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

Dissertation

Expand Messages
  • P. Alain-Marie de Lassus
    Dear Revelation List Members, I am glad to let you know that I successfully defended my doctoral dissertation on the Apocalypse at the University of Strasbourg
    Message 1 of 11 , Jun 14, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Revelation List Members,

      I am glad to let you know that I successfully defended my doctoral
      dissertation on the Apocalypse at the University of Strasbourg (France).
      The topic was: "The Letters to the Seven Churches in the Apocalypse of John.
      From Correction to Militant Testimony". Here is a short abstract in English:


      "This thesis studies the letters to the seven Churches in the Apocalypse of
      John. The first part is a large status quaestionis about exegetical research
      on the letters. It is shown that two areas need further research: the
      redactional problem of the letters and their paraenetical teaching; these
      two questions are studied in the following parts. The second part studies
      the place and role of the letters in the Apocalypse. This place is analogous
      to the place of the oracles against Israel in the prophetic oracles of the
      Old Testament; in these oracles, as a matter of fact, oracles against Israel
      usually come before oracles against the nations. The Churches of Asia are
      corrected by Christ to be disposed to give him testimony in front of the
      nations and partake of his struggle against his enemies. The third part
      studies the paraenesis contained in the letters in order to see how the
      intention at the origin of the letter's situation at the beginning of the
      Apocalypse is realized."


      A larger abstract in French (2 pages) is available for those who would be
      interested (in that case contact me off list).
      I hope to be able to publish the dissertation next year. Meanwhile it should
      be available through inter-library loan from the University of Strasbourg.

      Sincerely,

      Alain M. de Lassus
      Prof. of Sacred Scripture and Theology
      Ecole Saint Jean
      42590 Saint Jodard
      France
    • Bob MacDonald
      quiet list, what precedent is there for the phrase second death? to the author of Revelation, what death is first? thanks Bob Bob MacDonald
      Message 2 of 11 , Nov 10, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        quiet list,

        what precedent is there for the phrase second death?

        to the author of Revelation, what death is first?

        thanks

        Bob

        Bob MacDonald
        http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca
        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)
      • MORIAH
        shhhhh. You will awaken a monster! ... From: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:revelation-list@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Bob MacDonald Sent: 11
        Message 3 of 11 , Nov 10, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          shhhhh. You will awaken a monster!

          -----Original Message-----
          From: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
          [mailto:revelation-list@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Bob MacDonald
          Sent: 11 November 2005 09:19 AM
          To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [revelation-list] Second death



          quiet list,

          what precedent is there for the phrase second death?

          to the author of Revelation, what death is first?

          thanks

          Bob

          Bob MacDonald
          http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca
          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)





          Yahoo! Groups Links
        • KennethGentry@cs.com
          In a message dated 11/11/2005 2:15:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, ... I believe John the Apostle wrote both Revelation and the Gospel. I suspect John 5:24-29 is
          Message 4 of 11 , Nov 11, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            In a message dated 11/11/2005 2:15:28 AM Eastern Standard Time,
            bobmacdonald@... writes:


            > to the author of Revelation, what death is first?

            I believe John the Apostle wrote both Revelation and the Gospel. I suspect
            John 5:24-29 is the backdrop for the imagery of Revelation 20. The first death
            is spiritual death into which we are born. The second death is eternal
            punishment into which those who do not turn to Christ descend.

            This would fit with the Pauline conception, as well: Ephesians 2:1, 5 speaks
            of the original spiritual death overcome by the new spiritual life -- which is
            entered into by a spiritual resurrection (Eph. 2:6).

            The first death / second death parallel in some respects the "born again"
            concept that appears in John 3. In that case, however, the first birth is the
            physical birth, the new or second (born again) experience is the spiritual birth
            by the grace of God (cp. also John 1:12-13.



            Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., M.Div, Th.M., Th.D
            www.KennethGentry.com
            "Serious Studies for Serious Christians"

            Chancellor and Research Professor in Theology
            Christ College, Lynchburg, Virginia
            www.Christ-College.edu


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Bob MacDonald
            Thanks Kenneth your answer is traditional, perhaps however, making a unity out in a way that what was not so intended by the author(s). Not that there is
            Message 5 of 11 , Nov 11, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Thanks Kenneth

              your answer is traditional, perhaps however, making a unity
              out in a way that what was not so intended by the
              author(s). Not that there is disunity but perhaps a
              differing coherence than the traditional.

