What you were never told about the Book of REVELATION

The Apocalypse
[one of the Jewish and Christian writings of 200 b.c. to a.d. 150 marked by
pseudonymity, symbolic imagery, and the expectation of an imminent cosmic
cataclysm in which God destroys the ruling powers of evil and raises the
righteous to life in a messianic kingdom]

Introduction

Dating the Book of Revelation

One of the most important items in terms of interpreting the Bible is to

understand the historical context in which it was written. Much of the
debate concerning Bible Prophecy hinges on when Revelation was written.
While dispensational scholars insist that John wrote his apocalypse in the
mid 90's, a more compelling argument can be made for a much earlier date,
around 65-66 AD.

Now one may ask, "Why is this important?" After all, it was nearly 2,000
years ago. What difference does 30 years make? Obviously, 30 years (or
even 10 years) can make a big difference in the history of a nation. Germany
and Japan in 1950 were quite a bit different than they were in 1940. In the
same way, Rome and Jerusalem, the two main players in the Book of
Revelation, were much different in 96 AD then they were in 66 AD. Thus
the dating of the Book of Revelation becomes crucial in properly
interpreting the book.

External Evidence

I.) The Syriac History of John, the Son of Zebedee makes reference to
John's banishment under Nero, who reigned from 54 to 68 AD. It states:
"After these things, when the Gospel was increasing by the hands of the
Apostles, Nero, the unclean and impure and wicked king, heard all that had
happened at Ephesus. And he sent and took all that the procurator had and
imprisoned him; and laid hold of St. John and drove him into exile; and
passed sentence on the city that it should be laid waste ."

Elsewhere in the Syriac tradition, we should note that both of the Syriac
Versions of the Revelation give in the title the statement that John was
banished by Nero. Their titles say. - "The Apocalypse of St. John, written
in Patmos, whither John was sent by Nero Caesar." Since John was banished
to Patmos by Nero, and Nero died in 68 AD, then Revelation was written
prior to 68 AD.

II.) The Muratorian Canon states "…for the blessed apostle Paul himself,
following the order of his predecessor John, he wrote to only seven
churches by name, in the following order…". Paul was killed in 68 AD by
Nero. Since Paul copied John's example of writing to 7 churches, then John
wrote Revelation prior to 68 AD.

III.) In his work Against Jovinianum (1:26), Jerome states, "But if thou art
near to Italy, thou hast Rome, where we also have an authority close at
hand. What an happy Church is that, on which the Apostles poured out all
their doctrine, with their blood: where Peter had a like Passion with the
Lord; where Paul bath for his crown the same death with John; where the
Apostle John was plunged into boiling oil, and suffered nothing, and was
afterwards banished to an island."
It is almost universally accepted that Peter and Paul were murdered by
Nero. Jerome places John's banishment in the same time period (as do
many other church fathers).

IV.) In Quis Salvus Dives (Section 42), Clement of Alexander writes, "… a
true account of John the apostle that has been handed down and preserved
in memory. When after the death of the tyrant he removed from the island
of' Patmos to Ephesus,"
The fact that Clement does not identify "the tyrant" suggests that it was
probably Nero, not Domitian. Nero was universally feared and despised, and
his name became the household word for anything evil.

Internal Evidence

I.) Revelation was written during the reign of the 6th Roman Emperor
(Nero) - Revelation 17:10.

"There are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, and the other has not
yet come. And when he comes, he must continue a short time ."

Date Emperor

69 B.C. - 44 A.D
Julius Caesar

31 B.C. - 14 A.D
Augustus Caesar

14 A.D. - 37 A.D
Tiberius Caesar

37 A.D. - 41 A.D.
Gaius (Caligula)

41 A.D. - 54 A.D
Claudius

54 A.D. - 68 A.D
Nero Caesar
The Seventh king was Galba, who was killed in office after only 6 months.

II.) Revelation was written during a time of great persecution of the

Church - Revelation 2:10.

"Do not fear any of those things which you are about to suffer. Indeed, the
devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be tested, and
you will have tribulation ten days. Be faithful until death, and I will give you
the crown of life."

III.) Revelation was written while the temple was still standing in
Jerusalem, before the Romans destroyed the holy city - Revelation 11:1-2

"Then I was given a reed like a measuring rod. And the angel stood, saying,
"Rise and measure the temple of God, the altar, and those who worship
there. But leave out the court which is utside the temple, and do not
measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles. And they will tread the
holy city underfoot for forty-two months."

IV.) Revelation was written while there were still other apostles alive -
Revelation 2:2.

"I know your works, your labor, your patience, and that you cannot bear
those who are evil. And you have tested those who say they are apostles
and are not, and have found them liars;"

V.) There is a lot more internal evidence, such as Judaists in the church and
the state of the churches themselves. For more information, read "Before
Jerusalem Fell" by Kenneth Gentry.
Evidence for a late date?

The only evidence for the 95 AD date is a vague statement made by

Irenæus, the second century bishop of Lyons. In his book "Against
Heresies", he writes,

"We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the
name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be
distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by
him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen not very long time
since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign ." – Against
Heresies Book V, Chapter 30, Verse 3 (Domitian reigned from 81 to 96 AD).

Irenæus's statement is quite vague. He's not real clear on exactly what
was seen "towards the end of Domitian's reign." However, even if we allow
for the understanding that John saw the vision during Domitian's reign,
Irenæus remains a questionable source at best. In this same book, he wrote
that Jesus had an earthly ministry of 15 years and live to be almost 50
years old.

"For how had He disciples, if He did not teach? And how did He teach, if He
had not a Master's age? For He came to Baptism as one Who had not yet
fulfilled thirty years, but was beginning to be about thirty years old; (for
so Luke, who hath signified His years, hath set it down; Now Jesus, when
He came to Baptism, began to be about thirty years old:) and He preached
for one year only after His Baptism: completing His thirtieth year He
suffered, while He was still young, and not yet come to riper age. But the
age of 30 years is the first of a young man's mind, and that it reaches even
to the fortieth year, everyone will allow: but after the fortieth and fiftieth
year, it begins to verge towards elder age: which our Lord was of when He
taught, as the Gospel and all the Elders witness…" – Against Heresies Book
II, Chapter 22, Verse 5
Irenæus was a great Christian and church father, but was a poor historian.
Those who continue to hold to the late date based on Irenæus's statement
do so out of theological desperation, not sound historical research.

There are other church fathers, such as Victorious and Eusebius, who also
hold to this late date. However, they clearly use Irenæus as the source for
their belief.

"Irenæus, in the fifth book of his work Against Heresies, where he

discusses the number of the name of Antichrist which is given in the so-
called Apocalypse of John, speaks as follows concerning him:" Eusebius –
History of the Church Book III, Chapter 18, Verse 5.

In fact, Eusebius, in his work "Evangelical Demonstrations", contradicts this

belief, placing John's banishment under Nero.

Conclusion

When the evidence is weighed, both internally and externally, it clearly

supports the Neronic date. This fact is crucial considering that John was
writing to the First Century Churches of Asia Minor regarding "things
which must shortly take place" (Rev. 1:1), were "near" (Rev. 1:3), and were
"about to take place" (Rev. 1:19).

Chapter One Tradition vs Traditional

Gentle Reader,

I've been thinking about the recent events in the Middle-East and how
"Christians believers" if there are any left are holding their breath based
on their understanding of prophecy and especially the book of Revelation.
So many like their understanding to be like a old pair of slippers, broken
down in the heel and comfortable, the traditional approach to predict the
"future" A tradition is a ritual, belief or object passed down within a
society, also a basic character of a society still maintained in the present,
with origins in the past. They, believe it or not would call themselves
orthodox but are in fact technically "futurist". The best known to come to
mind is Jack Van Impe, and in his hit series Left Behind, Tim LaHaye writes
a fictional account based on his theological position that the events of
Revelation will occur in the future. The futurist view teaches that
Revelation prophesies events that will take place in the future. These
events include the rapture of the church, seven years of tribulation, and a
millennial rule of Christ upon the earth. This view is seemly held by the
most fundamental of believers, who would prefer their "Christianity" with
no surprises, everything fitting neatly into a package that they can show off
like a shiny new bauble at Christmas time.

Then we have another group that would be called Historicist. The

historicist view teaches that the book of Revelation is a symbolic
presentation of church history beginning in the first century AD through
the end of age. The prophecies of Revelation are fulfilled in various historic
events such as the fall of the Roman Empire, the Protestant Reformation,
and the French Revolution.

Yet another group the idealist view teaches that Revelation describes in
symbolic language the battle throughout the ages between God and Satan
and good against evil.

The last group that we might discuss would called the preterist view
teaches that the events recorded in the book of Revelation were largely
fulfilled in AD 70 with the fall of the Jerusalem Temple.

Now Gentle reader, far be it from me to hold any of these groups up to

criticism. Each group/ view attempts to interpret Revelation according to
the laws of hermeneutics, (the art and science of interpretation). This is
central to the debate about how we should approach and interpret
Revelation. The idealist approach believes that apocalyptic [which means
uncovering or disclosure, predicting or presaging imminent disaster and
total or universal destruction: ] literature like Revelation should be
interpreted allegorically. The preterist and historicist views are similar in
some ways to the allegorical method, but it is more accurate to say
preterists and historicists view Revelation as symbolic history. The
preterist views Revelation as a symbolic presentation of events that
occurred in AD 70, while the historicist school views the events as symbolic
of all Western church history. The futurist school believes Revelation
should be interpreted literally. In other words, the events of Revelation are
to occur at a future time.

So you can see each of these groups are trying to make sense out of a
written record that is at least 2000 years old. However not many are willing
to consider (even for a New York minute) that there might be a alternate
and different way to consider this Book of Prophecy that's what I want to
bring to your attention, not that I'm right in everything that I present but
you already know that I will look objectively (I stand ready to alienate all
those who demand to be absolutely right on everything)!

Where did the Book of Revelation come from and why? (Part 2)

Gentle Reader,

The anti-Christ. The Battle of Armageddon. The dreaded Four Horsemen of

the Apocalypse.

You don't have to be a student of religion to recognize references from the

Book of Revelation. The last book in the Bible has fascinated readers for
centuries. People who don't even follow religion are nonetheless familiar
with figures and images from Revelation.

This is a small attempt to teach you a wee bit of history and at the same
time unfold some things that you may not have heard but are certainly
worthwhile to consider especially if your one of these people who read their
horoscope every day to see what is in their future.

Current events in the United States have provided a catalyst for the
already intense fascination many have had with Revelation. Stan Campbell
and James S. Bell, Jr., authors of The Complete Idiot's Guide to The Book
of Revelation, write in the front cover of their book: "In the immediate
aftermath of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the
Pentagon, media commentators began making references to 'apocalyptic
scenarios' and using similar terms. Some preachers were quick to suggest
that the last days were indeed upon us. The sales of Bibles and end-times
books and commentaries shot up overnight. Some people began stocking up
on food, buying gas masks, and preparing for the worst." In the vast
Complete Idiot's Guide series, only one volume has been dedicated solely to
a book of the Bible. That Revelation was chosen for this honor over the
other books of the Old and New Testaments is perhaps a significant
indication as to the unique place this book holds in American culture.

In Raymond Brown's [ a Roman Catholic priest who held a distinguished

Biblical professorship at ( largely Protestant) Union Theological Seminary in
New York City] An Introduction to New Testament, he begins his section on
Revelation with the following comments:

[Revelation] is widely popular for all of the wrong reasons, for a great
number of people read it as a guide to how the world will end, assuming that
the author was given by Christ detailed knowledge of the future which he
communicated in coded symbols. For example, preachers have identified the
Beast from the Earth whose number is 666 as Hitler, Stalin, the Pope, and
Saddam Hussein, and have related events in [Revelation] to the Communist
Revolution, the atom bomb, the creation of the State of Israel, the Gulf
War, etc. The 19th and the 20th centuries have seen many interpreters of
prophecy who used calculations from [Revelation] to predict the exact date
of the end of the world. Up to the moment all have been wrong! Some of the
more militant exponents of [Revelation] have aggravated law- enforcement
authorities to the point of armed intervention (the Branch Davidians in
Waco, TX).

We will seek Gentle Reader, to examine Revelation in its historical context,

including the book's authorship, provenance, date, and original recipients

The development of the Christian canon is one of the more controversial

elements of the Christian faith. It is especially important to those who hold
dear the doctrine of the infallibility/inerrancy of the Scriptures. For those
who are unfamiliar with the concept of a "canon", all the word means is a
"measuring stick" or a "straight rod, edge, or ruler". In other words it is
the authority by which all other teachings that are considered Christian are
to be measured against. Or as N.T. Wright would say, "it is the first four
acts of a five act play that is missing its fifth act". It is not a legal
document but rather a guide which to measure our performance by.

One of the most controversial books to be accepted into the Christian

canon is what has been called The Book of Revelation. Many have attributed
authorship to the Apostle John but leading Johannine while scholars, like
the aforementioned Raymond Brown, believe that the author was someone
other than John the Apostle. Some believe it was another John, John the
Elder, who may have been a disciple of John the Apostle. Never the less,
other that the testimony of the Church Fathers, there is reason to believe
that the authorship of Revelation is suspect. I for one will share with later
who seems to be my canidate for the author of Revelation and why, but you
have to wait a wee bit.

The content of Revelation has also caused much concern. The very same
Jesus which is depicted in the canonical Gospels as a loving Savior figure is
depicted as a vicious king seeking revenge on those who do not accept his
rule. There is a taste of this in some of the epistles, but not to the extent
of what we see in Revelation. The problem of content though has often been
handled by an appeal to the genre that Revelation represents–apocalyptic.
For most apocalyptic means "end of the world" but as a genre it is more
like–once again parroting N.T. Wright here–as a picture of what is going on
"behind the scenes" or as we would say in our silly modern vernacular "in the
spirit realm".

Outside of questions pertaining to apostolic authorship and biblically

coherent content is the testimony of the canonical status of this book. As
the canon etched closer and closer to formation the church historian
Eusebius writes, in the fourth century, concerning "the Revelation of John"
that "some reject it, others include it among the recognized books". Also in
the fourth century bishops like St. John of Chrysostom argued against it
because of the trouble they had interpreting it. And for what it is worth
the Greek Orthodox tradition has never accepted it as canonical.

Of course it seems a majority of Christian scholars have accepted it

throughout history. This does not mean that it is legitimate, but it does
show the support of the Christian community over hundred’s of years. It is
probably safe to assume that interpretation must be done in humility and
reverence (unlike the popular Left Behind series) due to the impact a wrong
interpretation could have on the Christian community. It should also be
read, as aforementioned, as an apocalyptic work. Paul and Peter’s epistles
may be the best sources we have on the belief of early Christians
concerning the Second Coming. Unlike Revelation they are fairly straight
forward. The Gospels, due to the mix and match of history and literary
agendas found within, are a difficult source concerning the Second Coming
(consider the vast interpretations of Matthew 24). The author of
Revelation was trying to encourage the followers of Jesus at a time when
their world seemed doomed Revelation was an anti-Roman tract and a piece
of war propaganda wrapped in one. The message: God would return and
destroy the Romans. Also the writer of Revelation didn't really intend 666
as the devil's digits. He was describing another incarnation of evil: The
Roman emperor, Nero.

The arrogant and demented Nero was particularly despised by the earliest
followers of Jesus, including the writer of Revelation. Nero was said to have
burned followers of Jesus alive to illuminate his garden.
Well that’s enough to give food for thought to some of you and for the rest
you may now put your wee head down and take a nap

A Reality check for Christians (Part 3)

Gentle Readers,

Having given you a wee taste of the book of Revelation and the various
points of view (any of which you may decide this is the one I believe) I now
propose to present as your guide (historian and linguist ) to propose another
path (some would say, "Denis, your going down another rabbit trail, Again")!
Bare with me as a trial lawyer builds his case, I present another way to look
at the Book of Revelation. To clear the air to begin with, if you have
attended a church or Bible study and the subject of the Book of Revelation
comes up, you will have been told that The Apostle John (who walked with
Jesus) wrote Revelation around 95 A.D. And if your like me you probably
didn’t question these "facts". Surprise! Gentle Readers, now we are going to
ferret out as best we can together what is the truth and what is the
tradition about this most controversial and exciting book.

Now here is what I propose, do not buy everything that I present just to
make it easy on me, for I would not want that. We are going to be real
researchers (detectives) and examine every bit of evidence to settle once
and for all what is the Book of Revelation all about. Does it mean that it
predicts the future, who wrote it in what circumstance and when? But as I
build a case for us together allow me to sift through all the research
before you make a finial judgment. As the Life Insurance salesman would
"buy or don’t but just listen (in our case I want you to think for yourself to
"think outside the box" as it were. I don't know that I have any of the
answers, but I'm not afraid to look.

One of the ways that I have found to encourage looking is to have someone
to share that search with. I'll write it down and you serve as my sounding
board.

We will look at External evidence: We have Polycarp’s statement, with all of

it’s uncertainly, is the only evidence used to support the "late date" theory
of Revelation authorship/ It has been accepted by later generations of
people without anyone questioning or examining it in the light of the internal
facts of the book itself (until now)! The late date theory has been passed
on to us in the same way it was passed on to Eusebius, one must admit that
"it [was] handed down by tradition" However Gentle Reader, tradition is not
the proper way to interpret the historicity of Scripture and establish dates
of writings and events,

We will also need to consider Internal evidence, did the author of

Revelation expected the end to come soon or as we have been taught for
two thousand years?

In the Apocalypse the author (named) John says, for the time is at hand
(Rev. 1:3). The author also said the book was about things which must
shortly come to pass (Rev. 1:1). And the prophecy closed with the
declaration: "for the time is at hand" (Rev. 22:10) and "And, behold, I come
quickly" (Rev. 22:12).

I want you to think about the possibility that Revelation could have been
written much earlier that the accepted 95-97 A. D, Perhaps written as
early as 27-67 (40 years generation). Consider that the finished copy of
the Apocalypse was received before AD 68, and not the assumed date 95-
97. If (and here I’ll use the Greek if, if and it could be true) the
Apocalypse was received and the oral prophecy was written down after the
destruction of the Temple and fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD then that would
shed a whole new outlook on the things that would shortly come to pass.. So
if we can establish the date and author we can have an important part in a
correct interpretation of the book of Revelation.

For think about this Gentle Reader, every Theologian gives us one of two
opinions as to when this book was written and these two hypotheses are
summed up simply as the ...

1) "late date theory or

2) "early date theory"

which we will look at next time.

The Late Date Theory (Part 4)

Externals of Dating

The Late date theory was, according to tradition, handed down to Church
Historians from those that it handed down to them according to tradition.
And here we have again a split between the Western Churches those
governed by Rome and the Eastern churches who rejected the governance
of Rome over an autonomous churches governed by individual bishops, while
the natural learning centers of the Church were Antioch and Alexandria.
Orthodox apologists point to incidents as early as the 2nd century as
examples of claims by Rome to papal primacy and rejection by Eastern
Churches.

And without going down that "rabbit trail" today Gentle Reader, it was
"traditionally" understood by the Western Church in Rome that the author
the Apocalypse to be none other than the Apostle John (who walked with
Jesus). The list of of early church father who accepted John’s authorship is
formidable Melito, Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Tertullian,
Clement of Alexandria, Origen , Cyprian, Athanasius, Cyril of Alexandria,
and Basil to name the most prominent. All good and well intentioned men to
be sure.

One can find the "late date theory" in the external writings of Eusebius
Accredited as the "Father of Church History", "Ecclesiastical History"
among others. Now if you were in one of my classes Gentle Reader, you
would find a list of Names asking for their dates and whether they were
early or late date theorist.

Eusebius stood on the shoulders of Origen, an elitist. We might point out

that Eusebius lacked originality in his thinking and duplicated the thought
and work of Origen and had no fresh ideas on his own. Eusebius held to the
"late date theory" and believed that Revelation was written during the time
of Domitian Caesar (81-96 A.D.) Based on the statement from Irenaeus
(130-202 A.D.)

Here's the quote from Adversus Haereses by Irenaeus regarding the date
of the book of Revelation in the context of the Apostle John's life:

"We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the
name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be
distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by
him who beheld the apocalyptic vision.

For [it or he] was seen not very long time since, but almost in our day,
towards the end of Domitian's reign."

- Irenaeus, Adversus haereses 5, 30, 3

I read the Greek text preserved by Eusebius and it's ambiguous. The part
about "being seen" could be translated in three ways:

Option #1
For it, that is the vision, was seen not very long ago, but almost in our day,
towards the end of Domitian's reign.

Option #2
For it, that is the written book, was seen not very long ago, but almost in
our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign.
Option #3
For he, that is the Apostle John, was seen no very long ago, but almost in
our day, towards the end of Domitian's reign.

So which is it? I think that it's interesting that the classic Patristic text
for proof that John wrote the Apocalypse around A.D. 95 is ambiguous.

The interpretive tradition has favored Option #1 (because that is the spin
that Eusebius gave it).

Note: The bottom line is that there is some degree of uncertainty

regarding what Irenaeus meant. Was it Domitian or Domitius (Nero) that
Irenaeus was referring to? Where the book of Revelation is included in the
Syriac versions it is referred to as "The Revelation which was made by God
to John the evangelist in the island of Patmos, into which he was thrown by
Nero Caesar."

There is much more that we could, if you ask, provide, for example the
modern scholar usually doubts that the numerous heresies could have
existed any earlier that the end of of the first century partly because they
imagine early Christianity as a undogmatic spiritual movement so the letters
to the Churches must have been written latter!

Enough for now Gentle Reader, for your assignment - go check me out and I
meet you back here when your done.

Part 5 Truth or Tradition?

Dear Gentle Readers,

Having considered the Late Date exponents we turn now to those who felt
that the "traditional" beliefs were in a word erroneous. Remember we said
last time, "Just because something is accepted as tradition or traditional
does not mead that it is true!"
Those who doubted Johanine authorship were Dionysius, Denis of
Alexandria, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory Nazianzen, and John Chrysostom.

Most of the doubters, however had one thing in common: they strongly
objected to what they perceived to be the book’s millenarian slant. They
believed that an apostle would never have held the millenarian position that
they thought was integral to the Apocalypse.

In that they were right. If the Apocalypse taught a future thousand-year

corporeal reign of Christ after the second advent, the book could not have
been apostolic in origin. The concept was Jewish in origin, but not part of
the deposit of Faith Christ gave to the apostles.

The Authors the "Late Date"theory were wrong and here are my reasons
why.

First, Irenaeus neither witnessed nor received it by revelation from the

Lord. However, he referred to Polycarp who supposedly knew the apostle
John, son of Zebedee, if this was the author in question.

Secondly, the key lynch pin "it is not long since it was seen" was misleading.
According to Irenaeus recollection, Polycarp saw "it" sometime in 95-96
A.D., during the last part of Domitian’s reign.. This "it" is a strong part of
the late date theory, "it" could be the breaking point of the argument.

Third, of most importance, we do not know of the "it" that Polycarp was
referring to was the person of John, the visions he saw, the name of the
anti-Christ, or the book itself. Another factor to be considered is that we
don’t know if Polycarp meant that the oral sayings of the book were finally
written at that time or not, Not only that but a written "late date" book
scenario comes to us through three people separated by three centuries. To
put in basic terms, this is only traditional hearsay which for researchers as
we want to be cannot be completely trusted as historical fact. As we said
before, Polycarp's statement, with all of it's uncertainly, is the only
evidence used to support the "late date" theory of Revelation authorship/
It has been accepted by later generations of people without anyone
questioning or examining it in the light of the internal facts of the book
itself (until now)! The late date theory has been passed on to us in the same
way it was passed on to Eusebius, one must admit that "it [was] handed
down by tradition" However Gentle Reader, tradition is not the proper way
to interpret the historicity of Scripture and establish dates of writings and
events.

The disciples were warned of the Talmud which was condemned in the Bible
by Paul "being the traditions of the Elders" not giving heed to Jewish myths
and to commands of men turning away from the truth. (Titus 1:14).

We too must be warned against traditions handed down to us from

unfounded facts. The "late dating" of the Apocalypse is tradition, that is,
only tradition. In Irenaeus fifth book, he seems to indicate the earlier date
for he speaks as follows concerning the Apocalypse of John and the number
of the name of the Anti Christ:

"As these things are so, and this number is found in all the approved and
ancient copies."

He lived in the reign of Vespasian’s son Domitian and he spoke of the

Apocalypse as being written in "ancient copies" cause doubt as to the
"vision" being seen in 95 A.D., which was almost in his own day. His account
suggest an earlier time that was somewhat removed from his own day.
Tradition has taken Irenaeus’ words out of their true meaning and given
modernity only biased and unfounded information. There are far more
examples Gentle reader, the Old Testament of the Peshitta was translated
into the Syriac from the Hebrew probably in the second century excluded
certain disputed books 2nd Peter, 2nd & 3rd John, Jude, Revelation ), had
become standard by the early 5th century.
The inscription of the books in the Syrian version, first published by
Deuteronomy Dieu in 1627, and afterwards in the London Polyglot Reads
this way
“The Revelation, which was made by God to John the Evangelist, in the
island of Patmos, to which he was banished by Nero the Emperor ."

Since Nero died in 68 A.D. this would place the writing of Revelation prior
to the assumed year of 95-96 A. D.

So gentle reader, if the author of Revelation was in Patmos during the reign
of Nero, as this external evidence maintains, he must have written the
Revelation before the death of Nero in 68 A. D.

Next time we will look within the book itself for the proof of the date.

Since its been some time that I’ve written about the Book of Revelation
lets take a few minutes to review. Remember if you will that I wrote that
unlike those lockstep scholars and those ill taught in linguistics or history of
early Christianity, I hold that one needs to examine all the evidence on a
matter before rendering a verdict.

With the dating of Revelation, you establish the true historical prospective.
If you date it early, you have its fulfillment in God's judgment on Israel. If
you date it late, you have every man's idea. So dating plays a very important
part in its interpretation.

There are differences of opinion as to when this book was written. These
can be summed up as the "late date" and the "early date" theories. First,
we'll cover the late date theory. Then we'll examine the facts which
support the early date theory.

The Late Date Theory

Those who hold to the "late date," have Revelation written during the time
of Domitian Caesar (AD 95-96). This date is determined by the following
statement by Irenaeus (AD 130 to AD 202), as quoted by Eusebius, the
church historian, in AD 325: "We will not, however, incur the risk of
pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary
that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would
have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was
seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of
Domitian's reign."

There are things about this statement that need to be noted. First,
Irenaeus did not witness this. He referred to Polycarp (who supposedly
knew the apostle John). Secondly, the key part — "it is not long since it was
seen" — is ambiguous. According to Irenaeus recollection, Polycarp saw "it"
sometime in AD 95-96, during the last part Domitian's reign. Thirdly, we do
not know if the "it" Polycarp was referring to was John, the visions he saw,
the name of anti-christ, or the book itself and we do not know if he meant
that the book was written at that time or not. Furthermore, it comes to us
through three people separated by three centuries. Simply put, this is hear-
say.

This statement, even with all of this uncertainty, is the only evidence used
to support the "late date" theory. It has been accepted by generations of
people without really questioning it or examining it in light of the book
itself. The late date has been passed on to us in the same way it was passed
on to Eusebius, "…it [was] handed down by tradition…" Tradition is not the
way to interpret Scripture.

Another statement by Irenaeus seems to indicate the earlier date also. In

his fifth book, he speaks as follows concerning the Apocalypse of John and
the number of the name of the Antichrist: "As these things are so, and this
number is found in all the approved and ancient copies." Domitian's reign
was almost in his own day, but now he speaks of the Revelation being written
in ancient copies. His statement at least gives some doubt as to the "vision"
being seen in 95 AD which was almost in his day, and even suggests a time
somewhat removed from his own day for him to consider the copies
available to him as ancient.

The Early Date Theory

So, where can we turn to find evidence for the dating of Revelation? Within
the book itself! It will be shown, (as I will point out next time) from internal
evidence, that Revelation was written before the destruction of Jerusalem
in AD 70.

John must prophesy again

The first point to consider in favor of the early date is the fact that John
was told that he "must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations,
and tongues, and kings" in Revelation 10:11. Now, if Revelation was written in
AD 95-96, John would have been over 90 years old and it would have been
very difficult for him to travel to the various "nations and…many kings" and
preach. However, with Revelation written earlier, John would have been in
his mid 60's and at that age, his traveling would have been more feasible.

