How John Wrote the Book of Revelation Chapter 1

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
klewis
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:39 am

Re: How John Wrote the Book of Revelation Chapter 1

Post by klewis » Mon Apr 22, 2019 3:02 pm

rakovsky wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 7:09 am
I respect the careful research that you put into this. Robert Price wrote, as quoted earlier:
All careful readers know that Revelation is not simply an eyewitness account of a series of mind-blasting visions.
How can one prove definitively that this text was solely like a Christmas Carol, a carefully thought out and composed allegory of visions, and not an expansion of ideas that came in a dream-state, hallucination or trance like Crazy Horse's Dreams on his vision quest or shamanic vision stories?
Good question,

There are two assumptions that I will make. First, if John uses a process to create Revelation than he is not on drugs or having a vision. The process may be the vision but the vision is derived from the process. Second, if he in the later stages created complex parallels then they are not a product of a vision.

To understand the answer to this question you need to understand how Hebrew Poetry works, and its purpose. I have provided in my book an example of Hebrew Poetry https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lN8jRu ... sp=sharing (see also https://www.sbl-site.org/publications/a ... icleId=296 ). Please note, the term Complex Parallel is what I use, the real term is Chiasmus or an Inverted Parallel (Google it if you want to learn more or see examples).

I also ask you to review chapter 1 of my book https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QLNLgG ... sp=sharing.

So, now to the answer. This is what the first draft of Revelation looked like https://drive.google.com/file/d/12JZcor ... sp=sharing . Please note, first how John incorporates the Ezekiel Isaiah text into Revelation. Now imagine, that he does it the way the other drafts are described in chapter 1. This alone excludes the experience as a vision.

In the post processing part of Revelation John created this parallel https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gGkg-a ... sp=sharing. Please note, there are many parallels like this one covering all corners of the book of Revelation. Every section of Revelation has multiple parallels with other passages within Revelation.

Now as to why Revelation is the worse Greek in the Christian Scriptures. Most will say that he thought in Hebrew and wrote in Greek. I argue that his Greek was very good, just that the process in which he wrote required a polishing phase. Since John defined Domitian as the beast, and Domitian was assassinated, he wanted to publish it fast and thus skipped the finishing phase of his writing.
Last edited by klewis on Mon Apr 22, 2019 4:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

klewis
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:39 am

Re: How John Wrote the Book of Revelation Chapter 1

Post by klewis » Mon Apr 22, 2019 4:01 pm

Charles Wilson wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 9:22 am
klewis wrote:
Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:11 am
The honey motif comes from Ezekiel 2:8 - 3:3 and has an interesting story behind it
I would be most interested in reading of this "interesting story".

Josephus, Ant..., 14, 7, 4:

"...Aristobulus had no enjoyment of what he hoped for from the power that was given him by Cesar; for those of Pompey's party prevented it, and destroyed him by poison; and those of Caesar's party buried him. His dead body also lay, for a good while, embalmed in honey, till Antony afterward sent it to Judea, and caused him to be buried in the royal sepulcher..."

In a number of places, Josephus tells a tale that comes up short in the Details Department. He promises all of the story - "Pinkie Promise!" - but won't tell you who performs the sacrifices in the Temple during the pivotal Temple Slaughter of 4 BCE.

So it is here. "Members of Pompey's party..." poison Aristobulus 2. Whoa!!! When did Pompey use poison to achieve political ends? Well...after Mithridates poisoned Pompey's troops with Rhdodendron honey in the third Mithridatic War, Pompey certainly knew of it.

"His dead body also lay, for a good while, embalmed in honey..."

So here is the "interesting story" in Josephus and it aligns quite nicely with Revelation:

Revelation 10: 9 - 10 (RSV):

[9] So I went to the angel and told him to give me the little scroll; and he said to me, "Take it and eat; it will be bitter to your stomach, but sweet as honey in your mouth."
[10] And I took the little scroll from the hand of the angel and ate it; it was sweet as honey in my mouth, but when I had eaten it my stomach was made bitter.

What is your interesting story here?

THNX,

CW
I am not aware of the Josephus passage, so thanks for bringing it to my attention.

This is how the Mighty Angel story got into Revelation.

In the first draft of Revelation, John took the whole of Ezekiel and chapters 6 to 29 of Isaiah and formed a parallel with them. The content in both sections contained many of the same items in the same order. The result was two sets of wax tablets, one set from Ezekiel, the other from Isaiah

https://drive.google.com/file/d/12JZcor ... sp=sharing

On page 40, you can see how the content from Ezekiel 2:9 - 3:3 became the source of the scroll that contained honey. In Ezekiel, it is God that has the scroll and hands it to Ezekiel.

