Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

[Revelation-list] Jacque Ellul (was: the Man Child and the woman)

Expand Messages
  • Juan Stam
    I began reading Ellul with great expectations, but was largely disappointed. for several reasons: 1) Ellul s complicated arguments were hard for me to follow,
    Message 1 of 24 , Jan 10, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      I began reading Ellul with great expectations, but was largely disappointed.
      for several reasons:

      1) Ellul's complicated arguments were hard for me to follow, which makes me
      think that first-century common readers ("Joe Doe of Ephesus", Mrs
      Everywoman of Smyrna) would have had even more trouble understanding
      Revelation if it had such involuted significance. I believe "John" was a
      pastor, as well as a prophet, and wrote for flesh-and-blood people whom he
      knew. (In this, he differs from most other apocalyptic authors). From the
      stand-point of rhetorical criticism and reader-response, I find it hard to
      believe John's meaning was so complicated.

      2) Specifically, I have doubts about the concentric structure of Revelation
      proposed by Ellul and others (Fiorenza, and my friends and colleagues, Pablo
      Richard & Ricardo Foulkes). I know that chiasmus was an important element
      of some ancient mental structure, and that some/many passages (and perhaps
      some books of the Bible) are concentric, but the evidences of concentricity
      for Revelation as a whole seem largely speculative to me, hence authors
      disagree on the concentric structures they propose. Concentricity produces a
      structure or logic of the book which, it seems to me, the original hearers
      would have missed (especially since they had no written copies to turn to
      for more carfeful analysis). John seems to me to be a very reader-sensitive
      author, and I doubt that he would have confused his recipients with so
      complicated a scheme.

      I have tried to look around in the vast apocalyptic literature
      (Charlesworth, Díez Macho, etc) for other apocaluyptic works whose over-all
      strucutre is concentric, and have not been able to find any. Can someone
      point to such parallels?

      3) Although Ellul's commentary includes some brilliant passages (which I
      quote in my own commentary), too many of his specific interpretations seems
      speculative to me. To me, he seems to impose his pre-supposed scheme on the
      text rather than let the text speak for itself.

      Perhaps something along the way just prejudiced me against this commentary,
      but I throw out these remarks to see what others think.

      muchas gracias!!

      Juan Stam (Universidad Nacional, Costa Rica)
    • Richard H. Anderson <randerson58@comcast
      ... disappointed. ... makes me . . . I find it hard to ... Revelation ... colleagues, Pablo ... element ... perhaps ... concentricity ... authors ... I agree
      Message 2 of 24 , Jan 20, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Juan Stam <jstam@u...> wrote:
        >
        > I began reading Ellul with great expectations, but was largely
        disappointed.
        > for several reasons:
        >
        > 1) Ellul's complicated arguments were hard for me to follow, which
        makes me . . . I find it hard to
        > believe John's meaning was so complicated.
        >
        > 2) Specifically, I have doubts about the concentric structure of
        Revelation
        > proposed by Ellul and others (Fiorenza, and my friends and
        colleagues, Pablo
        > Richard & Ricardo Foulkes). I know that chiasmus was an important
        element
        > of some ancient mental structure, and that some/many passages (and
        perhaps
        > some books of the Bible) are concentric, but the evidences of
        concentricity
        > for Revelation as a whole seem largely speculative to me, hence
        authors
        > disagree on the concentric structures they propose.

        I agree that chiasmus arguments of complicated structures are hard
        to follow. I tried to find a good working definition of chiasmus
        that I could use to analyse the various arguments without success.
        Most of the definition I have seen have been definition by example
        such as "This may involve a repetition of the same words
        ('Pleasure's a sin, and sometimes sin's a pleasure' --Byron)"

        Any suggestions for a good working definition of chiasmus?

        Richard H. Anderson
      • Juan Stam
        Of course, the term comes from the Greek letter Chi, and refers to a structure of A1 - B1 - B2 -A2 (inverted, like the points of a Chi). A good example is
        Message 3 of 24 , Jan 20, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          Of course, the term comes from the Greek letter Chi, and refers to a
          structure of A1 - B1 - B2 -A2 (inverted, like the points of a Chi). A good
          example is Phil 2:6:

          A1 "being in the form of God"
          B1 "did not consider equality an usurpation"
          B2 "but emptied himself" (vs usurp)
          A2 "and took the form of a servant"

          Here A2 clearly pairs with A1 ("form" both times), on the outside of the
          chiasmus, and B2 with B1 on the inside (as corresponding negative and
          positive pair).

          (I'm using the English to avoid transliteration complications from the
          Greek)

          When the same struggle is applied to large documents, it is usually called
          concentric, & the key to the message is located in the very center (ej Rev
          12 for book of Rev)

          Hope this helps,

          Juan Stam (Costa Rica)
        • jonp
          While he likes the phrase concentric pattern for both types, Charles Talbert (Reading John, especially bottom of page 124) distinguishes chiasms into two
          Message 4 of 24 , Jan 21, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            While he likes the phrase "concentric pattern" for both types, Charles
            Talbert (Reading John, especially bottom of page 124) distinguishes
            "chiasms" into two types, an odd-numbered pattern (ABA or ABCBA), which
            is accurately called chiasm, and an even-numbered pattern (ABBA or
            ABCCBA) which is correctly called an epanados. The chiasm, with a single
            element in the center, highlights that center as the key to the passage
            or the book. The epanados, on the other hand, places the emphasis at
            the edges.

            If one reads Revelation as a chiasm (as Fiorenza essentially does) the
            emphasis would be somewhere in chapters 12-14. If one reads it as an
            epanados (as Strand does, although he calls it a chiasm), the emphasis
            rightly comes at the edges, the prologue and the epilogue. Of the two
            options, I prefer that of Fiorenza.

            One does not need to succumb to the argument that all chiasms are
            inventions of the interpreter, it seems to me that ABA thinking was as
            natural to the Hebrew mindset as ABC thinking is to ours. Just as an
            interpreter seeing a 27-point chiasm in this message is indulging in
            fantasy, I suggest that any genuine chiasm in Revelation will be natural
            to the author's thought process and will tend to be relatively simple
            (perhaps seven-point at times?). It seems to me that Talbert illustrates
            a responsible use of chiasm in his book Reading John.

            I address these issues briefly in my popular commentary on John.

            Jon Paulien, Chair
            New Testament Department
            Andrews University
            jonp@...


            -----Original Message-----
            From: juanstam@... [mailto:juanstam@...] On Behalf Of
            Juan Stam
            Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 10:03 AM
            To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: Re: [revelation-list] Re: chiasmus


            Of course, the term comes from the Greek letter Chi, and refers to a
            structure of A1 - B1 - B2 -A2 (inverted, like the points of a Chi). A
            good
            example is Phil 2:6:

            A1 "being in the form of God"
            B1 "did not consider equality an usurpation"
            B2 "but emptied himself" (vs usurp)
            A2 "and took the form of a servant"

            Here A2 clearly pairs with A1 ("form" both times), on the outside of the
            chiasmus, and B2 with B1 on the inside (as corresponding negative and
            positive pair).