              Not exactly out of line with your traditional thought
              process, I want to suggest that the first death is baptism -
              a death in the death of Christ. The second death is then
              physical death - the consequence of observable first birth.

              Whatever the ancients believed about 'life after death' is
              then not required as part of our speculation. After the
              first death, they claim they have a taste of the presence of
              God by the Holy Spirit. Whoever overcomes then is not
              afraid of the second death because the overcomer knows the
              eternal fire is love not judgment. The image of fire is
              consistently one of these two in the Scripture, particularly
              the fire of the Spirit. Consider the use of seraphim in the
              fiery serpents, Isaiah 6, and the referent in John 3 just as
              a start.

              This thesis needs more exegetical and historical critical
              and linguistic support in order to get inside the mind of
              the first century writers. I do not find the traditional
              interpretation a helpful start. It seems to me to be an
              accretion of theology and imagined cosmology.

              Bob

              Bob MacDonald
              http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca
              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)



              -----Original Message-----
              From: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
              [mailto:revelation-list@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
              KennethGentry@...
              Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 5:01 AM
              To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [revelation-list] Second death


              In a message dated 11/11/2005 2:15:28 AM Eastern Standard
              Time,
              bobmacdonald@... writes:


              > to the author of Revelation, what death is first?

              I believe John the Apostle wrote both Revelation and the
              Gospel. I suspect
              John 5:24-29 is the backdrop for the imagery of Revelation
              20. The first death
              is spiritual death into which we are born. The second death
              is eternal
              punishment into which those who do not turn to Christ
              descend.

              This would fit with the Pauline conception, as well:
              Ephesians 2:1, 5 speaks
              of the original spiritual death overcome by the new
              spiritual life -- which is
              entered into by a spiritual resurrection (Eph. 2:6).

              The first death / second death parallel in some respects the
              "born again"
              concept that appears in John 3. In that case, however, the
              first birth is the
              physical birth, the new or second (born again) experience is
              the spiritual birth
              by the grace of God (cp. also John 1:12-13.



              Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., M.Div, Th.M., Th.D
              www.KennethGentry.com
              "Serious Studies for Serious Christians"

              Chancellor and Research Professor in Theology
              Christ College, Lynchburg, Virginia
              www.Christ-College.edu


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



              ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups
              Sponsor --------------------~-->
              Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo!
              your home page
              http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/D1XolB/TM
              ------------------------------------------------------------
              --------~->


              Yahoo! Groups Links
            • George F Somsel
              ... _______________ The term second death is peculiar to the Apocalypse so the only context which we have by which to determine its meaning is that of the
              Message 6 of 11 , Nov 11, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 08:01:11 EST KennethGentry@... writes:
                > In a message dated 11/11/2005 2:15:28 AM Eastern Standard Time,
                > bobmacdonald@... writes:
                >
                >
                > > to the author of Revelation, what death is first?
                >
                > I believe John the Apostle wrote both Revelation and the Gospel. I
                > suspect
                > John 5:24-29 is the backdrop for the imagery of Revelation 20. The
                > first death
                > is spiritual death into which we are born. The second death is
                > eternal
                > punishment into which those who do not turn to Christ descend.
                >
                > This would fit with the Pauline conception, as well: Ephesians 2:1,
                > 5 speaks
                > of the original spiritual death overcome by the new spiritual life
                > -- which is
                > entered into by a spiritual resurrection (Eph. 2:6).
                >
                > The first death / second death parallel in some respects the "born
                > again"
                > concept that appears in John 3. In that case, however, the first
                > birth is the
                > physical birth, the new or second (born again) experience is the
                > spiritual birth
                > by the grace of God (cp. also John 1:12-13.
                >
                >
                >
                > Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., M.Div, Th.M., Th.D
                > www.KennethGentry.com
                > "Serious Studies for Serious Christians"
                >
                > Chancellor and Research Professor in Theology
                > Christ College, Lynchburg, Virginia
                > www.Christ-College.edu
                _______________