On page 41, The Isaiah side of the wax tablet has the interaction with Isaiah and the Seraphim. When page 40 and 41 are conflated we get the genesis of Chapter 5 of Revelation.

In the next draft, John integrated Zechariah into the book of Revelation by organizing the two stacks of wax tablets by reverse order of the the content found in Zechariah 1:1 to 12:10. He also sprinkled a lot of the content of Zechariah into the second draft. However John had a problem and that was that Zechariah had a flying scroll (Zech 5:1-4) and the order was in a different place than Revelation 5. So John split the Ezekiel scroll, literary and place half of it where the Zechariah scroll was. He then added two of the elements of destruction from Zechariah 5:3-5 into the text.

Before John split the scroll, he created the chain of custody of the scroll found in Revelation 1:1 where it went from God, to Jesus, to an Angel, and finally to John. However, for some reason he did not want to use the Seraphim found in Revelation, so he created a synonym for it known as the Mighty Angel. That is how the mighty angel got created.

When John split the scroll, he kept the Mighty angel in both Revelation 5 and 10. John does this type of thing several other places in Revelation.

Since the scroll was a judgment device, John included another scroll passage found in Jeremiah 51:49, 63-64. That is where we get the mill stone found in Revelation 18:21. Yes, you guessed it, when he moved that text there, he also carried the Mighty Angel to that location and that is how the Mighty Angel is found in three places in Revelation.

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

In the next draft, the Deuteronomy-Joshua draft, John took the last six chapters of Deuteronomy and the first six chapters of Joshua and inserted the text between the wax tablets. When he came to the Mighty Angel in Revelation 10:2, he placed one foot in the water, and one foot on the land just like the children of Israel did when they crossed the Jordan river (see page 9 of chapter 1 posted in this thread).

The last tinkering John did was in the Daniel Draft, where he integrated Daniel 12:3-11 into Revelation 10 and 11
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Y0D9wG ... sp=sharing

Sorry if the story is rough in its presentation, but I do hope you like how the Mighty Angel and the Scroll transformed from one draft to the next.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 6613
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: How John Wrote the Book of Revelation Chapter 1

Post by Ben C. Smith » Mon Apr 22, 2019 4:22 pm

klewis wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 3:02 pm
Now as to why Revelation is the worse Greek in the Christian Scriptures. Most will say that he thought in Hebrew and wrote in Greek. I argue that his Greek was very good, just that the process in which he wrote required a polishing phase. Since John defined Domitian as the beast, and Domitian was assassinated, he wanted to publish it fast and thus skipped the finishing phase of his writing.
I do not think that this is nearly as robust an explanation as is called for. Some of the solecisms or barbarisms are so egregious as to be unlikely to derive simply from forming part of a rough draft. They are either deliberate (various reasons are commonly adduced) or the sign of outright incompetence in the Greek language. A more robust explanation, in my humble opinion, would be that the original author wrote solecistically or barbarically, and then an editor did some polishing up, but not very thoroughly. Other, equally robust options are surely available, too, but I think one needs to account for the sheer severity of some of the grammatical issues.

ETA: You could probably make your suggestion more robust yourself by applying it only to some of the issues in the grammar or syntax, leaving others to be explained differently (deliberate effect, imitation of the Old Greek, and so on). But "fast publication" as a way to handle most/all of the issues strikes me as a nonstarter. Just my 2¢.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

klewis
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:39 am

Re: How John Wrote the Book of Revelation Chapter 1

Post by klewis » Mon Apr 22, 2019 5:03 pm

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 4:22 pm
klewis wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 3:02 pm
Now as to why Revelation is the worse Greek in the Christian Scriptures. Most will say that he thought in Hebrew and wrote in Greek. I argue that his Greek was very good, just that the process in which he wrote required a polishing phase. Since John defined Domitian as the beast, and Domitian was assassinated, he wanted to publish it fast and thus skipped the finishing phase of his writing.
I do not think that this is nearly as robust an explanation as is called for. Some of the solecisms or barbarisms are so egregious as to be unlikely to derive simply from forming part of a rough draft. They are either deliberate (various reasons are commonly adduced) or the sign of outright incompetence in the Greek language. A more robust explanation, in my humble opinion, would be that the original author wrote solecistically or barbarically, and then an editor did some polishing up, but not very thoroughly. Other, equally robust options are surely available, too, but I think one needs to account for the sheer severity of some of the grammatical issues.