            (I'm using the English to avoid transliteration complications from the
            Greek)

            When the same struggle is applied to large documents, it is usually
            called
            concentric, & the key to the message is located in the very center (ej
            Rev
            12 for book of Rev)

            Hope this helps,

            Juan Stam (Costa Rica)



            To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            revelation-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
            http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          • Juan Stam
            I agree with John Paulien that ABA thinking was natural to the Hebrew mindset (perhaps like puns or alliteration in modern mindset) but my doubts arrive when
            Message 5 of 24 , Jan 22, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              I agree with John Paulien that ABA thinking was natural to the Hebrew
              mindset (perhaps like puns or alliteration in modern mindset) but my doubts
              arrive when concentric patterns are imposed on entire books, like
              Revelation.

              To corroborate or refute these concentricity proposals, I have looked a bit
              for other apocalyptic literature that might have a concentric pattern, but I
              have found none. Does anyone know of examples in apocalyptic literare?

              Juan Stam



              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "jonp" <jonp@...>
              To: <revelation-list@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 2:29 PM
              Subject: RE: [revelation-list] Re: chiasmus


              > While he likes the phrase "concentric pattern" for both types, Charles
              > Talbert (Reading John, especially bottom of page 124) distinguishes
              > "chiasms" into two types, an odd-numbered pattern (ABA or ABCBA), which
              > is accurately called chiasm, and an even-numbered pattern (ABBA or
              > ABCCBA) which is correctly called an epanados. The chiasm, with a single
              > element in the center, highlights that center as the key to the passage
              > or the book. The epanados, on the other hand, places the emphasis at
              > the edges.
              >
              > If one reads Revelation as a chiasm (as Fiorenza essentially does) the
              > emphasis would be somewhere in chapters 12-14. If one reads it as an
              > epanados (as Strand does, although he calls it a chiasm), the emphasis
              > rightly comes at the edges, the prologue and the epilogue. Of the two
              > options, I prefer that of Fiorenza.
              >
              > One does not need to succumb to the argument that all chiasms are
              > inventions of the interpreter, it seems to me that ABA thinking was as
              > natural to the Hebrew mindset as ABC thinking is to ours. Just as an
              > interpreter seeing a 27-point chiasm in this message is indulging in
              > fantasy, I suggest that any genuine chiasm in Revelation will be natural
              > to the author's thought process and will tend to be relatively simple
              > (perhaps seven-point at times?). It seems to me that Talbert illustrates
              > a responsible use of chiasm in his book Reading John.
              >
              > I address these issues briefly in my popular commentary on John.
              >
              > Jon Paulien, Chair
              > New Testament Department
              > Andrews University
              > jonp@...
              >
              >
              > -----Original Message-----
              > From: juanstam@... [mailto:juanstam@...] On Behalf Of
              > Juan Stam
              > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 10:03 AM
              > To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
              > Subject: Re: [revelation-list] Re: chiasmus
              >
              >
              > Of course, the term comes from the Greek letter Chi, and refers to a
              > structure of A1 - B1 - B2 -A2 (inverted, like the points of a Chi). A
              > good
              > example is Phil 2:6:
              >
              > A1 "being in the form of God"
              > B1 "did not consider equality an usurpation"
              > B2 "but emptied himself" (vs usurp)
              > A2 "and took the form of a servant"
              >
              > Here A2 clearly pairs with A1 ("form" both times), on the outside of the
              > chiasmus, and B2 with B1 on the inside (as corresponding negative and
              > positive pair).
              >
              > (I'm using the English to avoid transliteration complications from the
              > Greek)
              >
              > When the same struggle is applied to large documents, it is usually
              > called
              > concentric, & the key to the message is located in the very center (ej
              > Rev
              > 12 for book of Rev)
              >
              > Hope this helps,
              >
              > Juan Stam (Costa Rica)
              >
              >
              >
              > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              > revelation-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              >
              >
              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
              > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              >
              >
              >
              > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              > revelation-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              >
              >
              > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              >
              >
              >
              >
            • jonp
              I like Juan s proposal for a comprehensive search for concentric patterns in ancient apocalyptic outside Revelation. This would have some bearing on structural
              Message 6 of 24 , Jan 22, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                I like Juan's proposal for a comprehensive search for concentric
                patterns in ancient apocalyptic outside Revelation. This would have some
                bearing on structural proposals for John's Apocalypse. It should not be
                forgotten, however, that Revelation has characteristics of prophecy,
                drama and epistle and is, therefore, not a pure apocalypse, if such a
                thing ever existed. If Revelation proves to be chiastic, it may be on
                account of the non-apocalyptic aspects of the document.

                Although his work has not engaged wide attention, Kenneth Strand notes
                some compelling evidence (in my opinion) for a concentric pattern in
                John's Apocalypse in his book Interpreting the Book of Revelation,
                second edition (Naples, FL: Ann Arbor Publishers, 1979), pages 45-47.
                While I believe his analysis runs aground a bit in the middle, the
                concentric parallels between Rev 1-11 and 16-22 are rather remarkable
                and deserve some sort of attention in any analysis of the structure of
                the book.

                Bowman's seven-part dramatic structure of the book (in the Interpreter's
                Dictionary of the Bible, article on Revelation) fits remarkably well
                with Strand's analysis, suggesting, perhaps, a Hebrew twist on a plot
                scheme drawn from Greek drama.

                Jon Paulien, Chair
                New Testament Department
                Andrews University
                jonp@...


                -----Original Message-----
                From: juanstam@... [mailto:juanstam@...] On Behalf Of
                Juan Stam
                Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 10:10 AM
                To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [revelation-list] Re: chiasmus


                I agree with John Paulien that ABA thinking was natural to the Hebrew
                mindset (perhaps like puns or alliteration in modern mindset) but my
                doubts
                arrive when concentric patterns are imposed on entire books, like
                Revelation.

                To corroborate or refute these concentricity proposals, I have looked a
                bit
                for other apocalyptic literature that might have a concentric pattern,
                but I
                have found none. Does anyone know of examples in apocalyptic literare?

