lord God (κύριος ὁ θεός), “who is and who was and who is to come (ὁ ὤν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ἐρχόμενος), the Almighty (παντοκράτωρ)” ’ (Rev. 1.8). The full tripartite affirmation is found for the third and final time in the throne room, where the four living creatures worship God, saying, ‘Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty (κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ), who was and is and is to come (ὁ ὤν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ἐρχόμενος)!’ In expanding his salutation, John becomes the first Christian writer to invoke the Greek version of the divine name, which was common among contemporaneous Jews.25 The Greek term ὁ ὤν is found in God’s self-revelation to Moses: ‘God said to Moses, “I am who I am (ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν)… Say this to the people of Israel: “I am (ὁ ὤν) has sent me to you” ’ (Exod. 3.14LXX). In so doing, John claims ultimate authority for his message, and his own status as a prophet. John condenses many images of God’s power into the opening verses of the Apocalypse. As well as invoking the divine name, he places himself in the tradition of the prophets who received divine revelation. His emphatic use of ἐγώ εἰμι in the record of God’s speech, ‘I am the Alpha and the Omega’ (ἐγώ εἰμι τὸ ἄλφα καὶ τὸ ὦ; Rev. 1.8), resonates with God’s claim to exclusive worship in the Hebrew Bible: You are…my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am He (ἐγώ εἰμι/‫)אנִ י הּוא‬. ֲ Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me. (Isa. 43.10)

Similarly consistent with God’s revelation in Isaiah is the triple acclamation that God was, is, and is to come, which emphasizes the eternal nature of God’s sovereignty, underscored later in the Apocalypse where God again declares himself to be the ‘Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end (ἡ ἀρχὴ καὶ τέλος)’ (Rev. 21.6). Again, the parallels with declarations of divine sovereignty in Isaiah are striking: ‘I the Lord, the first, and with the last; I am he’ (ἐγὼ θεὸς πρῶτος καὶ εἰς τὰ ἐπερχόμενα

23.  ‘God our Father’: Rom. 1.7; 1 Cor. 1.3; Eph. 1.2; Phil. 1.2; Phlm 3; ‘God the Father’: Gal. 1.3; 2 Thess. 1.2; 2 Tim. 1.2; 2 Tim. 1.2; 2 Jn 3. 24.  Aune, Revelation, 1:30. 25.  So Josephus, Ant. 8.13.7; Philo, Abr. 121; Det. Pot. Ins. 160; Deus Imm. 11; Mut. Nom. 11; Op. Mund. 172; Somn. 1.231; Spec. Leg. 3.181; Vit. Mos. 1.75.

3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr

107

ἐγώ εἰμι/‫;אנִ י־הּוא‬ ֲ Isa. 41.4).26 In another theme with ample support in the Hebrew Bible, John stresses God’s power is eternal (Rev. 1.6; 4.9, 10; 5.13; 7.12; 11.15; 15.7).27 John also describes God as ὁ παντοκράτωρ (Rev. 1.8; 4.8; 11.17; 15.3; 16.7, 14; 19.6, 15; 21.22), which, although very uncommon in the New Testament, is used frequently for God in the Septuagint.28 Indeed, outside Revelation it is found once only in 2 Cor. 6.18, where Paul cites several Old Testament passages (cf. Lev. 26.12; 2 Sam. 7.14; Isa. 43.6; 52.11; Jer. 32.38; Ezek. 20.41; 37.27), and ends his composite citations with the summary, λέγει κύριος παντοκράτωρ. In the Septuagint, παντοκράτωρ translates a variety of titles, such as ‫( ְצ ָבאֹות‬2 Sam. 5.10) or ‫( ַׁש ַּדי‬Job 11.7). Similarly, John, once again rather distinctively among New Testament authors, deploys the construction κύριος ὁ θεός to refer to God, which is the normal Septuagint rendering of ‫ֹלהים‬ ִ ‫( יְ הוָ ה ֱא‬e.g. Gen. 2.8, 15, 16, 18, 22; 3.1). The construction appears in various forms: κύριος ὁ θεός (Rev. 1.8; 4.8; 18.8; 22.5; cf. 22.6); κύριος ὁ θεός ὁ παντοκράτωρ (19.6; 21.22); and the vocative form, κύριε ὁ θεός ὁ παντοκράτωρ, in prayer (11.17; 15.3; 16.7). By contrast, the vast majority of occurrences in the rest of the New Testament are found when the authors quote the Old Testament.29 Attributes of God form an inclusio at either end of John’s short introduction (1.4–8), in which affirmations of divine sovereignty and power are found in particularly high concentration. However, John also incorporates Christ into this exalted theology. As God has been described as the Alpha and Omega (Rev. 1.8; 21.6), the beginning and the end (21.6), so too at the end of the Apocalypse, Christ says: Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense, to repay everyone for what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega (τὸ ἄλφα καὶ τὸ ὦ), the first and the last (ὁ πρῶτος καὶ ὁ ἔσχατος), the beginning and the end (ἡ ἀρχὴ καῖ τὸ τέλος). (Rev. 22.12–13)

26.  See also Isa. 43.13; 46.4; 48.12. 27.  So in Gen. 21.33, Abraham ‘called on the name of the Lord, the everlasting God’ (ἐπεκαλέσατο…τὸ ὄνομα κυρίου θεὸς αἰώνιος/‫)יְ הוָ ה ֵאל עו ָֺלם‬. 28.  W. Michaelis, TDNT 3:914–15. 29.  Mt. 4.7 (cf. Deut. 6.16); 4.10 (cf. Deut. 6.13); 22.37 (cf. Deut. 6.5); Mk 12.29–30 (cf. Deut. 6.4–5); Acts 3.22 (cf. Deut. 18.15). Only in the liturgical context of Lk. 1.32, 68, and in Peter’s sermon (Acts 2.39) is κύριος ὁ θεός found outside a quotation.

108

The Violence of the Lamb

John, therefore, gives to Jesus the same divine attribute of eternal sovereignty which belongs to God. Both God and Jesus lay claim to being the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, and while the claim to being ‘first and last’ is found only on the mouth of Jesus, this clearly resonates with God’s statement in Isa. 41.1. Both God and Jesus constitute the beginning and the end, and so for John, share in divine eternity. Moreover, while God and the Lamb remain two distinct figures throughout most of the Apocalypse, in the final vision of the holy city (Rev. 21.1–22.5) the two begin to morph into what might be thought to be a single entity. So John says that there is no need for a temple in the city ‘for its temple is the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb’ (ὁ γὰρ κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ ναὸς αὐτῆς ἐστίν καὶ τὸ ἀρνίον; 21.22). Similarly, the city needs neither sun nor moon because ‘the glory of God is its light and its lamp is the Lamb’ (ἡ γὰρ δόχα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐφώτισεν αὐτήν, καὶ ὁ λύχωος αὐτῆς τὸ ἀρνίον; 21.23). The chiastic structure again links the activity of God and Jesus. Furthermore, the image has its roots in Isa. 60.19, in which God will replace the sun and moon for the eschatological Jerusalem; once again, John attributes to Jesus the activity of God in the Hebrew Bible. The fusion of God and the Lamb continues as they both appear to occupy a single throne in the new Jerusalem: Then he showed me the river of the water of life…flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb (ἐκ τοῦ θρόνου τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἀρνίου). (Rev. 22.1) There shall no more be anything accursed, but the throne of God and of the Lamb (ὁ θρόνος τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἀρνίου ἐν αὐτῇ ἔσται) shall be in it, and his servants (οἱ δοῦλοι αὐτοῦ) shall worship him (αὐτῷ); they shall see his face (τὸ πρόσωπον αὐτοῦ), and his name (τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ) shall be on their foreheads. (Rev. 22.3–4)

There is seemingly a single throne with two occupants (cf. Rev. 3.21), but John then continues with a singular object of worship, a singular face that the occupants of the city will see, and a singular name on their foreheads. To be sure, God is then said to be their light, replacing lamp and sun (22.5; cf. 21.23 where both God and Jesus fulfil this role), but the names of both God and Jesus have already been written on the Christians’ foreheads (3.12; 14.1), and so either a single name or both the names of God and Jesus, though conceived singularly, is most likely in view.30 Effectively, the exalted theology of the Apocalypse, in which God is the Sovereign and eternal Lord, propels Revelation’s exalted Christology as Jesus shares in the divine attributes of God. 30.  Against Aune, Revelation, 3:1181, and with Holtz, Christologie, 202.

3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr

109

We will see further reinforcement of John’s high Christology throughout the Apocalypse, but for now we note that for the Seer, Jesus shares in many of the divine attributes that are exclusively claimed for God in the Hebrew Bible. We have seen that many commentators draw a sharp distinction between the Christology represented by the Lion of Judah and the Lamb who was slain in the throne room scene of Revelation 5. For many, the suffering death of Jesus is to be contrasted with his subsequent glorification and exaltation. For them, Jesus offers a model of suffering love, encapsulated in voluntary non-violent resistance. However, it seems to me that this position is far more intuitive rather than rooted in the thought world of John’s Apocalypse. In Revelation, as I will now argue, the death of Christ is part and parcel of John’s exalted Christology, and cannot be severed from John’s other Christological imagery. The Faithful Witness (Revelation 1.5–6) John balances his tripartite description of God with three statements about Jesus Christ: he is ‘the faithful witness (ὁ μάρτυς ὁ πιστός), the firstborn of the dead (ὁ προτότοκος τῶν νεκρῶν), and the ruler of the kings on earth (ὁ ἄρχων τῶν βασιλέων τῆς γῆς)’ (Rev. 1.5). These three titles representing the death, resurrection, and glorification of Jesus correlate to the past, present, and future of the God who was, and is, and is to come—though perhaps in the non-linear timeframe of the Apocalypse this should not be pushed too far. First, Jesus is the faithful witness or martyr (ὁ μάρτυς ὁ πιστός). The word μάρτυς has not yet taken on its later technical Christian meaning as exclusively representing one who dies for the faith.31 On that basis, some commentators argue μάρτυς refers to the witnessing Jesus undertook on his earthly ministry or during his trial (e.g. Jn 3.11, 32; 4.44; 5.31; 7.7; 8.14, 18; 13.21; 18.37).32 However, the Apocalypse shows very little interest in the ministry of the human figure of Jesus, and it is unlikely the specific trial scene before Pilate is in mind. It is more likely 31.  For classic treatments on the development of the term μάρτυς from its generic meaning ‘witness’ to its technical Christian usage for a martyr, see Norbert Brox, Zeuge und Märtyrer: Untersuchungen zur früchristlichen Zeugnis-Terminologie (Studien zum Alten und Neuen Testament, 5; Munich: Kösel-Verlag, 1961), and Trites, Concept of Witness. On the extent to which μάρτυς has become a terminus technicus in Revelation, see van Henten, ‘Concept’, for a negative judgement, while the opposite view can be found in Paul Middleton, ‘What Is Martyrdom?’, Mortality: Promoting the Interdisciplinary Study of Death and Dying 19, no. 2 (2014): 117–33, especially 120–21; idem, Radical Martyrdom, 158–70. I argue the concept of Christian martyrdom existed before the term was attached to the phenomenon (125). 32.  Smalley, Revelation, 35; Koester, Revelation, 227.

110

The Violence of the Lamb

that John does indeed take ‘faithful witness’ to refer specifically to Jesus’ death. Indeed, the only other person who is described as ὁ μάρτυς ὁ πιστός in Revelation is the martyr Antipas (Rev. 2.13). Moreover, the majority of the other uses of μάρτυς or μαρτυρία have a clear martyrological sense (6.9; 11.3, 7; 12.11; 17.6; 20.4). While it may be true that in Revelation we are some way from μάρτυς having an exclusively technical semantic range, this is not to say that one who dies for the faith is not yet one of the meanings of μάρτυς. It is, therefore, quite unwarranted to insist that for any given occurrence of the term, ‘witness cannot simply be equated with death’.33 That calling Jesus ὁ μάρτυς ὁ πιστός does indeed refer to his death is effectively confirmed by the second title; the firstborn from the dead (ὁ προτότοκος τῶν νεκρῶν), specifically linking Jesus’ death to his resurrection. The term ὁ προτότοκος is a Christological title in the Colossian hymn, one that has some resonances with the Christology of the Apocalypse: He is the image of the invisible God (εἰκὼν τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἀοράτου), the firstborn of all creation (πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως); for in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. He is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning (ἀρχή), the firstborn from the dead (πρωτότοκος ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν), that in everything he might be pre-eminent (πρωτεύω). For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross. (Col. 1.15–20)

The second of the two uses of πρωτότοκος in Col. 1.18 is closest to the way in which it used in Rev. 1.5. Jesus is resurrected from the dead and is glorified, although he is also ‘the beginning’, suggesting pre-existence. Nonetheless, the first appearance of the word in Col. 1.15 finds a parallel in Rev. 3.14: ‘The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness (ὁ μάρτυς ὁ πιστὸς καὶ ἀληθινός), the beginning of God’s creation (ἡ ἀρχὴ τῆς κτίσεως τοῦ θεοῦ)’, which both appear to allude to Wisdom or Logos theology. The affirmation that ‘all things were created in him’ (Col. 1.16) resonates with the Christology of the Johannine Prologue (Jn 1.1–18). Given πρωτότοκος appears twice in this short passage, and the hymn (Col. 1.15–20) is thought to predate the letter,34 it has been argued that 33.  Koester, Revelation, 216. 34.  For discussion, see Eduard Lohse, A Commentary on the Epistles to the Colossians and Philemon (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971), 41–46.

3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr

111

the hymn may have exerted some influence on John.35 However, the idea is common throughout early Christianity. Jesus is also designated πρωτότοκος in Heb. 1.6, and it functions as a metaphor for the resurrection as early as Rom. 8.29, where the resurrection makes Jesus ‘the firstborn among many brothers’ (ὁ πρωτότοκος ἐν πολλοῖς ἀδελφοῖς).36 Thirdly, Jesus is designated ‘the ruler of the kings of the earth’ (ὁ ἄρχων τῶν βασιλέων τῆς γῆς). John, in common with other early Christians, held that Jesus was Lord (cf. Rom. 10.9; 1 Cor. 12.3; Phil. 2.11), which negated any claim earthly rulers had on them. Despite occasional attempts in the New Testament to stress that the imperial authorities had no reason to be suspicious of the Christians (e.g. Rom. 13.1–7; 1 Tim. 2.1–2; 1 Pet. 2.13), the exclusive claim of Christians to the Lordship of Christ meant they could not accommodate the claims of Rome where Caesar was Lord. For Christians, God was the παντοκράτωρ, Jesus was the ‘King of kings, and Lord of lords’ (βασιλεὺς βασιλέων καὶ κύριος κυρίων; Rev. 17.14; 19.16). The ultimate vision for the Christians was for ‘the kingdom of the world…[to] become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ’ (11.15). Therefore, the kingly claim of any earthly ruler was at best temporary, but ultimately illusory.37 It is noteworthy that the death of Christ—his role as the faithful witness—does not in any way detract from John’s exalted Christology. In the opening verses, John has taken care to link strongly the figures of God and Christ. The authority Christ wields is not compromised by his death, as if it is a problem to be overcome, but is in fact a central element of that authority. The one who is King of kings and Lord of lords, and the ruler 35.  Aune (Revelation, 1:256) suggests a common connection may have been caused by the churches of Colossae and Laodicea (cf. Rev. 3.14–22) exchanging letters (Col. 4.16). See also Joseph B. Lightfoot, Saint Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon: A Revised Text with Introductions, Notes, and Dissertations (London: Macmillan, 1892), 41–44. 36.  In Hebrews, resurrected believers are called ‘the ἐκκλησία πρωτοτόκων enrolled in heaven’ (Heb. 12.23). 37.  In Revelation, οἱ βασιλεῖς τῆς γῆς carries generally (though pace Aune [Revelation, 1:40] not consistently) negative connotations. They associate themselves with the Whore (Rev. 17.2, 18; 18.3, 9), and make war on the Lamb (19.19; cf. 16.14 where they are called οἱ βασιλεῖς τῆς οἰκουμένης ὅλος). However, in 21.24 the term is used positively as the kings of the earth bring their glory into the holy city. The other two references are arguably neutral. That they are prophesied against (10.11) and cower for fear of the Lamb’s wrath (6.15) simply underlines the conviction of the Apocalypse that kingship belongs to God and Christ; even the power of imperial Rome must yield and recognise that it is God who is the true ‘King of the nations’ (ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν ἐθνῶν; 15.3).

112

The Violence of the Lamb

of the kings of the earth is also the one who is identified as the faithful witness—the proto-martyr. This is, as we will now see, a consistent theme repeated throughout the Apocalypse, and it will have a bearing on the way in which the slain Lamb must be interpreted in the throne room scene. The reader does not have to wait long before encountering a further reiteration of the centrality of Jesus’ death in John’s Christological schema. Immediately following the tripartite description of Jesus, which has on both a literary and theological level linked his activity to God’s, John inserts a doxology addressed to Christ: To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and father, to him be glory and dominion for ever. Amen. (Rev. 1.5d–6)

Once again, we find John instigating a liturgical Christological innovation. Although the doxology is a common form in the New Testament, this is the first early Christian doxological formulation in which glory is ascribed to Christ rather than to God.38 John also includes Jesus in a further doxology along with God: ‘To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honour and glory and might for ever and ever’ (Rev. 5.13). John’s final doxology is more traditional, having God as its subject (7.12), but again in the Apocalypse, worship of Jesus is clearly incorporated into correct worship of God. The death of Christ is once more at the forefront of the praise offered to him. Jesus’ function as the faithful martyr is an integral part of John’s elevated Christology. Christ is worthy of praise because his blood effected the freedom of Christians from their sins. The idea that Christ died for sins is found throughout the New Testament tradition,39 through a redemptive transaction,40 or sacrifice.41 In Revelation, Jesus’ blood makes believers a kingdom (βασιλεία) and priests to God (οἱ ἰερεῖς τῷ θεῷ), in the same way God makes the Israelites a ‘kingdom of priests’ or a ‘royal priesthood’ (‫מ ְמ ֶל ֶכת ּכ ֶֹהנִ ים‬/βασίλειον ַ ἱεράτευμα; Exod. 19.6). John considers faithful 38.  The other doxologies in the New Testament outside Revelation, all referring exclusively to God, are: Rom. 11.36; 16.25–27; Gal. 1.5; Eph. 3.20–21; Phil. 4.20; 1 Tim. 1.17; 2 Tim. 4.18; Heb. 13.21; 1 Pet. 4.11 (the closest in form to Rev. 1.6: ᾧ ἐστιν ἡ δόχα καὶ τὸ κράτος εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων, ἀμήν); 1 Pet. 5.11; 2 Pet. 3.18; Jude 25. 39.  Rom. 5.8; 14.5; 1 Cor. 8.11; 15.3; 1 Thess. 5.9–10; 1 Pet. 3.18. 40.  Mk 10.45//Mt. 20.28; Jn 10.11; Gal. 1.4; 1 Tim. 2.6; Tit. 2.14; 1 Jn 3.16; cf. Gal. 3.13; 4.5; 1 Cor. 6.20; 7.23; 1 Pet. 1.18; 2 Pet. 2.1. 41.  Rom. 3.24–25; Eph. 1.7; Heb. 9.12; 1 Pet. 1.19.

3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr

113

believers to be both priests and kings who will reign (Rev. 5.10; 20.6). This is ultimately made possible by the death of Christ. His blood frees Christians from their sins (1.5), and redeems people for God (5.9). In his blood, the saints who come through the great tribulation wash their robes and make them white (7.14), and by it, Christians are able to overcome the accuser (12.11). The death of Christ is not a marginal aspect of John’s Christology; it is front and centre of the first doxology. It is the achievement of Christ’s death, and the function of his blood, that is the main reason why Christ merits the ascription of everlasting glory and power, and is worthy of worship (1.5–6; 5.12). Coming on the Clouds (Revelation 1.7) In Rev. 1.5 Jesus was described as the faithful witness, firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth, mapping on to his death, resurrection, and glorification. The following doxology (Rev. 1.5d–6) focusses in the main on the first of these attributes, the faithful witness. However, from Rev. 1.7, John turns to the exaltation of Christ, and recounts two images of the exalted Jesus: the one like a son of man (1.12–20), and the Christ who comes on the clouds: Look! He is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all the tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Indeed! Amen. (Rev. 1.7)

The image of Christ coming in power dominates the Apocalypse (Rev. 2.5, 16, 25; 3.3, 11; 16.15; 22.7, 12, 20). Early Christian belief in Christ’s return is well attested in the New Testament, permeating practically every layer of tradition.42 While on occasion Jesus will return like a thief (Mt. 24.43; 1 Thess. 5.2), more often the parousia is accompanied by cosmic signs (e.g. Mk 13.24–25): Christ returns on the clouds (Mk 13.26; cf. 14.62) with angels (Mk 13.27; 1 Thess. 4.16) and trumpets (1 Thess. 4.16; 1 Cor. 15.52). The second coming is firmly associated with the end of the ages and judgement (Mt. 24.3; 1 Cor. 10.11), in the context of a particularly Christian understanding of the Day of the Lord [Jesus] (1 Cor. 1.8; 5.5; 2 Cor. 1.14; Phil. 1.10; 2.16; 1 Thess. 5.2; cf. 2 Pet. 3.12; Acts 2.20).43 42.  Mk 13.26//Mt. 24.30//Lk. 21.27; Mt. 25.13; Lk. 17.30; Acts 1.11; 3.19–21; 1 Cor. 1.7–8; 4.5; 11.26; 1 Thess. 1.9–10; 2.19–20; 4.15–18; 5.23; 2 Thess. 1.7; 2.8; Col. 3.4; 1 Tim. 6.13; 2 Tim. 4.1, 8; Tit. 2.13; Heb. 9.28; 10.37; Jas 5.7–9; 1 Pet. 1.13; 2.12; 4.13; 2 Pet. 1.16; 3.3, 8–10; 1 Jn 2.28; 3.2; Jude 21. 43.  Cf. Dan. 12.12; Joel 2.31; Amos 5.18–20.

114

The Violence of the Lamb

In Revelation, Christ’s coming is also associated with the threat of judgement (Rev. 2.5, 16; 3.3; 16.15; 22.7, 12). John combines Dan. 7.13 with Zech. 12.12, already found in Mt. 24.30, though reversed, suggesting an eschatological interpretation of the two verses is early: Rev. 1.7

Dan. 7.13/ Zech. 12.10, 12

Look! He is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him,

Look! One like a son of man Was coming with the clouds of heaven. They will look on me

even those who pierced him; and all the tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Indeed! Amen.

whom they have pierced, and they will mourn him. All the tribes of the earth

Mt. 24.30 The sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and they will see the son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory

and all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see…

In early Christian thought, Christ comes in judgement upon the earth, causing the nations of the earth to mourn. While some commentators see the wailing of the tribes of the earth as a sign of their repentance,44 there is no suggestion in early Christian tradition that the parousia provokes repentance. Christ returns in order to judge people according to their deeds (cf. Mt. 25.31–46). Indeed, throughout Revelation, it is the lack of repentance that characterises the peoples of the earth (Rev. 9.21; 16.11). Koester’s claim that ‘the picture of hostile peoples changing their stance toward Christ looks for the conversion rather than the destruction of the nations’ may be more palatable than a vision of judgemental destruction, but unfortunately, there is little in the text to support this interpretation.45 In a parallel account of the Day of the Lord in the Apocalypse, the peoples of the earth hide in caves, imploring the mountains to fall on them to hide them from the ‘wrath of the Lamb’ (ὀργὴ τοῦ ἀρνίου; 6.15–16). For John, the coming of Christ is associated more with judgement than repentance. The coming of Christ directly mirrors the coming of God. In the opening of the Apocalypse, God is twice described as the one ‘who is, 44.  Koester, Revelation, 219; Bauckham, Climax, 318–22. 45.  Koester, Revelation, 219. He cites Rev. 5.5, 9; 7.9; cf. 11.13; 21.24.

3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr

115

and was, and is to come’ (Rev. 1.4, 8). In the Hebrew Bible, the coming of God was also associated with judgement (Isa. 26.61; 66.15; Mic. 1.2–4; Zech. 14.5), as was the Day of the Lord (Joel 2.31; Amos 5.18). In early Christianity, this activity of God is taken over by Christ, and may be one of the factors that explains the high Christological mutation in the early Church. It is not entirely clear when ‘the coming of God’ was replaced by Christ’s second coming, but as early as Mark, there is already Christological exegesis of the coming of God in Malachi: Behold I send my messenger to prepare the way before me, and the Lord whom you seek, will suddenly come to his temple, and the messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight, behold, he is coming says the Lord of hosts. But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? (Mal. 3.1–2)

The first part of Mal. 3.1 is deployed by Mark, where the messenger is John the Baptist and the Lord is clearly Jesus (Mk 1.2). Mark also takes ‘the way of the Lord’ in Isa. 40.3 and makes it refer instead to Jesus: ‘A voice crying in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert the road of him (Mk 1.3)/of our God (Isa. 40.3)’. For the early Christians, the coming Lord is not God, as it is in the Hebrew Bible, but Jesus. The Apocalypse develops this Christological conviction to the extent that for John, the God who is to come is Christ. Once again, it is the crucifixion that is at the centre of John’s exalted Christology. The cosmic Christ who comes in the clouds is also the one who has been pierced. For John, there is no contrast between the two images of suffering and glory. Embedded within the Christian tradition of the second coming of Christ is the idea that people will see him return on the clouds in power and glory (Mk 13.26; 14.62). So it is in the Apocalypse, ‘every eye will see him, even those who pierced him’ (Rev. 1.7). John, in his application of Zech. 12.10, may have in mind the marks of the crucifixion, or the specific piercing of the dead Jesus by the soldier (Jn 19.34). The author of the Fourth Gospel takes Zech. 12.10 to refer to this event: ‘And again another scripture says “They will look on him whom they have pierced (ὄψονται εἰς ὃν ἐχεκέντησαν)” ’ (Jn 19.37).46 However, the Seer imagines more than one piercer, so it is more likely that the crucifixion in total rather than this particular incident is in view. 46.  The piercing tradition makes use of the MT text of Zech. 12.10 (‫וְ ִה ִּביטּו ֵא ֵלי‬ ‫ר־ּד ָקרּו‬ ָ ‫)את ֲא ֶׁש‬ ֵ rather than the Septuagint, which has κατορχέομαι (‘mocked’) rather than ἐκκεντέω (‘pierced’). At some point the theological difficulty of God, who is speaking, being the one who was pierced resulted in the variant ‫ ֵא ָליו‬rather than ‫א ַלי‬. ֵ

116

The Violence of the Lamb

Those who pierced Jesus may be the people of the Roman empire, or specifically Jews, which is how Justin appears to understand it.47 For John, the Christ who comes on the clouds in power and glory in order to execute judgement is also pierced (Rev. 1.7), just as the Root of David, and the lion of Judah is also a slain Lamb (5.6). We have seen that in the opening of the Apocalypse, images of Christ’s power and glory sit comfortably with his suffering and martyrdom. We will now turn more briefly to other Christological presentations in the Apocalypse, where it will be demonstrated that John’s conception of the conquering Messiah can incorporate the suffering of crucifixion without much difficulty. We will then return to examine the apparently incongruent image of the Lion/Lamb of ch. 5 in light of the Christology of the rest of Revelation. Christophanies in the Apocalypse The Son of Man/Ancient of Days (Revelation 1.12–20) The Revelation of John is a record of ‘all that he saw’ (ὅσα εἶδεν; Rev. 1.2). While God speaks in the introduction to the Apocalypse (1.8), it is only when John is ‘in the spirit on the Lord’s Day’ (1.10) that he hears Christ’s voice commanding him to write what he sees, and to send it to seven churches (1.11). Turning to ‘see the voice’, John sees one like a son of man, clothed with a long robe and with a golden girdle round his breast; his head and his hair were white as white wool, white as snow; his eyes were like a flame of fire, his feet were like burnished bronze, refined as in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters; in his right hand he held seven stars, from his mouth issued a sharp two-edged sword, and his face was like the sun shining in full strength. (Rev. 1.13–16)

John has already mined Dan. 7.13 for his image of Christ coming on the clouds, and he now appropriates not one, but both of its central characters—the one like a son of man (‫ּכ ַבר ְֶאנָ ׁש‬/ὡς ְ υἰὸς ἀνθρώπος) and the Ancient of Days—for his first Christophany. The ‘one like a son of man’ (ὅμιος υἰὸς ἀνθρώπος) that John saw fits the description of the Ancient of Days, whose ‘clothing was as white as snow, and the hair of his head like pure wool, his throne was a flame of fire, and a fiery stream went out from his face’ (Dan. 7.9–10LXX). While there are characteristics in 47.  Justin merges the images of the second coming and piercing in Dial. 14.8, when he says about the Jews: ‘In glory and on the clouds he will appear and your people will see and recognise the one they pierced’ (ἐν δόχῃ καὶ ἐπάνω τῶν νεφελῶν παρέσται καὶ ὄψεται ὁ λαὸς ὑμῶν γνωριεῖ εἰς ὃν ἐχεκέντησαν).

3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr

117

common with some angelophanies,48 John has conflated the two images of Dan. 7.9–1849 along with elements of Dan. 10.5–6.50 In the latter, fear comes upon bystanders, even though they do not see the vision of the figure themselves (Dan. 10.7), and Daniel falls on his face as in a great sleep when he hears the voice of the man in his vision (10.9). As in John’s revelation, the man in Daniel touches him (10.10), and tells him not to fear (10.11). John’s adaptation of the Son of Man imagery of Daniel is consistent with his Christological presentation of Christ as the one who comes in judgement. In his mouth is a double-edged sword, with which elsewhere in the Apocalypse he will make war on idolaters (Rev. 2.16), smite the nations (19.15), and slay the armies of the Beast (19.21).51 In the only other occasion in which Christ is presented as one like a son of man, he is seated on a cloud, with a crown on his head, and a sharp sickle in his hand with which he will harvest the earth (14.14). Clearly, John is here using the ‘Son of Man’ beyond its Jewish Messianic function.52 He displays 48.  So Apoc. Zeph. 6.11–12; Apoc. Abr. 10.4; 11.2–3; Jos. Asen. 14.8–9. See Peter R. Carrell, Jesus and the Angels: Angelology and the Christology of the Apocalypse of John (SNTSMS; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 129–74. 49.  It is possible this conflation already occurs in a number of manuscripts of Daniel (Adela Yarbro Collins, Cosmology and Eschatology in Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism [Leiden: Brill, 2000], 179–82; Loren T. Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology: A Study in Early Judaism and in the Christology of the Apocalypse of John [WUNT, II/70; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995], 213–18). However, it is also worth noting that 1 Enoch maintains the distinctiveness between the two figures (e.g. 1 En. 46.1–6). 50.  ‘I lifted up my eyes and looked, and behold a man clothed in linen whose waist was girded with gold… His body also was like beryl, his face had the appearance of lightening, his eyes were like flaming torches, his arms and feet looked like burnished bronze, and the sound of his voice was like the noise of a multitude’ (Dan. 10.5–6). 51.  Blount (Revelation, 45) maintains this violence should not be understood literally, but it is the judgement that words bring. To be sure, the sword metaphor is used for words in Pss. 52.2; 57.4; Prov. 5.4; Isa. 49.2. However, these texts are in the main speaking of human words, although the Word of God is likened to a sword in a non-literally violent way in Eph. 6.7 and Heb. 4.12–13. Again, it is not clear that these really parallel the violent imagery of Revelation. Closer is Wis. 18.15–16, in which the logos leapt from the throne ‘into the doomed land, a fierce warrior bearing the sharp sword of your sincere command, and filled every place with death’. In Isaiah, God smites the earth with the rod of his mouth, and slays the wicked with the breath of his lips (Isa. 11.4), which perhaps finds a parallel in the two witnesses who consume their enemies with fire that comes from their mouths (Rev. 11.4; cf. Dan. 7.10). 52.  1 En. 46.1–6; 48.2; 69.27–29; 70.1; 74.14, 17.

118

The Violence of the Lamb

qualities of God in his voice, sounding like many waters (cf. Ezek. 1.24; 43.2; cf. Apoc. Abr. 17.1) and holding stars in his hand (cf. Job 38.31–32; Isa. 40.12).53 John merges attributes of both the Messiah and God in his presentation of Christ. Even in this grand Christophany, once again the death of Jesus plays a central role. The vision of Christ causes John to fall at his feet as though dead (Rev. 1.17).54 However, the Christ figure touches John, saying, ‘Fear not (μὴ φοβοῦ), I am (ἐγώ εἰμι) the first and the last (ὁ πρῶτος καὶ ὁ ἔσχατος), and the living one (ὁ ζῶν); I died, and see I am alive for evermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades.’ (Rev. 1.17–18)

It is the claim to have died that firmly establishes the figure as Christ. Yet death is not an impediment to his claim to divine glory. In addition to the divine appearance he shares with the Ancient of Days figure, Christ is explicitly elevated to God-like status in several other ways. The claim to be the first, last, and living one, effectively parallels God, who was earlier described as the one who was, who is, and who is to come (Rev. 1.4, 8). That Jesus is ὁ ζῶν mirrors the God who is ὁ ὤν, while elsewhere in the Apocalypse, God is the one who lives forever (ζῶν εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων; 4.9, 10; 10.6; 15.7), as is said of Jesus in Rev. 1.18 (ζῶν εἰμὶ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων).55 The command not to fear, the ἐγώ εἰμι construction, and the claim to be the first and last, make clear allusions to divine revelation in the Hebrew Bible tradition. Only God (Rev. 1.8; 21.6) and Jesus (1.17; 2.23; 22.16) use the ἐγώ εἰμι construction in Revelation. God is first and last, and uses the ‘I am’ form in Isa. 41.4 (‘I the Lord, the first and the last, I am he’; 53.  It is also possible that the Son of Man walking among the lampstands recalls those which ‘burn before the Lord’ (Exod. 27.21; Lev. 24.2–4). See Aune, Revelation, 1:90. 54.  In the Hebrew Bible, encountering God directly could bring death (cf. Gen. 32.30; 2 Sam. 6.7//1 Chr. 13.10), and theophonies or angelophonies often provoked involuntary falling to the ground (Ezek. 1.28; Dan. 8.17; 10.9–12; Test. Abr. 9.1; 4 Ezra 10.30; Mt. 28.4; cf. Jn 18.6). See Bauckham, Climax, 121–22. 55.  The phrase ‘living God’ (‫ֹלהים ַחּיִ ים‬ ִ ‫)א‬ ֱ or variations is found in the Hebrew Bible (Deut. 5.26; Josh. 3.10; 1 Sam. 17.26, 36; Pss. 42.3; 84.3; Jer. 10.10; 23.36; Hos. 2.1 = Hos. 1.10 [RSV]; cf. Dan. 4.34; 6.26; 12.7), the New Testament (Mt. 16.16; 26.63; Acts 14.15; Rom. 9.26 = Hos. 1.10; 2 Cor. 3.3; 1 Thess. 1.9; 1 Tim. 4.10; Heb. 3.12; 9.14; 10.31; 12.22; Rev. 7.2; cf. Jn 6.57), as well as later Jewish (Est. 16.16; 2 Macc. 7.33; 15.4; Bel. 14.5, 25; 3 Macc. 6.28; Jub. 1.25; 21.4; Sir. 18.1; 2 Apoc. Bar. 21.9, 10) and Christian traditions (2 Clem. 20.2; Hermas, Vis. 2.3.2 [7.2]; 3.7.2 [15.2]).

3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr

119

‫ת־א ֲחר ֹנִ ים ֲאנִ י־הוֺא‬ ַ ‫אנִ י יְ הוָ ה ִראׁשֹון וְ ֶא‬/ἐγὼ ֲ θεὸς πρῶτος καὶ εἰς τὰ ἐπερχόμενα ἐγώ εἰμι) and Isa. 48.12 (‘I am he; I am the first and I am the last’; ‫אנִ י־הּוא ֲאנִ י ִראׁשֹון ֲאנִ י ַא ֲחרו ֺן‬/ἐγώ ֲ εἰμι πρῶτος καὶ ἐγώ εἰμι εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα),56 while the ἐγώ εἰμι formula is found with reassurance not to fear in Isa. 41.10 (‘Do not fear…for I am your God’; μὴ φοβοῦ…ἐγὼ γάρ εἰμι ὀ θεός).57 Christ stands in place of God in much of the Apocalypse. The death of Christ in this tableau is not merely a past event which is negated by his resurrection, in the same way as in his return he is still recognised as the one who was pierced (Rev. 1.7). Through his death, Jesus holds the keys to Death and Hades. Perhaps Blount’s narrative that ‘Jesus went to Hades and absconded with the keys’ is overly mechanical.58 Nonetheless, the authority Jesus claims over Death and Hades appears to be linked to his experience of death.59 The two, later personified in the Apocalypse, give up their dead (20.13), and are finally thrown into the lake of fire (20.14), both subject to the one who holds the key by virtue of his crucifixion.60 As Hurtado notes: He who is encountered here in theophanic glory is the same one whose bloody death was the crucial act that liberates and constitutes the redeemed as a royal priesthood acceptable to God.61

The crucifixion does not stand in contrast to John’s Christological claims; the death of Jesus is integral to the elevated Christology of the Apocalypse. Christological Oracles (Revelation 2–3) In establishing that the voice which John had heard belonged to none other than the risen Christ, John claims Christ’s authority for his Apocalypse.62 Three times in the opening chapter, John stresses the divine origin of 56.  See also Isa. 44.6: ‘I am the first and I am the last; and beside me there is no God’. 57.  The command to have no fear (‫ל־ּת ָירא‬ ִ ‫א‬/μὴ ַ φοβοῦ; μὴ φοβεῖσθε) is particularly common in Deutero-Isaiah. There is an interesting Christophanic parallel in Mk 6.50 in which Jesus declares ‘I am he’ before reassuring the disciples that they should not fear (ἐγώ εἰμι, μὴ φοβεῖσθε). 58.  Blount, Revelation, 46. 59.  Swete, Apocalypse, 20. Compare Mt. 16.19, where Peter’s authority is symbolised by being given the keys of the kingdom of heaven. 60.  For a discussion of Greek and Jewish mythology relating to the keys of Hades, see Aune, Revelation, 1:103–5. 61.  Larry W. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 591. 62.  DeSilva, Seeing, 124–29.

120

The Violence of the Lamb

his work. He stands at the end of a chain beginning with God, through Jesus, an angel, and finally to himself (Rev. 1.1). He bears witness to all that he saw (1.2). These ‘words of prophecy (οἱ λόγοι τῆς προφητείας)’ (1.3) are not from John; he is merely the carrier of a divine message. Two commands to write what he sees form an inclusio around the vision of the exalted Christ (ὃ βλέπεις γράψον, 1.11; γράψον οὖν ἃ εἶδες, 1.19). John also claims he received his visions while ‘in the Spirit’ (ἐν πνεύματι; 1.10), and was instructed to write what he saw in a book to send to the seven churches (1.11). Therefore, the specific letters to each church, which the others would read, are the words addressed individually and collectively to them from the risen Christ. A further inclusio concerning the nearness of the end further cements John’s prophetic role. Since he has been given access to heaven, he is able to reveal ‘what is and what is to take place’ (1.19), and that the time of its occurrence is near (1.3). That the oracles come from the risen Christ is further evidence of John’s high Christology. Each letter is introduced by the words Τάδε λέγει, followed by a description of Christ informed by the imagery of the first chapter (Rev. 2.1, 8, 12, 18; 3.1, 7, 14). This formulation, which although rare in Hellenistic Greek,63 is found more than three hundred times in the Septuagint to translate ‫( ּכֹה ָא ַמר יְ הוָ ה‬τάδε λέγει κύριος).64 As John sees himself as standing in the prophetic tradition, Christ rather than God becomes the one who delivers the heavenly oracles. As Hurtado surely correctly concludes, for John ‘unhesitatingly to present his prophetic oracles as the words of Jesus indicates a profound inclusion of Jesus within the sphere of action otherwise restricted to God’.65 John recapitulates much of the divine imagery associated with Christ in the first chapter in each of the introduction to his letters. Christ holds the seven stars in his right hand (Rev. 2.1; cf. 1.16); he is the first and last, who died and came to life (2.8; cf. 1.17–18); he has the sharp doubleedged sword (2.18; cf. 1.16); he has eyes like fire and feet like burnished bronze (2.18; cf. 1.14); he has the seven sprits of God and the seven stars (3.1; cf. 1.4, 16); he is the holy and true one, who has the key of David (3.7; cf. 1.18 for the key to Death and Hades); and he is the faithful and true witness (3.14; cf. 1.5).

63.  Aune, Revelation, 1:141–42. 64.  For example, Exod. 4.22; 5.1; 7.17, 26; 8.16; 9.1, 13; 10.3; 11.4; 32.27. The instances are obviously very dense in the prophetic books (e.g. 13 occurrences in Amos, 20 in Zechariah, 25 in Isaiah, and 64 times in the first 30 chapters of Jeremiah). 65.  Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 591.

3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr

121

John also goes beyond the attributes of Christ in the first chapter in the prophetic oracles. The title ‘holy and true’ (ὁ ἅγιος ὁ ἀληθινός; Rev. 3.7) is found on only one further occasion in Revelation, when the martyrs under the altar address God (ὁ ἅγιος καὶ ἀληθινός; 6.10). Moreover, although the individual attributes are used of God in the Old Testament,66 the title ‘holy and true’ is not found in at all in Jewish tradition.67 John, therefore, creates a new title, which only God and Jesus share. Moreover, the activity of Christ in the letters substantially overlaps with exclusively divine privileges. Each oracle warns its readers that Christ knows their works (οἶδα τὰ ἔργα σου or οἶδὰ σου τὰ ἔργα; 2.1, 19; 3.1, 8, 15); or their specific situations in cases of tribulation (2.9, 13). The risen Christ claims, ‘I am he (ἐγώ εἰμι) who searches mind and heart and I will give to each of you as your works deserve’ (2.23), which is a clear allusion to Jer. 17.10, where God speaking, says ‘I, the Lord, search the heart and try the mind, and give to each according to his ways’. Searching the heart or mind is a firmly established function of God,68 although the Gospels also claim Jesus could perceive inward thoughts.69 Yet, as always, Jesus’ death is integral to the Christological story: he is the faithful witness (Rev. 3.14), the one who died (2.8), and who conquered through his own death, just as he urges his hearers to conquer through their own suffering. The Rider on the White Horse (Revelation 19.11–16) While John makes many further Christological claims in the Apocalypse, the last of John’s three Christophanies occurs with the appearance of the rider on a white horse. After the fall of Babylon (Rev. 18.1–19.4), the marriage of the Lamb is announced (19.6–7). Heaven opens and

66.  God is called ‘holy’ (including ‘holy one’, ‘holy name’, etc.): e.g. Lev. 11.44; 19.2; Deut. 32.51; Josh. 24.19; 1 Sam. 2.2; 6.20; 2 Kgs 19.22; Pss. 22.3; 71.22; 89.18; 99.3; 103.1; 145.21; Isa. 1.4; 5.16, 19; 6.3; 10.20 etc. ‘True’ is less common, but found at 2 Chr. 15.3; Jer. 10.10 (‘true God’); Neh. 9.13 (‘true laws’); Pss. 19.9; 119.160 (‘true word’); Jer. 42.5 (‘true witness’); Ezek. 18.8 (‘true judgements’). Jesus is ‘holy’ in Mk 1.24; Jn 6.69; Acts 3.14; and ‘true’ in Jn 1.9; 15.1. 67.  Aune, Revelation, 1:235. 68.  1 Sam. 16.7; 2 Sam. 14.20; 1 Kgs 8.39; 1 Chr. 28.9; 2 Chr. 6.30; Pss. 44.21; 139.1–6; Wis. 7.1; Sir. 1.30; 15.18; 42.18–19; 2 Macc. 9.5; Mt. 6.4, 6, 18; Acts 1.24; 15.8; Rom. 2.16; 1 Cor. 4.5; 14.25; Heb. 4.12–13. 69.  Mt. 9.4; Jn 2.25; 4.29, 39; 16.30; 18.4; 21.17.

122

The Violence of the Lamb Behold, a white horse! He who sat upon it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war. His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems; and he has a name inscribed which no one knows but himself. He is clad in a robe dipped in blood, and the name by which he is called is The Word of God. And the armies of heaven, arrayed in fine linen, white and pure, followed him on white horses. From his mouth issues a sharp sword with which to smite the nations, and he will rule them with a rod of iron; he will tread the wine press of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has a name inscribed, ‘King of kings and Lord of lords’. (Rev. 19.11–16)

That Christ is the rider is confirmed by John’s reuse of earlier images of Christ: faithful and true (Rev. 19.11; cf. 1.5; 3.14); eyes like a flame (19.12; cf. 1.14; 2.18); the sharp sword from his mouth (19.15; cf. 1.16; 2.12, 16); and the title King of kings and Lord of lords (19.16; cf. 17.14; ‘ruler of the kings of the earth’; 1.5). The scene is another example of John’s Christological assimilation of the roles of both the Davidic Messiah and God. There are parallels between Rev. 19.11–16 and Messianic texts, such as Isa. 11.1–4, in which the root of Jesse (cf. Rev. 5.5) will judge with righteousness (Isa. 11.4MT), and ‘smite the earth with the rod of his mouth [“word of his mouth”, 11.4LXX] and slay the wicked with his breath’. Similarly, in Psalms of Solomon 17, God is asked to raise a king, a son of David, who will shatter the ungodly nations with a rod of iron, and the word of his mouth (Pss. Sol. 17.24), and judge the people in wisdom and righteousness (17.26, 29). Elsewhere in Isaiah, judgement is also associated with the image of the winepress, looking to a time in which God will destroy his enemies: I have trodden the winepress alone, and from the peoples no one was with me; I trod them in my anger and trampled them in my wrath; their lifeblood is sprinkled upon my garments, and I have stained all my raiment. (Isa. 63.3)

While God acts as judge in the Apocalypse (Rev. 6.10; 11.18; 14.7; 15.4; 16.5, 7; 18.8, 20; 19.2), Christ also shares the role of ‘righteous judge (ἐν διλαιοσύνῃ κρίνει)’ (19.11).70 The risen Jesus brings reward and punishment to the seven churches, and on a number of occasions shares God’s judgement throne. Punishment also takes place in the Lamb’s presence (14.10). Similarly, while the time of punishment is provoked by ‘the wrath of God’ (ἡ ὀργὴ τοῦ θεοῦ; 19.15), a theme found throughout Revelation (11.18; 14.10; 16.19), the day for judgement is caused also by ‘the wrath of the Lamb’ (ἡ ὀργὴ τοῦ ἀρνίου; 6.16). 70.  God’s judgements are ‘righteous’ in Pss 9.9LXX; 95.13LXX; 97.9LXX.

3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr

123

The royal warrior-Christ carries out the judgement of God’s wrath, smiting the nations, ruling them with a rod of iron, and treading the winepress of God’s fury. The winepress of the wrath of God appears in Rev. 14.14–20, and is connected to Rev. 19.11–16 also by the presence of Christ, who in the earlier passage appears like a son of man with a golden crown on his head. While it is an angel who appears to do the treading (although it is not clear), trampling the wine is a clear metaphor for the battle and the bloodshed that is about to take place as a result of the eschatological war.71 The war itself is not narrated. The armies assemble, the Beast, false prophet and kings of the earth on one side, with the rider and the heavenly army on the other (Rev. 19.19). However, in the next verse the battle is already over as the Beast and the prophet are captured (19.20). Nonetheless, this is not the bloodless battle that some commentators insist upon. The defeated armies are ‘slain by the sword of him who sits upon the horse, the sword that comes from his mouth’ (19.21). Smalley suggests the armies are slain by words,72 but the image is of a corpse-filled battlefield, where the wounded are systematically slaughtered after the main event. While it is just about possible to turn the sword into a metaphor, that the birds are invited to ‘gather for the great supper of God, to eat the flesh of kings, the flesh of captains, the flesh of mighty men, the flesh of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all men, both free and slave, both small and great’ (19.17–18) is a graphic representation of the slaughter John envisages. The battle is another expression of the eschatological judgement in which the wicked are pressed in the winepress, resulting in a great lake of blood 112 kilometres across and 1.5 metres deep.73 71.  Trampling is used as a metaphor for military victory in Isa. 25.10; Zech. 10.5; Lk. 21.4; and Rev. 11.2. 72.  Smalley, Revelation, 499. 73.  Bauckham (Climax, 40–48) lists a series of very close parallels to John’s rivers of blood metaphor: ‘And the horse will walk up to its chest in the blood of sinners, and the chariot will sink up to its height’ (1 En. 100.3); ‘and there shall be blood from the sword as high as a horse’s belly and a man’s thigh and a camel’s hock’ (4 Ezra 15.35–36). He also cites Ginza; y. Ta’an 4.8; Lam. R. 2.2.4; b. Git. 57a; the Prayer of Rabbi Shimon ben Yohai 9; Greek Tiburtine Sybil 183–184; Greek Apocalypse of Daniel 4.6–8 = 6.1–3; Prophecy of Daniel about the Island of Cyprus; Oracle of Leo the Wise 1.283–288; and the Prophecy of Themation about Constantinople, all of which have reference to great quantities of blood, often measured against the height of a horse. It is also possible the image of the fall of Jerusalem is in mind. Josephus says there was so much blood flowing through the streets of Jerusalem from the Roman slaughter that it quenched many of the fires in the houses (War 6.8.5).

124

The Violence of the Lamb

Christ is therefore depicted as a victorious military warrior, carrying out divine judgement and wrath, through the image of warfare in which he slays the assembled armies of the Beast. As we have come to expect, even in this exalted image in which he both judges and makes war, John continues to ensure the crucifixion remains part of his overall picture of Christ. The rider is dressed in a robe dipped in blood (Rev. 19.13). To be sure, it is not impossible that this is the blood of enemies from earlier skirmishes, especially given the volume of blood flowing from the winepress (14.20).74 This interpretation is also consistent with the possible Isaianic background, in which the victims’ blood stains God’s clothing (Isa. 63.3). Koester’s objection that if the blood belongs to the enemy this would create a continuity error, given the battle has not taken place,75 could be overcome by pointing back to Revelation 14. However, the battle of Armageddon is narrated in several different forms, and it is not likely that the events of chs. 14 and 19 should be understood as separate events. As earlier noted, there are clear echoes in the presentation of the rider’s appearance with the Christophany of Rev. 1.12–20, in which Christ declared himself to have died and risen. A reference to his death would therefore be in keeping with this vision. But more compelling is the function of Christ’s blood throughout the Apocalypse, which has a cleansing effect, freeing believers from sins, making them priests, and in which Christians can wash their robes making them white (Rev. 7.14). Juxtaposed with the rider’s clothes dipped in blood is the garments of heaven’s armies, which are fine, white, and pure (19.14), or in other words, washed in the blood of the Lamb. The conquering Christ is the one who faithfully witnessed to death, was raised, and now leads the heavenly army (1.5). As Koester argues, The vision of the divine warrior has similarities to Isa. 63.1–3, but the imagery is recast so that Christ comes to the battle in robes stained with his own blood, since his sacrificial death has been his path to victory.76 74.  This position is taken by Aune, Revelation, 3:1057; Bernard E. Allo, Saint Jean, L’Apocalypse (Paris: Lecoffre, 1921), 304–5; Smalley, Revelation, 491; Blount, Revelation, 352–53; Beckwith, Apocalypse, 733; Jürgen Roloff, The Revelation of John: A Continental Commentary (trans. John E. Alsup; Minnesota: Fortress, 1993), 218; Charles, Revelation, 2:133–34; Swete, Apocalypse, 248–49; and Osborne, Revelation, 682–83. 75.  Koester, Revelation, 756. 76.  Koester, Revelation, 756. Cf. Boring, Revelation, 196–97; Mitchell G. Reddish (‘Martyr Christology in the Apocalypse’, JSNT 33 [1988]: 85–95 [92]) claims ‘In the Apocalypse, Christ conquers not by shedding the blood of his enemies

3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr

125

John’s readers are also able to conquer the Devil by the blood of the Lamb, which appears to have a dual reference to Jesus’ atoning blood, and their own through martyrdom (Rev. 12.11).77 In the Apocalypse, Christ’s blood is a potent weapon in defeating and conquering the Beast and his followers. Therefore, it is more likely that at the scene of the Beast’s final defeat, the blood of Christ is prominent.78 The Lion and the Lamb (Revelation 4–5) In the Apocalypse, John offers three extended visions of Christ: the Ancient of Days/Son of Man (Rev. 1.12–20); the Lion/Lamb (5.1–12); and the divine warrior who conquers his enemies (19.11–16). We noted in the last chapter that it is the middle panel in this Christological triptych that generates most discussion among commentators, on account of the juxtaposition of the apparently incongruent images of a lion and a slain lamb. As we have seen with the other two ‘panels’, John does not isolate the death of Jesus to a historical past or theological compartment; for the Apocalypticist, the crucifixion is an integral component of John’s exalted Christology. Through Jesus’ conquering, his followers were then able to conquer the forces of the Beast, Devil, and Dragon. While John exalts Christ to the level of God by assigning to him divine attributes, functions, and titles, he is also the one who appears on the clouds as a pierced Messiah, and who goes out to slay his enemies with his robe dipped in his own blood. Therefore, we now return to the image of the Lamb in chapter 5 in light of John’s Christology and ask whether a Christological conundrum really exists in the image of the slain lamb. Clearly we may take the crucifixion of Jesus for granted in the slain lamb imagery; the question is whether the slain-ness of the Lamb represents meekness, weakness, or non-violent suffering love in contrast to the lion through which John channels his exalted Christology. As we have seen, many commentators draw a distinction between the conquering lion and the slain lamb. However, as I will demonstrate in the next chapter, it is the act of dying that is precisely the act of conquering in the Apocalypse both in the case of Jesus, and, as I argue in my final chapter, the martyrs. but by shedding his own blood for his enemies’. However, the idea that Christ’s blood is shed for his enemies owes more to later Christian reflection rather than John’s words. Rather, Jesus is able to shed the blood of his enemies because his own blood has been spilled. 77.  Caird (Revelation, 243–44) thinks the blood on the rider’s robe is that of the martyrs. 78.  This position is shared by Koester, Revelation, 755–56; Boring, Revelation, 196–97.

126

The Violence of the Lamb

In Revelation 4–5 John sees the throne room of God, with the two chapters focussing first on God, then on the Lamb. After the exalted Christ has delivered the last of the seven oracles to the churches, John sees an open door in heaven, and the voice like a trumpet which he had first heard, calls him up to heaven (Rev. 4.1; cf. 1.11). This notice identifies the voice as belonging to Jesus.79 While some have suggested the voice belongs instead to an angel,80 there is nothing to suggest the speaker with the voice like a trumpet is a different character from the figure in Rev. 1.12–20, who himself speaks from 1.17. Moreover, the voice in Rev. 4.1 invites John to see ‘what must take place after this’ (ἃ δεῖ γενέσθαι μετὰ ταῦτα), is entirely consistent with the Revelation of Jesus Christ, which discloses ‘what must soon take place’ (ἃ δεῖ γενέσθαι ἐν τάχει; 1.1), and the message given by the Christ-figure, who commands John to write what is and ‘what is about to take place after this’ (ἃ μέλλει γενέσθαι μετὰ ταῦτα; 1.19). The vision that follows, is therefore a revelation given by Jesus.81 John reiterates that he is ‘in the spirit’ (ἐν πνεύματι), and sees a throne standing in heaven, with one seated on the throne’ (ἐπὶ τὸν θρόνον καθήμενος; Rev. 4.2),82 surrounded by 24 elders on thrones (4.4), the seven torches of fire, which are the seven spirits of God (4.5), and four ‘living creatures’ (4.6b–7). The scene has connections with the throne room vision of Isaiah 6, with the six-winged creatures similarly singing ‘Holy, holy holy, is the Lord God Almighty, who was and is and is to come’ (Rev. 4.8; cf. Isa. 6.3).83 Finally, when the creatures sing, the elders ‘fall down before (πεσσοῦνται…ἐνώπιον) him who is seated on the throne, and worship him who lives for ever and ever (προσκυνήσουσιν τῷ ζῶντι εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνιων)’ (Rev. 4.10), singing, ‘Worthy (ἄξιος) are you, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honour and power (λαβεῖν τὴν δόξαν καὶ τὴν τιμὴν καὶ τὴν δύναμιν), for you did create all things, and by your will they existed and were created’ (4.11). God is worshipped as worthy of praise as he is the creator of all things.

79.  Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 111–12. 80.  So Beckwith, Apocalypse, 436; Roloff, Revelation, 44–45. 81.  It is likely the introduction in Rev. 4.1 is to the rest of the book rather than specifically the next vision. 82.  The construction ‘the one seated on the throne’ is used as a circumlocution for God several times in Revelation (Rev. 4.2, 9, 10; 5.1, 7, 13; 6.16; 7.10, 15; 19.4; 20.11). 83.  John emends Isaiah’s song to reflect particular themes of the Apocalypse: κύριος σαβαώθ becomes κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ, and John repeats the earlier designation for God: ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ὢν καὶ ἐρχόμενος.