ETA: You could probably make your suggestion more robust yourself by applying it only to some of the issues in the grammar or syntax, leaving others to be explained differently (deliberate effect, imitation of the Old Greek, and so on). But "fast publication" as a way to handle most/all of the issues strikes me as a nonstarter. Just my 2¢.
First, we need to understand the process in which he wrote the book of Revelation. The process is known (defined by me) as parallel formation, which is the process of taking one passage and forming a parallel with another passage. For example this is one of his better ones https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gGkg-a ... sp=sharing. Now imagine, that every section in the book of Revelation having at least four parallels to it. When a writer is writing this way, he is more concerned with forming parallels between two passages than forming a polish text each time. Why would he do that only to change it the next time.

Now imagine, that John also forms parallels by copying from the LXX. The vast majority of Revelation is from the Hebrew Scriptures which brings into the mix a more diverse range of meanings for same words and an older Greek writing grammar. Now imagine that each Hebrew text brought into the mix causes content to change and edits to be made and sometimes, texts to be erased.

An example of tinkering of bad text can be seen in the in the illustration below which is best seen in two page view.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/14MAHAc ... sp=sharing

In the attached example you can see how content got shifted and how parallels became broken. No two sections completely agree and yet they were all part of the parallel making process. I hope this illustrates, that parallel formation is a messy business.

klewis
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:39 am

Re: How John Wrote the Book of Revelation Chapter 1

Post by klewis » Mon Apr 22, 2019 5:16 pm

Ben,
I also wanted to let you know, that I had three years of Greek long time ago. Even when I was at my peak in Greek, I would not know good grammar from bad grammar. I have come to realize that that I am not alone. My conjecture was based upon the predominate opinion that sees John as a Hebrew thinker and not a Greek writer. So I based my assessment upon how I imagined the writing to take place and the problems that would occur. So, me being wrong on this does not invalidate my process but give me insight into new opportunities to develop this work further.

Charles Wilson
Posts: 1304
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: How John Wrote the Book of Revelation Chapter 1

Post by Charles Wilson » Mon Apr 22, 2019 7:20 pm

Thank you very much for your answer. Don't get defensive here! I'm gonna try and unpack as much of this as I can.
klewis wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 5:16 pm
My conjecture was based upon the predominate opinion that sees John as a Hebrew thinker and not a Greek writer.
Where we may differ is in seeing this "Hebrew Thinker" writing in Greek. The NT to me appears as a Set of Documents across Cultures, Languages and World Views. I see a Story written from the Mishmarot Priesthood that was stolen and rewritten for the Glory of the Roman Flavian Rulers. Jesus was a Construct and when the Stories are viewed this way, your Analysis of Revelation's Construction may be correct. "Jannaeus" was the King and the Mishmarot Group "Immer" was quite literally the "Lamb". The Word-Play on "Lamb" is lost in the Greek so John's "Lamb-of-God" may continue as a term for the created "Jesus" without challenge. Other examples abound, from the Latin Loan Word "Soudarian" to the use of Latin/Greek Military Terms such as "Fourth Watch" found in Mark.

On the "Strong Angel":

1. Revelation 5: Various (RSV):

[2] and I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, "Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?"
...
5] Then one of the elders said to me, "Weep not; lo, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that he can open the scroll and its seven seals."
[6] And between the throne and the four living creatures and among the elders, I saw a Lamb standing, as though it had been slain...
...
[8] And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints

I agree with our Poster Bernard that it makes sense for the 24 elders to be the Mishmarot Divisions. If you were a "Hebrew Thinker" at that time in the Priesthood, the Temple Apparatus needed no "Fixing". This is a rewrite for Roman Glory. Look at Revelation 4:

[4] Round the throne were twenty-four thrones, and seated on the thrones were twenty-four elders, clad in white garments, with golden crowns upon their heads.
[5] From the throne issue flashes of lightning, and voices and peals of thunder, and before the throne burn seven torches of fire, which are the seven spirits of God;

This is "Of God" since the 24 Elders and the Throne are separated by the "Seven Spirits OF GOD".

So, who is the "Mighty Angel" here? There are several possibilities but the main one deals with the "Lion of the Tribe of Judah, the Root of David" and the Lamb. The "Lion" could open it but the Lamb is the one does open the Scroll. The Lion is Jannaeus and the Lamb is Immer, which was slaughtered by Archelaus, who was given Demi-Kingship by Ptolemy, who kept Herod's seal, when Herod died one week or so too early.