                Juan Stam



                ----- Original Message -----
                From: "jonp" <jonp@...>
                To: <revelation-list@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 2:29 PM
                Subject: RE: [revelation-list] Re: chiasmus


                > While he likes the phrase "concentric pattern" for both types, Charles
                > Talbert (Reading John, especially bottom of page 124) distinguishes
                > "chiasms" into two types, an odd-numbered pattern (ABA or ABCBA),
                which
                > is accurately called chiasm, and an even-numbered pattern (ABBA or
                > ABCCBA) which is correctly called an epanados. The chiasm, with a
                single
                > element in the center, highlights that center as the key to the
                passage
                > or the book. The epanados, on the other hand, places the emphasis at
                > the edges.
                >
                > If one reads Revelation as a chiasm (as Fiorenza essentially does) the
                > emphasis would be somewhere in chapters 12-14. If one reads it as an
                > epanados (as Strand does, although he calls it a chiasm), the emphasis
                > rightly comes at the edges, the prologue and the epilogue. Of the two
                > options, I prefer that of Fiorenza.
                >
                > One does not need to succumb to the argument that all chiasms are
                > inventions of the interpreter, it seems to me that ABA thinking was as
                > natural to the Hebrew mindset as ABC thinking is to ours. Just as an
                > interpreter seeing a 27-point chiasm in this message is indulging in
                > fantasy, I suggest that any genuine chiasm in Revelation will be
                natural
                > to the author's thought process and will tend to be relatively simple
                > (perhaps seven-point at times?). It seems to me that Talbert
                illustrates
                > a responsible use of chiasm in his book Reading John.
                >
                > I address these issues briefly in my popular commentary on John.
                >
                > Jon Paulien, Chair
                > New Testament Department
                > Andrews University
                > jonp@...
                >
                >
                > -----Original Message-----
                > From: juanstam@... [mailto:juanstam@...] On Behalf Of
                > Juan Stam
                > Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 10:03 AM
                > To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
                > Subject: Re: [revelation-list] Re: chiasmus
                >
                >
                > Of course, the term comes from the Greek letter Chi, and refers to a
                > structure of A1 - B1 - B2 -A2 (inverted, like the points of a Chi).
                A
                > good
                > example is Phil 2:6:
                >
                > A1 "being in the form of God"
                > B1 "did not consider equality an usurpation"
                > B2 "but emptied himself" (vs usurp)
                > A2 "and took the form of a servant"
                >
                > Here A2 clearly pairs with A1 ("form" both times), on the outside of
                the
                > chiasmus, and B2 with B1 on the inside (as corresponding negative and
                > positive pair).
                >
                > (I'm using the English to avoid transliteration complications from the
                > Greek)
                >
                > When the same struggle is applied to large documents, it is usually
                > called
                > concentric, & the key to the message is located in the very center (ej
                > Rev
                > 12 for book of Rev)
                >
                > Hope this helps,
                >
                > Juan Stam (Costa Rica)
                >
                >
                >
                > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                > revelation-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                >
                >
                >
                > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                >
                >
                >
                > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                > revelation-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                >
                >
                >
                > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                >
                >
                >
                >



                To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                revelation-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
                http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              • Ian Paul
                ... that ... and ... I wonder if we could step back a little and ask a question about methodology, which I think (in this and other areas) is overlooked. What
                Message 7 of 24 , Jan 22, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  John wrote:
                  >Although it is liturgical, the *Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice* is also
                  >apocalyptic in many ways. In this connection, it is worth pointing out
                  that
                  >some scholars see a concentric pattern in this work

                  and

                  >Other scholars, however, see no such concentric structure

                  I wonder if we could step back a little and ask a question about
                  methodology, which I think (in this and other areas) is overlooked. What are
                  the grounds on which we might determine such a structure? What is the root
                  of the disagreements? Is it that certain words are or are not present, or
                  themes are thought to be present or absent--or what?

                  I do not have the arguments about Revelation's structure in my head to do
                  such an analysis spontaneously--but I think it would be fruitful to
                  enquire... (The one example I have to hand is Alan Garrow's unusual thesis
                  about Revelation's structure, and I do think it founders on precisely this
                  question of method.)

                  Ian Paul
                  .......................
                  Revd Dr Ian Paul 32 Penn Hill Avenue, Poole, Dorset BH14 9LZ
                  01202 745963 fax 01202 385539
                  Also Managing Editor, Grove Books Ltd, Ridley Hall Road, Cambridge CB3 9HU
                  01223 464748 fax 01223 464849
                  http://www.grovebooks.co.uk
                • John C. Poirier
                  Although it is liturgical, the *Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice* is also apocalyptic in many ways. In this connection, it is worth pointing out that some
                  Message 8 of 24 , Jan 22, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Although it is liturgical, the *Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice* is also
                    apocalyptic in many ways. In this connection, it is worth pointing out that
                    some scholars see a concentric pattern in this work, and regard the liturgy for
                    week 7 (out of 13 total) as the climax of the work. (I think this is Carol
                    Newsom's view, if I remember correctly.)

                    Other scholars, however, see no such concentric structure, and identify week 13
                    as the climax. Like Stam, I am also skeptical of "concentricity proposals," and
                    my own view of *Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice* is that it is not concentric.
                    Nevertheless, it is worth noting that some scholars *think* it is, and their
                    arguments might be relevant to the present discussion.


                    John C. Poirier
                    Middletown, Ohio


                    Juan Stam wrote:

                    > To corroborate or refute these concentricity proposals, I have looked a bit
                    > for other apocalyptic literature that might have a concentric pattern, but I
                    > have found none. Does anyone know of examples in apocalyptic literare?
                  • Richard Anderson
                    Dr. Ian Paul wrote: I wonder if we could step back a little and ask a question about methodology, which I think (in this and other areas) is overlooked. What
                    Message 9 of 24 , Jan 22, 2003
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Dr. Ian Paul wrote: I wonder if we could step back a little and ask a
                      question about
                      methodology, which I think (in this and other areas) is overlooked. What are
                      the grounds on which we might determine such a structure? What is the root
                      of the disagreements? Is it that certain words are or are not present, or
                      themes are thought to be present or absent--or what?

                      Since my initial inquiry to this list, I have learned that Ian Thompson
                      established a criteria which has been cited by others for micro-chiasmus and
                      Craig Blomberg a criteria which has been cited by others for macro-chiasmus.
                      Both of these studies are cited in the "Literary Development of John 13-17,
                      A Chiastic Reading": http://clawww.lmu.edu/~fjust/Review_Brouwer.htm .

                      I hope to obtain at least one of these publications and report back to this
                      list. I have wondered what basis any one had for a macro-chiasmus covering
                      the entire book of Revelation, Gospel of Mark or Amos. However Augustine
                      Stock writes that we need to remember that there was no paragraphs, periods,
                      capitalization punctuation, quotation marks, and other such synthetic
                      devices in ancient Hebrew literature and thus rhetorical devices, such as
                      chiasmus, fulfilled this purpose. "Chiastic Awareness and Education in
                      Antiquity," Biblical Theology Bulletin 14 (Jan, 1984), 23.

                      Richard H. Anderson
                    • Ken Flowers <kflowers@alum.mit.edu>
                      I ve done some rather extensive study on chiasmus in Revelation. Much of that study is based on an out of print work by Nils Lund called Studies in
                      Message 10 of 24 , Jan 23, 2003
                      • 0 Attachment
                        I've done some rather extensive study on chiasmus in Revelation.
                        Much of that study is based on an out of print work by Nils Lund
                        called "Studies in Revelation."

                        Lund approaches the topic at a much more scholarly level of detail
                        that would be appropriate for most. I have done some work
                        simplifying Lund's presentation, and removing some arcania.

                        Lund convinced me that there is micro and macro chiasmus in
                        Revelation. (And Parallelisms, FWIW)

                        I'm adding some flavor of the material here. If you're serious about
                        Chiasm and can handle the oddities of a book in draft state, I can
                        send you the Word file of my book.