The Seven Churches in Asia

Another point is that if John wrote Revelation to a specific group of

churches in Asia (Revelation 1:4). The importance of this statement cannot
be overlooked (even though it has been by many scholars). There is only one
small window of time in which there were only seven churches in Asia. The
early AD 60's. The apostle Paul established nine churches in that area, but
only seven were addressed in Revelation. The reason for this is that the
cities of Colosse, Hierapolis, and Laodicea, were all destroyed by an
earthquake around AD 61. Laodicea was rebuilt soon afterwards, but the
other two cities were not. This left only seven churches in Asia during the
five years just prior to the beginning of the Roman/Jewish war.

Of particular importance is the message to the church of Philadelphia

(Revelation 3:7-13). In verse's 10 and 11, Christ told John to inform them
that an "hour of temptation" was "about to come upon all the world," i.e.,
the Roman Empire. Christ then told them that He was coming quickly and
that they should hold fast. The reason this is important (besides the fact
that this was directed to an actual church in the first century) is that the
first persecution of Christians took place under Nero Caesar in AD 64.
Therefore, Revelation must have been written before that time.

The Temple was still standing

One of the most compelling proofs that Revelation was written before
Jerusalem was destroyed is the fact that the Jewish temple was still
standing!

Revelation 11:1-2, "And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the
angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and
them that worship therein. But the court which is without the temple leave
out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city
shall they tread under foot forty and two months."
How do we know that this was the temple of the first century and not some
future one? First, there is not one verse in the entire Bible that speaks of a
"rebuilt" Jewish Temple. Not one. That alone should be proof enough.

However, this passage is very similar to Luke 21:20-24. Notice that Jesus
told the disciples that they would see this event. They had asked Him about
their temple (verse 5), and Jesus told them it would be destroyed before
their generation passed away (verse 32). Notice again what Jesus said in
verse 24, "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles." This is the
same thing Christ told John in Revelation 11:2. Therefore, since the
disciples' generation has long since passed away, Revelation must have been
written before the nations trampled Jerusalem under foot in AD 70.

The Tribes of the Earth

Most writers consider the theme of the book to be Revelation 1:7. This
verse is very similar in context to Matthew 24:30.

Revelation 1:7, "Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him,
and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds [Greek phule meaning
offshoot, that is, race or clan: - kindred, tribe.] of the earth shall wail
because of him. Even so, Amen."
Matthew 24:30, "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in
heaven: and then shall all the tribes [Greek phule] of the earth mourn, and
they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and
great glory." Note: the book refers to a specific group of people those
related to the Jewish people not to everyone in the world

It may not be conclusive standing alone, but you can see that just based on
the language, a case can be made that the two verses are speaking of the
same event. Matthew 24:30 is a verse that speaks of the fall of Jerusalem.
And that is just the case that we are attempting to make about the book of
Revelation -- it speaks of the fall of Jerusalem.
Notice also the language of Revelation 1:7. It speaks of those who "pierced
him." Although we know that the Romans crucified him and pierced him, the
apostles accused the Jews (hence the overwhelming anti Semite attitude at
the time and of course down through the ages to even today) of the act. In
Acts 2:23,36, Peter says that they crucified Jesus. He continues to state
this in his following sermons (Acts 3:15; 4:10; 5:30). Stephen, in Acts 7:51-
52, calls them murderers. And Paul, in 1 Corinthians 2:8, speaks of the Jews
killing the Lord. And also in I Thessalonians 2:14-15, he speaks of the Jews
that killed both the Lord Jesus and the prophets. So perhaps the book
concerns itself with the Jews.

This view is further reinforced with the phrase, "kindreds of the earth."
("kindreds" is from the Greek word phule, which means "tribe"). This is a
direct allusion to the Jewish tribal system. Now, we must identify, from
Scripture, who those "tribes" were. To do that, we must keep in mind this
simple rule of interpreting the Bible: let Scripture interpret Scripture. We
can do that quite easily by looking at Zechariah 12:10-14.

Zechariah 12:10-14, "And I will pour upon the...inhabitants of Jerusalem,

the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom
they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his
only son...In that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem...And the
land shall mourn, every family apart; the family of the house of David apart,
and their wives apart; the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their
wives apart; The family of the house of Levi apart, and their wives apart;
the family of Shimei apart, and their wives apart; All the families that
remain, every family apart, and their wives apart."
This is the foundation for John's statement that "every eye shall see him,
and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth (or land) shall
wail because of him" So, in essence, Zechariah was saying that the "tribes
of the land" would mourn for Him whom they had pierced. Who were those
tribes? "The inhabitants of Jerusalem." This also helps us identify the
"earth" in Revelation 1:7. According to Zechariah, the "earth" is the land of
Palestine, specifically, Jerusalem. Also, it is those tribes, i.e., the nation of
Israel, who would "look upon Me whom they have pierced." And because of
that, "the mourning in Jerusalem" would be great. With all of this
information, we can see that the "tribes of the earth" in Revelation 1:7 are
the nation of Israel. The "earth" is Palestine. The land that would mourn is
Jerusalem.

So, the main purpose of Revelation would be to reveal Jesus to the nation of
Israel. The place of this revealing would be Jerusalem. Lastly, this revealing
would be to those who pierced Him, i.e., the Jews. This is not a general
reference to the Jewish nation, but to Christ's contemporary generation.
That generation was destroyed in AD 70, by the Roman Legions. Therefore,
the book of Revelation must have been written before that event.

The Woman

The next thing that we need to look at is "the woman" found in chapters 17
and 18. John wrote that he saw a "woman drunken with the blood of the
saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus" (17:6). The "woman" had
this name written on her forehead: "MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT,
THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH"
(17:5). The angel said that "the woman" was a poetic symbol of "that great
city" (17:18); in whom "was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and
of all that were slain upon the earth." (18:24). Then John wrote, "Rejoice
over her, thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and prophets; for God hath
avenged you on her… Thus with violence shall that great city Babylon be
thrown down, and shall be found no more at all." (18:20, 21). So who was this
"woman?" This "great city?"
John gave us a clue in Revelation 11:8, where he wrote, "And their dead
bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called
Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified." This shows us, as we
saw above, that John was referring to the Jerusalem of his day.

To check this assertion, Let's look at the term "Sodom." John wrote that
this is a "figurative" name. That means it does not tell us the actual name of
the city, but it's spiritual condition. Once more, in letting the Bible
interpret itself, we find this is a reference to Jerusalem. In Isaiah,
chapter 1, after declaring that he had a "vision…concerning Judah and
Jerusalem" (verse 1), Isaiah wrote, "Hear the words of the Lord, you rulers
of Sodom." In Jeremiah 23:14, because of the adulterous prophets, God
said that Jerusalem and her inhabitants were "all of them unto me as
Sodom."

But what about "Egypt?" No where in the Bible is Jerusalem called Egypt.
However, the first century generation was also in an exodus. While Old
Testament Israel's exodus was from the bondage of Egypt, the New
Testament Israel's exodus was from the bondage of the Old Covenant Law.
The most recognizable passage that depicts this "new exodus" is found in I
Corinthians 10:1-11. Paul wrote, "Now all these things happened unto them
for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the
ends of the world are come." His contextual foundation for this statement
was the Old Testament exodus from Egyptian bondage. He wrote that they
had passed through the sea (verse 1). They ate manna and drank from the
rock (verse's 3-4). He then relays how they wandered in the wilderness
(verse 5), became idolaters (verse 7), tried the Lord and were destroyed by
serpents (verse 9). This shows us that, just like the "type and shadow" of
the Old Testament and their deliverance from bondage, the New Testament
saints were undergoing the same exodus. The only difference was that
Paul's generation was the reality to which the Old Testament example
pointed.

Furthermore, in Luke 13:33-34, Jesus said, "[T]oday and tomorrow, and on

the following [day], I must travel on, because it is not possible [for] a
prophet to perish outside Jerusalem. Jerusalem! Jerusalem! The [one]
killing the prophets, and stoning those having been sent to her." Then, in
Matthew 23:29-37, Jesus accused the people of His day for killing the
prophets and the apostles. He declared that they are the children of their
fathers who also killed the prophets. Then in verse 32, Jesus said that they
would complete the sin that their fathers started. But the most crucial
evidence is found in verse 35, where Jesus said, "upon you (i.e., the Jews of
His day) may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on the earth."
Then He said, "I tell you the truth, all of these things will happen to you
people who are living now. Jerusalem, Jerusalem! You kill the prophets and
stone to death those who are sent to you" (verse's 36-37). In both
passages, Jesus told the Jews of His day that they were guilty of "all the
righteous blood shed upon the earth" (see also Acts 7:51-52).

Therefore, since both of these passages deal with the same crime and the
same judgment, the "great city" of Revelation must be the Jerusalem of
Christ's generation. Which gives evidence that Revelation must have been
written before Jerusalem fell in AD 70.

The Sixth King

So far we have seen that Revelation deals with the revealing of Jesus to
first century Israel. As noted above, "the woman" John saw was first
century Jerusalem. The "kings," therefore, were the rulers of the known
world of John's day, i.e., the Roman Empire. The "kings" were not ruling at
the same time, for the text stated "five fell," meaning that five of those
kings had come and gone. Then "one is," meaning the "king" who was ruling at
the time Revelation was written. Here in this verse, we have one of the
clearest evidence for dating this book. If we simply examine the list of
Roman Emperors, we will be able to determine who the sixth king was, and
the time Revelation was written.

Here are the Roman Emperors: Julius Caesar; Augustus; Tiberius; Gaius
(Caligula); Claudius; and the sixth emperor was…Nero. Nero reigned from
54AD to June of 68AD, with Galba to follow who reigns but six months.
Here we find the terrible persecutors of the Christians (at whose hand
Peter and Paul were martyred), whom God used to destroy the Jews. Nero
was in power and he gave the command to Vespasian to destroy Jerusalem.
This was the sixth king, proving beyond any doubt that Revelation was
written before the Roman/Jewish war.

Historically, Nero is the one that persecuted Christians beyond all

comparison. John's writing from Patmos was itself a result of the great
persecution of Nero. The apostle Paul was tortured and then beheaded by
the evil Emperor Nero at Rome in A.D. 67. The apostle Peter, who was
crucified upside down, was another victim of Nero.

The Song of Moses

To anyone familiar with the Law of Moses and Jewish tradition, Revelation
15:2,3 will have meaning. It says that those martyrs "who had come off
victorious from the Beast" were singing "the Song of Moses."

So let me ask a question at this point: if these martyrs are Christians living
2,000 years after Christ, why would these Christians be singing the Song of
Moses? Does any Christian alive today know how to sing this song?
Deuteronomy 32:1-43 is the song that John has reference to.

The people were to sing this song to remind themselves of what would befall
them "in the latter days" (Deuteronomy 31:29). the song talks about "their
end" - the Jews (verse 20), and details their destruction by a consuming
"fire" (verse 22), "famine" (verse 24), "plague" (verse 24) and "bitter
destruction" (verse 24). God calls them a "perverse generation" (verses 5
and 20), and says He will "render vengeance" upon them and "vindicate His
people" (verse 41 and 36 respectively). Why would Christian martyrs of the
21st century be singing this song about the Romans, when the song had
reference to the Jews living in the 1st century? It wouldn't make much
sense.

Aren't these the same who cried out earlier, "How long, O Lord, wilt Thou
refrain from judging and avenging our blood" (Revelation 6:10)? Who was it
who had all the "blood of the righteous" martyrs imputed against them?
Clearly, it was the remnant who had kept their faith in Jesus, in spite of
the intense persecution, and "had come off victorious from the Beast." (See
Matthew 23:35 and Luke 13:33)! This passage (Revelation 15:2,3) points
very clearly to followers of Christ living in the first century.

In Revelation 16:10,11, it says that the people in the Beast's kingdom

"gnawed their tongues because of pain." They had great sores on their
bodies along with other plagues that had been poured out on them. We know
from Josephus when the Jews literally gnawed their tongues for lack of
food during the siege of AD 70! And, it is interesting that Josephus even
calls the Jewish Zealot forces a "wild beast" in several places (Wars V.1.1;
IV.7.4; IV.9.8; V.2.5)! This point is emphasized even more by the fact that
the whole context of the Song of Moses is full of references to "beasts,"
"serpents," and "dragons" (Leviticus 26; Deuteronomy 28-32; Deuteronomy
32:24,33).
Next lets consider
The Time Element

Next consider the expectations of the author, Jesus Christ. He tells John
to expect the fulfillment of the prophecy soon (Revelation 1:1,3; 2:16; 3:11;
22:6,7,10,12,20).

In Revelation 1:1,3, right off the bat, John informed his readers, the seven
churches of Asia (verse 4), that the contents of this volume "must shortly
come to pass." Please note, that John did not write that some of the events,
or even most of the events must shortly take place. He wrote that all of the
events contained in Revelation "must shortly come to pass." Why? Why must
those things "shortly come to pass?" Because "the time (was) at hand." At
hand for whom? The seven churches of Asia, specifically, and to the church
of the first century in general. The time for what was at hand? "The
Revelation of Jesus Christ." Remember, as we saw above, this is the main
episode of Revelation.

In Revelation 22:6, John wrote that the Lord sent an angel to John "to
shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done." Here, at the
end of the book of Revelation, John recorded the exact same message that
he did in chapter 1. This again emphasizes that all of the events contained
in Revelation were about to take place in the first century — not stretched
throughout time, and certainly not for any future generation.

In Revelation 22:10, the angel of the Lord said to John, "Seal not the
sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand." Once more,
we have proof that the events of Revelation were about to take place in the
first century. However, another element was added to this warning. The
angel told John not to seal the Scroll. Why is this important? To answer
that, let's look at the book of Daniel.

After Daniel had received visions concerning his people (the nation of
Israel), he was told, "thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be
found written in the book" (12:1). Daniel is then told how they would be
rescued — by resurrection, some would be rewarded with "everlasting life"
and others with "everlasting contempt" (verse 2). But then, Daniel is told
something very peculiar. In verse 4, Daniel was told, "shut up the words, and
seal the book, even to the time of the end." Please note that this verse says
the "time of the end", and not "the end of time". There is a huge
difference between the end of time and the time of the end. Now, we must
ask "Whose time of the end?" Verse 1 told us that Daniel's visions
concerned the nation of Israel, not mankind in general.

Next, Daniel saw two angels talking about the fulfillment of all that he had
seen (verse 6). One asked the other, "How long shall it be to the end of
these wonders?" The answer was, "when he shall have accomplished to
scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished."
(verse 7). But Daniel could not understand what they meant, so he asked
again, "When?" The angel answered "Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are
closed up and sealed till the time of the end." Now that we have looked at
this passage, how does it relate to Revelation 21?

Did you know that there is only one other place in the Bible where a sealed
book is referred to? Revelation, chapter 5. How Daniel relates to Revelation
is that Revelation is the opening of Daniel's sealed book!! Remember,
Daniel's visions were concerning the "time of the end" of Israel, and
Revelation is about God's judgment on Israel. They are one and the same.
The reason this has direct bearing on Revelation 21, is that Daniel was told
to seal his book concerning the end "for it pertains to many days in the
future" (Dan.8:26), but John was told not to seal his book "because the time
is at hand" (Revelation 22:10). The end of Old Covenant Israel was at hand.
All things written had to be fulfilled by the time Jerusalem fell in AD 70
(see Luke 21:20-22). Therefore, since Revelation is the opening of Daniel,
then it must have been fulfilled by the summer of AD 70.

Our next time statement is found in Revelation 21:12. There, Jesus told
John, "And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every
man according as his work shall be." Notice that Jesus did not say that
"when I come, I will come quickly," He emphatically said that He was coming
"quickly." But He also said something else. He said that His reward was with
Him to give every man according to his works. Now some state that this has
not happened yet. However, we must let Scripture interpret Scripture, and
turn to Matthew 16:27-28 and Mark 8:38-9:1 and Luke 9:26-27.

Jesus said the exact same thing in these three verses that He did in
Revelation 21. In Revelation 21, He said He was coming and "he shall reward
every man according to his works." These are the exact same "comings" with
the exact same "rewards." But, Jesus also said in these three verses,
"There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see
the Son of man coming in his kingdom." Notice that Jesus tied His coming to
the lives of His disciples. He said that some of his listeners would not die
until He came. But to whom is He coming? And what will be their reward?
Jesus said that the "coming" would be to the first century generation of
Israel (Matthew 24:34, Mark 13:30, Luke 21:32). Daniel told us that the
"rewards" would be that some would be resurrected to "everlasting life"
and others to "everlasting contempt". Now, let's put these two passages
together. Jesus said He was coming and He was going to reward each
according to his works, and that some of the disciples wouldn't die until
they saw this take place. Therefore, since all of the disciples are dead,
Jesus must have returned and rewarded each according to his works.
Furthermore, in Revelation, He said the same thing, therefore it must be
fulfilled!
Conclusion for now ought to give you some food for thought. Gentle
readers ....

If one can not believe the first three verses of Revelation (i.e., the near
expectation of the events), neither will he believe the rest of the book. For
if a person is unwilling to accept the time constraints of the text, the rest
of the document can mean anything that the reader desires.

If John the Baptist (supposing that he might have been the author) was on
Patmos under the reign of Nero, as the internal evidence indicates, he
wrote the book of Revelation about AD 68 or 69, which was after the death
of that emperor; but the gospels and epistles some years later. One of the
oddest facts about the New Testament is that what on any showing would
appear to be the single most datable and climactic event of the period —
the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 — is never once mentioned as a passed fact.
The inscription to the book of Revelation, in the Syrian version, first
published by Deuteronomy Dieu, in 1627, and, afterwards in the London
Polyglot, is the following, "The Revelation which God made to John the
evangelist, in the Island of Patmos, to which he was banished by Nero
Caesar."

This places it before the year of our Lord 69AD.

Part 7
The Internal aspects of dating

Gentle Readers,
Where can we find evidence for the actual dating of the Apocalypse? Isn’t
it possible that the truth of the matter is hidden in plain sight? I want to
suggest to you that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem in
A.D. 70 based on internal documentation. In fact lets take it even one step
further and suggest that it could have been written before Christ
approached John the Baptist in A.D. 27. The prospect that the oral
information began around A.D. 24-29. Perhaps the first Ebyon Hebrew
Christians wrote down the sayings of the Baptist within a decade of its
origin. They began following John the Baptist with his prophetic message
that “He that cometh” is greater than I am and then later began following
Jesus the Messiah that has come. We need at this point to look at these
pro-to believers that are called Ebyon Hebrews if we are to have a clearer
understanding of Christianity before we had the written New Testament.

Christianity before the New Testament:

The very first followers of Jesus were Jewish and called Ebyons (Hebrew:
the poor). They spoke Aramaic and the Old Testament was written in Greek
(29 AD). Jesus did not write to them because they were mostly illiterate.
Oral sayings were very important to them. After the death, entombment
and resurrection of Christ (31 AD), Peter and James became the leaders of
the Ebyon Christians in Antioch and Jerusalem. They set their affections
on things above and were the first to be called Christians. The Ebyons did
not believe in the virgin birth because they believed that Jesus was
adopted as the Son of God at John's baptism. If the first Christians were
authentic, the belief in the virgin birth was not a part of the belief system.
They also believed that Jesus was just a man and became the adopted son
of God. This was when He became "the Christ." Therefore, they did not
believe that Jesus was God. They had no New Testament at the beginning,
only hear-say or oral tradition. Later, the Marcionites (130 AD) believed
that Jesus was God and only seemed to be a man. These two groups were
some of the first Christians. Were they authentic Christianity? The
Ebyons believed in one God, the Old Testament God. Marcionites believed
in two Gods, the mean old OT God and the loving NT God and Father of
Jesus Christ. Marcion had collected nine of Paul's epistles and the Gospel
of Luke (minus chapters 1 & 2) as their New Testament. The other writings
were rejected (140 AD). What kind of a Bible would authentic Christianity
possess. The proto-orthodox Christians were developing until 200 years
later (325 AD) they established an Imperial Orthodox Roman Church that
believed in a Trinity (God in three persons) and a high-arche of selected
men ruled over the people. Many, at the time, said that this was
polytheism... more than one God. The Orthodox Church of Rome canonized
the 27 books of the New Testament and labeled all other writings as false.
Is this Bible the result of an authentic Christianity among the proto-
orthodox Christians? The Ebyons said that one must become a Jew before
they can become a Christian and must also keep the Law of the Old
Testament to stay a Christian. Paul said that the Law of God was a curse
and only the Grace of God was important to save and keep the individual (57
AD). Imperial Roman Christianity said that baptism replaced the
circumcision of the Jews and was important to church salvation, which was
an ongoing salvation that could be lost (200 AD). Yet, the epistles of Paul
instructed that Grace alone was the true authentic message

Chew on that for a while Gentle readers and get back to me later...

To be continued. . .

Part 8 Internal aspects of Dating continued...The lessons begin in

earnest

Gentle Readers,

I do hope you have been taking notes or at least underling your computer
screen with a magic marker! From here forward it’s a big boys game. No
room to sugar coat what we are learning about early Christianity and the
book of Revelation.
The reason I write this is because this is the history that has been either
ignored, forgotten or conveniently “shelved” by most. Why? We leave that
to be answered for another time, but if in the excitement of discovering I
forget to come back to that question, remind me won’t you? Mark this down
in your wee notes books, History and tradition con only support and explain
Scripture, but can never refute it or discredit it.. The problem arises from
taking tradition and ignoring Scripture, or ignoring history in favor of a
position that proves to be untenable. So lets move on. You need to keep in
mind that of the 27 books we have in the New Testament there were
several hundred to chose from that provided comfort and encouragement
to the new believers and many were lost to us until recently. Were they
inspired perhaps not, were they of some value for insights to the mind of
the 1st century believers understanding of their new found faith? Most
definitely! For the longest time the Book of Revelation was not accepted
into canon and although written earlier than many that were accepted was
not considered to be a book to be included until later. In fact Revelation
was finely accepted at the Council of Carthage of 397 AD Second century
Christians in Syria rejected the book because it was relied heavily upon by
Montanism, a sect which was deemed to be heretical by the believers of
that day [Christian sect arising in the late second century and stressing
apocalyptic expectations, the continuing prophetic gifts of the Spirit, and
strict asceticism].
.

Now to get a handle on Revelation we need to jump ahead to A.D. 130.

Around that time believers began to select and divide texts that aligned
well with what would become to called orthodox “canon” or “measuring stick”
of accepted texts from those that promoted “heresy” another choice.
[ Orthodox' literally means 'the right way'. Most would like people to
believe that there were no differing perspectives in early Christianity and
that the opponents in any conflict with other texts or points of view were
just small splinter groups invested in deceiving people into “heresy” literally
meaning ‘choice’-which would mean that a heretic is someone who willfully
chooses not to believe the “right things”]

The earliest New Testament canon contained ten of Paul’s Epistles and the
Gospel of Luke minus the first two chapters . The book of Revelation was
too Jewish with its priestly pictures and the brutal wrath of the Old
Testament God to be included in the earliest New Testament Canon that
pictured a loving Father/God. That debate over what books should be
included continued for many decades.

Now think about the prospects of John prophesying again in his old age...
The first particular to consider in favor of an “early date” is the fact that
the prophet John was told that he ... And he said unto me, Thou must
prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings.
(Revelation 10:11)

If we assume the Authors of the “Late Date” theory are correct in saying
that the Apocalypse was written in 95-96 A.D. Then any one of the “Jons of
the New Testament would have been around one hundred years old and it
would have been difficult for them to physically travel by boat, horse to the
various “nations and many kings” to prophesy.

However if (there is that Greek prepositional if again, if and it could be

true) the Apocalypse were written earlier, the prophet John would have
been in his late 20's and that age, his traveling would have been more
feasible for the exposure to the conditions of weather and opposition.

Although we are getting into the really “good stuff” I don’t want to weary
your wee heads with to much information at once. So you’ll have to come
again to follow this stream of thought. And some of you thought this was
just a pretty blog!

Till next time....

Part 9 Thinking about the book of Revelation

Dear Gentle Reader,

You will remember that I pointed out that the Apocalypse better known as
the Book of Revelation was not received with any sort of eagerness by
those who were establishing what we now call the canon of Scripture. There
were many writings that claimed to be authentic, written by those who
claimed to either have walked with Jesus or one of His select twelve
disciples. We could stray from our destination to find out if at all possible
when the book of Revelation was written and then a corollary to this first
goal, to determine which John actually wrote this enigma that so many
devote themselves too.

Professor Bart Eharman used a phrase in one of his book called Lost
Christianities although I am not convinced that it was originally his. The
phrase was “ history is written by the victors” but in trying to determine
who might have said it first we have such notables as Winston Churchill,
Napoleon Bonaparte, George Orwell, Alex Haley, and Pliny the Elder who
was known as Gaius Plinius Secundus, better known as Pliny the Elder,
"History is the polemics of the victors." - Wm. F Buckley, Jr.. The only thing
that we can be certain is that the phrase was common enough to be
axiomatic The point being is that whoever wrote the Book of Revelation
certainly had overcome those who would have left it out of the Canon.

Within the book itself we can find that both in content and structural
construction it is obviously an appealing Jewish Apocalyptic writing and yet
it was with much difficulty that it was begrudgingly accepted in the New
Testament Canon.
It seems that the Revelation falls into three parts (for our purposes)
Chapters 1-3, 4-11 and 12-22. Chapter one verses 1-3 gives us the reader
the title of the book ans says that it is the “Word of God” [compare 1 Chron
17:3; Jer.1:4, 13; Ezek. 1:3; and Joel 1:1 ] Please note that each of these
citations come from the Hebrew Scriptures in what we call the Old
Testament a term used by biblical scholars to refer to the Tanakh. This
first verses speak of the prophecy as the testimony of Jesus Christ. While
Chapters 2-3 speak of the people on. the old earth, the seven churches.
Chapters 4- 11 radiate from the circle of John the Baptist and reflect his
own and his disciples’ expectations of “He that cometh” before they were
introduced to and could be enlightened by the life of Jesus Himself. If we
compare Rev 4:1 and following to Paul’s statement I knew a man in Christ
above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether
out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the
third heaven. (2 Corinthians 12:2). It would seem that Paul was speaking of
John the Baptist and not the Apostle John.

As John the Baptist was pictured as the keeper of the sheepfold and stood
at the door of the sheepfold waiting for the true shepherd to come for his
sheep, John allowed Jesus, the shepherd of the sheep to go in. John sees a
door in heaven and being in the spirit (in or out of body experience, no one
knows) hears a voice like a trumpet talking.

It seems that these chapters were not given to John the Evangelist after
the death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus, but rather given to the
prophet John the Baptist, the forerunner of Jesus Christ before the public
ministry of Jesus Christ that was approaching that age.
The Gospel of John (1:15-34) tells us that the Baptist received a revelation
from God about “He that cometh” the one we traditionally call Messiah. God
told the Baptist , And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with
water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit
descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the
Holy Ghost. (John 1:33)

And there Gentle Reader, you have a wee bit to chew on until we get back
together. It was Paul who knew that the man who had the vision and was
caught up to the third heaven wasn’t Paul himself as so many want to think
but was in fact John the Baptist!

Till next time....

 Part 10 Continuing the reevaluating of the dating of Revelation

Dear Gentle Reader,

Dr. Richard B. Hays, Dean and the George Washington Ivey Professor of
New Testament at Duke Divinity School, an internationally recognized
scholar for his work on the letters of Paul and on New Testament ethics.
Recently brought to my attention that the Apostle Paul has used the
method similar to the exegesis found in the Qumran biblical commentaries
(e.g., IQpHab), where the biblical text is treated as a cryptically encoded
allegory of the community's own history apocalyptically interpreted. You will
find this important as we dig even deeper into the Book of Revelation

As we said previously there are in the New Testament four themes that are
unique to the Apocalypse and found in sections of the Gospels that concern
John the Baptist.
1) The Lamb (of God, a reference to Isaac),
2) The term “He that cometh”
3)The concept of a baptism by fire
4) The direct application of the figure of the bridegroom to Jesus
5) The wrath of God
6) Tree as a metaphor for leaders of the people
7)Interest in the liturgy (remember the Baptist’s father named Zacharias,
was a priest and the Baptist’s vision occurred in the sanctuary) and
8) The idea of the adulterous generation, which was the belief of the
Qumran culture in contrast to the other Judeans.

All of these themes are amplified in the Apocalypse. Not only that but we
need to keep in mind that Jesus spoke in Matthew “But what went ye out
for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? behold, they that wear soft
clothing are in kings' houses. But what went ye out for to see? A prophet?
yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet. For this is he, of whom it is
written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare
thy way before thee. Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of
women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist:
notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than
he.” (Matthew 11:8-11).