3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr

127

The Lamb is absent from Revelation 4, yet attributes already associated with Jesus are present in the description of God: Jesus is the one who lives forever (ζῶν…τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνιων; Rev. 1.18), he has the seven spirits of God (3.1), and has his own throne, and also shares his Father’s throne (3.21). Moreover, when the Lamb finally appears, John draws further parallels between the two chapters. Chapter 5 has been variously interpreted as an enthronement scene, based on ancient coronation rites84 or that of a new god,85 a commission, such as found in the heavenly court scenes of 1 Kgs 22.19–23 or Isa. 6.1–11,86 or an investiture, which Aune argues is a more appropriate term since it ‘refers to the act of establishing someone in office or the ratification of the office that someone already holds informally’.87 While appreciating the distinction Aune seeks to make, it is not obvious here that the Lamb is being formally recognised in a new status. In the narrative framework of the Apocalypse, there already have been several confirmations of his exalted status; in other words, this picture does not add any new Christological information. Aune and others point to Dan. 7.9–14 as part of the background to the scene,88 which some see as an ‘enthronement’ of the son of man.89 However, there is a crucial distinction; in Dan. 7.14, the son of man is given ‘dominion and glory and kingdom, that all peoples, nations and tongues should serve him’. However, in Rev. 5.9b–10, the Lamb has ransomed all people, nations, and tongues and made them a kingdom and priests, enabling them to reign on earth. As in Rev. 1.12–20, the Lamb shares more with the Ancient of Days than with the Son of Man figure. The question–answer format of the heavenly court commission quite clearly maps onto the structure of Rev. 5.2–3:

84.  Holtz, Christologie, 27–54; Roloff, Revelation, 72–73; Sweet, Revelation, 121–27. 85.  Jeremias, Babylonisches, 13–14, 17–18; Hermann Gunkel, Zum religionsgeschichtlichen Verständnis des Neuen Testaments (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1903), 62–63. 86.  Hans-Peter Müller, ‘Die himmlische Ratsversammlung: Motivgeschichtliches zu Apc 5.1–5’, ZNW 54 (1963): 254–67. 87.  Aune, Revelation, 1:336. See his full discussion of these various backgrounds, 1:332–38. 88.  Aune, Revelation, 1:336–38; Adela Yarbro Collins, The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation (HDR, 9; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1976), 214–15. 89.  John J. Collins, A Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 301.

128 Isa. 6.8 I heard the voice of the Lord, saying ‘Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?’ Then I said, ‘Here I am. Send me!’

The Violence of the Lamb 2 Kgs 22.20–21 The Lord said, ‘Who will entice Ahab that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?’… Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, saying, ‘I will entice him’.

Rev. 5.2–3 And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, ‘Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?’ And no one on earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll or look into it.

However, unlike Isaiah and 1 Kings, the question is answered in the negative. This is not a divine commission, but the commission genre helps to emphasise John’s elevated Christology. In all creation, which has just been praised, no one is found to be ‘worthy’ (ἄξιος), again an attribute only given to God (Rev. 4.11). The striking absence of anyone, human or celestial, not even the ‘strong angel (ἄγγελος ἰσχυρός)’, emphasises the Lamb’s unique place in the cosmos. With all other avenues exhausted, and the Seer reduced to tears, one of the elders reveals that one who has conquered can open the scroll; the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David (5.5), at which point John sees the Lamb as if slain standing centre stage (5.6). John does not ‘turn’ to see the Lamb. Commentators who wish to accentuate an apparent difference between the sound and the image add this dramatic gesture, sometimes suggesting discontinuity between hearing and seeing is a feature of the Apocalypse. Earlier in Revelation, John does hear a voice and turns to see who is speaking, when he hears a voice like a trumpet (1.11) and then sees the glorious Christophany (Rev. 1.12–20); there is no lack of continuity present here. The image of the Lamb reinforces what John’s readers already know is the case: Jesus Christ is the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings on earth (1.5); he died, is the living one, and is alive for evermore (1.18). The Lamb is slain, but he is standing, and has seven horns, which is a symbol of royal power (5.6). The image of the Lamb is not an image of weakness in counterpoint to the conquering lion; it is as a Lamb, the one who died, that Jesus has already conquered and been glorified (3.21; 1.7), and now shares in the praise accorded to God. The elders ‘fell down before the Lamb’ (ἔπεσαν ἐνώπιον τοῦ ἀρνίου; Rev. 5.8), as they had done earlier before God (4.10), and praise the Lamb:

3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr

129

Worthy (ἄξιος) are you to take the scroll and open its seals because you were slain and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and tongue and people and nation, and have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on earth. (Rev. 5.9–10)

The Lamb is worthy because he was slain. The achievements of his death—ransoming people, making them a kingdom, and enabling them to reign (Rev. 5.10)—have already been listed in the Revelation’s first doxology (1.5–6). Again, this is not new information for John’s readers; they already knew what Christ’s death achieved, and more than likely, already sang hymns about his conquering crucifixion. In Revelation only God and Christ are worthy of praise. As a ‘worthy’ hymn was addressed to God (Rev. 4.11), so one is addressed to the Lamb (5.9–10). Next, multitudes in heaven—‘the living creature, and the elders, and the voice of many angels, numbering myriads of myriads and thousands of thousands (Rev. 5.11; cf. Dan. 7.10)—ascribe qualities, including glory, honour, and power, already given to God (Rev. 4.11), to the Lamb: ‘Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honour and glory and blessing’ (5.12). Finally, the cosmos unites—‘every creature in heaven and on earth, and under the earth and in the sea’—in praise of both God and the Lamb in a closing doxology:90 ‘To him who sits upon the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honour and glory and might for ever and ever!’ And the four living creatures said, ‘Amen!’ and the elders fell down and worshipped. (Rev. 5.13–14)

In the Apocalypse, John raises Jesus near to the status of God. Here, the Lamb and God are separated from the rest of the cosmos by their respective worthiness, and as proper recipients or praise and worship.91 An angel warns John on two occasions that the only divine being worthy of worship is God (Rev. 19.10; 22.8–9), and so we must assume that the 90.  Bauckham (Theology, 60) notes that ‘the worship of the Lamb (Rev. 5.8–12) leads to the worship of God and the Lamb together (5.13). John does not wish to represent Jesus as an alternative object of worship alongside God, but as one who shares in the glory due to God’. 91.  God and the Lamb are also collectively worshipped in a scene in which a multitude from every nation are ‘standing before the throne and before the Lamb (ἑστῶτες ἐνώπιον τοῦθρόνου καὶ τοῦ ἀρνίου)…crying with a loud voice, “Salvation belongs to our God who sits upon the throne, and to the Lamb (ἡ σωτηρία τῷ θεῷ ἡμῶν τῷ καθημένῳ ἐπὶ τῷ θρόνῳ καὶ τῷ ἀρνίῳ)!” ’ (Rev. 7.9–10).

130

The Violence of the Lamb

worship offered to Jesus throughout the Apocalypse is consistent with John’s understanding of monotheistic practice. Koester’s claim that ‘the Lordship of God and Christ is treated as a single entity in Revelation’92 is strengthened by John’s use of singular verbs or pronouns where God and the Lamb are the subjects (6.17; 11.15; 22.3–4).93 Similarly, God and the Lamb appear to share a single throne in the vision of the holy city, as the water of life flows ‘from the throne of God and of the Lamb’ (ἐκ τοῦ θρόνου τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἀρνίου; 22.1; also 22.3: ὁ θρόνος τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἀρνιοῦ; cf. 7.9), a situation anticipated in 3.21, where Jesus sat with his father on his throne.94 God and the Lamb collectively constitute the temple in the new Jerusalem (21.22), and also together provide its light (21.23). Finally, shortly after the souls under the altar ask God to judge and avenge the earth (6.10), we find a depiction of judgement which causes the peoples on the earth to call to the mountains, ‘Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb (άπὸ προσώπου τοῦ καθημένον ἐπὶ τοῦ θρόνου, καὶ ἀπὸ τῆς ὀργῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου); for the great day of their wrath (ἡ ἡμέρα ἡ μεγάλη τῆς ὀργῆς αὐτοῦ)95 has come, and who can stand before it?’ (6.16–17). The slain Lamb, then, is a symbol of power and divinity. John does not play down the death of Jesus in constructing his exalted theology. The cross contributes to his picture of Christ. In each of his extended presentations of Christ: Son of Man/Ancient of Days (Rev. 1.12–20); Lamb (5.1–14); and Rider on the white horse (19.11–16), Jesus’ death forms an integral part of these lofty images. In the oracles to the churches, his death provides a model for faithful witness; it is the means by which he conquers, freeing believers from their sins, and causing them to become 92.  Koester, Revelation, 228. 93.  Bauckham, Theology, 60. 94.  This is not to say John does not distinguish in some way between God and Christ. God is Jesus’ father (Rev. 3.21) and his God (3.2, 20). The Lamb is omitted from worship of God, rather conspicuously in 6.11 having been included in a song of praise (6.10), and he is described as ‘the beginning of God’s creation’ (3.14). Nonetheless, it is certainly a functional divinity that would have challenged more conservative monotheists, and Bauckham’s phrase ‘Christological monotheism’ captures the sense of John’s Christology. Nonetheless, Bauckham probably moves too far in the direction of Chalcedonian orthodoxy when he states, ‘God is related to the world not only as the transcendent holy One, but also as the slaughtered Lamb’ (Theology, 65). 95.  The variant αὐτῶν is found (including ‫ א‬and C), but it is easier to account for a scribe correcting αὐτοῦ so that the pronoun refers to both God and the Lamb rather than the other way round. As discussed above, this is an example of a single pronoun used collectively of both God and Jesus together.

3. The Lamb as Proto-Martyr

131

priests and kings. The Lamb does not stand in contrast to the Lion; the Lamb stands because, through his death, resurrection, and glorification, he shares the attributes and functions of God. Jesus conquers through his death, and his crucifixion makes him worthy to take and open the scroll, and to receive divine honours and worship. In opening the scroll, he unleashes judgement on the earth, in which he will fulfil the role of divine judge through the ensuing eschatological carnage. There is no contrast between the Lion and the Lamb; both are potent symbols of Christ’s power and might; the Lamb is the illustration that this power has been taken through death on the cross. Having concentrated in this chapter on Christ’s death and resurrection, in the next we turn to his role as judge, in which we see the full force of the violence of the Lamb.

Chapter 4 T h e L a m b a s D i vi n e J udge

Violence and Judgement in the Apocalypse Violence in the Apocalypse is most fully expressed in the judgement sequences upon the world. We have seen that John’s Christology does not allow the image of the Lamb to be restricted to sacrifice alone. In his glorified state, he executes judgement. Commentators, however, claim the violence of judgement is not what it seems. So Barr writes: The violence attributed to the Lamb is always equivocal. He slays all the wicked, but by the sword of his mouth (not his hand). He gathers an army but never leads a charge. Earth’s inhabitants cry out to be preserved from the ‘wrath of the Lamb’ but it is important to see that this wrath is never portrayed. From the very first introduction of the Lamb it is presented as the very antithesis of the conqueror.1

In this chapter I argue that this view cannot be maintained. The Lamb is the agent of divine wrath, sharing with God the role of judge. However, I will demonstrate that the violence inflicted on all peoples of the earth outside the church is educational. Despite some commentators’ claim to the contrary,2 John is not primarily interested in the earth-dwellers. For John, they are already judged as Beast-worshippers. He does not in any sense hope for their repentance or salvation. Instead, John’s focus is on the Christian communities to which he writes. The exaggerated fantasy violence against the nations of the earth is ultimately a threat of what could happen to those who read or hear the Apocalypse, if they do not take remedial action and repent. It is my contention that the oracles to the seven churches are the key to the violent judgement of the Lamb.

1.  Barr, ‘Lamb’, 208. 2.  Most fully expressed in Bauckham, Climax, 238–337.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

133

Judgement in the Oracles to the Seven Churches (Revelation 1–3) Revelation 2–3 contains seven messages to seven churches and each contributes to a cumulative picture of Christ as judge, who stands in the place of God. The seven letters are dictated to John by the glorified Christ, and contain his message to each church. The authority of the speaker is emphasised by the introductory formula τάδε λέγει, followed by an aspect of the figure from Rev. 1.12–20. John deliberately invokes a stylised form for marking God’s speech, indicating that, for him, the risen Jesus speaks with the authority of God.3 Significantly, many of the occurrences of τάδε λέγει in the Septuagint are found in the context of God proclaiming judgement, from the plagues of Egypt (Exod. 7.17, 26; 8.16; 9.1, 13; 10.3; 11.4) to the oracles in Amos (1.6, 9, 11, 13; 2.1, 4, 6; 3.11, 12; 5.3, 16; 7.11, 17). Sometimes, the threat of judgement is placed alongside the means of avoiding it (e.g. Amos 5.4). In the oracles to the seven churches, encouragement, warning, and the threat of judgement are prominent. In Revelation, the basis of judgement is ultimately according to one’s works (κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν; Rev. 20.12, 13). At the final judgement, two books will be open which will reveal the works of the dead (20.12). However, John’s readers are told that their deeds are already exposed. In his oracles to five of the seven churches, the risen Jesus declares ‘I know your works’ (οἶδα τὰ ἔργα σου; 2.2, 19; 3.1, 8, 15). In the case of the other two churches, Jesus knows (οἶδα) their affliction (2.9), and that they live where Satan has his throne (2.13). That the exalted Christ already has a record of the churches’ works implies the real threat of judgement. However, that threat is clearly designed to encourage readers to amend any current wayward behaviour. Collectively, the messages to the seven churches provide models of both faithful and faithless behaviour. Each letter, although it may carry a message principally to a single community, is also a message for all: All the churches (γνώσονται πᾶσαι αἱ ἐκκλησίαι) will know I am he (ἐγώ εἰμι) who searches the minds and the hearts; and I will give to each one of you according to your deeds (κατὰ τὰ ἔργα ὑμῶν). (Rev. 2.23)

3.  To be sure, τάδε λέγει is also found in respect of human rulers from Joseph (Gen. 45.9), Pharaoh (Exod. 5.10), and Israelite or other kings (Num. 22.16; 1 Kgs 2.30; 20.3, 5; 2 Kgs 1.11; 9.18; 18.19; 19.3).

134

The Violence of the Lamb

There is a clear parallel with Jer. 17.10: ‘I, the Lord (‫יְ הוָ ה ֲאנִ י‬/ἐγὼ κύριος), test the mind and search the heart, and give to all according to his ways, according to the fruit of his practices’. John, therefore, ascribes omniscience and God’s prerogative of judgement to the risen Jesus.4 Jesus, like God, knows the mind and heart of John’s readers, and this functions as a threat. The examples of judgement to which we will next turn reinforces that threat. Yet, the risen Christ places the threat of judgement in the context of a covenanted relationship. He tells the Laodiceans, but by extension all the churches, ‘those whom I love I reprove (ἐλέγχω) and discipline (παιδεύω)’ (Rev. 3.19). Therefore, an opportunity exists to amend their ways. Once again, the risen Jesus takes on one of God’s roles in the Hebrew Bible. For God also disciplines those he loves: ‘My son, do not despise the Lord’s (‫יְ הוָ ה‬/κύριος) discipline (παιδεία) or be wary of his reproof (ἐλέγχω), for the Lord (‫יְ הוָ ה‬/κύριος) disciplines (παιδεύω) the one he loves’ (Prov. 3.11–12). God disciplines his people throughout the Old Testament,5 and so for John, the relationship between the churches and Jesus is like God to his people. God is generally responsible for disciplining in the New Testament. Indeed, the author of Hebrews also quotes Prov. 3.11–12 (Heb. 12.6). Interestingly, in Hebrews, God’s discipline appears to be the explanation for the church enduring some form of persecution from outsiders. Although the Christians have not yet shed their blood in resistance (Heb. 12.4), they are reminded that God, like a father, disciplines those he loves (12.5–7). The author goes so far as to suggest this discipline is a sign of sonship, such that a lack of suffering would signal illegitimacy (12.8). In Hebrews, persecution, though unpleasant, can be endured because it will be for a short time (12.10), and is a sign of God’s favour (12.11). The idea that persecution from hostile forces might be the result of God’s chastisement is found in Second Temple Jewish texts, perhaps in its most extreme form in 2 Maccabees. Faced with enormous suffering and persecution at the hands of Antiochus IV, including the defilement of the

4.  God also searches the mind and heart of people in 1 Sam. 16.7; 2 Sam. 14.20; 1 Kgs 8.39; 1 Chr. 28.9; 2 Chr. 6.30; Pss 44.21; 139.1–6, 23. See also Wis. 7.1; Sir. 1.30; 15.18; 42.18–19; Sus. 42; Bar. 3.32; 2 Macc. 9.5. In the New Testament, see: Mt. 6.4, 6, 18; Acts 1.24; 15.8; Rom. 2.16; 1 Cor. 4.5; 14.25; Heb. 4.12–13. For giving judgement, see: Pss. 27.4; 31.13; 86.2; Prov. 24.12; Sir. 16.12; Jer. 27.9; Lam. 3.64; Rom. 2.6; 2 Cor. 11.15; 2 Tim. 4.14. 5.  Deut. 8.5; Pss. 94.12; 118.18; Prov. 3.11–12; Job 5.17–18; Jer. 2.30; 5.3; 10.24; 31.18//38.18LXX; 46.28//23.28LXX; Jdt. 8.27; Sir. 18.13; 22.6; 30.1; 2 Macc. 6.12–17; cf. Pss. 6.1; 38.1.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

135

Temple, the author interjects a note to the reader who might be tempted to ask how God can permit such atrocities to be carried out against his faithful people and the Temple: Now I urge those who read this book not to be depressed by such calamities, but to recognise that these punishments were designed not to destroy but to discipline our people. In fact, it is a sign of great kindness not to let the impious alone for long, but to punish them immediately. For in the case of the other nations the Lord waits patiently to punish them until they have reached the full measure of their sins; but does not deal in this way with us, in order that he may not take vengeance on us afterward when our sins have reached their height. Therefore, he never withdraws his mercy from us. Although he disciplines us with calamities, he does not forsake his own people. (2 Macc. 6.12–16)

Suffering is interpreted as God disciplining his people for the purpose of correction. Therefore, even repression as severe as that under Antiochus— including the defilement of the Temple—is caused, not by God’s inability to protect his people, but his intolerance of apostasy (cf. 2 Macc. 4.16–17; 7.18, 32). The author is, of course, engaged in theodicy, and while the Maccabean literature like the Deuteronomist’s account of history asserts God’s sovereignty over global political powers, by the late Second Temple Period, an alternative explanation for suffering and evil was developing that would be embraced by Christians; malevolent cosmic powers, with Satan at the head.6 The author of Hebrews is therefore unusual in his suggestion that persecution might be a sign of God’s discipline. In the New Testament and other early Christian literature, however, suffering and persecution normally has a satanic origin. In Revelation, it is the risen Jesus rather than God who is the Lord (κύριος) who chastises. It is not clear in the message to the church in Laodicea precisely what John imagines the form of this chastisement will take. The oracle is entirely negative about the state of the church: they are lukewarm (Rev. 3.16); they are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked, but unable to recognise their own poor spiritual state (3.17);7 their nakedness should make them ashamed, but they need ointment to open their eyes to the fact (3.18). The consequence of this litany of failure is that the risen Christ will vomit (ἐμέω) them out of his mouth (3.16). The vomiting theme is found in Leviticus, where, as the land had vomited out (‫ )קיא‬the previous

6.  Middleton, ‘Overcoming the Devil’. 7.  Cf. 1 Cor. 4.8.

136

The Violence of the Lamb

inhabitants who had defiled it (Lev. 18.25), the Israelites are threatened with the same fate should they practise abominations (18.28). Those who commit such acts are cut off from the people. Being spewed out from the land is effectively equivalent to being outside the covenant that the people enjoy with God (18.29). This appears to be the threat issued against those in the church who similarly flirt with abominations. In the seven letters, Jesus judges the seven churches, and while all but two have generally positive reports, he declares, ‘but I have this against you’ (ἀλλα ἔχω κατὰ σοῦ; Rev. 2.4, 14, 20).8 These specific complaints include: abandoning their first love (2.4); tolerating the teaching of ‘Balaam’ (2.14), the Nicolaitans (2.15; cf. 2.6), and the prophetess Jezebel (2.20). A call is made to ‘repent’ (μετανοέω; 2.5, 16; 3.3, 19), otherwise there will be consequences for the communities: Jesus will remove their lampstand (2.5); and come to them quickly (2.16), like a thief (3.3).9 Even where there is no explicit threat against the churches, the imminent return of Christ permeates each oracle; the Christians which are commended are urged to continue their good works until that time (Rev. 2.10, 26; 3.4, 11), while for others, the coming of Jesus, which dominates the whole Apocalypse (1.7; 2.5, 16; 3.11; 16.15; 22.7, 12, 20; cf. 6.17; 11.18; 14.7, 15; 18.10) will bring judgement. In the seven ecclesiastical oracles, John appears to imagine a difference between judgement or discipline on members of the church and judgement on those outside. Yet the disciplining of the churches differs in severity. In 1 Corinthians, Paul claims that sickness and even death can be explained by divine punishment for sin, in this case, inappropriate behaviour at the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor. 11.30).10 Paul explains that the one who eats and drinks unworthily (11.27), and does not ‘discern the body eats and drinks judgement upon himself’ (11.29). Paul then suggests that correct selfjudgement can avoid divine judgement (11.31). However, significantly, 8.  Even the church in Pergamum, which produced the martyr Antipas (Rev. 2.13), is subject to this judgement (2.14). The message to the churches in Smyrna (2.8–11) and Philadelphia are entirely positive, while the oracles to Sardis (3.1–6) and Laodicea (3.14–22) are uniformly negative, and therefore have no positive message to require the contrasting ἀλλα ἔχω κατὰ σοῦ. 9.  The idea that Jesus will return like a thief is firmly embedded in early Christian tradition, and is repeated in Rev. 16.15: ‘See, I am coming like a thief (ὡς κλέπτης)’. In 1 Thess. 5.2 we read ‘the Day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night’ (cf. 1 Thess. 5.4); similarly 2 Pet. 3.10. 10.  It is not impossible that Paul is speaking metaphorically about sickness and death: ‘For this reason many of you are weak and ill (ἐν ὑμῖν πολλοὶ ἀσθενεῖς καὶ ἄρρωστοι), and some have fallen asleep (καὶ κοιμῶνται)’ (1 Cor. 11.30).

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

137

and not unlike the theology found in 2 Macc. 6.12–17, Paul allows that there may indeed be a period of divine judgement and disciplining on the church in order to avoid the more general judgement that is coming on the world: ‘But when we are judged, we are disciplined by the Lord so that we may not be condemned along with the world’ (1 Cor. 11.32). If Paul understands ‘falling asleep’ in 1 Cor. 11.30 as literal death, then it seems that even a divine death sentence is the sort of chastisement that is ultimately better than facing condemnation when the world is judged. As strange as this may appear, a not dissimilar notion may be in view in the reference to delivering a man over to Satan in 1 Cor. 5.5. A particularly sinful man (1 Cor. 5.1) is to be removed from the community (5.2), and by means of Paul’s spirit, present through the power of Jesus, and in the name of the Lord Jesus (5.4), he is to be handed over to Satan (παραδοῦναι τὸν τοιοῦτον τῷ Σατανᾷ) ‘for the destruction of his flesh (εἰς ὄλεθρον τῆς σαρκός), so that his spirit might be saved in the day of the Lord (ἵνα τὸ πνεῦμα σωθῇ ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ)’ (5.5).11 Although precisely what Paul imagines will happen to the man is far from certain, it is entirely possible that his death is envisaged.12 If so, the chastisement, even though severe, is designed primarily to preserve the purity of the community. However, secondly, the rite, even if it involves divine capital punishment,

11.  In 1 Tim. 1.20, the author, claiming to be Paul, says he handed Hymenaeus and Alexander over to Satan. In this case, what is imagined is slightly less obscure than in 1 Cor. 5.5. The two men are handed over to Satan in order that they might be taught not to blaspheme (ἵνα παιδευθῶσιν μὴ βλασφημεῖν). While permanent exclusion from the community as punishment is certainly possible, it is more likely that after a period of divine correction the two might be restored as was Paul, who was once a blasphemer who persecuted the church (1 Tim. 1.13). See Martin Dibelius and Hans Conzelmann, The Pastoral Epistles (trans. Philip Buttolph and Adela Yarbro; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1972), 33–34; Houlden, Pastoral Epistles, 62. However, Kelly (Pastoral Epistles, 58–59) suggests that even if restoration is envisaged, the chastisement would be severe, such as paralysis or sickness. Similarly, Donald Guthrie, The Pastoral Epistles (2nd ed.; Leicester: IVP, 1990), 78–79. 12.  This is the conclusion reached by David R. Smith, ‘Hand This Man Over to Satan’: Curse, Exclusion and Salvation in 1 Corinthians 5 (LNTS, 386; London: T&T Clark International, 2008); see 3–56 for an extensive history of interpretation. Smith’s conclusions have been challenged by Robert E. Moses, ‘Physical and/or Spiritual Exclusion? Ecclesial Discipline in 1 Corinthians 5’, NTS 59 (2013): 172–91. Moses argues that the man’s exclusion will result in physical assaults from Satan in the hope that hardship will drive him to repentance. The most influential statement against the ‘death’ interpretation remains James T. South, ‘A Critique of the “Curse/ Death” Interpretation of 1 Corinthians 5.1–8’, NTS 39 (1993): 539–61.

138

The Violence of the Lamb

will also safeguard the man’s salvation in the day of judgement on the world. And yet, in Acts, when Ananias and Sapphira are killed by God, there is no sense in which this divine chastisement is in any way salvific (Acts 5.1–11). The couple are judged as outsiders. The oracles to the churches in Revelation seem to contain both corrective divine chastisement, but also a strong threat that any judgement that comes upon even Christians will be devastating and final. A command to repent (μετανοέω) is issued to every church which needs to change an aspect of their behaviour or whose works are not acceptable (Rev. 2.5, 16, 21, 22; 3.3, 19), followed by the consequences of not doing so.13 However, for some in and around the churches, the punishment will be more severe and violent. The churches of Ephesus, Pergamum, and Thyatira contain factions of which John clearly disapproves. There is little reason to believe these are not other Christian believers. However, something about their beliefs or practices irks the Seer. John, of course, transmits his judgement through the risen and exalted Christ. Although the Ephesians are criticised for not doing the good works they formerly did, they are praised for hating the works of the Nicolaitans, who Jesus also hates (μισέω; 2.6). The Nicolaitans also appear in the oracle to the church in Pergamum, where there seems to be some who belong to that group among the church (2.15), along with others who ‘hold to the teaching of Balaam’ (2.14). It is not clear what the Nicolaitans were teaching or practising, and most commentators simply amalgamate the negative actions of this group with the teaching of both Balaam and the prophetess Jezebel (2.20); eating food sacrificed to idols (εἰδωλόθυτα) and ‘committing immorality’ (πορνεύω; 2.14, 20).14 While later Christian heresiologists do mention the Nicolaitans and associate them with sexual licentiousness,15 it is probable that they are simply reading this from Revelation rather than any direct knowledge of their own. In any case, the immorality here is likely to be metaphorical, representing what John regards as unacceptably lax borderlines between the church and wider culture, such as eating food sacrificed to idols. Notably, avoiding both idolmeat (εἰδωλόθυτος) and immorality (πορνεία) were two of the conditions laid down for Gentile entry into the church by the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15.29). However, the prohibition against eating meat sacrificed to idols and that sold in the market 13.  DeSilva (Seeing, 54 n. 83) makes the important point that John’s audience is not homogeneous. 14.  So Koester, Revelation, 262–64; Aune, Revelation, 148–49. 15.  Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 1.26.3; Tertullian, Adv. Marc. 1.29.2; Hippolytus, Haer. 7.36.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

139

was not universally observed even in Paul’s churches (1 Cor. 8–10). The prohibition seems to have been rejected altogether by churches that later claimed a Pauline legacy (1 Tim. 4.3).16 Even if as is probable, the Nicolaitans were a different sect from the followers of the Christian prophet John dubs ‘Balaam’, the judgement on both groups is the same. That John urges the church to repent (Rev. 2.16) probably indicates these teachings are fairly well embedded in the congregations. Jesus warns them that if the church does not repent ‘I will quickly come to you (ἔρχομαί σοι ταχύ) and war against them (πολεμήσω μετ᾽ αὐτῶν) with the sword of my mouth’ (2.16), which invokes the image John used of Jesus in the introduction to the letter to the church (2.12; cf. 1.16). ‘Coming soon’ generally refers to Jesus’ final coming in judgement (2.16; 3.11; 22.7, 12, 20), but Koester insists the logic here means it should be understood as conditional chastisement or a ‘limited disciplinary visitation’.17 However, it is best to understand this threat as somewhere in between these two positions. The followers of Balaam and the Nicolaitans will be judged in the end rather than corrected. The congregation are called to distance themselves from those who hold these teachings to ensure that when Jesus comes to make war against them, they are not caught up in judgement. In Revelation 19, the final battle is waged by the sword from Jesus’ mouth, leaving behind a great slaughter. The threat, as it is throughout Revelation, is designed to force Christians to make a decision to ensure they are insiders and not outsiders at the time of judgement that is coming soon. In the oracle to the church in Thyatira, John commends the congregation’s works, love, faith and service (Rev. 2.19), but notes that the risen Christ is not completely satisfied with the situation there: But I have this against you (ἀλλὰ ἔχω κατὰ σοῦ), that you tolerate the woman Jezebel (τὴν γυναῖκα Ἰεζάβελ), who calls herself a prophet (προφῆτις) and is teaching and beguiling my servants (ἐμοὺς δούλους) to practise immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols (πορνεῦσαι καὶ φαγεῖν εἰδωλόθυτα). (Rev. 2.20)

16.  The claim εἰδωλόθυτος refers only to meat served in the context of pagan worship in Revelation probably reflects a desire to harmonise Paul’s ambivalence to idolmeat with the more extreme position in the Apocalypse. So Gordon D. Fee, ‘Eidōlothuta Once Again: An Interpretation of 1 Corinthians 8–10’, Bib 61 (1980): 173–97 (181–87); Ben Witherington, ‘Not So Idle Thoughts About Eidolothuton’, TynBul 44 (1993): 237–54; deSilva, Seeing, 58–63, 138–40. 17.  Koester, Revelation, 289.

140

The Violence of the Lamb

John has three distinct targets. First and most obviously, there is Jezebel. Like Balaam in Pergamum, ‘Jezebel’ is certainly not the prophet’s real name. Instead, John brands her with the same reputation as Queen Jezebel (1 Kgs 18–21; 2 Kgs 9), who was similarly accused of leading the Israelites into idolatry (1 Kgs 16.31–33), and called a harlot (πορνεία; 2 Kgs 9.22).18 The second group signalled out for criticism is made up of the Christians of Thyatira who have listened to her teaching, and been beguiled into immorality and eating idolmeat. That this group is called ‘my servants’ is a clear indication that this is an internal Christian matter. As with the Nicolaitans, it is likely the immorality (πορνεία) of which they are accused is metaphorical, representing some form of accommodation with the culture outside the Church, rather than sexual misdemeanours. Finally, the church itself is criticised for ‘tolerating’ Jezebel (Rev. 2.20). This is in itself significant for providing a glimpse into the social situation of the church in Thyatira, and perhaps by extension that of Pergamum. Significantly, there is no hint of tension in the church community. Whatever practices following Jezebel entailed, it appears the community were able to accommodate them with little difficulty. John commends the church for their works, love, faith, service, and their endurance (ὑπομονή), which may indicate the community experienced some low-level persecution, and he praises them for their current works are even greater than their earlier deeds (τὰ ἔργα σου, τὰ ἔσχατα πλείονα τῶν πρώτων; Rev. 2.19). Therefore, to most observers, the church in Thyatira would appear to be a faithful and religiously growing community that is at peace with itself. John’s problem appears to be that state of peace. There is no reason to doubt that ‘Jezebel’ was a real person, and that she not only called herself a prophet, but was recognised in Thyatira as such. There is ample evidence for itinerant prophets or apostles within early Christianity; the task for Christian communities was to test them,19 which the church in Ephesus is commended for doing: ‘You cannot bear evil

18.  Jezebel is also accused of practising sorcery (φάρμακα), and famously paints her eyes before being thrown from her window to her death (2 Kgs 9.30). Eye-painting was depicted as one of the ways in which women might lure men to commit adultery (Isa. 3.16; Jer. 4.30; Ezek. 23.40; Prov. 6.24–26). The presentation of her in the Hebrew Bible and Jewish tradition is uniformly negative. She persecutes the prophets (1 Kgs 18.3; 19.3), and arranges for the assignation of the innocent Naboth (1 Kgs 21.1–16). Josephus similarly tells the story of Jezebel negatively (Ant. 8.13.1–13.8; 9.4.2; 9.6.1; 9.6.4). 19.  So Mt. 7.15–20; 1 Jn 4.1–3; and especially Did. 11–12.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

141

men but have tested those who call themselves apostles (ἐπείρασας τοὺς λέγοντας ἑαυτοὺς ἀποστόλους εἶναι) but are not (καὶ οὐκ εἰσίν), and found them to be false’ (2.2).20 Significantly, in Pergamum and Thyatira this testing of the prophets, at least as far as John is concerned, has not taken place. In both churches the issue appears to be the eating of food sacrificed to idols, and suggests, as we have already noted, that there was not only a variety of early Christian attitudes to this practice, but that more than one view could coexist in a single Christian community. There does not appear to be any Christological dispute as found in other places where Christians are called to test prophets or apostles.21 For John, attitude to idols and works appear to be key. Nonetheless, it should be noted that John does not acknowledge any other prophet as having a positive influence.22 In the Apocalypse, John is the sole human mediator of divine revelation,23 and so these oracles may display an intolerance of any source of authority other than himself. While the teaching of ‘Jezebel’ is identical to that of ‘Balaam’ and the Nicolaitans, the particularly sexualised invective against this prophet may indicate that John does not believe Jezebel can be a prophet because she is a woman. John emphasises τὴν γυναῖκα (2.20), and of course, the place of women teachers in early Christianity was not uncomplicated. To be sure, Joel’s prophecy that the Spirit would be poured out on men and women certainly influenced some parts of early Christianity (Joel 2.28; cf. Acts 2.17; 21.9; 1 Cor. 11.5), but this is balanced by other texts in which women are prohibited from speaking in the Assemblies (1 Cor. 14.34; 1 Tim. 2.12). Friesen, in fact, argues John does recognise Jezebel’s 20.  That the Ephesians successfully tested false prophets and resisted the Nicolaitans (2.6) has led Aune to suggest John’s influence was so strong there that Ephesus was his primary base: David E. Aune, ‘The Social Matrix of the Apocalypse of John’, BR 26 (1981): 18–29 (27–28). 21.  In 1 Jn 4.1–3, the dispute is Christological, while in Mt. 7.15–20 the alignment of words and deeds are important. In the Didache, theology (Did. 11.1–2; 12.1) as well as a whole host of peculiar practices, such as attempting to lodge more than two days (11.5), are the tests for whether not someone is an apostle or prophet. 22.  Friesen, Imperial Cults, 184. 23.  Schüssler-Fiorenza (Revelation, 94–106; ‘The Quest for the Johannine School: The Apocalypse and the Fourth Gospel’, NTS 23 [1977]: 402–27) argues Revelation reveals a clash of what she terms ‘prophetic schools’, with ‘Balaam’, ‘Jezebel’, and the ‘Nicolaitans’ forming rival prophetic groups. She argues that plural ὑμῖν (Rev. 22.16) is evidence that John himself was part of a wider group of prophets. David Aune has also defended this perspective (‘The Prophetic Circle of John of Patmos and the Exegesis of Revelation 22:16’, JSNT 37 [1989]: 103–16; idem, ‘Social Matrix’).

142

The Violence of the Lamb

prophetic authority, for although he states that she ‘calls herself a prophet’ (ἣ λέγει ἑαυτὴν προφῆτιν; Rev. 2.20), he does not then add, ‘but she is not’ such as is found in the case of the false prophets in Ephesus (καὶ οὐκ εἰσίν; 2.2), or the false Jews in Smyrna (καὶ οὐκ εἰσίν; 2.9) or Philadelphia (καὶ οὐκ εἰσίν; 3.9).24 However, that her teaching beguiles members of the church is probably sufficient to draw a negative conclusion on this point (2.20). John’s call for repentance is aimed at the Church and the followers of Jezebel. It seems that the opportunity for Jezebel to repent has ended, and now it is for her followers, and the church that tolerates them to decide whether or not they want to continue in the behaviour that will lead to them sharing her awful fate. I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her immorality. Look! I will throw her on bed along with those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation (εἰς θλῖψιν μεγάλην), unless they repent of her works (ἐκ τῶν ἔργων αὐτῆς). And I will strike her children (τὰ τέκνα αὐτῆς) dead. (Rev. 2.21–23)

It is not clear in what way ‘Jezebel’ has been offered an opportunity to repent. It may well be that John himself has had some form of confrontation with her, a situation not uncommon in early Christianity.25 However, any effort to effect change in her stance has failed. Indeed, perhaps she could have perhaps appealed to the Pauline texts, especially as they developed in the Pastorals that might suggest a more liberal line on idolmeat. As John now believes the teacher is beyond redemption, he goes after her followers. He warns them that the prophet in whom they place their trust is an adulteress with whom they are committing fornication. Like the wilful pagans who will be encountered later in the Apocalypse, despite warning and punishment, ‘Jezebel’ will not repent (cf. Rev. 9.20, 21; 16.9, 11). John also links this Christian prophet to the pagan world by caricaturing her in the same way he will present Rome. ‘Jezebel’ not only encourages wayward Christians to commit adultery with the Great Whore, she herself becomes, in John’s eyes, a whore with whom members of the church might be tempted to fornicate. John effectively has the risen Christ cast ‘Jezebel’ out of the Christian community, punishing her with the violent judgement that will be visited on Babylon and all those who do not remain faithful to him. John

24.  Friesen, Imperial Cults, 187. 25.  Cf. Gal. 2.11–14; Acts 15.39.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

143

presents himself as the sole prophetic authority from whom Christians can guarantee receiving true teaching. To follow any other prophetic voice will risk sharing in the punishment of both whore and adulterer. Those most committed to Jezebel’s teaching, her disciples in Thyatira, will be struck dead (Rev. 2.23). It is not clear whether or not John understands this sentence of death to be literal (as 1 Cor. 11.22) or metaphorical. However, it is clear that John understands the threat of divine violence to be real. The letters to the churches are already ‘public’; each church sees good, bad, and mixed examples of how the risen Christ wishes them to be faithful Christians living in the midst of a powerful empire. This is further reinforced in the message to Thyatira. After pronouncing judgement on the false prophet, John broadcasts the message so everyone will understand (Rev. 2.23).26 In the seven oracles, John makes clear that there is no hiding place for those who seek to be Christian. Membership of the community does not exempt the Christian from judgement, for the risen Christ sees their minds and hearts. Their deeds must match their convictions, and while some Christian leaders might tolerate acts of accommodation with Graeco-Roman culture, John does not, and claims the authority of Christ to dismiss other prophetic authorities as false teachers and whores. All but two of the churches are put under the threat of judgement, but even the churches of Smyrna and Philadelphia are warned to hold fast, and not slip into the behaviour of the churches whose judgement they have overheard. Each letter finishes with the clarion call: ‘The one who has an ear listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches’ (Rev. 2.7, 11, 17, 29; 3.6, 13, 22). The message to the churches does not end with the individual letters: it continues throughout the Apocalypse, when the consequences of disobedience are spelled out. Even the threat of being struck dead is as nothing compared to the judgements to come. Indeed, as people will discover, death is preferable to the violent torments in store. As the Apocalypse unfolds, the message the Spirit is saying to the churches becomes ever clearer. In order to avoid finding themselves on the wrong side of a terrible and violent judgement, they must repent (2.5, 16, 22; 3.3, 19) before it is too late.

26.  DeSilva (Seeing, 189) argues the effect of each church being able to read the others’ mail evokes ‘shame and emulation’. See also David A. deSilva, ‘The Strategic Arousal of Emotions in the Apocalypse of John: A Rhetorical-Critical Investigation of the Oracles to the Seven Churches’, NTS 54 (2008): 90–114; Yarbro Collins, Crisis, 144–61.

144

The Violence of the Lamb

The Seven Seals and Trumpets (Revelation 6–7) The oracles to the seven churches are written primarily to encourage right Christian practice in relation to outsiders, and to warn of the consequences of not doing so. Some aspects of judgement take the form of chastisement; temporary suffering divinely imposed in order to correct behaviour to save the Christian from final judgement. For others, particularly those who make claims to leadership, it seems that the time for chastisement is over,27 and the Christian prophets of whom John does not approve will feel the full force of divine wrath. They will be cast down and visited with sickness, great tribulation, or even death. If these are the threats of judgement issued against insiders, when John turns to the fate that awaits those outside the church, we witness the full force of his apocalyptic imagination. In ch. 4, John is transported to the throne room of God, where in the next chapter, the figure of the quasi-slain Lamb is introduced. I have already argued against readings of this character that overemphasise his slain-ness as a symbol of non-violent suffering love. The slain Lamb, the Lion of Judah, and the Root of Jesse form a triptych that encompass the Apocalypse’s high Christology. The Lamb conquers as victorious Messiah because he was slain, not despite of it. The standing slain Lamb has been glorified and takes the place of highest honour beside God on or beside the throne. I have similarly argued that the image of the Lamb accords rather than contrasts with the other depictions of Christ in the Apocalypse: the glorious Ancient of Days/Son of Man, and the warrior Rider on the horse. I will now demonstrate that this continuity extends to his role in judgement. As the risen and glorified Christ has threatened judgement on the Churches (Rev. 2–3), the Lamb is also the agent of divine wrath, judgement, and violence. The Sealed Scroll As Rev. 5.6 is the first appearance of the Lamb in the Apocalypse, and given this is the most frequent depiction of Christ in the book, it is important to reflect on the Lamb’s function in this scene. God on the throne is the dominant image in Revelation 4, and in Rev. 5.5, attention turns to his right hand, in which he is holding a scroll. It is written on both sides, but is sealed with seven seals (Rev. 5.1). It is not immediately obvious what the contents of the scroll are, and various suggestions have 27.  Cf. Jas 3.1; Mt. 18.6//Mk 9.42//Lk. 17.1–2.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

145

been offered: the whole of various parts of the text of Revelation;28 the book of life;29 a legal document;30 or the scriptures.31 While the scroll may have contained a more general programme of eschatological judgement,32 it is noteworthy that the contents of the scroll are never actually read. There are certainly similarities with the scroll given to Ezekiel: I looked, and a hand was stretched out to me, and a written scroll was in it. He spread it before me; it had writing on the front and on the back, and written on it were worlds of lamentations and mourning and woe. (Ezek. 2.9–10)

However, Ezekiel, while not recounting the words on the scroll, reads enough to know it contains bad news for the people. The parallel with Ezekiel is pushed too far by those who identify the scroll in Rev. 10.2 with the sealed scroll in Rev. 5.1 on the grounds that both are written on two sides, and both are subsequently consumed by the prophets.33 However, there are important differences. The scroll is opened before Ezekiel, while the scroll in the Apocalypse is unsealed but not read. Therefore, just because the scroll Ezekiel reads is the same one he later eats certainly does not mean the scroll John does not read in ch. 5 is the same one he will eat in ch. 10. It seems to me that much scholarly energy has been expended unnecessarily on the question of the scroll’s content. The function of the scroll, rather than its contents, is its most significant aspect. The sealed scroll functions as an eschatological prop that sets the scene for both the 28.  Smalley, Revelation, 128; Holtz, Christologie, 35. Swete (Apocalypse, 75) and Beckwith (Apocalypse, 263–64) take the scroll as beginning with Rev. 8.2 because that is the point at which all the seals are open, and therefore the contexts can be read. 29.  R. Dean Davis, The Heavenly Court of Judgment of Revelation 4–5 (Lanham: University of America Press, 1992), 181–86. 30.  David Hellholm, ‘The Problem of Apocalyptic Genre and the Apocalypse of John’, Semeia 35 (1986): 13–64 (48–53); Smalley, Revelation, 127. Parallels are drawn with various legal documents, such as the last will and testament of the Lamb (Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 120–23); imperial legal documents that had to have at least six witnesses seal them (Ethelberg Stauffer, Christ and the Caesars: Historical Sketches [London: SCM, 1952], 182–83); or a marriage or bill of divorce (Ford, Revelation, 92–94, 165–66). 31.  This is a common ancient interpretation: e.g. Hippolytus, Comm. Dan. 34.3; Origen, Comm. John 5.4. See also Sweet, Revelation, 123. 32.  Swete, Apocalypse, 75; Caird, Revelation, 72; Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 120. 33.  Mazzaferri, The Genre of the Book of Revelation, 265–79; Bauckham, Climax, 243–57.

146

The Violence of the Lamb

appearance and the importance of the Lamb. The scene began with the voice of the risen Jesus34 telling John to come up through the open door in heaven to be shown ‘what must take place after this’ (Rev. 4.1). The throne room in Rev. 4.2–11 reinforces the idea that God is the true source of power in the universe. It then becomes clear that in his right hand—a well-known symbol of power, justice, protection, and judgement in the Hebrew Bible35—is the means by which that justice and judgement will unfold. The sealed scroll must be opened for the story to continue, which is why the fact that ‘no-one in heaven or on earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll or to look into it’ (5.3) was so devastating for John (5.4). Without the Lamb, the seals would have remained unopened, and there would have been no judgement upon the earth; the Lamb is the agent and facilitator of judgement. As I argued above, there is no discontinuity between the various presentations of Jesus in Rev. 5.5–6. Jesus’ unique ‘worthiness’ to take and open the scroll is twice proclaimed: Do not weep. See, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that he can open the scroll and its seven seals. (Rev. 5.5) You [The Lamb] are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slaughtered… (Rev. 5.9)

Jesus is worthy to take the scroll and open its seal in his manifestations of Lion of Judah, Root of David, and slaughtered Lamb, again demonstrating that this is a composite rather than a contrasting image of the conquering Christ. Having conquered and taken the scroll from God’s right hand (Rev. 5.7), the Lamb is incorporated into the one to whom praise and worship is due: ‘To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honour and glory and might for ever and 34.  With Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 411–12. Aune (Revelation, 282) is certainly correct in noting fairly untidy redactional activity in John’s attempt to link the vision that follows to the first part of the book. However, less certain is his argument that John intends to differentiate between the voice of Jesus and another voice. Beckwith (Apocalypse, 436) and Roloff (Revelation, 44–45) differentiate between the voices in 1.11 and 1.19. However, in the text as it currently stands, no such distinction is found. 35.  So Exod. 15.6, 12; Pss. 16.11; 17.7; 18.35; 20.6; 44.3; 48.10; 60.5; 63.8; 78.54; 89.13; 98.1; 118.16; 138.7; Isa. 41.10. Jesus appears at the right hand of God in Mt. 22.44//Mk 12.36//Lk. 20.42; Heb. 1.13 (cf. Ps. 110.1); Mt. 26.64//Mk 14.62//Lk. 22.69; Acts 2.33; 5.31; 7.55, 56; Rom. 8.34; Eph. 1.20; Col. 3.1; Heb. 1.3; 8.1; 10.12; 12.2; 1 Pet. 3.22; and holds the seven stars in his own right hand Rev. 1.16, 20; 2.1.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

147

ever’ (5.13; cf. 4.11).36 The opening of the seals that follow demonstrate the power, glory, and might that the Lamb shares with God through the execution of judgement upon the earth. As Boxall notes, from this point onwards ‘The Lamb’s role in enabling the fulfilment of God’s salvific plan will be evident’.37 The Lamb now effectively shares the judgement seat with God.38 With the opening of the seals, judgement commences. The First Four Seals (Revelation 6.1–8) The Lamb opens the seven seals one by one (Rev. 6.1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 12; 8.1).39 Like the seven trumpets and seven bowls that will follow, they are 36.  Ian Boxall (The Revelation of Saint John [BNTC; London: A. & C. Black, 2006], 99) suggests the moment he takes the scroll is ‘effectively the enthronement of the Lamb’. 37.  Boxall, Revelation, 103. Boxall is also aware of the potential theological problem caused by the Lamb’s responsibility for a lot of violence (104). Therefore, Bauckham (Climax, 243–66) argues the Lamb opening the scrolls is not specifically related to the judgements that follow. However, this concern appears to be driven by the need to divorce Jesus’ victory from judgement on the wicked. 38.  Jesus says that he shares God’s throne in Rev 3.21, and this is the image in 22.1, 3, where God and the Lamb are associated with a single throne (ὁ θρόνος τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἀρνίου). When the Lamb is first seen (Rev. 5.6), he is ἐν μέσῳ τοῦ θρόνου καὶ τῶν τεσσάρων ζῴων καὶ ἐν μέσῳ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων. While this can certainly mean the Lamb was in the centre of the throne, most commentators dismiss this interpretation on the grounds that he will later move to take the scroll from the right hand of the one sitting on the throne (5.7), and opt for the space between (Boxall, Revelation, 98) or among (Aune, Revelation, 352) the throne and the other characters. Nonetheless, the repetition of μέσος makes these translations difficult. There are those who, puzzled by John not having noticed the Lamb until now, imagine the Lamb literally just arriving (Holtz, Christologie, 29–31). However, this is to take the imagery over-literally. By this logic, the one seated on the throne has been holding a scroll in his right hand all the way through ch. 4! Surely it is better not to imagine what the scene looks like retrospectively, but to understand that John brings to attention those things that are important at the point in which he requires them (cf. John’s use of καὶ εἶδον an aspect of a scene already mentioned: Rev. 5.2, 6, 11; 6.2, 5, 8, 12; 7.2; 9.1; 16.13; 17.3, 6). Similarly, imagining the precise location of, or stage direction for, the Lamb is to miss the point. The Lamb is closely associated with God, and, although ‘taking the scroll’ becomes a key action, sharing God’s throne also indicates John’s Christological conviction. A similar phrase is used in Rev. 7.17 to position the Lamb in the middle of the throne (μέσον τοῦ θρόνου). Therefore, although the stage direction is not unproblematic, it is more likely that for John, Christology trumps everything else; the Lamb is best placed on the throne. 39.  There is no need to worry with Aune (Revelation, 392) that it is ‘obviously very difficult to imagine a Lamb opening a scroll’. There is probably little point in attempting to visualise this level of detail in the Apocalypse, when there is so much incongruity in the descriptions of the scenes.

148

The Violence of the Lamb

grouped in 4 + 3 clusters. When each of the first four seals is opened, one of the living creatures says ‘Come’ (ἔρχου; 6.1, 3, 5, 7), and a horse and rider appear: the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. The four horsemen appear to be loosely based on the four chariots of Zech. 6.1–8, with red, black, white, and grey horses respectively, which are sent to patrol the earth.40 In Revelation, the horses are white, red, black, and sickly green (χλωρός). Only one of the riders is explicitly identified; the rider on the green horse is Death (θάνατος), and Hades (ᾅδης) follows behind him (Rev. 6.8). Death and Hades are elsewhere enemies of God, which are forced to give up their dead and end up in the lake of fire (Rev. 20.13–14; 21.4; cf. 1.18). This has led to some commentators identifying all four horsemen as demonic or evil characters.41 However, others have noted parallels between the first rider on the white horse (6.2) and the later image of Christ on his horse (19.11–16). To be sure, the images are introduced in the same way: καὶ εἶδον, καὶ ἰδοὺ ἵππος λευκός, καὶ ὁ καθήμενος ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν… (Rev. 6.2) καὶ εἶδον…καὶ ἰδοὺ ἵππος λευκός καὶ ὁ καθήμενος ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν… (Rev. 19.11)

Although a common early Christian interpretation,42 the conclusion that the first rider is in fact Christ43 can be dismissed for four reasons. Aside from the introductory words, the riders are quite different: the Christological image of the horse and rider has not yet been introduced; the Lamb is the one opening the seals;44 and it is unlikely John would introduce Christ without more ceremony as merely one of four horsemen.45 Nonetheless, the first rider is given a crown, and went out conquering and to conquer (καὶ ἐδόθη αὐτῷ στέφανος καὶ ἐξῆλθεν νικῶν καὶ ἵνα νικήσῃ; Rev. 6.2). While the Lamb is introduced as the one who has conquered (5.5; cf. 17.14), this is not an activity restricted to Christ, or indeed to the Christians, who are called to conquer (2.7, 11, 17, 26; 3.5, 12, 21; 21.7), 40.  Cf. Zech. 1.7–11, in which only one rider is mentioned on a red horse, but further red, sorrel, and white horses are behind him (Zech. 1.8). 41.  Boxall, Revelation, 107. 42.  For example, Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 4.21.3. 43.  So John P. Heil, ‘The Fifth Seal (Rev. 6,9–11) as a Key to the Book of Revelation’, Bib 74 (1993): 220–43 (223); Sweet, Revelation, 138; George E. Ladd, A Commentary on the Revelation of John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972), 98. 44.  Aune, Revelation, 393. 45.  That the second horseman is introduced as ‘another horse’ (ἄλλος ἵππος; Rev. 6.4) hardly sufficiently distinguishes the first from the other three to warrant such a radically different identification.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

149

and who will conquer (12.11; 15.2). On two occasions, the Beast conquers (νικάω) the faithful (11.7; 12.11). Similarly, the crown (στέφανος) the rider is given is a mixed symbol in the Apocalypse. Those who remain faithful may gain (2.10) or retain (3.11) a crown, and the elders in the throne room have crowns (4.4), which they cast down before God (4.10). While the Son of Man with the sickle for harvest has a crown (14.4), so too does the woman in the sky (12.1), and the strange warring locusts (9.7). The Rider of Rev. 19.11–16 has many diadems (διαδήματα πολλά; 19.12), but so too have the anti-Christ figures: the dragon (12.3) has seven (ἑπτὰ διαδήματα); and the Beast (13.1) has ten (δέκα διαδήματα). Therefore, neither the crowns nor the conquering activity are uniformly positive or negative in the Apocalypse, and so these things in themselves cannot be decisive in assessing the identity of the horsemen. In sharp contrast to the Christ identification, a number of commentators interpret the first rider as the anti-Christ.46 Just as the Beast is an evil parody of the lamb, so the rider on the white horse parodies the triumphant Word of God who will later appear (Rev. 19.15). Others see in the seven seals echoes of the Synoptic Apocalypse:47 the second rider takes peace from the earth (6.3–4), which mirrors the wars and rumours of wars (Mk 13.7); the third brings famine (Rev. 6.5–6), just as there are earthquakes and famine (Mk 13.8); and the fourth brings pestilence (Rev. 6.7–8; cf. Lk. 21.11). Going back to the first seal, then, it would correspond to the false messiahs who claim Christ’s name and lead many astray (Mk 13.6).48 However, this view requires a very selective reading of both the seals and the Synoptic Apocalypses. The overlaps are more likely down to standard eschatological tropes than conscious modelling. While the destructive horsemen are, for many commentators, evil or demonic,49 the majority interpret the four riders’ activity as human destruction.50 Such violence results when humankind are left to the power of sin. Violence comes upon the earth, resulting in war, famine, and disease. However, interpreting the violence that accompanies the horsemen’s 46.  Mathias Rissi, ‘The Rider on the White Horse: A Study of Revelation 6.1–2’, Int 18 (1964): 407–18 (413–16); J. Ramsey Michaels, Revelation (NTCS; Leicester: IVP, 1997), 100–101; Beale, Revelation, 375–78; Caird, Revelation, 81; Boxall, Revelation, 106–7. 47.  Boxall, Revelation, 105–7. 48.  Boxall (Revelation, 106) provides a chart of the parallels. 49.  Caird, Revelation, 81; Boxall, Revelation, 107. 50.  Koester, Revelation, 394. Or specifically, a historical threat of conquest: Swete, Apocalypse, 86; Mounce, Revelation, 154; Roloff, Revelation, 80–81; Charles, Apocalypse, 1:164; Boring, Revelation, 122.

150

The Violence of the Lamb

appearance as human rather than divine action, while popular among those who advocate non-violent readings of the text, do not take the context of the vision sufficiently seriously. The seals are only opened at all because the Lamb has conquered. These visions and their resultant carnage flow directly out of the action in the throne room in Revelation 4–5. Without the Lamb, there would be no horsemen to wreak havoc. This leads us to the most likely account of the four horsemen. They are divinely appointed agents of wrath. In each case (except the third, which has a slightly different structure), the Lamb breaks open a seal, and a creature orders the rider to come. The rider is then given something by God or the Lamb, indicated by the ‘divine passive’ (ἐδόθη): a crown (Rev. 6.2); a great sword (μάχαιρα μεγάλη; 6.4); and power (ἐξουσία) over a quarter of the earth, to kill with sword, famine, pestilence, and by wild beasts (6.8). The second rider as well as a great sword, is ‘given the ability to take peace from the earth’ (ἐδόθη αὐτῷ λαβεῖν τὴν εἰρήνην ἐκ τῆς γῆς) causing people to kill one another (6.4). There is a clear contrast here with Zechariah, where the horsemen say: ‘We have patrolled the heart, and see, all the earth is peaceful and quiet’ (Zech. 1.11). In Revelation, although following the advent of the second horseman people kill one another,51 it is as a result of the divine direction to take peace away from the earth. This could be a veiled attack on the Roman achievement of pax et securitas (cf. 1 Thess. 5.3), or the contemporaneous fear of invasion or war. Nonetheless, it is not inconsistent with the Q sayings that Jesus came to bring not peace but a sword (Mt. 10.32–34//Lk. 12.51–53; cf. Lk. 12.49). Though ultimately it is the humans who kill one another when the second rider takes peace from the earth, the killing carried out after the breaking of the fourth seal appears to be by divine initiative. Death and Hades are given power to kill a quarter of the earth. To be sure, by sword (ἐν ῥομφαίᾳ) may indicate human war, although the rider on the white horse will slay the wicked with the sword from his mouth (Rev. 19.15), so it is not impossible that divine killing is in view here. However, death by hunger, plague, and wild beasts certainly suggest that God takes an active role in the killing, and in any case, in the Hebrew Bible, God kills with sword, famine, and pestilence (Jer. 14.12; 21.7, 9; 24.10; 27.8, 13; 29.17, 18; 32.24, 36; 34.17; 38.2; 42.17, 22; 44.13; Ezek. 6.11; 12.16). 51.  Boxall (Revelation, 109–10), Beale (Revelation, 379–80), and Heil (‘Fifth Seal’, 222–23) argue that this violence constitutes the Messianic woes directed against Christians, and accounts for at least some of the Christians found slain under the heavenly altar after the opening of the fifth seal (Rev. 6.9–11). However, this is unlikely given the rest of the seals concern judgement on the world. Besides, John makes clear that they slay one another (ἀλλήλους). See Koester, Revelation, 396.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

151

The four horsemen are agents of divine wrath set out into the world to kill and destroy. They are set on their way by heavenly voices, heavenly commands, and divine authority. The unfolding violence on the earth, whether carried out by human actors or not, is done by divine initiative, facilitated by the Lamb, who alone in all creation was able to open the seals of the scroll of judgement. The disasters the horsemen bring should not be considered too sequentially. The fourth seal is effectively a repetition or intensification of the results of the activity of the other three. In the timeframe of the Apocalypse, all these things will come upon the earth in the future, when God and the Lamb finally and decisively enact judgement upon the earth. The fifth seal (Rev. 6.9–11), which will be examined in detail in the next chapter, occurs prior to the judgements brought about by the first four, for judgement has yet to take place. The martyrs under the altar, killed for their witness (6.9), cry out for God to execute his wrath on the earth to avenge their deaths (6.10). They are told to wait a little longer and told that more martyrs are needed before judgement can commence. However, the reader need wait no further, for the first full description of judgement day follows with the opening of the sixth seal. The Sixth Seal: The Day of the Lord (Revelation 6.12–17) When the Lamb opened the sixth seal, John looked, and behold, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth, the full moon become like blood, and the stars of the sky fell to the earth as the fig tree sheds its winter fruit when shaken by a gale; the sky vanished like a scroll that is rolled up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. (Rev. 6.12–15)

Disturbances in the heavens are stock images for the eschatological Day of the Lord (‫יֹום יהוה‬/ἡμέρα κυρίου),52 and are freely taken up by early Christian writers to signal the coming of Christ as judge: But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken. And then they will see the Son of Man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. (Mk 13.24–26)

Earthquakes appear earlier in the Synoptic Apocalypse (Mk 13.8//Mt. 24.7//Lk. 21.11; cf. 2 Bar. 27.7; 70.8; 4 Ezra 9.3), often signalling the arrival or appearance of God (Exod. 19.18; Isa. 24.18–20; 29.6; Joel 2.10; Mic. 1.4; Nah. 1.4; Hag. 2.6–7, 21–22), and can be associated with divine 52.  See especially Isa. 13.9–10; 24.21, 23; Ezek. 32.7–8; Joel 2.1–32; Amos 8.9.