                        Ken Flowers
                        Lexington, MA

                        ------
                        Longer chiasm exists outside Revelation:

                        Psalm 3:7-8
                        Save me
                        O my God
                        For thou hast smitten
                        All my enemies
                        On the cheek-bone;
                        The teeth
                        Of the wicked
                        Thou has broken
                        To the Lord
                        The salvation

                        1 Corinthians 14:1b-5
                        But rather than ye may prophesy;
                        For he that speaketh with a tongue,
                        Speaketh not unto men but unto God;
                        For no man understandeth.
                        But in the Spirit he speaketh mysteries.
                        But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men
                        Edification
                        And exhortation
                        And consolation
                        He that speaketh in a tongue
                        Edifieth himself;
                        But he that prophesieth edifieth the church
                        Now I would have you all speak with tongues
                        But rather that ye may prophesy.

                        Note the center of this "But he ...
                        Edification/Exhortation/Consolation." Lund posits, and it seems
                        strongly born out in Revelation, that such triplets (and sometimes
                        quadruplets or septuplets) add emphasis and very frequently
                        numerically symbolic meaning. (But that's a whole other topic.)

                        -----
                        Micro chiasm in Revelation really is everywhere:

                        Rev. 4-1
                        After this
                        I looked, and, behold, a door was opened
                        in heaven:
                        and the first voice which I heard
                        was as it were of a trumpet talking with me;
                        which said,
                        Come up hither,
                        and I will show thee things
                        which must be hereafter.

                        Rev. 8:3-5a
                        And another angel came and stood at the altar,
                        having a golden censer;
                        and there was given unto him

                        much incense,
                        that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints
                        upon the golden altar
                        which was before the throne.

                        And the smoke of the incense,
                        which came with the prayers of the saints,
                        ascended up
                        before God

                        out of the angel's hand.
                        And the angel took the censer,
                        and filled it with fire of the altar,

                        Rev. 10:8,9a
                        And the voice which I heard from heaven spake unto me again,
                        and said, Go and take the little book which is open
                        in the hand of the angel
                        which standeth upon the sea
                        and upon the earth.
                        And I went unto the angel,
                        and said unto him, Give me the little book.
                        And he said unto me,


                        ----
                        Elemental Chiasm

                        Death and Hades Introduced – 6:8
                        The Dragon Introduced – 12:3
                        The First Beast Introduced – 13:1
                        The False Prophet Introduced – 13:11
                        The Harlot Introduced – 17:1
                        The Harlot Destroyed – 18:16-19
                        The Beast and the False Prophet Destroyed – 19:20
                        The Dragon Destroyed – 20:10
                        Death and Hades Destroyed – 20:14


                        ----
                        Chiastic/parallel outline

                        A key of point understanding this outline is to notice the grouping
                        of sets of sevens contained herein. Besides the obvious groups of
                        seven (B. Epistles, C. Seals, D. Trumpets, D'. Plagues, Bowls, or
                        Vials), there are two seldom noted groups of seven angels in C' and
                        B' which pair up and complete the sevens of B and C. These seven
                        angels sequences are less obvious because in each case the place of
                        the fourth angel is taken by Christ Himself.

                        A: Prolog (1:1-20)
                        B: Seven Epistles (2:1-3:22)
                        C: Seven Seals: Part A (4:1-8:1)
                        D: Seven Trumpets Given (8:2)
                        C: The Seventh Seal Concluded (8:3-5)
                        D: The First Six Trumpets (8:6-9:21)
                        E: Godly Approaches to Saving the World (10:1-11:13)
                        D: The Seventh Trumpet (11:14-19)
                        E': Evil's Approaches to Taking the World (12:1-13:18)
                        C': Seven Angels Part A (14:1-20)
                        D': Seven Plagues Introduced (15:1)
                        C': The Second Heavenly Scene: The Song (15:2-4)
                        D': Seven Plagues Part B (15:5-16:21)
                        B': Another Seven Angels (17:1-22:5)
                        A': Epilogue (22:6-22:21)

                        ---
                        Interesting global parallels

                        B
                        Three Letters"Children of Israel" (2:14)
                        Letter (Jesus in Intro and Promise, Rod of Iron)
                        Three Letters
                        B'
                        Three Angels
                        Jesus in Angel's Place (Rod of Iron
                        Three Angels"Children of Israel" (21:12)

                        C
                        Two Heavenly Scenes
                        Four Seals – War and Crops
                        Two Seals – Martyrs and Calamity
                        Two Heavenly Scenes: 144,000
                        One Seal – Silence and Calamity
                        C'
                        Heavenly Scene: 144,000
                        Three Angels – Be Faithful, Babylon Falls
                        Three Angels and Jesus – War and Crops
                        Heavenly Scene

                        D
                        Four Trumpets
                        Introduction to woes
                        Three Trumpets/Woes (Interrupted by E)
                        The Sanctuary Opened
                        Overall Result
                        D'
                        The Opened Sanctuary
                        Three Plagues
                        Interlude
                        Four Plagues
                        Overall Result
                      • kymhsm <ksmith@standrews.sa.edu.au>
                        Dear list, Unaware of the discussion on the list, I am in the middle of working through the authors mentioned and their criteria for establishing chiastic
                        Message 11 of 24 , Jan 23, 2003
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Dear list,

                          Unaware of the discussion on the list, I am in the middle of
                          working through the authors mentioned and their criteria for
                          establishing chiastic structures. I 'm doing it because I am
                          rewriting a book on the structure of John which involves many
                          micro-chiasms and several macro-chiasms. (A primitive version
                          of that book - without the macro-chiasms which is one of the
                          reasons for the rewrite - can be found at
                          http://homepages.picknowl.com.au/sherpub). Not being home
                          at themoment I cannot send much but hope to later today. I have
                          access to the books by Brouwer (whose book on Jn 13-17
                          inspired the rewrite) and Thomson and am awaiting a reply from
                          Criswell College whose journal (Criswel Theological Journal)
                          has the article by Blomberg.

                          Another interesting approach is being taken by Warren Gage and
                          others of Knox Theological Seminary, see:
                          http://www.knoxseminary.org/Prospective/Faculty/FacultyForum/J
                          ohnRevelationProject/

                          For criteria you could also look at John Breck, 'The Shape of
                          Biblical Language'. He has a useful appendix. That book also
                          has a fascinating postscript written by Charles Lock.