Can one think that this part of the Apocalypse contains what then was
revealed to John the Baptist and committed to the writing by one of John’s
disciples from the Qumran community. We now certainly have enough
circumstantial evidence to give more than a cursory look in this direction.
It is a well known understanding that as the canon was written down many
times the author attributed to a particular work was in fact that of an
Amanuensis (rather like a secretary ). And other times it was written by a
disciple of that personage. We find that this to be the case in chapters 12-
22 and are of a latter date but still originate from the disciples of John the
Baptist before 70 A. D., whp may or may not have joined the “Christians”
converting to become followers of Christ and then joined the Ebyon/Jews,
who were zealous of the Law. These chapters represent the view point of
those that predicted the fall of Jerusalem under the rule of Rome in 68-70
A.D. and ascribed this to the unorthodox behavior of their fellow Jews in
Jerusalem.

That attitude would be shared by such a culture as the Ebyon covenanters .

. [Note: EBIONITES, Judaizing Christians who developed into a separate
sect by the last quarter of the second century and had some influence on
the early history of the church in Egypt.
The term "Ebion" is probably derived from the Hebrew ebyon
(the poor). It is an attribute of those who serve the Lord, in contrast
with him who "would not make God his refuge but trusted in the
abundance of his riches" (Psalm 52:7). The Covenanters of the Dead
Sea regarded themselves as the "Congregation of the Poor" who
would inherit the earth (Commentary on Psalm 37 in Vermes, 1975,
pp. 243-44). Among the Essenes—who, if not identical with the
Covenanters, were closely allied to them and had settled near
Alexandria (Eusebius Historia ecclesiastica 2.18)—equality in
wealth and community of property were strictly adhered to. The
description of Josephus (Jewish War II.8.3), "It is impossible to find
anyone amongst them exceeding others in possessions . . . ," is that
of an ideal that was to pass into Egyptian monasticism.
Jesus' ideal as recorded in the Gospels was close to that of the Essenes
and Covenanters so far as it concerned possessions. "Take
no thought for the morrow," "Blessed are the poor" (Luke 6:20), and
the dispatch of the Twelve to teach the Kingdom and heal, "taking
nothing for their journey, no staff, nor bag, nor bread, nor money"
(Luke 9:3) are entirely in harmony with those who equated the
Congregation of Israel with "the Poor." The ideal of poverty,
however, was one of those that did not survive the Pauline
revolution. Paul's hearers were not to be found among the rural poor
but were recruited largely from the literate congregations of the
Hellenistic synagogues in the larger towns of western and southern
Asia Minor and Greece. It may well be that proponents of poverty in
the sixth and seventh decades of the first century were to be found
among Paul's opponents, the "Judaizers”. That the two began to be
equated is evident from a statement made by Ignatius of Antioch
about 109 in his letter to the Philadelphians. Criticizing the
Judaizers, he asserts, "such a man is poor of understanding as he is
by name an Ebionite" (Ad Philadelphenses 6). With the triumph of Paul's
interpretation of the Gospel, the Ebionites gradually became reduced to the
level of a sect.

From the writings of Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Hippolytus, it would seem

that by the end of the second century, they could be identified as those
who insisted on strict Jewish ritual, including the observance of the
Sabbath and circumcision for their members. They accepted one
Gospel only, that of Matthew, and rejected the Pauline Epistles.
They believed that Jesus was born a man by ordinary birth, but
became exalted to a status greater than Moses and higher than the
prophets through his outstanding virtues, because God's angel dwelt
in him. They practiced strict asceticism in their lives. In the fourth
century Epiphanius (Panarion XXX) describes the Ebionites as
having their own Gospel, which seems to have been identical to that
described by Origen (Homiliae in Lucam 1.1) as the "Gospel of the
Twelve Apostles."

The Ebionites' link with Egypt apart from the Alexandrian

Essenes continued but is not easy to follow. One may discern it
through the numerous fragments of Matthew's Gospel found at
Oxyrhynchus and the association of those with fragments of the
Gospel of Thomas (see Oxyrhynchus Papyri 1 and 654). The latter's
praise of abstinence, poverty, and the solitary life (cf. Logia 49, 69,
75) is in line with Ebionite teaching. If one accepts the Gospel of
Thomas as one of the influences that contributed to Egyptian
monasticism, then the Ebionites must be included among the
movements that lay behind this feature of the Coptic church.
The monastic ancestry of the Coptic church extended back
through Thomas to the Essenes and the ascetic movements within
Judaism at the time of Jesus, and included the Ebionites among its
formative influences.]

of Qumran and was intimated by the Baptist himself (see Matt. 3:7-10 anf
John 1:19-27) and perhaps the primitive Jerusalem church once led by
Jacob (James) the “brother” of the Lord.

We can also detect that Chapters 1-3 and 22:16a, 20b, 21 were added later
by a Jewish Christian disciple, one who had come to believe in Jesus as the
Messiah more accurately, like the disciples of the Baptist at Ephesus in
Acts 19:1-7. Or the scholar of Scripture Apollos in Acts 18:24-28. They
still retained the fiery and pessimistic outlook of John their former master
and leader. They looked forward to the imminent Second Coming of Christ
(compare 2 Peter 3:1-18) and their additions to the text of Revelation
influenced others to relate this expectation to the rest of the Apocalypse.
Note: [ Messiah is a title, not a person. The Hebrew form is mashiah and
the Greek form is Christos, commonly rendered in English as Christ. For
Jews, the Messiah is the “anointed” or “consecrated” one. Kings, priests,
and prophets were all anointed in some fashion, but the Messiah is typically
regarded as the perfect union of all three: a king, priest, and prophet
picked by God to lead his chosen people. ]

Dating the Book of Revelation (Part 11 in the series )

As we continue our investigation of the Revelation, I feel that it is

incumbent upon me to point out once again that what we call books were not
written before they were spoken. Many time the book were written to
preserve the thoughts and intents of the one spoken about lest they should
have been lost.
We see that Rev.. Chapters 4-11 in its oral form (not written) form
would be assigned to the time of John the Baptist and to a era prior to
Jesus public ministry (27-30 AD). Rev. 12-22 would have been dated in the
mid-sixties as the Roman Civil War gathered momentum.

In reading chapters 4-22 which would have been the original written
Apocalypse, with several additions in the last chapter, we find that we have
an entirely Jewish book that lster became a Jewish/Christian work. The
fact that it received additions should not be surprising as we have the same
additions taking place in a well known texts at the time called 1ST AND 2ND
Enoch [The Ethiopic Book of Enoch, Oxford University. Press), which I
believe to be the best translation currently available I concluded that the
book is probably what it appears to be; well preserved, ancient and genuine.
Enoch was the great-grandfather of Noah, and father of Methuselah, and
his book gives a unique view of the world before the flood; which recent
research suggests may have occurred as long ago as 17,000 BC.] not to
mention “Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs” [There are several passages
with Christian content, but these are assumed to come from Christian
redaction of an originally Jewish document]
The problem that many believers have is being caught in the trap of holding
that there is only one author for one book!. This happens in many cases but
not all.. For example the “five books of Moses”
also known as the Pentateuch (“five volumes”), seem to say one author,
Moses, wrote the books. The Five Books of Moses are the biblical books of
Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. Collectively these
books are known as the Torah.
In Hebrew, these books have very different names, each taken from the
first Hebrew word that appears in the book. They are:

•Genesis - Bereisheet. "Bereisheet" means "in the beginning." This Hebrew

word begins the narrative of Creation.
•Exodus - Shemot. "Shemot" means "names" in Hebrew. Exodus begins by
naming the sons of Israel who went to Egypt.
•Leviticus - Vayikra. "Vayikra" means "And He called" in Hebrew. This book
of the bible deals mostly with priestly subjects (how to run the sanctuary,
etc) and begins with God calling Moses to speak with him.
•Numbers - Ba Midbar. "Ba Midbar" means "In the wilderness" in Hebrew.
This book chronicles the Israelites' journey through the wilderness.
•Deuteronomy - D'varim. "D'varim" means "Words" in Hebrew. D'varim
chronicles the words of Moses and mostly consists of speeches wherein
Moses talks to the Israelites about the journey they have shared. At the
end of D'varim, Moses dies and the Israelites enter the Promised Land.
The five books of or about Moses indicate that someone other than Moses
must have written unless Moses wrote about his own death and entombment
in the book of Exodus.

Next time we will look at and consider the seven churches in Asia.

The seven churches in Asia (Part 12 )

Now here is a question for all my New testament scholars In Revelation

there are seven churches mentioned(Rev 1:4 John to the seven churches
which are in Asia:) . Why these seven ? And can you name the nine churches
that Paul Established in Asia?
Gentle Reader,
One has only to consider that John the Baptist wrote the Apocalypse to be
read and not preached to a select group of Jewish fellowships in Asia.
These groups are not found in the Apocalypse from the Qumran which I’ll
share with you later. Note: Here is an example of inserting into a book
something that was not there in the original. Can we overlook the
importance of this statement? Many Scholars have done that very thing.
There was only a very small window of time in which there were only seven
churches in Asia. And that time was the early 60's. Paul the Apostle and
others had established nine churches in Asia, but note only seven are
addressed in the Revelation. The Greek geographer, philosopher and
historian Strabo gave us the reason for this. These cities Colossae,
Laodicea, and Hierapolis were the target of a devastating earthquake
around AD 60-62, probably just after Paul wrote his letters to the
Christians of that area. According to historians, all three cities were
destroyed. Barring miraculous intervention, this historic event probably
claimed some of the lives of our Christian ancestors. Eusebius is said to
have chronicled an earthquake destroying Colossae, Laodicea, and Hierapolis
(Chron. Olymp. 210.4) in the 10th year of Nero [AD 64]. Adam Clarke's
Commentary on the Bible: "That this city [Colossae] perished by an
earthquake, a short time after the date of this epistle, we have the
testimony of Eusebius..."

Tacitus records the quake in the 7th year of Nero (Nero was Emperor of
Rome from AD 54-68, putting the earthquake around AD 61—Annals 14.27.
Tacitus recorded that Laodicea was also destroyed in the quake, but was
later rebuilt apparently without Roman assistance. Note that Jesus wrote
to Laodicea, but Colossae was not mentioned among the letters of
Revelation. By this time (AD 96), Colossae in large part no longer existed.

A few people were said to have formed a small village from the ruins of
Colossae. The village was totally abandoned in the 8th century.
Paul did not refer to this catastrophic event; thus, scholars believe Paul had
either not yet heard the news, or that his letters to Colossians and
Philemon predated the quake.

As mentioned, the church at Colossae may have met in the home of

Philemon, to whom Paul also wrote a brief letter (the "Book of Philemon").
Philemon had a slave named Onesimus who had escaped to Rome, where
evidently Paul met him and led him to Christ. Paul urged Onesimus to return
to Philemon. One wonders if Onesimus returned and, along with the
inhabitants of Colossae, became a victim of the quake. No known historians
indicate if Philemon's home was destroyed in the earthquake.

The hot springs of Hierapolis, and the beautiful pools of adjacent

Pamukkale, were apparently formed due to the earthquake faults of the
area, which are believed to have caused the great earthquake that
destroyed Hierapolis (AD 60)—along with Colossae and Laodicea. "The
tectonic movements that took place in the fault depression of the
Menderes river basin did not only cause frequent earthquakes, but also gave
rise to the emergence of a number of very hot springs. It is the water from
one of these springs, with its large mineral content—chalk in particular—
that created Pamukkale."

"The main active fault at the toe of the Pamukkale range-front is a normal
fault...capable of earthquakes of at least magnitude 6...[and responsible
for]...the earthquake of AD 60..." which destroyed nearby Hierapolis. "Most
of the active thermal springs [of the Hierapolis area] are lined up along the
fault," which cuts through the center of ancient Hierapolis. [pp 97-98]

Of the cities that were rebuilt only Laodicea would have been able to
rebuild itself as they were “rich’ enough not to ask for funds from Rome.
The other two locations Colosse and Hierapolis were not safe enough to
rebuild for some time. This left only seven Jewish/Christian churches in
Asia durinf the five years just prior to the beginning of the Roman/Jewish
war in A.D. 68-70

Finely in this part, I want to bring to your attention the importance of the
message to the church of Philadelphia (Revelation 3:7-13). In the verses
.Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from
the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them
that dwell upon the earth. Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou
hast, that no man take thy crown. (Revelation 3:10-11), Christ told the
author to inform them that the “hour of temptation “[ Gk. peirasmos = the
trial of man’s fidelity, .
integrity, virtue, constancy] was “about to come upon the world” i.e. the
Jewish cosmos [ Gk. oikoumene ] specifically the Roman empire: - earth,
world - the world in which the Jews lived in the Roman Empire]. Christ then
revealed that He was to “come quickly” to them and that they should “hold
fast” The reason that this is important [beside the fact that this was
directed to actual churches in the first century] is that the first
persecution of Christians took place under Nero Caesar in A.D. 64. Which
means that the Revelation must have been in the hands of the Ebyon
Christians before A.D. 61 or the latest possible date of A.D. 64 in order to
be a prophecy . No prophecy was written after the event.

To be continued . . .

**************************************************************

The Seven Letters even have elements more suggestive of a

period of time prior to the destruction of the Temple. A major one
of these has been discussed previously: the presence of strong Jewish
elements in the churches. This feature bespeaks an early period of
Christian development prior to the cleavage between Jew and Christian,
which was enforced by the complex of events associated with
both the Neronic persecution and the Jewish War (Rev. 2:9; 3:9)

Part 13 Dating the Book of Revelation

Gentle Reader,

Those who take their Irish coffee black, hardy and strong can never
appreciate the nuances or the delicate shades of difference that a dollop
of whipped cream can deliver to the weary traveler and the end of a long
days journey. The same can be said about Scripture and the study of the
Word and words of God as He presents them to us.. They should be read,
meditated upon, savored and time should be spent in gleaning as much as we
can from each word. Sadly to say in this “information age” none of this is
done to any degree. And much that would provide benefit to our spiritual
growth as well as our understanding is lost by the shear fact that we will
not spend the time with Him that He may teach us the things dear to His
heart. Jeremiah, sometimes called the weeping Prophet said “ Thy words
were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and
rejoicing of mine heart: for I am called by thy name, O LORD God of hosts .”
(Jeremiah 15:16)

One Word from God is worth all the words pronounced by men. For there is
a depth in that word that has no limit and should be appreciated by those
who claim the Name of the Most High God. Here is just a wee sample of a
word ignored by most and yet an explanation of rare worth to those who
search for it.. Think about this word.:

And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying,
Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship
therein. But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it
not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread
under foot forty and two months. (Revelation 11:1-2). That little word,
Gentle Reader, found in a book of Prophecy, overlooked by many. The most
compelling proof that the Apocalypse was in fact written before the
destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. What is seen is the Jewish temple was
still standing at the unveiling of the “Coming One”. How can I be so sure
that this was the temple of that first century and not some future one?
First there is nowhere in the Bible, not one verse that supports or speaks
of a “rebuilt”Jewish Temple. Not one! That should be proof enough for
those thoughtful individuals with eyes to see.

The First Temple was an Israelite Temple built by Solomon. Solomon's

Temple commenced - 970 BCE , Solomon's Temple completed - 964 BCE and
then Solomon's Temple destroyed - 586 BCE.

That brings us to, Zerubbabel, in 538 B.C.was part of the first wave of
Jewish captives to return to Jerusalem (Ezra 1:1-2). The Persian king
appointed Zerubbabel as governor of Judah (Haggai 1:1), and right away he
began rebuilding the temple in Jerusalem with the help of Joshua, the high
priest (Ezra 3:2-3, 8). It had been 70 years since the destruction of
Solomon’s temple, also known as the first temple, by the Babylonians in 586
B.C. (2 Kings 25:8-10).

It took Zerubbabel two years to rebuild the foundation of the temple. Then
construction was delayed by Samaritan settlers whose friendly overtures
masked a hidden hostility (Ezra 4:1-5). As a result of the opposition to the
temple construction, Persia withdrew support for the project for 17 years
(Ezra 4:21).

The temple had remained unfinished long enough. Finally, God sent the
prophets Haggai and Zechariah to encourage and support Zerubbabel (Ezra
5:1-2), and the work resumed. Four years later, in 515 B.C., the temple was
completed and dedicated with great fanfare (Ezra 6:16). It was also
celebrated by the observance of the Passover (Ezra 6:19). It’s interesting
that Zerubbabel is never mentioned in connection with the dedication
ceremonies, nor is his name mentioned again after Ezra 5:1. For this reason,
Zerubbabel’s temple is also referred to simply as the “second temple.”
This second temple that we call a Jewish temple a result of a return to the
land from Babylon captivity. There is no indication of or direction to build a
third temple. The only temple that we can find there is the Mosque of
Omar, a Muslim Temple. Which has occupied this area for more years that
the First and Second temples combined.

Notice what Jesus told His disciples in Luke Then let them which are in
Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it
depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. For
these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be
fulfilled. But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck,
in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon
this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led
away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the
Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. (Luke 21:21-24)

This is the prophecy that the risen Christ told John in Revelation But the
court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is
given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty
and two months. (Revelation 11:2)

Since the disciples’ generation has long departed this mortal coil, the
Revelation certainly was written before the nations trampled Jerusalem
under foot in 70 A.D. A prophecy that came true in their day while the
Second temple was still standing, not some future day in modernity. The
Temple that we read in Revelation is not the Third temple but the Second
Zerubbabel's/Herod’s temple.

Who were The Tribes in the Earth (Part 14 )

Gentle Reader,
As we look at the internal evidence I am reminded of this verse “"Arise up
and stand, behold the number of those that be sealed in the feast of the
Lord;'' (2 Esdras 2:38)

In the first chapter of Revelation we have the verse that many feel
represents the “theme” and gives credence to their thinking os to soon
coming of the Lord. “Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see
him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall
wail because of him. Even so, Amen.” (Revelation 1:7) The person referred
as the “cloud comer” directs our thoughts to the Book of Matthew, “ And
then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all
the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming
in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory”. (Matthew 24:30)
The term Kindred refers to and is a direct reference to the Jewish tribal
system KIN'DRED, n. [from kin, kind.]
Here we have the Greek word phule which means tribes
1. Relation by birth; consanguinity.

Like her, of equal kindred to the throne.

2. Relation by marriage; affinity.

3. Relatives by blood or marriage, more properly the former.

Thou shalt go unto my country and to my kindred. Gen 26.

4. Relation; suit; connection in kind.

KIN'DRED, a. Related; congenial; of the like nature or properties; as

kindred souls; kindred skies.

All the tribes of the land. By this the Jewish people [the house of Judah
the southern kingdom. Note: the Gentiles that were grafted into the
covenant that Paul taught were from the Nation of Israel the Northern
kingdom, not all Gentiles are from the other nations but the Gentiles that
Paul went to were what we would call Israelite strangers . See Eph 2: 11-14]
are most evidently intended, and therefore the whole verse may be
understood as predicting the destruction of the Jews; and is a presumptive
proof that the Apocalypse was written before the final overthrow of the
Jewish state. While it may not be conclusive standing alone, but one can
consider and based on the language that the case can be made that these
two verses are speaking of the same event. Matthew 24 speaks of the fall
of Jerusalem. Revelation in this first chapter is speaking about the same
fall of Jerusalem.

Note if you will in the seventh verse of Chapter One the language. It speaks
of those who “ pierced him”! We know that it was the Romans who crucified
and pierced Him, but the Apostles accused the Jews of the act. Peter says
directly that it was the Jews that were responsible for the crucifixion of
Christ. You can find him saying this in these verses : But ye denied the
Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you; And
killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we
are witnesses. (Acts 3:14-15)
Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of
Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised
from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole .
(Acts 4:10)

Others also Stephen: Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears,

ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of
the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them
which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been
now the betrayers and murderers: (Acts 7:51-52) And again Paul; Which
none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would
not have crucified the Lord of glory.
(1 Corinthians 2:8). Not the devils, as some have thought, who had they
known what God designed to do by the death of Christ, would never have
been concerned in bringing it about; nor so much the political governors of
the Roman empire, particularly in Judea, as Herod and Pontius Pilate, who
also were entirely ignorant of it; but rather the ecclesiastical rulers of the
Jewish church state, called “this world", in distinction from "the world to
come", or times of the Messiah. In Thessalonians Paul speaks of Jews that
killed both the Messiah and the prophets For ye, brethren, became
followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for
ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have
of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and
have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men:
(1 Thessalonians 2:14-15)

So you ought to now begin to make the connection and understand why the
Book of Revelation concerns itself exclusively to the Jews and the Jewish
nation.

Now who were the “Tribes”? In Zechariah And I will pour upon the house of
David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of
supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they
shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in
bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn. In that
day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning of
Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon. And the land shall mourn, every
family apart; the family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart;
the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart; The family
of the house of Levi apart, and their wives apart; the family of Shimei
apart, and their wives apart; All the families that remain, every family
apart, and their wives apart. (Zechariah 12:10-14)

This was the prophesy of John, the foundation of the expression “every eye
shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds (or tribes )
of the earth (or land ) shall wail because of him.

Zechariah was saying thar the “tribes of the Land” would mourn for Him
who they had pierced. Who were the tribes? The inhabitants of Jerusalem.
And the earth? Not the whole world as perhaps you have heard it said! But
the “earth” is the homeland of the Jews . The land that would mourn would
be Jerusalem!

The main purpose of the book of revelation was to reveal Jesus Christ to
the Nation of Israel.

Reexamining the book of Revelation (Part 15)

Gentle Reader,

We concluded last time with looking at the phrase “Tribes in the Earth”
and I might point out a few further items to add to our investigation.. We
said last time the the purpose of this particular book was written to reveal
the Messiah, the Christ, Jesus to the nation of Israel. And the place of the
revealing was to be in Jerusalem. And furthermore the revealing would be
to those who pierced Him (The Jews in Judea). One wonders at times that
those of us reading this book some twenty-one centuries in the future
would not have at least given serious consideration that these scriptures
were not just a general reference to the nation down though the years, but
to the contemporary generation, that generation that would fall under the
judgement of God and became desolate in not the Jewish “present age” but
in the “ages to come”. See The Wars of The Jews by Flavius Josephus
Written in 75 A.D.
Brief summary of Josephus' record:

The Judgment on Jerusalem according to History and Destruction of the

temple

Heavenly phenomena
A star resembling a sword
A comet
A bright light shining around the altar and the temple
A vision of chariots and soldiers running around among the clouds and all
cities of Palestine.

Earthly phenomena

(reported by priests)
A quaking
A great noise
The sounds of a great multitude saying, "Let us remove hence."

In Josephus’Wars and Antiquities, we read the following eyewitness

account from the Jewish priests about what they felt and heard in the
Temple on Pentecost in the year AD 66, at the very time when the Zealot
war with Rome was about to begin:

. . . at that feast which we call Pentecost, as the priests were going by night
into the inner [court of the] temple, as their custom was, to perform their
sacred ministrations, they said that, in the first
place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after that they
heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, “Let us remove hence.” [Wars
6.5.3 (6.299-300)]
Josephus gives us the exact day and hour when this event occurred (on the
day of Pentecost at the hour of the evening sacrifices), where it occurred
(in the Jerusalem Temple), and who witnessed it (the officiating priests).

Furthermore, Josephus puts this story in the mouths of his fellow priests
who were in the Temple at the very time these events occurred. He seldom
gives this kind of strong eyewitness testimony to confirm
his account, especially to the point of giving a date and place, and naming his
sources, as he does here.

The fact that he quotes these witnesses and identifies them, lends much
credence to his story. Out of all the possible eyewitnesses who could be
deemed reliable in the first century, the priests in the Temple
would have been at the top of the list. Those priests were lawyers, judges,
scribes, and teachers of the Law. They understood the penalty for false
testimony. Some of those priests survived the destruction of
Jerusalem, and could have easily discredited Josephus’ account. Yet, as far
as we know, this account was never challenged by them, but instead verified
“at the mouth of two or more” reliable first-century
eyewitnesses (Deut 19:15) and accepted as true by contemporary historians
such as Tacitus.

R. C. Sproul, Sr., calls this particular section of Josephus “one of the

weirdest passages you ever read in ancient history” (“Last Days Madness”
speech, Ligonier Ministries National Conference, Orlando,
Florida, 1999). When quoting this passage in The Last Days according to
Jesus, he describes it as a “most remarkable record” (pp. 123-127). He
notes that this story is “corroborated by others” in the first century
such as Tacitus (Eusebius, Yosippon, and Hegesippus also record this event).
As Sproul suggested, this testimony of Josephus “lends credence” to the
idea that there was some kind of coming of Christ
associated with the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 (“Last Days
Madness” speech, Ligonier Ministries National Conference, Orlando, Florida,
1999)

So Gentle reader, we have learned that Rome and her legions destroyed
that generation (the generation that Christ spoke about ) in 70 A.D.. And so
we have additional evidence the points to the book of Revelation being
written long before the events of 70 A.D.

My thanks to Ed Stevens who provided additional research and quotes for

this subject...
Reexamining the book of Revelation in light of recent scholarship Part
16

Who is the woman in Red?

Gentle Reader,

I do hope you have been taking notes and while the title of this study may
be a bit deceiving when you read the associated verses you understand why
I chose this as the title. So he carried me away in the spirit into the
wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of
names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. And the woman was
arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious
stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and
filthiness of her fornication: And upon her forehead was a name written,
MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND
ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. And I saw the woman drunken with the
blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I
saw her, I wondered with great admiration. (Revelation 17:3-6)

It occurred to me that in order to attempt to explain this next few verses

or at least give you some of my understanding of these terms and words
given in this seventeenth and eighteenth chapters that you need a
refresher course in how we scholars and theologians understand the Book
of Apocalypse. I was just told in a recent email that I wrote in what this
author called “ l think the language is too high, this is pure English
Literature!” So bearing that in mind I will try not to get too professorial in
my explanations. However if we are to understand this Book and what is
written we must first have a basic understanding of the words and intent
behind them.

There are two types of interpretation which have a vital effect on

Eschatology: ( a branch of theology concerned with the final events in the
history of the world or of humankind.) The allegorical and the
grammatical-historical methods.

The allegorical method is an ancient method of interpretation. The literal

meaning of the text is either, not the true meaning, or only one of many
meanings. The elements of each passage have a corresponding spiritual
reality which is the "real" or ultimate meaning of the passage.

In direct opposition to the allegorical method of interpretation stands the

literal or grammatical-historical method. The aim of the historical-
grammatical method is to discover the meaning of the passage as the
original author would have intended and what the original hearers would
have understood.

The method employed by the scribes was not an allegorical method, but a
literal method. It is recognized by all that the Bible abounds in figurative
language ( 217 figures of speech found in the Bible ). Then finally The first
principle is the fact that the book of Revelation uses extensive figurative
language. Revelation is a book of apocalyptic literature. Several books of
Jewish apocalyptic literature are available for study. In the Old Testament,
the books of Daniel, Ezekiel, Isaiah, and Joel contain apocalyptic literature.
Also, certain extrabiblical books such as the Book of Enoch, the Assumption
of Moses, and the Book of Baruch fall into the literary category of
apocalyptic writings. Apocalyptic literature uses signs and symbols to veil
its message to outside readers. This type of literature was written when
the Jewish nation was amidst one of its most tumultuous times—when the
Israelites were under attack, or ruled over, by another powerful nation.
Therefore, we must read Revelation with figurative language at the
forefront of our mind, remembering that apocalyptic literature had an
elaborate system of such language that was used to convey social and
political happenings of the time.

What we have seen over a long period of time is that depending on ones
Eschatological view the book of Revelation can have the meaning that one
puts into it. Here is just one example The Two Babylons, subtitled The
Papal Worship Proved to Be the Worship of Nimrod and His Wife is a
religious pamphlet published in 1853 by the Presbyterian Free Church of
Scotland theologian Alexander Hislop (1807-65), expanded in 1858, and
finally published as a book in 1919. Its central theme is its allegation that
the Catholic Church is a veiled continuation of the pagan religion of Babylon,
a product of a millennia-old conspiracy. It has been generally regarded by
scholars as discredited, with one calling it a "tribute to historical
inaccuracy and know-nothing religious bigotry" with "shoddy scholarship,
blatant dishonesty" and a "nonsensical thesis".
Hislop ultimately traces Catholic doctrines back to the worship of Nimrod,
claiming that the Roman Catholic Church is the Whore of Babylon in the
Bible Book of Revelation 17:5, and that "the Pope himself is truly and
properly the lineal representative of Belshazzar". He claims that the
Christogram IHS really stands for Isis, Horus, Seth.

