Are there any survivors in the apocalypse of John?

[Ben C. Smith]

I am pretty sure that throughout most of chapter 15 the focus is on the usual course of things, without necessarily implying that the usual is also the universal. None of the verses you have cited so far create any real discrepancy to my eye except possibly for "in Adam all die."

Alright, then what about 15:50: "Now I declare to you, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable."

The transformation of the living takes care of the flesh and blood. And imperishable is the same as immortal, essentially.

If "in Adam all die" and "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God," I'm still thinking that the "change" of a living ("natural"/"perishable") body into a "spiritual" body is like dying too.

"Like" dying. Sure. In a way. It accomplishes the same thing. Yet verse 51 is clear that "not all shall sleep," and the scenario in 1 Thessalonians 4.13-18 seems to imply the same thing (first the dead rise, and then the living join them). However close that moment of transformation might be to death, it is nothing like all who draw breath dying and remaining dead for 7 days, as in 4 Ezra 7.26-34.

I mean, it could even possibly be that Paul means that "we shall not all sleep" only up until that moment, at which point the living die for a split second and then are "transformed." But he nowhere makes this clear, and it is still something very different from what we actually find in 4 Ezra and what I am wondering about in Revelation. Also, he uses the term "resurrection" for the dead and "transformation" for the living, and he keeps the two groups, living and dead, separate both here and in 1 Thessalonians 4.

Doesn't that understanding make "in Adam all die" not a discrepancy and keep Paul more or less in step with Revelation?

No, not at all, not if Revelation is something like 4 Ezra in this respect (which is what I am exploring and am not sure about yet). The question is whether or not there are any "survivors" in Revelation, meaning people who survive up until the moment of resurrection; whether the transformation of the living is identical to a resurrection in Paul is very much a distraction from what I am trying to piece together. If the answer to that question in Revelation is no, then that answer differs from the answer that Paul himself gives to that same question: "we shall not all sleep" (even if my highly speculative interpretation above were correct about this line meaning "only until the resurrection moment").

What it all boils down to is that the following two statements are opposites:

1 Corinthians 15.51-52: 51 Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed.

4 Ezra 7.29-30: 29 And after these years my son the Messiah shall die, and all who draw human breath. 30 And the world shall be turned back to primeval silence for seven days, as it was at the first beginnings; so that no one shall be left.

Even if they can be harmonized (and I am not saying they can or cannot be), the question would remain as to why they were each phrased in this way. What shift of emphasis might have led to two such opposite expressions? It sounds like you may be pursuing a slightly different set of questions than I am in that respect.

The OP is asking which of the above Revelation is most like.

[John2]

Alright, then until someone finds something in Revelation that is like what Paul means, maybe he is just a lone wolf here and Revelation is indeed like 4 Ezra. Since I gather Revelation is a Jewish Christian writing, it wouldn't necessarily have to be in line with Paul on this matter.

[Ben C. Smith]

Alright, I'll give you all that, so until someone finds something in Revelation that is like what Paul means, then maybe he is just a lone wolf here and Revelation is indeed like 4 Ezra. Since I gather Revelation is a Jewish Christian writing, it wouldn't necessarily have to be in line with Paul on this matter.

Well, Paul would not quite be a lone wolf, I think. There is always this one, too:

John 21.20-23: 20 Peter, turning around, sees the disciple whom Jesus loved following them; the one who also had leaned back on His bosom at the supper and said, “Lord, who is the one who betrays You?” 21 So Peter seeing him says to Jesus, “Lord, and what about this man?” 22 Jesus says to him, “If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you? You follow Me!” 23 Therefore this saying went out among the brethren that that disciple would not die; yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but only, “If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you?”

And does the Didache not envision people surviving right up until they see the three signs?

Didache 16.5: 5 Then shall the creation of man come to the fiery trial of proof, and many shall be offended and shall perish; but they who remain in their faith shall be saved by the curse itself. 6 And then shall appear the signs of the truth: first the sign of the appearance in heaven, then the sign of the sound of the trumpet, and thirdly the resurrection of the dead — 7 not of all, but as it has been said, “The Lord shall come and all his saints with him” (= Zechariah 14.5). 8 Then shall the world behold the Lord coming on the clouds of heaven....