                          Sincerely,

                          Kym Smith
                          Adelaide
                          South Australia
                          khs@...
                        • kymhsm <ksmith@standrews.sa.edu.au>
                          Dear Listers, As promised, here is an edited bit of the section I am writing. I have included the footnotes as they may also be useful. ... Brouwer has
                          Message 12 of 24 , Jan 24, 2003
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Dear Listers,

                            As promised, here is an edited bit of the section I am writing. I
                            have included the footnotes as they may also be useful.
                            -------------------
                            Brouwer has provided a concise appraisal of several scholars'
                            guidelines for assessing micro- and macro-chiastic structures.
                            Beginning with Nils W. Lund's `seven theses', he notes R. Alan
                            Culpepper's criticism and David J. Clark's development of these. He
                            then cites Ian H. Thomson's re-writing of the first four of Lund's
                            theses and his addition of another two criteria for micro-chiastic
                            formations.(1) Brouwer has his own criticisms of Thomson's list but
                            it is satisfctory for our purposes here. Following, then, are
                            Thomson's criteria (2) with responses to them concerning the micro-
                            chiasms in John as per the following chapter. It is important to note
                            that Thomson himself insists, `The point must be carefully made that
                            these are characteristics that are frequently but not necessarily
                            present.'(3)
                            a. Chiasms frequently exhibit a shift at, or near, their centre. This
                            change can be varied in nature: a change of person of the verb, a new
                            or unexpected idea suddenly introduced, and so on. Usually, after
                            the `shift', the original thought is resumed. For this reason, in
                            this study, the phrase `shift and reversion' is preferred to Lund's
                            simple term. This immediately highlights the problem associated with
                            all such characteristics. Many passages have `shifts', but are
                            obviously not chiastic; in a chiasmus `shifts' that are not at its
                            centre will occur, marking, for example, points of development in an
                            argument.
                            b. Chiasms are sometimes introduced or concluded by a frame passage…
                            a `frame-passage' is a spring-board from which to launch into the
                            chiasmus, or a section which acts as a tail-piece to a chiasmus
                            without itself being part of the chiastic pattern.
                            c. Passages which are chiastically patterned sometimes also contain
                            directly parallel elements.(4)
                            d. Identical ideas may occasionally be distributed in such a fashion
                            that they occur in the extremes and at the centre of a given system.
                            e. Balancing elements are normally of approximately the same length.
                            On the few occasions when this is not the case, some explanation
                            seems to be called for.
                            f. The centre often contains the focus of the author's thought. …this
                            is a particularly powerful feature with obvious implications for
                            exegesis.

                            While the criteria according to Thomson seems most satisfactory to
                            Brouwer for the identification of micro-chiasms, his limitation of
                            such structures to around fifteen verses means that they fall down at
                            the very point that he (Brouwer) requires their support.
                            In essence, Thompson rigorously develops criteria for assessing micro-
                            chiasm while denying the possibility of macro-chiasm as a literary
                            device.(5)
                            For a further set of criteria by which he can appraise the macro-
                            chiastic formation of the Farewell Discourse in John (chs. 1-17),
                            Brouwer turns to Craig Blomberg's nine criteria for macro-chiasms.(6)

                            1. Brouwer, W., The Literary Development of John 13-17: A Chiastic
                            Reading, (SBL, 2000), pp. 29-38.
                            2. Thomson, I.H., Chiasmus in the Pauline Letters, JSNTS Series III,
                            Sheffield Academic Press, 1995, p. 27, italics Thomson's.
                            3. Ibid, p. 26
                            4. Brouwer finds fault with Thomson at this point claiming that his
                            (Thomson's) idea of `directly parallel elements' is restricted
                            to `clearly articulated word and phrase parallels'. He rejects what
                            Lund saw as `thematic parallelism' (Brouwer, W., The Literary
                            Development of John 13-17: A Chiastic Reading, [SBL, 2000], p. 32). I
                            must agree with Brouwer that this option must not be closed.
                            5. Brouwer, W., The Literary Development of John 13-17: A Chiastic
                            Reading, (SBL, 2000), p. 37.
                            6. Ibid, p. 38-45.
                            -----------------

                            I've not yet included them but, after a large quote from Welch
                            (mentioned in a previous post I think) Thomson adds
                            three 'requirements' apart from which a structure could not be
                            accepted as chiastic (he says).
                            1. The chiasmus will be present in the text as it stands, and will
                            not require unsupported textual emendation in order to 'recover it'.
                            2. The symmetrical elements will be present in precisely inverted
                            order.
                            3. The chiasmus will begin and end at a resonable point.

                            Hope this is helpful.

                            Sincerely,

                            Kym Smith
                            Adelaide
                            South Australia
                            khs@...
                          • Juan Stam
                            I m grateful for the valuable discussion on chiasmus. I have two more questions about the alleged concentric structure of Revelation: 1) I agree with Jon that
                            Message 13 of 24 , Jan 24, 2003
                            • 0 Attachment
                              I'm grateful for the valuable discussion on chiasmus. I have two more
                              questions about the alleged concentric structure of Revelation:

                              1) I agree with Jon that Revelation is not only apocalyptic but also
                              prophetic, epistolary and dramatic. It seems to me that its prophetic
                              character lies in its message (theology) more than it's literary form or
                              structure. It is certainly more similar formally to the apocalyptic
                              literature than to the biblical prophetic writings. And though it begins
                              and ends with epistolary formulas, I think the concentricity is claimed
                              primarily for the development of its apocalyptic drama.

                              2) That being so, I would expect many other apocalyptic writings to be
                              concentric. Can anyone come up with examples?

                              Juan Stam (Costa Rica)
                            • Bob MacDonald
                              The passages that have the phrase Synagogue of Satan speak of those that the author claims say that they are Jews but are not . I have not seen it suggested
                              Message 14 of 24 , Jan 26, 2003
                              • 0 Attachment
                                The passages that have the phrase "Synagogue of Satan" speak of those that
                                the author claims "say that they are Jews but are not".

                                I have not seen it suggested in commentaries that the group might be an
                                assembly of God-fearers and gentile believers in Jesus who do not practice
                                circumcision and who have a looser attitude towards meat sold in the
                                markets. (This is almost suggested by Feldman, Jew and Gentile in the
                                ancient world, 1993. He calls them sympathizers or half-way Jews. He
                                mentions the verse in passing as a Christian reference.)

                                Is it possible that the author of Revelation represents a stricter Judaism
                                than what was evolving through Paul's efforts? The two authors still appear
                                to be supporting an opening of worship of the God of Israel to all peoples.

                                Or is Marshall's reading: "a group of people who do not stand in opposition
                                to Rome", translating a "gathering of the adversary" able to be supported?
                                (p 133)

                                Such people would have had to be named as Jews or wanting for privilege sake
                                or for the sake of faith to be named as Jews also, making it difficult to
                                see them just as a "group".

                                A parallel passage "those who claim that they are apostles but are not"
                                (2:2c) might contribute to the weighing of evidence - though by the tenses,
                                (Aune 1998 vol 1 p 143), the false apostles appear to have been dealt with
                                rather than still presenting a current problem.

                                Marshall also takes up the phrase "Those who keep the commandments" as
                                pointing to traditional Mitzvoth but if the Revelation is at all related to
                                the 4th gospel, the commandments might be as simple as the faith and love
                                commanded there (6:29, 13:34, 15:12-17).

                                Perhaps the warning is that any 'gathering', political or religious of any
                                stripe, can fail 'to overcome' and can submit to those who accuse or act on
                                behalf of the accuser, such as the archetypical Nicolatians, Balaam, or
                                Jezebel. There seems to be a play on words in the verb nikon, overcoming,
                                and the name Nicolaus (or Balaam - almost a Hebrew equivalent). Does that
                                suggest to anyone a complementary role for Jezebel?