Although scholarship has shown the picture presented by Hislop to be

based on a misunderstanding of historical Babylon and its religion, his book
remains popular among some fundamentalist Protestant Christians.

So when we now go back to our verse in Rev. 17:6 , you have at least some
idea of the reason for the Apocalyptic Language used in these verses. The
danger was real, and present and to disguise the “real” meaning certain
words in place of others. Only those in the know would understand! “
MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND
ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH” Notice what the angel said that “the
woman”was a poetic symbol of that great city !. And the woman which thou
sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.
(Revelation 17:18) And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of
saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth. (Revelation 18:24). Then
John wrote Rejoice over her, thou heaven, and ye holy apostles and
prophets; for God hath avenged you on her. And a mighty angel took up a
stone like a great millstone, and cast it into the sea, saying, Thus with
violence shall that great city Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no
more at all. (Revelation 18:20-21).
So who was this “woman and where was this great city?” John points to a
clue given in Revelation 11:8, where he wrote, And their dead bodies shall lie
in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt,
where also our Lord was crucified. (Revelation 11:8)

This tells us, as we just saw that John was referring to the city Jerusalem
of his day.

We have just a wee bit more in this study of the “Woman in Red” but I’m
going to let you think about these things that I’ve pointed out so we’ll take a
break until next time. And as I have said previously check me out.

Revelation reexamined (part 17)

Gentle Reader,
We took a wee break for two reasons 1) I gave you a lot the think about and
2) even there was just a wee bit more to suggest in our search for the
identity of “The women in Red” , I wanted to step back for a moment to
consult with other colleagues to determine if I was as you say “pushing the
envelope” to make my case.

So here we are again continuing to look at the concept of “MYSTERY,

BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND
ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH”
The clue we talked about previously was found in Revelation 11:8, where
John wrote, And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city,
which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was
crucified. And if you remember that I suggested that John was writing not
about Rome as some would like to believe, but was referring to the city of
Jerusalem of his day!

Now I think you need to comprehend my reasoning for this assertion . Let’s
look at the term that our author, John, used. “Sodom” John wrote that this
is a “figurative name” That means that John was not telling us the real name
but its spiritual condition. Once more we must allow Scripture to interpret
itself, where we find this the a reference to Jerusalem. In Isaiah the first
chapter after declaring that he had a vision The vision of Isaiah the son of
Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of
Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah. (Isaiah 1:1) We find
Isaiah writing to Judah and Jerusalem in this manner Hear the word of
the LORD, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people
of Gomorrah.
(Isaiah 1:10) In Isaiah’s eyes Jerusalem was Sodom!

Next turn with me to the Prophet Jeremiah who on his part addresses
Jerusalem “I have seen also in the prophets of Jerusalem an horrible thing:
they commit adultery, and walk in lies: they strengthen also the hands of
evildoers, that none doth return from his wickedness: they are all of them
unto me as Sodom, and the inhabitants thereof as Gomorrah. (Jeremiah
23:14)

But what about “Egypt?” We don’t find in Scripture where Jerusalem is

directly called Egypt. As we can read in the book of Exodus in what is called
the “Old Testament” by those who have left the study of Hebrew culture to
those who some would call “wonks” Israel’s exodus was the bondage of
Egypt, the New Testament, that more people are familiar with, was from
the bondage of the man made Old Covenant Law.

Who should come along but the Apostle called Paul. A bi vocational
preacher! A tent maker by trade and a Pharisee trained in the
understanding and use of Rabbinic Traditions. Some modern day scholars
have accused Paul of doing what modern day preachers do. That is pick a
topic and find a proof text to back it up and twists scripture to fit. But
those who would say that have never bothered to see what Paul was seeing
or think Paul’s thoughts. To even asserting anachronistically that Paul read
the Old Testament as “real history” have been misled.
For Paul his many times “misleading” or one could say misuse of scripture to
make a point was the Jewish way of interpretation scripture. We might call
that rabbinic midrash. But rather than give you what Paul’s understanding of
Scripture was all about let’s let him speak for himself.

The most recognizable passage pointing to the “New”exodus in the New

Testament is found in Paul’s writings in 1 Corinthians 10 :1-11

Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all
our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; And were
all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; And did all eat the same
spiritual meat; And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of
that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ. But with
many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the
wilderness. Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should
not lust after evil things, as they also lusted. Neither be ye idolaters, as
were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink,
and rose up to play. Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them
committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand. Neither let us
tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of
serpents. Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured, and were
destroyed of the destroyer. Now all these things happened unto them for
ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of
the world are come.
Paul’s contextual foundation for this statement is to be found in the Old
Testament narrative of the Exodus from Egyptian bondage. He wrote
that ...
1) They passed through the sea (verse 1)
2) The ate manna and drank from the rock (verses 3-4)
3) They wandered in the wilderness (verse 5)
4)They fell into idolatry (verse 7)
5) They tried the Lord and were destroyed by serpents (verse 9)
Here we can see that “type and shadow” was what Paul alluded to in
Corinthians ( Midrash is commonly defined as the process of interpretation
by which the rabbis filled in "gaps" found in the Torah.) harkened back to
the Old Testament, and the New Testament believer would undergo the
same exodus. The only difference was what was past in the Old Testament
was a current reality in Paul’s generation.

Consider Jesus saying Nevertheless I must walk to day, and to morrow, and
the day following: for it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem.
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and stonest them
that are sent unto thee; how often would I have gathered thy children
together, as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would not!
(Luke 13:33-34)

And in Matthew 23:29-37 Jesus upbraids the Jews of His day for killing
the prophets. He declares that they are the children of their fathers who
killed the prophets before them.. And then we find the most damming
evidence in verse 35 where He says: That upon you (the Jews of His day)
may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood
of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye
slew between the temple and the altar. (Matthew 23:35) And then in verses
36-37 He says Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this
generation. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and
stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered
thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her
wings, and ye would not!
(Matthew 23:36-37)

In both of the above passages Jesus told the Jews of His day that they
were guilty of “all the righteous blood shed upon the earth” (C.F. Acts 7:51-
52) Same crime, same judgement, the “great City” of the Apocalypse was
the Jerusalem of Christ’s generation leading us once again to think that the
writing of Revelation was before the fall of Jerusalem and certainly before
70 AD.
To be continued . . .

Part 18 The Sixth King in the continuing study of Reexamining

Revelation

One of my favorite quotes comes from a dear Rabbi friend, who says this
“When you get six Jews together you will have twelve opinions”. It seems
its that way when it comes to understanding the Book of Revelation too.
When we have opinions we find that one’s opinion should only be as strong as
one’s knowledge on the matter. So before we tackle this next perspective
of the kings of Revelation let’s at least give those who have an opinion to
express it. “If John wrote near the end of his reign, that would place the
writing of Revelation somewhere in the 90's. “
”Traditionally, the book of Revelation has been dated near the end of the
first century, around A.D. 96"
. The testimony of Irenaeus, not far removed from the apostolic age, is
first rate. He places the book near the end of Domitian’s reign, and that
ruler died in A.D. 96. Irenaeus seems to be unaware of any other view for
the date of the book of Revelation.

Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 155-215) says that John returned from the
isle of Patmos “after the tyrant was dead” (Who Is the Rich Man? 42), and
Eusebius, known as the “Father of Church History,” identifies the “tyrant”
as Domitian (Ecclesiastical History III.23).

And of course we have those with differing opinions Here is a sampling of

those:

.States Revelation was written under "Claudius [Nero] Caesar." (Epiphanies,

Heresies 51:12,)
George Edmundson (1913)
"I mean the Apocalypse of St. John. The Apocalypse is full of references
to historical events of which the author had quite recently been himself an
eyewitness at Rome, or which were fresh in the memories of the Roman
Christians with whom he had been associating, and it can be dated with
great exactitude from internal evidence as having been written at the
beginning of the year 70 A.D."

Dr. E. Earle Ellis (1980)

“At the same time in some New Testament books the silence about the
destruction of Jerusalem is very surprising; that is, in books where Jesus’
prophecy of the destruction appears (Matthew, Mark, Luke), where the
critique of the temple or its transitory character is a major theme (Acts,
Hebrews) and where God’s judgments on a disobedient Jewish nation are of
particular interest to the writer (Acts, Jude). In these cases the absence
of any illusion to the destruction would seem to be a fairly strong argument
that such books were written before that event took place. The fall of
Jerusalem is important in another respect. It marked not only the
catastrophic destruction of a city but also the end of the Jewish world as
it had been known.” (“Dating the New Testament”, New Testament
Studies, 26; p. 488)

George E. Ladd (1972)

"The problem with this [Domitian date] theory is that there is no evidence
that during the last decade of the first century there occurred any open
and systematic persecution of the church ." (George E. Ladd, A Commentary
on Revelation (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1972), p. 8.)

Robert Mounce (1977)

"the Cambridge trio (Westcott, Lightfoot, and Hort) were unanimous in
assigning the Apocalypse to the reign of Nero or the years immediately
following." And "such a threefold cord of scholarly opinion is not quickly
broken" but that he (Swete) is "unable to see that the historical situation
presupposed by the Apocalypse contradicts the testimony of Irenaeus
which assigns the vision to the end of the reign of Domitian." Mounce seem
to agree with Swete on this (p. 21).

J. A. T. Robinson (1976)
"It is indeed generally agreed that this passage must bespeak a pre-70
situation. . . . There seems therefore no reason why the oracle should not
have been uttered by a Christian prophet as the doom of the city drew
nigh." (Redating the New Testament pp.. 240-242).

Albert Schweitzer (1906)

"The apocalyptic discourses in Mark xiii., Matt. xxiv., and Luke xxi. are
interpolated. A Jewish-Christian apocalypse of the first century, probably
composed before the destruction of Jerusalem, has been interwoven with a
short exhortation which Jesus gave on the occasion when He predicted the
destruction of the temple.. His construction rests upon two main points of
support; upon his view of the sources and his conception of the eschatology
of the time of Jesus. In his view the sole source for the Life of Jesus is
the Gospel of Mark, which was "probably written exactly in the year 73,"
five years after the Johannine apocalypse." (Quest for the Historical
Jesus)

Philip Schaff (1877)

"On two points I have changed my opinion -- the second Roman captivity of
Paul (which I am disposed to admit in the interest of the Pastoral Epistles),
and the date of the Apocalypse (which I now assign, with the majority of
modern critics, to the year 68 or 69 instead of 95, as before)." (Vol. I,
Preface to the Revised Edition, 1882 The History of the Christian Church,
volume 1)

So Gentle Reader you can see by this small sampling that there are
excellent scholars on both sides of this issue. Not that this one issue is
the end all be all of evidence. Dr. Bart “Ehrman ‘ puts the matter this way,
”The search for truth takes you where the evidence leads you, even if, at
first, you don't want to go there.” But as an old Pastor once said to me when
he picked up a music stand and carried it across the platform “Sometimes,
you have to take a stand!” So from a historical position here is where I will
take a stand and until further evidence come to the forefront this is my
best take on this piece of evidence
.
So far we have seen that Revelation deals with the revealing of Jesus to
first century Israel. As noted above, "the woman" John saw was first
century Jerusalem. The "kings," therefore, were the rulers of the known
world of John's day, i.e., the Roman Empire. The "kings" were not ruling at
the same time, for the text stated "five fell," meaning that five of those
kings had come and gone. Then "one is," meaning the "king" who was ruling at
the time Revelation was written. Here in this verse, we have one of the
clearest proofs for dating this book. If we simply examine the list of Roman
Emperors, we will be able to determine who the sixth king was, and the time
Revelation was written.

Here are the Roman Emperors: 1)Julius Caesar (45 B.C.) Time being
important to the people and the priests. Julius introduced a new calendar,
the Julian calendar:
2) Augustus (27 B.C.-14 A.D.) After more than a century of war and turmoil.
Following the defeat of Antony and Cleopatra in 30 B.C., Octavian becomes
Augustus and ruled for a period over a relative serene Empire ;
3)Tiberius (14 A.D-37) The was Rome’s tyrant, a ruthless ruler;

4) Gaius (Caligula) (37 A.D.-41)According to ancient sources, Caligula loved

his horse Incitatus so much that he gave the animal a marble stable, a
jeweled collar and servants who fed him oats mixed with gold flakes. ;

5) Claudius (41A.D. -54); and the sixth emperor was…

6) Nero. Nero reigned from ( 54AD to June of 68AD), with Galba to follow
who reigns but six months. Here we find the terrible persecutors of the
Christians (at whose hand Peter and Paul were martyred), whom God used to
destroy the Jews. Nero was in power and he gave the command to Vespasian
to destroy Jerusalem. This was the sixth king, proving beyond any doubt
that Revelation was written before the Roman/Jewish war.

Historically, Nero is the one that persecuted Christians beyond all

comparison. If the note in the Apocalypse in the Syrian version was correct,
John's banishment to Patmos was itself a result of the great persecution of
Nero. The apostle Paul was tortured and then beheaded by the evil Emperor
Nero at Rome in A.D. 67. The apostle Peter, who was crucified upside down,
was another victim of Nero.

However, the Apocalypse said that John “was in the isle that is called
Patmos, for the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ” Rev. (1:9).
It does not say that John was banished or imprisoned. As Paul went to
Arabia for his revelation and Moses went into the Mountain for his
revelation, John the Baptist went to Patmos for his revelation

To be continued . . .

Part 19 Reexamining Revelation The Song of Moses

Gentle Reader,

We are searching in paths that for the most part have not been traveled
frequently. I ask several groups about our previous study to write about the
kings referred to in revelation. Virtually all including some Hebrew scholars
indicated the Party line” Revelation written in 90-95 A.D. by the Apostle
John. Some even went so far as to make Revelation fit into modern present
times. Which Gentle Readers is called Eisegesis.Eisegesis is the process
of interpreting a text or portion of text in such a way that it introduces
one's own presuppositions, agendas, and/or biases into and onto the text.
The act is often used to "prove" a pre-held point of concern to the reader
and to provide him or her with a confirmation bias in accordance with his or
her pre-held agenda. Eisegesis is best understood when contrasted with
exegesis. While exegesis draws out the meaning from a text in accordance
with the context and discover-able meaning of its author, eisegesis occurs
when a reader imposes his or her interpretation into and onto the text. As a
result, exegesis tends to be objective when employed effectively while
eisegesis is regarded as highly subjective.

So you can see that we have not taken the easy path. Yogi Berra of baseball
fame once said “When you come to a fork in the road take it” And that's
what we are doing. Not the easy path but tracking down clues which may
give us more reason than ever to reject the “everybody’s says” concept.
Now we need to look at another passage that has been looked at and at the
same time in many cases overlooked. And I saw as it were a sea of glass
mingled with fire: and had been victorious from the Beast” were singing
“them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and
over his mark, and over the number of his name,[ Note
over the number of his name — The Vulgate, Syriac, and Coptic omit the
words in English Version, “over his mark.” The mark, in fact, is the number
of his name which the faithful refused to receive, and so were victorious
over it.
stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God. And they sing the song
of Moses the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, Great and
marvellous are thy works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are thy ways,
thou King of saints. (Revelation 15:2-3)
We have not only now consider not only the Law of Moses but also the
traditions of the Qumran Ebyon/Nazarenes before these verse will be put
in they proper perspective. I might point out, although unnecessary for my
regular readers that not many, if any, have bothered to take this path (too
much like work- reminiscent of the elementary schools daze)

When we look at Moses’ Law and then at the Dead Sea Scrolls we find the
reference to those who “had been victorious over the Beast” Greek, “those
(coming) off from (the conflict with) the beast-conquerors.”
were singing the “Song of Moses” [ Note at this point we might make a
distinction between two songs 1) found in Exodus 15:1 “Then sang Moses
and the children of Israel this song unto the LORD, and spake, saying, I will
sing unto the LORD, for he hath triumphed gloriously: the horse and his
rider hath he thrown into the sea.” And 2) the other Song we may
reference is to be found in Deuteronomy 32: 1- 44 The song exhibits
striking originality of form; nowhere else in the Old Testament are
prophetic thoughts presented in poetical dress on so large a scale.

So then Gentle reader, those who hold that this is written To them rather
than For them might do well to ask the question (which not many again have
thought about) If believers (Christians) were somehow martyrs living in
modern times, why would they be singing the Song of Moses? Do you know
any believer today that knows how to sing that song?

Moses said: "Just and right" are God’s "judgments."

Deuteronomy 32
The Lamb says: "Just and true" are "thy judgments."
Revelation 15.
There were two songs given by Moses, forty years apart, one at the
crossing of the Red Sea and the other was the song Moses’ sang the day
that he died.
The reason Jews were to sing this song was to remind them of what would
befall them “in the later days” in Deut. 31 (I suggest to get the full impact
of the song read this entire chapter - Now therefore write ye this song
for you, and teach it the children of Israel: put it in their mouths, that this
song may be a witness for me against the children of Israel. (Deuteronomy
31:19) and teach it the children of Israel; teach them by it, instructing
them in the meaning of it: thus it was usual in ancient times to write things
in verses, that they might be the more pleasingly attended to and regarded,
and be longer retained in memory; and especially this practice was used with
children, and still is:

We find the song talking about the End (of the Age) and “their end” in their
present captivity, as they called it (being ruled not by the Spirit of the
Most Holy but by th Roman Empire!

We ask again, our brethren, why would those living today, Christian martyrs
be singing a song about the Romans that no longer exist, when the song had
reference to the Jews living in the 1st century that were being ruled over by
the Romans? It would make much sense to sing that same song today.

And aren’t these the same martyrs who cried out earlier “ How long, O
Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them...”
(Rev. 6:10 )

Who was it who had all the “blood of the righteous” martyrs imputed
against them? dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell
on the earth? the men of the world, idolatrous persons, earthly princes, who
had shed their blood; the ungodly, of earth, earthly, as distinguished from
believers who had given their all!. Clearly it was those who had kept their
faith in the Messiah in spite of intense persecution and had “had come off
victorious from the Beast” (See Matthew 23:35 and Luke 13:33)! This
passage ( Revelation 15:2,3 ) points clearly to followers of Christ living in
the First century during “the wrath of God” Rev.15:1.

Now in Revelation 16:10,11 it says that the people in the Beast’s kingdom
“gnawed their tongues because of pain.” They had great sores on thier
bodies along with other plagues that had been poured out on them. We also
have the testimony from the writings of historian , Josephus that the Jews
literally gnawed their tongues for lack of food during the siege of AD 68-
70! And, it is interesting that Josephus even calls the Jewish Zealot forces
a “wild beast” in several places (Wars V.1.1; IV.7.4; IV.9.8; V.2.5)! This
particular is emphasized even more by the whole context of the Song of
Moses is full of references to “beasts” “Serpents,” and “dragons” (Leviticus
26; Deuteronomy 28-32; Deuteronomy 32:24, 33. We should also notice
that the Song of Moses, read as a prophetic prefiguration of God’s dealings
with Israel through Paul’s handling of his Gospel becomes in his hands a
hermeneutical key of equal importance with the prophecies of Deutero-
Isaiah. The song describes in sequence God’s election of and care for Israel
(Deut. 32:6-14), Israel’s inexplicable rebellion (Deut. 32:15-18, cf 32:5),
God’s judgement upon them (Deut. 32:19-35), and ultimately and
mysteriously God’s final deliverance and vindication of his own people (Deut.
32:36-43). In Deuteronomy 32, Paul found not only the prophecy of Israel’s
lack of faith and but also the prefiguration of the prophecy of God’s
intentions to “stir them to jealousy” through embracing the Gentiles
(Deut.32:21). It can not seem coincidental that Paul quotes both of these
verses explicitly (Rom. 10:19, 15:10). Deuteronomy 32 contains Romans in
nunc. And would place more evidence that Paul had meet John the Baptist
from our part 9 “I knew a man....”

Next time we’ll consider the time element and expectations of the author
called John. In Part 20.

The Element of time [Part 20]

Gentle Readers,

My wife herself, tells me that I have no sense of time, I fear that she will
be right once again! I always feel that when going to the market I have
enough time to look at the newest computers or HDTV’s when I just went
out for a loaf of bread or a tin of tea.

To be truthful, I attempt to be “in the moment” in the Now! For if one

thinks about things there is no past nor future only the Eternal Present!
What we have done as mankind with our limited vision is to set into the
motion the notion in our our thinking the concept of a past and a future.

Everyone admits there are numerous New Testament passages that say
"The coming of the Lord is at hand;" or in other ways indicate Christ's
return was imminent--and that was almost two thousand years ago! One of
the ways men have dealt with the problem is to say "Yes, the Bible said the
coming of the Lord was 'at hand' in the first century, but time doesn't
mean anything to God therefore 'at hand' didn't really mean it was
imminent."

Do you see the problem? The problem is real and has troubled honest Bible
students for centuries. The question is "Can God tell time?" As we now
perhaps have seen for the first time (no pun intended), when God uses time
words he does not have a special hidden meaning unknowable to man!
Prophetic time statements are not so "elastic" that the words "near" and
"at hand" can encompass hundreds, or even thousands of years! At hand
means at hand whether it referred to the coming of the kingdom or the
coming of the Lord!

There is no question that "time" is nothing to God. A thousand years are like
yesterday to Him (Psa. 90:4). In II Peter 3:8, we find the statement about
"one day being as a thousand years," etc. [By the way, please note the verse
does not say one day IS a thousand years with the Lord]. In verse 9 we find
a forgotten statement: "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as
some men count slackness;" The word "slack" means "slow" [Greek
"braduno"]. Peter's point is that if God sets a time for fulfillment, God
fulfills on time! He is not slow; God can tell time and knows how to keep his
promises on time! This verse asserts in no uncertain terms that God is a God
who keeps his promises!

But time is nothing only to God. When God communicates time to man, He
reasons with His creation in a way that man can understand Him. But in the
scripture, God spoke to MAN! The time statements about the kingdom's
establishment were made to MAN! The time statements in the Bible were
spoken to man to encourage or to warn man. If God did not mean TIME
when he used time words, what did he mean? Since man thinks in time when
"a long time" or "at hand" is used, would it not have been misleading on
God's part to say something was not going to happen for a long time when in
fact it was imminent? Conversely, would it not have been misleading for God
to say something was at hand when it was really not to happen for
centuries?

The question here is one of communication. Can God communicate with his
creation in an understandable way; or does God speak in purposely
ambiguous ways? Does the Lord hold out a carrot stick of imminent
blessings to his hurting creation while knowing all the time he is not really
going to bring the promises soon? Did God constantly threaten nations with
imminent judgment and not punish them for centuries? Where then is the
reality of the threat to the wicked? Does God's transcendence over time
prevent him from speaking to man in words that convey genuine nearness?

Here is a question to consider: if God is in the practice of saying something

is imminent when in reality it may not transpire for centuries, why is there
not one single Old Covenant prophecy of the kingdom that said it was "at
hand?" Daniel said the kingdom would be established in the days of the
Roman empire; he called it "the last days" (Dan.2:28). From Daniel's
perspective, it was several hundred years away. From God's perspective of
course, it was only a moment; but that is not the issue. God was speaking to
Daniel about things to happen in man's world--not in (the present that man
calls timeless eternity. This is why God did not cause Daniel to say the
kingdom was "near," "at hand," "right at the door," or coming "very, very
soon."

It was not until John the Baptist came that the message "the kingdom of
heaven is at hand" was preached; and the kingdom was established in the
very generation that heard John say it was at hand! In other words, God did
not allow his prophets to say the kingdom was at hand until it was REALLY
AT HAND! It would have been something less than honest if God had said
the kingdom was imminent when it was really hundreds of years away!

Consider the expectations of the real author of Revelation , Jesus Christ.

He tells John to expect the fulfillment of the prophecy soon (Revelation
1:1,3; 2:16; 3:11; 22:6,7,10,12,20).
In Revelation 1:1,3, right off the bat, John informed his readers, the seven
churches of Asia (verse 4), that the contents of this volume "must shortly
come to pass." Please note, that John did not write that some of the events,
or even most of the events must shortly take place. He wrote that all of
the events contained in Revelation "must shortly come to pass." Why?
Why must those things "shortly come to pass?" Because " the time (was) at
hand." At hand for whom? The seven churches of Asia, specifically, and to
the church of the first century in general. The time for what was at
hand? "The Revelation of Jesus Christ." Remember, as we saw above, this is
the main episode of Revelation.

In Revelation 22:6, John wrote that the Lord sent an angel to John "to
shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done." Here, at the
end of the book of Revelation, John recorded the exact same message that
he did in chapter 1. This again emphasizes that all of the events
contained in Revelation were about to take place in the first century —
not stretched throughout time, and certainly not for any future
generation.

In Revelation 22:10, the angel of the Lord said to John, " Seal not the
sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand ." Once more,
we have proof that the events of Revelation were about to take place in the
first century. However, another element was added to this warning. The
angel told John not to seal the Scroll. Why is this important? To answer
that, let's look at the book of Daniel.

After Daniel had received visions concerning his people (the nation of
Israel), he was told, "thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be
found written in the book" (12:1). Daniel is then told how they would be
rescued — by resurrection, some would be rewarded with "everlasting life"
and others with "everlasting contempt" (verse 2). But then, Daniel is told
something very peculiar. In verse 4, Daniel was told, " shut up the words,
and seal the book, even to the time of the end." Please note that this verse
says the "time of the end", and not "the end of time". There is a huge
difference between the end of time and the time of the end. Now, we must
ask "Whose time of the end?" Verse 1 told us that Daniel's visions
concerned the nation of Israel, not mankind in general.

Next, Daniel saw two angels talking about the fulfillment of all that he had
seen (verse 6). One asked the other, "How long shall it be to the end of
these wonders?" The answer was, "when he shall have accomplished to
scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished. "
(verse 7). But Daniel could not understand what they meant, so he asked
again, "When?" The angel answered "Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are
closed up and sealed till the time of the end." Now that we have looked at
this passage, how does it relate to Revelation 21?

Did you know that there is only one other place in the Bible where a sealed
book is referred to? Revelation, chapter 5. How Daniel relates to
Revelation is that Revelation is the opening of Daniel's sealed book!!
Remember, Daniel's visions were concerning the "time of the end" of
Israel, and Revelation is about God's judgment on Israel. They are one
and the same. The reason this has direct bearing on Revelation 21, is that
Daniel was told to seal his book concerning the end "for it pertains to many
days in the future" (Dan.8:26), but John was told not to seal his book
"because the time is at hand" (Revelation 22:10). The end of Old Covenant
Israel was at hand. All things written had to be fulfilled by the time
Jerusalem fell in AD 70 (see Luke 21:20-22). Therefore, since Revelation is
the opening of Daniel, then it must have been fulfilled by no later than the
summer of AD 70.

Our next time statement is found in Revelation 21:12. There, Jesus told
John, "And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every
man according as his work shall be." Notice that Jesus did not say that
"when I come, I will come quickly," He emphatically said that He was coming
"quickly." But He also said something else. He said that His reward was with
Him to give every man according to his works. Now some state that this has
not happened yet. However, we must let Scripture interpret Scripture, and
turn to Matthew 16:27-28 and Mark 8:38-9:1 and Luke 9:26-27.

Jesus said the exact same thing in these three verses that He did in
Revelation 21. In Revelation 21, He said He was coming and "he shall reward
every man according to his works." These are the exact same "comings" with
the exact same "rewards." But, Jesus also said in these three verses,
"There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see
the Son of man coming in his kingdom." Notice that Jesus tied His coming to
the lives of His disciples. He said that some of his listeners would not die
until He came. But to whom is He coming? And what will be their reward?
Jesus said that the "coming" would be to the first century generation of
Israel (Matthew 24:34, Mark 13:30, Luke 21:32). Daniel told us that the
"rewards" would be that some would be resurrected to "everlasting life"
and others to "everlasting contempt". Now, let's put these two passages
together. Jesus said He was coming and He was going to reward each
according to his works, and that some of the disciples wouldn't die until
they saw this take place. Therefore, since all of the disciples are dead,
Jesus must have returned and rewarded each according to his works.
Furthermore, in Revelation, He said the same thing, therefore it must be
fulfilled!

So Gentle reader,
What we have is not only a lesson on Revelation, But one on Quantum Physics
and time as you currently understand, I do hope you’ll set your clocks ahead
and join me in the “Present-the Now of God’s time”
If a person doesn't believe the first three verses of Revelation (i.e., the
near expectation of the events), neither will he believe the rest of the
book. For if a person is unwilling to accept the time constraints of the text,
the rest of the document can mean anything that the reader desires.

