Page 1 of 1

John 1:29 versus Book of Revelation

Posted: Tue Apr 30, 2019 10:58 am
by Giuseppe

29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, “Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!

John 1:29

What is strange is that the probably interpolated incipit of Revelation puts the visions & revelations about the Lamb on the mouth of the disciple John.

While according to John 1:29, it's John the Baptist who sees the mystical Lamb of Revelation.

In whiletime, the pauline "Mark" despises the Pillars by calling them "the sons of thunder", caustic reference to Revelation. Hence I think, with Couchoud, that the Mark/Mcn line of tradition connected firstly the Book of Revelation with a precise figure named John, one of the Pillars.

This connection (even if clearly sarcastic in the mind of "Mark") reflects the historical reality about the followers of the Pillars, who combated the paulines (both the pauline adorers of YHWH and the pauline haters of YHWH) by using the Book of Revelation et similia as propaganda.

Hence the question: why does the Fourth Gospel place the basic item of Revelation (=the vision of the mystical Lamb) on the mouth of John the Baptist, and not of John son of Zebedee?

I think that the author of the Fourth Gospel was reacting against the proto-catholic interpolation of the incipit of the Book of Revelation, an incipit that connected - but in a positive sense (as opposed to the negative sense meant by Mark and Marcion) - the Pillar John with the Book of Revelation. The proto-catholics, by connecting that book with the Pillar John, were co-opting the Jewish-Christian tradition of the Pillars (as reflected in Revelation) even if they, adopting Mark and Matthew, were co-opting also a Pauline tradition basically hostile to the Book of Revelation.

So what the Fourth Gospel does basically, by John 1:29?

The message is strongly anti-catholic: the vision of the mystical Lamb was not the property of the Gospel Pillars, especially when these Gospel figures are became catholicized by proto-catholics.

The fact that John the Baptist saw the mystical Lamb means simply that the vision of the mystical Lamb preceded the birth of Christianity (being John the Baptist the precursor par excellence).

Re: John 1:29 versus Book of Revelation

Posted: Tue Apr 30, 2019 11:21 am
by Giuseppe
The author of Fourth Gospel was writing in a time when:

1) the vision of the mystical Lamb was considered very much old. In virtue of the his antiquity, it couldn't be used as tool of Jewish-Christian propaganda against Pauline propaganda and vice versa, pace the xenophobic tone of Revelation.

2) it was too much evident that the proto-catholics had co-opted the Book of Revelation and the Gospel figures of the Pillars (notoriously parodied just in virtue of their connection with Revelation).

Therefore the author of Fourth Gospel made super partes the vision of the mystical Lamb: by giving it to John the Baptist.

Again and again the neutral role of John the Baptist emerges strongly. He is never parodied in the way of a Pillar. Even in Mcn, he is respected.

Re: John 1:29 versus Book of Revelation

Posted: Tue Apr 30, 2019 11:36 am
by Giuseppe
Speaking historically, the more probable thing is that the vision of the mystical Lamb was at the origin of Christianity, Peter and even Paul "seeing" (read: hallucinations) this mystical Lamb. No difference between Peter and Paul.

But then the vision of the mystical Lamb was used as Jewish-Christian propaganda against pauline Gnostics. In virtue of the same reason, the memory of the Pillars was parodied in the Gospel tradition.

With the Fourth Gospel, particularly in John 1:29, there is the final recognition of the vision of the mystical Lamb as being the true fundative act of Christianity. Even if emptied of the his original meaning. Even if disconnected from any link with the historical Pillars.