152

The Violence of the Lamb

displeasure (Isa. 13.13; 24.18–20; 34.4; Jer. 51.29; Ezek. 38.20; Joel 2.10; 3.16; 4.16; Nah. 1.5).53 In Revelation, the earthquake is clustered together with other signs of cosmic collapse, signalling the coming of God’s judgement. The Day of the Lord, for the prophet Amos, is a time of darkness (Amos 5.9), and the darkening of the sun signalled catastrophe in both the Hebrew Bible (Isa. 13.10; 24.23; 50.3; Amos 8.9; Ezek. 32.7–8; Joel 1.8; 2.10; 4.15; Zeph. 1.15)54 and in the Roman imagination.55 The image of cosmic catastrophe is completed by the stars falling like figs and the rolling away of the heavens, which is a clear allusion to Isa. 34.4LXX.56 Stars fall from the sky on a number of occasions in Revelation, where they generally refer to malevolent celestial beings (Rev. 8.10; 9.1; 12.4). While some scholars suggest the stars in Rev. 6.13 and the Synoptic Apocalypses should also be thought of as being somehow ‘animate’,57 given the rest of the cosmic signs, including the folding up of the sky (cf. 20.11), it is more likely this phenomenon should be understood as more literal images.58 For John, the eschatological signs that usher in the Day of the Lord are not restricted to the heavens. Like the stars from the sky, the mountains and islands are also removed from their place. In the Hebrew Bible, mountains quake or tremble before God’s anger (Judg. 5.5; Ps. 18.7; Isa. 5.25; Jer. 4.24), sometimes melting (Mic. 1.4; Nah. 1.5), thrown down (Ezek. 38.20), or splitting (Zech. 14.4). However, they generally represent stability (Job 14.18; Ps. 125.1–2), such that in Isa. 54.10, the logic is 53.  On the place of earthquakes in eschatological contexts and in Revelation, see Bauckham, Climax, 199–209. 54.  See also Test. Mos. 10.5; 4 Ezra 5.4–5; 7.39; Sib. Or. 2.194–202; 3.796–803; 5.344–50; Test. Levi 4.1; Ass. Moses 10. 55.  Cicero, De Republica 1.16.25; Virgil, Georgicon 1.463–468; Ovid, Metamorphoses 15.785. For surveys, see F. B. Krauss, An Interpretation of the Omens, Portents, and Prodigies Recorded by Livy, Tacitus, and Suetonius (Philadelphia: Philadelphia University Press, 1930), 70–71; Aune, Revelation, 416–19. 56.  Καὶ ἑλιγήσεται ὁ οὐρανὸς ὡς βιβλίον καὶ πάντα τὰ ἄστρα πεσεῖται ὡς φύλλα ἐξ ἀμπέλου καὶ ὡς πίπτει φύλλα ἀπὸ συκῆς (Isa. 34.4) 57.  Marcus, Mark, 2:908. 58.  The extent to which the ancients conceived of these events as literal is disputed. The most recent advocate of a literal ‘cosmic catastrophe’ is Edward Adams, The Stars Will Fall from Heaven: Cosmic Catastrophe and the World’s End in the New Testament and Its World (LNTS, 347; London: T&T Clark International, 2007). Adams reinforces his view using contemporaneous Stoic concept of ekpurōsis. However, Susannah McBay (‘The Divine Warrior and Cosmic Catastrophe: The Impact of the Sibylline Oracles 3–5 on the Interpretation of Mark 13.24–25’ [PhD diss., The University of Chester, 2017]) has argued that by the first-century Stoic ideas of cosmic catastrophe had, in fact, come to be interpreted less literally.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

153

that even in the highly unlikely event of the mountains being removed, God’s loving kindness will continue.59 Nonetheless, in Revelation, every mountain does not merely shake, but, and more remarkably, every island (πᾶν ὄρος καὶ νῆσος) is removed from its place (ἐκ τῶν τόπων αὐτῶν ἐκινήθησαν; Rev. 6.14). The undoing of creation, in which the luminaries of the heaven, including the sky itself, and the most solid structures on earth are destroyed, signal the final day of judgement; the Day of the Lord.60 These signs mirror the signs of the End in the Gospels, and the Christian expectation that ‘the Day of the Lord (ἡμέρα κυρίου) will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire (στοιχεῖα δὲ καυσούμενα λυθήσεται)’ which will disclose all the works of the earth (2 Pet. 3.10) ready for judgement. A number of commentators reject the idea that this scene signifies final judgement. Smalley, following Charles, argues ‘the writer of Revelation 6.12–17 knows that the end is not yet, and that there is more to follow’.61 However, while there is certainly more narrative to follow, in the Apocalypse time does not follow through the book in a linear fashion. This linear reading is in any case impossible; a third of the stars cannot fall from the sky in Rev. 8.2, for there are no stars left in the sky to fall, and indeed, there is no sky! Signs of this great cosmic catastrophe are later repeated (Rev. 20.10). Therefore, we are not, as Smalley claims, ‘brought to the edge of the end-time, without the Day of the Lord actually arriving’.62 Instead, in Rev. 6.12–17, final judgement, that will be described again later in the text, has come.63 Everything that follows should be understood as restating the central message of the Apocalypse; Christians must repent 59.  The same logic lies behind Mt. 17.20 and 1 Cor. 13.2. See Aune, Revelation 2:415–16. 60.  Ford (Revelation, 112) notes the order of the destruction follows ‘approximately’ the order of creation in Genesis: earth; sun; moon; stars; sky; mountains and islands (cf. separation of sea and dry land); humans. While the idea of an undoing of creation is certainly present in these and other apocalyptic signs, it is perhaps even more ‘approximate’ than Ford allows. 61.  Smalley, Revelation, 168; Charles, Revelation, 1:183. 62.  Smalley, Revelation, 168. See also Barr, ‘Waiting’. 63.  So with R. Jack McKelvey (‘The Millennium and the Second Coming’, in Moyise [ed.], Studies in the Book of Revelation, 85–100), who writes, ‘Each of the septets is marked by an incontestable completeness and finality (6.12–17; 11.15–19; 16.17–21)’ (89). So also Beasley-Murray, Revelation, 138; Beale, Revelation, 398–99. Blount (Revelation, 122) expresses this helpfully: ‘John is the master of a three-ring narrative circus’.

154

The Violence of the Lamb

of any behaviour that risks their position as insiders, lest they share in the judgements being described that will fall on those outside the church. This conclusion that Rev. 6.12–17 describes the Day of Judgement is solidified by John’s own description of the scene; it is the great day of wrath (ἡ ἡμέρα ἡ μεγάλη τῆς ὀργῆς) of God and the Lamb (6.17).64 Wrath is commonly associated with judgement in the Apocalypse (Rev. 6.16–17; 11.18; 14.10; 16.19; 19.15).65 While in the other occurrences, wrath is an attribute of God, in this scene, it is the Lamb as well as God, from whose wrath the peoples of the earth plead to be spared (6.16–17). In Christian tradition, Christ largely takes over the role of judgement from God (Mt. 25.31–46; Jn 5.22, 27; Acts 10.42; 17.31; Rom. 2.16; 2 Cor. 5.10; 2 Thess. 2.9; 2 Tim. 4.1; Ep. Barn. 7.2; 2 Clem. 1.1).66 Indeed, in Christian use of Day of the Lord terminology, with one exception (2 Pet. 3.12; cf. Rom. 2.16), the Lord refers to Jesus rather than God. So, judgement day is described variously as ‘the day of our Lord Jesus’ (ἡ ἡμέρα τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ; 1 Cor. 1.8; 2 Cor. 1.14; Phil. 1.16); ‘the Day of Christ’ (ἡμέρα Χριστοῦ; Phil. 1.10; 2.16), and where ἡ ἡμέρα τοῦ κυρίου is found in the New Testament, it clearly refers to the day in which Christ returns (1 Cor. 5.5; 1 Thess. 5.2; 2 Thess. 2.2; 2 Pet. 3.10). Similarly, in John, on the last day (ἡ ἐσχάτη ἡμέρα), it is Jesus who will raise up those who believe (Jn 6.39–40, 44, 54; cf. 12.48), while Paul can speak of both ‘the judgement seat of God’ (τό βῆμα τοῦ θεοῦ; Rom. 14.10) and ‘the judgement seat of Christ’ (τό βῆμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ; 2 Cor. 5.10). In Matthew’s judgement scene (Mt. 25.31–46), it is the Son of Man (ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου) who, when he comes in his glory with all the angels (ἐν τῇ δόξῃ αὐτοῦ καὶ πάντες οἱ ἄγγελοι μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ), will sit on his throne of glory (θρόνος δόξα) to judge and divide the saved 64.  A linear reading of the Apocalypse, such that each sequence of judgements is interpreted as events leading up to the end rather than different snapshots of final judgement, leaves Revelation without an ending. James Barr therefore creates a problem that need not exist in his ‘Waiting for the End That Never Comes: The Logic of John’s Narrative Story’, in Moyise (ed.), Studies in the Book of Revelation, 101–12. Similarly, Resseguie (Revelation, 131), who imagines the reader stuck in ‘penultimate time’. 65.  Both ὀργή (Rev. 6.16–17; 11.18; 14.10) and θυμός (14.10) are used for wrath. In Rev. 16.19 and 19.15, they are combined to describe the cup or wine of God’s wrathful anger (ὁ θυμός ἡ ὀργή). 66.  Judgement is generally still the reserve of God in post-Second Temple Judaism, though in some instances judgement is given over to the Messiah (4 Ezra 12.32–33; 13.8–11, 37–38; 1 En. 46.4–6; 49.4; 52.9; 55.4; 69.27; Pss. Sol. 17.21–25, 35). See Aune, Revelation, 420–23.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

155

from the damned (25.31). There is, therefore, nothing unusual in the context of early Christianity of the Lamb standing in the place of judge come the Day of the Lord. However, some commentators struggle with the concept of the ‘wrath of the Lamb (ἡ ὀργή τοῦ ἀρνίου)’ (Rev. 6.16; cf. 6.17).67 While Rossing argues the Lamb’s wrath is a softening of traditional images of divine anger,68 for Smalley, a wrathful Lamb is simply ‘a contradiction in terms’.69 Boring suggests that despite the violent imagery, the presence of the Lamb means that the penalty and the ‘One who has already paid the supreme penalty’ are depicted simultaneously.70 Perhaps most ingeniously, Caird argues that since the phrase occurs on the lips of those who seek to escape the presence of God and the Lamb, it does not represent John’s view, but that of ‘deluded’ sinners.71 However, this scene is entirely consistent with the judgement scenes that will follow, and, as we have seen, does not depart from the general New Testament view that Christ takes over the role of judge found in the Hebrew Bible with its attendant eschatological violence. Therefore, Sweet’s assertion that the cosmic disasters are not a result of the Wrath of the Lamb is not persuasive.72 For the same reason, equally implausible is the view that judgement in the Apocalypse is not 67.  In fairness, the concept of wrath in the wider biblical text has exercised scholars: Gary A. Herion, ‘Wrath of God: Old Testament’, ABD 6:989–96; Stephen H. Travis, ‘Wrath of God: New Testament’, ABD 6:996–98. Farmer (‘Undercurrents and Paradoxes: The Apocalypse to John in Process Hermeneutic’, in Barr [ed.], Reading the Book of Revelation, 109–18) acknowledges that if the text spanned only chs. 6–20, the vengeful and gratuitous violence would legitimate the claim that the Apocalypse is ‘the Judas of the New Testament’. For a study of early Christian responses to divine anger, see Michael C. McCarthy, ‘Divine Wrath and Human Anger: Embarrassment Ancient and New’, TS 70 (2009): 845–74. 68.  Rossing, Rapture, 135–40. 69.  Smalley, Revelation, 171. Similarly, Bredin (Jesus, 195) writes: ‘John reinterprets “wrath” by placing it alongside the most non-militaristic image, Lamb’. Harrington (Revelation, 96) dismisses the image of the wrathful lamb as a ‘paradox’. 70.  Boring, Revelation, 123. A similarly opaque view is held by Harrington (Revelation, 97), who writes that the ‘Lamb’s wrath is written on the cross’. Perhaps these views are similar to Bredin’s claim (Jesus, 195) that ‘Suffering love is the essence of wrath and therefore suffering love is that which brings about God’s judgment and kingdom’. Moyise (‘Does the Lion?’, 182) notes that such views resonate with modern theological strands (e.g. Jürgen Moltmann, The Crucified God: The Cross as the Foundation and Criticism of the Christian Gospel [London: SCM, 1993]). However, he is sceptical such theology is present in the Apocalypse. 71.  Caird, Revelation, 92. See also Beckwith, Apocalypse, 528–30. 72.  Sweet, Revelation, 146.

156

The Violence of the Lamb

primarily divine action, but an ‘effective’, impersonal, natural outworking and consequence of sinful and destructive human behaviour.73 The response of those living on earth to the cosmic signs and the Day of Judgement is terror. John’s list of seven categories of people suggests the totality of humanity outside the church will face judgement: kings of the earth, great men, commanders, rich, strong, slave, and free (Rev. 6.15). From the most powerful king to the least significant slave, all will cower in fear before the Day of the Lord. John’s comprehensive list is ‘inserted to democratize those who will be terrified by the imminent day of the wrath of God’.74 Revelation consistently stresses that seen from the vantage point of the throne room of God, even the mightiest emperor and all his armies will cower in terror when the true king of the universe is revealed. With the sky falling in, the sun blackened, and the stars falling from the sky, humanity’s response seems pitiful; they hide in caves and the rocks of the mountains (6.15), which the reader has already been told will be removed from their place (6.14). While hiding in caves in times of disaster was a standard defensive action,75 when the heavenly army invades, there will be nowhere to hide.76 When humans realise there is nowhere to run, they utter the pitiful cry to the mountains and the rocks, ‘Fall on us and hide us from the face of the one seated on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb’ (Rev. 6.16). Bredin’s interpretation, that humanity’s desire to hide is due to an ‘unwillingness to hear the message of the cross’, is fanciful.77 Rather, the scene is taken from the judgement against the sinful people in Hos. 10.8: ‘The sin of Israel will be destroyed… Then they will say to the mountains, “Cover us!” and to the hills, “Fall on us”.’ Humanity would 73.  Rowland (Open Heaven, 87) and Boxall (Revelation, 119) both draw comparisons with the ‘natural’ penalty for sin in Rom. 1.18, 28. Others who believe wrath and its disasters are impersonal include: Mounce, Revelation, 162; Caird, Revelation, 91; Sweet, Revelation, 144; Harrington, Revelation, 96; Bredin, Jesus, 194. 74.  Aune, Revelation, 419. Similarly, with Ford (Revelation, 112): ‘The number seven indicates completeness. Therefore, the author’s meaning is that no enemy of God, no matter what his position in society, will escape the terrors.’ 75.  Judg. 6.2; 1 Sam. 13.16; 14.11; Job 30.6; Jer. 13.4–6; 49.30; Ezek. 33.27; 1 Macc. 2.35; Josephus, Ant. 6.6.1; 6.6.3; 12.6.2; 12.11.1; 14.5.5; War 1.16.3; 6.7.3. See Aune, Revelation, 419–20. 76.  Aune (Revelation, 420) notes that in the Hebrew Bible, people flee to attempt to escape divine punishment: Gen. 19.17; Ps. 68.1; Hos. 5.3; Zech. 14.5. There is also a tradition that the Christians fled Jerusalem before its destruction, which was also interpreted as judgement (Mk 13.14//Mt. 24.15–16//Lk. 21.20–21). For similar tropes of hiding in terror, see Isa. 2.10, 19–21. 77.  Bredin, Revelation, 195.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

157

rather be crushed by the mountains than face the judgement to come, just as those who later, in a desperate attempt to escape the pain inflicted by the monstrous scorpions, ‘will seek death, but not find it’ (Rev. 9.6).78 There is nowhere humanity can hide, and nowhere to flee. All they can do is vainly cry out to the mountains to kill them and hide them from the face of the God.79 Finally, since the mountains and caves have been removed and cannot come to the people’s aid, they are left to tremble in fear and acknowledge that the great day of the wrath of God and the Lamb has come, and ask ‘Who is able to stand?’ (τίς δύναται σταθῆναι; 6.17). Again, this futile question is common in the Hebrew Bible in the face of God’s anger (1 Sam. 6.20; 2 Chr. 20.6; Job 41.10; Pss. 76.7; 147.17; Prov. 27.4; Jer. 49.19; 50.44; Nah. 1.6; Mal. 3.2; cf. Ps. 130.3). In Rev. 6.12–17, John gives the first of his depictions of the final day of judgement. With signs of cosmic catastrophe—which mark the undoing of creation that will eventually lead to the new heaven and new earth in which the faithful will dwell—those opposed to God will find themselves cowering in fear before the judgement throne of God and the Lamb. The kings of the earth will understand their power is illusory when the true Almighty and King of kings is revealed. Jesus, who was killed, but raised and vindicated by God, will stand as the judge of Rome and of all peoples on the earth. They will long for death, to be crushed by mountains rather than face the wrath of the Lamb, pitifully crying ‘Who can stand?’ However, these depictions of violent judgement are not recounted in order to encourage the inhabitants of the earth to repent. The message is for insiders; those who read the letters to the seven churches. They will hear the risen Christ, who will soon judge the earth, issue a call to either hold fast to appropriate Christian living, or to repent of those things that might lead to Christians being counted among the inhabitants of the earth. The answer to the question who can stand come the day of 78.  Hos. 10.8 is also cited by Luke when he has Jesus warn the women of Jerusalem of a time of judgement to come in which it would have been better never to have been born than face it: ‘Do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children. For see, the days are coming when they will say, “Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bore, and the breasts that never nursed”. Then they will begin to say to the mountains, “Fall on us” and to the hills “Cover us”. For if they do these things when the wood is green, what will happen when it is dry?’ (Lk. 23.28–31). Luke, therefore, suggests the people’s complicity in Jesus’ crucifixion will bring unimaginable judgement, probably the suffering that befell the inhabitants of Jerusalem during the Roman siege and aftermath. 79.  In Exod. 33.20, God says ‘You cannot see my face; for no one shall see me and live’. However, at the end of Revelation, the faithful will in fact see God’s face (Rev. 22.4).

158

The Violence of the Lamb

wrath is answered in ch. 7. The faithful, who in the next chapter I will identify as the martyrs of Christ, do stand (ἵστημι) with the Lamb and before the throne (7.9).80 The judgement described with the unfolding of the seven seals is a message to Christians. Repent, be faithful to death, and stand with Lamb. Plagues and Torments on the Damned (Revelation 8–16) After John’s first vision of the Day of Judgement, he begins another cycle to reinforce his message. This time, the judgements to be inflicted on the earth are structured around a septet of trumpets. However, while the sequence of seals might have implied that all people on earth would experience the apocalyptic conditions,81 John now clarifies his vision of judgement. Before the next sequence begins, the faithful are sealed (Rev. 7.3–4).82 The seal marks out who belong to God and bear his name (14.1; cf. 3.12; 22.4), in contrast to those who receive the mark of the Beast and serve him.83 God’s seal will be the Christians’ mark of exemption from the calamities to follow (7.15–16; 9.4).84 The Lamb finally opens the seventh seal, and there is a rather anticlimactic silence for about half an hour (Rev. 8.1). Various suggestions have been made to account for this silence, including a break in the Revelation,85 a return to the silence before creation,86 and a pause for 80.  In the next chapter I argue that the groups in Rev. 7.1–8, 9–17; and 14.1–5 are the same group; faithful martyrs. 81.  In fact, the souls under the altar (Rev. 6.9–11), in my view, were representative of all Christians, but an objection may be raised that they were in heaven at the time of the cosmic upheaval. 82.  Sealing occurs in an eschatological context in 4 Ezra 2.38, 40; 6.5. 83.  Aune (Revelation, 455) notes that since Christians are called God’s δοῦλοι, the seal is God’s stamp of ownership of the faithful. For further discussion, see his excursus on branding and tattooing in the Graeco-Roman world (456–59). Given the disasters that follow the trumpets are not unlike the plagues of Egypt, Blount (Revelation, 140) draws a parallel between this act of sealing and the Passover action of the Hebrews ‘sealing’ their doors with blood to save them from the visitation of the Angel of Death (Exod. 12). 84.  Boring (Revelation, 129) has suggested the sealing refers to Christian baptism (cf. 2 Cor. 1.22; Eph. 1.13; 4.30), but there is little to commend this view (Aune, Revelation, 455). Faithful witness rather than baptism is what marks out a Christian as faithful. 85.  Swete, Apocalypse, 106–7. 86.  Rissi, ‘Rider’, 5–6; Sweet, Revelation, 159.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

159

the prayers of the saints to be heard.87 Most likely, however, given what follows, is the silence associated with judgement.88 After the interlude, John sees the seven angels who ‘stand before God’ (οἳ ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ ἑστήκασιν; 8.2), which may be the same seven who were mentioned in Rev. 1.16, 20,89 or a more general reference to the seven archangels of Jewish tradition.90 Each one is given a trumpet (καὶ ἐδόθησαν αὐτοῖς ἑπτὰ σάλπιγγες), the divine passive (ἐδόθη) reminding the reader that God and the Lamb are still very much in control of events. The Seven Trumpets (Revelation 8.2–9.21; 11.15–19) The first four trumpets are blown in quick narrative succession with devastating results. Trumpets can be signs of warfare (Josh. 6.5; 1 Macc. 3.54; cf. 1QM 7.14), warning (Apoc. Zeph. 9–12),91 or associated with eschatological battle or judgement (Joel 2.1; Zeph. 1.14–16; 9.14; Apoc. Abr. 31.1; 4 Ezra 6.2–3; Sib. Or. 4.124; Mt. 24.31; 1 Cor. 15.52; 1 Thess. 4.16; Did. 16.6).92 As with the opening of the seals, the blowing of the trumpets causes disaster to fall on the earth. The first trumpet causes hail and fire mixed with blood93 to fall and burn up a third of the earth and all the grass (Rev. 8.7). At the second, something like a great burning mountain was thrown into the sea, turning

87.  Charles, Revelation, 1:153–55. This view has been vigorously defended by Bauckham, Climax, 70–83. However, although the prayers of the saints are mentioned in Rev. 8.3, it is not obvious why half an hour would be required to collect them. These are almost certainly related to the cries of those under the altar in 6.9–11. 88.  This view is common, although many of the texts listed in support are rather tenuous. However, this tradition is found in Isa. 47.5; Hab. 2.20; Zech. 2.13, and especially 1QpHab 13.1–4 (on Hab. 2.20): ‘Silence in his presence, all the world! Its interpretation concerns all the peoples which serve stone and wood. However, on the day of judgement God will destroy all the worshippers of idols, and the wicked from the earth’ (trans. Martínez and Tigchelaar, Dead Sea Scrolls). 89.  Blount, Revelation, 159. 90.  So Tob. 12.5: ‘I am Raphael, one of the seven holy angels who stand ready and enter before the glory of the holy one (ἐνώπιον τῆς δόξης τοῦ ἁγίου)’. See also 1 En. 20.1–7; T. Levi 8.2; cf. 3.5. Angels of the Presence are found in Jub. 1.27, 29; 2.1–2, 18; 15.27; 31.14. 91.  In Roman tradition, trumpets could also signal divine displeasure: Lucan 1.278; Dio Cassius, Historia 47.40.2; Ovid, Metamorphoses 18.784–788. 92.  See Schüssler-Fiorenza, Revelation, 70; Aune, Revelation, 519. 93.  Hail also appears in Rev. 11.19; 16.21. Cf. Exod. 9.22–26; Pss. 78.48; 105.32; Ezek. 38.22. For rain mixed with blood, see Sib. Or. 5.377–80 (cf. Pliny, Nat. Hist. 2.57).

160

The Violence of the Lamb

a third of it to blood, killing a third of the sea creatures,94 and destroying a third of the ships (8.8–9).95 A great star falls from the sky at the third blast, landing on a third of the rivers and fountains, turning a third of the waters to wormwood, killing many who drank it (8.10–11).96 At the sound of the fourth trumpet, the sky is affected, with a third of the sun, moon and stars struck (8.12).97 At this point, the action stops momentarily as an eagle announces woes (οὐαὶ οὐαὶ οὐαί) to the inhabitants of the earth,98 signalling that the last three trumpets will be even greater in their destructive power (8.13). While the first four trumpet blasts brought only limited human casualties, the next two events target humans. The narrative pace slows as John lingers over the suffering inflicted on the people of the earth. When the fifth trumpet sounds, another star (ἀστήρ) falls from heaven. This time, it is clearly a celestial being, for he is given the key to the shaft of the abyss (ἡ κλεὶς τοῦ φρέατος τῆς ἀβύσσου; Rev. 9.1). Once again, the divine passive is used (ἐδόθη), and it is worth remembering that earlier in the narrative, it was the glorified Christ who held the keys to Death and Hades (1.18).99 Although the star fell from heaven (ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ πεπτωκότα), it is not clear if the celestial being is evil.100 It is given a key 94.  Cf. Exod. 7.17–21. Koester (Revelation, 453) worries over-much about the fate of the sea life: ‘dolphins, sharks, and sea turtles to shellfish and sponges’ (449). It is not, as he states, inconsistent with ‘John’s theology of creation (8.9)’ in which God created the sea (Rev. 10.6; 14.7) and the sea creatures praise him (5.13). The cosmic signs represent an undoing of creation, and so just as the bodies in the heaven and earth are affected, so too are those that live in the sea. Of course, ultimately in Revelation, there will be no more sea (21.1)! 95.  A number of commentators (e.g. Aune, Revelation, 509; Beale, Revelation, 454; Blount, Revelation, 160) see this as a historical reference to the eruption of Vesuvius in 79 CE that resulted in debris falling into the sea such that ships could not moor (Pliny, Epistles 6.16.11). However, Koester (Revelation, 449) probably rightly notes that he fiery mountain is cast down from heaven, and is a miraculous apocalyptic sign like the others. 96.  Wormwood is found in the Hebrew Bible in Deut. 29.18; Prov. 5.4; Lam. 3.15, 19; Amos 5.7. Notably, it is used as a punishment for idolatry in Jer. 9.15; 23.15. 97.  Cf. Exod. 10.21. While commentators draw on traditions of eclipses (e.g. Aune, Revelation, 522; cf. Herodotus 7.37.2), this would not affect the stars. In any case, John appears to have a more permanent effect in mind. 98.  Eagles signify judgement in Deut. 28.49; Jer. 4.13; 48.40; 49.22; Lam. 4.9; Ezek. 17.3; Hos. 8.1; Hab. 1.8. Cf. 4 Ezra 11.7–8. 99.  By Rev. 20.1 an angel has the key to the abyss. 100.  Rev. 12.7–9; 14.12; cf. Judg. 5.20; Dan. 8.10. It may be the tradition stems from Gen. 6.1–4; cf. Jub. 38.7; 1 En. 86.3; 88.3; 90.24; Lk. 10.18; Jude 13.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

161

and carries out judgement against the earth’s inhabitants consistent with the other effects of the trumpet, which signifies whatever his identity, he operates either with God’s authority or permission.101 When the angel opens the abyss, smoke comes out that darkens the sky (9.2). However, worse is to follow. From the smoke, mutant locusts with powerful stings like scorpions come on the earth to torture humanity, except the Christians, who have been sealed by God (9.4): They were allowed to torture them for five months, but not to kill them, and their torture was like the torture of a scorpion when it stings a man. And in those days men will seek death and will not find it; they will long to die, and death will fly from them. (Rev. 9.5–6)

The king of the locusts is the angel of the bottomless pit, called Abaddon in Hebrew and Apollyon in Greek; the destroyer (Rev. 9.11).102 This has led several commentators to see the action of the locusts as primarily demonic. However, although it is tempting to deflect all destructive action in the Apocalypse from the locus of God, that divine passive verbs are found throughout this narrative suggests this is God’s judgement on the wicked. The angel is given the key that unleashes the tortuous terrors; the locusts are given instructions about what they should and should not harm. They are allowed to torture human beings, but they are not permitted to kill them.103 Finally, they are given a timeframe in which to work. Clearly these creatures are under divine control, especially as they act contrary to their nature by not devouring the grass and trees (9.4),104 but instead attack humans. Moreover, elsewhere a plague of locusts is a sign of divine judgement. This scene in Revelation alludes to the plague in Joel 2.1–15, that is accompanied by blasts of the trumpet, and the darkening of the sun and moon (Joel 2.10), such that it is interpreted as the Day of the Lord (2.1, 11). As von Rad puts it, Joel ‘equates the locusts with the armies of the Day of Yahweh marching into battle, and is thus able to draw on the whole range of war concepts connected with the Day of Yahweh’.105 101.  Blount, Revelation, 174. 102.  Interestingly, both Nero and Domitian claimed a special relationship with Apollo. See Bell, ‘Date’, 98–99; and Ben Witherington, Revelation (NCBC; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 153–54. 103.  Cf. Job 2.5. In Test. Job 5.1, Job is sealed to protect him from death. 104.  Cf. Deut. 28.38, 42; 1 Kgs 8.37; 2 Chr. 6.28; 7.13; Pss. 78.46; 105.3–5; Joel 1.4; 2.25; Amos 4.9; 7.2; Nah. 3.5. See Beale, Revelation, 496. 105.  Gerhard von Rad, The Message of the Prophets (London: SCM, 1968), 97.

162

The Violence of the Lamb

More famously, of course, are the locusts God sends on Egypt to punish Pharaoh’s disobedience (Exod. 10.4–15).106 The link between the plagues on Egypt and the disasters in Revelation is well known.107 Though by no means precise, four of the first five trumpet events have parallels in Exodus: hail (Rev. 8.7; cf. Exod. 9.22–26); water becoming blood (Rev. 8.8–9; cf. Exod. 7.20–21); darkness (Rev. 8.12; cf. Exod. 10.21); and locusts (Rev. 9.1–12; cf. Exod. 10.4–15). There is, therefore, no reason to interpret the punishments associated with this trumpet as having an origin any different from the others. It is God who is responsible for punishing the people of the earth, and indeed, this activity is still governed by the seventh seal, opened by the Lamb. Humanity is left in a pitiable condition for five months. People long for death, but there is no end to their misery (cf. Job 3.21; Jer. 8.3).108 In Graeco-Roman tradition, suicide was a legitimate noble death to end intolerable suffering. However, in Revelation, even that dignity is removed as a possibility for the inhabitants of the earth as their torture continues.109 However, when the sixth trumpet is blown (Rev. 9.13), a voice commands the angel with the trumpet to release the four angels bound at the Euphrates (9.14). These angels ‘had been held ready for the hour, the day, the month, and the year, to kill a third of humanity’ (9.15). Drawing on the insecurity felt at the Euphrates border with the Parthians, John describes the angels gathering an innumerably large cavalry (9.16). Like the locusts, the horses ridden by the army are extraordinary; fire, smoke and sulphur come from their mouths (9.17), and this is the means by which they slay their victims; a third of earth’s population (9.18). Moreover, they have tails like serpents with which they wound. It is not clear whether John imagines them wounding the third of humanity before killing them, or whether they create additional wounded casualties. With the exception of a relatively small number of those sealed by the angel, in the course of the fifth and sixth trumpets, every human being has been tortured to the point of wishing for death by the locusts, and one third of the population has been struck dead from the fire and sulphur breathed 106.  God is also said to control locusts in 2 Chr. 7.13. 107.  For extended discussions, see Koester, Revelation, 445–57; Aune, Revelation, 499–506. 108.  See also Sib. Or. 1.307–308; 8.353; 13.118; Apoc. Elijah 2.5, 32. For characters who long for death in the Hebrew Bible, see 1 Kgs 19.1–4; Job 3.1–26; 6.8–9; 7.15–16; Jer. 8.3; 20.14–18; Jon. 4.3, 8; cf. Lk. 23.27–30. 109.  On noble death more generally, see Arthur J. Droge and James D. Tabor, A Noble Death: Suicide and Martyrdom Among Christian and Jews in Antiquity (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1992).

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

163

out by the army of the four angels. In addition, the sun, moon, and stars have been struck, the water has been polluted, and burning mountains and stars have fallen from the sky. Yet, despite these apocalyptic signs, the torture and massacre of a third of the planet, the rest of mankind, who were not killed by these plagues (πληγαί) did not repent of the works of their hands (οὐδὲ μετενόησαν ἐκ τῶν ἔργων τῶν χειρῶν αὐτῶν) nor give up worshipping demons and idols of gold and silver and bronze and stone and wood, which cannot either see or hear or walk; nor did they repent of their murders or their sorceries or their immorality or their thefts. (Rev. 9.20–21)

For Aune, this lack of repentance is unsurprising, given the trumpets sequence is so rooted in the Egyptian plague tradition. In the face of God’s violent judgement on his people, Pharaoh’s heart was hardened by God (Exod. 7.22–23; 8.15, 19, 32; 9.7, 12, 34–35; 10.20, 27, 46),110 making repentance ‘impossible’.111 Similarly, John has simply made the inhabitants of the earth incapable of repentance (cf. Rev. 16.9, 11).112 Understandably, the scale and mode of divine violence has made others squeamish, so it is important for them to stress that repentance is at least a possibility envisaged by John.113 Schüssler-Fiorenza argues, ‘John writes this grotesque and brutal vision not for cruelty’s sake but rather for the sake of exhortation to repentance’.114 Similarly, Blount states: John’s entire visionary effort has operated under the ethical premise that those who hear and read will respond by either witnessing or at least curtailing their accommodations to the lordship of Roman imperial rule and religions. For those who are presently accommodating, the ethical expectation would certainly be one of repentance.115 110.  Cf. Josephus, Ant. 2.14.2, 4, 5; 2.15.3 111.  Aune, Revelation, 495–96. The same position is taken by Roloff, Revelation, 119. 112.  Greg Carey, Elusive Apocalypse: Reading Authority in the Revelation to John (Studies in American Biblical Hermeneutics; Macon: Mercer University Press, 2003), 148. 113.  For example, Smalley, Revelation, 244–45; Koester, Revelation, 468; Blount, Revelation, 185; Caird, Revelation, 295–96; deSilva, Seeing, 75–78; Harrington, Revelation, 152–53. However, Aune (Revelation, 2:496) is in my view correct in arguing the plagues and torments were ‘never intended to elicit the repentance of pagans’. 114.  Schüssler-Fiorenza, Revelation, 72. 115.  Blount, Revelation, 166. Blount goes on to note that these torments are of a future yet to occur, and can thus inspire ‘those who take the visions seriously to

164

The Violence of the Lamb

However, general repentance is not a particular concern of Revelation. Where repentance is mentioned outside the seven ecclesiastical oracles, it is in the main to note that the inhabitants of the earth did not or refused to repent (Rev. 9.20–21; 16.9, 11).116 Therefore, against Bredin’s view that John hopes ‘humankind as a whole can be released from the values of the world’,117 there is no evidence that John’s missionary call extends beyond those already within the walls of the church.118 It is important to bear in mind that the whole series of visions reinforces the message to the seven churches. As with the seals, the carnage unleashed on the world at the sounding of the trumpets once again presents John’s readers with a choice. Some have been told that they need to repent; others that they need to hold fast to what they have. It is almost certainly the case that remaining faithful will result in some discomfort for John’s churches. This is why he spells out the alternative in graphic detail. As with Jezebel (Rev. 2.21–23), the time allocated to repentance use whatever intervening time they have to change their ways’ (167). See also the massive essay by Bauckham (‘The Conversion of the Nations’, in Climax, 238– 337), who argues that John is calling the church to witness to the world through suffering. 116.  Carey (‘Apocalypse’, 172) correctly writes, ‘it is a mistake to imagine Revelation hopes for universal salvation’ (cf. Rev. 22.1). Also Aune, Revelation, 2:495–96; Ladd, Revelation, 28–29; Beale, Revelation, 466–67. 117.  Bredin, Jesus, 222. 118.  There is one possible exception at Rev. 11.13, when after the two witnesses have been raised there is an earthquake that destroys a tenth of the city, which has been identified earlier as Jerusalem (Rev. 11.8), and 7,000 people are killed. As a result, ‘the rest were terrified and gave glory to the God of heaven’ (11.13). Some commentators have disputed whether terror has genuinely converted the people here. However, fear accompanied by giving glory to God is not unusual in the biblical tradition (Sir. 1.11; Lk. 7.16; cf. Ps. 111.10), and is found elsewhere in Revelation (Rev. 14.7). While this is a key text in Bauckham’s case that Revelation envisages a universalised mission (Climax, 238–337), it should be noted that this section is unusual rather than normative within the Apocalypse (see Aune, Revelation, 2:585– 603, for discussion of the source history), and so it is unwise to read the rest of Revelation through it. Koester’s claim (Revelation, 512) goes well beyond the evidence: ‘The conversation of the nations, rather than their destruction, is God’s will for the world’. Moreover, it also noteworthy that even within the sequence of apocalyptic cataclysm, the setting for this story is extraordinarily localised, and although 7,000 causalities is not insubstantial, it is certainly low for the Apocalypse. Therefore, what we have in this instance is hardly the conversion of the ‘nations’. Ultimately, even in the narrative logic of Revelation, this small act of ‘repentance’ will soon be overtaken (Rev. 16.9, 11), and the inhabitants of the earth will once again be depicted as uniformly evil in Rev. 13.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

165

will soon be over, and the consequences for the faithless, even for those who were once inside the church, will be severe. There is no universal hope in Revelation, because for his warning to the seven churches to work, John’s narrative requires the unrepentant to remain faithless to the end, so he can spell out the consequences for his hearers who do not mend their ways. In portraying outsiders as unrepentant demon-worshipping idolaters,119 he creates a chasm between the Christians and ‘inhabitants of the earth’. John’s problem with some of his churches is that they do not appreciate how wide that chasm ought to be. In the remainder of the Apocalypse, he will create even more distance between followers of the Lamb and worshippers of the Beast. Two Last Judgements (Revelation 11.15–19; 14.6–20) John reinforces this message with two proleptic visions of the final judgement, although the event itself will not be described until Rev. 20.11–15. The first is introduced by last trumpet (Rev. 11.15), and the second by an angel flying in mid-heaven (14.6–7). Both visions function to remind John’s readers that judgement is coming, that the evils which have befallen the peoples of the earth are just, and to continue the exhortation to repent from the seven letters to the churches. The last trumpet takes the action back into the throne room of God, as loud voices reaffirm the lordship of God and the Lamb, not only of heaven, but of the earth as well:120 ‘The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Messiah, and he will reign for ever and ever’ (Rev. 11.15).121 Those who read or hear John’s text already know 119.  Idols are the work of human hands in the Hebrew Bible: Deut. 31.29; 1 Kgs 16.7; 2 Kgs 22.17; 2 Chr. 34.25; Isa. 2.8; 17.8; Jer. 1.16; 25.6–7; 32.30; Mic. 4.13; Acts 7.41. It is explicit in Pss. 113.2LXX; 134.15LXX in which τὰ εἴδωλα τῶν ἐθνῶν are τὰ ἔργα χειρῶν ἀνθρώπων. The link between idolatry and immorality was a standard Jewish charge against Gentiles; see 2 Kgs 9.22; Isa. 47.9–48.5; Jer. 7.5–11; Hos. 3.1–4.2; Mic. 5.12–15; Wis. 14.12–31; Rom. 1.18–29; Sib. Or. 3.8–45; Ep. Arist. 132–138; Test. Napth. 3.3–5; Josephus, Apion 2.33–34; Philo, Spec. Leg. 1.13–31. 120.  Against Blount (Revelation, 220) who says ‘the seventh trumpet blast inaugurates the reign of God and Christ’. Koester (Revelation, 514) is not as clear here but claims (incorrectly) that something has changed. If it has, it is only the perception of the readers rather than the cosmic reality. It is not impossible that this reflects God’s overthrow of evil forces that were believed to rule the world (Mt. 12.26; Jn 12.31; 14.30; 16.11; 2 Cor. 4.4; cf. Test. Sol. 2.9; 3.5–6; 6.1; 1QM 1.1–5; 18.1–3; 1QSa 1.18; 2.19; 3.20–21; 11Q13 11–13). However, although the Apocalypse is a world of cosmic forces, they generally represent the main enemy, Rome. 121.  For the idea that God’s reign is eternal, see Exod. 15.18; Pss. 10.16; 145.13; 146.10; Lam. 5.19; Ezek. 43.7; Dan. 4.3, 34; 6.26; Mic. 4.7; Wis. 3.8. God already

166

The Violence of the Lamb

that God is the παντοκράτωρ (1.8; 4.8),122 and Christ is the King of kings (1.5). Once again, Rome’s apparent power is set against the context of the heavenly throne and the cosmic disasters the divine ruler can wreak even on the Emperor and his armies. While the nations may rage, God’s wrath will overpower them (11.18).123 The heavenly voices proclaim the Almighty’s judgement, and the time for rewarding the saints and punishing the wicked (Rev. 11.17–18).124 The content is not described here, but the punishments have been covered in detail with the opening of the seals and blowing of the trumpets. Judgement divides humanity into two. First, servants, prophets, and saints, that is, all who fear God’s name (οἱ φοβούμενοι τὸ ὄνομα),125 and second, the destroyers of the earth, who will themselves be destroyed. Importantly, the saints include both small and great. A slave member of the Christian community will be rewarded while the emperor will face damnation. The churches were told that Christ is the one who knows and searches the hearts and rewards each according to their deeds. For hearers of the Apocalypse, it is becoming crystal clear what those rewards will be for those who find themselves inside or outside the community of the faithful come judgement day. If anything, the next judgement scene is even more explicitly divisive as it begins to outline graphically the contrasting fates of the saved and the damned. John has warned faithful Christians that they will face trouble at the hands of the Beasts and the Beast-worshippers. In contrast to those sealed by God, the inhabitants of the earth—a synonym for Beast worshippers—will be sealed by the Beast. The scene depicting the terrors of judgement (Rev. 6.12–17) was followed by a vision of the faithful (7.1–17), answering the question ‘who can stand?’ So too a further vision of the Christians who follow the Lamb (14.1–5) comes immediately after the depiction of the Beast’s activities on the earth (13.1–17). The visions directly answer the question of the ‘whole earth who followed the Beast’, ‘Who is like the Beast, and who can fight reigns or lives eternally (εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων) in the Apocalypse: Rev. 4.9, 10; 5.13; 7.12; 10.6; 11.15; 15.7; as does Jesus: Rev. 1.6, 18; 5.13; 11.15, and the saints: Rev. 22.5. 122.  See also Rev. 11.17; 15.3; 16.7, 14; 19.6, 15; 21.22. 123.  The nations rage at the reign of God in Ps. 99.1 (98.1LXX); cf. Ps. 2.5. 124.  See also Dan. 12.1–3; 4 Ezra 7.26–32; 2 Bar. 30.1–5; Mt. 25.31–46; Jn 5.28–29. 125.  The term καὶ φοβούμενος τὸν θεόν/οἱ φοβούμενοι τὸν θεόν is used as a technical term for Gentile ‘God-fearers’ in Acts (10.2, 22, 35; 13.16, 26), but in Revelation, it means all faithful Christians.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

167

against it?’ (13.4). For John, God and the Lamb are more than a match for the Beast; the Lamb and his followers are the ones who will fight against the Beast and conquer him. Revelation 14 is divided into three sections: the 144,000 followers of the Lamb (Rev. 14.1–5); three angels pronounce judgement on Babylon and Beast worshippers (14.6–13); the Son of Man reaps and judges the earth (14.14–20). The third vision essentially repeats the message of the second, and the Lamb (in the guise of the Son of Man in 14.14–20) is prominent throughout this chapter. John reiterates the terrible judgement in store for the peoples of the earth, while reminding his readers that they have the means of escaping that judgement if they repent. Not for the first time in Revelation, final judgement is announced by an angel flying in heaven. This time the message takes the form of an eternal message (εὐαγγέλιον αἰώνιος) to proclaim to those who dwell on the earth, to every nation and tribe and tongue and people (εὐαγγελίσαι ἐπὶ τοὺς καθημένους ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς καὶ ἐπὶ πᾶν ἔθνος καὶ φυλὴν καὶ γλῶσσαν καὶ λαόν). (Rev. 14.6)

That message comes in the form of a demand: ‘Fear God (φοβήθητε τὸν θεὸν) and give him glory (δότε αὐτῷ δόξαν), for the hour of his judgement has come (ἦλθεν ἡ ὥρα τῆς κρίσεως αὐτου); and worship him who made heaven and earth, the sea and the fountains of water’ (Rev. 14.7). Those who see some possibility of redemption for the nations in Rev. 11.13, interpret this call as an opportunity for all people to repent.126 However, against this, not only is this first angel announcing God’s judgement has arrived, another angel follows pronouncing that Babylon has already fallen (14.8). A third angel follows and warns of the dire consequences of worshipping the Beast and receiving its mark (14.9–11). As always in the Apocalypse, this is not a call to repentance to the nations, but a warning to the Church. Furthermore, it should certainly not be assumed that the content of this εὐαγγέλιον is necessarily any more than the words that follow. This is not the ‘evangelistic sermon’ of the conversion rally! In the context of Revelation, it is not inconceivable that the good news is the message of destruction and punishment that will befall worshippers of the Beast. Indeed, this is how εὐαγγελίζω is used in Isa. 40.9–11LXX:

126.  Koester, Revelation, 620; Osborne, Revelation; Smalley, Revelation, 285–87; Bauckham, Theology, 98–104. Aune (Revelation, 2:825) reads Rev. 14.6–7 this way despite not advocating the repentance position earlier.

168

The Violence of the Lamb Go up on a high mountain, O Zion, bearer of good news (ὁ εὐαγγελιζόμενος). Lift up your voice with strength, O Jerusalem, bearer of good news (ὁ εὐαγγελιζόμενος). Lift it, and do not fear (μὴ φοβεῖσθε). Say to the cities of Judah, ‘Behold your God’. Behold, the Lord comes in might and his arm with authority. Behold his reward is with him and his work before him. Like a shepherd he will shepherd his sheep, and in his arms he will gather lambs.127

The good news is both the announcement of victory for God and his people, and a warning of recompense for the enemy, and so the parallel with Rev. 14.6–7 is striking.128 The Lamb has already been identified as the shepherd of his people in Rev. 7.17, and fulfils a similar role in Rev. 14.4, as the redeemed follow the Lamb wherever he goes, linking Rev. 14.1–5 with what follows.129 Boring sees this Hebrew Bible tradition behind the way in which εὐαγγέλιον is used in Mark. Jesus announces the good news of God, that is, God is coming to win military victory.130 This twin meaning is not inconsistent with the way in which it was deployed in contemporaneous usage. It could certainly announce an important birth and a military victory,131 but similarly, the defeat of an enemy was also considered to be good news.132 In the context of the ancient world, good news was generally for some at the expense of others, and Rev. 14.6 is no exception.133 127.  Marcus (Mark, 1:145–47) makes the point that Isa. 40 is important for Mark, and so it is likely he would have been influenced by the way it was used by the prophet. 128.  Similarly Isa. 41.25–27; 52.7, where God judging Jerusalem’s enemies, and reasserting his reign, is good news. 129.  A. P. Van Schaik (‘ἄλλος ἄγγελος in Apk 14’, in Lambrecht [ed.], L’Apocalyptique johannique, 217–28 [219–21]) also makes this connection by another route, arguing Rev. 14.1–5 is based on Isa. 40.9–10 and 52.7–9. 130.  Boring, Mark, 30; see also Marcus (Mark, 1:146), who notes that in the cosmic arena of Mark’s Gospel, this background of the term is apt. 131.  Philostratus, Vita Apolloniii 5.8; Vit. Sophistarum 2.5.3. The inscription from 9 BCE commemorating the birth of Augustus is particularly instructive. His birth represented the beginning of the good news of the saviour Augustus (cf. Mk 1.1). Cf. Lk. 1.19. 132.  Josephus celebrates the good news of the downfall of enemies in Ant. 18.6.10; War 4.11.5. The Philistines celebrate the good news of Saul’s defeat (1 Sam. 31.9//1 Chr. 10.9); cf. 2 Sam. 18.19, 31. In Isa. 61.1 the speaker brings good news to the afflicted, broken hearted, captives, and prisoners, which again must signal victory over those who were oppressing the people. 133.  Obviously, the Gospel (τὸ εὐαγγέλιον) becomes a more technical term for the summation of the Christian message to which people must respond. However,

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

169

For the first time, the announcement of Babylon’s fall and punishment, to which John will return in more detail (Rev. 17–18), is announced: ‘Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great (ἔπεσεν ἔπεσεν Βαβυλὼν ἡ μεγάλη); she who gives to drink the wine of her impure passion (ὁ οἴνος τοῦ θυμοῦ τῆς πορνείας αὐτῆς) to all the nations’ (14.8).134 Against NRSV and NAS, there is nothing to suggest Babylon has forced the nations to share in her cup of immorality. John usually portrays committing fornication with Babylon as a voluntary act; an act with which some members of his churches are flirting. When the refrain of doom on Babylon returns, there is again no suggestion that drinking from her cup is done anything other than willingly.135 Throughout the Apocalypse, John contrasts Beast worshippers and followers of the Lamb, and by presenting their respective fates, hopes to persuade his Christian readers that ‘purity’ is always the better choice. Clearly, the enemy John has in mind throughout the Apocalypse is Rome, although it appears in various disguises as Babylon (Rev. 17–18)

its meaning is not fixed in its many uses in the New Testament. Paul is responsible for the majority of occurrences in the New Testament, often in an absolute form (Rom. 1.16; 10.16; 11.28; 1 Cor. 4.15; 9.14 bis, 18 bis; 9.23; 15.1; 2 Cor. 8.18; 11.4; Gal. 1.6, 11, 25; 2.2, 5, 7, 14; Phil. 1.5, 7, 12, 16, 27; 2.22; 4.3, 15; 1 Thess. 2.4; Phlm 13; cf. 2 Tim. 1.8), but see also τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ Χριστοῦ (Rom. 15.19; 1 Cor. 9.12; 2 Cor. 2.12; 9.13; 10.14; Gal. 1.7; Phil. 1.27, 32; 1 Thess. 3.2); τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς δόξης τοῦ Χριστοῦ (2 Cor. 4.4); τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ υἱοῦ (Rom. 1.9); τὸ εὐαγγέλιον θεοῦ (Rom. 1.1; 15.16; 2 Cor. 11.7; 1 Thess. 2.2, 8, 9); even τὸ εὐαγγέλιόν μου (Rom. 2.16; 16.25) or τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ἡμῶν (2 Cor. 4.3; 1 Thess. 1.5). In addition to Paul’s usage, in the disputed letters, there is ὁ λόγος τῆς ἀληθείας, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς σωτηρίας ὑμῶν (Eph. 1.13; cf. Col. 1.5); τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς εἰρήνης (Eph. 6.15). Paul’s usage is semi-technical, but clearly the content is not settled. In the gospel tradition, Jesus preaches τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς βασιλείας (Mt. 9.35; 24.14; cf. τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τοῦ θεοῦ; Mk 1.14). However, there is found the idea that τὸ εὐαγγέλιον should be preached to the whole world (Mt. 24.14//Mk 13.10; Mt. 26.13//Mk 14.9), that it should bring repentance (Mk 1.15; cf. Acts 15.7), and that believers may have to make difficult choices for its sake (Mk 8.35; 10.29). There is no sense of this usage in Rev. 14.6–7, and although the possible parallel with Mk 13.10//Mt. 24.14 is deceptive, in Revelation it is used without the definite article. Therefore it should be understood as a critical message (εὐαγγέλιον αἰώνιος) of impending judgement upon the nations. 134.  A similar announcement is made in Rev. 18.2–3, with an additional note of her pollution inserted. 135.  There is a clear allusion to Jer. 28.7LXX (51.7 MT): ‘Babylon was a golden cup in the Lord’s hand, intoxicating all the earth. Therefore, the nations are tottering.’

170

The Violence of the Lamb

and the Beast (13). John explicitly links getting drunk on Babylon’s impure wine (14.8) with worshipping the Beast and receiving its mark (14.9): [A] 14.8: Babylon falls [B] 14.8: All nations have drunk the wine of her impure lust (ὁ οἴνος τοῦ θυμοῦ τῆς πορνείας) [C] 14.9: [i.e.] Those who worship the Beast or receive its mark [B1] 14.10: They will also drink the wine of God’s wrath (ὁ οἴνος τοῦ θυμοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ) [A1] 14.10–11: They will be tormented for ever

For John, all nations (πάντα τὰ ἔθνη) drink from Babylon’s cup, follow the Beast, and receive his mark. The warning, ‘If anyone worships the Beast (εἴ τις προσκυνεῖ τὸ θηρίον)…’ (Rev. 14.9), is not a general appeal to the world, but a warning only to those John thought likely to hear his message—the Church. This is confirmed in Rev. 14.12–13 when their situation is explicitly addressed. In contrast to the nations of the earth, they must endure, keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus (14.12), even if it means death (14.13). Their motivation? The dead in the Lord will be blessed compared to those who follow the Beast. Beastworshippers—those who have drunk from Babylon’s cup—will be forced to drink an undiluted measure of God’s wrath, and they will be tormented with fire and sulphur.136 However, unlike the fire and sulphur that came out of the mouths of the angelic cavalry (9.17–18), this will not ‘kill’ the people. Although the scene should be understood as post-mortem, their torment will last forever: The smoke of their torment goes up for ever and ever; and they have no rest, day or night, these worshippers of the Beast and its image, and whoever receives the mark of its name. (Rev. 14.11)

136.  Fire and sulphur come from the mouths of the deadly cavalry in Rev. 9.17–18, and the wicked will burn in the lake of fire and sulphur (Rev. 19.20; 21.8), as will the Devil, the Beast, and the false prophet (20.10). Judgement from heaven also comes in the form of fire and sulphur in respect of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 19.24; cf. Deut. 29.23; 3 Macc. 2.5; Lk. 17.29; 1 Clem. 11.1), Gog (Ezek. 38.22), Rome (Sib. Or. 3.54, 60), and upon the wicked more generally (Ps. 11.3; 10.6LXX). In the New Testament, judgement with fire alone is found at Mt. 13.42, 50; 18.8–9; 25.41; Lk. 16.23–26 (cf. 1QH 17.13; 1QSa 2.8; 4.13).