                The term "second death" is peculiar to the Apocalypse so the only context
                which we have by which to determine its meaning is that of the book
                itself. In Re 2.9-11 he contrasts the condition of the Church at Smyrna
                as being about to suffer persecution in which he encourages them to "Be
                faithful unto death" with that which is promised to them if they
                "overcome." This term is used throughout the Apocalypse with respect to
                the faithful as indicating the suffering of persecution and even death.
                "To conquer" is to suffer for the name. The church is considered to be
                martyrs as Jesus Christ himself was the first martyr. As such they are,
                in the words of Paul, "being killed all the day long" yet living. Thus
                in Re 20.4-6 they are viewed as already having been beheaded. The "first
                death" is thus an actual physical death which all, including the
                followers of Christ must undergo and which they are viewed proleptically
                as having suffered in the persecution which they undergo. The 1000 yrs
                is thus the life of the Christian who experiences the new life
                (resurrection) in Christ. This is in keeping with Is 65.20
                No more shall there be in it an infant that lives but a few days, or an
                old man who does not fill out his days, for the child shall die a hundred
                years old, and the sinner a hundred years old shall be accursed.
                This is part of the view that the Kingdom is even now present in the New
                Jerusalem "coming down from God out of heaven."

                george
                gfsomsel
                ___________

                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • dtrini
                The Fall. West Band and Gaza threat: After Shabbat comes Sunday Helen http://caribpundit.com
                Message 7 of 11 , Nov 11, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  The Fall.

                  West Band and Gaza threat: "After Shabbat comes Sunday"

                  Helen

                  http://caribpundit.com



                  On Nov 11, 2005, at 2:37 AM, MORIAH wrote:

                  > shhhhh. You will awaken a monster!
                  >
                  > -----Original Message-----
                  > From: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
                  > [mailto:revelation-list@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Bob MacDonald
                  > Sent: 11 November 2005 09:19 AM
                  > To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
                  > Subject: [revelation-list] Second death
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > quiet list,
                  >
                  > what precedent is there for the phrase second death?
                  >
                  > to the author of Revelation, what death is first?
                  >
                  > thanks
                  >
                  > Bob
                  >
                  > Bob MacDonald
                  > http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca
                  > 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)
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------
                  > ~-->
                  > Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your
                  > home page
                  > http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/D1XolB/TM
                  > --------------------------------------------------------------------
                  > ~->
                  >
                  >
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                • ottoerlend
                  Hello, Usually pistin Iesou in Rev 14:12 is translated as faith in Jesus (NET, NAB) or faith of Jesus (NRSV) . I guess it s possible to understand the
                  Message 8 of 11 , Nov 11, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hello,

                    Usually "pistin Iesou" in Rev 14:12 is translated as "faith in Jesus"
                    (NET, NAB) or "faith of Jesus" (NRSV) . I guess it's possible to
                    understand the genitive as both subjective and objective; I am not
                    able to see that the context favours either of them. I have also seen a
                    translation like "faithful to Jesus" (cannot remenber where).

                    Now, I was wondering if the following translation might be possible /
                    likely: "faithfulness of Jesus". ("Faithfulness" does seem to be within
                    the semantic realm of "pistis".)

                    What do you think? All kinds of comments (context, semantics, syntax,
                    etc.) might be useful!


                    Best wishes

                    Otto E. Nordgreen
                  • Christian Maymann
                    Dear Otto Nordgreen The Greek text runs hoi têrountes tas entolas tou theou kai pistin Iesou In 13:10 the referent for pistis most likely is the faith of the
                    Message 9 of 11 , Nov 11, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Dear Otto Nordgreen

                      The Greek text runs hoi têrountes tas entolas tou theou kai pistin Iesou


                      In 13:10 the referent for pistis most likely is the faith of the holy one.
                      I think that we compare 13:10 and 14:12 for several reasons:
                      i) They belong together, as part of the "Sign" running from 12:1 to 14:20
                      ii) They have two themes in common the pistis and the hypomonê.

                      Therefore pistis Iêsou most likely referees to something that describe the
                      Christians, not Jesus himself, and therefore Iesou is (as I see it) an
                      objective genitive.

