The Book of Revelation is...

[Taverner]

And I would like to know if you're a believer or not, if you don't mind.

Especially since I know my fellow Atheists will agree with me that it's, well, delusion in printed form.

[stellanoir]

1. it reads like a totally bad medieval mushroom trip

[evlbstrd]

2. If wasn't 'shrooms, the lamb was bad.

[TechBear_Seattle]

14. It was neither shrooms nor bad food; John was snuffing fumes

Tradition holds that John received his revelations while living in a cave on the small Aegean island of Patmos (the cave itself is a World Heritage Site and for centuries has been a stop for religious pilgrims.) Like many Aegean islands, Patmos was created by vulcanism, and island has many cracks were gasses from deep in the earth seep to the surface. Some of these gases can cause hallucinations; when the cracks are in caves, these hallucinagenic gasses can accumilate. John's cave on Patmos has such cracks and, yes, has measurable amounts of hallucinagenic gas.

The cavern of the Oracle at Delphi is very similar, and there are a number of other "holy" spots around Greece, Turkey and the Aegean which are basically the same.

[xchrom]

3. it's a nutty book and should be taken out. nt

[CatholicEdHead]

11. It was talked about being taken out way back to the Council of Trent

and even before. It survived the committee cutoff in the Roman Catholic Church way back when to be included when many wanted it excluded like the gnostic gospels.

[xchrom]

12. that's true -- and too bad it didn't make it to

the cutting room floor.

it would sure cut a lot of nutty preachers off at teh knees.

i am one christian who is anxious for some new editing to be done to the bible -- revelations is where i'd like to see them start.

it won't happen of course -- but i can dream.

[Nitrogenica]

4. Agnostic, and yah it's just a book. There are a lot of books.

[The Magistrate]

5. It Is, Sir, A Political Tract

Emerging from a movement that, in Roman terms circa 130 A.D., was the equivalent of the Taliban in our day.

[Taverner]

7. Thank you sir

As always, you hit the nail on the head.

Thats why I voted "A book written by a power-crazy man"

[gateley]

9. That's interesting, and makes sense. nt

[On the Road]

20. That's the Best Depiction on This Thread

I would personally date it a little earlier an emphasize the religious over the political aspects. But then, like the Taliban, they're impossible to separate.

I think Revelation absolutely belongs in the New Testament, if for no other reason than it's an expression of the purist, anti-Roman segment of the Eastern church, which is probably closer to Jesus himself than the pro-establishment policies of Paul.

[The Magistrate]

21. Thank You, Sir

And you are right on the date, as you can see below: my head was a touch woolly, and I botched the date for the Emperor Domitian, swapping in the period of the Bar Kochba rebellion for the correct late first century C.E. span. You are also correct in identifying it as the 'pure' original teaching of the movement.

[On the Road]

22. You Might Have Been Right That it Was Before the Bar Kockba Revolt

I really haven't done much research on the date. But my sense is that the "New Jerusalem" reflects a recent memory of the old one being destroyed in 70AD. Also, I believe the eastern church had broken with the Jewish zealots who followed bar Kosiba, and so would be less likely to be inspired them in the 130s.

Modern people tend to be repelled by the visionary warlike Jesus of the first chapter. But as Jung said, that can exist alongside a philosophy of love. In fact, he thought they were two sides of the same coin and used Revelation versus the Gospel and Epistle of John as an example. It makes for a much more complex picture of Jesus than the Sermon of the Mount version.

[The Magistrate]

23. Domitian's Reign Seems The Best Starting Point, Sir

He reigned from 81 to 96, which puts him after the destruction of the Jerusalem temple, yet before the final Bar Kochba episode, and also covers the time the early exilic rabbinical reforms that barred End Times sectarians of all sorts, 'Christians' included, from the synagogues. The latter is pretty near to a cut-off date for Hebraicly rooted writings to gain a foot-hold in the Christian mainstream. It is said, at least, that there was a belief among Messianic sectarians that Domitian was a reincarnation, literally, of Nero, and this would mean that some of the events purportedly prophesied in the text had already ocurred, including the 'master-stroke' of 'The Beast's' resuscitation, This is, of course, an old trick in prophetic writings, to back-date a bit and so establish credibility by describing some events that are already history, thus encouraging belief that predictions will come to pass.

That the doctrine of End Times doom was the leading aspect of the early 'Christian' message is contested only by believers who find it somewhat embarrassing by contrast to modern views of a religion of peace and love with which they identify. The fact is blood and thunder sells a good deal better than peace and love, especially in conditions of chaos and oppression, and any group with expansionist aims will come to understand this, or it will go to the wall and become a foot-note for specialists. Paul's writings were pretty much sidelined during his lifetime, but in the period after the destruction of the Jerusalem temple, and the pacification campaign that followed on that, they proved useful to the congregations that were mostly of non-Jewish origin, enabling them to seperate themselves from those rebelling in the name of the Messiah, and thus secure a lower ranking in the attentions of the Imperial authorities, who drew little distinction between the various Messianic End Times sects, and saw little reason to do so.