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

171

The contrast with the followers of the Lamb is pronounced.137 Those who receive the mark of the Lamb or God will rest from their labours (Rev. 14.13); the smoke of their prayers, not their torment will rise (8.3).138 Once again, commentators baulk at the apparent unremitting cruelty of God inflicting irredeemable suffering even on the wicked. Smalley protests: Such a picture of unremitting punishment by God…calls into question both the justice and character of God, and indeed his saving purpose for the world… [John’s] teaching is always balanced, and never separates the judgment and justice of God from his love.139

Smalley instead suggests εἰς αἰῶνας αἰώνων in respect of their torment is a ‘quality’ rather than a ‘quantity’ of time, and that at some point it will end.140 However, there is really no evidence to support this view. Indeed, the four living creatures ‘day and night do not cease’ to worship God (Rev. 4.8) yet Smalley does not appear to interpret this worship in a timelimited sense! Whether or not it offends modern theological sensibilities, it is clear that for John, the eschatological torment of the earth-dwellers is unending; they are irredeemable. Whereas they were previously tortured for only five months (9.6), this time there is no end to their suffering. Moreover, the endless torture is carried out before the Lamb, who acts here as the agent of the furious wrath of God. While commentators who insist on reading the Lamb as a symbol of suffering, non-violent love once again struggle with the apparent incongruity of the scene, it is perfectly in keeping with the role the Lamb actually fulfils in the Apocalypse. This scene is the third depiction of the final Day of Judgement in Revelation, in which the Lamb plays a crucial role as the bringer or supervisor of divine judgement. Humanity also suffers under the gaze of the holy angels (ἄγγελοι ἅγιοι).141 It may be noteworthy that 137.  For a good contrast between Beast and Lamb followers, see deSilva, Seeing, 270–84. 138.  Normally the image of smoke rising is in the context of a destroyed city (Josh. 8.20; Judg. 20.40; Isa. 34.10), explicitly so in Rev. 19.3, where the smoke from Babylon’s burning will rise forever (εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων; 19.3; cf. 18.9). 139.  Smalley, Revelation, 368; Boring, Revelation, 170–72. 140.  Smalley, Revelation, 368; Caird, Revelation, 186–87. 141.  Aune (Revelation, 2:834) can find no parallel for the holy angels joining as spectators of punishment in early Jewish and Christian eschatologies. Perhaps beginning with Isa. 66.23–24, the idea developed that the righteous were able to look on the suffering of the damned (1 En. 27.2–3; 90.26–27; 4 Ezra 7.36–38, 88–93). In

172

The Violence of the Lamb

the only other occurrence of [οἱ] ἄγγελοι [οἱ] ἅγιοι in the New Testament is Mk 8.38//Lk. 9.26, in which those who wish to follow Jesus are warned that if they deny they will be denied when the Son of Man comes in glory with the holy angels. While the suffering is inflicted upon humanity, its primary purpose here is to encourage faithfulness to death among John’s readers (Rev. 14.12–13).142 The vision of Rev. 14.14–20 is the fourth representation of final judgement, and is based on Joel 3.13: ‘Put in the sickle for the harvest is ripe. Come, tread, for the wine press is full; that vats overflow, for their wickedness is great.’ Like the scene before, it divides the fate of the saved (Rev. 14.14–16) from the damned (14.17–20),143 using the metaphor of harvesting.144 The one like a Son of Man, who carries out the first reaping, is normally identified with Christ. That John has previously deployed the Son of Man title (1.13) and clouds (1.7) for Jesus means this is certainly the most natural reading.145 However, that the Son of Man appears to take Lk. 16.19–31, inhabitants of the two realms are able to communicate. For Christian development, see Apoc. Pet. 7–8; Tertullian, De Spec. 30. In Pass. Perp. 17.3, Saturus tells the crowd to note the faces of the martyrs because they will see them again on that day (in die illo), that is Judgement Day (Middleton, Radical Martyrdom, 92; cf. Thomas J. Heffernan, The Passion of Perpetua and Felicity [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012], 323), who, while accepting the phrase generally has the meaning of Judgement Day in early Christian usage, prefers the following day when the contest will take place). 142.  Although reflecting the older view of constant persecution, it may be that Swete (Apocalypse, 185) is not far wrong when he writes: ‘The punishment is aggravated by the presence of spectators. If Christians at the stake or in the amphitheatre suffered in the sight of a multitude of their fellowmen, those who deny their faith must suffer before a more august assembly composed of the holy angels and the Lamb.’ 143.  Joel 3.13 probably envisages a single harvest, although John has read it as two. However, Aune (Revelation, 2:844) judges the view that the first of the two harvests represent the elect is ‘without basis’. However, there a parallel with the tradition in Mark that the Son of Man comes on the clouds and gathers the elect (Mk 13.26–27). Moreover, that there are two angels and two harvests in the context of an apocalyptic text concerned with creating sharp division between insiders and outsiders counts against Aune’s position. Nonetheless, the first harvest is admittedly short on detail, but as Blount (Revelation, 280) suggests, there may be some connection with the 144,000 being dubbed ‘first fruits’ (ἀπαρχή; 14.4). 144.  Harvesting is used as a metaphor for judgement in Isa. 17.5; 18.4–5; 24.13; Jer. 51.33; Hos. 6.11; Joel 4.13; Mic. 4.12–13; 4 Ezra 4.28–32; 2 Apoc. Bar. 70.20; cf. Mt. 13.24–30, 36–43; Mk 4.29. 145.  With Blount, Revelation, 280; Boxall, Revelation, 212; Koester, Revelation, 623.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

173

orders from an angel has tipped some away from this interpretation.146 The Son of Man is told to reap the earth, and with a swing of his sickle, the earth was reaped. There is no winnowing to separate the good from the bad (cf. Mt. 3.11–12) leading some scholars mistakenly to reassert John’s concern for universal salvation.147 However, not only is the division of peoples signalled by two different harvests, it is clear that the ‘fruits’ of the second are far more voluminous than the first! The second reaping is far less ambiguous than the first. The harvest of the grapes is overseen by an angel which has power over fire, an instrument of judgement in the Apocalypse (Rev. 3.18; 8.5, 7–8; 9.17–18; 14.10; 15.2; 19.20; 20.10; 21.8). The grapes are gathered, and the angel threw the harvest ‘into the great winepress of the wrath of God’ (14.19). John takes the image of the vat overflowing in Joel 3.13, and combines it with that found in Isa. 63.1–6 of the victor whose clothes are red from the winepress, representing the blood of his enemies: ‘And I trampled them in my wrath, and I spilled their blood on the earth’ (Isa. 63.6LXX). The nations are judged and trampled, and a vat overflows with an unfeasibly large quantity of blood, forming a river148 stretching for more than 320 kilometres at a depth of around one and a half metres.149 After a short interlude in heaven praising God’s judgements (Rev. 15.1–8), John returns to the judgements that will fall on the earth with the tipping of the seven bowls. The Seven Bowls of Wrath (Revelation 15.7–16.21) Bowls ‘full of the wrath of God’ (ὁ θυμός τοῦ θεοῦ; Rev. 15.7; 16.1) form the final set of judgement septets. Seven angels are told to pour 146.  For example, Aune, Revelation, 2:841. Maurice Casey (The Solution to the ‘Son of Man’ Problem [LNTS, 343; London: T&T Clark International, 2007], 148–49) notes that in 14.15 ‘another angel’ (ἄλλος ἄγγελος) comes out of the temple, which suggests the first figure is also an angel. However, it is not clear why John would create this link with the first chapter if he had an angel in mind. 147.  Bauckham, Climax, 283–96; Blount, Revelation 279. 148.  Rivers of blood are associated with victory and judgement in Isa. 34.3; Ezek. 32.5–6; 2 Macc. 12.6; Sib. Or. 5.372. For an eschatological context, cf. 1 En. 100.3; 4 Ezra 15.35–36. 149.  Caird (Revelation, 192–93) offers an alternative interpretation. The blood, he says, is that of the martyrs being pressed into wine to be given to Babylon to drink. Although this offers a neat connection to the judgement on the Whore, the clear allusions to the Hebrew Bible, in which the winepress is a symbol of wrathful judgement, as well as it forming the second half of the Last Judgement diptych of Rev. 14.6–20, renders Caird’s reading highly unlikely.

174

The Violence of the Lamb

out (ἐκχέω)150 the contents of the bowls on the earth (16.1), and, as with the seals and trumpets, this has devastating effects. The narrative of the bowls is even quicker than that of the trumpets, but the bowls intensify the trumpets’ judgement. While formerly a third of the earth was affected, with these new plagues, there is total devastation. The first brings Beast worshippers out in foul and evil sours (Rev. 16.2).151 As they had been marked by the Beast, God now marks their skin. The second and third bowls affect all the sea and rivers respectively, as they become blood.152 All living things in the sea die (16.3).153 Drinking water also becomes blood, and an angel praises God’s ironic and fitting justice. ‘For men have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and you have given them blood to drink’ (16.6).154 The altar, probably representing the martyrs (6.9–11), joins in the heavenly approval of God’s justice.155 The fourth causes the sun to scorch people with fire (16.8; cf. 7.16), and in response, God’s victims curse him, as the Beast had done earlier (13.6). John again links the Beast with his followers. As before, ‘they did not repent and give him glory’ (16.9; cf. 9.21). In contrast, the fifth bowl, poured on the throne of the Beast and its kingdom, almost certainly

150.  The verb ἐκχέω is used only in Rev. 16, in all but one case representing the angels pouring or being told to pour their bowls on the earth (Rev. 16.1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 10, 12, 17). In the other (16.6), it refers to the wicked pouring out the blood of the saints. In the rest of the New Testament, it can represent violently shedding blood (Mt. 23.35; Lk. 11.50; Acts 22.20; Rom. 3.15; cf. Acts 1.18 of Judas), the pouring out of Jesus’ blood (Mt. 26.28//Mk 14.24//Lk. 22.50), or the pouring of the Spirit (Acts 2.17, 18, 33; cf. Tit. 3.6; Jud. 11). It is associated with the pouring out of God’s wrath in 2 Chr. 12.7; 34.21, 25; Ps. 69.24; Isa. 1.24; 63.3; Jer. 6.11; 7.20; 10.25; 42.18; 44.6; Lam. 4.11; Ezek. 7.8; 9.8; 14.19; 20.8, 13, 21, 33–34; 21.31; 22.22, 31; 30.15; 36.18; Hos. 5.10; Nah. 1.6; Zeph. 3.8; Sir. 36.8. 151.  As with the trumpets, there are several references back to the plagues on Egypt. Here Exod. 9.8–12. 152.  Cf. Exod. 9.8–12. 153.  Cf. Exod. 7.17–25. In Rev. 8.12 only a third of the sea creatures are killed. Koester (Revelation, 654) again laments this apparent senseless cruelty against those who previously worshipped God (cf. Rev. 5.13). 154.  In the Septuagint, it is used for killing in Gen. 9.6; 37.22; Num. 35.33; Deut. 19.10; 21.7; 1 Sam. 25.31; 2 Sam. 20.10; 1 Kgs 2.31; 2 Kgs 21.16; 24.4; 1 Chr. 22.8; 28.3; 1 Macc. 1.37; 7.17; 2 Macc. 1.8; Pss. 13.3; 78.3, 10; 105.38; Prov. 1.16; 6.17; Sir. 28.11; 34.22; Zeph. 1.18. The author pushes the lex talionis here to the point of laughing at one’s own joke! 155.  Aune (Revelation, 2:865) calls this a ‘judgement doxology’, pointing to other examples: 2 Chr. 12.6; Ezra 9.15; Neh. 9.33; Pss. 7.11; 9.4; Jer. 46.28.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

175

Rome,156 is plunged into darkness.157 Once again John notes the lack of repentance, as people, clearly located in the Beast’s kingdom, curse God for their sores (16.10; cf. 16.2). The sixth and seventh bowls prepare more explicitly for the final battle and judgement on Babylon that is to come. With the penultimate bowl, the Euphrates dries up, in preparation for an invasion by the kings of the East. What looks like a plague of frogs from the mouths of the dragon, Beast, and false prophet (Rev. 16.13),158 turns out to be demonic spirits which gather the kings of the whole world for the final battle ‘on the great day of God the Almighty’ (τῆς ἡμέρας τῆς μεγάλης τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ παντοκράτορος; 16.14), assembling them at Armageddon (16.16). The significance of this battle is increased by an apparent insertion by John: ‘Lo, I am coming like a thief! Blessed is the one who is awake, keeping his garments that he may not go naked and be seen exposed’ (16.15). This saying and makarism appears to be out of place; indeed Aune says it ‘is clearly an intrusive comment unrelated to what precedes or follows it’.159 However, it serves precisely the same warning to the churches inserted at other crucial points in the narrative (cf. 14.12–13). This is another moment for John’s readers to consider their own behaviour and which side they are currently on. As the Beast’s army assembles for battle, John’s readers have an opportunity to heed his call to repent. Notably, the image of the thief and nakedness come from the messages to the two churches that were most in need of repentance (cf. 3.3, 17). Furthermore, that the voice here is clearly that of Jesus reinforces John’s notion that behind all God’s judgements stands the Lamb. Whereas the other angels poured their bowls onto something (earth, sea, rivers, sun, throne of the Beast, Euphrates), the bowl of the final angel is poured into the air. Although if measured in terms of human deaths the resulting carnage does not appear to be as severe as previous plagues, John understands the seventh bowl to represent the victory God and the Lamb will win over human and cosmic evil. When the bowl is poured, God, the Lamb, or perhaps both, declares ‘It is done (γέγονεν)!’ (16.17), accompanied by a great array of eschatological signs. There is lightning, voices, thunder, and ‘a great earthquake such as had never been since men were on the earth, so great was that earthquake’ (16.18), causing the

156.  With Blount, Revelation, 301. 157.  Cf. Exod. 10.21–29. 158.  Cf. Exod. 8.1–15. 159.  Aune, Revelation, 2:896.

176

The Violence of the Lamb

great city to be split into three parts. As earthquakes are a stable sign of eschatological distress, the greatest of them all is devastating. The note that all the islands and mountains were displaced (16.20) recapitulates themes from the first of the last judgement scenes (6.12–17). In the face of God’s judgement, the cities of the nations fall, and John surely means all the cities on earth. The image is normally associated with military defeat, and so once again, and as he will recount later, John stresses that the powers on earth are no match for the powers in heaven. Babylon is, of course, singled out. God remembers Babylon, and while God’s remembrance can be a sign of blessing to come, here it is clearly a curse; she is made to drink the cup of God’s furious wrath. It is not enough for Babylon to fall; she must be violently humiliated in order for John to stress to his churches that they must have no part in her activities. Finally, as unfeasibly large hailstones rain down on earth,160 the people of earth still do not repent, but continue to curse God for his judgements on them (16.21). Throughout the plagues brought by the bowls, trumpets, and seals, John has continually stressed the lack of repentance on the part of the peoples of the earth. However, despite a number of commentators, perhaps concerned to protect the notion of a just God, satisfying themselves that this is a free choice made by the ‘wicked’, the fact is that these unrepentant sinners are literary characters of John’s own making. To be sure, John does not expect earth-dwellers to repent, but he probably never expects them actually to hear the gospel before judgement comes. Nonetheless, the near-incomprehensible recalcitrant behaviour demonstrated by the peoples of the earth is a situation created by John, driven by his concern to separate his readers from those he regards as fornicators with Babylon and worshippers of the Beast. Ultimately, against Koester and others, John has no concern for the welfare of the inhabitants of the earth;161 his only concern is that his churches note the terrible fate that is in store for the followers of the Beast, and interpret any present or potential difficulty, pressure, or persecution in light of a far worse fate that lies ahead if they do not repent.

160.  Cf. Exod. 9.13–35. 161.  That people do not appear to be killed in the bowl sequence has led Koester (Revelation, 655) to make the remarkable claim that there is ‘restraint in the judgment of God. The plague allows them to live, so that even here, repentance remains a possibility.’

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

177

The Fall of Babylon, the Final Battle, and the Last Judgement (Revelation 17–22) I have argued throughout this chapter that John does not present the reader with a timetable of events that must take place before the final judgement. Instead, the Last Day—the Day of the Wrath of God and the Lamb—is the vantage point from which John’s present should be understood. Each of John’s judgement scenes—seals, bowls, and trumpets—is effectively a sketch of the End. Although many have made the attempt, it should be clear that reading John’s narrative in anything like a linear fashion is unwise. Indeed, it requires several rearrangements of the cosmic furniture to, for example, realign the stars after one disaster in time for the next! Each judgement scene is, again against several readers, not concerned with the fate of the world, but the fate of the church. Everything from Revelation 4–22 reinforces the message contained in chs. 2–3; John’s churches must cling to their current faithful behaviour despite external pressure, or they need to repent of some form of conformity to the Roman world. While some judgement scenes have been somewhat opaque, in the closing quarter of his book, John is graphically explicit in his depiction of what will become of the great city of Rome. The Fall of Babylon (Revelation 17–18) John previewed Babylon’s fall, charging her with making the nations drink ‘from the wine of her impure passion’ (ἐκ τοῦ οἴνου τοῦ θυμοῦ τῆς πορνείας αὐτῆς; Rev. 14.8). He substantially expands on that image by representing her as ‘the great Whore’ (ἡ πόρνη τῆς μεγάλης; 17.1). As before, the earthdwellers (οἱ κατοικοῦντες τὴν γῆν) have become drunk (ἐμεθύσθησαν) ‘on the wine of her fornication’ (ἐκ τοῦ οἴνου τῆς πορνείας αὐτῆς; 17.2). John also accuses her of fornicating with the kings of the earth (οἱ βασιλεῖς τῆς γῆς), and, as a result, she is subject to judgement (κρίμα; 17.1). John deploys his dominant sexual metaphor for Rome (Rev. 17.1; 19.2) and her activities throughout his depiction (17.2, 4; 18.3, 9; 19.2).162 While the Harlot is first introduced ‘seated in many waters’ (17.1), when John sees her, she is dressed in purple and scarlet, and sits on a scarlet 162.  John frequently deploys the words πόρνη (Rev. 17.1; 19.2); πορνεύω (17.2; 18.3, 9); and πορνεία (17.2, 4; 18.3; 19.2). Obviously for modern readers, John’s depiction of female characters (especially the Whore and Jezebel) is problematic, not least his deployment of sexual violence imagery to demonstrate the ‘just’ judgement of the more powerful male deity, which the heavenly spectators (also depicted as male in Rev. 14.4) enjoy. For discussion, see Pippin, Death and Desire; and especially Michelle Fletcher, ‘Flesh for Franken-Whore: Reading Babylon’s Body in Revelation 17’, in Joan T. Taylor (ed.), The Body in Biblical, Christian and Jewish Texts (London:

178

The Violence of the Lamb

beast full of blasphemous names. This beast and the waters are later interpreted as the nations of the earth (17.15). In her hand, she holds the golden cup of her abominations (βδελύγματα) and ‘impurities of her fornication’ (τὰ ἀκάθαρτα τῆς πορνείας αὐτῆς; 17.4). This is the cup from which all people—earth dwellers (17.2), all nations (πάντα τὰ ἔθνη; 14.8; 18.3)— have drunk,163 while the kings of the earth have fornicated with her (17.2; 18.3, 9). In short, she is ‘the Great Whore, who has corrupted the earth with her fornication’ (ἡ πόρνη τὴν μεγάλην ἥτις ἔφθειρεν τὴν γῆν ἐν τῇ πορνείᾳ αὐτῆς; 19.2). The final charge against her is that she has murdered the faithful; she is ‘drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs of Jesus’ (μεθύουσαν ἐκ τοῦ αἵματος τῶν ἁγίων καὶ ἐκ τοῦ αἵματος τῶν μαρτύρων Ἰησου; 17.6; see also 18.24; 19.2; cf. 18.20).164 John sees her name written on her forehead: ‘Babylon the great; mother of harlots and of earth’s abominations’ (Βαβυλὼν ἡ μεγάλη, ἡ μήτηρ τῶν πορνῶν καὶ τῶν βδελυγμάτων τῆς γῆς; Rev. 17.5). Not only is Babylon the great prostitute; as the mother, she is the source of all harlotry and earth’s abomination. Therefore, for John, the Whore is the personification of all evil in the world; the dangerous body with which all peoples and kings on earth have dallied, and from which God’s people must flee (18.4). John’s target is clearly Rome.165 The woman sits on seven hills,166 and she is identified as ‘the great city (ἡ πόλις ἡ μεγάλη) which has dominion over the kings of the earth’ (Rev. 17.18).167 Despite Rome’s claim to T&T Clark International, 2014), 144–64; Elizabeth Schüssler-Fiorenza, ‘Babylon the Great: A Rhetorical-Political Reading of Revelation 17–18’, in Barr (ed.), Reality of the Apocalypse, 243–69. 163.  Cf. Jer. 28.7LXX. 164.  The saints and prophets of Jesus form a single group; the καί should be understood epexegetically (with Aune, Revelation, 3:937). 165.  A few commentators have instead identified the woman as Jerusalem. Ford, Revelation, 285–86; Margaret Barker, The Revelation of Jesus Christ (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 2000), 279–301. Mathias Rissi (Die Hure Babylon und die Verführung der Heiligen: Eine Studie zur Apokalypse des Johannes [BWANT, 136; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1995], 55–56) suggests the Whore does not represent a city at all, but the more general polluting influence of religious syncretism. 166.  Rome’s identification with the seven hills can be found in, e.g., Juvenal, Saturae 9.130; Horace, Carm. 5; Ovid, Trista 1.5.69; 3.7.51–52; Pliny, Nat. Hist. 3.66–67; Virgil, Aeneid 6.783. For discussion, see Aune, Revelation, 3:944. 167.  Rome is the great city in Horace, Carm. 4.13.3; Seneca, Helv. 6.3. Jerusalem is called ἡ πόλις ἡ μεγάλη in Rev. 11.8, but this does not govern the reference here. In both cases the phrase is qualified, in 11.8 the great city is where Jesus was crucified, while in 17.18, it is the city that has dominion over the earth’s kings, which would not obviously apply to Jerusalem.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

179

greatness and to rule over rulers (βασιλεία ἐπὶ τῶν βασιλέων), the readers of the Apocalypse know that Jesus, as King of kings (Βασιλεὺς βασιλέων; 19.5), is really the one who rules over earth’s kings (ὁ ἄρχων τῶν βασιλέων τῆς γῆς; 1.5), alongside God who, rather than the emperor, is the true Almighty (ὁ παντοκράτωρ; 1.8; 4.8; 11.17; 15.3; 16.7; 19.6; 21.22). Their day of wrath has arrived, and Rome will feel the full force of their judgement (17.1). Despite Rome’s claim of power and wealth, John reduces her to a branded prostitute (17.5).168 In the context of judgement, it is not uncommon to portray cities as prostitutes (Isa. 1.21; 23.16–17; Nah. 3.4). Indeed, Israel itself is cast in that role when the people turn to idolatry (Jer. 3.6–10; Ezek. 16.15–22; 23.1–49; Hos. 4.12–13; 5.3). For the Harlot, judgement is swift and brutal. A coalition of kings and the Beast attack the Whore, making her desolate and naked (Rev. 17.16). They eat her flesh and burn her with fire. The actions of stripping, devouring, and burning have precedents in the Hebrew Bible. It is normally dogs rather than the aggressor that is left to devour the flesh of enemies (1 Kgs 14.11; 16.4), most famously, Jezebel (1 Kgs 21.23–24; 2 Kgs 9.10, 36–37). The metaphor of stripping is often used against a city for idolatry or harlotry to demonstrate the shame of their actions.169 While stripping and burning can also appear together (Ezek. 23.5), burning is a standard trope for the destruction of cities (Jer. 34.22),170 as is making desolate.171 The pitiful state of the harlot Babylon contrasts with her self-perception: Since in her heart she says, ‘A queen I sit, I am no widow, mourning I shall never see’, so shall her plagues come in a single day, pestilence and mourning, and famine, and she shall be burned with fire; for mighty is the Lord God who judges her. (Rev. 18.7–8)

The city who ‘glorified herself’ (Rev. 18.7) will be laid waste, humiliated, and tortured. When seen through the lens of God’s throne room, Rome is not a queen, but a prostitute, and a widow,172 ravaged in war by the powerful God and his judgements. 168.  Jennifer A. Glancy and Stephen D. Moore, ‘How Typical a Roman Prostitute Is Revelation’s “Great Whore”?’, JBL 130 (2011): 551–69; deSilva, Seeing, 108–9. 169.  Isa. 3.7; 47.3; Jer. 13.26–27; Lam. 1.8; Ezek. 16.37–38; 23.10, 26–29; Hos. 2.5, 12; Nah. 3.5. 170.  Rome itself burns in Sib. Or. 2.15–19; 3.52–62; 5.158–161; 8.36–42. 171.  2 Kgs 19.7; Ezra 4.15; Neh. 2.3; Ps. 79.7; Isa. 1.7; 6.11; 23.13; 24.1; 34.10; 60.12; Jer. 10.25; 33.9LXX; 40.10LXX; Ezek. 26.2, 19; 32.15; 33.29; 35.3, 7; 1 Macc. 1.39; 2.12; 4.38; 15.4, 29; Wis. 5.23; Sir. 16.4. 172.  The image of the widow is used for defeated cities in Isa. 47.8, 9; 54.4; Lam. 1.1; 5.3–4.

180

The Violence of the Lamb

Commentators, squeamish over the sexualised violence exhibited in John’s metaphor for the destruction of Babylon, are quick to point out that her downfall appears to be an act of ‘self-destruction’.173 To be sure, it is the kings and beasts who ravage Babylon. However, John makes it clear that this is God’s judgement and God’s initiative: the kings and the Beast attack the Whore because ‘God has put it into their hearts to carry out his purpose’ (Rev. 17.17; cf. 17.1). That God is the primary actor is repeated when laments are offered for her by the kings of the earth (18.9–10), the merchants (18.11–17), and the sea farers (18.18–19), all of whom point to God’s judgement coming ‘in one hour’ (μιᾷ ὥρᾳ; 18.8, 18, 19). Finally, to emphasise the point, an angel casts a great millstone into the sea to represent the final doom of Babylon: ‘So shall Babylon the great city be thrown down with violence (ὁρμήματι)’ (18.21). The barrenness of the city is emphasised; there will be no music or craft, no lamplight shining, no bridegroom or bride—in short, no life (18.21). The fate of the city of Rome stands in sharp contrast to the future heavenly city, which is the bride ready for the bridegroom (19.7; 21.2), in which there will be no mourning (21.4). Babylon’s judgement is appropriate not only for her immorality, but because of her slaughter of the saints, whose blood is found in her lifeless body (18.24; cf. 17.6). God’s violent judgement on Rome is just vengeance for the ‘blood of his servants’ (19.2; cf. 6.10; 18.20). In the midst of this judgement scene, John issued a call for his people to ‘Come out’ of Babylon in case they share not only in her sin, but also in her punishment (Rev. 18.4). Once again, the contrasting visions of the two cities, Rome and the heavenly city, reinforce the choice John’s readers are called to make. They must choose in which city they wish to dwell. However, they must be aware of the consequences of making the wrong choice. The Final Battle (Revelation 16.12–16; 17.12–14; 19.11–21) No doubt because of John’s use of traditional material,174 the figure of Jesus as the agent of divine judgement has been in the background for some of John’s narrative. However, when it comes to the final eschatological battle, he once again takes centre stage. Just as it was the Lamb’s day of wrath that ushered in John’s first depiction of the final judgement (Rev. 6.12–17), so Christ appears through the opened heavens on a white horse to judge (κρίνω) and to make war (πολεμέω; 19.11). 173.  Blount, Revelation, 322–23. Blount notes that John’s language is ‘difficult’. 174.  For a very detailed analysis of John’s sources, see Aune, Revelation, 1:cv– cxxiv. Thompson (Revelation, 37–73) argues the text as it stands is a ‘linguistic unity’, while Koester (Revelation, 69–71) says the Apocalypse, although written over a long period of time, constitutes a single literary unity.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

181

This appearance of Jesus is taken by many to be John’s depiction of the parousia.175 However, others have argued that the image of military conqueror is not a standard Christian eschatological image,176 and owes more to Jewish apocalypticism.177 Furthermore, as Boxall notes,178 many features of the New Testament parousia are missing: the coming on the clouds (Rev. 1.7; cf. Mt. 24.30//Mk 13.26//Lk. 21.27; Mt. 26.64//Mk 14.62); gathering the elect (Mt. 13.41, 49; 16.27; 24.31//Mk 13.27; Mk 8.38; 1 Thess. 4.15–18), and the accompanying angels.179 However, there are certainly parallels with the more militaristic appearance of Christ in 2 Thess. 1.6–2.11. While there are aspects of the second coming here, it is probably better to see this scene as yet another depiction of the final judgement which has incorporated aspects of the parousia. The final war and the great day of God were conflated in Rev. 16.14, so it is unlikely John has taken his focus from the final judgement here. Moreover, there are clear parallels to the image of God coming as the warrior-judge (Isa. 63.1–6) who judges righteously (Pss. 72.2; 96.13; 98.9; Isa. 11.4).180 Blount stresses that the elements of the final battle itself are played down, and the imagery here is akin, not to a ‘political avenging Messiah’ but to a triumphal Roman victory procession.181 However, it is not obvious what is apolitical about a Roman procession, and indeed, the conquered captives following behind the victors were often executed in a mass ritualised slaughter (Josephus, War 7.5.3–7). The final battle takes place in three stages. First, when the sixth bowl was poured on the Euphrates it dried up to make way for the kings from the east. However, interrupting the sequence of judgements, John mentions that the frogs coming from the mouth of the dragon assembled the kings of the inhabitants of the world (αἱ βασιλεῖαι τῆς οἰκουμένης ὅλης) for the war on the great day of God Almighty (ἡ ἡμέρα 175.  Blount (Revelation, 349) states that it is ‘undoubtedly, for John, the Lamb’s parousia’. 176.  R. Jack McKelvey, The Millennium and the Book of Revelation (Cambridge: Lutterworth, 1999), 77–80. 177.  Cf. Zech. 9.9–10; 2 Apoc. Bar. 72.1–6; Pss. Sol. 17.21–29. See Beckwith, Apocalypse, 730–31; Mounce, Revelation, 351. 178.  Boxall, Revelation, 272. 179.  Of course, this point depends on the identification of the army that accompanies the rider. 180.  The pesher on Isa. 11.4 (4QpIsaa frags 8–10 3.18–23) transfers the role of the righteous judge from God to the Messiah. See Boxall, Revelation, 273; cf. Pss. Sol. 17.24–27. 181.  Blount, Revelation, 349; Aune, Revelation, 3:1051.

182

The Violence of the Lamb

τῆς μεγάλης τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ παντοκράτορος; Rev. 16.14). Second, the ten kings represented by the ten horns of the beast on which the Whore of Babylon sits, give power over to the Beast, and make war on the Lamb (17.12–14). Finally, the battle itself arrives (19.11–21). However, it is an anti-climax, for the reader has already been told that when the Beast and the kings made war (πολεμέω) on the Lamb, he overcame them (νικάω), because of his superior status as Lord of lords and King of kings (17.14). Therefore, the outcome of this war is never in doubt. The Beast with the kings and their troops (Rev. 19.19) line up against the Rider and his armies dressed in white.182 John has already given away the ending (17.14), but he does so twice more. First, he says that Christ will strike down (πατάσσω) the nations with the sword that comes from his mouth, and he himself will tread (καὶ αὐτὸς πατεῖ) the wine press of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty (19.15; cf. 14.20).183 Christ is, therefore, the arbiter of judgement and punishment, and the rider image is linked to the victorious Lamb through the inscription on his robe and thigh that he is King of kings and Lord of lords (19.16). Second, in 19.18, the outcome of the battle is once again announced before it commences through the invitation issued to the birds to partake in the great supper of God, in which they are invited to eat the flesh of kings, the flesh of captains, the flesh of mighty men, the flesh of mighty men, the flesh of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people (καὶ σάρκας πάντων), both free and slaves, both small and great. 182.  I argue that the Rider’s armies are martyrs in the next chapter. The assembly or armies is a common theme in Jewish apocalypticism. See Ps. 2.1–6; Joel 3.2; Zech. 12.1–9; 14.2; 4 Ezra 13.5, 34–35; 1 En. 56.7; 90.13–14; Sib. Or. 3.663–68; 2 Apoc. Bar. 48.37; Jub. 23.23; Est.LXX 11.5–9; Pss. Sol. 2.1–2; 1QM 10–12. See Aune (Revelation, 3:1095) for discussion. Koester (Revelation, 760) notes that occasionally armies opposed to God are goaded into striking first, which inevitably leads to their doom (1 En. 56.5–8; 4 Ezra 13.5–11). 183.  The notice that Christ will tread the wine press probably means the blood in which his robe is dipped belongs to his enemies (with Smalley, Revelation, 491; Beckwith, Apocalypse, 733; Roloff, Revelation, 218). The objection that the battle has not taken place (Koester, Revelation, 755–56) does not rule out this identification. This would be to read the Apocalypse in a far too linear way. Similarly, it is certainly possible the blood of the martyrs is intended (Caird, Revelation, 242–44). Blount’s objection (Revelation, 354) that the martyrs are at rest does not take account of the active role of martyrdom in John’s mind. Blount and Koester (Revelation, 755–56) understand the blood to be Jesus’ own. Again this is possible. That the rider’s name is Faithful and True (19.11) recalls the martyrdom of Jesus mentioned in Rev. 1.5. Ultimately, all three possibilities should be kept open.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

183

The universality of those whom John imagines will ultimately end up with the Beast to make war (πόλεμος) against Christ and his army (Rev. 19.19) is clear from his comprehensive description of all classes of people, similar to his description of those who attempted to flee from the Day of the Wrath of the Lamb (6.15). Once again, there is little warrant for expecting any repentance from those who dwell on the earth, for ultimately all humanity will receive the mark of the Beast, except those whose name was written in the book of life before the foundation of the world (13.5; 19.20; 20.15). Unsurprisingly, with the war a foregone conclusion, John does not describe the rout in any detail.184 Instead, he simply notes that the army’s generals—the Beast and the false prophet—were captured, and thrown alive into the lake of fire (Rev. 19.20).185 The rest ‘were slain by the sword of him who sits upon the horse, the sword that issues from his mouth; and all the birds were gorged with their flesh’ (19.20). As the angel had intimated, in a scene commentators have described as ‘revolting’186 or ‘exceedingly crass’,187 the birds gorged on the battlefield dead. As Babylon’s flesh was devoured (17.16), so all who associated with her are now themselves nothing more than bird food. The image of the macabre battlefield feast comes from the judgement on Gog and Magog in Ezek. 39.17–20,188 but it is no less graphic for 184.  David J. Neville (‘Faithful, True, and Violent? Christology and “Divine Vengeance” in the Revelation of John’, in Ted Grimsrud and Michael Hardin [eds.], Passionate Eschatology: The Future as Friend [Eugene: Cascade Books, 2011], 56–84 [76–77]) is surely incorrect in his assumption that because no battle is described, no battle actually took place. 185.  Being captured on the battlefield represented such great shame that generals often killed themselves rather than be taken by the enemy (e.g. Plutarch, Crassus 25.11). Saul asks his armour bearer to kill him so the Philistines would not be able to make sport of him (2 Sam. 1.8–10; but cf. 1 Sam. 13.1–5). The ‘triumphal procession’ could lead to the ritual humiliation and ritual execution of an enemy king or general (Josephus, War 7.5.5). This seems to be the fate of the Beast and false prophet here. 186.  Sweet, Revelation, 285. 187.  Roloff, Revelation, 220. 188.  ‘Speak to the birds of every kind and to all the wild animals: Assemble and come, gather from all around to the sacrificial feast that I am preparing for you, a great sacrificial feast on the mountains of Israel, and you shall eat flesh and drink blood. You shall eat the flesh of the mighty, and drink the blood of the princes of the earth— of rams, of lambs, and of goats, of bulls, all of them fatlings of Bashan. You shall eat fat until you are filled, and drink blood until you are drunk, at the sacrificial feast that I am preparing for you. And you shall be filled at my table with horses and charioteers, with warriors and all kinds of soldiers, says the Lord God’ (Ezek. 39.17–20).

184

The Violence of the Lamb

that.189 The full force of the scene should be allowed to stand. Efforts to suggest the battle is a ‘war of words’190 on account of the sword coming out of the rider’s mouth (cf. Eph. 6.17; Heb. 4.12), and therefore represents non-violent witness are hardly persuasive, and owe more to contemporary theological concerns than an attempt to understand John’s imagination.191 God wields the sword of judgement throughout the Hebrew Bible (Deut. 32.41; 1 Chr. 21.12; Ps. 17.13; Isa. 27.1; 66.1; Jer. 9.16; 47.6; Ezek. 29.8–9; 30.24; Zech. 13.7; cf. 1QM 12.11–12), which slays his enemies. This is the role of Jesus, the Lamb, in the Apocalypse (Rev. 1.16; 2.12, 16). Similarly, in Christian tradition, Christ slays the lawless one (ὁ ἄνομος) by the breath of his mouth (τῷ πνεύματι τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ; 2 Thess. 2.8; cf. 2 Bar. 70.2–10; 72.1–6; T. Jos. 19.8). John clearly invokes the imagery of the carnage of a battlefield strewn with the dead. He stresses that the wicked will suffer the shame of not undergoing burial; their bodies will be eaten by wild animals (Deut. 28.26; Jer. 7.33; 16.4; 19.7; 34.30; cf. Rev. 11.9). John has deliberately recycled the imagery from Ezekiel presumably because he finds it reflects his conviction about what will happen to the wicked on the last day. Similarly unpersuasive is the view that this violence represents rehabilitative or restorative justice.192 Once again, John sharply divides humanity between those who follow the Beast and members of his own communities; he warns some of them in no uncertain terms that without adequate repentance, they will end up along with the inhabitants of the earth half-eaten by birds on the battlefield, come the final judgement. The Last Final Judgement and the New Jerusalem (Revelation 20–22) I have suggested, building on Blount’s characterisation of the Apocalypse as a three-ring circus, that John has been presenting and representing the Last Judgement in various forms. Nonetheless, John’s main focus is 189.  Gog and Magog make a further appearance after Satan has been unbound (Rev. 20.7; cf. 20.1). Satan deceives the nations (Gog and Magog); a large army assembles for war (20.8), and march against the saints. However, they are consumed by fire from heaven (Rev. 20.9; cf. 2 Kgs 1.9–14; Ezek. 39.6). Satan then joins the Beast and the false prophet in the lake of fire where they will be tormented forever (20.10). While John links the fate of Satan with the other two members of the unholy trinity (cf. Rev. 19.20), on a purely linear reading, the reappearance of the nations of earth, who had been destroyed earlier, represents a ‘continuity error’ (19.20–21)! 190.  Blount, Revelation, 354. 191.  So Caird (Revelation, 241) insists, ‘He is armed…with no other weapon than the good confession which he witnessed before Pontius Pilate’. 192.  Blount, Revelation, 355; Smalley, Revelation, 495; Boxall, Revelation, 78.

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

185

not so much on the End, but on the current situation and behaviour of his first readers. Nonetheless, in Rev. 20.11–15, John depicts the more traditional judgement scene of apocalyptic tradition. While in the last battle scene, Christ functioned as the judge of the nations, it is now God who occupies the throne (cf. Rev. 4.2–3; Dan. 7.9). His presence causes the earth and sky to flee (cf. Rev. 6.12–17; cf. Ps. 114.3–7; 2 Pet. 3.7, 10, 12), and John here leaves the reader in no doubt that God’s power is greater than any other imaginable. While the Beast (Rev. 13.2; 16.10) and Satan (2.13) each had thrones, like conquered kings, they have been captured by the superior ruler, and tortured by him. Even Death and Hades are thrown into the lake of fire (20.14). John stresses to his readers that the power of Rome is illusory compared to the reality of God’s reign. For judgement, all the dead, great and small (Rev. 20.12), from the sea, and from Death and Hades (20.13), stand before the throne as ‘books’ (βιβλία) are opened,193 including the Lamb’s Book of Life (20.12; cf. 3.5; 13.8; 17.8; 20.15; 21.27). As ‘deeds’ (τὰ ἔργα) have been a prominent theme throughout the Apocalypse (2.2, 5, 6, 19, 22, 23, 26; 3.1, 2, 8, 15; 9.20; 14.13; 16.11; 18.6; cf. 22.12), it is unsurprising that this appears to form the basis of judgement here (20.12, 13). Yet, this is not the whole picture. Everyone whose name is not written in the book of life gets thrown in the lake of fire (20.15) to join Death, Hades, the Beast, the false prophet, and Satan—no doubt to be tormented forever, supervised by the Lamb (cf. 14.20).194 There is reason to conclude that this is not in fact the traditional judgement scene in which people are separated into the saved and the damned (cf. Dan. 12.1–3; Mt. 25.31–46).195 Instead, the dead who stand before the throne in this scene are those destined for destruction. For John has already divided humanity into those in the Lamb’s book of life and those who are not. Everyone not in the book of life are Beast worshippers (Rev. 13.8), and since the book of life was ‘written before 193.  For books being opened in judgement scenes, see: Dan. 7.10; Mal. 3.6; 4 Ezra 6.20; 1 En. 47.3; 86.1–4; 89.61–77; 90.17–20; 98.7–8; 2 Bar. 24.1. 194.  The idea of eternal torment is common in early Christianity (cf. Mt. 5.22; 18.9; 25.46; Mk 9.43; Lk. 16.23–24). There is little warrant for Harrington’s view (Revelation, 205) that John imagines the damned will be annihilated, or Blount’s spiritualising claim that separation from the presence of God is ‘like eternal agony’ (Revelation, 371). A similar spiritualising view has been recently advanced by Woodman (‘Fire from Heaven’), who offers a non-violent hermeneutical reading of the fire imagery as representing God’s presence and judgement through purification. However, he goes too far in claiming that ‘the imagery of fire and burning in Revelation does not readily lend itself in support of a “turn or burn” approach to salvation. Instead it tends towards a hopeful theology of nonviolence’ (190–91). 195.  The more traditional dividing of the dead is found at Rev. 11.18.

186

The Violence of the Lamb

the foundation of the world’, they were always going to be so (cf. 17.8; 21.27). The lake of fire is the second death (21.14), and those who have taken the mark of the Beast have already been destined for torment with fire and sulphur (14.10). By contrast, faithful followers of the Lamb have already been raised (20.4–6), and the second death has no power over them (20.6; cf. 2.11). This is not to say there is no tension in the judgement scene. Whereas faithful Christians have already been promised an exemption from the second death because their names have always been in the book of life, John warns his churches that unfaithfulness will result in their names being blotted out of the book (3.5). Again, this judgement scene is primarily for the benefit of Christians; they can be clad in white and confessed before God, or blotted out of the book of life (3.5). In other words, they can share in the first resurrection (20.4–6) or find themselves before the judgement seat of God as a result of their unfaithfulness, which had caused their name to be erased from the book of life. For them, the fiery lake awaits. Throughout the Apocalypse, John has used universal judgement on the nations to stress the contrasting fates of faithful and unfaithful Christians. This continues into his final vision of the New Jerusalem (Rev. 21–22). John offers a beatific image of a new city in which the faithful will live with God in their midst (21.1–3), where there will be no crying, mourning, pain, or death (21.4). Yet, John cannot forget his main purpose; even in his depiction of the celestial city, he inserts dire warnings. Those who conquer will be children of God (21.7), but the cowardly, the faithless, the polluted, the murderers, fornicators, sorcerers, idolaters, and all the liars, their lot shall be in the lake that burns with fire and sulphur, which is the second death. (Rev. 21.8)196

Similarly the kings of the earth (οἱ βασιλεῖς τῆς γῆς) will bring glory and honour to the city (Rev. 21.24–26), but nothing unclean—those who practice abomination or falsehood—shall enter, only those in the Lamb’s book of life (21.27). Those who wash their robes—those who remain faithful—will be blessed in the city, while the unfaithful—who are grouped with the dogs, sorcerers, fornicators, murders, idolaters, and liars—remain outside (22.14–15).197 In the final chapter, John relentlessly emphasises the nearness of Jesus’ return. He says he is being shown ‘these 196.  John employs a traditional vice list here. Cf. Mk 7.20–23; Rom. 1.29–31; 1 Cor. 5.9–11; 2 Cor. 6.9–10; Gal. 5.19–21; Eph. 5.5; Tit. 1.10, 16. 197.  Again, there are ‘continuity errors’ in John’s narrative. The kings of the earth have been destroyed, and everyone not in the Lamb’s book of life are in the lake

4. The Lamb as Divine Judge

187

things which must soon take place’ (ἃ δεῖ γενέσθαι ἐν τάχει; 22.6), and three times Jesus declares ‘I am coming soon’ (ἔρχομαι ταχύ; 22.7, 12, 20), and threatens to bring with him his reward for each one according to what he has done (τὸ ἔργον; 22.12). Conclusion Violence abounds in the judgement scenes of the Apocalypse. In a series of cascading scenes, John presents repeatedly the apocalyptic carnage of the final judgement, in which all nations will be punished, tortured, slaughtered, resurrected, judged, and cast in the lake of fire to be tormented for all eternity. The agent of judgement switches between God—whose power and dominion is revealed to be greater than anything Rome and all her armies can offer—and the Lamb, whose day of wrath will cause fear and panic among all people, great and small. The Lamb who was slain is the executor of ferocious judgement. As the rider on the horse, he will rout and slay the armies of the world, once again diminishing the power of Rome in the eyes of John’s readers. However, as I have argued, John’s concern is not principally what will happen to the inhabitants of the earth. As followers of the Beast, their fate is already sealed; John shows no interest in their conversion, rehabilitation, restoration, or salvation. John’s concern is for his Christian communities, which may be tempted to pollute themselves with the Whore of Babylon, by drinking of her impure wine. Instead, they are called to remain faithful, which may result in their blood being discovered in Babylon’s lifeless corpse after her judgement. John’s readers live under the shadow of judgement. The Apocalypse in its entirety essentially reinforces the message of the prophetic oracles to the seven churches. Those who are suffering must maintain their faithful witness, while those who are not must repent. We now turn to what John expects of his readers. In the final chapter, I argue that John’s idea of what it means to be a faithful Christian is mediated solely through the image of the martyr. I demonstrate that in John’s narrative all faithful Christians are martyrs. Moreover, in examining the function of martyrs and martyrdom, I will show that faithful Christians follow precisely the model of Jesus, the proto-martyr. They die through faithful witness, but they are also vindicated. Moreover, through their vindication, they share in the execution of divine judgement, and thus the martyr becomes, in the Apocalypse, an agent of violent divine judgement. of fire. However, John draws from the eschatological vision of Isa. 60.1–3, and has to ‘resurrect’ those in the lake in order for him to reinforce his warnings.

Chapter 5 A T h eol og y of M a rty r dom i n t h e B ook of R eve lati on

Martyrdom and Judgement The theme of judgement dominates the Apocalypse. The heavenly vision of John begins in the throne room of God, and becomes the prism through which all reality should be viewed. God is the παντοκράτωρ,1 the true power behind the universe. All the armies of the earth, even the great power of Rome, will be overthrown and humiliated when God comes as judge with the Lamb on their day of wrath (Rev. 6.12–17). I have argued that the visions of judgement in Revelation 6–22 each depict the final judgement on the world rather than an unfolding sequence of apocalyptic events leading to the Day of the Lord. I have also advanced the view that the threat of punishment hangs over the heads of John’s Christians should any of them continue in or are tempted to engage in ‘fornication with the Whore’. This is to say, John shows little interest in effecting change in anyone but those inside the church. For John, those outside—all the inhabitants of the earth—are Beast-worshippers. While the Seer warns his churches they may lose their crowns (3.11), or have their names blotted out of the Lamb’s book of life (3.5), he never outlines the means by which one could remove the mark of the Beast. Therefore, for John, the nations of the earth are already destined for judgement because they have taken the Beast’s mark and have fornicated with the Harlot. However, for John, there is also another significant basis for their terrible judgement; their treatment of the martyrs. Judgement Delayed (Revelation 6.10) The first of several visions of the martyrs takes place when the fifth seal is opened. John saw under the altar (ὑποκάτω τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου) the souls (ψυχαί) of those who had been slain for the world of God and for the witness they had given (τῶν ἐσφαγμένων διὰ τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ διὰ τὴν μαρτυρίαν ἣν εἶχον). And 1.  Rev. 1.8; 4.8; 11.17; 15.3; 16.7, 14; 19.6, 16; 21.22.

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

189

they cried out with a loud voice, saying, ‘Sovereign Lord (δεσπότης), holy and true! How much longer (ἕως πότε) will you not judge and avenge our blood (οὐ κρίνεις καὶ ἐκδικεῖς τὸ αἷμα ἡμῶν) on the earth-dwellers (ἐκ τῶν κατοικούντων ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς)?’ And a white robe was given to each of them, and they were told to rest a little time more (ἔτι χρόνον μικρόν) until their fellow servants, their brothers, who were about to be killed as they themselves had been, would complete their number (ἕως πληρωθῶσιν καὶ οἱ σύνδουλοι αὐτῶν καὶ οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτῶν οἱ μέλλοντες ἀποκτέννεσθαι ὡς καὶ αὐτοί). (Rev. 6.9–11)

While μαρτυρία is normally qualified as witness to Jesus in the Apocalypse (cf. Rev. 1.2, 9; 12.17; 19.10; 20.4), it is unspecified in this scene. This has led some to identify these souls as pre-Christian martyrs;2 those slain for religious truth more generally (cf. Mt. 23.31–35; Heb. 11.4; 12.24). However, a similar construction clearly referring to Christians is found elsewhere in the Apocalypse (Rev. 12.11), so there is little reason to doubt Christian martyrs are envisaged here. There is no need to be any more precise than this. While the souls under the altar have also been identified as the Neronic martyrs,3 the timeframe of the Apocalypse is not linear. It is entirely possible that anyone to whom John is writing could find themselves included in this scene. The placement of the martyrs under the altar hints at a sacrificial interpretation of martyrdom.4 Blood was placed at the base of the altar in the Hebrew cult (Lev. 4.7),5 and as Smalley notes, blood contained the ψυχή of the flesh (Lev. 17.11),6 and atoned for sins. The idea that martyrs atoned for their own sins is certainly found in early Christian tradition.7 Indeed, John’s vision of the martyrs in heaven almost certainly played a role in the development of the rudimentary Christian martyr cult,8 in which martyrs 2.  Feuillet, ‘Les martyrs de l’humanité’, 189–207; Kraft, Offenbarung, 119. Beale (Revelation, 390) suggests it includes a mixture of pre-Christian and Christian dead. 3.  Frederick J. Murphy, Fallen Is Babylon: The Revelation to John (Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1998), 289; Aune, Revelation, 2:406. 4.  Ignatius speaks of his own martyrdom as a sacrificial death (Rom. 2.2; 4.2; Poly. 2.3; 6.1; Smyr. 10.2; Eph. 21.1). A similar idea is found in Mart. Poly 14.1; and Mart. Lyons 1.39. 5.  Boring, Revelation, 125. 6.  Smalley, Revelation, 158. 7.  See Tertullian, Apol. 50; De Anima 55; De Pudicitia 22; Origen, Exhortatio 30; Hom. Lev. 2. Droge and Tabor (Noble Death, 129) go so far as to say of early Christian theology of martyrdom, ‘each Christian must become his own savior’. See also Middleton, Radical Martyrdom, 90–92. 8.  See the classic treatments by Hippolyte Delehaye, Les Origines de culte des martyrs (Brussels: Société des Bollandistes, 1933); Peter Brown, The Cult of the

190

The Violence of the Lamb

were placed in a category of ‘special dead’, having won an exalted place in heaven.9 However, while the Maccabean martyr tradition already points to the possibility of the atoning death of martyrs,10 this is probably not the case in Revelation. The heavenly altar (θυσιαστήριον) is mentioned seven times in the Apocalypse (Rev. 6.9; 8.3 bis; 8.5; 9.13; 14.18; 16.7).11 According to traditional belief, the Jerusalem Temple was modelled on the temple in heaven (Exod. 25.9; 1 Chr. 28.19; Wis. 9.8; Heb. 8.5). Since the Temple had two altars—one for incense, the other for sacrifice (Exod. 27.1–8; 30.1–10; cf. Josephus, War 5.216, 224)—some commentators have assumed two different altars are used in Revelation.12 So Blount argues the souls are here beneath the sacrificial altar, which is also is in mind in Rev. 11.1; 14.8; and 16.7, while John refers to the incense altar in 8.3, 5; and 9.13.13 However, others, coinciding with a rejection of a sacrificial interpretation of the martyrs, argue they are located under the altar of incense.14 Nevertheless, it is unlikely John imagines two altars in heaven. Saints: Its Rise and Function in Latin Christianity (London: SCM, 1981). See also Michael Perham, The Communion of Saints: An Examination of the Place of the Christian Dead in the Belief, Worship, and Calendars of the Church (London: SPCK, 1980), 1–24. 9.  Origen, Exhortatio 14, 15, 30, 49, 50; Clement, Strom. 4.4; 1 Clem. 5; Pontus, Vita Cyprian 1; Tertullian, Adv. Val. 43. Martyrs ‘attain God’ in Ignatius, Eph. 14.1; Trall. 12.2; 13.3; Rom. 1.2; 2.1; 4.1; 5.3 (‘attain Christ’); Smyrn. 11.1; Pol. 2.3; 7.1; Ep. Barn. 7. In addition to atoning for their own sins, there are early Christian traditions that martyrs or confessors could forgive the sins of others. This was controversial, and was curtailed by Cyprian (De Lapsis). For discussion, see Middleton, ‘Enemies of the (Church)’, 161–81. See also Middleton, ‘Unlock Paradise’, in which I argue Christian martyrdom was so consciously modelled on the pattern of Christ that theologies of Jesus’ death began to bleed into early Christian theologies of martyrdom. For Origen, martyrs, just like Christ, are both victim and priest (Exhortatio 30). 10.  4 Macc. 6.29; 17.22 11.  One use of θυσιαστήριον refers to the earthly altar (Rev. 11.1). The term θυσιαστήριον elsewhere in the New Testament tends to refer to the sacrificial altar (Mt. 5.23–24; 23.18–20, 35; Lk. 11.51; 1 Cor. 9.13; 10.13 [of pagan sacrificial altars]; Heb. 7.13; cf. Lk. 1.11; Rom. 11.3; Heb. 13.10; Jas 2.21). 12.  Blount, Revelation, 133. 13.  Blount, Revelation, 133. But see Aune (Revelation, 2:405), for whom Rev. 11.1 and 14.8 represent the sanctuary as a whole. Harrington (Revelation, 94), Bauckham (‘Judgement in the Book of Revelation’, in Allen, Paul, and Woodman [eds.], Book of Revelation, 55–79 [66]), and Swete (Apocalypse, 90) also identify the altar in 6.9 as the altar of burnt offerings. 14.  Charles, Revelation, 1:227–30; Beale, Revelation, 455; Caird, Revelation, 84; Heil, ‘Fifth Seal’, 224.

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

191

He is perfectly capable of distinguishing between two or more of the same thing (angels, beasts etc.), but always refers to the altar in the singular (τὸ θυσιαστήριον) without differentiation.15 In any case, it is the function of the souls, rather than their form or precise location, that matters.16 Whatever John did or did not see, he is aware that those under the altar are martyrs, slain for the word of God and their witness. The question posed by these souls strongly links judgement and martyrdom. The martyrs impatiently ask how much longer God will refrain from judging and avenging their blood on the inhabitants of the earth.17 As we have seen, John uses the category earth-dwellers to refer to worshippers of the Beast. In this tableau, he also accuses them of being responsible for making Christian martyrs, as he continues to divide the world into those inside and outside the Church. The martyrs call God δεσπότης (6.10), and this has been interpreted as a direct challenge to the Emperor, with Blount suggesting John ‘rhetorically slaps Caesar in the face’.18 However, while it is certainly the case that God’s power is contrasted with the emperor’s throughout the Apocalypse, in the New Testament, δεσπότης can be used of human authorities, such as the masters of slaves (1 Tim. 6.1, 2; Tit. 2.9; 1 Pet. 2.18). Moreover, in the Septuagint, its use for God predates any concern about the authority of the Roman emperor (Gen. 15.2, 8; Josh. 5.14; Job 5.8; Prov. 6.7; Isa. 1.24; Jer. 1.6; Jon. 4.3).19 It is clear from the martyrs’ question that judging and avenging represent the same activity. John, therefore, elevates martyrdom to a place of principal importance in the judgement of the nations. In other words, in the Apocalypse, avenging the blood of the martyrs is conflated with the traditional apocalyptic judgement associated with the Day of the Lord. 15.  With Koester, Revelation, 398. Koester also notes that comparable apocalyptic texts have only one heavenly altar (Test. Levi 6.9). 16.  Blount (Revelation, 133) imagines the martyrs in the ‘cramped space’ beneath the altar, but this goes too far in attempting to visualise the scene. Smalley (Revelation, 158–59) makes the highly unlikely proposal that the martyrs are beneath the altar on earth, more precisely, beneath the altar in Jerusalem, which he takes to be still standing at the time of composition. 17.  The believer’s cry ‘How long’ before God takes action is common complaint in the Hebrew Bible (Pss. 6.3; 13.1–2; 35.17; 74.9–10; 79.5; 80.4; 89.46; 90.13; 94.3; 119.84; Dan. 8.13; Hab. 1.2; Zech. 1.12). The scene has some similarities with 1 En. 47.1–4; 4 Ezra 4.35–37; and 2 Bar. 23.4–5. For discussion, see Bauckham, Climax, 48–56; and below 201–6. 18.  Blount, Revelation, 134. 19.  Δεσπότης is used of God in the New Testament at Lk. 2.29; Acts 4.24, and Christ at 1 Pet. 2.1; Jude 4.

192

The Violence of the Lamb

Some commentators worry about the martyrs’ cry for vengeance, which appears to be far removed from Jesus’ call to love one’s enemies (Mt. 5.48; cf. Lk. 23.34; Acts 7.60).20 However, Bauckham insists their cry is ‘not an expression of personal vindictiveness… They ask for justice in a positive way.’21 Similarly Schüssler-Fiorenza argues this is a cry for justice, which she takes to be a central theme of Revelation.22 Nonetheless, while it might offend modern sensibilities, justice and vengeance are one and the same in the Apocalypse.23 For John, justice comes through violent judgement on the people of the world,24 who are held responsible for slaughtering the saints (Rev. 6.10). The appeal for vengeance is not unlike the call for violence against the enemies of God found in the imprecatory psalms (Pss. 7, 35, 55, 58, 59, 69, 79, 83, 109, 137, 139). The Psalmist can call on God to pour out his anger on his enemies such that their habitation become desolate (Ps. 69.25), the teeth in their mouths are shattered (Ps. 58.6), their infants’ heads are dashed against rocks (Ps. 137.9), or they are slaughtered (Ps. 55.15). The martyrs’ call for God to avenge their death, and the subsequent judgement on the earth is, in the context of violence in the Biblical canon, unremarkable. The martyrs under the altar serve several important functions in the Apocalypse. First, they demonstrate that the faithful witness for which John calls will lead to martyrdom. As Jesus, the faithful witness (Rev. 1.5), shed his blood, so too do those who follow after him with their testimony. Second, they sharpen John’s divide between the inhabitants of the earth and the people of God. Third, and perhaps most importantly, they provide an important justification for the violent judgement that will follow. The devastation caused by the first four seals occurs off stage; we have at this point not yet witnessed the direct effects on the peoples of the earth. The martyrs under the altar create a deficit of justice. They have spilled their blood, which as yet is unavenged. Their blood cries out (cf. Gen. 4.10; 2 Macc. 8.3; 4 Ezra 15.8), and God, who avenges the blood of 20.  Koester, Revelation, 410; Charles, Revelation, 1:175; Martin Kiddle, Revelation of Saint John (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1940), 119; Ford, Revelation, 4; Klassen, ‘Vengeance’, 300–311; Yarbro Collins, ‘Persecution’, 729–30. 21.  Bauckham, ‘Judgement’, 66. See also Beale, Revelation, 392; Osborne, Revelation, 286. 22.  Schüssler-Fiorenza, Revelation, 64. 23.  The distinction Koester (Revelation, 400) seeks to make between ‘God’s justice rather than sheer retribution’ is not clear to me. 24.  Aune, Revelation, 2:407–10; Beale, Revelation, 392; Osborne, Revelation, 287; Stephen Pattemore, The People of God in the Apocalypse: Discourse, Structure and Exegesis (SNTSMS, 128; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 84.