If the John was on Patmos under the reign of Nero, as the internal
evidence indicates, he wrote the book of Revelation about AD 68 or 69,
which was after the death of that emperor; but the gospels and epistles
some years later. One of the oddest facts about the New Testament is that
what on any showing would appear to be the single most datable and
climactic event of the period — the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 — is never
once mentioned as a passed fact.

Determining the authorship of the Apocalypse Part 21 Phase 2

Gentle Readers,
At this point you may be convinced that the Book of the Apocalypse
(Revelation) at least may have an early dating. So at this point we are going
in another direction briefly or as I like to say down another rabbit trail.
There is a method to my madness, which if you bare with me a wee longer all
with become clear. Who might the author of Revelation be? Could there be
more than one? Here we present for your edification what others have
written (because we all know once you write something down that makes it
right and its permanent !):
“ . . . from the beginning of the church’s history much speculation has been
rife about him. It was the almost universal belief of the ancient church
from the middle of the second century that the author was the apostle
John. Justin and Hippolytus at Rome, Tertullian in North Africa, Clement
and Origen of Alexandria, Irenaeus of Lyons, all spoke of this John as one
of the Lord’s apostles (or disciples). Modern scholarship, however, has
remained unconvinced, preferring to identify the John of Revelation rather
with John Mark, John the Elder, an otherwise unknown John, or a
pseudonymous writer claiming for his work the prestige attaching to the
name of the apostle.” (The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible, p. 60.)

“. . . it cannot be said that John the seer of Revelation has been identified
with any known John in the first century of the church’s life. There must
have been many Christians of this name in those early days, and there is no
internal proof that the church’s tradition identifying the seer with the
apostle of the same name is correct. We know the John of Revelation only
as the seer or prophet and shepherd that he claims to be.” (ibid.)

“. . . the author could have been one of several people having the common
name John (JOHN THE APOSTLE; JOHN THE BELOVED DISCIPLE;
JOHN THE DIVINE). (The Family Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 17, p. 3216,
Curtis Books, Inc., New York, 1972)
“Was St. John the apostle and evangelist the writer of the Revelation? The
evidence adduced in support of his being the author consists of (1) the
assertions of the author, and (2) historical tradition. (1) The author’s
description of himself in the 1st and 22d chapters is certainly equivalent to
an assertion that he is the apostle. He names himself simply John, without
prefix or addition. He is also described as a servant of Christ, one who had
borne testimony as an eye-witness of the word of God and the testimony of
Christ. He is in Patmos for the word of God and the testimony of Jesus
Christ. He is also a fellow sufferer with those whom he addresses, and the
authorized channel of the most direct and important communication that
was ever made to the Seven Churches of Asia, of which churches John the
apostle was at that time the spiritual governor and teacher. Lastly, the
writer was a fellow servant of angels and a brother of prophets. All these
marks are found united in the apostle John, and in him alone of all historical
persons. (2) A long series of writers testify to St. John's authorship.
Justin Martyr (cir. 150 A.D.), Eusebius, Irenaeus (A.D. 195), Clement of
Alexandria (about 200), Tertullian (207), Origen (233). All the foregoing
writers, testifying that the book came from an apostle, believed that it was
part of Holy Scripture. (Smith’s Bible Dictionary, pp. 562-563, Zondervan
Publishing House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1984.)
These quotes were given to me to use by a gentleman who holds what we call
the “orthodox position (or thinking) based on the quotes that you just read.
So if your satisfied with his explanation you can close your laptop or shut
your computer down and drop off to sleep, but . . . if your like me your not
going to settle with out more evidence We are after all on the trail of an
elusive person. Who is this John? And what is his relationship to Christ?
Could it be that simple “Its John the Apostle, and that settles it!” Is it the
principle of Occam's razor is also called the principle of parsimony. These
days it is usually interpreted to mean something like "the simpler the
explanation, the better" or "don't multiply hypotheses unnecessarily."

Well Gentle reader, that may be sufficient for some. But I want more. So . .
. Another viewpoint about the authorship of Revelation comes from the
early church fathers who were the first bishops. Leaders like Dionysius,
Origen believe that the book of Revelation was written by someone other
than John the apostle. There are theories that the authorship may belong
to a disciple of John's. It was tradition to attribute one's writing to that of
the teacher. If John had a disciple, that man could have written the book,
and said it was John. The Church fathers believe John the apostle, John
the Epistle, and the John of Revelation could be three different Johns. In
fact John was just as common a name in Biblical days and time of Christ as
it is today.

There have been, however, a good number of scholars over the past two
thousand years who have leaned heavily toward the late 50's or early 60's
C.E. for the composition of the Book of Revelation simply because the
historical indications within the book point more appropriately to that time.
And true enough, if John were recording historical events contemporary
with the writing of the book, then the composition must be dated to near
60 C.E. Let us look at some of the reasons for this.

Recall in previous chapters that the apostles, and many Jews and Gentiles,
were expecting the soon appearing of the Messianic kingdom on earth. The
critical date for the apostles appears to have been the Sabbatical Year of
62 to 63 C.E. Up to that time the apostle Paul was emphasizing the nearness
of the second advent, but by 63 or 64 C.E. he had adopted a completely
different attitude to the matter. The apostles Peter and John may have
waited until after the miraculous events in the spring of 66 C.E. concerning
the Temple before they decided for certain that Christ was not returning
in that generation, but whatever the case, the period before C.E.62 was
alive with the imminent expectation of the Kingdom of God on earth.

Confused? Well imagine the confusion of those who study Prophecy (for a
living). Trying to make things fit so they can be right. But Gentle reader,
sometimes the most direct route is not the right way to approach things. I
am reminded of the sign telling the western settlers going West “Choose
your ruts carefully, you’ll be in them for the next one hundred miles! ” So
with that in mind lets take a more circular route.

Lets go back to the Apostle Paul. You remember in part 9 or chapter 4

depending on where your reading this Paul’s statement I knew a man in
Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or
whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth) such an one caught up
to the third heaven. (2 Corinthians 12:1, 2 & 4). Compare [I was in the Spirit
on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet ,
(Revelation 1:10)]
It would seem that Paul was speaking of John the Baptist and not the
Apostle John. Written AD 57 -from Macedonia
Paul was exposed to a great danger in Proconsular Asia, i.e. at Ephesus (2
Cor. 1:8). This happened in Acts 19:23-41. Paul traveled from Troas after
staying there for some time and then made his voyage to Macedonia (Acts
20:1). Paul was in Macedonia at the time of the writing (2 Cor. 9:2). The
verb is in the present tense. He intended (2 Cor. 13:1) shortly to visit
Corinth. This was the course of his journey in Acts 20:2. And for those who
read seriously Paul’s experience was after his personal conversion and Paul
was not referring to himself for he goes on to say Of such an (other ) one
will I glory: yet of myself I will not glory, but (only ) in mine infirmities . (2
Corinthians 12:5) Written in the winter of A.D. 57. Above 14 years (14 years
ago ) before would make that about A.D. 43.

Paul said that he “knew a man” and this would be an inexplicable way to
speak of himself ( in the third person) The reason was that the Greek word
Paul used for “knew” is oida which means to know intuitively without effort
or maybe (an even better phrase would be ) “to understand about the life of
a man that was well known to all” Paul did not make an effort to know this
man or he would have used the Greek word, ginosko . It was without effort
after his conversion on the road to Damascus near the Qumran community
of the zealous, law keeping Ebyon/Covenant Jews (where the Dead Sea
Scrolls were discovered in 1947). Everyone in Qumran knew and talked
about the “Prophet”, John the Baptist. For it was understood that he was a
Nazarene above all Nazarenes that had lived among them and he, above all
else in Israel, received a revelation from God and prophesied of “He that
cometh.” These Ebyon/Covenant Christian/Jews followers of John the
Baptist, “The Prophet”. John introduced them to Jesus Christ as the “lamb
of God” (pictured by the sacrifice of Isaac) The Hebrew/Ebyon followers
of Christ believed that God adopted Jesus as His son at the baptism of
John when God said “ And there came a voice from heaven, saying, “ Thou
art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” (Mark 1:11)

Part 22

Will the real author please stand

Gentle Reader,
As we all know from reading the Book of Acts Chapter 15 that James
( whose real name was Jacob-the brother of Jesus ) and Peter were the
leaders of the Christ-following Ebyons [Note:”The Poor Ones” was a name
of the followers of James in the Jerusalem Church in the New Testament.
Paul claims the only condition James imposed upon him in his missions to the
gentiles was to remember the poor. He is reminding him to send money not
for any poor but for “The Poor”, the Nazarenes, who, after the defeated
uprising, had a lot of widows to support.] Origen classified the Ebionites as
those who believed in the virgin birth and those who rejected it. Both the
Jewish sabbath and the Christian Lord’s Day were holy to them, and they
expected the establishment of a messianic kingdom in Jerusalem. Eusebius
describes as Ebionites those who held the brother of Jesus, James the
Just, in special regard

These were the ones in Jerusalem and Antioch, who were followers of John
the Baptist were the first to be called “Christians” at Antioch.

And Barnabas went forth to Tarsus, to seek for Saul,

and having found him, he brought him to Antioch, and it came to pass that
they a whole year did assemble together in the assembly, and taught a
great multitude, the disciples also were divinely called first in Antioch
Christians.(Acts 11:25,26). Now we find in an old commentary by Adam Clark
this phrase and understanding I knew a man in Christ - I knew a Christian,
or a Christian man; for to such alone God now revealed himself, for vision
and prophecy had been shut up from the Jews.2Cor 12:2 Since Malachi 400
hundred years there had been no vision nor prophecy. And now there burst
a fresh vision not from Paul but from a Nazarene Prophet, John the
Baptist ! John has gone from being a prophet to “The Prophet” caught up
into the “Third Heaven”. This is where Paul came to know John, while he was
in Antioch, where the Ebyons (the poor) were taking care of the poor. And
Paul learned of John the Baptist there. John was the one who had pointed
out Jesus John 1:29 on the morrow John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and
saith, `Lo, the Lamb of God, who is taking away the sin of the world; It was
This John who had pointed the Qumran/Ebyons to Christ and had told them
to follow Him. This John had received a new revelation of “he that cometh”
recognized Jesus as the Christ This seems to have been after Christ had
been forty days in the wilderness, from where he now returned, and came
to attend on John's ministry; both to do honour to him, and that he might
be made manifest by him; and this was the day after John had bore such a
testimony concerning him, to the priests and Levites.

The former followers of John (Ebyon Christians) believed that one must be
baptized and become a Jew before they could become a “Christian” The
Church Fathers spoke of early Christian sects (Ebionaioi) which still held on
to some (if not all) Jewish beliefs. In Hebrew, “ebyon” means “poor”.
Irenaeus (AH 1:26:2), Origen (CC 2:1; DP 4:1:22) and Eusebius (HE 3:27) say
Ebionites were called poor because of their “poor and mean opinions
concerning Christ”. In fact, the name was used by the Essenes of
themselves, as the Scrolls show plainly. Aramaic quite commonly uses as
nouns adjectives like “poor”, “pious”, “holy”, “just”, “righteous”, “perfect”
and “meek”. The Qumran literature often speaks of the community as “The
Poor,” “The Meek” and “The Downtrodden” which, in the scrolls, seem to be
used interchangeably. The scrolls have hymns to “The Poor”. This name the
Essenes gave to themselves was a reaction to the cultural imperialism of
the Greeks—Hellenization—which had led to the displacement of the
original Persian Magi (“Hasidim”, The Holy Ones) from the temple, and the
substitution of Hellenized priests. The Hasids who remained faithful to the
original Persian traditions constantly opposed the new rulers in Jerusalem
(the Scoffers), and were persecuted by them. Thus they remained poor but
true to their traditional conception of Judaism.
“The Poor” are those who believed in the spiritual virtue of poverty, like
Christ himself! That is the meaning of the phrase “poor in spirit”, used both
by Christ and the Essene sectaries, and practised by the apostles and the
Essenes. Can it be coincidence that “The Poor Ones” was a name of the
followers of James in the Jerusalem Church (Gal 2:10 and Jas 2:3-5)? What
the Greeks translating the words of the evangelists did not know was that
the words they used when they said—“the poor”, “the holy” or “the
righteous” meant the Essenes and not the poor, holy or righteous in general.
Paul claims the only condition James imposed upon him in his missions to the
gentiles was to remember “the poor”. He is reminding him to send money not
for any poor but for “The Poor”, the Nazarenes, who, after the defeated
uprising, had a lot of widows to support (Acts 6:1-6). Though there must be
occasions in the New Testament when these words have been used in a
general sense, perhaps by a later editor, in their original use they refer to
the Essenes. Plainly, they were the orthodox Jewish Christians of Palestine
who continued as Jews to observe the Mosaic Law. Isolated from the bulk
of Christians from the time of the Jewish War they continued to practice
the apostolic life, like the Essenes and Jesus, unpolluted by gentile
adaptations until, the gentile Church Fathers declared them heretical. It
was the gentile Church that was “The Meek” was also one of the
community’s names for itself. Jesus said “Blessed are the meek for they
shall inherit the earth” (Mt 5:5) an exact expression of the community’s
beliefs about itself for, when God created His kingdom on earth, the elect
would inherit it. In one scroll fragment (4Q521), the pious are glorified on
the throne of the everlasting kingdom, and the righteous are promised
resurrection. Adonai (Lord—God or the messiah?) visits “the meek”, calls
the righteous by name, makes the blind see, raises up the downtrodden and
resurrects the dead, and his spirit hovers over “the meek” announcing to
them glad tidings. This astonishing little fragment alone ought to be
sufficient to prove the relationship of early Christianity with the Essenes…
this passage contains an exact verbal parallel with the passages in Matthew
and Luke for identifying the times of the messiah. It appears in the “Q”
source common to Matthew and Luke, thought to have been a pre-gospel
collection of worthy sayings. Here we have a precise verbal formula,
repeated in this fragment and in the source “Q”, showing some at least of
its material was pre-Christian—not merely pre-gospels—because it was
Essene. The early Christians, like the Essenes called “elect” or “saints”,
were expecting to rule over the gentiles and even judge angels (1 Cor 6:1-4).

These believers held that only “The Law”brought a person to God.

The leaders of the “Jerusalem Church” James and Peter in Antioch did not
regard themselves as founders of a new religion or for that matter
connected with any Gentile fellowships that appeared on the scene after
Paul’s teachings. They were and regarded themselves as Jews (from the
house of Judah) while the Gentiles were (Israelite foreigners). The Jews
were from the tribes of Judah, Benjamin and Levi. While the Gentile
believers that Paul was bringing into the Fellowship of Christ were from the
tribes of Israel: Gad, Ephraim, Naphtali, Manesseh, Reuben, Asher, Simeon,
Zebulun, Issachar. These were the two joining together of Jews and
Gentiles in Ephesians is the binding of the two twigs spoken of in the Old
Testament. It is the joining together of the twelve tribes. These are the
“Gentiles” that we read about throughout Paul’s writings, and who he was
sent to in the commission of Acts chapter 9 There are times when the
Scriptures address the total nations of the earth but most times in the
singular the Scripture is speaking about the race of 12 tribes called by the
southern tribes “goy” Israel. Goy (Hebrew: regular plural goyim ) is the
standard Hebrew biblical term for a "nation," including the "great nation" of
Israel. Use of the plural, "nations," to refer to non-Jews is found from "I
will cast out the nations before thee" (Exodus 34:24) and long before
Roman times it had also acquired the meaning of "gentile"

Now look at the second chapter of Ephesians verses 12-14 and see the
barrier between the two tribes and the ten coming together by the
preaching of Paul.

And we’ll leave there for now and pick up the author of Revelation next
time.

Part 23 .

As we pointed out before the leaders of the “Jerusalem church James,

(Jacob the brother of Jesus) and Peter (in Antioch) did not regard
themselves as founders of a new religion or connected with any Gentile
fellowships that appeared on the scene after Paul’s teachings. They
regarded themselves as Jews, who were differentiated from there fellow
Jews only by their belief in Jesus as Messiah. They held a confidence that
when the resurrected Jesus returned to earth, which in their expectations
would be very soon, God would perform through his agency astounding
miracles for his chosen people. It is not a well known fact in Christianity
today but miracle working in the first century was common place. There was
a man by the name of Apollonius of Tyana (a city south of Turkey) who was
in every way a miracle worker equal to Jesus. Apollonius of Tyana was a
first century AD sage who had a miraculous birth, gathered disciples,
taught wisdom, performed miracles, healed the sick, cast out demons, and
raised the dead. After he died he was worshiped as a God. You can read
about this unusual man [Philostratus, The Life of Apollonius of Tyana, 4.10
(217 AD), -- which you can find in: Conybeare, F. C. Philostratus I: The Life
of Apollonius of Tyana, Books I - V (Loeb Classical Library #16) (2000), pg.
389- 91.

So you can see that Jesus had certainly competition. The followers of Jesus
also expected that God would defeat the Romans by supernatural means and
rout them from the land of Israel. Then all Jews would except Jesus as the
“real Messiah” and would be united under his royal rule in a theocracy
governed by the prescription of the Torah of Moses, as interpreted by the
Oral Law, administered by the Pharisees. They did not envision any split
between the followers of Jesus and the main body of Jewish believers. For
they all observed the Laws of the Jewish nation, prayed the same prayers,
as their fellow Jews with the addition of certain prayers such as the “Lords
prayer” which was added to the normal service in the way that groups among
the Jews as the Hasidim have done without any sense of schism. What if
the Lord’s Prayer is neither a Jewish prayer for Jews nor yet a Christian
prayer for Christians? What if it is—as this study suggests—a prayer from
the heart of Judaism on the lips of Christianity for the conscience of the
world? What if it is—as this study suggests—a radical manifesto and a
hymn of hope for all humanity in language addressed to all the earth? The
Lord’s Prayer is, for me, both a revolutionary manifesto and a hymn of hope.

The movement at Jerusalem, known as “the Way” did not observe the
service known as “The Eucharist, or the Lords Table, Communion or any kind
of Mass that marked off what came to be known as Christianity as a
separate religion eventually. No Hebrew could ever bring himself to see
Jesus as God or a god. They had learned their lesson well in captivity. And
the Shema (the central statement of Jewish belief, the sentence "Hear, O
Israel: the Lord is your God; the Lord is One") was indelibly left on their
psyche. “ Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt
love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with
all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in
thine heart: And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and
shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest
by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou
shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets
between thine eyes. And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house,
and on thy gates. (Deuteronomy 6:4-9). To them this would be pagan.
However, Paul with new Revelation, new understanding of the Torah, new
insights, brought to the Nation, a different Jewish thought and presented
Jesus as divine.

The Ebyons were a large part of the uprisings and sealed their fate with
Rome and the Temple Priest in Jerusalem. They opposed the Herodians and
Sadducees that controlled the temple in Jerusalem. These Ebyon/Hebrew
followers first of the prophet and the “The Prophet” John, and finally
Jesus were called “Nazarenes and later called Essenes by those who
recorded their story as well as called Christians and talked much about the
Revelation of John.

Part 24

We have been considering the author of Revelation, and you don’t need to
explain to me that it is settled in stone that everyone agrees that John the
Apostle who was banished to Patmos, everyone except those of us who are
not willing to take someone’s declaration as settled . I have given you
evidence that first it was not the writer who was banished (if we allow
Scripture to speak for itself). But if you listen to some who have decided
that you should believe them rather than see for yourself well then . . . Yes
there was a John there but Nowhere does it say that he was banished! And
second while there was a John which John? John the Apostle? Was this the
John who had a prophetic vision of 2000 + years into the future? Or could
there have been another John, writing to those in the first century about
the things there were about to take place? We shall see.

Now, if your remember we said that Paul had a dust-up (commotion, quarrel,
or fight run in) with Peter and James (Jacob) about the Gentiles (remember
who they are) being circumcised, baptized and keeping the Law before being
accepted as a follower of Jesus.
Galatians 2:1-16
(1) Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas,
and took Titus with me also.
(2) And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel
which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of
reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain.
(3) But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be
circumcised:
(4) And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in
privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might
bring us into bondage:
(5) To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the
truth of the gospel might continue with you.
(6) But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it
maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person:) for they who
seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me:
(7) But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision
was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
(8) (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the
circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)
(9) And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived
the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right
hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the
circumcision.
(10) Only they would that we should remember the poor; the same which I
also was forward to do.
(11) But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face,
because he was to be blamed.
(12) For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the
Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself,
fearing them which were of the circumcision.
(13) And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that
Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.
(14) But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth
of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest
after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou
the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
(15) We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,
(16) Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the
faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might
be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by
the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

After Paul’s conflict with James and Peter about certain followers
pressuring Gentiles to become Hebrews before becoming what we now call
as Christian, they all agreed that Peter and James would minister to the
“Circumcision” under the “Law”and Paul to the “Uncircumcision” Grace was
the message to the Gentiles. Paul never called believers , followers of
Jesus "Christians” in any of his epistles or messages in the Acts of the
Apostles. While the “New Testament” followers were zealous of the Law
and emphasized baptism and works ( read the Didache or the teaching of
the Twelve Apostles).

If we look at Paul’s letters, it is not difficult to pull out what on the surface
appear to be directly opposing views, anti- and pro-Israel:
I. Anti-Israel:
• “All who rely on works of the law are under a curse” (Galatians 3:10).
• “No one is justified before God by the law” (Galatians 3:11).
• “For [some manuscripts add ‘in Christ Jesus’] neither circumcision counts
for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation is everything!”
(Galatians 6:15).
• “No human being will be justified in his [God’s] sight by works of the law,
sincethrough the law comes knowledge of sin” (Romans 3:20).
• “Israel, who pursued righteousness based on the law, did not succeed in
fulfilling that law” (Romans 9:31).
• “But their minds were hardened. Indeed, for to this day, when they read
the old covenant, that same veil is still there, because only through Christ is
it taken away. Yes, to this day, whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their
minds” (2 Corinthians 3:14–15).

II. Pro-Israel:
• “What is the advantage of the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision?
Much in every way” (Romans 3:1).
• “Do we not overthrow the Law by this notion of faith? By no means. On the
contrary, we uphold the Law” (Romans 3:31).
• “What shall we say? That the Law is sin? By no means” (Romans 7:7).
• “Thus the Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good”
(Romans 7:12).
• “To the Israelites belong the sonship, the glory, the covenants, the giving
of the Law, the Temple, and the promises. To them belong the patriarchs
and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ” (Romans 9:4).
• “Has God rejected his people? By no means” (Romans 11:1).
• “All Israel will be saved” (Romans 11:26).
• “Is the Law then opposed to the promises of God. Certainly not!”
(Galatians 3:21).
These two sets of quotations appear to contradict one another. But do
they? Was the apostle to the gentiles incapable of consistent thinking?
Some recent Paul scholars have made precisely this claim. The Finnish
exegete Heikki Räisänen, for example, has taken what I call a
“contradictionist” view of Paul’s letters, insisting that “Paul’s thought on the
law is full of…inconsistencies.”
Other scholars have sought to resolve the dilemma by supposing that the
problem was introduced by later editors. Thus the eminent Australian Bible
scholar J.C. O’Neill has stated: “If the choice lies between supposing that
Paul was confused and contradictory and supposing that his text has been
commented on and enlarged, I have no hesitation in choosing the second.”
And so O’Neill proceeds to eliminate many passages, arguing that they were
introduced into the text by later editors who profoundly misunderstood
him..

The salvation of all Jews at or immediately prior to the eschaton, presently

holds the majority. After the “fullness of the Gentiles” (11:25) has come in,
the Jews will finally be saved all at once, probably through a mass
conversion of all Jews to Christ, perhaps brought on by the jealousy
sparked by the Gentile mission, though there is some debate as to whether
“all Israel” means every individual Jew will be saved or idiomatically
represents ethnic Israel as a collective. The majority of scholars hold the
latter view. A minority advocate a larger, diachronic view of “all Israel”. It
is therefore clear that to solve this passage one must satisfactorily answer
three primary interpretive questions: (1) how Paul defines “all Israel,” (2)
what Paul means by “the fullness of the nations,” and (3) how the salvation
of “all Israel” is related to (..t..) the ingathering of “the fullness of the
nations.” In short, the essential question can be framed as follows:

What does the ingathering of “the fullness of the Gentiles” have to do with
the salvation of “all Israel”?

As Josephus informs us, the term (“Jew” or “Judean”) refers to a person

descended from the southern kingdom ofJudah, which is only a part of the
larger historical entity called Israel. Regardless of
whether it refers to “Judeans” or “Jews” living outside Judea, the term is
necessarily limited to descendants of the southern kingdom, which was
exiled to Babylon and then returned (or to proselytes and their
descendants, who are regarded as having become a part of this people). In
contrast, “Israel” is a polyvalent (often confusing) term, with several
distinct references in the Hebrew Bible/LXX [Septuagint ]: (1) the
patriarch Jacob/Israel; (2) “the nation composed of his descendants,
that is, all twelve tribes of ‘Israel,’ including Judah”; (3) the northern
kingdom, the ten tribes of the “house of Israel,” excluding the southern
kingdom, the “house of Judah”; and (4) the returnees from Judah after the
Babylonian Exile. To use a modern parallel, a Floridian would surely be called
an American when being distinguished from an Australian, but not all
Americans are Floridians. In the same manner, the term “Israel” may—and
often does—refer to Jews, though its meaning is not limited to just the
Jews. The addition of the quantifier “all” (as in Rom 11:26) helpfully narrows
the possibilities. In the O.T. the expression ‘all Israel’
relates exclusively to the tribal structure of the descendants of
Jacob/Israel,” while also consistently referring to the twelve tribes in
Jewish literature of the Second So, in a technical sense, “Israel”
necessarily includes Jews but is not limited to the Jews, while “all Israel”
more specifically refers to all twelve tribes as a whole.

The key question is whether first-century Jews (Paul in particular)

continued to make this distinction. The evidence points to an answer in the
affirmative. Josephus certainly upholds the distinction, using the terms
only in the first eleven books of the Antiquities—books dealing with the
preexilic and exilic periods—and nowhere else in the Josephan corpus., on
the other hand, occurs 1,190 times in the Josephan corpus—but only
twenty-seven times in the first ten books of the Antiquities. Once the
northern tribes are off the scene, Josephus restricts himself to more
precise terminology referring only to the southern tribes —he no longer
speaks of “Israel,” but only “the Jews.” But when all twelve tribes are in
play, Josephus clearly prefers the more comprehensive term “Israel.”
The Qumran community maintains similar distinctions. It is noteworthy that
the sect “generally refrained from simply calling [itself] ‘Israel.’” Indeed,
“the members seem to have been conscious of their status
as sectarians, chosen from out of Israel, and as being a forerunner of the
true Israel, which God would establish to fight the decisive war,”
identifying themselves as a faithful subset within Israel (e.g., “the remnant
of Israel,” “captives of Israel,” “house in Israel,” and “repentant of Israel”).
They likewise avoid calling themselves “Judah” or “Judahites

But notice as I wrote before that Paul never called believers those who
became or would become Jesus followers, “Christians”. Paul emphasizes the
idea of Grace and Mercy which abounded in the Hebrew Scripture. It was
as Paul considered the thoughts given to him on His Damascus Road
experience that he began to realize the importance of the Law guiding the
chosen of God toward Himself. We might say that Paul had an epiphany
[(From the Greek epiphaneia, "manifestation, striking appearance" is an
experience of sudden and striking realization. Epiphanies are relatively rare
occurrences and generally follow a process of significant thought about a
problem. Often they are triggered by a new and key piece of information,
but importantly, a depth of prior knowledge is required to allow the leap of
understanding].

Paul never gave up his Jewishness or the Law but expanded his
understanding of the ramifications more fully than anyone had ever
imagined. However it was the fundamentalists Ebyon Christians who called
Paul “The Liar.” Next time we’ll look at a few of the summaries of the
beliefs of the Ebonites.

Part 25

We have been looking like a sleuth for clues as to not only the dating of the
Book of Revelation but as a wee side trip can we determine who might have
actually written that book. Last time I wrote that the Ebonites called Paul
“The Liar” We are going to take a look at the some of the Ebonite beliefs
but first you need to know that one of the issues. which to those who want
everything wrapped up in a neat package will undoubtedly set your hair on
fire.