[On the Road]

25. I Did Not Know That

the exilic rabbis banned apocalyptic sects from the synagogues. That puts a new light on things. And I did not know about the supposed reincarnation of Nero as the explanation for the revival of the Beast. That also makes sense.

I don't have a good feel for the timeline of Jewish Christian or Ebionite relationships with either the Jewish mainstream or the Pauline gentile church. There's evidence that there was a Christian component of Judaism for a couple of centuries, such as the Christian elements in the Roman catacombs. That would suggest the Christians who wanted to remain part of Judaism had to change their apocalyptic beliefs, suppress them, or else leave the synagogues entirely -- either joining the gentile church or establishing a splinter group.

My take on Paul seems to be that there was a point in his ministry that he was pretty definitely thrown out of the synagogues and excommunicated by the movement led by James ("all have deserted me, even Barnabas"). After that, the two Christian sects pretty much kept apart and hated each other, at least until the destruction of Jerusalem.

There must have been an eventual reconciliation, since there are continuing references to the eastern church, and books like James were included in the New Testament due their support. Perhaps they struck a bargain with their opponents, being in political defeat and no longer welcome in the synagoges. Eusebius in the 4th century refers to the movement, so it was still around, although probably was in decline at that point. Constantine's insistence on uniformity probably killed it for good.

Speaking of Eusebius, he mentions that one of the Ebionites prized possessions was a throne, presumably for the leader of the movement. It raises the question of how old the throne was, how it was used, and suggests (to me) the fascinating possibility that it might even have been used by Jesus in a kind of government-in-exile capacity.

[The Magistrate]

26. It Was Subtle, Sir, As Rabbis Often Are

It is not that a rule was posted saying "If you believe thus and so, you are barred from entry": a section was added to the benedictions of service calling down a curse on zealous sectarians calculating the End of Days. This such people could hardly be expected to pronounce on themselves. But not being a member of a synagogue had serious teeth: to be recognized as a Jew by the authorities, and so be exempted from certain state religious duties and regulations on gatherings and meetings, a head tax had to be paid, and this was collected through the synagogues. Thus, to not be a member of a synagogue's congregation was to be an outlaw in the eyes of the Empire, if one maintained also one was in fact a Jew.

[On the Road]

29. Magistrate, Sir,

can you recommend a good source on this material? It's very enlightening, and I'd like to find out more.

[The Magistrate]

30. Not Readily, Sir

My interest in the subject was much keener a couple of decades ago, and my comments are based on memory of past studies. One remembers conclusions drawn, but what went into them tends to depart with time. Back then one of my haunts was a coffee shop across the street from a seminary, whose students provided much amusement for this hard old infidel.

But figures you would want to look into include Jochanan bar-Zakkai, Gamaliel II, and one Samuel the Little.

[On the Road]

31. Thank You.

Will look into those names. Am not up on Judaica, although it's very important for understanding Christianity.

The writer who I have found most interesting on understanding Jesus is Robert Eisenman, who brings in a tremendous amount of new material to the discussion, including material from the zealot tradition, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and materials on King Agabus, a very early converts to some form of Messianic Judaism. Because Eisenman associates the Dead Sea Scrolls with early Christianity, he is considered something of an eccentric. To balance that, I spend some time lurking on a Yahoo message board for scholars studying the historical Jesus and the Gospels. Very enlightening to see how it's discussed among professionals. There's a 22,000-post archive that I'm gradually working through.

[The Magistrate]

32. And Thank You, Sir

I will look into that fellow, who is new to me.

What you say of his views illustrates one of the chief difficulties, namely attempting to distinguish "Christian" from "Jewish" in the earliest periods. There really was not much distinction at the time, and most which appear are actually anachronisms in one degree or another.

[Meshuga]

33. I think that distinguishing "Jewish" from "Christian"...

...is easier when you look at James' sect as a Jewish sect that saw Jesus as the Jewish messiah but insisted on following Jewish religious law and rites. Once one abandoned Torah to follow Pauline Christianity, for example, it was no longer Jewish.

"Christian" and "Jewish" were very different at the time when one throws the priestly Jewish class at the Temple and Pharisaism into the mix.

[smoogatz]

24. Yep. A metaphor-laden attack on the Romans

and the Hebrew appeasers and capitulators. Not crazy in the least. Though I'm not sure how apt the Taliban comparison really is; the early Christians were utterly powerless against Rome. Plus they were pacifists, no? They wanted their just God to wreak his vengeance, and be quick about it.