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

193

his servants (Deut. 32.43; 2 Kgs 9.7; Ps. 9.12; Joel 3.21; cf. 4 Ezra 15.9), must therefore act.25 Crucially, in identifying the inhabitants of the earth as the ones who spilled innocent blood, John renders them justly liable for the judgements that follow.26 With the opening of the sixth seal, the judgement for which the souls had been craving begins (Rev. 6.12–17).27 There is no hiding place for the peoples of the earth from the wrath of God and the Lamb. Now that John has charged humanity with making martyrs, judgement begins. God’s Judgement for the Martyrs John explicitly links the judgement of humanity with killing the martyrs throughout the Apocalypse. At the judgement brought about by the third bowl (Rev 16.4–7) a further connection is made; when the angel poured out (ἐκχέω) his bowl into the rivers and fountains the water became blood (16.4). This leads the angel of the water (ὁ ἄγγελος τῶν ὑδάτων) to utter a ‘judgment doxology’,28 praising God’s just judgement: You are just (δίκαιος εἶ), O Holy One, who is and who was. For you have judged (ἔκρινας) these things, because people poured out (ἐξέχεαν) the blood 25.  Aune (Revelation, 2:407) makes the interesting suggestion that the scene is a dramatisation of Lk. 18.7: ‘Will God not give justice (ἐκδίκησις) to his chosen people who cry to him day and night, and will he delay over them?’ Aune does not press the parallel, but if John was aware of the parable, the next verse may be instructive: ‘I tell you, he will grant justice (ἐκδίκησις) to them quickly (ἐν τάχει)’. The verse ends with a reference to both the eschatological return of the Son of Man, and the hint of judgement on the earth (Lk. 18.8). 26.  ‘Innocent blood’ (‫ּדם נָ ִקי‬/αἷμα ָ ἀναίτιον) is an important theme in the Hebrew Bible, and guilt resulting from spilling it must be dealt with (Deut. 19.10–13; 21.8–9; 27.25; 2 Kgs 21.16; 24.4; Ps. 106.38; Prov. 6.17; Isa. 59.7; Jer. 7.6; 19.4; 22.3, 17; 26.15; Joel 3.19; 1 Macc. 1.37; 2 Macc. 1.8; cf. Jon. 1.14; Mt. 27.4). 27.  Against Koester (Revelation, 647), who states that by the time of ch. 16, ‘God’s justice has seemed slow in coming, because no action has been taken against those responsible for the martyrs’ deaths (Rev. 6.9–11)’. On the contrary, they have endured the wrath of the sixth seal, and the judgements of the seven trumpets. 28.  See Hans D. Betz, ‘On the Problem of the Religio-Historical Understanding of Apocalypticism’, Journal for Theology and the Church 6 (1969): 134–56 (139); Adela Yarbro Collins, ‘The History-of-Religions Approach to Apocalypticism and the “Angel of the Waters” (Rev. 16.4–7)’, CBQ 39 (1977): 367–81 (368–70). However, Yarbro Collins prefers the term ‘eschatological vindication formula’. Aune (Revelation, 2:885) usefully defines this formula/doxology as ‘a brief hymnic passage that provides general or specific justification for the judgment of God’. Cf. Apoc. Mos. 27.7; Test. Job. 43.13.

194

The Violence of the Lamb of the saints and prophets (αἷμα ἁγίων καὶ προφητῶν),29 and you have given them blood to drink (καὶ αἷμα αὐτοῖς [δ]έδωκας πιεῖν). It’s only right (ἄξιοί εἰσιν)! (Rev. 16.5–6)

Some commentators over-complicate this scene by arguing over precisely what is meant by God giving the people blood to drink. Some argue that giving someone blood to drink means to kill in the Hebrew Bible. In fact, with the exception of Isa. 49.26, it is those who do the drinking who are the ones who kill.30 Charles argues they ‘drink each other’s blood’, that is, they will go to war with one another (cf. 1 En. 7.5).31 However, there is little to commend this reading. Instead, this is a straight forward example of lex talionis (cf. Exod. 21.24); as people shed the blood of the martyrs, God forces them to drink blood.32 In response to God’s righteous judgement, the altar (τὸ θυσιαστήριον) joins in the praise of God: ‘Yes, Lord God Almighty. Your judgements are true and just’ (Rev. 16.7). John almost certainly has the martyrs under the altar in mind here.33 They asked for the people of the earth to be judged and for their blood to be avenged (6.10). It is specifically the blood of the saints and prophets that determines the punishment in this judgement scene. They have received what they asked for, and roar their approval. 29.  As with Rev. 6.9–11, it is not impossible that pre-Christian martyrs are included here (cf. Mt. 23.34–36), but with Koester (Revelation, 648), the primary reference is probably Christians. 30.  So Aune (Revelation, 2:878) and Smalley (Revelation, 432) between them list Num. 23.24; 2 Sam. 23.27//1 Chr. 11.19; Jer. 46.10; Ezek. 39.7–19; Zech. 9.15. In none of these cases is the recipient of the blood the one who dies. Similarly, both mention Rev. 17.6. However, once again, it is those whose blood is being drunk, in this case the martyrs, who are the ones who have been killed, not the drinker. Even in Isa. 49.26, the people are said to drink their own blood, so the parallel would not be exact. 31.  Charles, Revelation, 2:123 32.  There is also a parallel between people pouring out (ἐκχέω) the blood of the saints (Rev. 16.6) and the angel pouring (ἐκχέω) out the bowl that causes the punishment (16.3). Strictly speaking the lex talionis principle is not followed through; the murderers’ deaths are not narrated. However, there is little warrant for interpreting this as ‘divine restraint’ (Koester, Revelation, 648). This is simply one aspect of the judgement that inevitably leads to the lake of fire, and in any case, if one were to follow on from this narrative logically, the people would die for lack of fresh water. 33.  With Blount (Revelation, 299) and Koester (Revelation, 648), who, rightly in my view, understands altar metonymically. Aune (Revelation, 2:888) dissents from the idea that the altar is personified and prefers ‘[someone] from the altar’. However, he does suggest the voice could be a martyr. Given the close parallels back to Rev. 6.10, it is better to understand the voice collectively.

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

195

The link between martyrdom and judgement is made even more explicit in the scene is which the Whore of Babylon is judged (Rev. 17.1–19.4). On two occasions reference is made to her culpability in shedding the blood of the martyrs: she is ‘drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs of Jesus’ (17.6); and in her corpse is ‘found the blood of prophets and saints’ (18.24). The blood of the martyrs, therefore, is a prominent theme in her judgement. Moreover, the saints and apostles are invited to ‘rejoice over her…for God has given judgement against her for you’ (18.20). God’s action against Babylon is connected to the fate of the faithful. This is made even clearer in heaven’s song of celebration in response to the humiliation and destruction of the Whore: Hallelujah! Salvation (σωτηρία)34 and glory and power (ἡ δόξα καὶ ἡ δύναμις) to our God, because his judgements are true and just (ἀληθιναὶ καὶ δίκαιαι αἱ κρίσεις αὐτοῦ). For he has judged (ἔκρινεν) the great Whore who was corrupting the earth (τὴν γῆν) with her fornication, and he has avenged (ἐξεδίκησεν) on her the blood of his servants (τὸ αἷμα τῶν δούλων αὐτοῦ). (Rev. 19.1–2)

John’s summary of the judgement on Rome puts the martyrs centre stage. His affirmation that God’s judgements are true and just repeats precisely the cry of the altar/martyrs in Rev. 16.7, following the lex talionis judgement on the people of the earth for spilling the martyrs’ blood. Furthermore, the language in this ‘taunt song’35 echoes the cry for vengeance of the martyrs under the altar (Rev. 6.10): Rev. 6.10 ὁ δεσπότης ὁ ἅγιος καὶ ἀληθινός, οὐ κρίνεις

καὶ ἐκδικεῖς τὸ αἷμα ἡμῶν ἐκ τῶν κατοικούντων ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς

Rev. 16.7 ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ ἀληθιναὶ καὶ δίκαιαι αἱ κρίσεις σου Rev. 16.5 ὅτι ταῦτα ἔκρινας

Rev. 16.6 αἷμα ἁγίων καὶ προφητῶν

Rev. 19.1-2 ἡ σωτηρία…τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν ἀληθιναὶ καὶ δίκαιαι αἱ κρίσεις αὐτοῦ ὅτι ἔκρινεν τὴν πόρνην τὴν μεγάλην ἥτις ἔφθειρεν τὴν γῆν ἐν τῇ πορνείᾳ αὐτῆς καὶ ἐξεδίκησεν τὸ αἷμα τῶν δούλων αὐτοῦ [ἥτις ἔφθειρεν τὴν γῆν]

34.  Σωτηρία can be rendered ‘victory’. See, e.g., Aune (Revelation, 3:1022) and Boxall (Revelation, 267). Blount (Revelation, 122) notes that destruction for those who oppose God means salvation for those who follow him. 35.  Aune, Revelation, 3:1024; cf. Rev. 18.1–3.

196

The Violence of the Lamb

God began to answer the martyrs’ question, ‘How long?’, with the Day of Wrath inaugurated by the opening of the sixth seal (Rev. 6.12–17), and the judgements and tortures that followed. Nonetheless, in the judgement and destruction of the Whore, John insists that the martyrs’ cry is decisively and completely answered. They asked for the inhabitants of the earth to be judged (κρίνω) so their blood (αἷμα) might be avenged (ἐκδικέω) on the inhabitants of the earth (6.10). The heavenly chorus affirms that God has indeed avenged (ἐκδικέω) their blood (αἷμα) by judging (κρίνω) the Whore, who corrupted the earth (19.2).36 They also share the martyrs’ conviction that in doing so, God’s judgements are true and just (16.7; 19.2). Throughout the judgement scene (Rev. 17–18), Babylon is portrayed as a harlot who fornicates with humanity, corrupting them and leading them astray. Rome constitutes an apparent rival claim to God’s power. However, chief among her sins is that through her and the Beast’s influence, the earth-dwellers murder Christians. Therefore, John stresses that Babylon is judged for the martyrs (ἔκρινεν ὁ θεὸς τὸ κρίμα ὑμῶν ἐξ αὐτῆς), and they should ‘rejoice over her’ (εὐφραίνου ἐπ᾽ αὐτῇ; 18.20), which of course they do in their victory song (19.1–4).37 As the martyrs celebrate over Babylon’s downfall, John adds a further dimension to his division between followers of the Lamb and worshippers of the Beast; this is also a distinction between victors and vanquished. The destruction of Rome and mourning of the kings, merchants, and seafarers that follows is contrasted with the joyful cries of the saints in heaven.38 The final battle is a zero-sum game, and John’s churches must choose a side. Rome will suffer for spilling the martyrs’ blood, but those same martyrs will proclaim their victory cry, ‘Hallelujah’ (ἁλληλουϊά; 19.1, 3, 4; cf. 19.6).39 36.  It is significant that John uses ἐκδικέω only twice in the Apocalypse in these two places in reference to the martyrs. 37.  Bauckham (‘Judgement’, 68) argues Rome is judged not only for martyring the saints but for killing all innocent victims. However, it is not clear that John has a particular interest in the non-Christian or non-Jewish slain. 38.  Blount, Revelation, 340; Koester, Revelation, 732–33. 39.  Remarkably, given its frequency in later Christian hymns, the word ἁλληλουϊά is found in the New Testament only in Rev. 19.1–6, where it occurs four times: ‘ἁλληλουϊά! Salvation and glory and power belong to our God, for his judgements are true and just’ (Rev. 19.1–2); ‘ἁλληλουϊά! The smoke from her [Babylon] goes up for ever’ (Rev. 19.3); ‘The twenty-four elders and the four living creatures fell down and worshipped God, who is seated on the throne, saying, ἀμὴν ἁλληλουϊά’ (Rev. 19.4); ‘ἁλληλουϊά! For the Lord our God the Almighty reigns’ (Rev. 19.6). In each case, the activity of God in judging and reigning is celebrated, as is appropriate from its Hebrew origin ‫ה ְללּו־יָ ה‬. ַ The Hebrew term is found only as an introduction or conclusion to individual Psalms from Ps. 104 onwards. For discussion, see Aune, Revelation, 3:1024.

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

197

However, it is my contention that the martyrs do not conquer simply by observing God judge the nations on their behalf. In the Apocalypse, martyrs play a more active role in the cosmological drama. They participate in the judgement of God and the Lamb. Through their active witness, they follow the Lamb wherever he goes (Rev. 14.4); in Revelation, the Lamb is the proto-martyr, who died, was raised, glorified, and now shares the throne of God, and acts as an arbiter of judgement. In the Apocalypse, the act of martyrdom is conceived not merely of dying for the faith. As I now argue, to be martyred is, for John, to conquer. Martyrs, like the Lamb, are raised, reign with Christ, and become agents of divine wrath. Moreover, John’s call to conquer is a call to martyrdom, and it is made to all faithful Christians. The Call to Martyrdom The importance of the theme of martyrdom in Revelation has been long appreciated. It is in the Apocalypse that μάρτυς comes closest to its later technical meaning; one who dies a violent death for Jesus. As we have already noted, Jesus functions as proto-martyr (Rev. 1.5), and the way in which μάρτυς is used of Antipas (ὁ μάρτυς μου ὁ πιστός μου) could already constitute a technical designation. Although many scholars stress the importance of martyrdom in the Apocalypse, most stop short of the interpretation that John advocates the necessity of martyrdom. To be sure, Hurtado goes quite far: Revelation portrays an immediate future of death that Christians will almost certainly face to avoid the only alternative, apostasy. Jesus himself is the paradigmatic ‘faithful witness’…in this book, whose death was not only redemptive but also the pattern for those who bear his name; believers are urged likewise to ‘be faithful unto death’ (2.10), that they might have Jesus’ reward.40

In my view, Hurtado’s reading is exactly correct. However, he appears to indicate he does not intend to push the full implications of his reading with the quip, ‘In effect, Revelation warns, in the coming crisis the only good Christian will likely be a dead Christian!’41 40.  Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 620. 41.  Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 620 (exclamation mark original). Bauckham (Climax, 215–37) also comes very close to this view, but appears to just back off by stating that ‘The martyrs conquer not by their suffering and death as such, but by their faithful witness to the point of death’ (237).

198

The Violence of the Lamb

I have previously argued that this is indeed correct—but without the qualifying exclamation point!42 However, virtually all commentators draw back at this point, insisting that it is the attitude towards martyrdom, rather than actual martyrdom, that is crucial for John. The conclusion to van Henten’s recent essay on martyrdom in Revelation is representative of the mainstream view: It is important to note that a violent death is not a necessary requirement for being victorious, the crucial point is in Revelation the attitude of the believers, the willingness to undergo suffering and death if necessary, not a violent death per se.43

Indeed, Beale takes the souls under the altar to include ‘metaphorical martyrs’ on the grounds that John could not have expected all his readers to undergo death, yet he notes his call to conquer was given to all. Therefore, for Beale, the call to death cannot be taken literally.44 It seems to me that there are two largely unspoken reasons for rejecting a more universal martyr theology in Revelation. The first is the sociohistorical situation. It would have been near impossible for everyone in John’s church to undergo martyrdom. This is particularly the case given the general agreement about the lack of persecution facing early Christians. Even if my argument that some form of Pliny’s sacrifice test was in operation far earlier than generally supposed, it would still have provided something of a challenge for John’s Christians to have carried out this mission. However, this does not preclude a more universalistic anticipation of martyrdom in terms of the literary world created by John, which would in turn provoke further martyrdom, especially if the possibility was more realistic than now generally accepted. However, it is also true to say that there is general resistance towards interpretations of the Apocalypse that suggest John advocated active enthusiasm for martyrdom. Indeed, scholars of early Christian martyrdom have demonstrated some discomfort with its more enthusiastic manifestations, such as Ignatius’ desire to be ‘eaten by the beasts, and…ground

42.  Middleton, Radical Martyrdom, 158–70. See also my contribution to the recent Festschrift for Hurtado, ‘Christology, Martyrdom and Vindication’. 43.  Van Henten, ‘Concept’, 617. See also Sweet (Revelation, 82–83), who similarly argues that willingness to face death is the key to victory in Revelation. Although Pattemore (People of God, 89) argues all Christians should be prepared for martyrdom, he does not think John suggests all will (96 n. 119). 44.  Beale, Revelation, 390.

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

199

by the teeth of wild beast, so that [he] may become pure bread of Christ.’45 Similarly, the phenomenon of ‘voluntary martyrdom’, where Christians would volunteer for arrest or provoke their own deaths,46 has been largely dismissed as an aberration.47 However, as I have argued, scholars have been too quick to accept the classification of normative martyrdom created by Clement of Alexandria. Instead, early Christian texts, as well as the witness from pagan opponents, suggest ‘Christian voluntary martyrdom was in fact a significant historical as well as literary phenomenon’.48 Therefore, there is no reason to rule out a priori enthusiasm for martyrdom in Revelation on either ideological or historical grounds. Indeed, with Hurtado, Revelation’s portrayal of Christians’ μαρτυρία ‘which always seems to involve their deaths…anticipates (and probably helped to shape) the subsequent special Christian use of the terms for “martyr” and “martyrdom” ’.49 Therefore, we now turn specifically to John’s expectations for Christian martyrdom.

45.  See Ignatius, Rom. 4.1–5.3. 46.  See the classic treatment by de Ste. Croix, ‘Early Christians’; Droge and Tabor, Noble Death; Christel Butterweck, ‘Martyriumssucht’ in der alten Kirche? Studien zur Darstellung und Deutung früchristlicher Martyrien (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1995); Middleton, Radical Martyrdom; idem, ‘Early Christian Voluntary Martyrdom: A Statement for the Defence’, JTS ns 64 (2013): 556–73. 47.  Everett Ferguson, ‘Early Christian Martyrdom and Civil Disobedience’, JECS 1 (1993): 73–83; Kenneth R. Morris, ‘ “Pure Wheat of God” or Neurotic Deathwish? A Historical and Theological Analysis of Ignatius of Antioch’s Zeal of Martyrdom’, Fides et Historia 26 (1994): 24–41; Darrell W. Amundsen, ‘Did the Early Christians Lust after Death? A New Wrinkle in the Doctor Assisted Suicide Debate’, in T. J. Denny and G. P Stewart (eds.), Suicide: A Christian Response. Crucial Considerations for Choosing Life (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1998), 285–95; and most recently, P. Lorraine Buck, ‘Voluntary Martyrdom Revisited’, JTS ns 63 (2012): 125–35. 48.  Middleton, ‘Early Christian Voluntary Martyrdom’, 573. On Pagan criticism of Christian enthusiasm for death, see Paul Middleton, ‘Noble Death or Death Cult: Pagan Criticism of Early Christian Martyrdom’, in Outi Lehtipuu and Michael Labahn (eds.), People Under Power: Early Jewish and Christian Responses to the Roman Empire (Early Christianity in the Roman World, 1; Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2015), 205–28. Candida R. Moss (‘The Discourse of Voluntary Martyrdom: Ancient and Modern’, Church History 81 [2012]: 531–51) has warned against imposing modern concerns to distinguish between voluntary and other forms of martyrdom. 49.  Hurtado, ‘Jesus’ Death’.

200

The Violence of the Lamb

Revelation 6.11 The souls under the altar cried for vengeance. In response, they were given (ἐδόθη) a white robe (στολὴ λευκή) and told to rest a little longer (ἔτι χρόνον μικρόν) until the number of their fellow servants and their brothers should be complete, who were to be killed as they themselves had been (ἕως πληρωθῶσιν καὶ οἱ σύνδουλοι αὐτῶν καὶ οἱ ἀδελφοὶ αὐτῶν οἱ μέλλοντες ἀποκτέννεσθαι ὡς καὶ αὐτοί)’. (Rev. 6.11)

The command to rest for a while seems anti-climactic.50 However, this tableau provides a hugely significant interpretative lens through which to view the Apocalypse.51 Although the time the martyrs will have to rest until their blood is avenged is not specified, their time of waiting will come to an end when a predetermined number of martyrs have been killed. John, therefore, clearly expects more martyrs to be created from the Christian communities; those who are fellow servants and brothers of the martyrs in heaven.52 As they share a connection through their witness to Jesus, so they will suffer the same fate. Significantly, the souls must wait only a short time, but however many martyrs John anticipates, his expectation is that they will undergo martyrdom in the very near future. John is not principally concerned about communicating a theology of heaven or an intermediate state. As Pattemore rightly notes, the martyrs in heaven are not ‘real people, but elements of a vision’.53 I have argued that in the Apocalypse, John’s main focus is his Christian community, and this remains the case whether the visions are of gruesome judgements on the people of the earth or the rewards for paradigmatic faithful witnesses. While in Rev. 6.11, it is the martyrs in heaven who are told to wait, ‘the rhetorical force of the verse is not an instruction to those who 50.  Pattemore, People of God, 86. 51.  The significance of Rev. 6.9–11 in the schema of Revelation has been recognised by a number of scholars: Michelle V. Lee, ‘A Call to Martyrdom: Function as Method and Message in Revelation’, NovT 40 (1998): 164–94; Feuillet, ‘Les martyrs’; Heil, ‘Fifth Seal’; Pattemore (People of God, 68–116); Middleton, Radical Martyrdom, 158–60. 52.  The καί is epexegetical; the fellow servants and brothers constitute a single group (contra Håken Ulfgard, Feast and Future: Revelation 7.9–17 and the Feast of Tabernacles [Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1989], 55–57). 53.  Pattemore, People of God, 88. Some have speculated on the form of the souls. Aune (Revelation, 2:404–5) notes that for the Stoics, souls were corporeal, which is how Tertullian explains this scene (De Anima 8). Smalley (Revelation, 157) notes, ‘The ability of John to see a disembodied spirit presents no problem to a visionary’ (emphasis original).

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

201

have died but a communication to people who still live’.54 Those to whom John writes are the fellow servants and brothers of the martyrs in heaven. John now lays out the consequence of that identification; he effectively tells his readers that they must be killed as the souls under the altar had been. Indeed, John creates an eschatological crisis for the Christian. The apocalyptic timetable now depends on Christian martyrdom. Yarbro Collins correctly interprets John’s fundamental message to the seven churches: ‘Each martyr’s death brings the eschaton closer’.55 This places a significant responsibility on the faithful Christian, for ‘the cry for justice from the souls under the altar can be answered only so long as other Christians present themselves for martyrdom.’56 However, this interpretation is rejected by those who point out that the Greek word ἀριθμός (‘number’) is not in fact found in the text.57 Blount emphatically dismisses the notion that a particular number of martyrs is required before God acts: ‘Actually, the Greek says no such thing…John himself actually says nothing about numbers. He simply writes that first the brothers and sisters must be fulfilled.’58 Nonetheless, if this is the case, then it is by no means clear precisely what the souls are being told. It is of little surprise Blount then struggles to make sense of the instruction: ‘Admittedly, this odd response is ambiguous’.59 Similarly, Koester argues that John does not seem to refer to the number of martyrs, although he undermines his point by then noting the 144,000 sealed in Rev. 7.1–8 and the innumerable crowd in 7.9–17. However, he claims the first crowd are not martyrs, and takes the lack of number of the second to reject the requirement for martyrs in 6.9–11.60 However, that the size of the second crowd is not specified is unproblematic. John is not given access to the number required to complete the cohort of martyrs, only that martyrs are required. Koester’s solution is what needs fulfilling is the completion of the Christians’ testimony.61 Yet, as I will demonstrate, faithful Christian testimony will in fact lead to martyrdom.

54.  Pattemore, People of God, 88. 55.  Yarbro Collins, Cosmology, 209; Harrington, Revelation, 93. 56.  Middleton, Radical Martyrdom, 160. Cf. Ford (Revelation, 111), who argues that the main focus of the scene is the coming of Christ rather than the role of the martyrs. 57.  See, for example, Blount, Revelation, 136; Koester, Revelation, 410. 58.  Blount, Revelation, 136. 59.  Blount, Revelation, 136. 60.  Koester, Revelation, 410–11. 61.  Koester, Revelation, 411.

202

The Violence of the Lamb

The notion of a fixed number of the dead is found in contemporaneous apocalyptic sources. Bauckham points to three parallel passages in Jewish Apocalypses—1 En. 47.1–4; 4 Ezra 4.35–37; and 2 Bar. 23.4b–5a62— which all mention reaching a full quota of the dead: The hearts of the holy ones are filled with joy, because the number of righteous had been offered, the prayers of the righteous ones has been heard, and the blood of the righteous has been admitted before the Lord. (1 En. 47.4)63 Did not the souls of the righteous in their chambers ask… ‘How long are we to remain here? And when will come the harvest of our reward?’ And Jeremiel the archangel answered them and said, ‘When the number of those like yourselves is completed; for he has weighted the age in the balance…and he will not move or arouse them until that measure is fulfilled’. (4 Ezra 4.35–37)64 The multitude of those to be born were numbered. And for that number a place was prepared where the living ones might live and where the dead might be preserved. No creature will live again unless the number that has been appointed is completed. (2 Bar. 23.4b–5a)65

There are, however, important differences between and among these texts and Revelation. Only in Revelation and 1 Enoch do the righteous suffer a violent death. Both texts mention the prayers of the righteous and the avenging of blood, yet there is no parallel with the martyrs’ question, ‘How long?’ (Rev. 6.10). For this we must turn to 4 Ezra, in which God will not take action to reward the saints and punish the wicked until the measure of souls is fulfilled. In 2 Baruch, there is a similar idea of completing the number, but this applies to the total number of all people who have been born, with no sense that the completed dead make up a special category.66 Different elements contained in John’s vision in Rev. 6.9–11 are found in each of the parallel texts, but there is no consistency with any single one, or indeed between the other texts. Therefore, there is no clear evidence of either literary dependence or a clear trajectory of thought running through them.67 It is more likely that John employs a common numerus iustorum 62.  Bauckham, Climax, 48–56. 63.  Trans. E. Isaac, OTP 1:5–89. 64.  Trans. B. M. Metzger, OTP 1:517–59. 65.  Trans. A. F. J. Klijn, OTP 1:615–52. 66.  Although the author then goes on to discuss judgement in which books will be opened and the righteous and unrighteous separated (2 Bar. 24.1–2). 67.  But see Pierre-Maurice Bogaert, ‘Les apocalypses contemporains de Baruch, d’Esdras et de Jean’, in Lambrecht (ed.) L’Apocalyptique johannique, 77–104; Michael E. Stone, Fourth Ezra: A Commentary on the Fourth Book of Ezra (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990), 96–97.

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

203

apocalyptic tradition,68 which would also suggest this is the concept (contra Blount and Koester) that lies behind John’s vision. The idea of a set number of righteous is also found in other early Christian writing. Clement twice refers to ‘the number of the elect’ (ὁ ἀριθμὸς τῶν ἐκλεκτῶν; 1 Clem. 2.4; 59.2), and also to the ‘number of the saved’ (ὁ ἀριθμὸς τῶν σῳζομένων; 58.2). While this suggests the idea was well known by Clement’s time,69 it does not have the sense of eschatological urgency as in Revelation. However, far closer to John is Justin’s deployment of the concept. Justin says that God raised Jesus to heaven and kept him there until he had defeated his enemies, ‘and until the number of those who are foreknown by him as good and virtuous is complete, on whose account he has still delayed the consummation’.70 In two second-century Christian martyr texts, the ‘number’ is explicitly made up of martyrs. Before his execution, Polycarp blessed God because through his death he expected to receive ‘a share in the number of the martyrs’ (μέρος ἐν ἀριθμῷ τῶν μαρτύρων; Mart. Poly. 14.2).71 While the notion that martyrs hasten the end is missing in the Martyrdom of Polycarp, there is nonetheless a strong suggestion that the martyrs have a cosmic effect. Polycarp is the twelfth Christian to be martyred in Smyrna (Mart. Poly. 19.1) and, by his death, ends the persecution by ‘putting a seal on it by his martyrdom (ἐπισφαγίας τῇ μαρτυρίᾳ αὐτοῦ)’ (1.1). In other words, Polycarp completes the number of martyrs required to end the persecution. Similarly, in the Martyrs of Lyons, those arrested and martyred ‘fill up the number’ (ἀναπληροῦντες ἀριθμόν; Mart. Lyons 1.13). They are, therefore, counted among the ‘number of the martyrs’ (τῳ κλήρῳ μαρτύρων; 1.26, 48). The Martyrs of Lyons has a strong apocalyptic imprint, set immediately prior to Satan’s final assault (1.5).72 The martyrs of Lyons participate in a cosmic conflict in which their deaths contribute to the coming final victory.73 The Lyons narrative quotes Revelation, and so it is possible the ‘number of the martyrs’ theology came from the Apocalypse. Significantly, the author equates ‘following the Lamb’ (Rev. 14.4) with martyrdom.74 68.  Bauckham, Climax, 54. 69.  Aune, Revelation, 2:412. 70.  Justin, 1 Apol. 45.4 71.  There is a clear sacrificial interpretation of martyrdom in this text, which may also be present in Rev. 6.9–11. Importantly, Polycarp’s death is interpreted as ‘putting a seal’ on the persecution that the local church had been experiencing. 72.  See Middleton, ‘Overcoming the Devil’, 357–62. 73.  Middleton, Radical Martyrdom, 96–97. 74.  Mart. Lyons 1.10. It is possible, but not certain, that the author of Mart. Poly. quotes from Revelation. The address to God, κύριε ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ, is identical

204

The Violence of the Lamb

A very similar concept, although unrelated to martyrdom, is found in Romans, in which Paul speaks of a hardening of Israel until the ‘fullness’ (πλήρωμα) of Gentiles has come in (Rom. 11.25). Most likely, Paul here imagines that once the number of Gentiles who believe reaches the total number whom God elects, God will act to un-harden Israel in order to save them (Rom. 11.24–26).75 As with Rev. 6.11, God stays his hand until a quota is reached.76 As with the noun πλήρωμα, the verb πληρόω can also have the sense to fill up or complete a number.77 Those who resist this interpretation struggle to offer a viable translation, strengthening the case that John does indeed imagine that in Rev. 6.11, martyrs are required to move the action along towards eschatological judgement.78 Importantly, John juxtaposes the cry of the martyrs with the first glimpse of the final judgement (Rev. 6.12–17) to signal that their prayers will be answered, but also to create a sharp contrast between the faithful martyrs and the inhabitants of the earth, who will be judged. Revelation 12.7–17 While John has used the threat of judgement as a disincentive for Christians who might be tempted to carouse with Babylon, he also creates a literary world in which there is an incentive to undergo martyrdom. First, to Rev. 11.17; 15.3; 16.7 (cf. κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ παντοκράτωρ at Rev. 1.8; 4.8; 19.6; 21.22). This alone is not sufficient to make a positive judgement as the phrase was common enough in Jewish prayer (Buschmann, Martyrium, 273–74). For discussion, see Hartog, Polycarp, 307–8. 75.  The precise interpretation of Rom. 11.25–26 is, of course, controversial, but need not be untangled here. It is sufficient for the parallel with Rev. 6.11 that the notion that each Gentile who believes brings the end nearer is clearly established. For a ‘Beyond the New Perspective’ approach, see Mark D. Nanos, ‘ “Callused”, not “Hardened”: Paul’s Revelation of Temporary Protection Until All Israel Can Be Healed’, in Kathy Ehrensperger and J. Brian Tucker (eds.), Reading Paul in Context: Explorations in Identity Formation: Essays in Honour of William S. Campbell (LNTS, 428; London: T&T Clark International, 2013), 52–73. 76.  See Charles E. B. Cranfield, Romans (ICC; 2 vols.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1975, 1979), 2:575. A number of scholars argue that in Rom. 11.25, Paul is invoking the numerus iustorum tradition. See Käsemann, Romans, 313; Judith Gundry Wolf, Paul and Perseverance: Staying in and Falling Away (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1990), 177–78; Rainer Stuhlmann, Das eschatologische Maß im Neuen Testament (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983), 169. 77.  Aune, Revelation, 2:412; G. Delling, TDNT 6:283–311. 78.  While some may make an anachronistic theological objection that humans cannot frustrate the judging action of God, in 2 Pet. 3.12 there is a not dissimilar idea that Christians can hasten (σπεύδω) the day of Christ’s return and God’s day of wrath.

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

205

as we have seen, he links each martyr’s death with the coming of the Day of Wrath; each martyr contributes to the judgement that is to come on the earth. Second, martyrdom is placed in the context of cosmic battle, in which to lose one’s life is in reality to conquer. Revelation 12.7–9 describes war in heaven between Michael and the dragon, together with their respective angelic armies.79 When the dragon was defeated he and his angels were thrown down to earth. John then reveals that the dragon is, in fact, the ancient Serpent (ὁ ὄφις ὁ ἀρχαῖος), called the Devil (διάβολος) and Satan (Σατανᾶς), who deceives the whole world (Rev. 12.9). It is not necessary to pinpoint this war in primordial history. John deploys mythical narratives to describe the situation as he finds it; cosmic forces are at war and Christians are on the battlefield. An unspecified loud voice from heaven offers an interpretation of this war vision:80 Satan’s expulsion represents the coming of the power and kingdom of God, and the authority of Christ (12.10), which has already been announced (11.15–17), heralding the judgement of dead, and rewarding of the saints (11.18). Martyrs are prominent in this scene. Although accused (κατηγορέω) by Satan, they have conquered him (νίκησαν αὐτόν) by the blood of the Lamb (διὰ τὸ αἷμα τοῦ ἀρνίου) and by the word of their testimony (διὰ τὸν λόγον τῆς μαρτυρίας αὐτῶν), for they loved not their lives to death (οὐκ ἠγάπησαν τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτῶν ἄχρι θανάτου). (Rev. 12.11)

Some commentators imagine this action to have taken place in the past, and so the martyrs in view here are the same as those under the altar.81 However, this is to read the Apocalypse in too linear a fashion. Others argue these martyrs have not yet met their deaths.82 John is certainly more concerned to read the present through future judgement than the past, and 79.  Most scholars agree John incorporates features of the ancient combat myth in Rev. 12. See especially, Yarbro Collins, Combat Myth; Aune, Revelation, 2:667–74; Jan Willem van Henten, ‘Dragon Myth and Imperial Ideology in Revelation 12–13’, in Barr (ed.), Reality of the Apocalypse, 181–203; Bauckham, Climax, 185–98. 80.  Various possibilities include angels (Beasley-Murray, Revelation), the martyrs under the altar (Charles, Revelation, 1:327–28; Aune, Revelation, 2:701), or all the redeemed (Koester, Revelation, 551). 81.  Pattemore, People of God, 95; Heil, ‘Fifth Seal’, 235–36. 82.  Those who believe the martyrs are those about to be killed in the great tribulation (7.14) include Caird, Revelation, 156; Michaels, Revelation, 152; Aune, Revelation, 2:702. Beale (Revelation, 663) hedges his bets and argues the martyrs are drawn from the past, present, and future.

206

The Violence of the Lamb

so it is likely that most visions of the martyrs represent the as yet incomplete number of which John’s readers are urged to become part. As in the scene in Rev. 6.9–11, John clearly expects more martyrs. Testifying to Jesus demands that the Christian is prepared to relegate love for their own lives below commitment to Christ. John must, therefore, imagine Christians will be placed in a situation in which they will have to choose between saving their lives or confessing Christ (cf. Mk 8.34–38). For John, the presence of Satan on earth means persecution for the church, just as the church in which Satan had his throne had to ensure suffering. However, as John makes clear, this is a showdown heading for only one outcome. The Lamb has already conquered through his death, and Christians will similarly conquer through their own (Rev. 12.11). Satan has already been defeated through the decisive action of the Lamb.83 As Blount argues: What remains is a mopping up of the huge pocket of satanic resistance that the dragon has initiated on earth… Persecution is part of that pocket. Soon, however, that pocket of resistance too will be overthrown.84

For Blount and others, the martyrs conquer because of Christ. However, this is not precisely what John claims. The martyrs are conquerors because of two factors: first, the blood of the Lamb; but second, they conquer through their own word of testimony (Rev. 12.11). Their testimony, as it always does in the Apocalypse, leads to martyrdom, so in short, they conquer through the death of Jesus, and through their own deaths.85 Martyrdom is not simply the inevitable result of witnessing faithfully to Christ; it is active engagement in the eschatological war. The war in heaven (Rev. 12.7–9) is only one point on a larger canvass of war in the Apocalypse. The battle waged between cosmic forces86 mirrors wars between cosmic and human troops, which may manifest as conflicts between humans. Much of the war language clusters in Revelation 11–13, though it continues from there to the end. First, the Beast will make war (ποιήσει μετ᾽ αὐτῶν πόλεμον) on God’s two witnesses (δύο μάρτυρές; 11.3, 7), who had been given authority to bring drought and slay those who attempted to harm them (11.5–6). The Beast kills them 83.  Bauckham, Climax, 185–86. 84.  Blount, Revelation, 237. 85.  Aune (Revelation, 2:702) suggests the martyrs conquer through Christ’s resurrection, but that is not what John says here. 86.  In Rev. 12.7 the language of war is used three times within a short space of time: there is war (πόλεμος) in heaven; Michael and his angels make war (πολεμέω) against the dragon; and the dragon and his angels wage war (πολεμέω) in return.

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

207

‘after they have finished their testimony’ (ὅταν τελέσωσιν τὴν μαρτυρίαν αὐτῶν; 11.7). The earth-dwellers, who had suffered at their hands, refuse to allow them to be buried and rejoice at their apparent defeat (11.8–9). However, God resurrects them and calls them to heaven (11.11–12), and an earthquake then kills seven thousand people (11.13). While the story is highly symbolic,87 it is best understood as a ‘parable’88 that provides ‘a paradigm for martyrdom’.89 Despite being conquered by the Beast (11.7), it is the martyrs who conquer in reality. With their vindication judgement comes on the earth.90 Revelation 12 similarly describes the Christians’ earthly struggle in highly symbolic terms. John saw two great portents (σημεῖον μέγα) appear in heaven: a woman in labour, clothed with the sun (Rev. 12.1); and a big red dragon, who swept a third of the stars from the sky (12.3–4). John employs a mythical drama to depict the struggle between the Church and the forces of evil, represented by the dragon, but signifying Rome. The woman’s child is clearly Christ, for he ‘is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron’ and he is taken up to the throne of God (11.5). Revelation 12.7–12 is effectively a retelling of Rev. 12.1–6, representing the expulsion of Satan from heaven and his assaults on the faithful. Similarly, while some commentators see a temporal shift in the third section of the chapter— Rev. 12.7–12 represents the past, and Rev. 12.13–17 is where John inserts himself and his churches into the narrative91—it is best understood as a continuation of a complete narrative that depicts the present cosmic conflict in which John is encouraging his readers to play their full part. If John’s readers are unaware that they are in a war situation, John makes it explicit. The dragon, after his unsuccessful assault on the woman (12.1–6, 13–16), ‘went off to make war on…those who keep the commandments of God and bear witness to Jesus’ (ἀπῆλθεν ποιῆσαι πόλεμον μετὰ…τῶν τηρούντων τὰς ἐντολὰς τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἐχόντων τὴν μαρτυρίαν Ἰησοῦ; 12.17). John then sets the scene for the pivotal, and iconic, representation of the confrontation between the Beast and his followers, and the followers of the Lamb (13.1–18). 87.  For a discussion of metaphor theories applied to this passage, where it is argued the highly metaphorical drama goes beyond what is normally expected of metaphor, see Andrew Harker, ‘Prophetically called Sodom and Egypt: The Affective Power of Revelation 11.1–13’, in Allen, Paul, and Woodman (eds.), Book of Revelation, 19–39. 88.  Bauckham, Theology, 90; Aune, Revelation, 2:588–93. 89.  Yarbro Collins, Crisis, 69. 90.  Middleton, Radical Martyrdom, 169. 91.  Pattemore, People of God, 96; Michaels, Revelation, 152.

208

The Violence of the Lamb

Revelation 13 In Revelation 13, John clearly outlines the battle in which Christians must fight. He identifies the opposition, both cosmic and human, that his churches face, and most importantly, the action he expects them to take. In the literary world he creates, John expects all Christians to face martyrdom. He imagines them to be opposed by the rest of humanity, who, at least as far as John is concerned, operates under the authority of the Beast. The dragon, who has now waged for on the Church, stands on the seashore (Rev. 12.17), and a beast rises out of the sea (13.1). The dragon gives over his power, throne, and great authority to the Beast (13.2), which causes the whole earth (ὅλη ἡ γῆ) to follow it (13.3), and to worship both it and the dragon (13.4). The full force of the ‘the whole earth’ as all humanity, the church excepted, should be allowed to stand. As John noted earlier, the Devil is ‘the deceiver of the whole world’ (ὁ πλανῶν τὴν οἰκουμένην ὅλην; 12.9), and he restates that ‘all who live on the earth’ (πάντες οἱ κατοικοῦντες ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς) will worship the Beast (13.8), because he was been given authority ‘over every tribe, people, tongue, and nation’ (ἐπὶ πᾶσαν φυλὴν καὶ λαὸν καὶ γλῶσσαν καὶ ἔθνος; 13.7). It is in their response to the Beast that John draws his sharpest division between people so far. The earth-dwellers, who worship the Beast, are also defined as ‘every one whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain’ (οὗ οὐ γέγραπται τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τῆς ζωῆς τοῦ ἀρνίου τοῦ ἐσφαγμένου ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου; 13.8).92 To reinforce the point that all humanity lines up against the church, John repeats their association with the forces of evil. A further beast comes out of the earth, and ‘makes the earth and its inhabitants’ (ποιεῖ τὴν γῆν καὶ τοὺς ἐν αὐτῇ κατοικοῦντας) worship the first Beast (13.12); it ‘deceives those who live on earth’ (πλανᾷ τοὺς κατοικοῦντας ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς; Rev. 13.14), and causes them to make an image to the Beast (εἰκών τῷ θηρίῳ). As a sign of the Beast’s authority over humanity, and their slavish obedience to it, all people ‘small and great, rich and poor, free and slave’ are branded on the right hand of forehead with the mark of the Beast (13.16). As I have noted before, John shows no interest in the salvation 92.  The Lamb slain from the foundation of the world is also grammatically possible (so Harrington, Revelation, 139; Thompson, Revelation, 140; Witherington, Revelation, 183; Resseguie, Revelation, 186; NIV). However, Rev. 17.8 settles the question decisively in favour of John imagining that the names of the saved have been written in the book of life since the foundation of the world (Aune, Revelation, 2:746–47; NRSV).

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

209

of those outside the church. They are all dismissed as followers and worshippers of the Beast, and therefore, their names are not to be found in the book of life. One of the principal reasons given for the earth-dwellers’ infatuation with the Beast is their awe of its power and authority. The power of the Beast, like the might of Rome, seems unconquerable. They ask, expecting the answer ‘no-one’, ‘Who is like the Beast, and who can wage war against it?’ (τίς ὅμοιος τῷ θηρίῳ καὶ τίς δύναται πολεμῆσαι μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ; Rev. 13.4).93 However, this is precisely the question the Apocalypse answers. God and his Lamb wield greater power than that of the Beast, and they will slaughter his forces on the apocalyptic battlefield. However, John gives a second answer in Revelation. Who can war against the Beast? The martyrs! In the same way as John systematically aligns the earth-dwellers with the Beast, he creates a Christian identity that is characterised by witness and martyrdom. Christians are primarily followers of the Lamb who was slain, but who now receives worship in heaven. Christian identity is forged through suffering at the hands of the Beast. He was permitted (ἐδόθη αὐτῷ) to make war on the saints (οιῆσαι πόλεμον μετὰ τῶν ἁγίων) and to conquer them’ (καὶ νικῆσαι αὐτούς; Rev. 13.7). Like the witnesses (11.3–13), they are apparently defeated. However, martyrdom is the sign that one’s name is in the Lamb’s book of life (13.9). Having set up the two sides in the conflict, John spells out what this means for his readers: If anyone is destined for captivity, to captivity he goes; if anyone is to be killed by the sword, by the sword he must be killed (εἴ τις ἐν μαχαίρῃ ἀποκτανθῆναι αὐτὸν ἐν μαχαίρῃ ἀποκτανθῆναι).94 Here is the endurance and faith of the saints (ἡ ὑπομονὴ καὶ ἡ πίστις τῶν ἁγίων). (Rev. 13.10)

The warning clearly alludes to Jer. 15.2LXX, which similarly mentions captivity and dying by the sword.95 However, while in Jeremiah these 93.  There is an echo of this cry in Rev. 18.18 when Babylon is burning τίς ὁμοία τῇ πόλει τῇ μεγάλῃ; 94.  There is a range of textual variations here. The active form (‘Those who kill with the sword, with the sword will be killed’) is the majority reading (‫ ;א‬e.g. NRSV). The passive is found in A, and is more likely given the context, and the parallel with Jer. 15. The active reading probably came about to provide an allusion to Mt. 26.52. For discussion, see Koester, Revelation, 576; Aune, Revelation, 2:719. 95.  Pestilence and famine are also mentioned by Jeremiah: ‘Thus says the Lord: Those destined for pestilence, to pestilence; and those destined for the sword, to the sword; and those destined for famine, to famine; and those destined for captivity, to captivity’ (Jer. 15.2LXX; cf. 50.11LXX). John’s omission of pestilence and famine are

210

The Violence of the Lamb

‘disasters’ are the result of God effectively disowning his sinful people, in Revelation the sword is the eventual destination for the faithful. This is why John issues another clarion call for endurance (Rev. 13.10); in the face of pressure to worship the Beast, Christians must maintain their faithful testimony, and choose not to love their lives, which will result in death (cf. 12.10). For just as it is the destiny of those whose names are not in the Lamb’s book of life to worship the Beast (13.8) and receive its mark (13.16), so all those who do not worship the image of the Beast will be slain (ὅσοι ἐὰν μὴ προσκυνήσωσιν τῇ εἰκόνι τοῦ θηρίου ἀποκτανθῶσιν; 13.15). In the literary world of the Apocalypse, there is little warrant for viewing the martyrs as merely a subset of the faithful. In the vision of the first resurrection, the Christians who come to life are exclusively martyrs: Then I saw thrones, and those seated on them were given authority to judge, that is, the souls of those who had been beheaded for their testimony to Jesus and for the word of God; those who had not worshipped the Beast or its image and had not taken its mark on their forehead or hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. (Rev. 20.4)

For John, the category of faithful Christians and the category of martyrs do not merely overlap, they are identical. Of course, it may have been easier to write about martyrdom than actually achieve it in John’s time. However, I have argued that the ‘sacrifice test’ was in all probability more widespread than is generally accepted. This kind of localised unofficial action, such as that presided over by Pliny, fits the scenario envisaged by John precisely. John imagines that Christians may lose their lives over their decision not to worship an image of the emperor, which becomes a standard trope in later Christian martyr narratives. In the Apocalypse, there is no halfway house and no middle road. John divides the world into two clearly distinct groups: the earth-dwellers (Rev. 6.10), who follow and worship the Beast (13.3, 8), who receive his mark (13.16), and whose names are not written in the Lamb’s book of life (13.8); and, in contrast, those who refuse to worship the Beast (13.15), whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life (cf. 13.8), who do not take the mark of the Beast but bear the name of God

not difficult to explain. These two afflictions are more like the plagues that will be endured by the wicked (see Aune, Revelation, 2:749–50). For John, martyrdom is the ultimate goal for Christians, which explains the reversal of sword and captivity, whereas for Jeremiah, captivity and exile was the main traumatic experience for the people.

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

211

(cf. 7.3–4), and who follow the Lamb wherever he goes (14.4). John’s readers are currently in the second group, but he is concerned that some are in danger of becoming earth-dwellers, and as a consequence have their names blotted out of the book of life (cf. 3.5).96 John’s Apocalypse is a wake-up call to those who need to repent. John reminds his churches that ‘in Revelation one is either a worshipper of the Beast or a martyr of Jesus’.97 Revelation 14 I have been arguing that the best way to read the Apocalypse is not as a sequence of visions that represent different points of narrative time. Instead, from Revelation 4–22, John paints verbal pictures for his readers from the vantage point of the end of time. Therefore, the plagues brought about by the seals, the trumpets, and the bowls should not be thought to follow one another in any temporal sequence, and neither should the various instances of judgement. This is also true of the main actors: the earth-dwellers led by the Beast, and the Lamb and his faithful Christians. The Apocalypse depicts a series of contrasts that sets these two groups against the other, along with their respective fates. The vision of the souls under the altar, who suffered at the hands of the inhabitants of the earth (Rev. 6.9–11), is juxtaposed with image of judgement upon the martyrs’ assailants (6.12–17). Similarly, the scene in which Beast worshippers are prominent (13.1–17) is followed by a vision of the saints (14.1–5). In fact, the picture is more complex. Two sets of triptychs are formed by further visions of Christians (7.1–17) and Beast worshippers (14.8–20). However, in the second set of visions, strategic warnings to the saints are found when the Beast’s followers are the principal focus (13.10; 14.12). The 144,000 (Rev. 14.1–5) who follow the Lamb (14.4) stand in direct contrast to those who go after the Beast (13.3). In addition, as the Beast worshippers were marked (13.16), the Lamb’s followers bear his and God’s name on their foreheads (14.1); all who dwell on the earth (οἱ κατοικοῦντες ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς) worship the Beast, while the 144,000 have ‘been redeemed from the earth (οἱ ἠγορασμένοι ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς)’ (14.3).98

96.  Beale (Revelation, 279–82) argues unconvincingly that it is not possible for a Christian’s name to be removed from the book of life. 97.  Middleton, ‘Male Virgins’, 199. 98.  Aune (Revelation, 2:809) concludes this means that people are redeemed from all parts of the earth. However, given the contrast with Beast worshippers on the earth, it is more likely to mean from [out of] the earth.

212

The Violence of the Lamb

There is some debate whether the 144,000 represent the whole Christian community99 or only martyrs.100 Yarbro Collins argues that they represent a special subset of Christians because they alone know the ‘new song’ (14.3), the image of first fruits (ἀπαρχή) suggests a more general harvest to follow (14.4), and they are specifically numbered in contrast to the multitude no-one can count (7.9–14).101 However, although the first fruits are indeed a small portion of the harvest, significantly, this is the portion that is offered to God (Deut. 26.1–15). In Revelation, the redeemed are indeed first fruits for God and the Lamb, but as we have already noted, humanity either belongs to the Lamb or to the Beast. In fact, both those who argue the 144,000 are martyrs and those who argue they represent all Christians are correct, because in the Apocalypse all faithful Christians are martyrs.102 The martyrs, in contrast to the Beast worshippers, are sealed, and, in one of the more controversial verses, are identified as ‘those who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are virgins’ (οἳ μετὰ γυναικῶν οὐκ ἐμολύνθησαν, παρθένοι γάρ εἰσιν; Rev. 14.4).103 The literal reading, that John imagines an ideal special group of 144,000 virgin men, is normally 99.  Koester, Revelation, 607. 100.  Murphy, Fallen, 222. Aune’s suggestion (Revelation, 2:804) that they are those who are left on the earth at the End is unlikely. 101.  Yarbro Collins, Crisis, 127–28. For Aune (Revelation, 808), John’s failure to provide the words of the song is taken as evidence that he does not know it, and therefore means he does not consider himself part of the 144,000. However, this is an over reading. Martyrs learn the song once they have been martyred. 102.  Koester (Revelation, 607) is therefore correct but for the wrong reason. He is right that the 144,000 are redeemed from humankind (ἀπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων), that is, the realm of the wicked, rather than from other Christians, but his conclusion that this means they are not solely martyrs is incorrect. 103.  On this verse, see Middleton, ‘Male Virgins’; Pattemore, People of God, 179–96; Elizabeth Schüssler-Fiorenza, ‘Followers of the Lamb: Visionary Rhetoric and Social-Political Situation’, Semeia 36 (1986): 123–46; Daniel C. Olson, ‘ “Those Who Have Not Defiled Themselves with Women”: Revelation 14.4 and the Book of Enoch’, CBQ 59 (1997): 492–510; Hanna Stenström, ‘ “They Have Not Defiled Themselves with Women…”: and Christian Identity According to the Book of Revelation’, in Amy-Jill Levine (ed.), A Feminist Companion to the Apocalypse of John (London: T&T Clark International, 2009), 33–54. For more general discussion of gender in the Apocalypse that treat this verse, see Stephen D. Moore, ‘Revolting Revelations’, in I. R. Kitzberger (ed.), The Personal Voice in Biblical Interpretation (London: Routledge), 183–99; Pippin, Death and Desire; Jorunn Økland, ‘Sex, Gender, and Ancient Greece: A Case-study in Theoretical Misfit’, Studia Theologica 57 (2003): 124–42.

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

213

rejected for a range of reasons—some more convincing than others.104 Celibacy may be advised given the nearness of the end, such as is found in Paul’s recommendation that the unmarried stay as they are ‘in view of the impending distress’ (1 Cor. 7.25).105 However, that John imagines sex as polluting goes well beyond Paul’s statement. Temporary celibacy is also a purity requirement of soldiers’ preparation for Holy War (Lev. 15.16; Deut. 23.9–14; 1 Sam. 21.5; 2 Sam. 11.9–13; 1QM 7.6).106 This view has been criticised on the grounds that a military role for the group is not made explicit.107 However, I argue below that the martyrs do in fact engage in the eschatological war. Nonetheless, the specificity of the allusion is less certain because there is nothing to suggest the celibacy envisaged by John is temporary. Finally, there is a range of explanations that cluster around the idea of celibacy as a metaphor for avoiding cultic pollution, that is, worshipping the Beast or fornicating with the Whore.108 The verb μολύνω is deployed in 104.  The male virgin spiritual elite interpretation is found in the early church, e.g. Origen, Comm. John 1.1–4; Cyprian, Hab. Virg. 4–5; Augustine, Serm. 304.2. This is also the view of Pippin (Death and Desire), as well as Økland (‘Sex, Gender’, 134), who concludes, ‘Revelation’s holy places are all-male’. There is certainly a strong strand in early Christianity that might support a literal celibacy reading, from Jesus’ instruction that disciples must abandon family ties, including house or wife (Lk. 18.29; Q 14.26–27; Mk 10.29; cf. Acts of Paul 12), or the opaque saying about eunuchs (Mt. 19.12). Nonetheless, others insist this is not the meaning of the text, though often without much by way of argument. Swete (Apocalypse, 179) simply asserts that denigration of marriage is not in view, while Charles (Revelation, 2:6–9), implicitly conceding the meaning of the text as it stands is not as he would wish, puts the verse down to an interpolator who turns the 144,000 into a ‘body of monkish celibates’! There is, however, no evidence for the interpolation theory. Koester (Revelation, 607–9) argues that the two clauses 14.4a–b are two separate sentences, so that two groups are in fact in view: ‘They [the 144,000] were not defiled with women. Now these [other group] who followed the Lamb wherever he goes are maidens.’ This ingenious solution takes seriously the fact that παρθένος is not normally used of men. However, as Koester himself notes, it does indeed refer to a male virgin in Jos. Asen. 4.7; 8.1. Koester protests, ‘but such usage is almost unprecedented’. It is not obvious why the author of Jos. Asen. could deploy the term in an ‘almost unprecedented way’, but John could not. 105.  Yarbro Collins, Crisis, 129–31. 106.  See most notably Bauckham (Climax, 210–37), who argues that the two groups of 144,000 represent a role call for battle. See also Caird, Revelation, 179–81. 107.  Olson, ‘Those who have not Defiled Themselves’, 495; Aune, Revelation, 2:436. 108.  Ford, Revelation, 242–43.