This points to Herod and the Roman Political Control Officers and then to Caesar. This will lead to the idea that the "Strong Angels" are the Caesars and Herodian Rulers who oppress the Priesthood and who will make the High Priest an appointed office.

2. Revelation 10: 1 - 2 (RSV):

[1] Then I saw another mighty angel coming down from heaven, wrapped in a cloud, with a rainbow over his head, and his face was like the sun, and his legs like pillars of fire.
[2] He had a little scroll open in his hand. And he set his right foot on the sea, and his left foot on the land,

This is Pompey. The scene is describing the poisoning of Aristobulus 2, as mentioned in a Post given above. The 2 Witnesses are Aristobulus 2 and Alexander.

3. Revelation 18: 21 (RSV):

[21] Then a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone and threw it into the sea, saying,
"So shall Babylon the great city be thrown down with violence,
and shall be found no more;

Klewis --

I'm quite happy with Rome being the Object of Scorn and Hatred here. I do, however see your deeper point. It is found in the "Millstone" imagery:

Mark 9: 42 (RSV):

[42] "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were hung round his neck and he were thrown into the sea.

This is a Herod Story. In the middle of a real ass-kicker famine, Herod sells EVERYTHING of value from the Palace and buys grain from Petronius, Procurator of Egypt. He is indeed dropping giant stones in the rough waters of Caesarea to create a Breakwater for ships. See Matthew 7: 7 - 12 for another reference to the Safe Harbor of Caesarea.

I am WAY over in length here but I want to offer another explanation of "Strong Angel" from a "Hebrew Thinking" person at that time. "Jesus" gets created and back-mapped onto the Revelation Story that centers on Queen Salome @ Chapter 8. You may align events starting at Chapter 4 and moving through Chapters 10+.

Your use of Ezekial et. al. and your wax plates is intriguing. It was all in the Production. I certainly agree with that.

Best,

CW
Last edited by Charles Wilson on Mon Apr 22, 2019 7:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 6613
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: How John Wrote the Book of Revelation Chapter 1

Post by Ben C. Smith » Mon Apr 22, 2019 7:21 pm

klewis wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 5:03 pm
When a writer is writing this way, he is more concerned with forming parallels between two passages than forming a polish text each time. Why would he do that only to change it the next time.
Juggling parallels is not a very good explanation of a Greek writer using, say, the wrong case in an obvious construction (the equivalent in English of saying, for example, "Me had a good time"). Just because the process is a bit complex does not mean that a native English speaker is likely to make that kind of mistake: a sign either of incompetence or of deliberate design (for whatever reason). Both of these reasons (incompetence and deliberate design) have been adduced for the issues in Revelation at various times by various scholars, issues for which "lack of polish" is a somewhat severe understatement.

(There are crass case errors which native English speakers make, but they are the result of overcorrection and are also unfortunately found all over modern English writing.)
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

klewis
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:39 am

Re: How John Wrote the Book of Revelation Chapter 1

Post by klewis » Tue Apr 23, 2019 1:11 am

Ben C. Smith wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 7:21 pm
klewis wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 5:03 pm
When a writer is writing this way, he is more concerned with forming parallels between two passages than forming a polish text each time. Why would he do that only to change it the next time.
Juggling parallels is not a very good explanation of a Greek writer using, say, the wrong case in an obvious construction (the equivalent in English of saying, for example, "Me had a good time"). Just because the process is a bit complex does not mean that a native English speaker is likely to make that kind of mistake: a sign either of incompetence or of deliberate design (for whatever reason). Both of these reasons (incompetence and deliberate design) have been adduced for the issues in Revelation at various times by various scholars, issues for which "lack of polish" is a somewhat severe understatement.

(There are crass case errors which native English speakers make, but they are the result of overcorrection and are also unfortunately found all over modern English writing.)
That would be true if there was only one parallel between two passages. How about four parallels between every passage as found in Revelation. Now combined each of those passages having a combination of source texts that also have singular and plural wording.

For example, John has the two prophets in Rev 11 as imagery for Jesus, plural representing singular. He also sees Jesus as the child in Rev 12. Those two passages also share the same description of what is happening (Rev 11:15; 12:10)

11:15 The seventh angel sounded, and great voices in heaven followed, saying,
The kingdom of the world has become the Kingdom of our Lord,and of his Christ. He will reign forever and ever!”