[The Magistrate]

28. The Position Of the Early Church, Sir

Is a bit more intricate than that. What eventually became Christianity was at the beginning merely one strain of a many-facetted apocalyptic movement, many elements of which were deeply committed to violence and revolution. The idea that the original movement was 'pacifist' is not nearly so soundly grounded as most nowadays suppose. Paul, certainly, was a quietist, but he had in his life-time very little influence. All the gospels date from well after the destruction of the Jerusalem temple, and even in these, there remain hints of more violent associations and attitudes, amid the general "what, us rebels?' tone the writers strove to strike. A complicating factor, too, is the belief in magic and powers of prophetic word so prevalent among all persons save a very narrow strata of philosophers. A man ranting on the imminent return of the Messiah with fire and sword to destroy the Kingdoms of the Earth believed that by doing so he was hastening that advent, and counted himself a member of the army of the Righteous the Messiah would lead, and this is not quite what we mostly mean today when we speak of a person being a pacifist. Those hearing such a rant, authorities included, viewed it as a form of operative magic, a cursing intended to cause the thing predicted, and thus an act of violence under the laws on the subject of black magic. The Christians executed for firing Rome towards the end of Nero's reign seem to have been charged under just these regulations, and viewed as having attempted by an act of imitative magic to force the general conflagration they prophesied. The truth of that incident is unfortunately lost to history, but there seems no reason to take the charges in Tacitus against Nero more seriously than the charges in Shakespeare against Richard Plantagenet.

[pleah]

6. It was a symptom of shroomis sagloomis!

Can anyone out there tell me where this phrase came from?


left some words out, oops getting tired after listening to Uh Uh Uh all day.

[Donnachaidh]

8. poorly written mythology

like most religious texts. :shrug:

[zonmoy]

10. Rants of an evil/insane god of all the evil deeds he has planned

for mankind.

[TreasonousBastard]

13. It was written in a code meant to be...

understood by adherents.

It was a message of hope based on Old Testament prophesies for Christians and Jews being tormented for sport by the Romans. It talkded of a chuirch eventually triumphant after many obstacles, if only that church would remain true to its beliefs. It should be noted it was written around the time of Nero-- not the best of times for Christians.

While not many around here seem willing to take Catholic views seriously, the Catholic Encyclopedia does have a pretty good overview on Revelation:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01594b.htm

If anyone cares, that is.

[crawfish]

15. Good post

There is no denying the similarity between Revelations and the book of Daniel. Understanding the latter helps to understand the former.

And, to be honest, apocalypses written with the language this was were somewhat common at the time. It's not as if John was inventing a genre.

[nickpecoraro]

16. Jewish Apocalyptic literature

There is evidence in the book that points to it having been originally written in Hebrew.
rev 19:16....on his thigh....the Hebrew words for thigh and banner are only different by a stroke.
Easy for a copyist to make an error. A banner with his name is consistent with banners in the OT with the names of the tribes, but nothing in the Bible with a name written on a thigh.

Revelation was fabricated from earlier Jewish literature.

Nick Pecoraro

[The Magistrate]

17. Domitian, Sir, Seems A Better Candidate For The Time Of Its Composition

And the two or three decades involved were important.

[TreasonousBastard]

18. Probably, but Nero was the Hitler of the day...

and even though Domitian might have been worse, Nero was the villian they loved to hate.

Some seem to have believed they were one and the same.

[The Magistrate]

19. But The Time Difference Matters, Sir

The book was written after the destruction of the Jerusalem temple, and speaks to a greatly different situation within the bifurcated Messianic movement, and the whole Mediterranean. It is an Eastern and mostly Hebraic work, not a Western and Pauline one. Conditions were quite different in the two pools of believers on the Christ. Domitian's repressive activities were focused in the East, and believers in the Christ were, in that region, widely unpopular, both with the mass of ordinary folk and with Jews in the satellite communities, who were desperately trying to dissociate themselves from End Times sectarians of all stripes. The book in question, merely one of many in circulation at the time, was simply a restatement of the doom preaching that had been on of the earliest draws of the Messianic movement, a prediction that Rome would be drowned in fire and blood before the end of the lives of those then alive, and that those who believed would then be rulers in glory and luxury. It is hardly a surprise the Roman authorities looked askance, particularly as the thing did lie close to a real revolutionary movement that had cost a good deal to break in a recent eruption, and had been troublesome for many decades previous.

[jody]

27. I like the idea the Book of Revelation is a seven-act play with seven scenes. n/t

[Lydia Leftcoast]

34. An anti-Roman allegory that almost didn't make it into the Bible

:shrug:

[saltpoint]

35. It's a vent screed.

A rant, a rage event.

Most of us would have been better off, IMO, if this book had never made it into the Bible, but there it is.

The directors of horror movies are likely the most grateful of all.