214

The Violence of the Lamb

a number of comparable contexts, such as the defiling of the consciences of the weak through eating idolmeat in Corinth (1 Cor. 8.7), defilement of temple vessels (Zech. 14.2LXX), the temple (1 Macc. 1.37; 2 Macc. 6.2), or even the priests and prophets themselves (Jer. 23.11LXX). Although this constitutes the most fruitful path, these interpretations still struggle with the question why all sex pollutes.109 I have argued the issue could be resolved if the 144,000 who represent the whole martyr-church not only refrain from cultic immorality, but remain virgins (παρθένοι) so they can then be transformed into the Bride of Christ (Rev. 19.7–8).110 The Bride is clothed in bright and pure fine linen, which is ‘the righteous deeds of the saints’ (τὰ δικαιώματα τῶν ἁγίων; 19.8). These deeds lead to martyrdom (14.13), and such clothing has already been associated with purity and witnessing (2.23–24; 6.10; 7.14).111 The church collectively as the virgin Bride (Zion) is contrasted with the fornicating Whore (Rome); they follow the Lamb who stands (cf. 5.6) on Mount Zion (14.1)112 as undefiled virgin martyrs who witness to Christ, are redeemed by Christ, and who have been sacrificed for Christ. By their deeds, they stand as unblemished (ἄμωμος) offerings (14.4).113

109.  This is also the problem with Olson’s thesis (‘Those who have not Defiled Themselves’) in which he draws parallels with the retelling of Gen. 6.1–4 in the Book of the Watchers (1 En. 1–36), where angels ‘defile’ themselves ‘with the daughters of men’ (1 En. 15.3). As I have noted elsewhere (‘Male Virgins’, 197), the issue in that text is ‘inter-species intercourse rather than sexual activity per se.’ 110.  The apparently curious image of male brides is found elsewhere in the New Testament, especially Eph. 5.22–33, in which Christ consummates his marriage with the body, which is his own body, the Church; cf. 2 Cor. 11.2. See further, Middleton, ‘Male Virgins’, 206–7; cf. Ernest Best, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Ephesians (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1998), 559–61. 111.  See Middleton, ‘Male Virgins’, 205–8. There are clear connections between the 144,000 and the Bride/City in Rev. 19–21. The city is 144,000 square stadia (Rev. 21.2, 9); the twelve tribes are mentioned (cf. 7.1–8), and, of course, the word παρθένος is used of the virgin Zion or daughter of Zion (2 Kgs 19.21LXX; 37.22LXX; Lam. 2.13LXX). 112.  Contrasted with the Beast who stands on the seashore as he makes war on the saints (Rev. 12.17). 113.  Animals sacrificed to God are to be without blemish (ἄμωμος); see, e.g., Exod. 29.1, 38; Lev. 3.1, 6; 4.3, 14, 23, 28, 32; 5.15, 18, 25; 9.2, 3; 22.19, 21; etc.; cf. Eph. 5.27; Heb. 9.14; 1 Pet. 1.19; Jud. 24. The martyrs are spotless and no lie (ψεῦδος) is found in their mouths (Rev. 14.5). They stand in contrast to those who lie, and who will not be permitted into the holy city (Rev. 21.27; 22.15).

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

215

Revelation 7 There are clear connections between the martyrs of Rev. 14.1–5 and the two crowds in Revelation 7. Most obvious is the numerical link with the 144,000 from the twelve tribes of Israel (Rev. 7.1–8), but there are also connections with the great multitude (7.9–17), not least their relationship to the Lamb. The παρθένοι follow the Lamb wherever he goes (14.4), while the multitude have the Lamb as their shepherd (7.17). With only a few exceptions, commentators generally see the two visions of the 144,000 as two different snapshots of the same group.114 The link between the first group, sealed on their foreheads (7.3–4), and the second, bearing God’s and the Lamb’s names on their foreheads (14.1), is so explicit as to settle the question. Nonetheless, there is considerable discussion over who the group are, or what aspect of the church is being represented. Bauckham, who reads the Apocalypse as a Christian war scroll,115 notes that the list takes the form of a measure of military strength before battle. In Numbers, Moses is commanded to ‘take a census of all the congregation of the people of Israel, by families…every male…from twenty years old and upward, all in Israel who are able to go out to war’ (Num. 1.2–3). Each tribe is of identical size, in contrast with the results in the Hebrew Bible (cf. Num. 1.20–43), suggesting an idealised number of completeness.116 This view is strengthened by the numerical parallels with the vision of heavenly Jerusalem that is 12,000 stadia squared (Rev. 21.16) and has the name of the twelve tribes on its twelve gates (21.12). While some have taken the listing of the twelve tribes to indicate the 144,000 is Jewish,117 it is more likely the complete church is envisaged

114.  For example, Charles (Revelation, 2:5–6) sees the lack of the definite article in Rev. 14.1 as an indication that John is not referring back to the previous group. However, Beale (Revelation, 733–35) addresses this point directly, demonstrating that this is not uncommon for John (e.g. Rev. 13.1). The majority view is held by, among others, Bauckham, Climax, 230–31; Boring, Revelation, 128; Yarbro Collins, Crisis, 127. Aune (Revelation, 2:804) concludes that however they were identified in earlier sources they are ‘identical in the final edition’. 115.  Bauckham, Climax, 210–37. 116.  So, e.g., Koester, Revelation, 417. However, Bauckham (Climax, 218) cautions against reaching for the ‘purely symbolic’ reading too quickly. He notes that an army of equally sized tribal forces are sent into battle against the Midianites (Num. 31.4–6). 117.  Jonathan A. Draper, ‘The Heavenly Feast of Tabernacles: Revelation 7.1–17’, JSNT 19 (1983): 133–47 (136). Bauckham (Climax, 127) takes the combination of the tribal census and Rev. 14.4a to identify the crowd as being comprised

216

The Violence of the Lamb

here.118 To begin with, the crowd stands in contrast with the people of the earth who have just been exposed to the Day of Wrath (Rev. 6.12–17); they are sealed to protect them from the further calamities to come (cf. Ezek. 9.4–6). However, nothing is to be harmed until ‘the servants of God’ (δοῦλοι τοῦ θεοῦ) are sealed on their foreheads (Rev. 14.3). As the Beast’s servants are marked (13.17), so God’s servants are also marked on their foreheads, not simply for protection, but to signal their allegiance to God and the Lamb (cf. 14.1).119 In John’s strong dualistic world, it is inconceivable that John imagines a group of Christians who would not be sealed. Everyone either bears the mark of the Beast or the mark of the Lamb; the latter are those who refused to take the mark of the Beast (cf. 20.4–6). Moreover, the voice instructs the angel to seal God’s servants, which is used of the whole church throughout the Apocalypse (1.1; 2.20; 11.18; 22.3, 6), and unambiguously of martyrs (19.2, 5). The reasonable expectation from the instruction of Rev. 7.3 would be that all Christians would be sealed. There is no reason to think the roll call of tribes (7.4–8) undermines the full extent of the sealing.120 I have argued that crowds of 144,000 in Rev. 7.1–8 and 14.1–5 are not only identical but represent the whole church, which is itself made up of martyrs. Therefore, the same is true of the innumerable multitude of Rev. 7.9–17.121 To be sure, the crowds are described in different ways: the first is numbered, while no one is able to number the second multitude (Rev. 7.9); the first comes from the tribes of Israel, the second ‘from every nation, from all tribes, peoples, and languages’ (ἐκ παντὸς ἔθνους καὶ φυλῶν καὶ λαῶν καὶ γλωσσῶν; 7.9). However, John skilfully connects each of his pictures of the martyrs to form a coherent visual and theological solely of Israelite men, echoing expectation of the restoration of Israel (Isa. 11.11–16; 27.12–13; Ezek. 37.15–28; Sir. 36.1–13; 4 Ezra 13.39–40; Pss. Sol. 11.29; Sib. Or. 2.17; cf. Mt. 19.28; Lk. 22.30; Acts 26.6–7). 118.  Koester’s view (Revelation, 427) that the church is presented this way to demonstrate their claim to be heirs of the promise is not impossible, but unnecessary. 119.  Bauckham, Climax, 216. 120.  There is no need to speculate whether or not the heavenly sealing corresponds to an ecclesiastical ritual such as baptism. Although baptism later came to be associated with sealing (1 Clem. 7.6; 8.6), it is not obvious this is what is in mind here. See also Koester, Revelation, 426. 121.  Many commentators make a distinction, but this is generally because they do not view the whole church as being made up of martyrs. But see Yarbro Collins, Crisis, 127. Koester (Revelation, 419), however, interprets the crowd as the 144,000 seen from a different angle. Also Harrington, Revelation, 100; Resseguie, Revelation, 137.

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

217

matrix. There are clear structural connections between the martyrs of Revelation 7 and those found in Rev. 14.1–5 and 6.9–11. Aune notes that Rev. 14.1–5 and Rev. 7.1–17 follow the same pattern of sealing (7.1–4; cf. 14.1), praising (7.9–12; cf. 14.2–3), and finally explanation (7.13–17; cf. 14.4–5).122 Both groups are also connected with the martyrs under the altar. The innumerable crowd shares the white robes of martyrdom (6.11; cf. 7.9),123 while the numbered 144,000 reflects the ‘completion of the martyrs’ that answer the souls’ question of how long they must wait until judgement commences. Efforts, therefore, to distinguish the three crowds of martyrs from one another are misplaced. Moreover, as we have noted, John describes the Day of Judgement in many diverse images that are difficult to reconcile or place in logical sequence. The same is true of the martyrs. The pictures of the souls under the altar (Rev. 6.9–11), the 144,000 from the twelve tribes (7.1–8), the great multitude (7.9–17), and the 144,000 virgin followers of the Lamb (14.1–5) are different snapshots of the same martyr church, in the same way as the enemy is variously represented by beasts, the Dragon, the Whore, earth-dwellers, and Rome. Similarly, the Day of Judgement comes in plagues from seals, trumpets, bowls, and the reading of books before the throne. Revelation is not linear, but takes the reader on a journey around the perimeter of an apocalyptic compound, viewing the same exhibits from different angles. The great crowd is identified by an elder as the ones who have come out of the great tribulation (οἱ ἐρχόμενοι ἐκ τῆς θλίψεως τῆς μεγάλης); they have washed their robes (αὶ ἔπλυναν τὰς στολὰς αὐτῶν) and made them white in the blood of the Lamb (καὶ ἐλεύκαναν αὐτὰς ἐν τῷ αἵματι τοῦ ἀρνίου). (Rev. 7.14)

122.  Aune, Revelation, 2:796. Aune’s structural analysis therefore demands a close connection between the groups in Rev. 7.1–8 and 7.9–17. 123.  Bauckham, Climax, 55. The suggestion by Charles (Revelation, 1:184–88) that the robes represent spiritual bodies is unlikely, although there is a not dissimilar idea in Asc. Isa. 9.9: ‘I saw Enoch and all who (were) with him, stripped of (their) robes of the flesh; and I saw them in their robes of above, and they were like the angels who stand there in great glory’ (trans. M. A. Knibb, OTP 2:143–76). For Beale (Revelation, 394), the robes represent a declaration of purity, while SchüsslerFiorenza (Revelation, 64) argues they are wedding garments. There is indeed a strong connection with the bridal garments of Rev. 19.8. However, as I will argue, the narrative logic of the Apocalypse suggests the wedding robes should be interpreted as martyr garments rather than the other way round.

218

The Violence of the Lamb

Blount argues that the great tribulation these Christians go through is the judgements that God will visit upon the earth. He imagines that there are both sealed and unsealed Christians, and while the sealed will escape the plagues, unsealed Christians will face the same terrors as the earthdwellers.124 Blount spells out the implications of his argument in his comment on the fifth trumpet (Rev. 9.1–11). The scorpions are allowed to torture all humanity, with the exception of those who are sealed (9.4). For Blount, the 144,000 are therefore exempt from this torture. However, he goes on to argue: The saints at 7.9–17 were not sealed and therefore were not protected from the ravages that accompanied God’s preliminary acts of judgment… This means that there will be many saints who will also be tormented by the scorpion stings of the demon locusts. As 3.10 explains, the child of humanity will keep them, enable them to endure, but will not rapture them from the circumstances that surround the coming of the end.125

This interpretation is unconvincing. To begin with, Rev. 3.10 does not in fact suggest Christians will share in the fate of the earth-dwellers; it states the opposite: Because you have kept (ἐτήρησας) my word of patient endurance (τὸν λόγον τῆς ὑπομονῆς μου), so I will keep (τηρήσω) you from the hour of trial (ἐκ τῆς ὥρας τοῦ πειρασμοῦ τῆς μελλούσης) that is coming on the whole world to test the inhabitants of the earth (ἔρχεσθαι ἐπὶ τῆς οἰκουμένης ὅλης πειράσαι τοὺς κατοικοῦντας ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς). (Rev. 3.10)

If the Christians keep (τηρέω) Jesus’ word, he will in turn keep (τηρέω) them from the hour of trial that the rest of the world will have to endure. Moreover, as we have seen throughout the Apocalypse, there is a clear trade-off between right behaviour and not sharing in the plagues coming on the earth. It is far more likely that the great tribulation refers to the expectation that Christians will suffer before the end of the age (cf. Mt. 24//Mk 13// Lk. 21),126 with an emphasis on persecution (Mk 13.9–13//Mt. 10.17–21; cf. Mt. 24.9). From the outset, John indicates that faithfulness results in θλῖψις (Rev. 1.9) and warns his readers to expect further experiences

124.  Blount, Revelation, 153. 125.  Blount, Revelation, 176. 126.  Indeed, Mt. 24.21 uses the phrase θλῖψις μεγάλη.

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

219

(2.9–10).127 The general Christian reflection on eschatological tribulation comes from Daniel. There are many specific resonances with Daniel’s ‘day of tribulation’ (ἡ ἡμέρα θλίψεως; Dan. 12.1LXX),128 in which Michael and the books of judgement appear. Furthermore, it will be the wise— those who keep the covenant—who will fall by the sword (11.33), but will be cleansed and ‘made white’ (‫ ;לבן‬Dan. 11.35).129 They will in turn be vindicated, and shine like stars after the resurrection (Dan. 12.1–3). A similar idea is found in the War Scroll in which the final battle will usher in a time of suffering for God’s people, the like of which there has never been until the final redemption (1QM 1.11–12). However, the sons of light will prevail (1.13), and in a striking parallel with Rev. 7.14, ‘they shall wash their clothes and cleanse themselves of the blood of the guilty corpses’ (1QM 14.2–3). In Revelation, however, it is the blood of the Lamb together with their own faithfulness to death (cf. Rev. 12.10) that has given the martyrs the victory that has brought them through the great tribulation, and won them the right to carry palm branches, sing to God and the Lamb before the throne, and to wear white robes of martyrdom (7.9–10).130 As with the martyrs on Zion (Rev. 14.1–5), the Lamb is a significant presence in the description of the great multitude (7.9–17); they stand before the Lamb (7.9), sing about the victory (ἡ σωτηρία) of God and the Lamb (7.10), wash their robes in the blood of the Lamb (7.14), and like the 144,000 who follow the Lamb (14.4), the Lamb is their shepherd and will guide them (7.17). This takes us back full circle to the initial appearance of the Lamb, who was both slain and victorious in Rev. 5.6. The scene of the martyrs before the throne takes the one who experiences the Apocalypse back to the throne room of God (Rev. 4–5). The martyrs are joined by characters from the earlier scene, the elders and the four living creatures, and, as before, join in the praise of God and the Lamb. Indeed, Sweet notes the same hearing/seeing combination that introduced the Lion/Lamb (5.5–6; cf. 7.4, 9).131 Moreover, Bauckham strengthens

127.  Θλῖψις is characteristic of Christian experience throughout the New Testament even beyond a specific apocalyptic context (Mt. 13.21//Mk 4.17; Jn 16.33; Acts 11.19; 14.22; 20.23; Rom. 5.3; 8.35; 12.12; 2 Cor. 1.4, 8; 2.4; 4.17; 6.4; 7.4; 8.2, 13; Phil. 4.14; 1 Thess. 1.6; 3.3, 7; 2 Thess. 1.4, 6; Eph. 3.13; Heb. 10.33; cf. Col. 1.24). 128.  Or καιρὸς θλίψεως θλῖψις in Dan. 12.1Theod. 129.  Cleansed and purified in Dan. 11.35LXX. 130.  Blount (Revelation, 150) suggests that the sound of plural word ‘palm branches’ (φοίνικες) may resonate with ‘victory’ (νίκη). 131.  Sweet, Revelation, 150–51.

220

The Violence of the Lamb

this link by noting that the Lion/Lamb image parallels the two visions of the martyrs. The Lion of Judah (5.5) mirrors the twelve tribes of Israel (7.4–8), while the slain Lamb reflects those who have come out of the great tribulation (7.9–17).132 The image of Christ and the victory song of the martyrs reminds the reader that they are engaged in an eschatological battle in which they must remain faithful to Christ. However, that they follow the Lamb wherever he goes, including to death, and that the Lamb is the one who has won victory, leads to a further aspect of John’s theology of martyrdom. Dying for Christ in the Apocalypse is not to fall in war, it is to help win that war. We now turn to the call to conquer in Revelation, in which I will argue that to conquer is to be martyred, because martyrdom in the Apocalypse must be seen as more than simply the death of the Christian, but her vindication. Through that vindication, the martyr is transformed not only into a soldier of Christ, but an agent of his divine wrath. The Call to Conquer The presentation of the victorious Christ in the Apocalypse is made up of three clear aspects; death, resurrection, and glorification. Jesus is ‘the faithful martyr (ὁ μάρτυς, ὁ πιστός), the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings on earth’ (Rev. 1.5), who died, but is alive for ever (1.18). In Revelation, Jesus is the proto-martyr, the model for all faithful Christians. However, it is crucial to recognise that the vindication of Jesus is not in any sense a reversal of his death. The crucifixion of Jesus—his martyrdom—is of major significance. Through his death, Christians are freed from their sins, and made into a kingdom (1.6). His death is the cause of judgement (1.7), and having overcome death, Christ possesses the keys to Death and Hades (1.18). It is through his death that the Lion/ Lamb had conquered (νικάω; 5.5). Similarly, although refusing to worship the image of the Beast or receive its mark will result in martyrdom, it is through death that Christians conquer (νικάω) the Beast (Rev. 12.11; 15.2).133 While the Beast makes war (πόλεμος) on the Christians in which they lose their lives on 132.  Bauckham, Climax, 216. Although he does not push the distinction too strongly, Bauckham does see some difference between the two sets of martyrs. However, as I have argued above, that there is no discontinuity or incongruence in the Lion/Lamb image, there is no need to separate the two groups on the grounds of their parallel with the two aspects of Christ’s death and resurrection in Rev. 5.5–6. 133.  On two occasions the enemies of the Christians are said to conquer them (Rev. 11.7; 13.7). Both cases are unambiguous references to martyrdom. However,

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

221

earth (13.7), in the corresponding heavenly war, the martyr army led by their martyred general, conquer (νικάω) the enemy (17.14) and leave them slaughtered on the battlefield (19.21). In the Apocalypse, John lays out two options for his readers: they can follow the Beast or follow the Lamb. Following the Lamb means resisting the Beast, refusing to worship him or receive his mark, which will mean martyrdom. However, through being faithful to death they will conquer their enemy, even the might of Rome (12.11). Conquering in the Seven Churches John most explicitly lays out the choice to the Christians of Asia Minor in his oracles to the seven churches, warning some of them to change their ways and repent. It is also in these letters where he repeatedly issues a call to conquer. Each letter ends with such a call (τῷ νικῶντι), generally followed by the rewards which conquerors will receive (Rev. 2.7, 11, 17, 26; 3.5, 12, 21). There is no doubt the call to conquer is issued to all Christians, and it is my contention that, at the very least on a literary level, John envisages martyrdom.134 This can be seen clearly by comparing the list of rewards for conquerors with those reserved for martyrs. John has meshed together a martyrological matrix into which all Christians were urged to take their place. Most of the rewards outlined for those who conquer reflect John’s vision of the heavenly city (Rev. 21–22). Entry to the heavenly city is restricted to conquerors, and is used by John as another means to stress the fundamental chasm that divides humanity: The one who conquers (ὁ νικῶν) will inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be my son. But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the polluted, the murderers, the fornicators, the sorcerers, the idolaters, and all liars, their place will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death. (Rev. 21.7–8)

The conquerors of Ephesus (Rev. 2.1–7) will be ‘given the right to eat from the tree of life which is in the Paradise of God’ (2.7).135 The tree the use of the divine passive demonstrates that by being conquered the saints are conquering. John’s readers have already been told that victory comes through death (12.11). 134.  See Middleton, Radical Martyrdom, 161–63, and ‘Male Virgins’, 198–202. 135.  The tree of life image is from Gen. 2.9 (cf. 3.23–24). Aune (Revelation, 1:152–53) notes that in Jewish eschatological thought, the tree of life can stand for either salvation (1 En. 12.5; 3 En. 23.18; Test. Levi 18.11; Apoc. Mos. 28.4; Apoc. Elij. 5.6) or the elect (Pss. Sol. 14.3; Apoc. Adam 6.1; 1QH 8.5–6).

222

The Violence of the Lamb

is the reward conquerors will inherit in the heavenly city (22.2, 14, 19), and those who will be able to eat its fruit is further qualified: ‘Blessed are those who wash their robes (οἱ πλύνοντες τὰς στολὰς αὐτῶν), so that they will have the right (ἐξουσία) to the tree of life and may enter the city by the gates’ (22.14). Entrance to the city, along with access to the tree of life, therefore, is given to those who have washed their robes, which, of course, resonates strongly with the crowd of martyrs, for whom washing their robes (ἔπλυναν τὰς στολὰς αὐτῶν) was a sign of their martyrdom (Rev. 7.14; cf. 12.11). The white robes (στολὴ λευκή) they wear (7.9, 13) connects the conceptual chain back to the martyrs under the altar, who were similarly clothed in white (στολὴ λευκή; 6.11). The martyrological association with conquering is further strengthened through white clothing in the oracle to Sardis (Rev. 3.1–6). John has warned that unfaithfulness will lead to judgement (3.3), and this behaviour is characterised as soiling one’s garments: ‘But you have a few people in Sardis who have not polluted (μολύνω) their clothes; they will walk with me dressed in white (ἐν λευκοῖς) because they are worthy’ (3.4). Once again, the connection with the martyrs is unmistakable. In addition, the connection to the white clothed martyrs (7.9, 13) who are led by the Lamb (7.17), those who are worthy in Sardis who have not polluted their garments, resonates with the 144,000 who have not polluted themselves with women, and who follow the Lamb (14.4). The reward for conquerors in Sardis is similarly martyrological: The one who conquers will be clothed in white clothes and I will not blot out his name from the book of life. And I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels. (Rev. 3.5)

Several themes associated with martyrdom cluster together here: white clothes, the book of life, and confession. As already noted, in early Christian tradition, the confession of one’s name before God is the reward for those who confess Jesus’ name before earthly authorities, and here is connected both with the martyrs’ white robes, but also the book of life. We have seen that those whose names are in the book of life will not follow the Beast (Rev. 13.8; 17.8). However, given the perilous relationship between some of John’s readers and the Harlot, they are in danger of having their name blotted out of the book of life unless they repent. In the context of a trial, to deny Jesus is to soil one’s robes, which in turn will result in Jesus denying them before God, and their name being blotted out of the book of life. Only those who are in the book of life will be permitted to enter the heavenly city (21.6).

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

223

The conquerors of Smyrna (Rev. 2.8–11), that is, those who are faithful to death, will be given the crown of life (2.10) and will not be hurt by the second death (2.11). This is the explicit reward for those who were martyred for Jesus (20.4–6); they reign after the first resurrection, and the second death has no power over them (20.6). Similarly, those who need not fear the second death are those whose names are in the Lamb’s book of life (20.14–15), that is, those killed for not worshipping the Beast (13.14; 20.4). In Pergamum (Rev. 2.12–17) and Philadelphia (3.7–13) conquerors receive the name of God and Jesus (2.17; 3.12),136 clearly alluding to those who are sealed (7.3–4) with the name of God and Jesus on their foreheads (14.1). Everyone in the heavenly city also has the names of God and the Lamb on their foreheads (22.4), reinforcing the point made throughout that faithful Christians comprise only one single group. Additionally, the Philadelphian conquerors will be pillars in the Temple, meaning they will never leave it (3.12), in the same way as the first resurrection martyrs are priests of God and Christ (20.6; cf. 1.6; 5.10). Finally, those who conquer in the churches at Thyatira (Rev. 2.18–28) and Laodicea (3.14–22) will be given the authority to reign. In Thyatira, those who keep Jesus’ works to the end will be given power over the nations, and authority to rule over them (2.27–28), while the Laodiceans will be granted the right to sit with Christ on his throne (3.21). In both cases Jesus grants to the conquerors power that he himself has received from God (2.28; 3.21). Once again, it is in the resurrected picture of the martyrs (20.4–6) in which these promises find fulfilment. The martyrs, who had been beheaded for their testimony—their refusal to worship the Beast or receive its mark—are resurrected and ‘they reigned with Christ (ἐβασίλευσαν μετὰ τοῦ Χριστοῦ) for a thousand years’ (20.4, 6). The rewards to those who conquer in the letters are therefore clearly associated with the martyrs. The martyrs follow Jesus wherever he goes (14.4), and he leads them like a shepherd (7.17). Jesus is characterised by his death right from the outset of the Apocalypse (1.5); he is the proto-martyr whom all Christians are expected to follow to martyrdom by retaining their faithful testimony (12.11). The final utterance to the seven churches sums up the overall message to all the churches, and makes explicit what is already implicit in the parallel rewards for conquerors and martyrs: 136.  Conquerors in Pergamum receive a white stone on which is written a new name (ὄνομα καινός) known only to the receiver (Rev. 2.17; cf. 19.12). It is possible this is a new name for the Christian (cf. Isa. 62.2), as argued by Hemer (Letters, 102–3), but others argue for the name of God and Jesus (Aune, Revelation, 1:190).

224

The Violence of the Lamb The one who conquers I will give to him a place to sit with me on my throne, just as I myself have conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne. Anyone who has an ear, you must listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches. (Rev. 3.21–22)

In other words, Jesus conquered by his death, and Christians must, by following his example, conquer through martyrdom. Martyrs as Agents of Divine Judgement I have argued thus far that John issues a call to conquer to all his readers. For John, to conquer is to be martyred. Therefore, at a literary level at least, John does not envisage a faithful Christian who will not be martyred. This means that all visions of the church in heaven represent the martyred church, and removes much of the controversy over the need to define precisely the particular groups of martyrs under the altar (Rev. 6.9–11), sealed from the tribes of Israel (7.1–8), standing before the throne (7.9–17), or following the Lamb (14.1–5). Each vision is simply another perspective on the martyrs of the church. As martyrdom is so prevalent, many commentators have found it a convenient hook on which to hang non-violent readings of the Apocalypse that seek to mitigate against the violent judgement found elsewhere. The martyrs and the slaughtered Lamb become the dominant lens through which to refract the violence. Martyrs become a symbol of non-violent resistance, such that ‘suffering and not brute power’ is the means by which God will triumph,137 and weakness is the most potent weapon in overcoming the Beast.138 However, this is to misunderstand the theology of martyrdom in the Apocalypse. For John, martyrs are conquerors, who are victorious not because they offer non-violent resistance, but because they follow the proto-martyr, the Lamb, whose death was followed by vindication and glorification such that he shares God’s throne and is the agent or arbiter of judgement. I have already demonstrated the full extent of John’s Christology, arguing that commentators have not paid full attention to the extent of the Lamb’s cosmic story. Jesus is not only the one who died through faithful witness, he is the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth (Rev. 1.5). As ruler, he exercises violent judgement (e.g. 6.12–17). 137.  Yoder, Politics of Jesus, 232. See also Bredin, Jesus, 157–216; and Crossan (Birth, 289), who describes martyrdom as ‘the final act of ethical eschatology’. 138.  Or as Blount (Witness?, 70) puts it, ‘For John, weakness is the silver bullet that God fires out like a deadeye marksman against the scarcely exposed heart of cosmic and human evil’.

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

225

It is my contention that martyrs conquer through death, because martyrdom is the means by which they too access the power to sit on Christ’s throne and participate in the Lamb’s warring judgement. Vindication of The Martyrs We have noted that martyrs, like Jesus, are faithful witnesses. By bearing their testimony, and refusing to engage with the seductions of Rome, they will face certain death. However, like Jesus, they are also raised (Rev. 20.4–6). As Jesus was ‘the firstborn of the dead’ (ὁ πρωτότοκος τῶν νεκρῶν; 1.5), his martyred followers are ‘first fruits (ἀπαρχή) to God and the Lamb’ (14.4).139 Moreover, as Christ now reigns, so too will the martyrs. The resurrected martyrs reign with Christ for a thousand years (20.4–6) and share Christ’s throne, which will, significantly, give to them power over the nations: To the one who conquers (ὁ νικῶν) and who keeps my works until the end, I will give him power over the nations (δώσω αὐτῷ ἐξουσίαν ἐπὶ τῶν ἐθνῶν), and he shall rule them with a rod of iron (ποιμανεῖ αὐτοὺς ἐν ῥάβδῳ σιδηρᾷ), as when earthen pots are broken in pieces, even as I myself have received from my Father. (Rev. 2.26–27)

If Revelation displays high Christology, it also demonstrates a high martyrology. As Christ receives power from God, he then passes it to the martyrs. Some have attempted to soften the image, by interpreting ποιμανεῖ αὐτοὺς ἐν ῥάβδῳ σιδηρᾷ in terms of shepherding imagery.140 However, this interpretation hardly fits the context. Moreover, that John quotes from Ps. 2.9, in which the anointed crushes the nations, makes a gentle shepherding reading somewhat unlikely. Furthermore, the power to rule with the iron staff comes from Jesus, and in the Apocalypse, when Christ rules with an iron rod it brings destructive judgement. In the guise of the rider on the horse, Christ wields ‘a sharp sword from his mouth with which to strike down the nations (ἵνα ἐν αὐτῇ πατάξῃ τὰ ἔθνη), and he will rule them with a rod of iron (ποιμανεῖ αὐτοὺς ἐν ῥάβδῳ σιδηρᾷ), and he will tread the wine press of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty’ (Rev. 19.15).141 139.  Paul also uses ἀπαρχή of Jesus’ resurrection (1 Cor. 15.20), explicitly stating believers will follow: ‘Christ the first fruits (ἀπαρχή), after that those who are Christ’s (ἔπειτα οἱ τοῦ Χριστοῦ) at his coming’ (1 Cor. 15.23). 140.  Blount, Revelation, 64; Swete, Apocalypse, 46–47; Koester, Revelation, 301–2. 141.  See also Rev. 12.5, where the child who is to rule the nations with an iron rod is snatched up to heaven.

226

The Violence of the Lamb

The Church also enjoys an elevated status over the world in the oracle to Philadelphia (Rev. 3.7–13). In response to the persecution from the ‘Synagogue of Satan’, the church has remained faithful, and not denied Jesus’ name. The Christ-figure promises retribution: ‘I will make them come and bow down before your feet (ποιήσω αὐτοὺς ἵνα ἥξουσιν καὶ προσκυνήσουσιν ἐνώπιον τῶν ποδῶν σου), so that they will know that I have loved you’ (3.9). The image, taken from Isaiah, suggests the future humiliation of the church’s tormentors: [The enemy kings and queens] with their face on the ground shall bow before you (ἐπὶ πρόσωπον τῆς γῆς προσκυνήσουσίν σοι) and lick the dust from your feet (καὶ τὸν χοῦν τῶν ποδῶν σου λείξουσιν), and you will know that I am the Lord and you will not be put to shame. (Isa. 49.23LXX)

As in Isaiah, it is not enough for God’s people not to be put to shame; the enemy must be humiliated. The judgement to be meted out to the Synagogue of Satan encapsulates the judgement sequence in the Apocalypse in miniature. Not only will those who faithfully witness to Christ be saved, those who oppose them will be crushed. Although the Philadelphians’ enemy looks strong, and the church appears to have little power (Rev. 3.8), those who afflict them will grovel at their feet.142 In effect, the Apocalypse encourages Christians to see their current situation through the lens of God’s final victory. They may live as a small maligned group in the midst of Roman power, who could experience what they interpreted as persecution at the hands of local magistrates. However, they are told how things really are when seen from the vantage point of the throne room of God. Those who are tempted not to maintain their testimony in the face of pressure are given a graphic account of the fate that lies in store for Rome. Not only is martyrdom the best option when faced with the respective fate of Christians and earth-dwellers, it is also the means by which they conquer and participate in the cosmic war being waged between the Lamb and the Beast. Those who are given the Lamb’s authority must join his army. 142.  Duff (‘Synagogue of Satan’, 157–59) suggests that the Jews will learn through their experience of humiliation and be saved. However, this conclusion is by no means obvious. The use of προσκυνέω here (Rev. 3.9) is striking. The other occurrences of the term in Revelation have the sense of cultic worship of God (3.9; 4.10; 5.14; 7.11; 11.1, 16; 14.7; 15.4; 19.4, 10; 22.9), idols (9.20), the dragon (13.4), or the Beast (13.4, 8, 12, 15; 14.9, 11; 16.2; 19.20; 20.4). On two occasions, John is stopped from worshipping an angel (19.10; 22.8–9). Although speculative, it could be that this is an embryonic stage in the cult of the martyrs with rudimentary martyr-devotion.

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

227

The Noble Army of Martyrs The Apocalypse presents the cosmos in all-out warfare. The war in heaven (Rev. 12.7) is reflected by war on earth waged against God’s people (11.7; 12.17; 13.7; 17.14; 19.19; 20.8). Martyrdom, as we have seen, is the way in which God’s people conquer (12.11; 15.2). For John, the martyrs are not non-combatants. They fight in the war God and the Lamb wage in return (16.14; 19.11). Those who share the Lamb’s authority share in his victory on the front line. We have noted the way in which John’s description of the 144,000 sealed martyrs resembles a military census (Rev. 7.1–8), which echoes the possible holy war cultic purity of the martyrs in Rev. 14.1–5. For John, martyrdom is a contribution to the war, and his depiction of the holy warriors is his way of illustrating this theme. When it comes to the presentation of the final battles, the martyrs are present with the Lamb: They will make war on the Lamb (μετὰ τοῦ ἀρνίου πολεμήσουσιν), and the Lamb will conquer them (τὸ ἀρνίον νικήσει αὐτούς) for he is Lord of lords and king of kings, and those with him (οἱ μετ᾽ αὐτοῦ) are called and elect and faithful (κλητοὶ καὶ ἐκλεκτοὶ καὶ πιστοί). (Rev. 17.14) And I saw heaven opened, and there was a white horse. Its rider is called Faithful and True (πιστὸς καὶ ἀληθινός), and in righteousness he judges and makes war (ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ κρίνει καὶ πολεμεῖ)… He is clothed in a robe dipped in blood (ἱμάτιον βεβαμμένον αἵματι), and his name is called The Word of God (ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ). And the armies in heaven (τὰ στρατεύματα ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ), followed him (ἠκολούθει αὐτῷ) wearing white and pure (λευκὸν καθαρόν) fine linen on white horses… And I saw the Beast and the kings of the earth with their armies gathered to make war against the rider on the horse and against his army. (Rev. 19.11, 13–14, 19)

The iconic battles that deliver the decisive blow to the forces of evil are over in an instant. While those commentators concerned with non-violent interpretations argue that no battle takes place, the fact that the enemies lie slaughtered on the battlefield to be eaten by birds demonstrates this reading is incorrect (Rev. 19.21). Rather, the battle is over so quickly because it is a rout. Even the mighty armies of Rome took time to complete their conquests; for example, the siege of Jerusalem took more than four years. Readers of the Apocalypse are indeed to imagine a battle, but one that is so one-sided that it requires no narration, simply ‘the Lamb will conquer them’ (17.14) or ‘the rest were slain by the sword of him who sits on the horse’ (19.21). In Revelation’s final battle, after Satan is released (20.7–8), the forces of evil ‘marched over the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints (ἡ παρεμβολή τῶν ἁγίων)’, but even

228

The Violence of the Lamb

that war is over before it begins; ‘but fire came down from heaven and consumed them’ (20.9). Nonetheless, despite the brevity of these skirmishes, we should not overlook the fact that in each case the Lamb has an army; indeed, after his initial appearance, the Lamb never appears alone. Those accompanying the Lamb are chosen and faithful. On each occasion πιστός has been used in the Apocalypse, it either referred to Jesus as the faithful martyr-witness (Rev. 1.5; 3.14; cf. 19.11) or the faithful martyrs (2.10, 13).143 While the armies in heaven could refer to angels, it is much more likely they are martyrs. First, they follow (ἀκολουθέω) him, which is reminiscent of the martyrs that follow (ἀκολουθέω) the Lamb wherever he goes (14.4). They are dressed in pure fine linen (βύσσινος…καθαρός), which has just been identified as the clothing of the Bride,144 and has been specifically identified as ‘the righteous deeds of the saints’ (τὸ δικαίωμα τῶν ἁγίων; 19.8). The white clothes are, of course, representative of martyrdom (3.4, 5; 6.11; 7.9, 13). Finally, the Beast makes war on the rider and his army. Revelation is not linear, and so this scene reiterates the whole message of the Apocalypse; the forces of evil, represented by the Beast, which is, of course, Rome, have made war on God’s people. Christians must fight alongside the Lamb, conquering as he has done through death, confident that each martyr’s death contributes to the inevitable final victory of the Lamb. In the Apocalypse, the martyrs do not endure through non-violent resistance; they engage in bloody warfare. Martyrs as Rulers: Revelation 20.4–6 The martyrs follow the Lamb—the proto-martyr—through death and vindication. They participate in the cosmic battle through their own earthy struggles with Rome, remaining faithful to their testimony to Jesus. There is no doubt that the cry of the martyrs under the altar (Rev. 6.10) is more than answered, but it requires more martyrs to enrol in the war of the Lamb. God vindicates the martyrs by judging Babylon, the Beast, the Devil, and all the forces of evil for them. Those who torment the Christians will be burned alive and tortured for all eternity with no rest (14.11; 19.3; 20.10). Rome, so apparently invincible that people wonder who can fight against it (13.4), will be brought down and humiliated for what it has done to the Christian church by the true power behind the 143.  Rev. 17.14 is the only occurrence of both κλητός and ἐκλεκτός. When πιστός reappears it is in reference to the words of Revelation (Rev. 21.5; 22.6). 144.  The Bride clothed herself ‘in fine linen, bright and pure (βύσσινον λαμπρὸν καθαρόν); for the fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints’ (Rev. 19.8).

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

229

Universe; God and his Lamb. However, we now complete John’s theology of martyrdom. As Jesus is the proto-martyr who died, rose again, and now shares the judgement throne of God, I will demonstrate that the martyrs who follow him also share in that power to judge. They are agents of divine judgement. The clearest image of the vindication of the martyrs comes at the first resurrection when they come to life to reign with Christ: Then I saw thrones (θρόνοι), and seated on them were those to whom judgement was given (κρίμα ἐδόθη αὐτοῖς); the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus (διὰ τὴν μαρτυρίαν Ἰησοῦ) and for the word of God (διὰ τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ). They had not worshipped the Beast or its image and had not received its mark on their forehead or their hands. They came to life (ἔζησαν) and reigned with Christ a thousand years. (Rev. 20.4)

It is an important element of the vindication of the martyrs that they are not merely resurrected; they reign and exercise judgement with Christ. Although the identity of those who sit on the thrones is not immediately clear, it becomes obvious that it is those martyred for Jesus.145 Those who sit on the throne have been killed for their testimony and the word of God, and lost their lives through not worshipping the Beast.146 Nonetheless, Koester, along with other commentators, insist the vision is not limited to martyrs, and expand the identification of those resurrected to include all Christians.147 While I agree with this assessment on the grounds that I have argued that John imagines all faithful Christians will be martyred, for those who do not hold this position, it is not obvious on what grounds non-martyrs are included here.148 Indeed, as Aune has convincingly 145.  See Yarbro Collins, Crisis, 128–29; Bauckham, Theology, 106–8; Murphy, Fallen, 398–99; Blount, Revelation, 364; against Charles, Revelation, 2:182. 146.  There is no need to imagine a subset of martyrs here who are beheaded rather than killed in other ways. For various methods of Roman execution, see Aune, Revelation, 3:1086. However, it is not impossible that beheading is the principal way in which John has experienced or expects beheading to be the principal method of Christian execution. Similarly, there is no call to imagine more than one group. Those beheaded for their testimony lose their lives through their refusal to engage in Beast worship (Rev. 13.14). 147.  Koester, Revelation, 771; Smalley, Revelation, 505–6; Mounce, Revelation, 365. Beale (Revelation, 996) imagines the group who judge to include Christians and angels. 148.  For Smalley (Revelation, 506–7), Rev. 20.4–5 refers to martyrs, but 20.6 then includes all Christians. However, this reading is unwarranted.

230

The Violence of the Lamb

demonstrated, the literary relationship between this scene and the tableau of the martyred souls under the altar (Rev. 6.9–11) is so close that the two probably constitute a doublet:149 Rev. 6.9 εἶδον… τὰς ψυχὰς τῶν ἐσφαγμένων διὰ τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ διὰ τὴν μαρτυρίαν ἣν εἶχον

Rev. 20.4 εἶδον… τὰς ψυχὰς τῶν πεπελεκισμένων διὰ τὴν μαρτυρίαν Ἰησοῦ καὶ διὰ τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ

The martyrs cried out for vindication and vengeance (6.10) and John now shows how that will be achieved. Their tormentors will be destroyed and the martyrs take part in their judgement. The enthronement of the martyrs fulfils the promise Jesus gave to the conquerors to sit on his throne (Rev. 3.21), strengthening the view that conquerors should be interpreted as martyrs. The judgement scene of the Apocalypse is modelled on Dan. 7.9–14, in which the Ancient of Days sits on the judgement throne, books are opened, beasts are destroyed, and the Son of Man is given power and glory. In Revelation, the Son of Man and the Ancient of Days are conflated (Rev. 1.12–20), and authority and power are shared with the martyrs. While there are traditions in both Judaism and Christianity of the righteous acting as judges,150 some readers insist that in Revelation only God judges. So Koester states, ‘there is no evidence the saints judge anyone during the Millennium or afterwards’.151 Instead, God gives judgement for them, rather than over to them (κρίμα ἐδόθη αὐτοῖς; 20.4), in what Smalley calls ‘judicial vindication’.152 While this view is not inconsistent with the points of the Apocalypse where God judges Babylon for the saints (ἔκρινεν ὁ θεὸς τὸ κρίμα ὑμῶν ἐξ αὐτῆς; 18.20), John goes a stage further in the first resurrection. He has already been explicit that the martyrs conquer as Jesus has conquered, and in the same way that God has given over power to Jesus to sit on his throne, so Jesus extends that right to those who follow him through death, resurrection, and glorification (3.21). Moreover, that martyrs now judge is entirely consistent with the 149.  Aune, Revelation, 3:1087–88. 150.  Wis. 3.8; 1QpHab. 5.4; cf. Mt. 19.28; 1 Cor. 6.2. 151.  Koester, Revelation, 772. 152.  Smalley, Revelation, 506; Koester, Revelation 772.

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

231

power they have been given over the nations, so that, like Jesus, they can smash them as a clay pot (2.27). It is also worth noting that it is the prayers of the saints that fill up the censor that is thrown on the earth that heralds the devastation of the seven trumpets (8.3). However uncomfortable for modern readers, martyrs are given the authority to judge, and to share in their own vengeance. We turn finally to something of a crux interpretum in which the martyrs are apparently called to share in inflicting violent judgement on Babylon. Martyrs as Agents of Judgement: Revelation 18.4–8 In John’s scenes in which the Whore of Babylon is judged, she is subjected to violent assault by a number of characters. The kings and the Beast hate her, making her desolate and naked, eat her flesh, and devour her with fire (Rev. 17.16), because God put it into their hearts (17.17). God sends plagues, pestilence, mourning, and famine, and he too burns her with fire (18.8). An angel throws a millstone into the sea to represent her destruction with violence (18.21), and heaven rejoices over her, as the smoke from her destruction rises for all eternity (19.1–3). However, there is one final group of actors who inflict violence on Babylon which is often overlooked—the saints: Then I heard another voice from heaven saying, ‘Come out of her, my people (ἐξέλθατε ὁ λαός μου ἐξ αὐτῆς), so you do not participate in her sins (ἵνα μὴ συγκοινωνήσητε ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις αὐτῆς), and share in her plagues. For her sins are heaped high as heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities. Pay back to her as she herself has doled out (ἀπόδοτε αὐτῇ ὡς καὶ αὐτὴ ἀπέδωκεν), and double according to her deeds (διπλώσατε τὰ διπλᾶ κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῆς). Mix a double draught for her as she has mixed (ἐν τῷ ποτηρίῳ ᾧ ἐκέρασεν κεράσατε αὐτῇ διπλοῦν). As she glorified herself and lived in luxury, so give to her torment and mourning (δότε αὐτῇ βασανισμὸν καὶ πένθος), since she says in her heart, ‘I sit as a queen; I am not a widow, and I will not see mourning’. Because of this her plagues will come in a single day—death, mourning, and famine—and she will be burned with fire, because it is the mighty Lord God who judges her (ἰσχυρὸς κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὁ κρίνας αὐτήν). (Rev. 18.4–8)

It appears that it is the faithful who are being commanded to come out of Babylon (Rev. 18.5) and ‘render to her as she herself has rendered, and repay her double for her deeds; mix a double draught for her in the cup she mixed’ (18.6). While the most natural interpretation is that the voice addresses Christians, this has been resisted on the grounds that it is hard to see how a beleaguered Christian group would be in a position to exact

232

The Violence of the Lamb

revenge on the Roman empire. For others, the problem is ethical. For instance, Blount unpacks the perceived problem clearly: if Christians are enjoined to violent retribution, it counters every expectation for the believing witness that John has heretofore narrated. No other passage makes such a demand. In fact, believers are explicitly directed toward nonviolent forms of witnessing resistance… [T]his single verse would therefore contradict the book’s entire ethical superstructure.153

Therefore, other interpretations suggest that it is angels of punishment,154 the kings of the earth,155 the archangel Michael,156 or otherwise unidentified agents of divine wrath157 who are being addressed. In the martyrological schema of Revelation that I have outlined, there is no theological objection to imagining that saints, and in particular martyrs, could share in judgement against Babylon. Blount correctly notes that Christians are called to model their witness on Christ, and die like him.158 However, he does not take into account the conquering aspect of martyrdom that incorporates vindication and glorification.159 In Revelation, 153.  Blount, Revelation, 330. DeSilva (Seeing, 266) seems to accept it is addressed to Christians, but notes it is not ‘corroborated’ anywhere else. Therefore, ‘the purpose of this solitary exhortation must, then, not be to call Christians to act in a sub-Christian manner’. Similarly, Koester, Revelation, 700. More overtly theological objections to reading the command being given to Christians is advanced by Smalley (Revelation, 448), who sees it as contravening Jesus’ command to love one’s enemies (Mt. 5.38–42). Of course, this objection is illegitimate. There is a notable lack of loving one’s enemies in the Apocalypse, and in any case, there is no reason to constrain the interpretation of John by one theme in the Gospels. Nonetheless, Smalley is at least explicit in his theological objection. It is probably the case that this is a concern driving many other readings. 154.  Beckwith, Apocalypse, 714; Swete, Apocalypse, 229, Caird, Revelation, 224, Smalley, Revelation, 448; Yarbro Collins, Crisis, 117. 155.  L. Goppelt, TDNT 6:152 156.  Blount, Revelation, 330. 157.  Peder Borgen, ‘Two Philonic Prayers and their Contexts: An Analysis of who is the Heir of Divine Things (Her.) 24–29 and Against Flaccus (Flac.) 170–175’, NTS 45 (1999): 291–309 (305); Harrington, Revelation, 177; Ford, Revelation, 297–98. 158.  Blount, Revelation, 329–30; Pattemore, People of God, 68–116. 159.  Koester (Revelation, 700) cites eschatological texts in which the righteous will slay the wicked (1QM 1.1; 1 En. 90.19; 91.12; 95.3; 96.1; 98.12; Apoc. Ab. 29.19), yet still judges this interpretation here not to fit with Revelation, ‘in which agents of evil destroy each other’. In a reasonably close parallel of vengeance carried out by God’s people, although in the context of the Maccabean revolt, Mattathias in

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

233

martyrs do share in judgement, and it is they who are addressed in Rev. 18.6–7. Revelation 18.4–7 contains a string of second person plural aorist infinitives: ἐξέλθατε (Rev. 18.4); ἀπόδοτε, διπλώσατε, κεράσατε (18.6); δότε (18.7). That ἐξέλθατε is addressed to Christians is uncontroversial (18.4).160 John has worked hard throughout the Apocalypse to demonstrate why Christians must separate from Babylon. John does not signal in any way a change of addressee from this command to flee and the other commands to execute judgement.161 While it is clear that God is the ultimate arbiter of judgement (Rev. 18.8), as we have seen, judgement can be carried out by or shared with other agents. Aune has noted John’s dependence on Jeremiah 50–51 (Jer. 27–28LXX) in his depiction of Babylon’s judgement, where God’s destruction of Babylon is carried out by the king of the Medes (Jer. 51.11). Babylon falls (51.8/28.8LXX),162 the people are instructed to flee from Babylon (50.8/27.8LXX; 51.6/28.6LXX), and not to partake of her guilt (51.6). Babylon is a golden cup from which the nations of the earth drank and became mad (51.8); her sins reach up to heaven (51.9), and God will execute judgement and vindicate the people (51.10). Furthermore, a command is issued to ‘Repay her according to her deeds; just as she has done, do to her’ (50.29b/27.29bLXX), which parallels the command in Rev. 18.6a: ἀνταπόδοτε αὐτῇ κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῆς κατὰ πάντα ὅσα ἐποίησεν ποιήσατε. (Jer. 27.29LXX) ἀπόδοτε αὐτῇ ὡς καὶ αὐτὴ ἀπέδωκεν καὶ διπλώσατε τὰ διπλᾶ κατὰ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῆς. (Rev. 18.6a) his dying speech urges his sons to ‘repay the Gentiles in full (ἀνταπόδοτε ἀνταπόδομα τοῖς ἔθνεσιν), and obey the commands of the Law’ (1 Macc. 2.68). I have previously argued that Christians spiritualised Jewish Holy War ideology in constructing their theologies of martyrdom (Middleton, Radical Martyrdom, 128–34). 160.  Although Harrington (Revelation, 178) makes the unlikely suggestion this is an evangelistic opportunity for the wicked to repent. 161.  Some manuscripts render Rev. 18.6 ἀπόδοτε αὐτῇ ὡς καὶ αὐτὴ ἀπέδωκεν ὑμῖν, which would leave no doubt that Christians are being addressed. The variation is found in only in a handful of witnesses (051; Andr; itgig; vgclem), but not in more important traditions (‫ א‬A C). Nonetheless, it demonstrates that some copyists had no difficulty in attributing the vengeance to the Christians. Curiously, Koester (Revelation, 696) translates the verse (addressed to an avenging agent other than Christians), ‘Give her what she herself has given to others’ (my emphasis). It is not obvious what the basis is for this reading. 162.  However, Isa. 21.9 is a much closer parallel to Rev. 18.2.

234

The Violence of the Lamb

While this parallel with Jeremiah has been deployed to argue that John has human political agents in mind, such as the kings of the earth, they have already played their role in the Babylon’s judgement (Rev. 17.12, 17). If John really did have addresses other than God’s people in mind, it is not clear why they do not come into narrative view as the king of the Medes does in Jeremiah.163 In conclusion, there is no grammatical, or internal theological impediment to interpreting the text as meaning anything other than what it says. Christians, or more specifically martyrs, are called to join God’s assault on the Whore of Babylon. When Babylon is humiliated before them and for them, the martyrs ‘do not watch from a safe distance’.164 The martyrs are commanded to render to Babylon as she has done, to repay her for her deeds, and to mix a double draught in the cup she herself has mixed, bringing down on her torment and mourning (Rev. 18.6–7a). From their vantage point on the judgement thrones that they share with God and the Lamb, the martyrs do precisely that. In the Apocalypse, Jesus is the faithful witness (1.5), the Lamb who was slain (5.6), and who conquered through his death. As conqueror, he rules the nations with a rod of iron and shares the judgement seat of God from where he will judge the wicked. One of the ways John portrays this divine judgement is the torments brought about by the seals, which Christ is uniquely able to open because of his martyrdom. Opening the seals also leads to the violent judgement heralded by the trumpets and bowls. John also depicts the Lamb’s assault on evil through his Day of Wrath, and in a series of battles, in which the Lamb will rout the Beast’s forces, leaving Beast-worshippers lying slain on the battlefield for the birds. John calls all faithful witnesses to disassociate themselves from Babylon, and to make themselves enemies of the Beast and Rome. This will lead to their own martyrdom, but through their death, following the Lamb wherever he goes, they too will be vindicated. They will be given power over the nations; they will share the judgement 163.  Susan M. Elliott, ‘Who Is Addressed in Revelation 18:6-7?’, BR 40 (1995): 98–113 (105). Yarbro Collins (Crisis, 117) suggests that both speaker and addressees shift unannounced several times during the course of ch. 18. According to Yarbro Collins, a heavenly agent of divine punishment finds support in a possible parallel with Ezek. 9.1–5, where divine executioners are called to exercise judgement on Jerusalem where abominations had been practised. However, not only is there no explicit parallel to the text of Revelation, the agents in Ezekiel are identified. Even if, as some commentators believe, ch. 18 was largely based on a pre-existing text, ‘John’s hand is discernible throughout’ (Aune, Revelation, 3:984). 164.  Peter S. Perry, ‘Critiquing Excess of Empire: A Synkrisis of John of Patmos and Dio of Prisa’, JSNT 29 (2007): 473–96 (490).

5. A Theology of Martyrdom in the Book of Revelation

235

seat of Christ. When they cry out under the oppressive force of Rome, and ask when God will execute vengeance for them, John tells them that when God crushes their tormentors, they will have a ringside seat. Moreover, as the army of the Lamb, who is King of kings and Lord or lords, they will take part in and win that battle. Then, seated on their own thrones, they will also participate in his judgement on Rome. The martyrs, like the Lamb, are agents of divine wrath.

C on cl u s i on

The Apocalypse offers its readers a clear choice. John is obviously unhappy with the conduct of some of the recipients of his letter; there is an air of happy compromise with the Whore of Babylon. There is a repeated clarion call for Christians to distance themselves from her polluting influence, culminating in the call to ‘come out of her’, to avoid taking part in her sins and sharing in her plagues (Rev. 18.4); this must be a real possibility for John. The heavenly figures repeatedly stress that judgement will take place according to one’s deeds (2.23; 18.6; 20.12, 13; 22.12; cf. 2.2, 19; 3.1, 8, 15), and that judgement is coming soon (1.3; 2.16; 3.11; 22.6, 7, 12, 20). Often, the call to separate is accompanied with a call for endurance: loyalty to the Lamb will result in death (13.10). However, by juxtaposing the activity of the Beast and his armies (Rev. 13) with the Lamb and his armies (Rev. 14), John also draws attention to the respective fate of their followers. Both groups are sealed by their masters (7.3; 13.16), and both groups will suffer. As we have seen, those who are sealed by the Lamb, who refuse to worship the Beast and take his mark, will be slain (13.7, 10, 15). However, they will be glorified, and receive power to judge and repay their slayers. Those who are not sealed by God will be tortured by scorpions (9.4–6), and those who bear the mark of the Beast will drink unmixed a draught of God’s wrath and be tormented day and night in the presence of the Lamb (14.9–11): they will be plagued by sores (16.2); the birds will gorge on their flesh (19.17–18); and they will ultimately face the second death and the lake of fire (20.14– 15). Readers of the Apocalypse are called to choose which side they are on. When the torments of those with the mark of the Beast are recounted, a call for endurance is issued to the saints who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus (14.12), with a promise that those who die in the Lord are blessed (14.13). It is a time for decision, but John makes clear that the consequences of apostasy and accommodation are grave. Bredin argues that the Apocalypse ‘critiques the ideal of power and violence. John hopes for a break in the spiral of violence and that aggression will cease and the peaceful Kingdom of God be established.’1 1.  Bredin, Jesus, 154.



Conclusion

237

This is correct to the extent that the spiral of violence will be broken; but it will be broken not through suffering, weakness, or non-violence, nor with ‘love and compassion’.2 The spiral will be broken when the might of Rome crumbles when faced with the true might of God, the Lamb, and his saints in a day of wrath and judgement. As Pippin rightly points out, ‘there is no democracy in the Apocalypse; God is as much a power of domination as any other power’.3 Does this mean the Apocalypse is an unethical book? For some, it may. Barr writes: ‘If God triumphs over evil only because God has more power than evil, then power—not love or goodness or truth—is the ultimate value of the universe’.4 It is hard to escape the conclusion that, at least in terms of how God triumphs, this is indeed the vision offered by John’s Apocalypse. As powerful as the armies of Rome may seem, or as futile as any resistance to Roman governance may appear, the true power behind the universe is not the emperor, but God. His principal agent is the Lamb. The Lamb was slain, but his death had cosmic effects. Through his death, he took his own place in heaven, and he will crush with lethal force the most powerful enemy imaginable; the combination of human and cosmic forces of evil; Rome and the Beast. John’s violence is, of course, fantasy. But it is none the less coercive. John is not interested in the people of the earth; he is unconcerned that earth-dwellers will end their days writhing in agony in a lake of fire which will burn forever. John uses this fantasy violence to threaten his readers. If they do not repent, then the torments in his book will fall on them. As Christ is coming soon to judge their deeds, and given he is clearly capable of merciless judgement on former believers, such as Balaam and Jezebel, those who are engaging in fornication with the Whore must repent quickly. Martyrdom plays a crucial role in the Apocalypse. Although it can hardly be maintained that Revelation was written against a backdrop of sustained empire-wide persecution, I have argued that it would not have been an unreasonable expectation that Christians could fall foul of local initiatives that may lead to a rudimentary sacrifice test before ‘an image of the Beast’. John’s text interprets that confrontation as a crisis in which martyrdom is the only alternative to Beast-worship. Although this enthusiastic promotion of martyrdom has been downplayed by commentators (incorrectly in my view), those who wish to promote non-violent or at least less violent readings of the Apocalypse have pointed to the fact that weakness and non-violent resistance is what ultimately defeats the Beast. 2.  Bredin, Jesus, 126. 3.  Pippin, Apocalyptic Bodies, xi. 4.  Barr, ‘Lamb’, 211.