According to radical critic Hermann Detering, Simon Magus may be a

proxy for Paul of Tarsus, with Paul originally being detested by the church,
and the name changed when Paul was rehabilitated by virtue of forged
Epistles correcting the genuine ones.

THE EBIONITE LEGACY...THEIR WRITINGS

The testimony of the Ebionites has been preserved in two forms.

First, there are the summaries, already mentioned, of Ebionite beliefs

found in the writings of the Church authors Justin Martyr (second
century), Irenaeus, Hippolytus and Tertullian (end of the second century
and the first half of the third), Origen (middle of the third century), and
Epiphanius and Jerome (fourth century). These all confirm that the
Ebionites opposed Paul as a false apostle.

The second type of testimony is more indirect, depending on the detective

work of modern scholars, yet it is very convincing. Certain texts which have
been handed down from the ancient world and the early middle ages are
ostensibly not writings of the Ebionites, but of other religious groups; but
the painstaking analysis of scholars has shown that embedded in each of
these works is a stratum written by an Ebionite author, which has been
taken over and adapted by a non-Ebionite author. The two examples that
are most pertinent here (since they show how the Ebionites thought of
Paul) are the following.

The Pseudo-Clementine writings:

These writings were preserved as orthodox patristic works because they

were falsely attributed to the authorship of Pope Clement I, who was
popularly supposed to have been a disciple of Peter himself. In fact, the
core of these writings, as was pointed out by F. C. Baur in the nineteenth
century and as most scholars now agree (after an interim of dispute and
denigration of Baur's work), is Jewish Christian or Ebionite, stemming from
second-century Syria. This core shows a staunch adherence to the Torah,
and contains an impassioned attack on those who attributed anti-Torah
views to Peter. Paul is not mentioned by name, but he is strongly hinted at
as the supreme enemy under the disguise of "Simon Magus," against whom
Peter is represented as polemicizing. Peter's attack on this lightly disguised
Paul is on the grounds that he is a false prophet, that he has spread lies
about Peter and, most telling of all, that he knows nothing about the true
teachings of Jesus, since he never met him in the flesh and bases his ideas
of Jesus on delusive visions. That this "Simon Magus" is really Paul is now
accepted by scholars, despite many desperate attempts to resist this
conclusion made by critics of Baur who realized how profound would be the
consequences of such an admission. For it shows that Paul, far from being a
unanimously accepted pillar of the Church, like Peter, was a controversial
figure, whose role in the founding of Christianity was a subject of great
contention.

The Arabic manuscript discovered by Shlomo Pines.

Some interesting evidence of the views of the Jewish Christian community

of Syria at a later date, probably the fifth century, was discovered by the
Israeli scholar Shlomo Pines. While studying a tenth-century Arabic work
by "Abd al-Jabbar in a manuscript in Istanbul, he was able to prove that one
section of this work had actually been incorporated from a Jewish Christian
source. The standpoint of this incorporated section is that of the Ebionites:
belief in the continuing validity of the Torah, insistence on the human
status of Jesus as a prophet, and strong opposition to Paul as the falsifier
of Jesus' teachings. According to this source, Paul abandoned the
observance of the Torah mainly in order to obtain the backing of Rome and
achieve power and influence for himself. Paul is even held responsible for
the destruction of the Temple by the Romans, since his anti-Jewish
propaganda inflamed the Romans against the Jews. His Christianity, says
this source, was "Romanism; instead of converting Romans into Christians,
he converted Christians into Romans.
In general, the picture emerging from this text is of a Jewish Christian
community, in the fifth century, out of touch in many ways with its own
sources and barely managing to preserve an underground existence, yet still
clinging to elements of belief deriving from centuries earlier and, at certain
points, still linked to the earliest Jewish Christians of all, the Jerusalem
Nazarene community of James and Peter. The Ebionites did not survive for
the simple reason that they were persecuted out of existence

Part 26

Last time we challenged you to think outside the box for a moment to
consider that Simon Magus might have been Paul the Apostle. Simply
because the Ebionites called Paul a liar! Which if you care to look, many still
do today. Before we continue on as I feel Paul was instrumental in our study,
I want to clear up some misunderstanding about Paul.

If Israel’s Scriptures were the textual matrix within which Paul’s thought
took place and with which he wrestled, it is reasonable to ask if indeed he
had a coherent and consciously articulated hermeneutic. Paul was insistent
that his message stood in direct continuity with Scripture (which was the
reason, over and over, he defended his position as Apostle) and at the same
time that his gospel was radically new, a revelation that would demand a
reassessment of all that was past. One might ask how was this possible?
Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me;
but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus. Then after
three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him
fifteen days. (Galatians 1:17-18) As N. T. Wright tells us “We don’t know,
say most of the commentators, why Paul went to Arabia or what he did
there. We aren’t even sure which bit of “Arabia” he visited.

In what is, for Paul, an unusually long autobiographical section (Gal 1:11-
2:21), he describes the events leading up to and following from his dramatic
experience on the road to Damascus, including two visits to Jerusalem, his
confrontation with Peter at Antioch—
and his trip to Arabia. Whatever precise reasons one gives for this lengthy
account, it clearly has something to do with reinforcing the basic point he
enunciates in 1:11-12: he received his gospel message not from other human
sources (to whom, by implication, his hearers might appeal, over his head,
for a more accurate version) but rather by “a
revelation of Jesus Christ” (1:12).
It would lead us to at least entertain the idea that Paul was revising his
previous Jewish understanding based on “New” revelation.

Why Arabia? Some think it was a time of solitary meditation, in preparation

for the Gentile mission; others, that it was Paul’s first attempt at Gentile
evangelism. Where was “Arabia,” anyway, at that time? No really precise or
attractive answers have been forthcoming to these quite natural questions.
Most agree that the main point Paul is making in the passage is that he did
not go to Jerusalem. But the question of Arabia is still a puzzle. I wish to
propose a solution to it.

Paul indicates in 1:14 that he belonged, before his conversion, to the

tradition of “zeal for the law.” This zeal led him not just into zealous study
and prayer but into violent action. Zeal of this sort was part of a long
tradition within Judaism, looking back to particular scriptural and historical
models. Of these, the best known was Phinehas, whose brief moment of
glory appears in Num 25:7-13, when he intervened to kill a
Jewish man consorting with a Moabite woman. Phinehas remained as a model
for subsequent “zealous” activity, not least in the Maccabean period, when
the same issue (compromise with pagans and paganism) was perceived to be
at stake. In these developed traditions, the other figure who emerges
prominently is Elijah. The reason is again obvious: Elijah, too, acted
zealously, killing the prophets of Baal who were leading Israel into
paganism.5 So strong, indeed, is the connection between Phinehas and Elijah
in the popular consciousness of “zeal,” not least in the first century, that
the two figures are actually merged in several traditions, with Phinehas-like
attributes being credited to Elijah and vice versa. Elijah, too, was clearly a
man of “zeal.” “I have been very zealous for YHWH of Hosts,” he says
(LXX: And he saith, `I have been very zealous for Jehovah, God of Hosts;
for the sons of Israel have forsaken Thy covenant, Thine altars they have
thrown down, and Thy prophets they have slain by the sword, and I am left,
I, by myself, and they seek my life--to take it.' ) (1 Kgs 19:14). His zeal, of
course, had consisted precisely in slaying the prophets of Baal, as recounted
in the previous chapter. But he had been stopped in his tracks, confronted
by Ahab and Jezebel with a threat to his life (19:1-2); and he had run away
“to Horeb, the mount of God” (19:8), apparently to resign his prophetic
commission. There, in the famous story, he was met by earthquake, wind,
and fire, but YHWH was in none of them. Finally he heard “a still small
voice,” inquiring why he was there. His explanation, as we just saw:great
zeal, and now great disappointment. “I alone am left, and they seek my life.”

Back comes the answer:

Go, return on your way to the wilderness of Damascus; when you arrive, you
shall anoint Hazael as king over Aram. Also you shall anoint Jehu son of
Nimshi as king over Israel; and you shall anoint Elisha son of Shaphat of
Abel-meholah as prophet in your place. Whoever
escapes from the sword of Hazael, Jehu shall kill; and whoever escapes
from the sword of Jehu, Elisha shall kill. Yet I will leave seven thousand in
Israel, all the knees that have not bowed to Baal, and every mouth that has
not kissed him. (1 Kgs 19:15-18)

What has this to do with Galatians?

Saul of Saul of Tarsus, prior to his conversion, was a “zealous” Pharisee. As

I have suggested elsewhere, this means that he belonged to the Shammaite
school and was ready to take the law into his own hands and act even when
the official authorities were apparently negligent. One who had “advanced
beyond most of his contemporaries” in his study and knowledge of Jewish
law and lore would undoubtedly have been well aware of the Phinehas/EIijah
tradition; one who had come to the conclusion that “zeal” was the only
proper response to the crisis facing Israel would have been ready to follow
the Maccabees in imitating Phinehas/Elijah. This did not mean that Saul was
a member of something called “the Zealot party,” for at that time it is quite
likely that things were not so formalized. It does mean that he
sympathized, and acted in tune, with those who were choosing the route of
violence against Jews who were regarded as traitors. Someone in this
position would naturally choose certain appropriate styles of action, based
on scriptural and traditional models, in the belief that Israel’s God would
vindicate such action. That, it appears, is what Saul of Tarsus did.
Saul saw himself, I suggest, acting out the model of Phinehas and/or Elijah.

His zeal led him into physical violence against those whom he saw as the
heirs and successors of the compromised Jews of Numbers 25 and the Baal
worshipers of 1 Kings 18 (see Acts 22:3-5). He “was persecuting the church
with great violence and was trying to destroy it” (Gal. 1:13)
However, when stopped in his tracks by the revelation on the road to
Damascus he again did what Elijah did. He went off to Mount Sinai.11 The
word “Arabia” is very imprecise in Paul’s day, covering the enormous area to
the south and east of Palestine; but one thing we know for sure is that, for
Paul, “Arabia” was the location of Mount Sinai. Indeed, Gal 1:17, our present
passage, and 4:25, “for Sinai is a mountain in Arabia,” are the only two
occurrences of this Word in the whole New Testament.

And, in case this remarkable coincidence of themes is still unconvincing, we

may note that in the same passage Paul describes his call in “prophetic”
terms: “the God who set me apart from my mother’s womb . . .” (Gal 1:15; cf.
Isa 49:1; Jer 1:5). Even though the Hebrew scriptures are silent about
Elijah’s birth or call, this locates Paul firmly within the prophetic tradition
of which Elijah was one of the foremost members.
If I am correct, Saul certainly did not go to Arabia in order to evangelize.
He might have been doing what a puzzled zealous prophet might be
expected to do: going back to the source to resign his commission.
Alternatively, and perhaps preferably, he might be conceived of as doing
what a puzzled, newly commissioned prophet might do, complaining (like
Moses, Jeremiah, and others) that he is not able to undertake the work he
has been assigned.14 And whatever still, small voice he may have heard, it
was certainly not underwriting the land of zeal in which he had been
indulging up until then.
.
His zeal was now to be redirected (Gal 4:18; see also 2 Cor 11:2). He was to
become the herald of the new king. Saul was sent back from Arabia to be
the herald of the newly anointed Messiah, Jesus (1:16, 23). His was the
kingship that would challenge all pagan powers (4:1-11), that would create
the true community of the people of God.

Saul, having taken the Elijah of 1 Kings 18 as his role model in his
persecuting zeal, took the Elijah of 1 Kings 19 as his role model when
confronted, after his zealous triumph, with a totally new reality that made
him question his whole life and mission to
date. Paul saw Isa. 49:l-6 as setting out his apostolic agenda, Paul may here
be indicating that he had exchanged the role of Elijah-like zeal for the role
of the servant. Instead of inflicting the wrath of YHWH on rebellious
Jews, he would become the light of the nations

Paul faces the question: Granted the failure of Israel to believe in its
Messiah, is salvation now impossible for a Jew? Paul replies with an
indignant denial. He is, himself, the living proof to the contrary. But, though
he may sometimes feel totally alone, he has heard the Sinai oracle that
assures him this is not the case.

The Post Christian Paul’s verdict on the pre-Christian Saul is this: he had a
zeal for Israel’s God, but it was an ignorant zeal, seeking to establish a
covenant membership for Jews and Jews only, and to see that identity
marked out by the works of Torah. What Saul learned on the road to
Damascus, and perhaps on Sinai too as he reflected on Elijah’s
post-zeal humiliation, was that the true remnant was a remnant defined by
the divine call, not by works

So now you have some wee idea of why the Ebyon believers would have
branded Paul as “The Liar!”
What was important to these Ebyonites believers was first becoming a
Hebrew and being baptized. In the Jewish sacred writings Abraham was the
first person to be designated "a Hebrew" (Gen. 14:13). Abraham crossed
over the river Euphrates to come out of the land of his birth, ancient Iraq,
into the land of Canaan, present day Israel (Josh. 24:2-3). Hence, Abraham
lived up to his name. He was a real "Hebrew", ( the name [Hebrew] is
derived from the root ‘avar, meaning to pass beyond, over, or through.") one
who crossed the river. When Abraham crossed the river it was not just a
physical crossing. He left his culture, background, religion, and traditions to
enter into a new realm, a life with God and for God. And all that followed
Abraham became Eberites or Hebrews by that baptism through the water
and by passing through the water identified them as Eberites.

Notably, Simon Magus is sometimes described in apocryphal legends in

terms that would fit Paul, most significantly in the previously mentioned
Clementine Recognitions and Homilies. It is contended that the common
source of these documents may be as early as the 1st century, and must
have consisted in a polemic against Paul, emanating from the Jewish side of
Christianity. Paul being thus identified with Simon, it was argued that
Simon's visit to Rome had no other basis than Paul's presence there, and,
further, that the tradition of Peter's residence in Rome rests on the
assumed necessity of his resisting the arch-enemy of Judaism there as
elsewhere. Thus, the idea of Peter at Rome really originated with the
Ebionites, but it was afterwords taken up by the Catholic Church, and then
Paul was associated with Peter in opposition to Simon, who had originally
been himself.
Part 27

Here we need to take a wee step backward to move forward in our quest.
Terah, the father of Abraham was a priest in Babylon of the Nibiru
worshipers. Jews, Christains and Muslims don't pay that much attention to
the fact that Abraham came from Ur in ancient Sumeria and they don't
consider the fact that he was probably brought up and lived like any other
inhabitant of this very early, but sophisticated civilization. The fact that
Abraham's original name was Ab.Ram clearly suggests that he was a native
Sumerian and was brought up as a Sumerian, because Ab.Ram had a
definite meaning in the ancient Sumerian language, which is "Father's
Beloved". Also Abraham's family identified themselves as Ibri, which is the
origin of the word Hebrew. The word Ibri is usually translated as
"wanderers" or "those who crossed over", but in the ancient Sumerian
language it meant natives of IBR. IBR is also connected to the original
Sumerian name for the city of Nippur, which is NI.IB.RU, which is
translated to mean "The Crossing Place". Cuneiform tablets tell of Nibiru
being the “cross over” Planet where the “gods’ lived.

Drop the N from Nibiru and you have the origin of the word Hebrew Nibiru
was pronounced Ibiru and became Ebrew or Hebrew. With this as a
background let’s go back even further to the flood narrative with Noah and
compare that with the Babylonian account and if you can bare with me a bit
more all will become clear.

Noah's ark and the flood

Comparison of the Babylonian
and Noachian flood stories

Comparing the stories

The Chaldean Flood Tablets from the city of Ur in what is now Southern
Iraq contain a story that describes how the Bablylonian god Enlil had been
bothered by the incessant noise generated by humans. He convinced the
other gods to completely exterminate every person on Earth as well as land
animals and birds with a great flood. One of the gods, Ea, went against the
decision of the rest of the gods, and told a human, Ut-Napishtim, to build
an ark to save a few humans, and some animals.

Excerpt from the Epic of Gilgamesh as translated by N. K. Sandars:

"You know the city Shurrupak, it stands on the banks of the Euphrates.
That city grew old and the gods that were in it were old. There was Anu,
lord of the firmament {earth}, their father, and warrior Enlil their
counselor, Ninurta the helper, and Ennugi, watcher over canals; and with
them also was Ea. In those days the world teemed, the people multiplied,
the world bellowed like a wild bull, and the great god was aroused by the
clamor. Enlil heard the clamor and he said to the gods in council, 'The
uproar of mankind is intolerable and sleep is no longer possible by reason of
the babel {everyone talking at once}.' So the gods agreed to exterminate
mankind. Enlil did this, but Ea warned me in a dream. He whispered their
words to my house of reeds, “Reed-house, reed-house! Wall, O wall, hearken
reed-house, wall reflect; O man of Shurrupak, son of Ubara-Tutu; tear
down your house and build a boat, abandon possessions and look for life,
despise worldly goods and save your soul alive. Tear down your house, I say,
and build a boat. These are the measurements of the barque {boat} as you
shall build her: let her beam equal her length, let her deck be roofed like
the vault that covers the abyss; then take up into the boat the seed of all
living creatures."

The flood story from "The Epic of Galgamesh" and the Hebrew story in
Genesis are very similar with almost 20 major points in common. Their texts
are obviously linked in some way. Either:

Genesis was copied from an earlier Babylonian story, or

The Galgamesh myth was copied from an earlier Hebrew story in

Genesis, or

Both were copied from a common source that predates them both.

In both the Genesis and Gilgamesh stories:

The Genesis story describes how mankind had become obnoxious (sinful) to
God; they were hopelessly sinful and wicked. In the Babylonian story, they
were too numerous and noisy.
 The gods (or God) decided to send a worldwide flood. This would have
drowned all men, women, children, babies and infants, as well as eliminate all
of the land animals and birds.

God (or one of the gods) knew of one righteous man, Ut-Napishtim or Noah.

One of the gods (or God) ordered the hero to build a multi-story wooden
ark (called a chest or box in the original Hebrew).

The ark would be sealed with pitch.

The ark would have many internal compartments

It would have a single door

It would have at least one window.

The ark was built and loaded with the hero, a few other humans, and
samples from all species of other land animals.

A great rain covered the land with water.

The mountains were submerged under water.

The ark landed on a mountain in the Middle East.

The hero sent out birds at regular intervals to find if any dry land was in
the vicinity.

The first two birds returned to the ark. The third bird apparently found
dry land because it did not return.
 The hero and his family left the ark, ritually killed an animal, offered it as
a sacrifice.

God (or the gods in the Epic of Gilgamesh) smelled the roasted meat of the
sacrifice.

The hero was blessed.

The Babylonian gods seemed genuinely sorry for the genocide that they
had created. The God of Noah appears to have regretted his actions as
well, because he promised never to do it again.

There were a number of details in which the two stories differed:

Noah received his instructions directly from Yahweh; Ut-Napishtim

received them indirectly during a dream.

Noah's ark was 3 stories high and rectangular in shape. Two estimated
dimensions are 547 x 91 ft. and 450 x 75 ft. The Babylonian ark was 6
stories high and square.

Ut-Napishtim invited additional people on board: a pilot and some skilled

workmen.

Noah's ark landed on Mt. Ararat; Ut-Napishtim's at on Mt. Nisir; these

locations are both in the Middle East, and are located few hundred miles
apart.

In the Bible, some of the water emerged from beneath the oceans. The
rains from above lasted for 40 days and nights. A 40 day interval often
symbolized a period of judgment in the Hebrew Scriptures. In the
Babylonian account, the water came only in the form of rain, and lasted only
6 days.

Noah released a raven once and a dove twice; Ut-Napishtim released three
birds: a dove, swallow and raven.

Significance of the two stories To conservative Christians,

Genesis is inerrant: it is completely truthful and contained no error in its
original autograph form. God inspired Moses to write the book and
preserved him from including any errors. Thus the Noachian flood really
happened exactly as stated in Genesis. The similarities between the
Babylonian and Hebrew texts were probably caused by two factors:

Both were accounts of the same worldwide flood.

The Genesis account is absolutely true and was written down during the
Exodus of the Jewish people from Egypt. The Babylonian account was
written later; its author may have copied elements from the Hebrew story.

Frank Lorey, an author at the Institute for Creation Research, wrote: "The
Epic of Gilgamesh, then, contains the corrupted account as preserved and
embellished by peoples who did not follow the God of the Hebrews."

To liberal/progressive Christians,
The flood story in Genesis were mainly written by three unknown authors:
"J" used Yahweh as the name of God, and wrote circa 848 BCE to 722 BCE.

"P" a priest who lived much later, sometime before 587 BCE.

"R", an unknown redactor, who joined the writings of J and P and two other
writers together. He added only one sentence of his own to the flood story.

The story is a legend with spiritual significance. However there was no

actual worldwide flood. The story is a myth, derived largely from the earlier
Babylonian account. It was picked up by the ancient Israelites as an oral
tradition and later written down by "J" and "P."

The Babylonian tablets which contain the full story of the flood have been
dated circa 650 BCE. However, portions of the story have been found on
tablets from about 2000 BCE. A study of the language used in the tablets
indicates that the story originated much earlier than 2000 BCE. 3
Variations of the original story have been found translated into other
ancient languages.

Many conservative Christians believe that the flood occurred circa 2349
BCE, and that the account in Genesis was written by Moses circa 1450 BCE,
shortly before his death. Thus, the Babylonian text must be a corrupted
version based on a Paganized adaptation of the true story in Genesis.
Alternatively, it might be an independent attempt at describing the world-
wide flood.
Liberal theologians, noting the different names used to refer to God, and
the different writing styles throughout the Pentateuch (first 5 books of
the Hebrew Scriptures), believe that Genesis was assembled over a 4
century interval, circa 950 to 540 BCE by authors from a variety of Hebrew
traditions.

J and P seem to have based their stories on two original stories from
Mesopotamian sources, perhaps based on a massive series of floods in Ur
and surrounding areas circa 2800 BCE which would be perceived by the local
population as being very extensive; perhaps world wide. Alternatively, it may
have been based on the catastrophic flooding of the Black Sea.

So whether you’re a conservative or a progressive there is a version for you.

But what is overlooked in either of these versions is “hidden in plain sight”
the water! Crossing over or passing through!

Now we move forward to Abraham’s father Terah was the priest of the
Nibiru worshipers. And even Moses “crossed over or through the Red Sea
(Reed Sea) and those who were followers of Moses through the water were
identified as a nation of Hebrews. The closer to our subject John the
Baptizer calls the nation out of the wilderness, tells them to repent and
“cross over” or through the Jordan River to be identified as true Hebrews,
and Jesus joined the rite of initiation of baptized converts and became
identified with the followers of John as a true Hebrew.

The baptism or ancient “crossing over” or through the water practice was
important to the Ebyons and they could not relinquish the rite of baptism
through water. They believed that one Must be identified as a Hebrew
before they could become identified as a Christian and be a true “cross
over follower of Jesus

Part 28

What a shock eh?

That we could have a similar account in the Bible as in the Babylonian
Tradition of “The Epic of Gilgamesh” But we noted that the important issue
for the purposes of our study about the Book of Revelation, the date
written and the author was the “Water” and the crossing over” for those of
the Ebyon/Nazarenes who followed after John the Baptist. For them the
issue was far more simple as we might think. Baptism! The crossing over or
in Moses case crossing through the water! In the Mesopotamia festivals,
the “crossing over” or baptism identified the initiates as true worshipers of
Elohim of Gods. Just as baptism represented to this Ebyon/Nazarene sect
becoming a “true” Hebrew.

The ancient Hebrews were important to Paul as well as to the Ebyon

believers. So when we look at the epistle to the Romans for example we find
that Paul was ministering to the “the Jew first” But look at what he was tols
as recorded in the book of Acts But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for
he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and
kings, and the children of Israel: (Acts 9:15) Notice the order of the
desire of God and the reverse order that Paul went. It is brought out to
those who have eyes to “see” for a reason to call attention to the fact that
it was never in Gods plan to totally abandon the Jews.. And it the writings
of Paul the epistles of 1st and 2nd Thessalonians, Galatians, 1st and 2nd
Corinthians, Romans and Hebrews were for the most written to and for the
Hebrew followers of Christ.

While Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians were written to the Gentiles

( Remember who I wrote were the Gentiles, if not look back in your notes).
The purpose in writing to this group was to show how the cross and
Resurrection brought them near to the chosen people of God.

Paul seemed to be totally uninterested in the”historical “ Jesus (another

reason that some today think that Paul had started another “Religion”!
Jesus birth, and teachings were not the focus of Paul’s efforts. It was the
Parousia (the appearing of the Messiah) that was important, very important
to those first century believers and Paul letters dealt almost exclusively
and extensively with the subject of binging Gentiles to the soon appearing
Christ.

Paul was completely and engulfed in the death, entombment, resurrection

and the seating in the heavenlies and the soon appearing with His Holy
Ones. Lets look briefly at Paul’s writings to confirm this hypotheses
In his first epistle to the Thessalonians, Paul told them to expect the
speedy coming of Christ (in their lifetime within a generation-which in
those years would have been forty years) He also warned of the wrath of
God and with the appearance Of Christ and the events that would ensue.

In Paul’s second epistle to the Thessalonians, he speaks of the time of

judgment to the enemies of Christ (both Jew and Gentile) and the
deliverance to His people (followers). He speaks of the “apostasy”(is the
formal disaffiliation from or abandonment or renunciation of a religion by a
person.) There are at least four distinct images in Scripture of the concept
of apostasy. All connote an intentional defection from the faith." These
images are: Rebellion; Turning Away; Falling Away; Adultery and the “man
of Sin”

In the First epistle to the Corinthians Paul spoke of their attitude in

relation to the Parousia. The nearness of the approaching consummation and
“Day of the Lord” was something they must consider. He said that the end
of the age had already arrived (note: Not the end of the World!) There
were only two (2) ages in Jewish understanding the present age and the age
to come (the Messianic age) . He wrote of the events that would accompany
the Parousia and that the living saints would be changed at the Parousia. He
wrote of “the Last trump” and the watch word would be “Maran-atha”

And in Paul’s second epistle to the Corinthians he was anticipating the “End”
and 'the Day of the Lord' along with the Dead in Christ to be presented
along with the living at the Parousia. As well as expectation of Future
Blessedness at the Parousia.

In Galatians Paul speaks of 'The present Evil Age, or Aeon' and the two
Jerusalem’s- the Old and the New.

But in Romans, Paul addresses The Day of Wrath, Nearness of the Coming
Salvation and the Prospect of Speedy Deliverance.

In his first epistle to Timothy, Paul tells that there would be an apostasy in
the Last Days and it was already manifesting itself. In his second epistle to
Timothy that the Apostasy of the 'Last Days' was imminent.

In Titus Paul tells Titus that Anticipation of the Parousia could be

expected.

In Hebrews, he says the Last Days have already come and the great
consummation was near All of theses epistle written by Paul early not late in
the first century. All prior to 70 A.D.
I have deliberately left the prison epistles out to this study as I wish to
spend a wee bit more time on them , but never fear we will return and
include them in our ongoing study.

Next time we’ll take the other authors who chimed in the the expectation
of the Return of Christ.

Part 29
There were others in that first century that expected the soon return of
Jesus. Peter expected the coming of the Lord in his lifetime. James spoke
of the last days as being upon them because of the nearness of the
Parousia.
In Peter’s first epistle he instructs the scattered Judeans that their
salvation was ready to be revealed in the last day, with the approaching
revelation of Jesus Christ. He gives the relationship of the redemption of
Christ to the time before the flood. He declares the nearness of Judgment
and the end of all things, the nearness of Glory that was about to be
revealed in the day of salvation.

In Peter’s second epistle, he speaks of scoffers in these last days and the
approaching consummation. He encourages those that think the Parousia was
delayed.

In John’s first epistle, the idea was put forward that the world (Gr. Cosmos
or world of the Jews) was passing away and that it was the last hour
because the Antichrist was present.

THE WORLD PASSING AWAY: THE LAST HOUR COME.

1 John ii. 17, 18.---‘And the world passeth away, and the
lust thereof. . . . Little children, it is the last time’ [hour].
We have frequently in the course of this investigation had occasion to
remark how the New Testament writers speak of ‘the end’ as fast
approaching. We have also seen what that expression refers to. Not to the
close of human history, nor the final dissolution of the material creation;
but the close of the Jewish aeon or dispensation, and the abolition and
removal of the order of things instituted and ordained by divine wisdom
under that economy. This great consummation is often spoken of in language
which might seem to imply the total destruction of the visible creation.
Notably this is the case in the Second Epistle of St. Peter; and the same
might also be said of our Lord’s prophetic language in Matt. xxiv. 24.