Re: John 1:29 versus Book of Revelation

Posted: Tue Apr 30, 2019 1:05 pm
by klewis
The Lamb came into the book of Revelation on the third draft of Revelation (see p.9 in the link below). In that draft, John incorporated the last six chapters of Deuteronomy and the first six chapters of Joshua into the prior draft. Every place he used that cited Joshua (Jesus in Hebrew and Greek) he used the synonym 'Lamb'. The problem he ran into was the Passover meal depicted in Rev 7:9-17 and depicting Jesus as the Lamb, because the Lamb is the main course.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QLNLgG ... sp=sharing

Re: John 1:29 versus Book of Revelation

Posted: Tue Apr 30, 2019 4:22 pm
by Bernard Muller
to klevis,
The problem he ran into was the Passover meal depicted in Rev 7:9-17 and depicting Jesus as the Lamb, because the Lamb is the main course.
You need a lot of imagination in order to consider Rev 7:9-17 as the Christian Passover meal. This kind of assumption is part of your effort to Christianize passages which are not Christian.

Cordially, Bernard

Re: John 1:29 versus Book of Revelation

Posted: Tue Apr 30, 2019 5:01 pm
by klewis
Bernard Muller wrote:
Tue Apr 30, 2019 4:22 pm
to klevis,
The problem he ran into was the Passover meal depicted in Rev 7:9-17 and depicting Jesus as the Lamb, because the Lamb is the main course.
You need a lot of imagination in order to consider Rev 7:9-17 as the Christian Passover meal. This kind of assumption is part of your effort to Christianize passages which are not Christian.

Cordially, Bernard
Yup it does
John 12:1, 13 Revelation 7:9-10
Then, six days before the Passover
So they took branches of palm trees and went out to meet him. They began to shout, "Hosanna! Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord! Blessed is the king of Israel!"
After these things I looked, and here was an enormous crowd that no one could count, made up of persons from every nation, tribe, people, and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb dressed in long white robes, and with palm branches in their hands.
10 They were shouting out in a loud voice, "Salvation belongs to our God, to the one seated on the throne, and to the Lamb!" (Rev. 7:9-10 NET)


Re: John 1:29 versus Book of Revelation

Posted: Tue Apr 30, 2019 9:50 pm
by Bernard Muller
to klevis,
Still a very long way in order to demonstrate Rev 7:9-17 is the Passover meal of the gospels.
Rev 7:16-17:
They shall hunger no more, neither thirst any more; neither shall the sun light on them, nor any heat.
For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.


The feeding is in heaven, not on earth, and to a multitude, not to the twelve. No mention of blood (or wine) and bread is specified, but instead water is.
And, as you noticed, "the problem he ran into was the Passover meal depicted in Rev 7:9-17 and depicting Jesus as the Lamb, because the Lamb is the main course".
Furthermore, "the one seated on the throne" is God, not the king of Israel, not the Lamb (who had become Jesus thanks to the Christian additions).
So, why you got left for so-called evidence are these palm branches as the clue for the last Supper. Not even remotely enough in order to support your assumption.

BTW, I determined Rev 7:9-17 are Christian additions (but certainly not because of any Passover meal).
Why? because the 144,000 virgin Jews are the first fruits. So this multitude of white robes cannot be in heaven before the first fruits.
These white robes would stand for Christians.

Cordially, Bernard

Re: John 1:29 versus Book of Revelation

Posted: Wed May 01, 2019 4:01 am
by Ben C. Smith
Bernard Muller wrote:
Tue Apr 30, 2019 9:50 pm
So, why you got left for so-called evidence are these palm branches as the clue for the last Supper. Not even remotely enough in order to support your assumption.
Palm branches are also closely associated with the Feast of Tabernacles (Sukkot); the palm branch is one of the "four species" listed in Leviticus 23.40 in connection with that holy day.

Re: John 1:29 versus Book of Revelation

Posted: Wed May 01, 2019 7:45 am
by klewis
I should have not brought that comparison up.

What I was trying to state first is that if you look at how Deuteronomy-Joshua came into Revelation on the third draft (page 9 of the link below). You will see the path that the items From Deuteronomy-Joshua came into Revelation. The Revelation 7:9-17 passage had Passover removed because John used the synonym of Lamb for Jesus / Joshua from imagery derived by the person, Joshua.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QLNLgG ... sp=sharing