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

Re: [revelation-list] Re 16.15 a gloss?

Expand Messages
  • Ramsey Michaels
    Possibly the phrase, the great day of God the Almighty (v 14) called to the author s mind the familiar phrase day of the Lord, which in turn triggered the
    Message 1 of 16 , Apr 18 10:06 AM
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Possibly the phrase, "the great day of God the Almighty" (v 14) called to the author's mind the familiar phrase "day of the Lord," which in turn triggered the language of v 15, in light of the notion that "the day of the Lord" comes as a thief (1 Thess 5). Notice the variant reading, "behold he comes," or perhaps "it comes" as a thief in Codex Sinaiticus.
       
      Ramsey Michaels
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 11:40 AM
      Subject: Re: [revelation-list] Re 16.15 a gloss?

      In a message dated 4/18/2004 8:19:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time, profram@... writes:
      Some years ago I suggested in an NTS article (37.4, p. 613) that 16:14 is already an explanatory "narrative aside" by the author, explaining the "three unclean spirits like frogs" (v 13). Such narrative comments (here introduced by eisin gar) are common in Revelation.
       
      If this is so, then v 15 can be seen as simply an extension of this narrative aside, identifying the narrative voice as that of Jesus Christ, who "comes as a thief." Thus it is not a question of v 15 but of vv 14-15 as being "narrative asides," a term I prefer to gloss. Gloss implies someone other than the author. To me the book is the work of one author speaking with several narrative voices.
      _________
       
      This is an interesting proposal, but it does not solve the dilemma that 16.15 in not congruent with its context.  The question remains:  "Why and how did this get written in its current location?"  Even if 16.14 is taken as a narrative aside, 16.15 is an aside from the aside.
       
      gfsomsel
    • Timothy P. Jenney
      I suggest that 16:15 is original with the author and essential to the structure and meaning of the Apocalypse. Note that each of the book¹s septets are
      Message 2 of 16 , Apr 18 2:19 PM
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Re: [revelation-list] Re 16.15 a gloss?
        I suggest that 16:15 is original with the author and essential to the structure and meaning of the Apocalypse.

        Note that each of the book’s septets are interrupted between the sixth and seventh of the series: the breaking of the seals by the worshipping multitude (Rev. 7), the blasts of the shophar by the appearance of the three witnesses [the author(?) + two others], 10:1-11:14, the libations by this exhortation at 16:15.

         Furthermore, I think this is the way in which the author sought to identify his own position [and his audience’s] in the septets. It is near the end of human history, an unexpected gap in the series that has allowed for the evangelization of the Gentiles and the appearance of the Church. If one reads the septets as parallels that places him [and us!] at 666.

        Nevertheless, the harvest (14:14ff) will soon be over, so everyone must be ready for the Messiah’s return (16:15). The harvest festival [Sukkoth] is about to begin!

        Timothy P. Jenney
        PhD NES (U Mich, 1993)
        Winter Haven, FL

        “Revelation” in the Life in the Spirit NT Commentary


        From: "Ramsey Michaels" <profram@...>
        Reply-To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 07:55:26 -0400
        To: <revelation-list@yahoogroups.com>
        Subject: Re: [revelation-list] Re 16.15 a gloss?

        Some years ago I suggested in an NTS article (37.4, p. 613) that 16:14 is already an explanatory "narrative aside" by the author, explaining the "three unclean spirits like frogs" (v 13). Such narrative comments (here introduced by eisin gar) are common in Revelation.
         
        If this is so, then v 15 can be seen as simply an extension of this narrative aside, identifying the narrative voice as that of Jesus Christ, who "comes as a thief." Thus it is not a question of v 15 but of vv 14-15 as being "narrative asides," a term I prefer to gloss. Gloss implies someone other than the author. To me the book is the work of one author speaking with several narrative voices.
         
        Ramsey Michaels
         
         
         
         
        ----- Original Message -----

        From:  polycarp66@...
         
        To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com  
         
        Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 4:04 AM
         
        Subject: [revelation-list] Re 16.15 a  gloss?
         

         
        It is well-known that certain scholars such  as R. H. Charles went overboard in finding redactions and glosses "on every  high hill and under every green tree", so to speak.  I am rather loathe  to follow such a practice and prefer to retain the text as we have it.   There is, however, one place which seems to me must certainly have been a  marginal comment whch was then taken up into the text.  This is  16.15.  Curiously enough, this is not tagged by anyone else as a  gloss.  Yet, it seems totally out of place coming between the description  of the "foul spirits" going forth for the gathering of the nations  to battle and the statement that they "assembled them at a place which is  called in Hebrew Armageddon."  What relevance the statement that Christ  is coming as a thief in the night has to such a sequence is puzzling if it  were taken to be authentic.  It would seem to me that the reluctance to  consider this a gloss when so much else has been considered as such rests upon  the desire of the commentators to find seven makarisms in the  Apocalypse.  While seven is certainly a recurring quantity in the book  and has a special, and well-known, significance, the author, who elsewhere has  not been reluctant to point out the number seven, never states that there are  seven makarisms.  
         