                                Something bothers me about the traditional interpretation that makes
                                'Synagogue of Satan' Christian anti-Jewish polemic. I am trying to see if
                                this 'insult' along with the others is intra-mural or not. I suspect it must
                                be. Prophesy traditionally is in-house criticism.

                                Bob

                                mailto::BobMacDonald@...
                                + + + Victoria, B.C., Canada + + +

                                Catch the foxes for us,
                                the little foxes that make havoc of the vineyards,
                                for our vineyards are in flower. (Song 2.15)
                                http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca
                              • goranson@duke.edu
                                Perhaps you might read: David Frankfurter, Jews or Not? Reconstructing the Other in Rev 2:9 and 3:9, HTR 94 (2001) 403-25 Stephen Goranson, Essene Polemic
                                Message 15 of 24 , Jan 27, 2003
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Perhaps you might read:
                                  David Frankfurter, "Jews or Not? Reconstructing the 'Other' in Rev 2:9
                                  and 3:9," HTR 94 (2001) 403-25

                                  Stephen Goranson, "Essene Polemic in the Apocalypse of John," in Legal
                                  Texts and Legal Issues [J.M. Baumgarten FS] (STJD 23; Leiden: Brill,
                                  1997)453-60.

                                  best,
                                  S. Goranson
                                • Paul Anderson
                                  Thanks, Bob, I read in that reference the sort of tensions that Lou Martyn and Raymond Brown have argued was a dialectical set of tensions between Johannine
                                  Message 16 of 24 , Jan 27, 2003
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Thanks, Bob, I read in that reference the sort of tensions that Lou Martyn and Raymond Brown have argued was a dialectical set of tensions between Johannine Christians and leaders within local Jewish communities. Whether the similarities imply anything about direct convergence is beyond what is arguable, but at least parallel issues might have been experienced among the mission churches of Asia Minor.

                                    I think "intra-mural" is going in the right direction here. The author of Revelation is clearly Jewish, and he sees Jesus as fulfilling Jewish ideals. "Those who claim to be Jews" should be seen as his competition, to at least some degree, not his enemies.


                                    Paul Anderson

                                    -----Original Message-----
                                    From: Bob MacDonald [mailto:bobmacdonald@...]
                                    Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2003 4:58 PM
                                    To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
                                    Subject: [revelation-list] Say that they are Jews but are not


                                    The passages that have the phrase "Synagogue of Satan" speak of those that
                                    the author claims "say that they are Jews but are not".

                                    I have not seen it suggested in commentaries that the group might be an
                                    assembly of God-fearers and gentile believers in Jesus who do not practice
                                    circumcision and who have a looser attitude towards meat sold in the
                                    markets. (This is almost suggested by Feldman, Jew and Gentile in the
                                    ancient world, 1993. He calls them sympathizers or half-way Jews. He
                                    mentions the verse in passing as a Christian reference.)

                                    Is it possible that the author of Revelation represents a stricter Judaism
                                    than what was evolving through Paul's efforts? The two authors still appear
                                    to be supporting an opening of worship of the God of Israel to all peoples.

                                    Or is Marshall's reading: "a group of people who do not stand in opposition
                                    to Rome", translating a "gathering of the adversary" able to be supported?
                                    (p 133)

                                    Such people would have had to be named as Jews or wanting for privilege sake
                                    or for the sake of faith to be named as Jews also, making it difficult to
                                    see them just as a "group".

                                    A parallel passage "those who claim that they are apostles but are not"
                                    (2:2c) might contribute to the weighing of evidence - though by the tenses,
                                    (Aune 1998 vol 1 p 143), the false apostles appear to have been dealt with
                                    rather than still presenting a current problem.

                                    Marshall also takes up the phrase "Those who keep the commandments" as
                                    pointing to traditional Mitzvoth but if the Revelation is at all related to
                                    the 4th gospel, the commandments might be as simple as the faith and love
                                    commanded there (6:29, 13:34, 15:12-17).

                                    Perhaps the warning is that any 'gathering', political or religious of any
                                    stripe, can fail 'to overcome' and can submit to those who accuse or act on
                                    behalf of the accuser, such as the archetypical Nicolatians, Balaam, or
                                    Jezebel. There seems to be a play on words in the verb nikon, overcoming,
                                    and the name Nicolaus (or Balaam - almost a Hebrew equivalent). Does that
                                    suggest to anyone a complementary role for Jezebel?

                                    Something bothers me about the traditional interpretation that makes
                                    'Synagogue of Satan' Christian anti-Jewish polemic. I am trying to see if
                                    this 'insult' along with the others is intra-mural or not. I suspect it must
                                    be. Prophesy traditionally is in-house criticism.

                                    Bob

                                    mailto::BobMacDonald@...
                                    + + + Victoria, B.C., Canada + + +

                                    Catch the foxes for us,
                                    the little foxes that make havoc of the vineyards,
                                    for our vineyards are in flower. (Song 2.15)
                                    http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca



                                    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                    revelation-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



                                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                  • Alan Fuller <rocsy@yahoo.com>
                                    Bob, If John was familiar with the writings of Paul, then he may have been referring to Jews that were not worshipping Christ (Romans 2:17,28,29 9:6).
                                    Message 17 of 24 , Jan 29, 2003
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Bob,

                                      If John was familiar with the writings of Paul, then he may have been
                                      referring to Jews that were not worshipping Christ (Romans 2:17,28,29
                                      9:6).
                                    • Alan Fuller <rocsy@yahoo.com>
                                      Ken F, I like your outline, but I have a couple of questions. ... I only find 6 announcing angels here. (14:6, 8, 9, 15, 17, 18) Do you count the one like the
                                      Message 18 of 24 , Jan 29, 2003
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Ken F,

                                        I like your outline, but I have a couple of questions.

                                        >>C': Seven Angels Part A (14:1-20)<<

                                        I only find 6 announcing angels here. (14:6, 8, 9, 15, 17, 18)
                                        Do you count the one like the Son of Man (14:14)?

                                        >>B': Another Seven Angels (17:1-22:5)<<

                                        I find six angels that seem to be giving explanations. (17:1, 18:1,
                                        18:21, 19:17, 20:1, 21:9) Where do you find the seventh?

                                        Thanks,
                                        Alan
                                      • kymhsm <ksmith@standrews.sa.edu.au>
                                        Dear Alan, You wrote,
                                        Message 19 of 24 , Jan 29, 2003
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Dear Alan,

                                          You wrote,

                                          <<< If John was familiar with the writings of Paul, then he may
                                          have been referring to Jews that were not worshipping Christ
                                          (Romans 2:17,28,29; 9:6).>>>

                                          I think this is exactly what John/the Revelation means, whether or
                                          not he was familiar with Paul's writings. What Paul expresses in
                                          the passages you mention would have been the common
                                          understanding. As it happens I think the two apostles were very
                                          close and familiar with each others thinking and writings.