To whom would the resurrection be a sign if no one remained at that point? (The Didache, such as we have it, is silent on what happens to any who remain; but something like what we find in 4 Ezra seems unlikely here, I think.)

[John2]

I'm very rusty on this, but didn't we discuss the ending of the Didache before? I recall (vaguely) that there could be an issue with it. If there isn't, that's fine.

[John2]

But that passage from John doesn't appear to subscribe to the idea that "not all shall sleep" to me, since it says:

Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but only, “If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you?”

[Ben C. Smith]

But that passage from John doesn't appear to subscribe to the idea that "not all shall sleep" to me, since it says:

Yet Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but only, “If I want him to remain until I come, what is that to you?”

Correct, but it implies that there were some people who did think that, at least about the "beloved disciple."

[Ben C. Smith]

I'm very rusty on this, but didn't we discuss the ending of the Didache before? I recall (vaguely) that there could be an issue with it. If there isn't, that's fine.

The issue was whether or not Alan Garrow is correct to look to the Renunciation of Boniface and to the Apostolic Constitutions for the lost ending. It may affect the present issue, but it is not immediately evident that it does.

[andrewcriddle]

I'm not sure but Revelation 12:6

and the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God, in which she is to be nourished for 1,260 days.

may imply that there will be righteous survivors of the tribulation.

Andrew Criddle

What do you make of Revelation 12, Andrew? Surely it has to mean something that the number of days (1,260) here matches the number of days in Revelation 11 (the two witnesses' tenure). But is that time period the same as "time, times, and half a time" in 12.14? And then, after the dragon vows to make war on the woman's children (12.17), another period which could denote the same approximate range, 42 months, appears in 13.5; the dragon standing on the shore in 13.1 seems to be drawing continuity between chapters 12 and 13.

Even back during a time when I foolishly thought I had something of a grasp on this book, chapters 11 and 12 still rather perplexed me. Elaborate partition theories never took hold in my mind, with the only possible exceptions being those two chapters and the letters to the seven churches. I can see why some scholars have been led to think that this book is a sometimes clumsy attempt (despite all the apparent structuring using the number 7) to sew together various inconsistent sources.

ETA: If chapter 12 is a self contained unit which could theoretically span the entire time frame of the rest of the book — as it appears to be, at least at first glance — then the woman's sojourn in the wilderness may mean survivors exist. If, on the other hand, chapter 12 is part of the sequence of events — as 13.1 seems to imply — then events have not yet gotten to the point at which a meaningful category of survivors can exist.

Hi Ben

I share your uncertainty about exactly how Revelation 12 fits into the rest of Revelation. However I am unhappy with a scenario in which the Woman (i.e. the righteous remnant) hides in the wilderness in order to survive the first stage of persecution only to be killed in the full-blown tribulation. It seems more likely IMHO that the Woman is sheltered until the coming of the time of deliverance.

Andrew Criddle

[Ben C. Smith]

I share your uncertainty about exactly how Revelation 12 fits into the rest of Revelation. However I am unhappy with a scenario in which the Woman (i.e. the righteous remnant) hides in the wilderness in order to survive the first stage of persecution only to be killed in the full-blown tribulation. It seems more likely IMHO that the Woman is sheltered until the coming of the time of deliverance.

A priori it does seem more likely that she is delivered throughout the tribulation. I am just not sure how to fit that in with other parts of the book.

[Bernard Muller]

Before the Christian additions (which confuse everything), there was a Jewish apocalypse of John written soon after the events of 70 CE. That Jewish apocalypse was very coherent.
For the ones interested by my work, read http://historical-jesus.info/rjohn.html which show how I came to that conclusion and how I extricated the Jewish version from the canonical Christian version. Also you can see my construct of the original version here:
http://historical-jesus.info/rjohn.html. In it, the 144,000 virgin Jews are first to be saved in heaven, and afterward, other good Jews (& proselytes?).
Not all Gentiles are killed because of 21:24: "The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it."

Cordially, Bernard