Earl Doherty on the Book of Revelation: is he de-politicizing it ?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Earl Doherty on the Book of Revelation: is he de-politicizing it ?

Post by Giuseppe »

I quote only a part from a Doherty's comment on the Book of Revelation:

John A. T. Robinson (Redating the New Testament, p.230f) interprets this as echoing Nero’s slaughter of Christians, suggesting that without an historical provocation like that, the “vindictive reaction” of John’s Apocalypse “is scarcely credible.” But Revelation is chockfull of other equally horrific scenes of blood and destruction to be wreaked upon the earth, and few if any of those suffer attempts to be identified with specific historical events. The apocalyptic fever of the times itself, especially in the decades following the Jewish War, would have been sufficient to provoke John’s “vindictive reaction.” To that we might also add John’s own personality, a mind bordering on the psychotic; there are many preachers today who consign non-believers to similar horrors without having experienced anything on the scale of the alleged Neronian persecution.

(my bold)

It is sad to see that only Bruno Bauer and the mythicists of the past gave to Book of Revelation the importance it deserves. For Bauer, Revelation is even the earliest book of the entire NT. A view that had influence even on many historicists of his time.

It is also sad to see that Doherty minimizes the role of the first Jewish revolt on the view of the author of Revelation. Surely the war was the great "persecution" suffered by the community of Revelation. He minimizes also the fact that the hated Babylon is codeword for Rome.

When he writes:
there are many preachers today who consign non-believers to similar horrors without having experienced anything on the scale of the alleged Neronian persecution.
...Doherty appears to ignore that the author of Revelation experienced anything on the scale of the First Jewish Revolt (66-70 CE).

Hence I reiterate my exhortation to readers:

have you examples of "mystical" sects who were involved in political propaganda against Rome? Examples of sects who invoked the divine violence against Rome in the name merely of a mythical archangel?

Did the Essenes invoke the archangel Melkizedek against Rome?

My point is that against Rome only a davidic earthly Messiah was necessary, especially if the final goal was to provoke divine violence on Rome.
Post Reply