THE ANTICHRIST COME, A PROOF OF ITS BEING THE LAST

HOUR.

1 John ii. 18.---‘And as ye have heard that [the] antichrist

cometh, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we
know it is the last hour’ [wra].
In this passage for the first time ‘the dreaded name’ of antichrist rises
before us. This fact of itself is sufficient to prove the comparatively late
date of the epistle. That which appears in the epistles of St. Paul as a
shadowy abstraction has now taken a concrete shape, and appears
embodied as a person,---‘the antichrist.’

It is certainly remarkable, considering the place which this name has filled
in theological and ecclesiastical literature, how very small a space it
occupies in the New Testament. Except in the epistles of St. John, the
name antichrist never occurs in the apostolic writings. But though the
name is absent, the thing is not unknown. St. John evidently speaks of ‘the
antichrist’ as an idea familiar to his readers,---a power whose coming was
anticipated, and whose presence was an indication that ‘the last hour’ had
come. ‘Ye have heard that the antichrist cometh; even now are there many
antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last hour.’
We expect, then, to find traces of this expectation---predictions of the
coming antichrist---in other parts of the New Testament. And we are not
disappointed. It is natural to look, in the first place, to our Lord’s
eschatological discourse on the Mount of Olives for some intimation of
this coming danger and the time of its appearance. We find notices in that
discourse of ‘false christs and false prophets’ (Matt. xxiv. 5, 11, 24), and we
are ready to conclude that these must mean the same evil power designated
by St. John the antichrist. The resemblance of the name favours this
supposition; and the period of their appearance,---on the eve of the final
catastrophe, seems to increase the probability almost to certainty.

There is, however, a formidable objection to this conclusion, viz. that the
false Christs and false prophets alluded to by our Lord seem to be mere
Jewish impostors, trading on the credulity of their ignorant dupes, or
fanatical enthusiasts, the spawn of that hot-bed of religious and political
frenzy which Jerusalem became in here last days. We find the actual men
vividly portrayed in the passages of Josephus, and we cannot recognize in
them the features of the antichrist as drawn by St. John. nnot recognise in
them the features of the antichrist as drawn by St. John. They were the
product of Judaism in its corruption.
There is much more that we can point to if you insist, but to do so would
take us too far away from where we want to go. So I suggest a question for
you consideration.

If this Parousia (arrival or presence of the expected Messiah ) was not to

come upon that first century generation. Then why were they all urgently
preaching its seriousness and adjusting to it as if the last hour of the day
was already at hand. Did Paul write to his readers and give a worthless hope
in a deluded belief that was for a generation thousands of years in the
future. If Paul was writing his letters as an instrument of the Holy Spirit
and saying the “The Lord IS at hand” should we not believe that it came to
pass? And how should we believe this ? As the Jews who expected a bodily
presence of Elijah The Jewish people of 2000 years ago were expecting to
see the Old Testament Prophet Elijah literally, physically descend from
heaven. They had been promised that this was going to happen by the Old
Testament Prophet Malachi. This prophecy reads:
"For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and... all that do
wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up,
saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch...
And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles
of your feet in the day that I shall do [this], saith the LORD of hosts....
Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great
and dreadful day of the LORD" -Malachi 4:1-5

The reason why the return of Elijah prophecy was so important is that it
became one of the primary reasons why the Jewish people rejected Jesus'
claim to be the Messiah. The Jewish religious leaders of two thousand years
ago knew that Elijah was going to return before the Christ was going to
come. So, they concluded, that Jesus or anyone else who claimed to be the
Messiah before Elijah visibly returned from heaven had to be an impostor.

The story of how the 'return of Elijah' prophecy was actually fulfilled can
be found in two separate places in the New Testament. It can also be found
in a 1900 year old, non-Biblical, Christian book that provides us with what is
probably the most graphic example illustrating the importance of this
prophecy.

Justin Martyr was a very prominent Christian at a time when Christianity

was still in its infancy. In "Eerdman's Handbook to the History of
Christianity" Justin Martyr is described as "the most notable of the second
century [Christian] apologists." (p. 108)

Justin Martyr lived approximately 100 AD. He wrote a book titled The
Dialogue with Trypho the Jew. This book is a record of a discussion
between Justin Martyr and Trypho- a Jewish rabbi. This "dialogue" begins
with Justin telling the rabbi that he believes that Jesus was the long
awaited Messiah. The following excerpt contains this rabbi's response.
It reads:

"When I (Justin) had said this, [the students who were with the rabbi]
laughed; but he smiling, says, 'I approve of your other remarks, and admire
the eagerness with which you study divine things; but it were better for you
abide in the philosophy of Plato..."
Before Justin became a Christian he was a follower of the Greek
philosophers and he still wore the characteristic flowing robes of a Roman
philosopher. The quote continues:

"...It were better for you abide in the philosophy of Plato rather than be
deceived by false words, and follow the opinions of people of no
reputation... for when you have forsaken God, and reposed confidence in
man, what safety still awaits you?"
Now, here's the important part:

"...But Christ- if he has indeed been born, and exists anywhere... has no
power until Elijah comes to anoint him, and make him manifest to all. And
you, having accepted a groundless report, invent a Christ for yourselves,
and for his sake are inconsiderately perishing." -Ante Nicene Fathers, Vol.
1, p. 198.

In this one short passage, this rabbi reveals exactly what the Jewish
religious leaders and the Jewish people of two thousand years ago were
expecting to see before the Messiah appeared. Trypho knew that Jesus
could not possibly have been the Messiah because he knew from the
unmistakable text of the 'return of Elijah' prophecy that anyone who
claimed to be the Christ before Elijah the Prophet had visibly returned
from heaven would have to be a false Prophet.

This prophecy was one of the primary reasons why the Jewish people
rejected Jesus' claims to be the Messiah. No one had seen Elijah return
from heaven yet... so how could Jesus possibly have been the Messiah?
Two thousand years ago, the Jewish people were expecting to see Elijah
literally, physically descend from heaven... possibly in the exact same
"chariot of fire" that he had used to ascend "into heaven." Furthermore,
they also expected that soon after Elijah's return, the Messiah was going
to appear. And they knew that when the Messiah came, he not only was
going to free them from Roman domination, but he also was going to exalt
Israel over all the nations of the earth. The Jewish people had good reason
to believe these things. These expectations are derived from explicit
statements made in the Bible. Jesus explains how these prophecies were
actually fulfilled.

According to the Old Testament account, about 850 BC Elijah the Prophet
ascended "into heaven." (see: II Kings 2) Then, about four hundred years
later (in about 450 BC) the Prophet Malachi promised that Elijah will return
from heaven before the Christ appears.

Malachi's prophecy reads:

"try me in this, says the Lord of Hosts: shall I not open for you the
floodgates of heaven, to pour down a blessing upon you without measure...
Lo, I will send you Elia (Elijah), the prophet before the day of the Lord
comes, the great and terrible day."-Malachi 3:10-24

The Jewish religious leaders of Jesus' day were well aware of the 'return
of Elijah' prophecy. At one time the rabbis had asked Jesus' disciples to
explain how Jesus could possibly have been the Messiah when it was obvious
that Elijah had not returned from heaven yet.

The Apostles couldn't answer this question, so they asked Jesus:

"Why do the Jewish leaders insist Elijah must return before the Messiah
comes?"
Jesus answered by first affirming that this question was valid and that this
prophecy indeed was true. He said: "They are right. Elijah must come and
set everything in order..."
But then, to everyone's surprise, Jesus explained:
"In fact, he [Elijah] already has come, but he wasn't recognized, and was
badly mistreated by many... Then the disciples realized he was speaking of
John the Baptist."-Matthew 17:10-13

Clearly, Jesus taught that this was a true prophecy. Jesus agreed that
Elijah indeed "must return before the Messiah comes." But then, to the
surprise to everyone there, Jesus claimed that John the Baptist was the
fulfillment of this prophecy. John the Baptist WAS Elijah!

And Paul too delivered the message given to him by God and not by men And
John the Baptist was the first to prophesy and the message of Paul, Peter,
James, John and Jude followed that revelation in the days that followed.

Next time we’ll look at the Author of Revelation and what he knew...

Part 30

The author of Revelation tells us that he was a prophet and that his words
were prophecy. Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the
sayings of the prophecy of this book. (Revelation 22:7)And he saith unto
me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at
hand. (Revelation 22:10) For I testify unto every man that heareth the
words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things,
God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any
man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall
take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and
from the things which are written in this book.
(Revelation 22:18-19) They were about the Lamb of God. And the prophet,
John the Baptist spoke of “one to come” and introduced Jesus to the Ebyon
Jews as the Lamb of God. This was the prophetic ministry of John the
Baptist. The long awaited Messiah had come to save and to judge.

Of all the places Yehohanan ben Zechariah (John son of Zechariah) could
have chosen to begin his ministry why this desolate part of the Jordan
River Valley? Wouldn't he have reached more people in the densely
populated region of the Galilee or in the holy city of Jerusalem? The
Jordan River flows from springs in the Golan Heights down through the Sea
of Galilee southward through the barren wilderness into the lowest point on
the entire face of the earth the Dead Sea (approximately 1,200 feet below
sea level). Why would anyone want to travel all that way from the lush
Galilee or even the 20 odd miles from Jerusalem through a desert
wilderness to ford the Jordan River near Jericho and submit to some young
priest who had separated himself from the Temple priesthood, and who was
wearing such unattractive apparel as a camel-hair tunic and living on a
meager diet of locusts and honey as he ritually purifies the covenant people
in the muddy Jordan River? Any modern real estate agent could tell John
that it is a question of location, location, location, for any such an
adventure. Actually that is exactly true in this case....location is the answer
to the question "Why did the people come?" It was all about "location" and
the way this young priest dressed in a camel hair tunic with a leather belt.

For the Jews and Israelites of the Roman provinces of Judea and the
Galilee the location of the ritual baptism and the attire of the priest would
have spoken volumes symbolically. This location was the exactly where
these people expected God to do great things:
This was the place where the 9th century BC prophet Elisha cured Naaman,
the servant of the King of Syria (2 Kings 5:1-14), and This was where a
young Elisha saw his master, the prophet Elijah, assumed into heaven in a
fiery chariot (2 Kings 2:1-10).

But most important, for these 1st century Jews and Israelites oppressed
by the Roman Empire, this site would recall a period in their history when
their people were freed from oppression and were given sanctuary and
freedom in a new land' the Promised Land.

The history of the children of Israel is why "location" is everything! This is

the location of the "place of the crossing" (Beth Abarra in Hebrew) where
God's holy nation crossed over the Jordan River into the land God had
promised them. As God's holy prophet, and as a legitimate descendant of
Aaron, John had called the people out into the wilderness to be purified
with a baptism of repentance and afterward to re-enter their land
[Matthew 3:11; Luke 3:3; Acts 19:4]. For the people this action of
symbolically reenacting the Exodus experience signaled a new beginning with
hopes for freedom from their current oppressors' Romans! No wonder the
people came in huge crowds to this desolate site! All they needed now was
another "Joshua" or "Yehoshua" to complete the prophetic picture!

Note: at this time the leadership of the priests in the Temple in Jerusalem
was not through the direct descendants of Zadok in the line of Aaron,
brother of Moses, the first High Priest. King David had designated Aaron's
descendants "the sons of Zadok" as the legitimate line to succeed to the
Aaronic priesthood. The last legitimate high priest of this line, Onias III,
was assassinated in 170BC. Later when the Maccabees, a priestly family
(not from Zadok), defeated the Greek Seleucid Empire that had controlled
their country as well as the appointment of the High Priest, they [the
Maccabees] usurped the office. In protest, a community was established
near the Dead Sea. In their sectarian writings they refer to themselves as
"the sons of Zadok" and they refer to the Jerusalem priesthood as "the
wicked priests." It is this community that archaeologists call Qumran, and
it is in caves near this settlement that the Dead Sea Scrolls were
discovered. The Dead Sea Scrolls comprise a library of what in the final
count will probably be 1,000 volumes of scrolls, containing every book of the
Old Testament [except Esther], Bible commentaries, non-canonical texts,
the sectarian writings of the community as well as several cryptic [coded]
documents and a treasure map written on almost pure copper.. These books
date from 250BC to 68AD when the Romans destroyed the site. The
buildings of Qumran are within site of where John was baptizing the people.
There were also other prophecies that would have increased the symbolic
significance of John's baptismal site like the prophecy of Isaiah 40:3-5,
&10-11: A voice cries, 'Prepare in the desert a way for Yahweh. Make a
straight highway for our God across the wastelands [deserts]. Let every
valley be filled in, every mountain and hill be leveled, every cliff become a
plateau, every escarpment a plain; then the glory of Yahweh will be revealed
and all humanity will see it together, for the mouth of Yahweh has
spoken.'.....(10-11) Here is Lord Yahweh coming with power, his arm
maintains his authority, his reward is with him and his prize precedes him.
He is like a shepherd feeding his flock, gathering lambs in his arms, holding
them against his breast and leading to their rest the mother ewes.

In 63BC the Roman Empire had conquered and absorbed Judah, establishing
the Roman Province of Syria-Judea. The Romans allowed the Judeans to
administer the civil law and to worship their God in the Jerusalem Temple,
provided they made a daily sacrifice to the Roman emperor, but the Jews
and Israelites of the 1st century AD desperately longed to be liberated
from Roman oppression as their ancestors had been liberated from Egyptian
oppression and to be intimately reunited with Yahweh as Isaiah had
prophesied. And it is this very passage from Isaiah that John the Baptist
claimed was his prophetic mission: He claimed to be "the voice crying in the
wilderness" (Matthew 3:3; John 1:23). It is interesting that the Qumran
[Dead Sea Scrolls] community chose this text as their reason for
establishing their community in the desert wilderness near the Dead Sea.

Note: every Jew, a descendant of the patriarch Judah or a citizen of the

kingdom of Judah, was an Israelite, but not every Israelite was a Jew. An
Israelite was a member of one of the 12 tribes of the children of Israel.
The Galileans had been part of the Northern Kingdom of Israel and were
for the most part, Israelites. Perhaps this is why St. John, a Galilean
Israelite is so critical of the Jews of Judea in his Gospel. Notice in John
1:47 that Jesus calls Nathaniel, a Galilean from Bethesda, an Israelite and
not a Jew.
There is another passage that would also strike a longing cord in 1st century
AD Jews and Israelites. It was another unfulfilled prophecy and it came
from the prophet Hosea. The Assyrians had destroyed the Northern
Kingdom of Israel in the 8th century BC, and the 10 northern tribes had
been disbursed into the gentile world. Only a faithful remnant of those 10
lost tribes of Israel had returned and settled in the Galilee. Then, 135
years later, the Babylonians destroyed the Southern Kingdom of Judah and
the Temple of Solomon, and the people were taken into exile. They had
been allowed to return 70 years later to occupy the land and to rebuild
their Temple, but the Holy of Holies was an empty room. No sacred "Ark of
the Covenant" graced that room and God's presence did not fill and indwell
the Temple as He had filled both the desert Tabernacle and the Temple of
Solomon. There was a sense among the people of an imperfect restoration.
But the prophets Ezekiel and Hosea had promised full restoration. God's
prophet, Ezekiel, promised the re-uniting of Israel with Judah and the
prophet Hosea promised that God would forgive His bride Israel for her
unfaithfulness and take her back. God's people of the 1st century AD were
looking for the time when these great prophesies would be fulfilled!
Now consider these verses in light of John the Baptist as the author of
the Apocalypse. Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the
sayings of the prophecy of this book. And I John saw these things, and
heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before
the feet of the angel which shewed me these things.
(Revelation 22:7-8)Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not: for I am thy
fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep
the sayings of this book: worship God. And he saith unto me, Seal not the
sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand. (Revelation
22:9-10)
And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man
according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the
end, the first and the last. (Revelation 22:12-13)
I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify these things to you in the
assemblies. I am the root and offspring of David, the bright and morning
star. (Revelation 22:16)
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of
this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him
the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away
from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part
out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which
are written in this book. (Revelation 22:18-19)

It was Jesus speaking to the prophet John (not the apostle John) but in
fact John the Baptist!
Think on theses things and we’ll take up more later.

Part 31

The fifty key documents discovered near Qumran were exclusively

messianic, visionary and mystical even Kabbalistic in content and imagery.
And the Book of Revelation fits within the writings of the Baptist’s
community at Qumran that eventually became followers of Jesus.

The Damascus Document speaks . . . of a [Teacher of Righteousness] And

according to Michael O. Wise was the "first messiah", a figure predating
Jesus by roughly 100 years. This figure - whom Wise believes was named
Judah - rose to prominence during the reign of Alexander Jannaeus, and
had been a priest, and confidant to the king. However, he became
dissatisfied with the religious sects in Jerusalem, and in reaction, founded a
"crisis cult". While amassing a following, the Teacher (and his followers)
claimed he was the fulfillment of various Biblical prophecies, with an
emphasis on those found in Isaiah. The Teacher was eventually killed by the
religious leadership in Jerusalem, and his followers hailed him as messianic
figure who had been exalted to the presence of God's throne. They then
anticipated that the Teacher would return to judge the wicked and lead the
righteous into a golden age, and that it would take place within the next
forty years. Wise explains that dating of manuscript copies among the Dead
Sea Scrolls shows that the Teacher's postmortem following drastically
increased in size over several years, but that when the predicted time
frame failed to live up to expectations, his following dissipated rapidly.

4Q521 or the 4QMessianic Apocalypse is one of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

The text begins:

[for the heav]ens and the earth will listen to his Messiah, [and all] that is
in them will not turn away from the holy precepts. Be encouraged, you who
are seeking the Lord in his service! Will you not, perhaps, encounter the
Lord in it, all those who hope in their heart? For the Lord will observe the
devout, and call the just by name, .

The subject of the text is eschatological and makes connection the healing
ministry of the Messiah. 4Q521 may be related to other apocalyptic end-
time texts, 4QSecond Ezekiel 4QApocryphon of Daniel, and has been
studied in relation to Gospel of Luke's Messianic Magnificat and Benedictus
and especially striking is the comparison with Luke 7:22 about raising the
dead.

The Damascus Document found at the end of the last century in the Cairo
Genizah [Note:The Cairo Geniza is a collection of some 300,000 Jewish
manuscript fragments that were found in the geniza or storeroom of the
Ben Ezra Synagogue in Fustat or Old Cairo, Egypt. These manuscripts
outline a 1,000-year continuum (870 CE to 19th century) of Jewish Middle-
Eastern and North African history and comprise the largest and most
diverse collection of medieval manuscripts in the world. The Genizah texts
are written in various languages especially Hebrew, Arabic and Aramaic
mainly on vellum and paper, but also on papyrus and cloth. In addition to
containing Jewish religious texts such as Biblical, Talmudic and later
Rabbinic works (some in the original hands of the authors)]. Contained the
‘Community Rule’ from “Cave One” and was about a single Messiah that most
Hebrew Believers found familiar to the Gospel preached by the disciples in
the first century. These same teachings were characteristic of the
Baptist’s followers, the Qumran community.

Paul was on the Damascus road intent on killing the Ebyon Hebrew followers
when according to his own testimony he was struck down and converted.
This happened on the road leading toward the Qumran community and not
the Damascus that lay north of Jerusalem. Paul was engaging believing ones
thinking he was doing services to G_d and the Roman influenced Sadducees.
Paul had heard about their righteous teacher and Prophet, John who had
received the revelation from G_d of “He that cometh” and had announced
publicly that “the time was at hand”

We’ll take up the Authorship again next ...

Part 32

The Author of the Book of Revelation

We have noted that the book of Revelation was a prophecy ( 22:7, 10, 18,
19) And the author of Revelation testified that he was a Prophet and his
words were prophecy. He wrote about the Lamb of God. The prophet John
the Baptist spoke of “one to come ” and introduced the bridegroom (Jesus
Christ ) to the Bride (Israel) and to the Ebyon Jews as the One who was
the coming Lamb of God. This was the prophetic ministry of John the
Baptist. The one who the Apostle Paul wrote about I knew a man in Christ
above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether
out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the
third heaven. And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the
body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) How that he was caught up into paradise,
and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter . (2
Corinthians 12:2-4) The long awaited Messiah had come to judge and save.

Next consider that the author of the book of Revelation was well
acquainted with the Priesthood. John the Baptist was from a priestly family.
John’s parents were Zechariah and Elizabeth, an elderly couple, both of
priestly descent and hitherto childless. Zechariah belonged to the priestly
‘course’ or ‘division’ of Abijah—one of 24 courses which served in the
Temple, each for one week at a time, twice a year. One
day when Zechariah was on duty and the lot had fallen to him to make the
incense-offering in the Holy Place, within the Temple and close to the Holy
of Holies, the angel Gabriel appeared to him.

Gabriel announced that Elizabeth would bear a son, whose name would be
John (Johanan, ‘Yahweh has shown favour’). John would drink no wine or
beer, but be filled with holy Spirit. He was to play the role of Elijah in the
prophesy of Malachi, the words of which are echoed on the lips of Gabriel:
“He will turn many of the people of Israel to the Lord their
God. With the spirit and power of Elijah he will go before him, to turn the
hearts of parents
to their children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the righteous, to
make ready a people prepared for the Lord.” (Luke 1:16-17, cf .Mal.3:1, 4:5-
6). When Zechariah asks for a sign that all this is true, he is given a
punitive sign: he is struck dumb until the child is born.

John the Baptist knew well the activities and office of a priest. He would
have been well acquainted with the furniture in the Temple and could write
about the alter, candlestick and the other objects in the Holy Place. The
author and the scribes of the book of the Apocalypse knew about all of the
Temple furniture. This was the John the Baptist group that took his
revelations and published the corpus later in a scroll for future generation
to read.

Note: this is the only John (out of the five recorded) that fits the identity
and certainty of being “the Prophet”! The only one that had knowledge of
both the priesthood and the Temple. On the other had those who hold the
Apostle John was the author neglect to take into consideration that the
disciples that were the sons of Zebedee (James and John) were from
Galilee and rich fishermen but were uneducated. So we may hypothesize
that the author of the Apocalypse and the gospel of John, could not have
been the disciple, brother of James, son of Zebedee

Who wrote John’s Gospel? James Charlesworth says, “The apostle Thomas.”
Ben Witherington believes it was Lazarus. And Esther de Boer contends the
author of John’s Gospel was Mary Magdalene! Many others believe the
author was in fact a committee of unknown authors, editors, and redactors
—the Johannine community. The traditional view of the Church has been
that this is the “Gospel according to John,” John the apostle, that is, as in
John the son of Zebedee. How can reputable scholars dealing with the same
evidence come to such drastically different conclusions? And where does
the evidence really point?

In several publications, I have surveyed the external and internal evidence

with regard to Johannine authorship. I have documented that the Church,
from the second century until around 1790, has universally held that the
apostle John wrote the Gospel that bears his name. When the apostolic
authorship of John’s Gospel was questioned, and the tide turned against
Johannine authorship, this occurred not because the evidence supported a
different outcome, but because in the wake of the Enlightenment scholars
reacted against traditional ecclesiastical dogma, and Johannine authorship
became one of the many casualties of critical scholarship.

One important internal datum from the Gospel is that “the disciple Jesus
loved” (i.e. the author of the Gospel; compare John 21:24 with 21:20–23) is
consistently paired with the apostle Peter (see John 13:23–24; 18:15–16;
20:2–9; 21:1–8, 15–23). This clearly points to the apostle John, as it is this
disciple who is consistently paired with Peter elsewhere in the New
Testament (cf. Luke 5:8–10; 22:8; Acts 1:13; 3–4; 8:14–25; Gal. 2:9). Also,
note that John the Baptist, who in the other Gospels is called “John the
Baptist” or “the Baptist” or “Baptizer,” is called simply “John” in this Gospel
—which is possible because the apostle John remains unnamed.
Now Witherington (BAR 32/2 [2006]: 24) believes the author of John’s
Gospel cannot be John the son of Zebedee because the sons of Zebedee
are mentioned in John 21:2 (and Bauckham says the same). I would respond
that, in fact, this reference considerably narrows the pool of candidates
for “beloved disciple,” who is mentioned later in the same narrative (John
21:7) and hence must be one of the 7 disciples referred to in John 21:2 but
was obviously not Simon Peter, Thomas, or Nathaniel, so that he must have
been either one of the sons of Zebedee (but not James who was martyred
early) or one of the two other disciples not mentioned by name.

As I have suggested in a past study, that in could have been “disciple whom
Jesus loved” could have been understood as an expression of authorial
modesty, similar to the word “I suppose” in the last verse of the Gospel
(John 21:25). This, as well as the author’s practice of talking about himself
in the third person singular or first person plural, is in keeping with first-
century historiographical practice. There is therefore reason to overturn
the long-standing belief, held by the Church through most of its history,
that the author of John’s Gospel was the apostle John, the son of Zebedee.
But I will disagree! And here is why. The two authors of the Gospel of John
were first an unnamed believer or follower of John and “the disciple whom
Jesus loved" who was in fact “Lazarus” the beloved disciple.

After much research on the first century life in Judea, and several
discussions with leading scholars which brought to light facts concerning
John the Baptist as the actual author of the book of Revelation.

It is more than conceivable that The Prophet John the Baptizer was part
of the Qumran community from an early age because the Qumran people
had priestly connections, plus an interest in priestly matters and a priestly
Messiah (1QS 5.2)

The first of at least five I will give you here and the other in a ensuing
followup so you can check me out.
1) The Baptist had priestly connections because his father was a priest and
his parents may well have passed away when he was quite young
And they had no child, because that Elisabeth was barren, and they both
were now well stricken in years.(Luke 1:7), sterility and old age both met in
the person of Elisabeth, to render the birth of a son (humanly speaking)
impossible.

It is apparent in Jewish history that the Qumran community frequently

adopted orphans. (See Josephus J.W. 2.120) Essene Monastic Rules
120 Although (the Essenes) are Jews by birth, they love one another even
more than the others. They avoid pleasures as a vice and hold that virtue is
to overcome one's passions and not be subject to them. Marriage is
disdained by them. But they adopt the children of others while still young,
leading them like kin through their studies and impressing them with their
customs. Check it out and next time I give other reasons why I feel it was
John the Baptizer who actually wrote The Book of Revelation.

For further study see the following writings by Dr. Köstenberger:

“Introduction to John’s Gospel” and “Early Doubts of the Apostolic
Authorship of the Fourth Gospel in the History of Modern Biblical
Criticism,” Chapters 1 and 2 in Studies in John and Gender; Chapter 1 in
Encountering John; John (BECNT), pp. 6–8; and “ ‘I Suppose’ (oimai): The
Conclusion of John’s Gospel in Its Literary and Historical Context,” in The
New Testament in Its First Century Setting (ed. P. J. Williams et al.;
Eerdmans, 2004), 72–88.

Part 33

Well now, since I have given away who I think wrote the book of Revelation
lets see if I can make a convincing case for you scholars and amateur
sleuths as to my reasons for believing John the Baptist might have been the
author (or at least told the prophecy to his followers , who subsequently
wrote down John’s words.
First, we said that the author of the book of Revelation was well
acquainted with the Priesthood.

Secondly, the location of the Baptist’s ministry suggests a connection with

the Qumran community.

Third, The Gospel tradition introduces John the Baptist as using Isaiah
40:3 The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of
the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God .
(Isaiah 40:3) As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger
before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.
(Mark 1:2) as a text that was very important at Qumran (1QS 8.14).
Note: The prophet, therefore, represents himself as hearing the voice of a
herald, or a forerunner in the pathless waste, giving direction that a way
should be made for the return of the people. The whole scene is
represented as a march, or return of Yahweh at the head of his people to
the land of Judea. The idea is taken from the practice of Eastern
monarchs, who whenever they entered on a journey or an expedition,
especially through a barren and unfrequented or inhospitable country, sent
harbingers or heralds before them to prepare the way. The Latins call
stratores. Ipse (Johannes Baptista) se stratorem vocat Messiae, cujus
esset alta et elata voce homines in desertis locis habitantes ad itinera et
vias Regi mox venturo sternendas et reficiendas hortari. - Mosheim,
Instituta, Majora, p. 96. “He (John the Baptist) calls himself the pioneer of
the Messiah, whose business it was with a loud voice to call upon the people
dwelling in the deserts to level and prepare the roads by which the King was
about to march.”

Fourth, John the Baptists disciplined diet and apparent penitent behavior
is analogous with the Qumran culture. We also note that the Damascus Rule
12.13-14 in fact specifies how to eat honey and locusts.