                                          Christians had been in Asia from the beginning (Acts 2:9). There
                                          would have continued to be a trickle of converts among the
                                          pilgrims returning from Jerusalem each year. No doubt these
                                          young Christians met great opposition, especially from their
                                          Jewish brethren (I think Heb 10:32 is ikely to fit here), so that,
                                          even before Paul's mission to Asia after two decades, the
                                          believers had been 'forced' into considerable compromise. They
                                          would need to repent for their own faithlessness, but the Jews
                                          who had refused the gospel and opposed them would also be
                                          answerable for their actions.

                                          Sincerely,

                                          Kym Smith
                                          Adelaide
                                          South Australia
                                          khs@...
                                        • Bob MacDonald
                                          Alan:
                                          Message 20 of 24 , Jan 31, 2003
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Alan: <<< If John was familiar with the writings of Paul, then he may
                                            have been referring to Jews that were not worshipping Christ
                                            (Romans 2:17,28,29; 9:6).>>>

                                            Kym: >>As it happens I think the two apostles were very
                                            close and familiar with each others thinking and writings. << snip
                                            >> No doubt these young Christians met great opposition,
                                            especially from their Jewish brethren (I think Heb 10:32
                                            is ikely to fit here)<<

                                            Response: (still searching)
                                            It seems too early historically for a consolidated 'Christian' view of 'Jews
                                            not worshipping Christ' to be considered as a Synagogue of Satan. This is an
                                            extreme polemic even for 'brethren' and it makes nonsense out of the plea
                                            for unity expressed in Romans - a plea which Mark Nanos (Mystery of Romans)
                                            thinks had a relatively long term unifying effect on Christ believers and
                                            Jewish non-believers in the Roman situation. (I tend to agree with Marshall
                                            when he complains of the imposition of the word Christian onto the ekklesia
                                            of Asia which John is addressing.)

                                            We must not also impose our rapid and instantaneous communication onto this
                                            century. I wonder who had copies of the emerging writings about Jesus. One
                                            or two centres, Corinth maybe, possibly Ephesus, may have had more than one
                                            apostolic missive or sayings collection. I even wonder if John expected his
                                            letter to get to the seven churches - or if he just wrote it because he was
                                            told to. (I do not see any problem about the reality of John's vision or
                                            auditory experiences. They are not psychologically verifiable but they are
                                            equally plausible and within bounds of a person who is immersed in the
                                            Jewish tradition.) If John was familiar with Paul's writing - surely we
                                            would see echoes of this in the Revelation. It is an indication, if we do
                                            not, that the letters of Paul were not available to him - perhaps indeed
                                            they were available in these assemblies and John was not in agreement with
                                            the assemblies' interpretation - much as Paul was not in agreement with the
                                            Corinthian interpretation of his first preaching.

                                            The letter form 'grace and peace' seems similar - but is not. The Pauline
                                            (and deutero-Pauline) corpus letters are personally from 'Paul' and his
                                            fellows, with a very regular formula (varied only in the pastorals and
                                            Colossians) of grace and peace from God the Father and our Lord Jesus
                                            Christ. The Revelation blessing (1:4) is considerably more complex including
                                            a blessing from the seven spirits before the throne.

                                            The above is not a 'position' I am taking, merely a question to open up
                                            possible exploration of answers that do not imply that John is 'Christian'
                                            and that these 'Jews' are already separated from others by the witness and
                                            faith of Jesus.

                                            Bob

                                            mailto::BobMacDonald@...
                                            + + + Victoria, B.C., Canada + + +

                                            Catch the foxes for us,
                                            the little foxes that make havoc of the vineyards,
                                            for our vineyards are in flower. (Song 2.15)
                                            http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca
                                          • Greg Carey
                                            I offered a paper on this topic at SBL last November. The abstract is below. As I worked on the paper, I realized that it also needed a discussion of
                                            Message 21 of 24 , Jan 31, 2003
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              I offered a paper on this topic at SBL last November. The abstract is
                                              below. As I worked on the paper, I realized that it also needed a
                                              discussion of Revelation as colonial literature: I argued that the
                                              pressure of self-definition within the Empire likely created tension
                                              between the synagogues and the churches. Rev 2:9; 3:9 would be
                                              symptoms of that tension.

                                              {SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1}The œSynagogue of Satan (Rev 2:9; 3:9) “ What™s at Stake for
                                              Us?
                                              Greg Carey, Lancaster Theological Seminary
                                              Revelation 2:9 and 3:9 allude to œthose who say they are
                                              Jews and are not, but are instead œthe synagogue of Satan. This
                                              paper examines both in historical identity of John™s opponents and
                                              in cultural discourses of historical scholarship. First,
                                              conversations about John™s opponents cannot escape two
                                              discourses of biblical interpretation, the legacy of scholarly anti-
                                              Semitism and the renewed awareness that the distinction between
                                              œJews and œChristians is often anachronistic. Indeed,
                                              Revelation™s commentators have tended to express their anti-
                                              Semitism in their treatment of Rev 2:9; 3:9, while they have also
                                              assumed a clean split between œchurch and œsynagogue.
                                              Second, I will argue for the traditional case that in
                                              Revelation œthe synagogue indeed represents Jews who are
                                              outside of the churches of Asia Minor, and who “ in John™s view “
                                              were a threat to the security of his audience. Many scholars,
                                              sensitive to Christian anti-Semitism, have minimized the
                                              overwhelming evidence that some early Jews persecuted some
                                              early Jesus people. While it is not at all evident that any Jews
                                              were persecuting any of the Jesus people in Smyrna or
                                              Philadelphia, there are strong reasons to believe that Revelation
                                              reflects tensions between Jews who were not Jesus believers and
                                              participants in John™s churches.
                                              Third, if indeed Revelation reflects what we might
                                              anachronistically call Jewish-Christian tension, what might
                                              represent an ethically responsible scholarly reconstruction? It is
                                              not appropriate to follow John™s lead by simply transferring his
                                              polemic into the discourse of modern anti-Semitism, nor is it
                                              sufficient to minimize the conflicts between some Jews and some
                                              Jesus followers in the ancient world. A more viable option would
                                              be to ask what might have been at stake for some Jewish
                                              communities when confronted with the presence of Jesus people,
                                              especially when those Jesus people contended for Jewish identity.
                                              ------------------------------------
                                              Greg Carey
                                              Associate Professor of New Testament
                                              Lancaster Theological Seminary
                                              555 W. James St.
                                              Lancaster, PA 17603
                                              717/ 290-8753
                                              gcarey@...
                                              http://www.lts.org/faculty/carey/carey.html
                                            • kymhsm <ksmith@standrews.sa.edu.au>
                                              Dear Bob, In response to parts of your post,
                                              Message 22 of 24 , Feb 2, 2003
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                Dear Bob,

                                                In response to parts of your post,

                                                <<<It seems too early historically for a consolidated 'Christian'
                                                view of 'Jews not worshipping Christ' to be considered as a
                                                Synagogue of Satan.>>>

                                                How early is too early, I wonder? As you probably know, I think
                                                that the Revelation was given in 62, and yet such a term for
                                                hostile, Church-opposing , unbelieving Jews could still be given
                                                (consider the riots against Paul in a number of places, his
                                                stoning [Acts 14:19] – even the riots in Rome at `the preaching of
                                                Chrestus'). I do not know that the apostles would have normally
                                                thought in such terms, especially not if Paul's affection for his
                                                own countrymen (Rom 9-11) is any indication. If, however, the
                                                Revelation was given /dictated in a vision – something with
                                                which you do not see as a problem – then the term is not
                                                something the disciples / apostles generated. It was part of the
                                                language given to John. It was not just `extreme polemic' but part
                                                of the symbolic language of the Apocalypse.