238

The Violence of the Lamb

238

They are correct that martyrdom is key to the Christians’ victory, but they fail to take account of the whole sequence of the experiences John envisages for faithful martyrs. Faithful witnesses follow the model of the Lamb. Again, commentators have pointed to the slaughtered Lamb as the lens through which the Christology of the Apocalypse should be refracted. Again, this is to fail to see the whole picture. There is no incongruity between the Lion of Judah and the slaughtered Lamb. The Lamb is the one who died, rose again, and is glorified, was raised to the judgement throne of God, and given the power to rule the nations with an iron rod, and inflict or oversee judgement. The Lamb wages war, and appears in various guises: the exalted Son of Man, the rider on the horse who will slaughter his enemies, and even as a Lamb, the one from whom all people cower in his day of wrath. The Lamb is the template, the proto-martyr, for all faithful Christians. But martyrdom in the Apocalypse is a conquering transformation from being a member of a small maligned group who feel threatened in the Roman empire to becoming a warrior in the Lamb’s army, who will triumph over and judge even the might of Rome. There is little sense in which martyrs in the Apocalypse offer a model of non-violent resistance. While some readers of Revelation may be disappointed, it seems to me that we do John of Patmos a great disservice by imagining his Apocalypse, penned at the end of the first century from a position of insecurity in the Roman empire, must somehow transcend all time and space to offer twenty-first-century readers a well-developed model for contemporary ethical thought and behaviour, or a vision of a perfectly just world. This is to expect too much. Those who look to the Apocalypse to find a model of non-violent resistance as a counterpoint to violence in today’s world, will find it neither in the slain Lamb nor the slaughtered martyrs.

B i b l i og r a p h y

Adams, Edward. The Stars Will Fall from Heaven: Cosmic Catastrophe and the World’s End in the New Testament and Its World (LNTS, 347; London: T&T Clark International, 2007). Allen, Garrick V. ‘Reusing Scripture in the Book of Revelation: Techniques of Reuse and Habits of Reading’. Pages 1–17 in Garrick V. Allen, Ian Paul, and Simon P. Woodman (eds.), The Book of Revelation: Currents in British Scholarship on the Apocalypse (WUNT, II/411; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015). Allo, E. Bernard. Saint Jean, L’Apocalypse (Paris: Lecoffre, 1921). Amundsen, Darrell W. ‘Did the Early Christians Lust After Death? A New Wrinkle in the Doctor Assisted Suicide Debate’. Pages 285–95 in T. J. Denny and G. P Stewart (eds.), Suicide: A Christian Response: Crucial Considerations for Choosing Life (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1998). Aune, David E. Revelation (WBC, 52A–C; 3 vols.; Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1997–98). ———. ‘The Prophetic Circle of John of Patmos and the Exegesis of Revelation 22:16’, JSNT 37 (1989): 103–16. ———. ‘The Social Matrix of the Apocalypse of John’, BR 26 (1981): 18–29. Barclay, John M. G. ‘Conflict in Thessalonica’, CBQ 55 (1993): 512–30. Barker, Margaret. The Revelation of Jesus Christ (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 2000). Barnes, Timothy D. ‘Legislation Against the Christians’, JRS 58 (1968): 32–50. Barr, David L. ‘The Lamb Who Looks Like a Dragon? Characterizing Jesus in John’s Apocalypse’. Pages 205–20 in David L. Barr (ed.), The Reality of the Apocalypse: Rhetoric and Politics in the Book of Revelation (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006). ———. ‘Doing Violence: Moral Issues in Reading John’s Apocalypse’. Pages 97–108 in David L. Barr (ed.), Reading the Book of Revelation: A Resource for Students (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003). ———. ‘Waiting for the End that Never Comes: The Narrative Logic of John’s Story’. Pages 101–112 in Steve Moyise (ed.), Studies in the Book of Revelation (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 2001). ———. Tales of the End: A Narrative Commentary on the Book of Revelation (Santa Rosa: Polebridge, 1998). ———. ‘The Apocalypse as a Symbolic Transformation of the World: A Literary Analysis’, Int 38 (1984): 39–50. Barrett, Charles K. The Gospel According to Saint John (London: SCM, 1965). Bauckham, Richard. ‘Judgement in the Book of Revelation’. Pages 55–79 in Garrick V. Allen, Ian Paul, and Simon P. Woodman (eds.), The Book of Revelation: Currents in British Scholarship on the Apocalypse (WUNT, II/411; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015).

240 Bibliography ———. The Climax of Prophecy: Studies in the Book of Revelation (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1993). ———. The Theology of the Book of Revelation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993). Beale, Gregory K. The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999). Beare, Frank W. The First Epistle of Peter: The Greek Text with Introduction and Notes (Oxford: Blackwell, 1947). Beasley-Murray, George R. Revelation (NCBC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974). Beckwith, Isbon T. The Apocalypse of St John: Studies in Introduction with a Critical and Exegetical Commentary (New York: Macmillan, 1919). Bell, A. A. ‘The Date of John’s Apocalypse: The Evidence of Some Roman Historians Reconsidered’, NTS 25 (1979): 93–102. Benko, Stephen. ‘Pagan Criticism of Christainity During the First Two Centuries AD’, ANRW II.23.2 (1980): 1055–118. Best, Ernest. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Ephesians (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1998). ———. Following Jesus: Discipleship in the Gospel of Mark (JSNTSup, 4; Sheffield: University of Sheffield, 1981). Betz, Hans D. ‘On the Problem of the Relgio-Historical Understanding of Apocalypticism’, Journal for Theology and the Church 6 (1969): 134–56. Bloom, Harold. The Revelation of St John the Divine (London: Chelsea House, 1988). Blount, Brian K. Revelation: A Commentary (NTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2009). ———. Can I Get a Witness? Reading Revelation Through African American Culture (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2005). Boesack, Alan A. Comfort and Protest: The Apocalypse from a South African Perspective (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1997). Bogaert, Pierre-Maurice. ‘Les apocalypses contemporains de Baruch, d’Esdras et de Jean’. Pages 77–104 in Jean Lambrecht (ed.), L’Apocalyptique johannique et l’Apocalyptique dans de Nouveau Testament (BETL, 53; Gembloux: Leuven University Press, 1980). Borgen, Peder. ‘Two Philonic Prayers and Their Contexts: An Analysis of Who Is the Heir of Divine Things (Her.) 24–29 and Against Flaccus (Flac.) 170–175’, NTS 45 (1999): 291–309. Boring, M. Eugene. Mark: A Commentary (NTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2006). ———. ‘Narrative Christology in the Apocalypse’, CBQ 54 (1992): 702–23. ———. Revelation (Interpretation; Louisville: John Knox, 1989). Bornkamm, Günther. Jesus of Nazareth (trans. Irene and Fraser McLuskey with James M. Robinson; London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1960; orig. 1957). Boxall, Ian. ‘The Mighty Angel with the Little Scroll: British Perspective on the Reception History of Revelation 10’. Pages 245–63 in Garrick V. Allen, Ian Paul, and Simon P. Woodman (eds.), The Book of Revelation: Currents in British Scholarship on the Apocalypse (WUNT, II/411; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015). ———. Patmos in the Reception History of the Apocalypse (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013). ———. The Revelation of Saint John (BNTC; London: A. & C. Black, 2006). Boyarin, Daniel. Dying for God: Martyrdom and the Making of Christianity and Judaism (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1999).

Bibliography

241

Brawley, Robert L. Luke–Acts and the Jews: Conflict, Apology, and Conciliation (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987). Bredin, Mark. Jesus, A Revolutionary of Peace: A Nonviolent Christology in the Book of Revelation (Paternoster Biblical Monographs; Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2003). Brent, Allen. The Imperial Cult and the Development of Church Order: Concepts and Images of Authority in Paganism and Early Christianity Before the Age of Cyprian (Leiden: Brill, 1999). Brown, Raymond E. The Epistles of John (AB, 30; New York: Doubleday, 1982). ———. The Gospel According to John (AB, 29–29A; 2 vols.; New York: Doubleday, 1966, 1970). Brown, Peter. The Cult of the Saints: Its Rise and Function in Latin Christianity (London: SCM, 1981). Brox, Norbert. Zeuge und Märtyrer: Untersuchungen zur früchristlichen ZeugnisTerminologie (Studien zum Alten und Neuen Testament, 5; Munich: Kösel-Verlag, 1961). Bruce, Frederick F. The Epistle to the Hebrews (New London Commentaries; London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1965). ———. The Acts of The Apostles (NLC; London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1954). Buck, P. Lorraine. ‘Voluntary Martyrdom Revisited’, JTS ns 63 (2012): 125–35. Buschmann, Gerd. Das Martyrium des Polykarp (KAV; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998). Butterweck, C. ‘Martyriumssucht’. Pages in der alten Kirche? Studien zur Darstellung und Deutung früchristlicher Martyrien (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1995). Caird, George B. The Revelation of Saint John (BNTC; London: A. & C. Black, 1966). Campbell, W. Gordon. ‘Facing Fire and Fury: One Reading of Revelation’s Violence in the Context of Recent Interpretation’. Pages 147–73 in Garrick V. Allen, Ian Paul, and Simon P. Woodman (eds.), The Book of Revelation: Currents in British Scholarship on the Apocalypse (WUNT, II/411; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015). ———. Revelation: A Thematic Approach (Cambridge: James Clarke, 2012). Carey, Greg. ‘Early Christian Apocalyptic Rhetoric’. Pages 218–34 in John J. Collins (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Apocalyptic Literature (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014). ———. Elusive Apocalypse: Reading Authority in the Revelation to John (Studies in American Biblical Hermeneutics; Macon: Mercer University Press, 2003). ———. ‘The Apocalypse and Its Ambiguous Ethos’. Pages 163–80 in Steven Moyise (ed.), Studies in the Book of Revelation (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 2001). Carrell, Peter R. Jesus and the Angels: Angelology and the Christology of the Apocalypse of John (SNTSMS; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997). Carroll, Robert P. ‘Canonical Criticism: A Recent Trend in Biblical Studies?’, ET 92 (1981): 73–78. Casey, Maurice. The Solution to The ‘Son of Man’ Problem (LNTS, 343; London: T&T Clark International, 2007). Castelli, Elizabeth A. Martyrdom and Memory: Early Christian Culture Making (New York: Columbia University Press, 2004). Charles, Robert H. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St John (ICC; 2 vols.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1920). Childs, Brevard S. The New Testament as Canon: An Introduction (London: SCM, 1988). ———. ‘Response to Reviewers of Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture’, JSOT 16 (1980): 52–60.

242 Bibliography ———. Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979). Cobb, L. Stephanie. Dying to be Men Gender and Language in Early Christian Martyr Texts (New York: Columbia University Press, 2008). Collins, Raymond F. 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus: A Commentary (NTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002). Collins, John J. A Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Heremeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993). Cranfield, Charles E. B. Romans (ICC; 2 vols.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1975, 1979). Crossan, John Dominic. The Birth of Christianity: Discovering What Happened in the Years Immediately After the Execution of Jesus (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1998). ———. The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1991). Davies, W. D., and Dale C. Allison. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to Saint Matthew (ICC; 3 vols.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1988, 1991, 1997). Davis, R. Dean. The Heavenly Court of Judgment of Revelation 4–5 (Lanham: University of America Press, 1992). de Jonge, Henk J. ‘The Apocalypse of John and the Imperial Cult’. Pages 127–42 in H. F. H. Horstmanshoff, H. W. Signot, F. T. van Straten, and J. H. M. Strubbe (eds.), Kykeon: Studies in Honour of H. S. Versnel (Leiden: Brill, 2002). de Ste. Croix, Geoffrey E. M. ‘Why Were the Early Christians Persecuted?—A Rejoinder’, Past and Present 27 (1964): 28–33. ———. ‘Why Were the Early Christians Persecuted?’, Past and Present 26 (1963), 5–23. de Villiers, Pieter G. R. ‘Unmasking and Challenging Evil: Exegetical Perspectives on Violence in Revelation 18’. Pages 200–225 in Pieter G. R. de Villiers and Jan Willem van Henten (eds.), Coping with Violence in the New Testament (Leiden: Brill, 2012). Decock, Paul. ‘Images of War and Creation: Of Violence and Non-Violence in the Revelation of John’. Pages 185–200 in Pieter G. R. de Villiers and Jan Willem van Henten (eds.), Coping with Violence in the New Testament (Leiden: Brill, 2012). Dehandschutter, Boudewijn. ‘The Meaning of Witness in the Apocalypse’. Pages 233–38 in Jean Lambrecht (ed.), L’Apocalyptique johannique et l’Apocalyptique dans de Nouveau Testament (BETL, 53; Gembloux: Leuven University Press, 1980). Delehaye, Hippolyte. Les Origines de culte des martyrs (Brussels: Société des Bollandistes, 1933). deSilva, David A. Seeing Things John’s Way: The Rhetoric of the Book of Revelation (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2009). ———. ‘The Strategic Arousal of Emotions in the Apocalypse of John: A RhetoricalCritical Investigation of the Oracles to the Seven Churches’, NTS 54 (2008): 90–114. Dibelius, Martin, and Hans Conzelmann. A Commentary on The Pastoral Epistles (trans. Philip Buttolph and Adela Yarbro; Hermenia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1972). Dixon, Sarah Underwood. ‘ “The Testimony of Jesus” in Light of Internal Self-References in the Books of Daniel and 1 Enoch’. Pages 81–93 in Garrick V. Allen, Ian Paul, and Simon P. Woodman (eds.), The Book of Revelation: Currents in British Scholarship on the Apocalypse (WUNT, II/411; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015). Dodd, Charles H. Apostolic Preaching and its Developments (London: Harper & Row, 1964). ———. The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1958).

Bibliography

243

Donfried, Karl P. ‘The Cults of Thessalonica and the Thessalonian Correspondence’, NTS 31 (1985): 336–56. Downing, F. Gerald. ‘Pliny’s Prosecutions of Christians: Revelation and 1 Peter’, JSNT 34 (1988): 105–23. Downing, Jonathan. ‘The Woman Clothed in the Sun: The Reception of Revelation 12 among Female British Prophets 1780–1814’. Pages 265–280 in Garrick V. Allen, Ian Paul, and Simon P. Woodman (eds.), The Book of Revelation: Currents in British Scholarship on the Apocalypse (WUNT, II/411; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015). Draper, Jonathan A. ‘The Heavenly Feast of Tabernacles: Revelation 7.1–17’, JSNT 19 (1983): 133–47. Droge, Arthur J., and James D. Tabor. A Noble Death: Suicide and Martyrdom Among Christian and Jews in Antiquity (SanFrancisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1992). Duff, Paul B. ‘ “The Synagogue of Satan”: Crisis Mongering and the Apocalypse of John’. Pages 147–68 in David L. Barr (ed.), The Reality of the Apocalypse: Rhetoric and Politics in the Book of Revelation (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006). ———. Who Rides the Beast? Prophetic Rivalry and the Rhetoric of Crisis in the Churches of the Apocalypse (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001). Edwards, M. J. ‘Martyrdom and the First Epistle of John’, NovT 31 (1989): 164–71. Elliott, Susan M. ‘Who Is Addressed in Revelation 18:6–7?’, BR 40 (1995): 98–113. Farmer, Ronald L. ‘Undercurrents and Paradoxes: The Apocalypse to John in Process Hermeneutic’. Pages 109–18 in David L. Barr (ed.), Reading the Book of Revelation: A Resource for Students (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 2003). Fee, Gordon D. ‘Eidōlothuta Once Again: An Interpretation of 1 Corinthians 8–10’, Bib 61 (1980): 173–97. Ferguson, Everett. ‘Early Christian Martyrdom and Civil Disobedience’, JECS 1 (1993): 73–83. Feuillet, A. ‘Les martyrs de l’humanité et l’Agneau égorgé: une interpretation nouvelle de la prière des égorgés en Ap 6,9–11’, NTR 99 (1977): 189–207. Finnamore, Stephen. God, Order, and Chaos: René Girard and the Apocalypse (Paternoster Biblical Monographs; Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2009). Fletcher, Michelle. ‘Flesh for Franken-Whore: Reading Babylon’s Body in Revelation 17’. Pages 144–64 in Joan T. Taylor (ed.), The Body in Biblical, Christian and Jewish Texts (London: T&T Clark International, 2014). Ford, Josephine M. Revelation (AB, 38; Garden City: Doubleday, 1975). Frankfurter, David. ‘The Legacy of Sectarian Rage: Vengeance Fantasies in the New Testament’. Pages 114–28 in David A. Bernat and Jonathan Klawans (eds.), Religion and Violence: The Biblical Heritage (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2007). Fredrickson, David E. ‘Paul, Hardships, and Suffering’. Pages 2:1–25 in J. Paul Sampley (ed.), Paul in the Greco-Roman World: A Handbook (2nd ed.; 2 vols.; London: T&T Clark International, 2016). Frend, William H. C. The Donatist Church: A Movement of Protest in Roman North Africa (Oxford: Clarendon, 1952). Friesen, Steven J. Imperial Cults and the Apocalypse of John: Reading Revelation in the Ruins (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001). Glancy, Jennifer A., and Stephen D. Moore. ‘How Typical a Roman Prostitute Is Revelation’s “Great Whore”?’, JBL 130 (2011): 551–69. Gunkel, Hermann. Zum religionsgeschichtlichen Verständnis des Neuen Testaments (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1903).

244 Bibliography Guthrie, David. ‘The Lamb in the Structure of the Book of Revelation’, Vox Evangelica 12 (1987): 64–71. Guthrie, Donald. The Pastoral Epistles (2nd ed.; TNTC; Leicester: IVP, 1990). Haenchen, Ernst. ‘Judentum und Christentum in der Apostelgeschichte’, ZNW 54 (1963): 155–89. Hanson, Anthony T. The Wrath of the Lamb (London: SCM, 1957). Harker, Andrew. ‘Prophetically Called Sodom and Egypt: The Affective Power of Revelation 11.1–13’. Pages 19–39 in Garrick V. Allen, Ian Paul, and Simon P. Woodman (eds.), The Book of Revelation: Currents in British Scholarship on the Apocalypse (WUNT, II/411; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015). Harrington, Wilfred J. Revelation (Sacra Pagina; Minnesota: Liturgical Press, 1993). Harris, Dana M. ‘Understanding Images of Violence in the Book of Revelation’. Pages 148–64 in Markus Zehnder and Hallvard Hagelia (eds.), Encountering Violence in the Bible (The Bible in the Modern World, 55; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2013). Hartog, Paul. Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians and the Martyrdom of Polycarp: Introduction, Text and Commentary (Oxford Apostolic Fathers; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013). Hawthorne, Gerald F. Philippians (WBC, 43; Waco: Word, 1987). Hays, Richard B. The Moral Vision of the New Testament (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1997). Heffernan, Thomas J. The Passion of Perpetua and Felicity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012). Heil, John P. ‘The Fifth Seal (Rev 6,9-11) as a Key to the Book of Revelation’, Bib 74 (1993): 220–43. Hellholm, David. ‘The Problem of Apocalyptic Genre and the Apocalypse of John’, Semeia 35 (1986): 13–64. Hemer, Colin J. The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia in Their Local Setting (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1986). Herion, Gary A. ‘Wrath of God: Old Testament’, ABD 6:989–96. Hill, David. ‘Prophecy and Prophets in the Revelation of St. John’, NTS 18 (1972): 401–18. Holmes, Michael W. The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations (3rd ed.; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007; orig. 1992). Holtz, Traugott. Die Christologie der Apokalypse des Johannes (Berlin: Akedemie-Verlag, 1971). Hopkins, Keith. ‘Christian Number and its Implications’, JECS 6 (1998): 185–226. Horrell, David G. ‘The Label Χριστιανός: 1 Peter 4:16 and the Formation of Christian Identity’, JBL 126 (2007): 361–81. Houlden, James L. Pastoral Epistles: I and II Timothy, Titus (NTC; London: SCM, 1976). Hurtado, Larry W. ‘Jesus’ Death as paradigmatic in the New Testament’, SJT 57 (2004): 413–33. ———. Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003). ———. ‘Pre-70 CE Jewish Opposition to Christ-Devotion’, JTS ns 50 (1999): 35–58. ———. ‘Revelation 4–5 in the Light of Jewish Apocalyptic Analogies’, JSNT 25 (1985): 105–24. Hyldahl, Jesper. ‘Gnostic Critique of Martyrdom’. Pages 119–38 in Jakob Engberg, Uffe H. Erikson, and Anders K. Petersen (eds.), Contextualising Early Christian Martyrdom (Early Christianity in the Context of Antiquity; New York: Lang, 2011).

Bibliography

245

Hylen, Susan. ‘Metaphor Matters: Violence and Ethics in Revelation’, CBQ 23 (2011): 777–96. Johns, Loren L. ‘Conceiving Violence: The Apocalypse of John and the left Behind Series’, Direction 34 (2005): 194–214. ———. The Lamb Christology of the Apocalypse of John (WUNT, II/167; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003). Johnson, Luke T. Hebrews: A Commentary (NTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2006). Jones, Brian W. The Emperor Domitian (London/New York: Routledge, 1992). Jones, Donald L. ‘Roman Imperial Cult’, ABD 5:806–9. Jung, Carl H. Answer to Job (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984; orig. 1959). Käsemann, Ernst. Commentary on Romans (trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980; orig. 1973). ———. The Testament of Jesus: A Study of the Gospel of John in the Light of Chapter 17 (trans. Gerhard Krodel; London: SCM, 1968). Kelber, Werner H. Mark’s Story of Jesus (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979). Kelhoffer, James A. Conceptions of ‘Gospel’ and Legitimacy in Early Christianity (WUNT, 324; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014). Keller, Catherine. Apocalypse Then and Now: A Feminist Guide to the End of the World (Boston: Beacon, 1996). Kelly, John N. D. A Commentary on The Pastoral Epistles: I & II Timothy, Titus (BNTC; London: A. & C. Black, 1963). Keresztes, Paul. Imperial Rome and the Christians: From Herod the Great to about 200 A.D. (Lanham: University Press of America, 1989). Kiddle, Martin. Revelation of Saint John (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1940). King, Karen L. ‘Martyrdom and its Discontents in the Tchacos Codex’. Pages 23–42 in April D. DeConick (ed.), Codex Judas Papers: Proceedings of the International Congress on the Tchacos Codex Held at Rice University, Houston Texas, March 13–16, 2008 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2009). Klassen, William. ‘Vengeance in the Apocalypse of John’, CBQ 28 (1966): 300–311. Klawiter, Frederick C. ‘The Role of Martyrdom and Persecution in Developing the Priestly Authority of Women in Early Christianity: A Case Study of Montanism’, Church History 49 (1980): 251–61. Koch, Klaus. ‘Das Lamm, das Agypten vernichtet: Ein Fragment aus Jannes und Jambres und sein Geschichtlicher Hintergrund’, ZNW 57 (1966): 79–93. Koester, Craig R. Revelation: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AYBC, 38A; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2014). Koskenniemi, Erkki, Kirsi Nisula and Jorma Toppari. ‘Wine Mixed with Myrrh (Mark 15.23) and Crurifragium (John 19.31–32): Two Details of the Passion Narratives’, JSNT 27 (2005): 379–91. Kovaks, Judith, and Christopher Rowland. Revelation: The Apocalypse of Jesus Christ (BBC; Oxford: Blackwell, 2004). Kraft, Heinrich. Die Offenbarung des Johannes (HNT, 16a; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1974). Krauss, F. B. An Interpretation of the Omens, Portents, and Prodigies Recorded by Livy, Tacitus, and Suetonius (Philadelphia: Philadelphia University Press, 1930). Kraybill, J. Nelson. Imperial Cult and Commerce in John’s Apocalypse (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1996).

246 Bibliography Kruger, Michael J. ‘The Reception of the Book of Revelation in the Early Church’. Pages 159–74 in Thomas J. Kraus and Michael Sommer (eds.), Book of Seven Seals: The Peculiarity of Revelation, Its Manuscripts, Attestation, and Transmission (WUNT, 363; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016). Ladd, George E. A Commentary on the Revelation of John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972). Lambrecht, Jean. ‘ “Synagogues of Satan” (Rev 2.9 and 3.9): Anti-Judaism in the Book of Revelation’. Pages 279–92 in Reimund Bieringer, Didier Pollefeyt, and Frederique Vandecasteele-Vanneuville (eds.), Anti-Judaism and the Fourth Gospel (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001). Lampe, Geoffrey W. H. ‘St Peter’s Denial’, BJRL 55 (1973): 346–68. Lane, William L. Hebrews 1–8 (WBC, 47A; Waco: Word, 1991). Last, Hugh. ‘The Study of the Persecutions’, JRS 27 (1937): 80–92. Lawrence, D. H. Apocalypse and the Writings on Revelation (The Cambridge Edition of the Works of D. H. Lawrence; ed. Mara Kalnins; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002; orig. 1931). Laws, Sophie. In the Light of the Lamb: Imagery, Parody, and Theology in the Apocalypse of John (Wilmington: Glazier, 1988). Lee, Michelle V. ‘A Call to Martyrdom: Function as Method and Message in Revelation’, NovT 40 (1998): 164–94. Lieu, Judith. ‘ “I am a Christian”: Martyrdom and the Beginning of “Christian Identity”?’. Pages 211–31 in Neither Jew Nor Greek? Constructing Early Christianity (Studies of the New Testament and Its World; London: T&T Clark International, 2002). Lightfoot, Joseph B. Saint Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon: A Revised Text with Introductions, Notes, and Dissertations (London: Macmillan, 1892). ———. The Apostolic Fathers: Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp: Revised Tests with Introduction, Notes, Dissertations, and Translations (London: Macmillan, 1890). Lim, Kar Yong. ‘The Sufferings of Christ are Abundant in Us’: A Narrative Dynamics Investigation of Paul’s Sufferings in 2 Corinthians (LNTS, 399; London: T&T Clark International, 2009). Lincoln, Andrew T. Hebrews: A Guide (London: T&T Clark International, 2006). Lindars, Barnabas. The Theology of the Letter to the Hebrews (NTT; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991). ———. The Gospel of John (NCBC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972). Lohmeyer, Ernst. Die Offenbarung des Johannes (HNT, 16; Tübingen: Mohr, 1970). Lohse, Eduard. A Commentary on the Epistles to the Colossians and Philemon (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971). Longenecker, Richard N. (ed.). Patterns of Discipleship in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996). Malbon, Elizabeth S. ‘Texts and Contexts: Interpreting the Disciples in Mark’, Semeia 62 (1992): 81–102. ———. ‘Fallible Followers: Women and Men in the Gospel of Mark’, Semeia 28 (1983): 29–48. Malina, Bruce J. On the Genre and Message of Revelation: Star Visions and Sky Journeys (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995). Marcus, Joel. Mark (ABYC, 27–27A; 2 vols.; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000, 2009).

Bibliography

247

Marshall, John W. ‘Collateral Damage: Jesus and Jezebel in the Jewish War’. Pages 35–50 in Shelley Matthews and E. Leigh Gibson (eds.), Violence in the New Testament (London: T&T Clark International, 2005). Martin, Dale B. The Corinthian Body (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995). Martínez, Florentino G., and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar (eds.). The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition (2 vols.; Leiden: Brill, 1999). Matthews, Shelley. Perfect Martyr: The Stoning of Stephen and the Construction of Christian Identity (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010). Mayo, Philip L. ‘Those Who Call Themselves Jews’: The Church and Judaism in the Apocalypse of John (Princeton Theological Monograph Series; Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2006). Mazzaferri, Frederick D. The Genre of the Book of Revelation from a Source-Critical Perspective (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1989). ———. ‘Martyria Iēsou Revisited’, BT 39 (1988): 114–22. McBay, Susannah. ‘The Divine Warrior and Cosmic Catastrophe: The Impact of the Sibylline Oracles 3–5 on the Interpretation of Mark 13.24–25’. PhD diss., The University of Chester, 2017. McCarthy, Michael C. ‘Divine Wrath and Human Anger: Embarrassment Ancient and New’, TS 70 (2009): 845–74. McKelvey, R. Jack. ‘The Millennium and the Second Coming’. Pages 85–100 in Steve Moyise (ed.), Studies in the Book of Revelation (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 2001). ———. The Millennium and the Book of Revelation (Cambridge: Lutterworth, 1999). Merkel, Helmut. ‘Peter’s Curse’. Pages 66–71 in Ernst Bammel (ed.), The Trial of Jesus: Cambridge Studies in Honour of C. F. D. Moule (Studies in Biblical Theology, 2nd Series, 13; London: SCM, 1970). Michaels, J. Ramsey. Revelation (NTCS; Leicester: IVP, 1997). Middleton, Paul. ‘Were the Early Christians Really Persecuted’. In O. Lehtipuu and Michael Labahn (eds.), Models of (In)Tolerance in the Early Christian Age: Encountering Others in Early Judaism and Christianity (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, forthcoming). ———. ‘Overcoming Satan in the Acts of the Martyrs’. Pages 357–74 in Chris Keith and Loren T. Stuckenbruck (eds.), Evil in Second Temple Judaism and Early Christianity (WUNT, II/417; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2016). ———. ‘Christology, Martyrdom, and Vindication in the Gospel of Mark and the Apocalypse: Two New Testament Views’. Pages 219–37 in Chris Keith and Dieter T. Roth (eds.), Mark, Manuscripts, and Monotheism: Essays in Honour of Larry W. Hurtado (LNTS, 528; London: T&T Clark International, 2015). ———. ‘Male Virgins, Male Martyrs, Male Brides: A Reconsideration of the 144,000 who Have Not Dirtied Themselves with Women (Rev 14.4)’. Pages 193–208 in Garrick V. Allen, Ian Paul, and Simon P. Woodman (eds.), The Book of Revelation: Currents in British Scholarship on the Apocalypse (WUNT, II/411; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015). ———. ‘Noble Death or Death Cult: Pagan Criticism of Early Christian Martyrdom’. Pages 205–28 in Outi Lehtipuu and Michael Labahn (eds.), People Under Power: Early Jewish and Christian Responses to the Roman Empire (Early Christianity in the Roman World, 1; Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2015).

248 Bibliography ———. ‘ “Unlock Paradise with Your Own Blood”: Martyrdom and Salvation in Islam and Christianity’. Pages 109–20 in Hannah Bacon, Wendy Dossett, and Steve Knowles (eds.), Alternative Salvations: Engaging the Sacred and the Secular (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2015). ———. ‘Suffering and the Creation of Christian Identity in the Gospel of Mark’. Pages 173–89 in C. Baker and B. Tucker (eds.), The T&T Clark Handbook to Social Identity in the New Testament (London: T&T Clark International, 2014). ———. ‘What Is Martyrdom?’, Mortality: Promoting the Interdisciplinary Study of Death and Dying 19, no. 2 (2014): 117–33. ———. ‘Early Christian Voluntary Martyrdom: A Statement for the Defence’, JTS ns 64 (2013): 556–73. ———. ‘Enemies of the (Church) and State: Martyrdom as a Problem for Early Christianity’. Pages in Annali di Storia dell’Esegesi 29, no. 2 (2012): 161–81. ———. ‘ “Dying We Live” (2 Cor. 6.9): Discipleship and Martyrdom in Paul’. Pages 79–89 in Paul Middleton, Angus Paddison, and Karen Wenell (eds.), Paul, Grace, and Freedom: Essays in Honour of John K. Riches (London/New York: T&T Clark International, 2009). ———. Radical Martyrdom and Cosmic Conflict in Early Christianity (LNTS, 306; London: T&T Clark International, 2006). Millar, Fergus. ‘The Imperial Cult in the Persecutions’. Pages 145–75 in Willem den Boer (ed.), Le culte des souverains dans l’Empire Romain (Geneva: Vandoeuvres, 1972). Moberly, Robert B. ‘When Was Revelation Conceived?’, Bib 73 (1992): 376–93. Moltmann, Jürgen. The Crucified God: The Cross as the Foundation and Criticism of the Christian Gospel (London: SCM, 1993). Moore, Stephen D. ‘Revolting Revelations’. Pages 183–99 in Ingrid R. Kitzberger (ed.), The Personal Voice in Biblical Interpretation (London: Routledge, 1999). Morris, Leon. The Gospel According to John (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971). Morris, Kenneth R. ‘ “Pure Wheat of God” or Neurotic Deathwish? A Historical and Theological Analysis of Ignatius of Antioch’s Zeal of Martyrdom’, Fides et Historia 26 (1994): 24–41. Moses, Robert E. ‘Physical and/or Spiritual Exclusion? Ecclesial Discipline in 1 Corinthians 5’, NTS 59 (2013): 172–91. Moss, Candida R. The Myth of Persecution: How Early Christians Invented the Story of Martyrdom (San Francisco: HarperOne, 2013). ———. ‘The Discourse of Voluntary Martyrdom: Ancient and Modern’, Church History 81 (2012): 531–51. ———. The Other Christs: Imitating Jesus in Ancient Christian Ideologies of Martyrdom (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010). Mounce, Robert H. The Book of Revelation (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997). Moyise, Steve. ‘Does the Lion Lie Down with the Lamb?’ Pages 181–94 in Steve Moyise (ed.), Studies in the Book of Revelation (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 2001). Müller, Hans-Peter. ‘Die himmlische Ratsversammlung: Motivgeschichtliches zu Apc 5.1–5’, ZNW 54 (1963): 254–67. Murmelstein, B. ‘Das Lamm in Test. Jos. 19.8’, ZNW 58 (1967): 273–79. Murphy, Frederick J. Fallen Is Babylon: The Revelation to John (Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1998). Musurillo, Herbert. The Acts of the Christian Martyrs (Oxford: Clarendon, 1972).

Bibliography

249

Nanos, Mark D. ‘ “Callused”, not “Hardened”: Paul’s Revelation of Temporary Protection Until All Israel Can Be Healed’. Pages 52–73 in Kathy Ehrensperger and J. Brian Tucker (eds.), Reading Paul in Context: Explorations in Identity Formation: Essays in Honour of William S. Campbell (LNTS, 428; London: T&T Clark International, 2013). Neville, David J. ‘Faithful, True, and Violent? Christology and “Divine Vengeance” in the Revelation of John’. Pages 56–84 in Ted Grimsrud and Michael Hardin (eds.), Passionate Eschatology: The Future as Friend (Eugene: Cascade Books, 2011). Newport, Kenneth G. C. Apocalypse and Millennium: Studies in Biblical Eisegesis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). O’Neill, John C. ‘The Lamb of God in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs’, JSNT 2 (1979): 2–30. Økland, Jorunn. ‘Sex, Gender, and Ancient Greece: A Case-study in Theoretical Misfit’, Studia Theologica 57 (2003): 124–42. Olson, Daniel C. ‘ “Those Who Have Not Defiled Themselves with Women”: Revelation 14.4 and the Book of Enoch’, CBQ 59 (1997): 492–510. Osborne, Grant R. Revelation (BECNT; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002). Pagels, Elaine. The Gnostic Gospels (New York: Random House, 1979). Pattemore, Stephen. The People of God in the Apocalypse: Discourse, Structure and Exegesis (SNTSMS, 128; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004). Perham, Michael. The Communion of Saints: An Examination of the Place of the Christian Dead in the belief, Worship, and Calendars of the Church (London: SPCK, 1980). Perkins, Judith. The Suffering Self: Pain and Narrative Representation in the Early Christian Era (London: Routledge, 1994). Perry, Peter S. ‘Critiquing Excess of Empire: a Synkrisis of John of Patmos and Dio of Prisa’, JSNT 29 (2007): 473–96. Pippin, Tina. Apocalyptic Bodies: The Biblical End of the World in Text and Image (London: Routledge, 1999). ———. Death and Desire: Rhetoric of Gender in the Apocalypse of John (Philadelphia: Westminster John Knox, 1992). ———. ‘The Heroine and the Whore: Fantasy and the Female in the Apocalypse of John’, Semeia 60 (1992): 67–82. Pippin, Tina, and J. Michael Clark. ‘Revelation/Apocalypse’. Pages 753–68 in Deryn Guest, Robert E. Goss, Mona West, and Thomas Bohache (eds.), The Queer Bible Commentary (London: SCM, 2006). Radcliffe, Timothy. ‘ “The Coming of the Son of Man”, Mark’s Gospel and the Subversion of the Apocalyptic Imagination’. Pages 167–89 in Brian Davies (ed.), Language, Meaning and God: Essays in Honour of Herbert McCabe O. P. (London: Chapman, 1987). Reddish, Mitchell G. ‘Martyr Christology in the Apocalypse’, JSNT 33 (1988): 85–95. Resseguie, John L. Revelation Unsealed: A Narrative Critical Approach to John’s Apocalypse (Leiden: Brill, 1998). Rissi, Mathias. Die Hure Babylon und die Verführung der Heiligen: Eine Studie zur Apokalypse des Johannes (BWANT, 136; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1995). ———. ‘The Rider on the White Horse: A Study of Revelation 6.1–2’, Int 18 (1964): 407–18. Rist, Martin. ‘Revelation: Introduction and Exegesis’. Pages 345–613 in vol. 12 of George A. Buttrick (ed.), The Interpreter’s Bible (New York: Abingdon, 1957). Robinson, John A. T. Redating the New Testament (London: SCM, 1976).

250 Bibliography Rojas-Flores, Gonzalo. ‘The Book of Revelation and the First Years of Nero’s Reign’, Bib 85 (2004): 375–92. Roloff, Jürgen. The Revelation of John: A Continental Commentary (trans. John E. Alsup; Minnesota: Fortress, 1993). Rossing, Barbara R. The Rapture Exposed: The Message of Hope in the Book of Revelation (New York: Basic, 2001). Rowland, Christopher. ‘British Interpretation of the Apocalypse: A Historical Perspective’. Pages 225–43 in Garrick V. Allen, Ian Paul, and Simon P. Woodman (eds.), The Book of Revelation: Currents in British Scholarship on the Apocalypse (WUNT, II/411; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015). ———. The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity (New York: Crossroads, 1983). Ryan, Sean M. ‘ “The Testimony of Jesus” and “The Testimony of Enoch”: An Emic Approach to the Genre of the Apocalypse’. Pages 95–113 in Garrick V. Allen, Ian Paul, and Simon P. Woodman (eds.), The Book of Revelation: Currents in British Scholarship on the Apocalypse (WUNT, II/411; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015). Sanders, Jack T. The Jews in Luke–Acts (London: SCM, 1987). Schimanowski, Gottfried. Die himmlische Liturgie in der Apokalypse des Johannes: Die früjüdischen Tradition in Offenbarung 4–5 unter Einschluss der Hekhalotliteratur (WUNT, II/154; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002). Schüssler-Fiorenza, Elizabeth. ‘Babylon the Great: A Rhetorical-Political Reading of Revelation 17–18’. Pages 243–69 in David L. Barr (ed.), The Reality of the Apocalypse: Rhetoric and Politics in the Book of Revelation (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006). ———. The Book of Revelation: Vision of a Just World (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1993). ———. ‘The Followers of the Lamb: Visionary Rhetoric and Social-Political Situation’, Semeia 36 (1986): 123–46. ———. ‘The Quest for the Johannine School: The Apocalypse and the Fourth Gospel’, NTS 23 (1977): 402–27. Searle, Joshua T. The Scarlet Woman and the Red Hand: Evangelical Apocalyptic Belief in the Northern Ireland Troubles (Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 2014). Self, Will. Revelation (Pocket Canons; Edinburgh: Canongate, 1998). Sherwin-White, Adrian N. The Letters of Pliny: A Social and Historical Commentary (Oxford: Clarendon, 1966). ———. ‘Why Were the Early Christians Persecuted?—An Amendment’, Past and Present 27 (1964): 23–27. ———. Roman Law in the New Testament (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1963). ———. ‘The Early Persecutions and Roman Law Again’, JTS ns 3 (1952): 199–213. Siecienski, Edward A. The Papacy and the Orthodox: Sources and History of a Debate (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017). Skaggs, Rebecca, and Thomas Doyle. ‘Lion/Lamb in Revelation’, CBR 7 (2009): 362–75. ———. ‘Violence in the Apocalypse of John’, CBR 5 (2007): 220–34. Slater, Thomas B. ‘Dating the Apocalypse to John’, Bib 84 (2003): 252–58. Smalley, Stephen S. The Revelation to John: A Commentary on the Greek Text (London: SPCK, 2005). Smith, David R. ‘Hand this Man Over to Satan’: Curse, Exclusion and Salvation in 1 Corinthians 5 (LNTS, 386; London: T&T Clark International, 2008). South, James T. ‘A Critique of the “Curse/Death” Interpretation of 1 Corinthians 5.1–8’, NTS 39 (1993): 539–61.

Bibliography

251

Spitta, Friedrich. Streitfragen zur Geschichte Jesu (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1907). Stauffer, Ethelberg. Christ and the Caesars: Historical Sketches (London: SCM, 1952). Stenström, Hanna. ‘ “They Have Not Defiled Themselves with Women…”: and Christian Identity According to the Book of Revelation’. Pages 33–54 in Amy-Jill Levine (ed.), A Feminist Companion to the Apocalypse of John (London: T&T Clark International, 2009). Stone, Michael E. Fourth Ezra: A Commentary on the Fourth Book of Ezra (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990). Strauss, Mark L. The Davidic Messiah in Luke–Acts: The Promise and Its Fulfilment in Lukan Christology (JSNTSup, 110; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1995). Streett, Matthew J. Here Comes the Judge: Violent Pacifism in the Book of Revelation (LNTS, 462; London: T&T Clark International, 2012). Stuckenbruck, Loren T. Angel Veneration and Christology: A Study in Early Judaism and in the Christology of the Apocalypse of John (WUNT, II/70, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995). Stuhlmann, Rainer. Das eschatologische Maß im Neuen Testament (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983). Sweet, John P. M. Revelation (Pelican Commentaries; London: SCM, 1979). Swete, Henry B. The Apocalypse of John: A Commentary on the Greek Text (London: Macmillan, 1917). Tabernee, William. ‘To Pardon or Not To Pardon? North African Montanism and the Forgiveness of Sins’, Studia Patristica 35 (2001): 375–86. Tabor, James D., and Eugene V. Gallacher. Why Waco? Cults and the Battle for Religious Freedom in America (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995). Talbert, Charles H. The Apocalypse: A Reading of The Revelation of John (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1994). Tannehill, Robert C. ‘The Gospel of Mark as Narrative Christology’, Semeia 16 (1979): 68–76. ———. ‘The Disciples in Mark: The Function of a Narrative Role’, JR 57 (1977): 386–405. Thompson, Leonard L. The Book of Revelation: Apocalypse and Empire (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990). Thompson, Marianne M. The Humanity of Jesus in the Fourth Gospel (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 1988). Tilley, Maureen A. The Bible in Christian North Africa: The Donatist World (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1997). Tite, Philip L. ‘Voluntary Martyrdom and Gnosticism’, JECS 23 (2015): 27–54. Travis, Stephen H. ‘Wrath of God: New Testament’, ABD 6:996–98. Trites, Allison A. The New Testament Concept of Witness (SNTSMS, 31; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977). Trocmé, Étienne. The Formation of the Gospel According to Mark (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975). Tyson, Joseph B. ‘The Blindness of the Disciples in Mark’, JBL 80 (1961): 261–66. Ulfgard, Håken. Feast and Future: Revelation 7.9 – 17 and the Feast of Tabernacles (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1989). van der Horst, Pieter W. ‘Lamb’. Pages 502–4 in Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst (eds.), Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible (2nd ed.; Leiden: Brill, 1999).

252 Bibliography van Henten, Jan Willem. ‘The Concept of Martyrdom in Revelation’. Pages 587–618 in Jörg Frey, James A. Kelhoffer, and Franz Tóth (eds.), Die Johannesapokalypse: Kontexte—Konzepte—Rezeption (WUNT, 287; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2012). ———. ‘Dragon Myth and Imperial Ideology in Revelation 12–13’. Pages 181–203 in David L. Barr (ed.), The Reality of the Apocalypse: Rhetoric and Politics in the Book of Revelation (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006). van Iersel, Bastiaan M. F. ‘Failed Followers in Mark: Mark 13.12 as a Key for the Identification of the Intended Readers’, CBQ 58 (1996): 244–63. van Kooten, George H. ‘The Year of the Four Emperors and the Revelation of John: The “pro-Neronian” Emperors Otho and Vitellius, and the Images and Colossus of Nero in Rome’, JSNT 30 (2007): 205–48. van Schaik, A. P. ‘ἄλλος ἄγγελος in Apk 14’. Pages 217–28 in Jean Lambrecht (ed.), L’Apocalyptique johannique et l’Apocalyptique dans de Nouveau Testament (BETL, 53; Gembloux: Leuven University Press, 1980). Volf, Miroslav. Exclusion and Embrace: A Theological Embrace of Identity, Otherness, and Reconciliation (Nashville: Abingdon, 1996). von Hase, Karl. Geschichte Jesu: nach akademischen Vorlesungen (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1876). von Rad, Gerhard. The Message of the Prophets (London: SCM, 1968). Weeden, Theodore W. Mark: Traditions in Conflict (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971). ———. ‘The Heresy That Necessitated Mark’s Gospel’, ZNW 59 (1968): 145–58. Wilcox, Max. ‘The Denial-Sequence in Mark XIV.26–31, 66–72’, NTS 17 (1971): 426–36. Wilson, J. Christian. ‘The Problem of the Domitianic Date of Revelation’, NTS 39 (1993): 587–605. Wink, Walter. Engaging the Powers: Discernment and Resistance in a World of Domination (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992). Witherington, Ben. Revelation (NCBC; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003). ———. ‘Not So Idle Thoughts About Eidolothuton’, TynBul 44 (1993): 237–54. Witulski, Thomas. Johannesoffenbarung und Kaiser Hadrian: Studien zur Datierung der neutestamentlichen Apocalypse (FRLANT, 221; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2007). Wolf, Judith Gundry. Paul and Perseverance: Staying in and Falling Away (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1990). Woodman, Simon P. ‘Fire from Heaven: Divine Judgment in the Book of Revelation’. Pages 175–91 in Garrick V. Allan, Ian Paul, and Simon P. Woodman (eds.), The Book of Revelation: Currents on British Research on the Apocalypse (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2015). Wright, N. T. ‘Knowing Jesus: Faith and History’. Pages 15–27 in Marcus J. Borg and N. T. Wright, The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1999). Yarbro Collins, Adela. Cosmology and Eschatology in Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism (Leiden: Brill, 2000). ———. ‘Pergamum in Early Christian Literature’. Pages 164–84 in Helmut Koester (ed.), Pergamum, Citadel of the Gods: Archaeological Record, Literary Description, and Religious Development (Harvard Theological Studies, 46; Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1998). ———. ‘Vilification and Self-Definition in the Book of Revelation’, HTR 79 (1986): 308–20.

Bibliography

253

———. ‘Persecution and Vengeance in the Book of Revelation’. Pages 729–49 in David Hellholm (ed.), Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr/ Paul Siebeck, 1983). ———. Crisis and Catharsis: The Power of the Apocalypse (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1984). ———. ‘The History-Of-Religions Approach to Apocalypticism and the “Angel of the Waters” (Rev 16.4–7)’, CBQ 39 (1977): 367–81. ———. The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation (HDR, 9; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1976). Yoder, John H. The Politics of Jesus (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994).

I n d ex of R ef er e nce s Hebrew Bible/ Old Testament Genesis 1–3 5 1–2 5 1.3 99 1.6 99 1.9 99 1.11 99 1.14 99 2.8 107 2.9 221 2.15 107 2.16 107 2.18 107 2.22 107 3 5 3.1 107 3.23-34 221 4.10 192 6.1-4 160, 214 9.6 174 15.2 191 15.8 191 15.9 87 19.17 156 19.24 170 21.33 107 22 87 22.7-8 87 22.12-14 88 30.32-40 74 32.30 118 37.22 174 45.9 133 49.8-10 68 49.9-10 69

Exodus 3.14LXX 106 4.22 120 5.1 120 5.10 133 7.17-25 174 7.17-21 160 7.17 120, 133 7.20-21 162 7.22-23 163 120, 133 7.26 8.1-15 175 8.15 163 120, 133 8.16 8.19 163 8.32 163 120, 133 9.1 9.7 163 9.8-12 174 9.12 163 9.13-35 176 9.13 120, 133 9.22-26 159, 162 9.34-35 163 10.3 120, 133 10.4-15 162 10.20 163 10.21-29 175 10.21 160, 162 10.27 163 10.46 163 11.4 120, 133 12 158 12.1-13 79 12.5 81 12.15 79 12.46 80

15.1-8 81 15.6 146 15.12 146 15.18 165 19.6 112 19.18 151 21.24 194 24.1-8 77 24.8 78 25.9 190 27.1-8 190 27.21 118 29 87 29.1 214 29.16 74 29.20 74 29.21 77 29.38-41 71 29.38 214 30.1-10 190 32.12-13 98 32.27 120 33.20 157 Leviticus 1.5 74 1.11 74 3.1 214 3.6 214 4 77 4.3 214 4.7 189 4.14 214 4.23 214 4.28 214 4.32 74, 214 5.14 87

255 5.15 214 5.18 214 5.25 214 6.6 87 9.2 214 9.3 214 11.44 121 14.48-53 77 15.16 213 17.5 74 76, 189 17.11 18.25 136 18.28 136 18.29 136 19.2 121 19.22 77 22.19 214 22.21 214 23.12 74 23.18 87 24.2-4 118 26.12 107 Numbers 1.2-3 215 1.20-43 215 7 74 7.17 74 7.23 74 7.29 74 7.35 74 7.41 74 7.47 74 7.53 74 7.59 74 7.65 74 7.71 74 7.77 74 7.83 74 7.88 74 9.12 80 15.11 74 22.16 133 23.24 68, 194 24.9 68 28.1-8 71

Index of References 28.9-10 71 28.11-14 71 28.16-21 71 28.26-29 71 29.1-4 71 29.7-10 71 29.12-38 71 31.4-6 215 35.33 174 Deuteronomy 5.26 118 6.4-5 107 6.5 107 6.13 107 6.16 107 8.5 134 18.15 107 19.10-13 193 19.10 174 21.7 174 21.8-9 193 21.22-23 81 23.9-14 213 26.1-15 212 27.25 193 28.26 184 28.38 161 28.42 161 28.49 160 29.18 160 29.23 170 31.29 165 31.30–32.43 81 32.41 184 32.43 193 32.43LXX 100 32.51 121 33.17 85 33.20 68 33.22 68 34.10 98 Joshua 3.10 118 5.14 191

6.5 159 8.20 171 24.19 121 Judges 5.5 152 5.20 160 6.2 156 14.18 68 20.40 171 1 Samuel 2.1 85 2.2 121 2.10 85 6.20 121, 157 13.16 156 14.11 156 16.7 121, 134 17.26 118 17.36 118 17.37 68 21.5 213 25.31 174 31.9 168 2 Samuel 1.8-10 183 1.23 68 5.10 107 6.7 118 7.5-16 69 7.14 107 11–14 69 11.9-13 213 13.1-5 183 14.20 121 14.20 134 17.10 68 18.19 168 18.31 168 20.10 174 22.3 85 23.27 194

256 1 Kings 2.30 133 2.31 174 8.37 161 8.39 121, 134 10.19-20 68 13.24-25 68 22.19-23 127 14.11 179 16.4 179 16.7 165 16.31-33 140 18–21 140 18.3 140 19.1-4 162 19.3 140 20.3 133 20.5 133 21.1-16 140 21.23-24 179 2 Kings 1.9-14 184 1.11 133 9 140 9.7 193 9.10 179 9.18 133 9.22 140, 165 9.30 140 9.36-37 179 18.19 133 19.3 133 19.7 179 19.21LXX 214 19.22 121 21.16 174, 193 22.17 165 22.20-21 128 24.4 174, 193 37.22LXX 214 1 Chronicles 10.9 168 11.19 194 13.10 118 21.12 184

Index of References 22.8 174 25.5 85 28.3 174 28.9 121, 134 28.19 190 29.21 74 2 Chronicles 6.28 161 6.30 121, 134 7.13 161, 162 8.18 169 9.18-19 68 11.4 169 12.6 174 12.7 174 15.3 121 16.9 86 20.6 157 34.21 174 34.25 165, 174 36.5 174 Ezra 4.15 179 9.15 174 Nehemiah 2.3 179 9.13 121 9.33 174 Esther 11.5-9LXX 182 16.16 118 Job 2.5 161 3.1-26 162 3.21 162 5.8 191 5.17-18 134 6.8-9 162 7.15-16 162 10.16 68 11.7 107 14.18 152

16.15 85 30.6 156 38.31-32 118 41.10 157 Psalms 2.1-6 182 2.9 225 6.1 134 6.3 191 7 192 7.2 68 7.11 174 8.5-7LXX 99 8.5 99 9.4 174 9.9LXX 122 9.12 193 10.6LXX 170 10.9 68 10.16 165 11.3 170 13.1-2 191 13.3 174 16.11 146 17.7 146 17.12 68 17.13 184 18.2 85 18.7 152 18.35 146 19.9 121 20.6 146 22.3 121 22.13 68 22.31 68 27.4 134 31.13 134 33.6 99 34.15 86 35 192 68, 191 35.17 38.1 134 42.3 118 44.3 146 44.21 121, 134 48.10 146

257 52.2 117 55 192 55.15 192 57.4 68, 117 58 192 58.6 192 59 192 60.5 146 63.8 146 68.1 156 69 192 69.24 174 71.22 121 72.2 181 74.9-10 191 75.4 85 75.10 85 76.7 157 78.3 174 78.10 174 78.46 161 78.48 159 78.54 146 79 192 79.5 191 79.7 179 80.4 191 83 192 84.3 118 86.2 134 89.13 146 89.17 85 89.18 121 89.20-37 69 89.24 85 89.46 191 90.13 191 92.10 85 94.3 191 94.12 134 95.13LXX 122 96.7LXX 100 96.13 181 97.9LXX 122 98.1 146 98.1LXX 166 98.9 181

Index of References 99.1 166 99.3 121 103.1 121 104 196 105.3-5 161 105.32 159 105.38 174 106.38 193 109 192 109.1LXX 99 110.1 99, 146 111.10 164 112.9 85 113.2LXX 165 113.4LXX 88 113.6LXX 88 114.3-7 185 114.4 88 114.6 88 118.16 146 118.18 134 119.84 191 119.160 121 125.1-2 152 130.3 157 131.17 85 132.10-12 69 132.13 85 132.16-18 85 69, 95 132.17 134.15LXX 165 137 192 137.9 192 138.7 146 139 192 139.1-6 121, 134 139.16 86 139.23 134 145.13 165 145.21 121 146.10 165 147.17 157 148.14 85 Proverbs 1.16 174 3.11-12 134

5.4 160 6.7 191 6.17 174, 193 6.24-26 140 8.22-31 98 15.3 86 19.12 68 20.2 68 22.13 68 24.12 134 26.13 68 27.4 157 28.1 68 28.15 68 30.30-31 68 30.30 68 Isaiah 1 75 1.4 121 1.7 179 1.11-14 75 1.11 74 1.15 75 1.16-20 75, 76 1.16 75 1.17 75 1.18 75 1.21 179 1.24 174, 191 2.8 165 2.10 156 2.19-21 156 3.7 179 3.16 140 5.16 121 5.19 121 5.25 152 5.29 68 6 126 6.1-11 127 6.3 121 6.8 128 6.11 179 9.2-7 69 10.20 121 11.1-4 122

258 Isaiah (cont.) 11.1 69 11.4 117, 122, 181 11.10 69 11.11-16 216 13.9-10 151 13.10 152 13.13 152 17.5 172 17.8 165 18.4-5 172 21.9 233 23.13 179 23.16-17 179 24.1 179 24.13 172 24.18-20 151, 152 24.21 151 24.23 151, 152 25.10 123 26.61 115 27.1 184 27.12-13 216 29.6 151 31.4 68 34.3 173 34.4 152 34.4LXX 152 34.10 171, 179 38.13 68 40.3 115 40.9-11LXX 167 40.9-10 168 41.10 146 40.12 118 41.1 108 41.4 107, 118 41.10 119 41.25-27 168 43.6 107 43.10 106 43.13 107 44.6 119 46.4 107 47.3 179 47.5 159

Index of References 47.8 179 47.9–48.5 165 47.9 179 48.12 107 49.2 117 49.23LXX 226 49.26 194 50.3 152 52.7-9 168 52.7 168 52.11 107 53 84 53.1-12 83 53.4 84 53.5 83 53.6 84 53.7-8 83 53.7 83 53.12 84 54.4 179 54.10 152 59.7 193 60.1-3 187 60.12 179 60.19 108 61.1 168 62.2 223 63.1-6 173, 181 63.1-3 124 122, 124, 63.3 174 63.6LXX 173 66.1 184 66.15 115 66.23-24 171 Jeremiah 1.2 104 1.4 104 1.6 191 1.11 104 1.16 165 2.15 68 2.30 68, 134 3.6-10 179 4.7 68 4.13 160

4.24 152 4.30 140 5.3 134 6.11 174 7.5-11 165 7.6 193 7.20 174 7.33 184 8.3 162 9.15 160 9.16 184 10.10 118, 121 10.24 134 10.25 174, 179 11.9 74 13.4-6 156 13.26-27 179 14.12 150 15 209 15.2LXX 209 16.4 184 17.10 121, 134 19.4 193 19.7 184 20.14-18 162 21.7 150 21.9 150 22.3 193 22.17 193 23.5 69 23.11LXX 214 23.15 160 23.28LXX 134 23.36 118 24.10 150 25.6-7 165 25.38 68 26.15 193 27–28LXX 233 27.8 150 27.8LXX 233 27.9 134 27.13 150 27.29 233 28.6LXX 233 169, 178 28.7LXX 28.8LXX 233

259 29.17 150 29.18 150 31.18 134 32.24 150 32.30 165 32.36 150 32.38 107 33.9LXX 179 33.15 69 34.17 150 34.22 179 34.30 184 38.2 150 38.18LXX 134 40.10LXX 179 42.5 121 42.17 150 42.18 174 42.22 150 44.6 174 44.13 150 46.10 194 134, 174 46.28 47.6 184 48.25 85 48.40 160 49.19 68, 157 49.22 160 49.30 156 18, 233 50–51 50.8 233 50.11LXX 209 50.17 68 50.29 233 50.44 68, 157 51.6 233 51.7 169 51.8 233 51.9 233 51.10 233 51.29 152 51.33 172 Lamentations 1.1 179 1.8 179 2.3 85