12:10 I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying,
Now the salvation, the power, and the Kingdom of our God, and the authority of his Christ has come;
for the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down, who accuses them before our God day and night.

So, what I need to do is to compare the process that I have derived and see how it interacts with the grammatical problems found in Revelation. If there is a solid correlation then it adds evidence to my process and my assertion that John did not finish the book. If there is no correlation between the two then it at least says his Greek sucked.

Thanks, that would be a great project, and since I have done a lot of the work, it should not be as painful of a process.
Last edited by klewis on Tue Apr 23, 2019 2:23 am, edited 1 time in total.

klewis
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:39 am

Re: How John Wrote the Book of Revelation Chapter 1

Post by klewis » Tue Apr 23, 2019 1:50 am

Charles Wilson wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 7:20 pm
Thank you very much for your answer. Don't get defensive here! I'm gonna try and unpack as much of this as I can.
klewis wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 5:16 pm
My conjecture was based upon the predominate opinion that sees John as a Hebrew thinker and not a Greek writer.
Where we may differ is in seeing this "Hebrew Thinker" writing in Greek. The NT to me appears as a Set of Documents across Cultures, Languages and World Views. I see a Story written from the Mishmarot Priesthood that was stolen and rewritten for the Glory of the Roman Flavian Rulers. Jesus was a Construct and when the Stories are viewed this way, your Analysis of Revelation's Construction may be correct. "Jannaeus" was the King and the Mishmarot Group "Immer" was quite literally the "Lamb". The Word-Play on "Lamb" is lost in the Greek so John's "Lamb-of-God" may continue as a term for the created "Jesus" without challenge. Other examples abound, from the Latin Loan Word "Soudarian" to the use of Latin/Greek Military Terms such as "Fourth Watch" found in Mark.

On the "Strong Angel":

1. Revelation 5: Various (RSV):

[2] and I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, "Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?"
...
5] Then one of the elders said to me, "Weep not; lo, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that he can open the scroll and its seven seals."
[6] And between the throne and the four living creatures and among the elders, I saw a Lamb standing, as though it had been slain...
...
[8] And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints

I agree with our Poster Bernard that it makes sense for the 24 elders to be the Mishmarot Divisions. If you were a "Hebrew Thinker" at that time in the Priesthood, the Temple Apparatus needed no "Fixing". This is a rewrite for Roman Glory. Look at Revelation 4:

[4] Round the throne were twenty-four thrones, and seated on the thrones were twenty-four elders, clad in white garments, with golden crowns upon their heads.
[5] From the throne issue flashes of lightning, and voices and peals of thunder, and before the throne burn seven torches of fire, which are the seven spirits of God;

This is "Of God" since the 24 Elders and the Throne are separated by the "Seven Spirits OF GOD".

So, who is the "Mighty Angel" here? There are several possibilities but the main one deals with the "Lion of the Tribe of Judah, the Root of David" and the Lamb. The "Lion" could open it but the Lamb is the one does open the Scroll. The Lion is Jannaeus and the Lamb is Immer, which was slaughtered by Archelaus, who was given Demi-Kingship by Ptolemy, who kept Herod's seal, when Herod died one week or so too early.

This points to Herod and the Roman Political Control Officers and then to Caesar. This will lead to the idea that the "Strong Angels" are the Caesars and Herodian Rulers who oppress the Priesthood and who will make the High Priest an appointed office.

2. Revelation 10: 1 - 2 (RSV):

[1] Then I saw another mighty angel coming down from heaven, wrapped in a cloud, with a rainbow over his head, and his face was like the sun, and his legs like pillars of fire.
[2] He had a little scroll open in his hand. And he set his right foot on the sea, and his left foot on the land,

This is Pompey. The scene is describing the poisoning of Aristobulus 2, as mentioned in a Post given above. The 2 Witnesses are Aristobulus 2 and Alexander.

3. Revelation 18: 21 (RSV):

[21] Then a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone and threw it into the sea, saying,
"So shall Babylon the great city be thrown down with violence,
and shall be found no more;

Klewis --

I'm quite happy with Rome being the Object of Scorn and Hatred here. I do, however see your deeper point. It is found in the "Millstone" imagery:

Mark 9: 42 (RSV):

[42] "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were hung round his neck and he were thrown into the sea.

This is a Herod Story. In the middle of a real ass-kicker famine, Herod sells EVERYTHING of value from the Palace and buys grain from Petronius, Procurator of Egypt. He is indeed dropping giant stones in the rough waters of Caesarea to create a Breakwater for ships. See Matthew 7: 7 - 12 for another reference to the Safe Harbor of Caesarea.