                      As You know, there have been an For several years debate about exactly that
                      problem in the letters of Paul. For some general semantic consideration You
                      can read the article "Faith Versus Works of Law in Galatians" in Carson et
                      al. Justification and Variegated Nomism Vol 2, Mohr Siebeck 2004


                      Christian Maymann
                      M.Theol.
                      Copenhagen

                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
                      [mailto:revelation-list@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ottoerlend
                      Sent: 11. november 2005 20:07
                      To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: [revelation-list] Rev 14:12 ("pistin Iesou")

                      Hello,

                      Usually "pistin Iesou" in Rev 14:12 is translated as "faith in Jesus"
                      (NET, NAB) or "faith of Jesus" (NRSV) . I guess it's possible to understand
                      the genitive as both subjective and objective; I am not able to see that the
                      context favours either of them. I have also seen a translation like
                      "faithful to Jesus" (cannot remenber where).

                      Now, I was wondering if the following translation might be possible /
                      likely: "faithfulness of Jesus". ("Faithfulness" does seem to be within the
                      semantic realm of "pistis".)

                      What do you think? All kinds of comments (context, semantics, syntax,
                      etc.) might be useful!


                      Best wishes

                      Otto E. Nordgreen





                      ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get
                      fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
                      http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/D1XolB/TM
                      --------------------------------------------------------------------~->


                      Yahoo! Groups Links






                      --
                      No virus found in this incoming message.
                      Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                      Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.8/166 - Release Date: 10-11-2005


                      --
                      No virus found in this outgoing message.
                      Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                      Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.8/166 - Release Date: 10-11-2005
                    • Bob MacDonald
                      George writes: proleptically as having suffered Ken references a suspicion of a link to John 5:24 George - thanks for the note. I think your explanation is not
                      Message 10 of 11 , Nov 12, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        George writes: proleptically as having suffered
                        Ken references a suspicion of a link to John 5:24

                        George - thanks for the note. I think your explanation is
                        not far off from supporting my thesis that the implied first
                        death in Rev is like Paul's image of baptism in Romans, a
                        real identification with the suffering and death of the
                        firstborn and an overcoming through this death. Thank you
                        for the interpretation of the 1000 years - nice work and
                        good idea - one day in thy courts is better than a thousand
                        also comes to mind as an indication of the notion of
                        'eternal' - a subject that has been debated at least since
                        Aquinas

                        Ken - re John 5:24-29; these verses are part of a double
                        chiasm with the centre of each focussing on opposites -
                        believing and non believing. Given the complex concentric
                        structures in Revelation, it is possible that the same poet
                        wrote both - but hardly necessary. (For the double chiasm
                        see http://bmd.gx.ca/synoptic/tuej_only_viii.htm#141

                        I have no axe to grind on this - but sometimes I wonder if
                        the reputed young man in the rich young man story (only in
                        Mark) might not have been the poet of G John (but not John
                        of Patmos) - too many inferences to resolve...

                        Bob

                        Bob MacDonald
                        http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca
                        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)
                      • KennethGentry@cs.com
                        In a message dated 11/12/2005 8:39:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, ... Bob: I do not used the seeming relationship between Rev 20 and John 5 as evidence for
                        Message 11 of 11 , Nov 12, 2005
                        • 0 Attachment
                          In a message dated 11/12/2005 8:39:32 PM Eastern Standard Time,
                          bobmacdonald@... writes:


                          > Ken - re John 5:24-29; these verses are part of a double
                          > chiasm with the centre of each focussing on opposites -
                          > believing and non believing. Given the complex concentric
                          > structures in Revelation, it is possible that the same poet
                          > wrote both - but hardly necessary.

                          Bob:

                          I do not used the seeming relationship between Rev 20 and John 5 as evidence
                          for Johannine authorship of Rev. 20. I already have in mind (from other
                          evidence) that John is the author of both the Gospel and the Revelation. Having that
                          in mind, I see a double resurrection in John 5 and suppose that since (on
                          other grounds) John wrote Rev 20, that he would be picking up on his already
                          established two resurrection motif.

                          I see Rev 11:2 as reflecting Luke 21:24 also. But I (obviously) wouldn't say
                          this is evidence Luke wrote Revelation.

                          I am afraid I may have made you think I was using the Rev 20 / John 5
                          similarity as evidence of authorship. That was a mistaken impression that I didn't
                          intend.

                          Thanks,

                          Ken

                          Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., M.Div, Th.M., Th.D
                          www.KennethGentry.com
                          "Serious Studies for Serious Christians"

                          Chancellor and Research Professor in Theology
                          Christ College, Lynchburg, Virginia
                          www.Christ-College.edu


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.