February 28: Revelation 22:20-21

Revelation 22:20-21

The concluding words, of the exalted Jesus as a witness (ma/rtu$) to the prophetic message, come now in verse 20a:

“The (one) bearing witness [marturw=n] to these (thing)s says: ‘Yes, I come quickly [taxu/]’.”

To which the author of the book echoes:

“Amen, may you come, Lord Yeshua!” (v. 20b)

This refrain surely expresses the heartfelt desire of believers throughout the years, down to the present day. However, in the context of first-century Christianity, it carries a special significance, due to the nature of the imminent eschatology of early Christians and the profound effect it had on nearly every aspect of their thought. I have discussed the subject at length in these notes, and throughout the wider study series (“Prophecy & Eschatology in the New Testament”). It bears repeating as our examination of the book of Revelation comes to a close. Believers at the time (c. 90 A.D.?) fully expected that they would live to see the events prophesied in the book–the great period of distress, the return of Jesus, and the onset of the Judgment. Indeed, this expectation is made clear all through the book itself, including the final words of 22:20.

Jesus states clearly, and unequivocally, that he is coming “quickly” (taxu/). The adverb taxu/, along with the related expression e)n ta/xei (“in [all] speed”), was used to express the widespread belief that Jesus’ return would occur soon (also with the sense of “suddenly”). This language has been used repeatedly, particularly at the beginning and end of the book (1:1; 2:16; 3:11; 22:6-7, 12); cf. also Luke 18:8; Rom 16:20, and the discussion in my earlier study on imminent eschatology in the New Testament.

The Greek e&rxou ku/rie (“may you come, Lord”) reflects an underlying Semitic (Aramaic) expression at* an`r^m* (m¹ranâ tâ), which is preserved transliterated in Greek (mara/na qa/) by Paul at the close of 1 Corinthians (16:22). Indeed, the closing of the book of Revelation (v. 21) resembles that of Paul in a number of his letters (1 Thess 5:28; 1 Cor 16:23; Rom 16:20; also 2 Thess 3:18; Gal 6:18; 2 Cor 13:13; Phil 4:23; Philemon 25), cf. below. Interestingly, Paul also uses the expression “may you come, Lord” (mara/na qa/) in 1 Cor 16:22 directly after a curse-formula, just as here in Revelation (cf. the previous note). The verb form e&rxou is an imperative (“you must come, come!”), but when used to address God (or the exalted Jesus) it is perhaps more fitting to translate it as an exhortation (“may you come”), much as imperatives are typically rendered in a prayer-setting (e.g., in the Lord’s Prayer). In the early Christian writing known as the “Teaching (of the Twelve)”, the Didache, the curse + marana/ qa/ format is used in a eucharistic context (10:6), cp. the reference to Jesus’ return in 1 Cor 11:26.

The final words of the book of Revelation are a benediction, or blessing, quite similar to that used by Paul in his letters, as noted above; the closest examples are in 2 Corinthians and 2 Thessalonians:

“(May) the favor of the Lord Yeshua (be) with (you) all” (Rev 22:21)
“(May) the favor of our Lord Yeshua (be) with you all” (2 Thess 3:18)
“(May) the favor of the Lord Yeshua…(be) with you all” (2 Cor 13:13)

This may simply indicate a standard form, commonly used by believers at the time. There are a considerable number of textual variations in v. 21, no doubt reflecting variations in usage of the basic form over time, and preserved by copyists. The absence of the pronoun (u(mw=n, “[with] you”) could be due to the fact that, strictly speaking, the book of Revelation was not written to a specific congregation, but to believers generally, over a wide region. In a very real sense, it was written “to all”, i.e. to all believers.