Index of References 2.13LXX 214 2.17 85 3.15 160 3.19 160 3.64 134 4.9 160 4.11 174 5.3-4 179 5.19 165 Ezekiel 1.3 104 1.24 118 1.28 118 2.9-10 145 6.11 150 7.8 174 9.1-5 234 9.4-6 216 9.8 174 12.16 150 14.13 57 14.19 174 15.8 57 16.15-22 179 16.37-38 179 17.3 160 18.8 121 18.24 57 19.1-6 68 20.8 174 20.13 174 20.21 174 20.27 57 20.33-34 174 20.41 107 21.31 174 22.22 174 22.25-27 68 22.31 174 23.1-49 179 23.5 179 23.10 179 23.26-29 179 23.40 140 26.2 179 26.19 179

29.8-9 184 29.21 85 30.15 174 30.24 184 32.2 68 32.5-6 173 151, 152 32.7-8 32.15 179 33.27 156 33.29 179 34.3 74 34.21 85 35.3 179 35.7 179 36.18 174 37.15-28 216 37.27 107 38.20 152 38.22 159, 170 39.6 184 39.7-19 194 39.17-20 183 40–43 18 40.3-4 97 43.2 118 43.7 165 45.18-19 77 Daniel 4.3 165 118, 165 4.34 6.26 118, 165 7.7-8 85 7.9-18 117 7.9-14 127, 230 7.9-10LXX 116 7.9 185 7.10 117, 129, 185 7.13 86, 114, 116 7.14 127 7.16 97 7.23-27 85 8 88, 89 8.10 160 8.13 191 8.15-26 97

260 Daniel (cont.) 8.17 118 8.20 85, 88 8.21 88 9.22-27 97 10.5-6 117 10.7 117 10.9-12 118 10.9 117 10.10 117 10.11 117 10.18–12.4 97 11.33 219 11.35 219 11.35LXX 219 12.1-3 166, 185, 219 12.1 219 12.7 118 12.12 113 Hosea 1.1 104 1.10 118 2.1 118 2.5 179 2.12 179 3.1–4.2 165 3.5 69 4.12-13 179 156, 179 5.3 5.10 174 5.14 68 8.1 160 10.8 156, 157 13.7-8 68 Joel 1.1 104 1.4 161 1.6 68 1.8 152 2.1-32 151 2.1-15 161 159, 161 2.1 2.10 151, 152, 161

Index of References 2.11 161 2.25 161 2.28 141 113, 115 2.31 3.2 182 172, 173 3.13 3.16 152 3.19 193 3.21 193 4.13 172 4.15 152 4.16 152 Amos 1.6 133 1.9 133 1.11 133 1.13 133 2.1 133 2.4 133 2.6 133 3.11 133 3.12 133 4.9 161 5.3 133 5.4 133 5.7 160 5.9 152 5.16 133 5.18-20 113 5.18 115 7.2 161 7.11 133 7.17 133 8.9 151, 152 9.11 69 Jonah 1.1 104 1.14 193 3.1 104 4.3 162, 191 4.8 162 Micah 1.1 104 1.2-4 115

1.4 151 4.7 165 4.12-13 172 4.13–5.5 69 4.13 85, 165 5.8 68 5.12-15 165 Nahum 1.4 151 1.5 152 157, 174 1.6 2.13 68 3.4 179 161, 179 3.5 Habakkuk 1.2 191 1.8 160 2.20 159 3.4 85 Zephaniah 1.1 104 1.14-16 159 1.15 152 1.18 174 3.8 174 9.14 159 Haggai 1.1 104 1.3 104 2.6-7 151 2.21-22 151 Zechariah 1.1 104 1.7–6.15 97 1.7-11 148 1.7 104 1.8 148 1.11 150 1.12 191 1.18-21 85 1.18 85 2.13 159

261 3.8 69 4 86 4.2 86 4.6 86 4.10 86 6.1-8 148 6.12 69 7.53 97 9.9-10 181 9.15 194 10.5 123 10.25-26 101 12.1-9 182 12.10 82, 83, 114, 115 12.12 114 13.7 184 14.2 182 14.2LXX 214 14.5 115, 156 14.15 101 Malachi 1.1 104 3.1-2 115 3.1 115 3.2 157 3.6 185 New Testament Q 12.2-9 54 12.4-9 55 14.26-27 213 14.27 32 Matthew 1.1 69 1.6 69 1.20 98 2.13 98 2.19 98 3.11-12 173 4.7 107 4.10 107 4.11 98 5.11 29

Index of References 5.12 30 5.22 185 5.23-24 190 5.38-42 232 5.48 192 121, 134 6.4 121, 134 6.6 6.18 121, 134 7.15-20 140, 141 9.4 121 9.27 69 9.35 169 10.1-21 218 10.14-23 55 10.16 71 10.17-25 55 10.17-22 32 10.22-23 55 10.25 55 10.26 54, 55 10.28 54, 55 10.29-30 54 10.31 55 10.32-33 52 10.33 55 10.35-36 55 10.38 32 11.27 97 12.23 69 12.26 165 13.19 104 13.20 104 13.21 104, 219 13.22 104 13.23 104 13.24-30 172 13.36-43 172 13.41 181 13.42 170 13.49 181 15.6 104 15.22 69 16.16 118 16.19 119 16.27 181 17.20 153 18.6 144

18.8-9 170 18.9 185 19.28 216, 230 20.28 112 20.30 69 22.37 107 99, 146 22.44 23.18-20 190 23.31-35 24, 189 23.34-36 194 23.35 174, 190 24 218 24.3 113 24.7 151 24.9 218 24.14 169 24.15-16 156 24.21 218 24.30 113, 114, 181 24.31 159 24.43 113 25.13 113 25.31-46 114, 154, 166, 185 25.41 170 25.46 185 26.2 80 26.13 169 26.24 99 77, 174 26.28 26.52 209 26.63 83, 118 26.64 146, 181 26.69-75 49 27.4 193 28.4 118 28.5 98 34.31 181 37.14 83 43.50 170 Mark 1.1 168 1.2 115 1.3 115 1.13 98

262 Mark (cont.) 1.14 169 1.15 169 1.24 121 2.2 104 3.19 53 4.5-6 54 4.14 104 4.15 104 54, 104 4.16 4.17 32, 54, 104, 219 4.18 104 4.19 104 4.20 104 4.23 104 4.29 172 6.50 119 7.13 104 7.20-23 186 8.27-33 51 8.34–9.1 51 8.34-38 51, 54, 55, 62, 206 8.34 32, 33 8.35 51, 104, 169 8.36 51 8.37 51 8.38–9.1 51 8.38 51, 52, 62, 172 9.27 51 9.35–11.1 55 9.42 144 9.43 185 10.29-30 53 10.29 169, 213 10.32-34 150 10.38-39 32 10.45 84, 112 10.47-48 69 12.29-30 107 12.35 69 12.36 99, 146 13 218 13.7 149 13.8 151

Index of References 13.9-13

32, 53, 55, 218 13.9 104 13.10 169 13.12 53, 60 13.13 54 13.14 156 13.20 32 13.24-26 151 13.24-25 113 13.26-27 57, 172 13.26 113, 115, 181 13.27 113 13.32 98 14.1 80 14.9 169 14.12 80 14.24 174 14.31 52 14.36 32 14.62 99, 113, 115, 146, 181 14.64 83 14.66-72 49 14.67 50 14.68 51, 52 14.69 50 14.70 50, 52, 54 14.71 50 15.51 83 16.5-7 98 Luke 1.2 104 1.11-19 98 1.11 190 1.19 168 1.26-38 98 1.32 69, 107 1.68-69 85 1.68 107 1.69 69 2.4 69 2.9-15 98 2.29 191 3.2 104

3.31 69 5.1 104 6.22-23 30 7.16 164 8.11 104 8.21 104 9.26 172 10.3 70 10.18 160 10.22 97 11.28 104 11.50 174 11.51 190 12.4 54 12.5 55 12.6-7 54 12.8-9 52, 54, 55 12.49 150 12.51-53 150 16.19-31 172 16.23-26 170 16.23-24 185 17.1-2 144 17.29 170 17.30 113 18.7 193 18.8 193 18.29 213 18.38-39 69 20.42 99, 146 21 218 21.4 123 21.11 149, 151 21.20-21 156 21.27 113, 181 22.1 80 22.7 80 22.30 216 22.43 98 22.50 174 22.55-62 49 22.69 99, 146 23.27-30 162 23.28-31 157 23.34 192 24.4 98 24.23 98

263 John 1.1-18 110 1.1-14 104 1.3 98 1.9 121 1.10 98 1.18 97 70, 78, 81 1.29 1.36 70, 78, 81 2.25 121 3.11 109 3.32 109 4.29 121 4.39 121 4.41 104 4.44 109 4.50 104 5.22 154 5.24 104 5.27 154 5.28-29 166 5.31 109 5.38 104 6.39-40 154 6.44 154 6.54 154 6.57 118 6.69 121 7.7 109 8.14 109 8.18 109 8.28 97 8.31 104 8.37 104 8.51 104 8.52 104 8.53 104 8.55 104 10 70 10.11 112 12.31 165 12.48 154 12.49-50 97 13.21 109 14.7 97 14.9 97 14.10 97

Index of References 14.30 165 15.1 121 15.15 97 15.18 32 15.20 32 16.2 32 16.11 165 16.30 121 16.33 219 17.14-16 32 17.14 97 18.4 121 18.6 118 18.13-18 49 18.25-27 49 18.37 109 19.9 83 19.14 80 19.24 82 19.28 82 19.31 80 19.32-33 80 19.33-37 82 19.36-37 82 19.36 80, 82 19.37 82, 115 21.15-17 70 21.15 70 21.16 70 21.17 70, 121 Acts 1.11 113 1.18 174 1.24 121, 134 141, 174 2.17 2.18 174 2.20 113 2.30-32 69 2.33 146, 174 2.34 99 2.39 107 2.41 104 3.14 121 3.19-21 113 3.22 107 4.24 191

4.29 104 4.31 104 5.1-11 138 5.31 146 5.33 30 5.40 30 5.41 30 6.2 104 6.4 104 6.7 104 6.8–8.1 30 7.41 165 7.55 146 7.54–8.1 35 7.56-58 30 7.56 146 7.60 192 8.1 30 8.3 30 8.4 104 8.25 104 8.32-33 83 8.35 83 9.1-2 30 9.3-5 30 9.16 30 9.23-25 30 9.23 30 10.2 166 10.22 166 10.35 166 10.42 154 11.1 104 11.19 219 12.1-5 35 12.2 30 12.3 30 12.24 104 13.5 104 13.7 104 13.16 166 13.22-23 69 13.26 166 13.44 104 13.45 30 13.46 104 13.48 104

264 John (cont.) 14.4-5 30 14.15 118 14.19-20 30 14.22 219 14.25 104 15.7 169 121, 134 15.8 15.25 104 15.26 30 15.29 138 15.39 142 16.19-23 30 16.32 104 17.1-7 30 17.3 104 17.5 30 17.11 104 17.13 30 17.31 154 18.11 104 18.12-17 30, 53 19.10 104 19.20 104 19.21-40 30 19.35-41 53 20.23 219 21.9 141 21.13 30 21.26–22.24 30 21.37–22.29 53 22.20 174 22.30 30 23.2 30 23.7-10 30 23.23–36.32 53 25.24 30 26.6-7 216 28.22 31, 35 Romans 1 10 1.1 169 1.3 69 1.7 105, 106 1.9 169 1.16 169

Index of References 1.18-29 165 1.18 156 1.28 156 1.29-31 186 2.6 134 2.16 121, 134, 154, 169 3.15 174 3.24-25 112 3.25 78 5.3 219 5.8 112 5.9 78 6.4 61 8.17 29 8.18 30 8.29 111 8.34 99, 146 8.35-36 29 8.35 219 9.26 118 10.8 104 10.9 111 10.16 169 10.17 104 11.3 190 11.24-26 204 11.25-26 204 11.25 204 11.26-27 78 11.28 169 11.36 112 12.2 29 12.12 219 13.1-7 111 14.5 112 14.10 154 15.16 169 15.19 169 16.3-4 35 16.25-27 112 16.25 169 1 Corinthians 1.3 105, 106 1.7-8 113 1.8 113, 154

1.18 104 4.5 113, 121, 134 4.8 135 4.9-13 29 4.15 169 5.1 137 5.2 137 5.4 137 5.5 113, 137, 154 5.7 78, 80, 82 5.8 80 5.9-11 186 6.2 230 6.11 78 6.19-20 73 6.20 73, 112 7.23 73, 112 7.25 213 8–10 139 8.6 98 8.7 214 8.11 112 8.23 169 9.12 169 9.13 190 9.14 169 9.18 169 10.11 113 10.13 190 11.5 141 11.22 143 11.23-24 53 11.26 113 11.27 136 11.29 136 136, 137 11.30 11.31 136 11.32 137 12.3 111 13.2 153 14.25 121, 134 14.34 141 14.36 104 15.1 169 15.2 104

265 15.3 73, 78, 112 15.9 30 15.20 225 15.23 225 15.25 99 15.52 113, 159 2 Corinthians 1.2 105 1.3-8 29 1.4 219 1.8 219 1.14 113, 154 1.22 158 2.4 219 2.12 169 2.17 104 3.3 118 4.2 104 4.3 169 4.4 165, 169 4.8-9 29 4.17 219 5.10 154 6.4-10 29 6.4-5 29 6.4 219 6.9-10 186 6.10 29 6.18 107 7.4 219 8.2 29, 219 8.13 219 9.13 169 10.14 169 11.2 214 11.7 169 11.15 134 11.21-30 29 11.23-29 29 12.10 29 13.9 29 Galatians 1.3 105, 106 1.4 112 1.5 112

Index of References 1.6 169 1.7 169 1.11 169 1.13 30 1.25 169 2.2 169 2.5 169 2.7 169 2.11-14 142 2.14 169 3.13 73, 112 3.19 97 4.4-5 73 4.5 112 4.12-15 29 5.19-21 186 6.6 104

1.32 169 2.6-11 100 2.6-8 100 2.9-11 100 2.11 111 2.16 104, 113, 154 2.17 29 2.22 169 2.30 35 3.6 30 4.3 169 4.4-6 29 4.14-15 29 4.14 219 4.15 169 4.20 112

Ephesians 1.2 105, 106 1.7 78, 112 1.13 158, 169 1.20 99, 146 2.13 78 3.13 219 3.20-21 112 4.30 158 5.5 186 5.22-23 214 5.26 104 5.27 214 6.7 117 6.15 169 6.17 104, 184

Colossians 1.5 104, 169 1.14 78 1.15-20 110 1.15 110 1.16 98, 110 1.18 110 1.20 5, 78 1.24 219 1.25 104 3.1 99, 146 3.4 113 3.13 78 3.16 104 4.3 104 4.16 111

Philippians 1.2 105, 106 1.3-7 29 1.5 169 1.7 169 1.10 113, 154 1.12 169 1.14 104 1.16 154, 169 1.19-26 29 1.27 169 1.29-30 29

1 Thessalonians 1.5 169 1.6 29, 104, 219 1.8 104 1.9-10 113 1.9 118 2.2 169 2.4 169 2.8 169 2.9 169 2.13 104 2.14 29

266 1 Thessalonians (cont.) 2.19-20 113 3.1-5 29 3.2 169 3.3 219 3.7 219 4.15-18 113, 181 4.15 104 4.16 113, 159 113, 136, 5.2 154 5.3 150 5.4 136 5.9-10 112 5.23 113 2 Thessalonians 1.2 105, 106 1.4 219 1.6–2.11 181 1.6 219 1.7 113 2.2 154 2.8 113, 184 2.9 154 3.1 104 1 Timothy 1.2 105 1.13 137 1.15 61 1.17 112 1.20 137 2.1-2 36, 111 2.6 112 2.12 141 3.1 61 4.3 139 4.5 104 4.9 61 4.10 118 6.1 191 6.2 191 6.13 113

Index of References 2 Timothy 1.2 105, 106 1.8 61, 169 1.12 61 2.3 62 2.8 62, 69 2.9 62, 104 2.10 62 2.11-13 61, 62 2.11 61, 62 2.12 62 2.13 62 2.15 104 3.12 31, 62 4.1 113, 154 4.2 104 4.6-8 62 4.8 113 4.14 134 4.18 112 Titus 1.3 104 1.4 105 1.9 104 1.10 186 1.16 186 2.5 104 2.9 191 2.13 113 2.14 112 3.6 174 3.8 61 Philemon 3 105, 106 13 169 Hebrews 1.1-5 98 1.3 99, 146 1.6 100, 111 1.13 146 2.6-7 99 2.7 99 2.9 99

3.12 118 4.12-13 117, 121, 134 4.12 104, 184 6.4-6 55, 56, 58 6.4 57 6.5 104 6.6 57 7.13 190 8.1 146 8.5 190 9.12 112 9.13-14 78 9.14 118, 214 9.20 78 9.22 78 9.28 84, 113 10.12 146 10.26-31 57 10.31 118 10.32-35 57 10.33 219 10.36 57 10.37 57, 113 10.39 57 11.1-40 57 11.3 104 11.4 24, 189 11.35-38 57 11.37-38 35 12.1-3 57 12.2 146 12.4 35, 57, 134 12.5-7 134 12.6 134 12.8 134 12.11 134 12.22 118 12.23 111 12.24 24, 189 13.7 104 13.10 190 13.12-13 35 13.13 57 13.21 112

267 James 1.2 30 1.3 30 1.21 104 1.22 104 1.23 104 2.21 190 3.1 144 5.7-9 113 1 Peter 1.2 78 1.3 32 1.6 31 1.7 32 1.9 31 1.11 32 1.13 113 1.18-19 81 1.18 112 1.19-21 32 1.19 78, 112, 214 1.21 32 1.23 104 1.25 104 2.1 191 2.4-7 32 2.8 104 2.12 113 2.13 36, 111 2.17 36 2.18-25 31 2.18 191 2.19-23 32 31, 32 2.19 2.20 32 2.21 31, 32 2.23 32 2.24 84 3.1 104 3.13-14 31 3.14 32 3.15 31 3.16 31 3.17 31, 32 3.18-22 32

Index of References 3.18 32, 112 3.22 146 4.1 32 4.5 32 4.11 112 4.12 31 4.13 31, 32, 113 4.15 32 4.16 31 4.17-19 31, 32 4.19 32 5.1 32 5.8 31 5.9 31, 32 5.10 31, 32 5.11 112 2 Peter 1.2 105 1.9 78 1.16 113 2.1 112 3.3 113 3.5 104 3.7 185 3.8-10 113 3.10 136, 153, 154, 185 113, 154, 3.12 185, 204 3.18 112 1 John 1.7 78 1.10 104 2.5 104 2.7 104 2.14 104 2.22-24 62 2.28 62, 113 3.2 113 3.10 62 3.16 62, 112 4.1-3 140, 141 4.2 63 4.3 63

4.15 63 5.16 62 5.21 63 2 John 3

105, 106

Jude 4 191 11 174 13 160 21 113 24 214 25 112 Revelation 1–8 97 1–3 133 1.1-8 103 1.1-2 103 1.1 79, 97, 100, 101, 120, 126, 216 1.2 24, 101, 103, 105, 116, 120, 178, 189 1.3 104, 120, 236 1.4-8 107 1.4-5 105 1.4 86, 105, 115, 118, 120 1.5-6 72, 109, 112, 113, 129 1.5 14, 22, 24, 64, 73, 75, 77, 79, 84, 109, 110, 113, 120, 122, 124, 128, 166, 179, 182, 192, 197, 220, 223–25, 228, 234

268 Revelation (cont.) 1.6 107, 112, 166, 220, 223 1.7 83, 113–16, 119, 128, 136, 172, 181, 220 1.8 106, 107, 115, 116, 118, 166, 179, 188, 204 1.9–22.5 103 1.9-20 97 1.9 21, 22, 24, 101, 103, 189, 218 1.10 22, 94, 116, 120 1.11 116, 120, 126, 128, 146 1.12-20 15, 22, 79, 113, 116, 124–28, 130, 133, 230 1.12 94 1.13-16 116 1.13 122, 172 1.14 86, 120, 122 120, 139, 1.16 146, 159, 184 1.17-18 79, 118, 120 1.17 118, 126 1.18 22, 118, 120, 127, 128, 148, 160, 166, 220 1.19 120, 126, 146 1.20 146, 159 2–3 119, 133, 144, 177 2.1–3.22 22 2.1-7 221

Index of References 2.1

120, 121, 146 2.2 22, 133, 141, 185, 236 2.3 22 2.4 136 2.5 113, 114, 136, 138, 143, 185 2.6 136, 138, 141, 185 2.7 143, 148, 221 2.8-11 136, 223 120, 121 2.8 2.9-10 219 2.9 22–24, 121, 133, 142 14, 22–24, 2.10 35, 136, 149, 197, 223, 228 2.11 143, 148, 186, 221, 223 2.12-17 223 2.12 120, 122, 139, 184 24, 110, 121, 2.13 133, 136, 185, 228 2.14 136, 138 2.15 136, 138 2.16 113, 114, 117, 122, 136, 138, 139, 143, 184, 236 2.17 143, 148, 221, 223 2.18-28 223 2.18 120, 122 2.19 22, 121, 133, 139, 140, 185, 236 2.20 136, 138–42, 216

2.21-23 142, 164 2.21 138 2.22-24 14 2.22 138, 143, 185 2.23-24 214 118, 121, 2.23 133, 143, 185, 236 2.25 113 2.26-27 225 2.26 136, 148, 185, 221 2.27-28 223 2.27 231 2.28 223 2.29 143 3.1-6 136, 222 3.1 86, 120, 121, 127, 133, 185, 236 3.2 130, 185 113, 114, 3.3 136, 138, 143, 175, 222 3.4 136, 222, 228 3.5 148, 185, 186, 188, 211, 221, 222, 228 3.6 143 3.7-13 223, 226 3.7 120, 121 3.8 24, 121, 133, 185, 226, 236 3.9 22, 23, 142, 226 3.10 22, 218 3.11 113, 136, 139, 149, 188, 236 3.12 108, 148, 158, 221, 223

269 3.13 143 3.14-22 111, 136, 223 3.14 110, 120–22, 130, 228 3.15 121, 133, 185, 236 3.16 135 3.17 135, 175 3.18 73, 135, 173 134, 136, 3.19 138, 143 3.20 130 3.21-22 224 3.21 108, 127, 128, 130, 147, 148, 221, 223, 230 3.22 143 4–22 177, 211 4–5 86, 125, 150, 219 4 65, 127, 144, 147 4.1–5.5 65 4.1 65, 126, 146 4.2-11 146 4.2-3 185 4.2 126 4.4 65, 126, 149 4.5 86, 126 4.6-7 126 4.6 65 107, 126, 4.8 166, 171, 179, 188, 204 4.9 107, 118, 126, 166 4.10 107, 118, 126, 128, 149, 166, 226 4.11 126, 128, 129, 147

Index of References 5

65, 93–95, 109, 116, 145 5.1-14 97, 130 5.1-12 125 5.1-5 65 5.1 65, 126, 144, 145 5.2-3 127, 128 5.2 147 5.3 65, 146 5.4-7 94 5.4 146 5.5-6 15, 93–95, 146, 219, 220 5.5 14, 65, 66, 68, 114, 122, 128, 144, 146, 148, 220 5.6 8, 14, 64–66, 70, 74, 75, 79, 84, 86, 94, 116, 128, 144, 147, 214, 219, 234 5.7 126, 146, 147 5.8-13 101 5.8-12 129 5.8 75, 128 5.9-10 71, 77, 87, 127, 129 5.9 73, 75, 81, 84, 113, 114, 146 5.10 113, 129 5.11 129, 147 5.12 87, 113, 129 5.13-14 129 5.13 107, 112, 126, 129, 147, 160, 166, 174 6–22 188

6–7 144 6.1-8 147 6.1 147, 148 147, 148, 6.2 150 6.3-4 149 147, 148 6.3 6.4 74, 148, 150 6.5-6 149 6.5 147, 148 6.7-8 149 6.7 147, 148 6.8 147, 148, 150 11, 34, 150, 6.9-11 158, 159, 174, 189, 193, 194, 200, 201, 202, 203, 206, 211, 217, 224, 230 6.9 24, 26, 74, 75, 101, 103, 104, 110, 147, 151, 190, 230 6.10 11, 121, 122, 130, 151, 180, 188, 191, 192, 194–96, 202, 210, 214, 228, 230 6.11 24, 130, 200, 204, 222, 228 6.12-17 92, 151, 153, 154, 157, 166, 176, 180, 185, 188, 193, 196, 204, 211, 216, 224 6.12-15 151

270 Revelation (cont.) 6.12 147 6.13 152 6.14 153, 156 6.15-16 114 6.15 111, 156, 183 9, 130, 154 6.16-17 6.16 122, 126, 155, 156 130, 136, 6.17 154, 155, 157 7 24, 73, 158, 215, 217 34, 158, 166, 7.1-17 211 7.1-8 11, 158, 201, 214–17, 224, 227 7.1-4 217 7.2 118, 147 7.3-4 158, 211, 215, 223 7.3 216, 236 7.4-8 216, 220 7.4 94, 219 7.9-17 201, 215–20, 224 7.9-14 212 7.9-12 217 7.9-10 129, 219 7.9 94, 114, 130, 158, 216, 217, 219, 222, 228 7.10 126, 219 7.11 226 7.12 107, 112, 166 7.13-17 217 7.13 72, 222, 228 7.14 72, 73, 75, 113, 124, 205, 214, 217, 219, 222

Index of References 7.15-16 158 7.15 18, 72, 126 7.16 174 7.17 147, 168, 215, 219, 222, 223 8–16 158 8.1 147, 158 8.2–9.21 159 8.2 145, 153, 159 8.3 75, 159, 171, 190, 231 8.5 75, 173, 190 8.7-8 173 8.7 159, 162 8.8-9 160, 162 8.9 160 8.10-11 160 8.10 152 8.12 160, 162, 174 8.13 160 9.1-12 162 9.1-11 218 9.1 147, 152, 160 9.2 161 9.4-6 236 9.4 158, 161, 218 9.5-6 161 9.6 171 9.7 149 9.11 161 9.13 75, 162, 190 9.15 162 9.16 162 9.17-18 170, 173 9.18 162 9.20-21 163, 164 9.20 142, 185, 226 9.21 114, 142, 174 10–11 18 10 145

10.2 145 10.6 118, 160, 166 10.11 111 11–14 25 11–13 206 11–12 25 11 26 11.1-2 17, 18 11.1 75, 190, 226 11.2 17, 18, 123 11.3-13 18, 209 110, 167, 11.3 206 11.4-6 25 11.4 117 11.5-6 206 11.5 207 11.7 25, 26, 110, 149, 206, 207, 220, 227 11.8-9 207 11.8 18, 164, 178, 185 11.9-10 25 11.9 26, 184 11.10 26 11.11-12 207 11.11 25 11.12 25 11.13 18, 25, 114, 164, 207 11.15-19 153, 159, 165 11.15-17 205 11.15 107, 111, 130, 165, 166 11.16 226 11.17-18 166 11.17 107, 166, 179, 188, 204 11.18 122, 136, 154, 166, 205, 216

271 11.19 159 12 25, 207 12.1-6 207 12.1 25, 149, 207 12.3-4 207 12.3 149 12.4 152 12.5 225 12.7-17 204 12.7-12 207 12.7-9 160, 205, 206 12.7-8 25 12.7 206, 227 12.9 205, 208 12.10 205, 210, 219 14, 24–26, 12.11 72, 110, 113, 125, 149, 189, 205, 206, 220–23, 227 12.13-17 25, 207 12.13-16 207 12.17 24, 25, 102, 103, 189, 207, 208, 214 13 25, 26, 164, 170, 208, 236 13.1-18 207 13.1-17 166, 211 13.1-10 27 13.1 149, 208, 215 13.2 26, 185, 208 13.3-4 26 13.3 18, 74, 208, 210, 211 13.4 26, 74, 167, 208, 209, 226, 228 13.5 183 13.6 174 13.7-10 26

Index of References 13.7

26, 208, 209, 220, 221, 227, 236 13.8 26, 185, 208, 210, 222, 226 13.9 26, 209 13.10 22, 25, 26, 209–11, 236 13.11-18 27 13.11 70, 87 13.12 18, 27, 208, 226 13.14 18, 27, 208, 223, 229 27, 105, 210, 13.15 226, 236 13.16 208, 210, 211, 236 13.17 73, 216 13.18 19 14 124, 167, 211, 236 14.1-5 34, 158, 166–68, 211, 215–17, 219, 224, 227 14.1 108, 158, 211, 214–17, 223 14.2-3 217 14.3 73, 212, 216 14.4-5 217 14.4 14, 73, 149, 168, 172, 177, 197, 203, 211–15, 219, 222, 223, 225, 228 14.5 73, 74, 77, 214 14.6-20 165, 173 14.6-13 167 14.6-7 165, 167–69 14.6 18, 167, 168

122, 136, 160, 164, 167, 226 14.8-20 211 167, 169, 14.8 170, 177, 178, 190 14.9-11 167, 236 14.9 170, 226 14.10-11 170 14.10 14, 122, 154, 170, 173, 186 14.11 170, 226, 228 14.12-13 170, 172, 175 14.12 22, 25, 102–104, 160, 170, 211, 236 14.13 3, 170, 171, 185, 214, 236 14.14-20 123, 167, 172 14.14-16 172 14.14 117 14.15 18, 136 14.17-20 172 14.17 18 75, 190 14.18 14.19 173 14.20 124, 182, 185 15.1-8 173 15.2 149, 173, 220, 227 15.3-4 81 15.3 81, 107, 111, 166, 179, 188, 204 15.4 122, 226 15.5 18 15.6 18 15.7–16.21 173 14.7

272 Revelation (cont.) 15.7 107, 118, 166, 173 15.8 18 16 174 16.1 18, 173, 174, 185 16.2 174, 175, 226, 236 174, 194 16.3 16.4-7 193 16.4 174, 193 16.5-6 194 16.5 122 16.6 174, 194, 195 75, 107, 122, 16.7 166, 179, 188, 190, 194–96, 204 16.8 174 16.9 142, 163, 164, 174 174, 175, 16.10 185 16.11 114, 142, 163, 164 16.12-16 180 16.12 174 16.13 147, 175 16.14 107, 111, 166, 175, 181, 182, 188 16.15 113, 114, 136, 175 16.16 175 16.17-21 153 16.17 18, 174, 175 16.18 175 16.19 18, 122, 154 16.20 176 16.21 159, 176 17–22 177 17–18 169, 177, 196 17.1–19.4 195

Index of References 17.1

177, 179, 180 17.2 111, 177, 178 17.3 147 17.4 18, 177, 178 178, 179 17.5 17.6 110, 147, 178, 194, 195 17.8 186, 208, 222 17.10 17 17.12-14 180, 182 17.12 234 17.14 92, 111, 122, 148, 182, 221, 227, 228 17.15 178 17.16 179, 183, 231 17.17 102, 180, 231, 234 111, 178 17.18 18 18, 234 18.1–19.4 121 18.1-3 195 18.2-3 169 18.2 18, 233 18.3 111, 177, 178 18.4-8 231 18.4-7 233 18.4 178, 180, 233, 236 18.5 231 18.6-7 233, 234 185, 231, 18.6 233, 236 18.7-8 179 18.7 179, 233 18.8 107, 122, 180, 231, 233 18.9-10 180

18.9

111, 171, 178 18.10 18, 136 18.11-17 180 18.11 73 18.18-19 180 18.18 180 18.19 180 18.20 122, 178, 180, 195, 196, 230 18.21 18, 180, 231 18.24 74, 178, 195 19–21 214 19 124 19.1-6 196 19.1-4 196 19.1-3 231 19.1-2 195, 196 19.1 196 19.2 122, 177, 178, 180, 196, 216 19.3 171, 196, 228 19.4 126, 196, 226 179, 216 19.5 19.6-7 121 19.6 107, 166, 179, 188, 196, 204 19.7-8 214 19.7 180 19.8 217, 228 19.9-10 102 19.10 24, 101, 129, 189, 226 19.11-21 9, 15, 180, 182 19.11-16 97, 121–23, 125, 130, 148, 149 19.11-13 102 19.11 122, 148, 180, 227, 228

273 19.12

122, 149, 223 19.13-14 227 19.13 10, 124 19.14 124 19.15 10, 107, 117, 122, 149, 150, 154, 166, 182, 225 111, 122, 19.16 182, 188 19.17-18 123, 236 19.18 182 19.19 111, 123, 182, 183, 227 19.20-21 184 19.20 123, 170, 173, 183, 184, 226 19.21 117, 123, 221, 227 20–22 184 20.1 160, 184 20.4-6 34, 186, 216, 223, 225, 228 20.4-5 229 20.4 21, 24, 26, 101, 103– 105, 110, 189, 210, 223, 226, 229, 230 20.5 105 20.6 77, 113, 186, 223, 229 20.7-8 227 20.7 184 20.8 184, 227 20.9 184, 228 20.10 153, 170, 173, 184, 228 20.11-15 165, 185

Index of References 126, 152 133, 185, 236 20.13-14 148 20.13 119, 133, 185, 236 20.14-15 223, 236 119, 185 20.14 20.15 183, 185 20.18-19 103 21–22 186, 221 21.1–22.5 108 21.1-3 186 21.1 160 21.2 18, 180, 214 148, 180, 21.4 186 21.5 228 21.6 106, 107, 118, 222 21.7-8 221 21.7 148, 186 21.8 170, 173, 186 21.9 214 21.10 18 21.12 215 21.14 16, 186 21.16 215 21.22 107, 108, 130, 166, 179, 188, 204 21.23 108, 130 21.24-26 186 21.24 111, 114 21.27 185, 186, 214 22.1 108, 130, 147, 164 22.2 103, 222 22.3-4 108, 130 22.3 130, 147 22.4 157, 158 22.5 107, 108, 166 20.11 20.12

22.6-21 103 22.6 101, 107, 187, 216, 228, 236 22.7 113, 114, 136, 139, 187, 236 129, 226 22.8-9 22.9 101, 226 22.12-13 107 22.12 113, 114, 136, 139, 185, 187, 236 22.14-15 186 22.14 222 22.15 214 22.16 100, 101, 103, 118, 141 22.19 222 22.20 113, 136, 139, 236 25.31 155 Apocrypha Tobit 12.5 159 Judith 8.27 134 Wisdom of Solomon 3.8 165 5.23 179 6.9 57 7.1 121, 134 7.26 98 8.3-6 98 9.1 99 9.8 190 14.12-31 165 18.15-16 117

274 Ecclesiasticus 1.11 164 1.30 121, 134 15.18 121, 134 16.4 179 16.12 134 17.15 86 17.19 86 18.1 118 18.13 134 22.6 134 23.19 86 24.1-12 98 28.11 174 30.1 134 34.22 174 36.8 174 39.19 86 42.15 99 42.18-19 121, 134 47.5 85 Baruch 3.32 134 Bel and the Dragon 14.5 118 14.25 118 Susanna 42 134 1 Maccabees 1.37 174, 193 1.39 179 2.12 179 2.35 156 3.4 68 3.54 159 4.38 179 7.17 174 15.4 179 15.29 179 2 Maccabees 1.8 174, 193 4.16-17 135 6.12-17 134, 137

Index of References 6.12-16 135 7.18 135 7.32 135 7.33 118 8.3 192 9.5 121, 134 12.6 173 15.4 118 Pseudepigrapha 1 Enoch 1–36 214 1.2 97 7.5 194 12.5 221 15.3 214 20.1-7 159 21.5 97 22.3 97 27.2-3 171 46.1-6 117 46.4-6 154 47.1-4 191, 202 47.4 202 47.3 185 48.2 117 49.4 154 52.9 154 56.5-8 182 56.7 182 59.27-29 117 69.27 154 70.1 117 74.14 117 74.17 117 85–90 91 86.1-4 185 86.3 160 88.3 160 89.16 91 89.22 91 89.26 91 89.28 91 89.29 91 89.30 91 89.33 91 89.36 91 89.42 91

89.43 91 89.45-46 91 89.45 91 89.50 91 89.51 91 89.52 91 89.54 91 89.57 91 89.61-77 185 89.70 91 89.71 91 89.75 91 89.76 91 90.6 91 90.8-9 91 90.9 85 90.12 91 90.13-14 182 90.17-20 185 90.19 91 90.20 91 90.24 160 90.26-27 171 90.28 91 90.33 91 90.38 91 91.12 232 91.19 232 95.3 232 96.1 232 98.7-8 185 98.12 232 100.3 123, 173 2 Baruch 2.4-5 191 10.1-3 18 11.1 18 21.9 118 21.10 118 23.4-5 202 24.1-2 202 24.1 185 27.7 151 30.1-5 166 48.37 182 55.3 97 67.7 18

275 70.2-10 184 70.8 151 70.20 172 72.1-6 181, 184 3 Enoch 23.18 221 3 Maccabees 2.5 170 6.28 118 4 Ezra 2.38 158 2.40 158 3.1-2 18 3.28-34 18 4.1-5 97 4.28-32 172 4.35-37 191, 202 5.4-5 152 6.2-3 159 6.5 158 6.20 185 7.26-32 166 7.36-38 171 7.39 152 7.88-93 171 9.3 151 10.30 118 11.7-8 160 11.36-46 69 12.32 69 12.32-33 154 13.5-11 182 13.5 182 13.8-11 154 13.34-35 182 13.37-38 154 13.39-40 216 15.8 192 15.9 193 15.35-36 123, 173 31–32 97 4 Maccabees 6.29 190 17.22 190

Index of References Apocalypse of Abraham 10.4 117 11.2-3 117 17.1 118 29.19 232 31.1 159 Apocalypse of Adam 6.1 221 Apocalypse of Elijah 2.5 162 2.32 162 5.6 221 Apocryphon of Ezekiel frag. 2 76 Apocalypse of Moses 27.7 193 28.4 221 Apocalypse of Zephaniah 6.11-12 117 9–12 159 Ascension of Isaiah 9.9 217 Assumption of Moses 10 152 Aristeas the Exegete 132-138 165 Joseph and Aseneth 4.7 213 8.1 213 14.8-9 117 Jubilees 1.25 118 1.27 159 1.29 159 2.1-2 159 2.18 159 15.27 159 21.4 118

23.23 182 31.14 159 38.7 160 Psalms of Solomon 2.1-2 182 11.29 216 14.3 221 17 122 17.21-29 181 17.21-25 154 17.21 69 17.24-27 181 17.24 122 17.26 122 17.29 122 17.35 154 Sibylline Oracles 1.307-308 162 2.15-19 179 2.17 216 2.194-202 152 3.8-45 165 3.52-62 179 3.54 170 3.60 170 3.663-68 182 3.796-803 152 4.119-122 19 4.124 159 4.137-139 19 5.137-154 19 5.143 18 5.158-161 179 5.214-227 19 5.344-50 152 5.372 173 5.377-80 159 8.36-42 179 8.68-72 19 8.353 162 12.78-94 19 13.118 162 Testament of Abraham 9.1 118

276 Testament of Job 5.1 161 43.13 193 Testament of Joseph 19 89 19.1-5 89 19.6-7 89 19.8-12 90 19.8 89, 90, 184 19.11-12 90 Testament of Levi 3.5 159 4.1 152 6.9 191 8.2 159 18.11 221 Testament of Moses 10.5 152 Testament of Naphtali 3.3-5 165 Testament of Solomon 2.9 165 3.5-6 165 6.1 165 Philo De Abrahamo 121 106 Quod deterius potiori insidari soleat 160 106 Quod Deus sit immutabilis 11 106 De mutatione nominum 11 106 De opificio mundi 172 106

Index of References De somniis 1.231 106 De specialibus legibus 1.13-31 165 3.181 106 De vita Mosis 1.75 106 Josephus Jewish Antiquities 2.14.2 163 2.14.4 163 2.14.5 163 2.15.3 163 6.6.1 156 6.6.3 156 8.13.1-13.8 140 8.13.7 106 9.4.2 140 9.6.1 140 9.6.4 140 10.5.1 76 12.6.2 156 12.11.1 156 14.5.5 156 18.6.10 168 Against Apion 2.33-34 165 Jewish War 1.16.3 156 4.11.5 168 5.216 190 5.224 190 6.7.3 156 6.85 123 7.3.3 44 7.5.3-7 181 7.5.5 183 7.10.1 45 Dead Sea Scrolls 1QH 8.5-6 221 17.13 170

1QM 1.1-5 165 1.1 232 1.11-12 219 1.13 219 7.6 213 7.14 159 10–12 182 12.11-12 184 14.2-3 219 18.1-3 165 1QpHab 5.4 230 13.1-4 159 1QSa 1.18 165 2.8 170 2.19 165 3.20-21 165 4.13 170 1QSb 5.24-29 85 5.26 85 5.27-29 69 4Q174 1.1.11-12 69 4Q252 5.3-4 69 4QpIsaa frags. 8-10 3.18-23 181 11Q13 11–13 165 Babylonian Talmud Giṭin 57a 123 Jerusalem Talmud Ta‘anit 4.8 123

277 Other Rabbinic Works Lamentations Rabbah 2.2.4 123 Jewish Authors The Prayer of Rabbi Shimon ben Yohai 9 123 Apostolic Fathers 1 Clement 2.4 203 5 190 5.2 33 5.3 33 5.4-7 33 7.4 76 7.6 216 7.7 76 7.8 76 8.3 76 8.6 216 9.3 76 9.4 76 10.11–11.2 76 11.1 170 12.1–78.4 76 12.1-7 76 12.7 76 16 83 58.2 203 59.2 203 2 Clement 1.1 154 5.2 71 20.2 118 Barnabas 2.5 74 5.1-2 83 7 190 7.2 154 Didache 11–12 140 11.1-2 141 11.5 141

Index of References 12.1 141 16.6 159 Shepherd of Hermas Similitude 6.2.2-4 59 8.8.2 58, 59 9.18.1-5 58 9.19.1 58, 60 9.19.2 58 9.19.3 59 9.26.5-6 58 Vision 2.2.4 58 2.3.2 118 3.7.2 118 Ignatius To the Ephesians 1.1 33 3.1 33 10.3 33 14.1 190 18.2 69 20.2 69 21.1 189 To the Magnesians 5.2 33 To Polycarp 2.3 189, 190 6.1 33, 189 7.1 33, 190 To the Romans 1.2 190 2.1 190 2.2 189 4.1–5.3 199 4.1-2 33 4.1 190 4.2 189 5.3 33, 190 6.3 33 17.3 69

To the Smyrnaeans 1.1 69 4.2 33 10.2 189 11.1 190 To the Trallians 12.2 190 13.3 190 Martyrdom of Polycarp 1.1 203 6.1-2 60 9.2-3 35 10.2 37 12.1 49 14.1 35, 189 14.2 203 19.1 203 Nag Hammadi Codices Testimony of Truth 31.21–32.21 48 New Testament Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha Apocalypse of Peter 7–8 172 Gospel of Peter 4.14 80 Classical and Ancient Christian Literature Augustine Sermons 304.2 213 Cicero De Republica 1.16.25 152 Clement of Alexandria Paidagogos 1.10 76

278 Quis dives salvetur 42 22 Stromateis 4.4 190 Cassius Dio Historia 47.40.2 159 66.19.3 19 76.6 40 Cyprian De habitu virginum 4–5 213 Epiphanius Panarion 16.2.1 88 Eusebius Historia ecclesiastica 3.17 16 4.26.9 16, 20 7.25 16 Greek Apocalypse of Daniel 4.6-8 123 6.1-3 123

Index of References Horace Carmen 5 178 4.13.3 178 Irenaeus Adversus haereses 1.26.3 138 4.21.3 148 5.30.3 16 24 36

Oracle of Leo the Wise 1.283-288 123 Origen Commentarii in evangelium Joannis 1.1-4 213 5.4 145

Justin 1 Apologia 4 33 17 36 26 47 45.4 203

Exhortatio 14 190 15 190 30 189, 190 49 190 50 190

Dialogus cum Tryphone 14.8 116

Homiliae in Leviticum 2 189

Juvenal Satires 9.130 178

Ovid Metamorphoses 15.785 152 18.784-788 159

Lucian 1.278 159

Greek Tiburtine Sybil 183-184 123

Martial 2.2 21 8.15 21 8.78 21

Herodotus 7.37.2 160

Martyrdom of Carpus 21 36

Hippolytus Commentarium in Danielem 34.3 145

Martyrs of Lyons 1.4-6 34 1.5 203 1.10 203 1.11 47 1.13 203 1.14 60 1.26 203 1.39 189

Refutatio omnium haeresium 7.36 138

1.45-46 61 1.48 203

Tristia 1.5.69 178 3.7.51-52 178 Philostratus Vitae sophistarum 2.5.3 168 Vita Apollonii 5.8 168 Pliny the Elder Naturalis historia 2.57 159 3.66-67 178 17.1 40 17.5 40

279 Pliny the Younger Epistulae 1.12.6-8 20 3.11.3-4 21 4.24.4-5 21 6.16.11 160 7.27.14 21 10.96 40-42 10.97 42

Index of References Statius Sylvae 3.3.171 21 4.1.34-39 21 4.3.159 21

Panegyricus 11.4 20 48.3-5 20 75.5 20 82.4 20 90.5-7 20 95.3-4 21

Suetonius Domitian 1.1 20 1.3 20 4.1 20 4.4 20 5 20 12.1 20 12.2 23 14.1 20 22.1 20

Plutarch Crassus 25.11 183

Nero 38 40 57.2 19

Pontus Vita Cyprian 1 190

Tacitus Agricola 2–3 21 44–45 21

Quintilian Institutio oratoria 10.1.91 21 Saturus Passio Perpetuae 17.3 172 Scillitan Martyrs 6 36 Seneca Ad Helviam 6.3 178 Silius Italicus Punica 3.607 21

Annals 15.44

40, 59

Germanica 37 20 39 20 43 20 Historiae 2.8-9 19 4.2 20 4.68 20 Tertullian Adversus Marcionem 1.29.2 138 4.2 22 5.16 22

Adversus Valentinianos 43 190 de Anima 8 200 55 189 Apologeticus 2 46 2.4-5 33 5 20 29–33 36 40 34 50 189 De pudicitia 22 189 Scorpiace 1, 5. 7

47

De spectaculis 30 172 Victorinus Commentary on the Apocalypse 10.11 22 Virgil Aenid 6.783 178 Georgicon 1.463-468 152

I n d ex of A ut hor s Adams, E. 152 Allen, G. V. 86 Allison, D. C. 49, 55, 71, 78, 98 Allo, E. B. 124 Amundsen, D. W. 199 Aune, D. E. 18, 19, 23, 65, 68, 70, 74, 81, 83, 86, 87, 97, 102, 104, 106, 108, 111, 118–21, 124, 127, 138, 141, 146–48, 152–54, 156, 158–60, 162, 163, 164, 167, 171–75, 178, 180–82, 189, 190, 192–96, 200, 203–13, 215, 217, 221, 222, 229, 230, 234 Barclay, J. M. G. 35 Barker, M. 178 Barnes, T. D. 28, 44 Barr, D. L. 9, 11, 13, 66, 68, 132, 153, 154, 237 Barrett, C. K. 81 Bauckham, R. 10, 11, 66, 70, 72, 79, 101, 102, 114, 118, 123, 129, 130, 132, 145–47, 152, 159, 164, 167, 173, 190–92, 196, 197, 202, 203, 205–207, 213, 215–17, 220, 229 Beale, G. K. 85, 86, 149, 150, 153, 160, 164, 189, 190, 192, 198, 205, 211, 215, 217, 229 Beare, F. W. 43 Beasley-Murray, G. R. 20, 126, 145, 153, 205 Beckwith, I. T. 16, 124, 126, 146, 155, 181, 182, 232 Bell, A. A. 18, 19, 161 Benko, S. 37 Best, E. 52, 214 Betz, H. D. 193 Bloom, H. 2 Blount, B. K. 9, 11, 12, 93, 105, 117, 119, 124, 153, 158–61, 163, 165, 172, 173, 175, 180–82, 184, 185, 190, 191, 194–96, 201, 206, 218, 219, 223, 224, 229, 232 Boesack, A. A. 12 Bogaert, P.-M. 202 Borgen, P. 232

Boring, M. E. 49, 66, 67, 81, 124, 125, 149, 155, 158, 168, 171, 189, 215 Bornkamm, G. 50 Boxall, I. 4, 22, 147–50, 156, 172, 181, 184, 195 Boyarin, D. 47 Brawley, R. L. 31 Bredin, M. 10, 66, 68, 155, 156, 164, 223, 236, 237 Brent, A. 20 Brown, P. 189, 190 Brown, R. E. 62, 80, 81, 89 Brox, N. 109 Bruce, F. F. 35, 56 Büchsel, F. 72 Buck, P. L. 199 Buschmann, G. 60, 204 Butterweck, C. 199 Caird, G. B. 67, 86, 125, 145, 149, 155, 156, 163, 171, 173, 182, 184, 190, 205, 213, 232 Campbell, W. G. 8, 13 Carey, G. 2, 12, 163, 164 Carrell, P. R. 117 Carroll, R. P. 6 Casey, M. 173 Castelli, E. 47 Charles, R. H. 6, 16, 22, 87, 124, 149, 153, 159, 190, 192, 194, 205, 213, 215, 217, 229 Childs, B. S. 4, 6 Clark, J. M. 3 Cobb, L. S. 47 Collins, J. J. 127 Collins, R. F. 61 Conzelmann, H. 61, 137 Cranfield, C. E. B. 204 Crossan, J. D. 8, 11 Davies, W. D. 49, 55, 71, 78, 98 Davis, D. R. 145 Davis, R. D. 145 de Jonge, H. J. 19 de Ste Croix, G. E. M. 28, 35, 41, 44, 199

281

Index of Authors Authors

de Villiers, P. G. R. 10 Decock, P. 5, 10, 12 Dehandschutter, B. 102, 103 Delehaye, H. 189 Delling, G. 204 deSilva, D. A. 13, 22, 119, 138, 139, 143, 163, 171, 179, 232 Dibelius, M. 61, 137 Dixon, S. U. 103 Dodd, C. H. 6, 80, 89, 91, 92 Donfried, K. P. 35 Downing, F. G. 43 Downing, J. 4 Doyle, T. 8, 67 Draper, J. A. 215 Droge, A. J. 189 Duff, P. B. 12, 22, 225

Heffernan, T. J. 172 Heil, J. P. 148, 150, 190, 200 Hellholm, D. 145 Hemer, C. J. 23, 222 Herion, G. A. 155 Hill, D. 103 Holmes, M. W. 58, 76 Holtz, T. 81, 108, 127, 145, 147 Hopkins, K. 28 Horrell, D. G. 43 Houlden, J. L. 61, 62, 137 Hurtado, L. W. 23, 32, 95, 119, 120, 197–99 Hyldahl, J. 48 Hylen, S. 13

Edwards, M. J. 63 Elliott, S. M. 234

Jeremias, J. 71, 127 Johns, L. L. 4, 9, 66, 67, 69, 72–74, 81–83, 89, 91–94 Johnson, L. T. 58, 99 Jones, B. W. 20 Jones, D. L. 20 Jung, C. H. 2

Farmer, R. L. 155 Fee, G. D. 139 Ferguson, E. 199 Feuillet, A. 24, 189, 200 Finnamore, S. 9 Fletcher, M. 177, 178 Ford, J. M. 87, 89, 145, 153, 156, 178, 192, 201, 213, 232 Frankfurter, D. 12 Fredrikson, D. E. 29 Frend, W. H. C. 48 Friesen, S. J. 18, 24, 141, 142 Gallacher, E. V. 4 Glancy, J. A. 179 Goppelt, L. 232 Gunkel, H. 127 Guthrie, D. 66, 137 Haenchen, E. 31 Håken, H. U 200 Hanson, A. T. 9 Harker, A. 207 Harrington, W. J. 68, 155, 156, 163, 185, 190, 201, 208, 216, 232, 233 Harris, D. M. 5, 6 Hartog, P. 60, 204 Hawthorne, G. F. 100 Hays, R. B. 7

281

Isaac, E. 91, 202

Käsemann, E. 97, 204 Kee, H. C. 90 Kelber, W. H. 52 Kelhoffer, J. A. 19, 28 Keller, J. N. D. 9 Kelly, J. N. D. 61, 137 Keresztes, P. 41, 42 Kiddle, M. 192 King, K. L. 48 Klassen, W. 10, 93, 192 Klawiter, F. C. 48 Klijn, A. F. J. 202 Knibb, M. A. 217 Koch, K. 90 Koester, C. R. 68, 69, 82, 94, 97, 109, 110, 114, 124, 125, 130, 138, 139, 149, 150, 160, 162–65, 167, 172, 174, 176, 180, 182, 191–94, 196, 201, 205, 209, 212, 213, 215, 216, 224, 229, 230, 232, 233 Koskenniemi, E. 81 Kovaks, J. 3, 4 Kraft, H. 22–24, 83, 189 Krauss, F. B. 152

282

Index of Authors Authors

Kraybill, J. N. 66, 67 Kruger, M. J. 2 Ladd, G. E. 148, 164 Lambrecht, J. 23 Lampe, G. W. H. 49, 50 Lane, W. L. 56 Last, H. 43 Lawrence, D. H. 3 Laws, S. 66, 91 Lee, M. V. 200 Lieu, J. 47 Lightfoot, J. B. 20, 111 Lim, K. Y. 29 Lincoln, A. T. 56 Lindars, B. 56, 80 Lohmeyer, E. 89 Lohse, E. 110 Longenecker, R. N. 32 Malbon, E. S. 52 Malina, B. J. 88, 89 Marcus, J. 49–51, 152, 168 Marshall, J. W. 12 Martínez, F. G. 85, 159 Martin, D. B. 73 Matthews, S. 32, 33, 47 Mayo, P. L. 23 Mazzaferri, F. D. 103, 145 McBay, S. 152 McCarthy, M. C. 155 McKelvey, R. J. 153, 181 Merkel, H. 50 Metzger, B. M. 202 Michaelis, W. 107 Michaels, J. R. 149, 205, 207 Middleton, P. 10, 25, 28, 29, 32, 34, 37, 39, 47, 48, 52, 54, 60, 72, 77, 109, 135, 172, 189, 190, 198–201, 203, 207, 211, 212, 214, 221, 233 Millar, F. 42 Moberly, R. B. 18 Moltmann, J. 155 Moore, S. D. 179, 212 Morris, K. R. 199 Morris, L. 81 Moses, R. E. 137 Moss, C. R. 28, 33, 199 Mounce, R. H. 89, 149, 156, 181, 229

282

Moyise, S. 6, 13, 67, 95, 155 Müller, H.-P. 127 Mueller, J. R. 76 Murmelstein, B. 90 Murphy, F. J. 189, 212, 229 Musurillo, H. 35 Nanos, M. D. 204 Neville, D. J. 183 Newport, K. G. C. 4 Nisula, K. 81 O’Neill, J. C. 90 Økland, J. 212, 213 Olson, D. C. 212–14 Osborne, G. R. 16, 93, 124, 167, 192 Pagels, E. 48 Pattemore, S. 192, 198, 200, 201, 205, 207, 212, 232 Perham, M. 190 Perkins, J. 47 Perry, P. S. 234 Pippin, T. 3, 13, 177, 212, 213, 237 Radcliffe, T. 49, 60 Reddish, M. G. 124, 158, 189 Resseguie, J. L. 9, 94, 154, 208, 216 Rissi, M. 149, 158, 178 Rist, M. 19 Robinson, J. A. T. 18, 27 Robinson, S. E. 76 Rojas-Flores, G. 17, 18 Roloff, J. 124, 126, 127, 146, 149, 163, 182, 183 Rossing, B. R. 9, 155 Rowland, C. 3, 4, 10, 156 Ryan, S. M. 103 Sanders, J. T. 31 Schimanowski, G. 69, 93 Schüssler-Fiorenza, E. 11, 12, 16, 141, 159, 163, 178, 192, 212, 217 Searle, J. T. 12 Self, W. 2 Sherwin-White, A. N. 28, 41, 43 Siecienski, R. 49 Skaggs, R. 8, 67 Slater, T. B. 17

283

Index of Authors Authors

Smalley, S. S. 7, 12, 16, 17, 71, 79, 94, 97, 109, 123, 124, 145, 153, 155, 163, 167, 171, 182, 184, 189, 191, 194, 200, 229, 230, 232 Smith, D. R. 137 South, J. T. 137 Spitta, F. 89 Stauffer, E. 145 Stenström, H. 212 Stone, M. E. 202 Strauss, M. L. 69 Streett, M. J. 5, 8, 10 Stuckenbruck, L. T. 117 Stuhlmann, R. 204 Sweet, J. P. M. 68, 94, 127, 148, 155, 156, 158, 183, 198, 219 Swete, H. B. 16, 22, 119, 124, 145, 158, 172, 190, 213, 224, 232 Tabernee, W. 56 Tabor, J. D. 4, 162, 189 Talbert, C. H. 89 Tannehill, R. C. 52 Thompson, L. L. 20–22, 38, 180, 208 Thompson, M. M. 97 Tigchelaar, E. J. C. 85, 159 Tilley, M. A. 48 Tite, P. L. 48 Toppari, J. 81 Travis, S. H. 155 Trites, A. A. 102, 109 Trocmé, E. 52 Tyson, J. B. 52

283

Ulfgard, H. 200 van Henten, J. W. 23, 27, 109, 198, 205 van Iersel, B. M. F. 49, 60 van Kooten, G. H. 17, 28 van Schaik, A. P. 168 van der Horst, P. W. 89 Volf, M. 12 von Hase, K. 97, 98 von Rad, G. 161 Weeden, T. W. 52 Wilcox, M. 49, 60 Wilson, J. C. 18, 20 Wink, W. 3, 6 Witherington, B. 139, 161, 208 Witulski, T. 19 Wolf, J. G. 204 Woodman, S. P. 7, 185 Wright, N. T. 8 Yarbro Collins, A. 3, 11, 12, 17, 18, 23, 24, 38, 117, 127, 143, 192, 193, 201, 205, 207, 212, 213, 215, 216, 229, 232, 234 Yoder, J. H. 11, 223