         
         
        gfsomsel



        Yahoo! Groups Links

      • polycarp66@aol.com
        In a message dated 4/18/2004 5:20:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, drjenney@earthlink.net writes: Nevertheless, the harvest (14:14ff) will soon be over, so
        Message 3 of 16 , Apr 18 3:02 PM
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          In a message dated 4/18/2004 5:20:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, drjenney@... writes:
          Nevertheless, the harvest (14:14ff) will soon be over, so everyone must be ready for the Messiah’s return (16:15). The harvest festival [Sukkoth] is about to begin!
          _________________
           
          The harvest is already past.  This is the destruction of Jerusalem.  The extent of the flow of the blood is ~189 miles which, taken from the epicenter of Jerusalem, would cover the entire land.  Similarly, the measurements of the New Jerusalem would cover the Roman Empire and thus represent the conquering of the world-system by the Christian faith.
           
          gfsomsel
        • Timothy P. Jenney
          From: polycarp66@aol.com Reply-To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 18:02:28 EDT To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re:
          Message 4 of 16 , Apr 18 5:36 PM
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Re: [revelation-list] Re 16.15 a gloss?


            From: polycarp66@...
            Reply-To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 18:02:28 EDT
            To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: Re: [revelation-list] Re 16.15 a gloss?

            In a message dated 4/18/2004 5:20:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, drjenney@... writes:
            Nevertheless, the harvest (14:14ff) will soon be over, so everyone must be ready for the Messiah’s return (16:15). The harvest festival [Sukkoth] is about to begin!
            _________________
             
            The harvest is already past.  This is the destruction of Jerusalem.  The extent of the flow of the blood is ~189 miles which, taken from the epicenter of Jerusalem, would cover the entire land.  Similarly, the measurements of the New Jerusalem would cover the Roman Empire and thus represent the conquering of the world-system by the Christian faith.
             
            Gfsomsel
            -------

            It’s certainly a possibility. There are two harvests in 14 though, not one. I think the grape harvest symbolizes Christian martyrs [or at least includes them]. Note that the blood that fills the seven vials is that of prophets AND saints (16:5f). When the number of these martyrs is complete, the End will come (Rev. 6:9-11).

            I should add that my theory is that Revelation’s liturgical passages are an eschatologically heightened Sukkoth [Tabernacles] celebration. I argued this in my 1993 U Mich dissertation, The Harvest of the Earth.

            Timothy P. Jenney


            Yahoo! Groups Links

          • polycarp66@aol.com
            In a message dated 4/18/2004 8:37:33 PM Eastern Daylight Time, drjenney@earthlink.net writes: It’s certainly a possibility. There are two harvests in 14
            Message 5 of 16 , Apr 18 7:56 PM
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              In a message dated 4/18/2004 8:37:33 PM Eastern Daylight Time, drjenney@... writes:

              It’s certainly a possibility. There are two harvests in 14 though, not one. I think the grape harvest symbolizes Christian martyrs [or at least includes them]. Note that the blood that fills the seven vials is that of prophets AND saints (16:5f). When the number of these martyrs is complete, the End will come (Rev. 6:9-11).

              I should add that my theory is that Revelation’s liturgical passages are an eschatologically heightened Sukkoth [Tabernacles] celebration. I argued this in my 1993 U Mich dissertation, The Harvest of the Earth.
              ______________
               
              I think it would be going beyond the evidence to say that the seven vials contain the blood of the martyrs.  While the sea and the fresh water sources are said to turn to blood, it is nowhere stated that the vials contained blood but rather that they are the vials of the Wrath of God.  Also, it should be noted that the pouring of the vials on other portions of the cosmos does not produce blood.  That the grape harvest symbolizes the Christian martyrs is, in my opinion, precisely wrong since they are thrown into the wine-press of the Wrath of God.  This is rather God's wrath against those who rejected the Son.
               
              I'm not ready to say that ALL the liturgical passages refer to Sukkoth.  It is relatively certain, however, that this is in view with regard to the 144,000 sealed from the twelve tribes in chapter 7 since the great multitude is there pictured as having palm branches in their hands.  Also, in chapter 14, when the 144,000 again appear on the heavenly Mount Zion they themselves have palm branches and are specifically designated as first fruits.
               
              gfsomsel
            • Ian Paul
              ... But you only have to look at the amazing complex of words occurring four, seven, ten, 14 and 28 times (Richard Bauckham gives a start in Climax of
              Message 6 of 16 , Apr 19 1:46 AM
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                On Sunday, April 18, 2004, at 05:01 PM, polycarp66@... wrote:

                > Our author was not loathe to specify that there were seven lampstands
                > representing seven churches and seven spirits of God.  He also
                > enumerated seven seals, four angels holding back the winds, seven
                > trumpets, seven bowls of wrath and three woes.  Nowhere does he
                > specify that there are seven makarisms.  Even had he thus specified,
                > the question would remain "Why is this placed here?" though, in such a
                > case its authenticity would not then be in question.
                >
                But you only have to look at the amazing complex of words occurring
                four, seven, ten, 14 and 28 times (Richard Bauckham gives a start in
                Climax of Prophecy) to see that there are structures in the book which
                are not made explicit.

