New thoughts on the Book of Revelation

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
ABuddhist
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:36 am

Re: New thoughts on the Book of Revelation

Post by ABuddhist »

neilgodfrey wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 6:58 am
Giuseppe wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 5:40 am Neil, can you ask to Russell about why he writes (see my post above):
I think it more appropriate for you to ask him. But as for your point about a rebel leader necessarily being a preacher or teacher, I don't believe that. People can share ideas and commitment to a cause without any of them, not even their leader, being a teacher or preacher of any kind.
Cf., for example, Zhu Yuanzhang, who became not just a rebel leader but a successful rebel leader (founding the Ming Dynasty) after he joined and eventually took over what had begun as a millenarian movement (based upon Manichaeism) while never being a preacher or a public teacher (although he had been a Mahayana Buddhist monk).
Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: New thoughts on the Book of Revelation

Post by Giuseppe »

It escapes me how a Theudas could derive so many people near the Jordan without being a preacher of some kind, i.e. a person who addresses masses by crying a slogan ("Follow me!") or other. If I am correct, Josephus's point again and again is that the rebels, all the rebels, had some sophisticated form of propaganda in action, hence the propaganda was one of their weapons and a Zealot leader couldn't not use it.
ABuddhist
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:36 am

Re: New thoughts on the Book of Revelation

Post by ABuddhist »

Giuseppe wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 7:39 am It escapes me how a Theudas could derive so many people near the Jordan without being a preacher of some kind, i.e. a person who addresses masses by crying a slogan ("Follow me!") or other. If I am correct, Josephus's point again and again is that the rebels, all the rebels, had some sophisticated form of propaganda in action, hence the propaganda was one of their weapons and a Zealot leader couldn't not use it.
With all due respect, the term "preacher" in English has different connotations than simply being "a person who addresses masses by crying a slogan ("Follow me!") or other"; such a person is better described by other terms, such as agitator, leader, or provoker. A preacher is a person who delivers comparatively sophisticated ideas to a crowd in order to persuade them - although such ideas may be briefly stated, such as "Accept Jesus as your saviour or be damned" or "Faith in Amitabha Buddha is the only way to avoid a bad rebirth". Furthering the comparison with Amitabha Buddha's movement (which under the Ikko-ikki became violent and militarily powerful), a person inspiring an army of followers of Amitabha Buddha by chanting "Hail to Amitabha Buddha!", or "To advance leads to Sukhavati; to retreat leads to a hell-realm!" (my own translations of real Ikko-Ikki slogans) would not be acting as a preacher (although e may have been a preacher at other times) but as an agitator, leader, or provoker.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: New thoughts on the Book of Revelation

Post by Giuseppe »

ABuddhist wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 7:50 am With all due respect, the term "preacher" in English has different connotations than simply being "a person who addresses masses by crying a slogan ("Follow me!") or other"; such a person is better described by other terms, such as agitator, leader, or provoker.
an instigator, yes, even with a very low profile as speaker. A figure who could be potentially idealized by his followers (as Paul) as a teacher. If the instigator called "Jesus" was deified rapidly by his followers, obviously his words (whatever they were) were to rise immediately to the rank of divine utterances. And reported faithfully as such.

Even more so if such 'divine' words were very few in number.

But Paul is silent about anything could have been spoken by a such Jesus.

I can concede a Paul who was silent about a historical Jesus. But I am reluctant to concede a historical Jesus who was completely silent.
User avatar
neilgodfrey
Posts: 6161
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: New thoughts on the Book of Revelation

Post by neilgodfrey »

Giuseppe wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 8:21 am If the instigator called "Jesus" was deified rapidly by his followers, obviously his words (whatever they were) were to rise immediately to the rank of divine utterances. And reported faithfully as such.
Not necessarily. Julius Caesar attracted a strong following and was murdered after which he was deified, but nobody thinks of him as a teacher. Ditto with Romulus. Both became gods after a martyrdom but as far as I am aware their words were never raised to the status of a teaching.
ABuddhist
Posts: 1016
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:36 am