                                                <<< This is an extreme polemic even for 'brethren' and it makes
                                                nonsense out of the plea
                                                for unity expressed in Romans>>>

                                                Sorry, `brethren' was a poor choice of words, it usually has
                                                connotations of shared faith (i.e. Christian faith). Countrymen,
                                                kinfolk or fellow Jews may have been better.

                                                <<<I tend to agree with Marshall when he complains of the
                                                imposition of the word Christian onto the ekklesia of Asia which
                                                John is addressing.>>>

                                                While the Revelation speaks of people and issues broader than
                                                the Christian Church itself, I cannot see that it can be understood
                                                in any sense other than a communication to and for the Christian
                                                communities in Asia and elsewhere; those who hold the
                                                testimony of Jesus (Rev 1:2; 19:10).

                                                <<<We must not also impose our rapid and instantaneous
                                                communication onto this
                                                century.>>>

                                                Instantaneous communication, no, but I think we underestimate
                                                the speed of communication. Relative to the technology of the
                                                day, quite rapid and widespread communication was possible.
                                                That is one of the reasons the Romans built their extensive road
                                                system – not to mention the shipping available. A letter or book
                                                written probably anywhere in the Mediterranean could have been
                                                in the hands of all centres around the sea within a couple of
                                                months. My early date for the Revelation means that much of the
                                                NT was written afterwards and meant for rapid dissemination,
                                                e.g. Ephesians, 1 John, 1&2 Peter, even the Gospel of Mark.

                                                As an exercise I once copied the first chapter of Mark. It took me
                                                49 minutes (in English, perhaps Greek would be quicker for
                                                someone familiar with it) which meant that it would take about 15
                                                hours to do the whole book. Someone (Mark?) on board a ship –
                                                let's say from Rome – could write several copies by himself (and
                                                still enjoy the scenery) in the sailing time from Rome to Corinth.
                                                If he left a copy there and another in Ephesus to be copied and
                                                distributed through Achaia and Asia, doing the same in Anticoch
                                                and Jerusalem, by the time he reached Alexandria, there would
                                                be few churches around the Mediterranean that did not have a
                                                copy of the book. It could all be done in a month or two.

                                                Incidentally, I don't think that the Revelation was copied in great
                                                quantities until the end of the first century. It was too dangerous
                                                to have it freely available; the Romans could only interpret it as
                                                anti-state propaganda.

                                                Sincerely,

                                                Kym Smith
                                                Adelaide
                                                South Australia
                                                khs@...
                                              • Ken Flowers
                                                I ve had two requests for a breakdown of the seven angels in section C and B from the chiastic outline I posted a few days again. Here s how I (and Lund)
                                                Message 23 of 24 , Feb 4, 2003
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  I've had two requests for a breakdown of the seven angels in section C' and
                                                  B' from the chiastic outline I posted a few days again. Here's how I (and
                                                  Lund) break them down:

                                                  C': Seven Angels
                                                  One - 14:6,7
                                                  Two - 14:8
                                                  Three - 14:9-11
                                                  Jesus in Fourth Angels Place - 14:14
                                                  Five - 14:15,16
                                                  Six - 14:17
                                                  Seven - 14:18-20

                                                  B': Seven Angels
                                                  One - 17:1-18
                                                  Two - 18:1-20
                                                  Three - 18:21-24
                                                  Jesus in Fourth Angels Place - 19:11-16
                                                  Five - 19:17-21
                                                  Six - 20:1-15
                                                  Seven - 21:9-22:5

                                                  Ken Flowers
                                                  Lexington, MA
                                                • Bob MacDonald
                                                  Kym wrote ... still be given (consider the riots against Paul in a number of places, his stoning [Acts 14:19] – even the riots in Rome at `the preaching of
                                                  Message 24 of 24 , Feb 6, 2003
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    Kym wrote
                                                    >>and yet such a term for hostile, Church-opposing , unbelieving Jews could
                                                    still be given (consider the riots against Paul in a number of places, his
                                                    stoning [Acts 14:19] – even the riots in Rome at `the preaching of
                                                    Chrestus') I do not know that the apostles would have normally thought in
                                                    such terms, especially not if Paul's affection for his own countrymen (Rom
                                                    9-11) is any indication. <<

                                                    response: I think sources of conflict are many and varied. It is not just
                                                    Romans 9-11 that expresses Paul's concern for his countrymen, it is the
                                                    whole letter. (I have found Nanos helpful on this. I think he is right to
                                                    consider that Paul did not call the non-Christ-believing Jew faithless.

                                                    Kym wrote
                                                    >>I cannot see that it [Revelation] can be understood in any sense other
                                                    than a communication to and for the Christian communities in Asia and
                                                    elsewhere; those who hold the testimony of Jesus (Rev 1:2; 19:10).

                                                    response: Aune volume 1 reviews the source criticism of Revelation. He shows
                                                    visible if arguable seams and structure that would put most of the text,
                                                    1:7-12a, 4:1-22:5, into a Jewish perspective pre 70. Chapters 1:12b-3:22 are
                                                    part of the postulated second edition (mid '90s). What we may have, if your
                                                    suggestion is true, is a growth away from a pre-70 Jewish apocalyptic text
                                                    where the Christology is nascent but not a problem for Judaism, to a revised
                                                    text by a Hebrew leader of Christ-believing Jews in the 90s when the
                                                    Christology is becoming more and more an adoration of the sacrifice of Jesus
                                                    and there is a group of Jews who isolate and report the now less-licit
                                                    religion. At least then we might see a change in viewpoint in the years 68
                                                    to 95. But even this is too much vindictiveness for me - for no
                                                    Christ-believing Jew worth his salt - and we have a Jewish writer by all
                                                    accounts, would put this text onto his 'former' colleagues when he knows
                                                    that a Lamb was sent to shepherd the sheep - and that the judgment of God
                                                    fell on that shepherd.

                                                    Perhaps there are alternatives in the analysis of this conflict. In the
                                                    absence of allusions in Revelation to Paul or Acts, are there any hints in
                                                    the postulated earlier material that would help interpret the redactor's
                                                    framing vision?

                                                    Bob

                                                    mailto::BobMacDonald@...
                                                    + + + Victoria, B.C., Canada + + +

                                                    Catch the foxes for us,
                                                    the little foxes that make havoc of the vineyards,
                                                    for our vineyards are in flower. (Song 2.15)
                                                    http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca
                                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.