I am WAY over in length here but I want to offer another explanation of "Strong Angel" from a "Hebrew Thinking" person at that time. "Jesus" gets created and back-mapped onto the Revelation Story that centers on Queen Salome @ Chapter 8. You may align events starting at Chapter 4 and moving through Chapters 10+.

Your use of Ezekial et. al. and your wax plates is intriguing. It was all in the Production. I certainly agree with that.

Best,

CW
I get upset with Bernard on statements like this one:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4499&start=60#p97796
I am amazed how you twist and invent things to support your agenda and to deny an original strictly Jewish Revelation.

Let's start by Rev 11:8: "...the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified."
Frankly, I don't see what that have to do with Ezekiel 5, interlaced with Zechariah 2, 4.

About the two prophets of Revelation: why do you assume to be Jesus (the son of Jozadak) & Zerubbabel? Why would the twosome stand for Jesus (of Nazareth)? Pure imagination from your part.

"John" used some OT passages for inspiration, or even material, but out of the original context. Never "John" said he quoted passages from the OT as prophecies of what would happen during his time.
All I can do is to tell how I derived the twenty four elders. I hope you don't mind me just describing it and not going through a whole production. I hope that I have earned the privileged to be lazy on this one.

In the first draft of Revelation, page 62 https://drive.google.com/file/d/12JZcor ... sp=sharing I show how John derived the twelve gates as representing the twelve tribes of Israel. You will find this in almost every good commentary on Revelation and every book about Hebrew Scriptures and Ezekiel.

In my chapter on the Exodus draft, I show how John overlays the servicing of the temple onto Revelation (page 10 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QLNLgG ... sp=sharing). In the Exodus draft, John is creating a new set of believers known as the great multitude, comprise of every nation, tongue, and race. Therefore, the New Jerusalem is given the twelve foundation stones representing the twelve apostles. He associates the elders with the loaves of bread found in the tabernacle and expands them to represent the twelve tribes and the twelve apostles.

Evidence of this is contained in my chapter on the Exodus draft, but the gist of it is when he refers to the elders they are in groups of 24 when they can represent everyone, and simply as elders when they are only one group, such as the 144,000.

The Lamb, synonym to Jesus, which came into the book of Revelation during the Deuteronomy-Joshua draft (DJD). John used the Lamb instead of Joshua, everyplace that he incorporated the DJD and where Jesus is mentioned. As you know Joshua and Jesus are the same word in Greek and Hebrew. The problem that John had was in chapter 7 where he describes the Passover, and as you know the Lamb is served in the Passover. So John removed the meal portion from Joshua.

Once again, I apologize of reducing 100 pages into a few paragraphs. Also, please note, I am more interested in how the text changed from draft to draft than the final interpretation or today's interpretation of Revelation. I feel that seeing the process transition from one draft to another has its own rewards for understanding the Book of Revelation.

User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 6613
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: How John Wrote the Book of Revelation Chapter 1

Post by Ben C. Smith » Tue Apr 23, 2019 2:53 am

klewis wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 1:11 am
Ben C. Smith wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 7:21 pm
Juggling parallels is not a very good explanation of a Greek writer using, say, the wrong case in an obvious construction (the equivalent in English of saying, for example, "Me had a good time"). Just because the process is a bit complex does not mean that a native English speaker is likely to make that kind of mistake: a sign either of incompetence or of deliberate design (for whatever reason). Both of these reasons (incompetence and deliberate design) have been adduced for the issues in Revelation at various times by various scholars, issues for which "lack of polish" is a somewhat severe understatement.
That would be true if there was only one parallel between two passages. How about four parallels between every passage as found in Revelation. Now combined each of those passages having a combination of source texts that also have singular and plural wording.
The number of parallels is not relevant, nor are all or even most of the errors to be found in passages with so many parallels. What is relevant is the likelihood of a native speaker accidentally writing such a poor construction under any circumstances, and then doing it many more times throughout the text. A native speaker should be able to reword the same thought in a dozen different ways and not commit these kinds of mistakes.
So, what I need to do is to compare the process that I have derived and see how it interacts with the grammatical problems found in Revelation. If there is a solid correlation then it adds evidence to my process and my assertion that John did not finish the book. If there is no correlation between the two then it at least says his Greek sucked.
Yes, that is the thing to do.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ

Post Reply