Re: New thoughts on the Book of Revelation

Post by ABuddhist »

neilgodfrey wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 2:30 pm
Giuseppe wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 8:21 am If the instigator called "Jesus" was deified rapidly by his followers, obviously his words (whatever they were) were to rise immediately to the rank of divine utterances. And reported faithfully as such.
Not necessarily. Julius Caesar attracted a strong following and was murdered after which he was deified, but nobody thinks of him as a teacher. Ditto with Romulus. Both became gods after a martyrdom but as far as I am aware their words were never raised to the status of a teaching.
Good point. Furthermore, neither man, unlike Zhu Yuanzhang, took over (and "secularized") a religious movement - whose members might be expected to deify the man who led them to success.
Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: New thoughts on the Book of Revelation

Post by Giuseppe »

Thanks to Russell for this exhaustive answer:

I would view Jesus as “teacher” to mean someone bringing wisdom, enlightenment, and ethical truths on a theoretical level. It is common to portray Jesus as a teacher, like a sort of wandering Cynic philosopher. The gospels indeed promote this sort of image with their referring to Jesus “teaching” others and others as his “disciples”.

This is different from Jesus as a Messianic rabble-rouser gaining followers, gathering armies in the wilderness. Under this interpretation the speeches of Jesus did not consist of teachings but a military-political call to action, although there may have been a back-and-forth on peripheral subjects with opponents and hecklers.

The figures in Josephus as a rule are best called prophets, in the language of that day; preacher is I think a (Christian) modernism. Note that OT prophets (especially Moses) were men and women of action as much or more than of words (until you get to the written prophets, which give a false impression of prophets as word-smiths).

(my bold)

This portrait of Jesus fits the evidence in Paul, about which I am collecting the list of authors who think that Paul didn't depoliticize (=betrayed) the original message of Jesus, but at contrary was equally anti-Roman as the rebel "Jesus" (his real name is probably unknown) whereas they were the late Paulinists (Marcion in primis) who betrayed/depoliticized the historical Paul himself.

I have found, until now:
  • Joseph Turmel
Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: New thoughts on the Book of Revelation

Post by Giuseppe »

E.P.Sanders and W.D.Davies would agree with the logic of Gmirkin's argument:

‘The entire teaching material which is attributed to Jesus points away from his being a revolutionary in a way that would actually have threatened Rome. Either the evangelists have not only invented the Jewish trial scenes, but also an enormously rich body of teaching material, while completely hiding Jesus’ true views, or he was no revolutionary in the political sense of the word. The latter seems overwhelmingly the more likely hypothesis’

(W.D. Davies and E.P. Sanders, ‘Jesus: From the Jewish Point of View', in The Cambridge History of Judaism. Volume 3: The Early Roman Period [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999], pp. 618-77, here 670, my bold).
User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 8789
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: New thoughts on the Book of Revelation

Post by MrMacSon »

The two olive trees and two lampstands of Rev 11:4 is likely an adaptation and re-application of the two olive trees and one lampstand of Zech 4. Has there been anything done on intertextuality between [other] passages in the Book of Revelation and the OT?
klewis
Posts: 175
Joined: Mon Apr 15, 2019 9:39 am

Re: New thoughts on the Book of Revelation

Post by klewis »

MrMacSon wrote: Fri Dec 03, 2021 1:25 am The two olive trees and two lampstands of Rev 11:4 is likely an adaptation and re-application of the two olive trees and one lampstand of Zech 4. Has there been anything done on intertextuality between [other] passages in the Book of Revelation and the OT?
John incorporates Zechariah chapters 2 to 4 into chapters 11 & 12 of Revelation via a chiasmus parallel formation see (https://shared-assets.adobe.com/link/aa ... 15b409debd). There are many other passages from the Hebrew Bible in which he incorporates into chapter 11. Most of them are covered in my book on How John Wrote the Book of Revelation: From Concept to Publication.
Post Reply