                If you are suggesting that we can effectively discard part of the text
                unless we see a reason for it being there--I think I would want to take
                issue with your methodology!

                Ian Paul
                _________________
                Revd Dr Ian Paul
                Director of Partnership Development, St John's College, Bramcote, Nottm
                NG9 3DS
                w 0115 925 1114 x 254 h 01202 745963 m 07974 351502
                Also Managing Editor, Grove Books Ltd Ridley Hall Road Cambridge CB3
                9HU
                01223 464748 Fax 01223 464849
                http://www.grovebooks.co.uk
              • polycarp66@aol.com
                In a message dated 4/19/2004 4:51:07 AM Eastern Daylight Time, editor@grovebooks.co.uk writes: But you only have to look at the amazing complex of words
                Message 7 of 16 , Apr 19 5:26 AM
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  In a message dated 4/19/2004 4:51:07 AM Eastern Daylight Time, editor@... writes:
                  But you only have to look at the amazing complex of words occurring
                  four, seven, ten, 14 and 28 times (Richard Bauckham gives a start in
                  Climax of Prophecy) to see that there are structures in the book which
                  are not made explicit.

                  If you are suggesting that we can effectively discard part of the text
                  unless we see a reason for it being there--I think I would want to take
                  issue with your methodology!
                  _________
                   
                  Do you mean to say that if you were to find (hypothetically speaking, of course) a passage with a recipe for Trout Munieres in the middle, you would have any hesitation in saying it wasn't original?  I find something amiss with that methodology.
                   
                  gfsomsel
                • Ian Paul
                  ... What I would do is ask: 1. whether it is genuine data in the text, or has been constructed by unjustifiably selective reading 2. whether this was a
                  Message 8 of 16 , Apr 19 6:50 AM
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On Monday, April 19, 2004, at 01:26 PM, polycarp66@... wrote:

                    > Do you mean to say that if you were to find (hypothetically speaking,
                    > of course) a passage with a recipe for Trout Munieres in the middle,
                    > you would have any hesitation in saying it wasn't original?  I find
                    > something amiss with that methodology.
                    >
                    What I would do is ask:

                    1. whether it is genuine data in the text, or has been constructed by
                    unjustifiably selective reading
                    2. whether this was a possible significance of the text for the author
                    3. whether an informed first reader might have been able to discern
                    this (ie so that this feature of the text was a genuine act of
                    communication, which presumably all texts are intended to be)
                    4. whether this could fit with the explicit (ie expressed at the level
                    of semantic content) theology of the text.

                    All four are satisfied in the observation of word frequencies (see my
                    Grove booklet on the subject http://www.grovebooks.co.uk) whereas the
                    supposed recipe for Trout Munieres would, I think, fall at every step.
                    (As an alternative example, the Bible Code stuff fails at least at
                    steps 1, 3 and 4.)

                    There is also the question of burden of proof, that is, if we think
                    that text has been added, we would need to support this with a good
                    reason why a later scribe would see the need for this. (As an example,
                    there are two good reasons for justifying the alternative reading of
                    616 in Rev 13.18 which explains why it might have arisen, and
                    additionally makes sense of the primary reading 666). The difficulty in
                    16.15 is constructing a plausible meaning for the text *without* the
                    interpolation (the meaning for the author) and constructing a plausible
                    meaning for the text *with* the interpolation (the meaning for the
                    later scribe/editor) and being able to tell the difference and how we
                    might attribute these two meanings to the two people concerned the
                    right way around (since if they are attributed the other way around,
                    then the scribe should have taken text out not added it in).

                    What I would avoid is:
                    1. assuming that if something does not fit in with my reading, then it
                    could not have fitted with the author's (possibly incoherent) intention
                    2. offering slightly facile illustrations as a counter to a serious
                    comment
                    3. going under an anonymous signature in my emails

                    regards

                    Ian Paul
                    _________________
                    Revd Dr Ian Paul
                    Director of Partnership Development, St John's College, Bramcote, Nottm
                    NG9 3DS
                    w 0115 925 1114 x 254 h 01202 745963 m 07974 351502
                    Also Managing Editor, Grove Books Ltd Ridley Hall Road Cambridge CB3
                    9HU
                    01223 464748 Fax 01223 464849
                    http://www.grovebooks.co.uk
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.