Fifth, John’s public water rite has similarities to Qumran ablution rites.
Ablution is common to most ancient religions. Shintoists, Buddhists, and
Hindus all recognize ablution as part of their ritual practice and there is
ample evidence concerning its role in ancient Egypt and Greece (Herodotus,
2:37; Hesiod, Opera et Dies, 722). Most ancient peoples held doctrines
about ritual impurity and ablution was the most common method of
purification. In varying forms ablution is important to Christianity and
Islam as well; this is hardly surprising since they are both post-Judaic
religions. In Jewish history there have been several sects that have laid
great stress on the importance of ablution. The Essenes (Jos., Wars, 2:129,
149, 150) and the Qumran community (Zadokite Document, 10:10 ff.; 11:18
ff. and other DSS texts) both insisted on frequent ablutions as did the
Hemerobaptists mentioned by the Church Fathers. The tovelei shaharit
("morning bathers") mentioned in Tosefta Yadayim 2:20 perhaps may be
identified with the latter but more likely were an extreme group within the
general Pharisaic tradition (Ber. 22a; Rashi, ad loc.).

Sixth, John’s eschatological orientation and beliefs that judgments of God

would soon fall upon Israel itself with the exception of those who would
repent, coincide perfectly with the message of the Qumran community

One popular narrative among the Nazzarenes was of Elisha’s miraculous sign
of the tale of an ax-head that was lost in a river. Elisha caused the metal.
Ax head to rise to the surface (2 Kings 6:6). Perhaps a minor miracle but
one that pointed to God’s power. The Qumran community held Elisha in high
esteem among the Prophets of their past. And coupled with John’s belief
that the religious leadership of Israel was hopelessly corrupt struck a cord
with the attitudes at Qumran. So much so that when the Baptist used the
narrative of the ax head to prophecy that God’s judgements was already
laid at the root of the tree, for the end was near. And now also the axe is
laid unto the root of the trees: every tree therefore which bringeth not
forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.(Luke 3:9). John the
Baptist was the last of the prophets and the author of the Book of
Revelation which takes us back to the date of Revelation would have been a
early date.
John the Baptist had no thought of beginning a new off shoot of Judaism,
nor did Jesus. The disciples were not cognizant that they were starting
something radically new. In fact we have a startling lack of any evidence
that a new religion was being brought into play. Pentecost was not the
beginning of Christianity. It was merely (if I can use that phrase) an
indication that the gift of prophecy was being renewed. This is what was
expected to happen in what we would term. today the Messianic age “The
Age to come” Gibbon based on information provided by Eusebius indicates
the first ten bishops of the Jerusalem fellowship were circumcised Jews.
They kept the dietary laws, the Sabbaths, festivals, including the Day of
Atonement, the Jewish purity laws (when they entered the temple) and
used the same Jewish liturgy for their daily prayers.
. To be continued . . .

Part 34

It should be clear that from John the Baptist to Peter and James that
under no circumstance was a new religion was ever considered. They
regarded themselves as being Jews in every respect and they belived that
the Messiah had come and that did not in any way lessen their respect for
Judaism or for that matter lessen their fellowship with other Jews. Was
John the Baptist in any way involved with the Essenes? Was he close to
them, or even an Essene himself? Was his baptism an adoption and
continuation of Essene rites? These are questions that scholarship has
concerned itself with for centuries, but reliable answers to them have
become possible only with the Qumran discoveries. Other possible
connections between John the Baptist and the Essenes
are suggested by the content of the Qumran texts. Thus, we now have the
appeal by both John and the Qumran writings to Isaiah 40:3, with its call
for the preparation of a highway in the desert (1QS 8:12-16; Mark 1:2-3;
Matt. 3:3; Luke 1:76; 3:4-6; John 1:23); the expectation by both parties of
the Last Judgment as imminent and now at hand; both sides' call to "
conversion " ; or the distance kept by both from the sacrificial worship of
the Temple.
The very number of these parallels or possible connections often counts
as clear evidence that there was a historical connection between John the
Baptist and Qumran, however this connection may have presented itself
concretely.

The only thing missing now is the baptizing that was such a salient
characteristic of his exercise of his mission. Baptism presents itself
neither in Malachinor in any other biblical source. True, one could like Paul
appeal to the cloud and the crossing through the sea at die moment of
Israel's flight f r o m Egypt (1 Cor. 10:1-2). But even then it would be a
baptism by God himself, and not by a human figure. Of just as little help is
the frequent reference to the healing of the Syrian military commander
Naaman by way of his immersion in the Jordan (2 Kings 5:1-19); it was not
the prophet Elijah who had sent him there, however, but his successor
Elisha, who actually stayed at home and did not function as the baptizer of
Naaman; and, finally, Naaman's
sevenfold immersion in no way prefigured John's rite of baptism.
Indeed, until John's appearance, neither in Judaism nor in die world
around had anyone baptized other persons. True, there was a plethora of
ritual purification, including the immersion of the entire body to that
effect. But each person performed these rites of purification completely
independently, without the cooperation of a baptizer. John was the very
first to immerse others.

With all of that I must contend that the book of Apocalypse is not a
Christian book. It is the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecy
concerning the “coming One” The appearing was in A.D.70. Therefore, we
should not expect any Old Testament prophecy to become part of our “Age
of Grace”.

Edmond Bordeaux Szekely (1905–1979) was a Hungarian philologist/linguist,

philosopher, psychologist and natural living experimenter. Szekely received
a Ph.D. from the University of Paris, and other degrees from the Vienna and
Leipzig.[ He held professorships in philosophy and in experimental
psychology at the Bolyai University in Kolozsvár (now Cluj, and now in
Romania). His books were published in English, Romanian, Esperanto,
German, French, Hungarian, and Spanish, per the introductory bibliography
in his 1938 book 'Cosmotherapy, the Medicine of the Future'. Szekely
claimed to have translated a text he discovered at the Vatican in 1923,
called The Essene Gospel of Peace which he published in four parts over
several decades. With the 1974 edition, he also included what he said was
the complete original Hebrew text from which he translated Book 1.
Szekely claimed that, while studying at the Vatican in 1923, he had found
and translated several obscure Hebrew and Aramaic texts.
Szekely claimed to have found an Aramaic translation of The Essene Gospel
of Peace and The Essene Book of Revelation at the Vatican library. In the
scriptorium of the Benedictine monastery of Monte Cassino he claimed to
have found the original Hebrew text of The Essene Gospel of Peace. His
findings, as did the writings of Romain Rolland, often challenged the
assumptions of conventional religious adherents and politicized, established
religious institutions about the life and teachings of Jesus, and he was
therefore often criticized by them

The Vatican also denied that Szekely had ever been admitted to the
Vatican Archives in 1923. The third claimed manuscript source was the
library at Monte Cassino, which was destroyed during World War II.
Which strikes me as unusual that Szekely’s work would have been denied
categorically by so many.
In any case I will present this document in its complete form so that you
may read and decide for your self. Could this have been the “original” Book
that we call Revelation?
And before you bother to ask I have contacted my Catholic sources in the
Vatican for more information. At this point they have refused to
acknowledge my requests

Part 35

The Essene Book of Revelations

 Translated by E B Szekely

Note: The Ebyon/Nazarenes of Qumran believed that the Angel is the

Messenger and "every eye" is the "brotherhood" of Israel.

Behold, the Angel of the Air shall bring him,

And every eye shall see him,
And the brotherhood,
All the vast brotherhood of the Earth
Shall raise their voice as one and sing,
Because of him.
Amen.

Note: The second introduction to the Apocalypse.

"I am the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End;
What is, what was, and what is to come."

And the voice spoke, and I turned to see

The voice that spoke to me,
And being turned, I saw seven golden candles;
And in the midst of their blazing light
I saw someone like a son of man,
Clothed in white, white as the snow.
And his voice filled the air with the sound of rushing water;
And in his hands were seven stars,
And when he spoke, his face was streaming light,
Blazing and golden like a thousand suns.
And he said, "Fear not, I am the first and the last;
I am the beginning and the end.
Write the things that you have seen,
And the things that are, and the things that will come after;
The mystery of the seven stars which fill my hands,
And the seven golden candles, blazing with eternal light.
The seven stars are the Angels of the Heavenly Father,
And the seven stars are the Angels of the Earthly Mother.
And the spirit of man is the flame
That streams between the starlight and the glowing candle;
A bridge of holy light between Heaven and Earth."

These things said he who held the seven stars in his hands,
Who walked within the flames of the seven golden candles.

Note: the cofession

He that has an ear, let him hear what the spirit said:
"To him that overcomes I will allow to eat from the tree of life,
That stands in the midst of the shining paradise of God."

In Heaven
And then I looked, and behold,
A door was opened in heaven:
And a voice which sounded from all sides, like a trumpet,
Spoke to me: "Come up here, (Could this not be the baptizer John?)
And I will show you the things which must be hereafter."

And immediately I was there, in spirit,

At the threshold of the open door.
And I entered through the open door
Into a sea of blazing light.
And in the midst of the blinding ocean of radiance was a throne:
And on the throne sat one whose face was hidden.
And there was a rainbow around about the throne,
Which looked like emerald.
And round about the throne were thirteen seats:
And upon the seats I saw thirteen elders sitting,
Clothed in white raiment;
And there faces were hidden by swirling clouds of light.
And seven lamps of fire burned before the throne,
The fire of the Earthly Mother.
And seven stars of heaven shone before the throne,
The fire of the Heavenly Father.
And before the throne
There was a sea of glass like crystal:
And reflected within it
Were all the mountains and valleys of the Earth,
And all the creatures abiding therein.
And the thirteen elders bowed down before the splendour of him
Who sat upon the throne, whose face was hidden,
And rivers of light streamed from their hands, one to the other,
And they cried, "Holy, Holy, Holy,
Lord God Almighty,
Which was, and is, and is to come.
Thou art worthy, O Lord,
To receive glory and honour and power:
For thou hast created all things."
And then I saw in the right hand
Of him that sat on the throne,
A book written within and on the back,
Sealed with seven seals.
And I wept, because the book could not be opened,
Nor was I able to read what there was written.
And one of the elders said to me, 'Weep not.
Reach out your hand and take the book.'
And I reached out my hand and touched the book.
And behold, the cover lifted,
And my hands touched the golden pages,
And my eyes beheld the mystery of the seven seals.

And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels

Round about the throne,
And the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand,
And thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice,
"All glory, and wisdom, and strength,
and power forever and ever,
To him who shall reveal the Mystery of Mysteries."
And I saw the swirling clouds of golden light
Stretching like a fiery bridge between my hands,
And the hands of the thirteen elders,
And the feet of him who sat on the throne,
Whose face was hidden.

On Earth
Note: There no seven Christian churches in this Nazarene/Jewish
prophecy.
First seal
And I opened the first seal.
And I saw, and beheld the Angel of the Air,
And between her lips flowed the breath of life,
And she knelt over the earth
And gave to man the winds of wisdom,
And man breathed in.
And when he breathed out, the sky darkened,
And the sweet air became fetid,
And clouds of evil smoke hung low over all the earth.
And I turned my face away in shame.
Second seal
And I opened the second seal.
And I saw, and beheld the Angel of the Water.
And between her lips flowed the water of life,
And she knelt over the Earth
And gave to man an ocean of love.
And man entered the clear and shining waters.
And when he touched the water, the clear streams darkened,
And the crystal waters became thick with slime,
And the fish lay gasping in the foul blackness,
And all the creatures died of thirst.
And I turned my face away in shame.
Third seal
And I opened the third seal.
And I saw and beheld the Angel of the Sun.
And between her lips flowed the light of life,
And she knelt over the earth
And gave to man the Fires of Power.
And the strength of the Sun entered the heart of man,
And he took the power, and made with it a false sun,
And he spread the fires of destruction,
Burning the forests,
Laying waste the green valleys,
Leaving only charred bones of his brothers.
And I turned away in shame.

Fourth seal
And I opened the fourth seal.
And I saw, and beheld the Angel of Joy.
And between her lips flowed the music of life,
And she knelt over the Earth
And gave to man the song of peace.
And peace and joy like music
Flowed through the soul of man.
But he heard only the harsh discord of sadness and discontent,
And he lifted up his sword
And cut off the heads of the singers.
And I turned my face away in shame.

Fifth seal
And I opened the fifth seal.
And I saw, and beheld the Angel of Life.
And between her lips
Flowed the holy alliance between God and Man,
And she knelt over the Earth
And gave to man the gift of Creation.
And man created a sickle of iron in the shape of a serpent,
And the harvest he reaped was of hunger and death.
And I turned my face away in shame.

Sixth seal
And I opened the sixth seal.
And I saw, and beheld the Angel of the Earth.
And between her lips flowed the river of eternal life,
And she knelt over the Earth
And gave to man the secret of eternity,
And told him to open his eyes
And behold the mysterious Tree of Life in the Endless Sea.
But man lifted up his hand and put out his own eyes,
And said there is no eternity.
And I turned my face away in shame.

Seventh seal
And I opened the seventh seal.
And I saw, and beheld the Angel of the Earthly Mother.
And she brought with her a message of blazing light
From the throne of the Heavenly Father.
And this message was for the ears of Man alone,
He who walks between the Earth and Heaven,
And into the ear of man was whispered the message.
And he did not hear.
But I did not turn away my face in shame.
Lo, I reached out my hand to the wings of the angel,

In Heaven
And turned my voice to heaven saying,
"Tell me the message. For I would eat of the fruit
Of the Tree of Life that grows in the Sea of Eternity."
And the angel looked upon me with great sadness,
And there was silence in Heaven.

And then I heard a voice,

Which was like the voice that sounded like a trumpet,
Saying, "O Man, would you look upon the evil you have done
When you turned your face away from the throne of God?
When you did not make use of the gifts
Of the seven Angels of the Earthly Mother,
And the seven angels of the Heavenly Father?"

And a terrible pain seized me

As I felt within me the souls of all those
Who had blinded themselves,
So as to see only their own desires of the flesh.
Seven Trumpets and Incense
And I saw the seven angels who stood before God;
And to them were given seven trumpets
And another angel came and stood at the alter,
Having a golden censer;
And there was given to him much incense,
That he should offer it with the prayers of all the angels
Upon the golden alter that was before the throne.

And the smoke of the incense ascended up before God

Out of the angels hand.
Coals of Fire
And the angel took the censer,
And filled it with fire of the alter,
And cast it onto the Earth,
And there were voices and thunderings,
And lightnings, and earthquakes.
And the seven angels that had the seven trumpets
Prepared themselves to sound.
On Earth
First Trumpet
The first angel sounded,
And there followed hail and fire mixed with blood,
And they were cast upon the Earth.
And the green forests and trees were burnt up,
And all the green grass shrivelled to cinders.

Second Trumpet
The second angel sounded,
And a great mountain burning with fire
Was cast into the sea
And blood rose from the earth as a vapour.
Note: the third Trumpet is missing
Fourth Trumpet
And the fourth angel sounded,
And there was a great earthquake;
And the sun became as black as sackcloth of hair,
And the moon became as blood.
Fifth Trumpet
And the fifth angel sounded
And the stars of heaven fell onto the earth
Like figs from fig tree
Shaken by a mighty wind.
Sixth Trumpet
And the sixth angel sounded
And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together.
And over the whole earth there was not one tree,
Nor one flower, nor one blade of grass.
And I stood on the earth,
And my feet sank into the soil,
soft and thick with blood,
Stretching as far as the eye could see.
And all over the earth was silence.
Seventh Trumpet
And the seventh angel sounded.
And I saw a mighty being come down from Heaven,
Clothed with a cloud;
And a rainbow on his head,
And his face was as is it were the Sun,
And his feet were pillars of fire.
And he had in his hand a book open:
And he set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot on the earth,
And he cried with aloud voice, which was wondrous to hear:
'O Man, would you have this vision come to pass?'
And I answered, 'You know I would do anything
So that these terrible things might not come to pass.'

The Angel

And he spoke: "Man has created these powers of destruction.

He has made them from his own mind.
He has turned his face away
From the angels of the Heavenly Father and the Earthly Mother,
And he has fashioned his own destruction."
Reply

And I spoke: "Then is there no hope, bright angel?"

And a blazing light streamed like a river from his hands
As he answered, "There is always hope,
O thou for whom Heaven and Earth were created."

The Angel

And then the angel,

He who stood upon the sea and upon the earth,
Lifted up his hand to heaven,
And swore by him who lives for ever and ever,
Who created heaven and the things that therein are,
And the Earth, and the things that therein are,
And the sea, and the things that are therein,
That there should be time no longer:
But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel,
When he shall begin to sound,
The mystery of God should be revealed to those
Who have eaten from the Tree of Life
Which stands forever in the Eternal Sea.

Book
And the voice spoke again saying:
"Go take the book that is in the hand of the angel,
who stands upon the sea and upon the earth."

Reply
And I went to the angel, and said to him,
"Give me the book,
For I would eat from the Tree of Life
Which stands in the middle of the Eternal Sea."
And the angel gave to me the book,
And I opened the book, and I read therein
What had always been, what was now, and what would come to pass.

I saw the holocaust that would engulf the Earth,

And the great destruction
That would drown all her people in oceans of blood.
And I saw too the eternity of man
And the endless forgiveness of the Almighty.
The souls of men were as blank pages in the book,
Always ready for a new song to be there inscribed.
 Hymn

And I lifted up my face

To the seven Angels of the Earthly Mother
And the seven Angels of the Heavenly Father,
And I felt my feet touching the holy brow of the Earthly Mother,
And my fingers touching the holy feet of the Heavenly Father,
And I uttered a hymn of thanksgiving:
"I thank thee, heavenly father,
Because thou hast put me at a source of running streams,
At a living spring in a land of drought,
Watering an eternal garden of wonders,
The Tree of Life, Mystery of mysteries,
Growing everlasting branches for eternal planting,
To sink their roots into the stream of life from an eternal source.
And thou, Heavenly Father,
Protect their fruits
With the angels of day and night,
And with flames of Eternal Light lighting every way.

The Angel

But again the voice spoke,

And again my eyes were drawn away
From the splendours of the realm of light,
"Heed thou, O man!
You may walk on the right path
And walk in the presence of the angels,
You may sing of the Earthly Mother by day
And of the Heavenly Father by night,
And through your being course the golden stream of the Law,
But would you leave your brothers
To plunge through the gaping chasm of blood,
As the pain-wracked Earth shudders and groans
Under her chains of stone?
Can you drink from the cup of eternal life
While your brothers die of thirst?"

Reply

And my heart was heavy with compassion.

And I looked, and lo,
In Heaven

There appeared a great wonder in heaven:

A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet,
And upon her head a crown of seven stars.
And I knew she was the source of running streams
And the mother of the forests.

On Earth

And I stood upon the sand of the sea,

And saw a beast rise up out of the sea,
And from his nostrils wafted foul and loathsome air,
And where he rose from the sea, the clear waters turned to slime,
And his body was covered with black and steaming stone.
And the woman clothed with the sun
Reached out her arms to the beast,
And the beast drew near and embraced her.
And lo, her skin of pearl withered beneath his foul breath,
And her back was broken by his arms of crushing rock,
And with tears of blood she sank into the pool of slime.

And from the mouth of this beast there poured armies of men,
Brandishing swords and fighting, one with the other.
And they fought with a terrible anger,
And they cut off their own limbs and clawed out their own eyes,
Until they fell into the pit of slime,
Screaming in agony and pain.

And I stepped to the edge of the pool and reached down my hand,
And I could see the swirling maelstrom of blood,
And the men therein, trapped like flies in a web.
And I spoke in a loud voice, saying,
"Brothers, drop your swords and take hold of my hand.
Leave off this defiling and desecration
Of she who has given thee birth,
And he who has given thee thy inheritance.
For you the days of buying and selling are over
And over, too, the days of hunting and killing.
For he that leadeth into captivity will go into captivity,
And he who kills with the sword must be killed by the sword.
And the merchants of the earth shall weep and mourn
Because no man buys their merchandise any more.
The merchants of gold, and silver, and precious stones,
And of pearls, and fine linen, and purple dyes, and silk, and scarlet,
And marble, and beasts, and sheep, and horses,
And chariots, and slaves, and souls of men,
All these things you cannot buy and sell,
For all is buried in a sea of blood
Because you have turned your back on your father and mother,
And worshipped the beast who would build a paradise of stone.
Drop thy swords, my brothers, and take hold of my hand!"

And as our fingers clasped,

I saw in the distance a great city,
White and shining on the far horizon, glowing alabaster,
And there were voices and thunders, and lightnings,
And there was a great earthquake,
Such as was not since men were on the Earth,
So mighty an earthquake, and so great.
And the great city was divided into three parts,
And the cities of the nations fell.
And the great city came in remembrance before God
To give unto her the cup of the wine
Of the fierceness of his wrath,

And every island fled away,

And the mountains were not found,
And there fell upon men a great hail out of heaven,
Every stone about the weight of a talent.
And a mighty angel took up a stone like a great millstone,
And threw it into the sea, saying,
"Thus, with violence shall the great city be thrown down,
And shall be found no more at all.'

And the voice of harpists, and musicians, and of pipers,

And of singers, and trumpeters,
Shall be heard no more in thee;
And no craftsmen, of whatever craft he be,
Shall be found anymore in thee;
And the sound of the millstone shall be heard no more in thee.
And the light of the candle will shine no more in thee
And the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride
Shall be heard no more in thee
For your merchants were great men of the Earth;
By there sorceries all nations were deceived.
And in her was found the blood of prophets and saints,
And all those who were slain upon Earth.

And my brothers laid hold of my hand,

And they struggled out of the pool of slime
And stood bewildered on the sea of sand,
And the skies opened and washed their naked bodies with rain.
 In Heaven
And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters,
And as the voice of great thunder:
And I heard the sound of harpists playing their harps,
And they sang a new song before the throne.

And I saw another angel fly in the midst of Heaven,

Having the songs of day and night
And the everlasting gospel to preach to them that dwell on the Earth,
Unto them that have climbed from the pit of slime,
And stand naked and washed by rain before the throne.
And the angel cried out, "Fear God, and give glory to him;
For the hour of his judgment has come:
And worship him that made Heaven and Earth,
And the sea, and the fountains of waters."

White Horse

And I saw Heaven open, and beheld a white horse;

And he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True,
And in righteousness he does judge.
His eyes were like a flame of fire,
And on his head were many crowns,
And he was cloaked in blazing light
And his feet were bare.
And his name is called the Word of God.
And the holy brotherhood followed him upon white horses,
Clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
And they entered the eternal Infinite Garden,
In whose midst stood the Tree of Life.

And the rain washed naked throngs came before them,

Trembling to receive their judgment.
For their sins were many, and they had defiled the Earth,
Yea, they had destroyed the creatures of the land and sea,
Poisoned the ground, fouled the air,
And buried alive the mother who had given them birth.

But, I saw not what befell them, for my vision changed,

New Heaven and Earth

And I saw a new Heaven and a new Earth;
For the first Heaven and the first Earth had passed away;
And there was no more sea.
And I saw the holy city of the brotherhood
Coming down from God out of Heaven,
Prepared like a bride adorned for her husband.
And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying:
"Lo, the mountain of the Lord's house
Is established in the top of the mountains
And is exalted above the hills;
And all people shall flow to it.
Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord,
To the house of God;
And he will teach us of his ways,
And we will walk in his paths:
For out of the Holy Brotherhood shall go forth the Law.
Behold, the Tabernacle of God is with men,
And he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people,
And God himself will be with them, and be their God.'
And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes;
And there shall be no more death,
Neither sorrow, nor crying,
Neither shall there be any more pain:
For the former things have all passed away.
Those who made war shall beat their swords into ploughshares,
And their spears into pruning hooks:
Nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
Neither shall they learn war anymore:
For the former things have passed away.

A New Creation

And he spoke again: "Behold I make all things new.

I am Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End.
I will give to him that thirsts at the Fountain of the Water of Life freely.
He who overcomes shall inherit all things,
And I will be his God, and he shall be my son.
But the fearful, and the unbelieving,
And the abominable, and murderers, and all liars,
Shall dig their own pit which burns with fire and brimstone."

Another vision

And again my vision changed,

And I heard the voices of the holy brotherhood raised in song,
Saying, "Come ye, and let us walk in the light of the Law."
And I saw the Holy City,
And the brothers were streaming to it.
And the city had no need of the sun,
Neither of the moon to shine on it:
For the glory of God did lighten it.

And I saw the pure river of the Water of Life,

Clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God.
And in the middle of the river stood the Tree of Life,
Which bore fourteen kinds of fruits,
And yielded her fruit to those who would eat of it,
And the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

And there shall be no night there;

And they need no candle, neither light of the sun,
For the Lord gives them light:
And they shall reign for ever and ever.

Conclusion

I have reached the inner vision

And through thy spirit in me
I have heard thy wondrous secret.
Through thy mystic insight
Thou hast caused a spring of knowledge
To well up within me,
A fountain of power pouring forth living waters;
A flood of love and all embracing wisdom
Like the splendour of eternal light.

Epilogue

The emphasis on Christian themes are noticeably absent in this Qumran

Apocalypse. You should note that the message to the seven churches is
missing. This would indicate that it was written prior to John the Baptist
meeting Jesus. The Ebyon (Jewish) believers that followed John the
Baptist were separate from those who followed Paul.

Peter and James the leaders of the Jerusalem fellowship comprised of the
Ebyon Jewish followers of John the Baptist help that Paul had turned his
back on the Torah and had for all intents and purposes become a Gentile
(those who were related to the Jews within the land but separated buy
culture and understanding of the Law of God). It was these factors as well
as many more that caused the Ebyon believers to label Paul as “The Liar”.
Paul recognized his kerygma (message) of inclusiveness and the
ecclesiocentric nature and character of his message would be not only hard
to understand as Peter said: And account that the longsuffering of our
Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the
wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles,
speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be
understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do
also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction (2 Peter 3:15-16)

Paul agreed with James and Peter that they wold minister to the Jews and
he would go to the Romans, Greeks and others outside of Judea. Therefore
at this interchange of ministries the message would change.
The spiritual gifts that were given as signs to Israel were beginning to wane
and fade as a new age, ministry and message was approaching.

Some modern scholars and many followers of a more liberal persuasion

would continue to hold that only seven book were written by Paul and that
they doubt that the books of Ephesians and Colossians were not written by
Paul because the author gives a message that was never spoken of before, a
secret in ages past, but now is revealed to man. (Ephesians 3:1-13)

In the epistles of Paul, he preferred the term brothers (Adelphoi). And

though the masculine noun was used generically for the whole Brotherhood,
Paul addresses specific women followers of Jesus as Sister (Adelphe)- the
wives of Peter and the Lord’s brothers, for instance (1 Cor 9:5) or Phoebe
(Rom 16:1). Other terms Paul used were The Holy (Hagioi or Hegiasmenoi)
[Rom. 12;13]. Those in Messiah [Hoi en Christo [i]. The Called (Kletoi ).
Housefellows (Oikeioi ). Those of the Path (Hoi tes Hodou ) There were so
many terms precisely because Christian had not yet been accepted to
absorb them yet. The name was used derision by outsiders. In Scripture the
disciples never called themselves by that name. Believers refused to be
called Christian for over 130 years,

The evidence of the author of Revelation all indicates that it was probably
John the Baptist and was first written down by his followers who expanded
as it was passed from one group to another.
The author of Revelation would not have recognized that humble son of a
carpenter as the “coming one” in Revelation. Undoubtedly John was
surprised when the Spirit descended upon him at his Baptism. The voice of
God convinced John that Jesus was the Son of God and the Lamb that
would take away the sins of the world.. But the Baptist must have been
astonished at the peaceful conduct and presentation of a loving and
forgiving Father/God. This certainly would help to explain why after
imprisoned by Herod, John would send his disciples to ask Jesus “Are you
the Coming One , or should we look for another?” (Matt. 11:3 ).

The Revelation certainly shows that it could have been a composite work
from the “Followers of John” the Ebyons or Nazarenes who represented a
primitive form of Christianity and inherited the Baptist’s apocalyptic and
heated tendencies. It has been suggested that the gospels themselves
presuppose the existence of a Baptist community in competition with the
young and forming church (Kasemann: Essays on New Testament themes.
And it was the task of the authors of the Gospels of John and Mark to
modify this heated theology in comparison and contrasting with the “Gospel
of Christ” For this reason we conclude that the book of Revelation may be
assigned to the period prior to the writing of the First Gospel. And in the
opinion of some the Book of Revelation with its obviously early dating could
be considered the “First Gospel”.