* * * * * * *

This concludes the series of daily notes on the book of Revelation; however, as a way of summarizing the results of this study, I feel it is important now to deal with certain topics which were left largely unaddressed in the notes. These involve issues regarding the authorship and date of the book, different approaches to interpreting the visions, and application of the eschatology for modern-day Christians. I purposely avoided these issues so as not to detract (and distract) from a careful examination of the text itself. Thus, a short set of supplemental notes will be presented during the upcoming week.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 2019EschatologyNT_header1a.png

February 27: Revelation 22:18b-19

Revelation 22:18b-19

The declaration of the truthfulness of the book’s message, as testified formally by the exalted Jesus himself (v. 18a, cf. the previous note), is followed by a curse in vv. 18b-19. Such a “curse” is part of the ancient concept of the binding agreement, which utilized various religious and magical formulae as a way of guaranteeing adherence to the agreement. Quite frequently, deities were called upon as witnesses to the binding agreement, who would, it was thought, punish those who violated the terms of the agreement. Punishment (or “curse”) forms were built into the structure of the agreement, and the description of what would happen if the terms were violated was equally binding.

The exalted Jesus, functioning as God’s witness (1:1, etc), has the power and authority to effect the divine punishment for violating the agreement—which here must be understood in terms of verses 7ff, the expectation that all true and faithful believers will guard the message of the book. Anyone who violates this implicit agreement will face the punishment declared by Jesus in vv. 18b-19:

“If any(one) would set (anything else) upon these (thing)s, God shall set upon him the (thing)s (that will) strike, (those) having been written in this paper-roll [i.e. scroll]; and if any(one) would take (anything) away from the accounts of the paper-roll [i.e. scroll] of this foretelling [i.e. prophecy], God shall take away his portion from the tree of life and out of the holy city, (all) the (thing)s having been written in this paper-roll [i.e. scroll].”

This curse-formula follows the ancient lex talionis principle, whereby the punishment matches the nature of the transgression. The violation is two-fold, each part mirroring the other:

    • Violation: Put (anything else) upon [i.e. add to] what is in the book
      Punishment: God will put upon him (same verb, e)piti/qhmi) what is described in the book (i.e. the Judgment on the wicked)
    • Violation: Take (anything) away from what is in the book
      Punishment: God will take away from him (same verb, a)faire/w) what is in the book (i.e. the reward of eternal life for the righteous)

Some commentators would question whether this strictly refers to altering the book itself—its content and text—or if, instead, the primary reference is to faithful observance, etc, of the prophetic message. Certainly, there are examples, both in Greco-Roman and Jewish literature, of warnings given against tampering with a written work, especially one considered to be a sacred text—cf. Epistle of Aristeas 311; Josephus Against Apion 1.42; 1 Enoch 104:10-13; Artemidorus Onirocritica 2.70; Koester, p. 845). However, in this instance, a closer parallel is perhaps to be found in the traditional understanding of adherence to the Torah (the terms of the Covenant between YHWH and Israel), such as expressed in Deuteronomy 4:2; 12:32, etc:

“You shall not add (anything) upon the word that I (have) charged you (to keep), and you shall not shave off (anything) from it (either), (but you are) to guard (the thing)s charged (to you) of [i.e. by] YHWH your God, which (indeed) I have charged (you).” (Deut 4:2)

In the Greek LXX, the verb corresponding to “add upon” (Heb. [s^y` + preposition lu^]) is prosti/qhmi (“set/place toward [i.e. next to]”), which is close to the e)piti/qhmi (“set/place upon”) here in v. 18. The Hebrew “shave off from” (ur^G` + preposition /m!) is translated by the verb a)faire/w (“take [away] from”), just as here in v. 19.

Thus, once again, the book of Revelation draws upon Old Testament tradition, regarding Israel as the people of God (according to the old Covenant), applying it to believers in Christ (in the new Covenant). Just as one who willfully disobeyed or disregarded the Torah could not belong to the true people of God, based on the terms of the old Covenant, so one who similarly disobeyed the inspired message of Revelation’s prophecies could not be part of God’s people (believers) in the new Covenant. Since the message of the visions centered on the need to remain faithful to Jesus during the end-time period of distress, with a clear distinction between those who belong to the Lamb and those who belong to the forces of evil (Dragon and Sea-creature), a true believer would not (and could not) violate this message.

It is also likely that the curse was meant to warn people from tampering with the book itself; if so, I would tend to agree with Koester (p. 858) that this emphasis is secondary. The message, not the text, is primary; and yet, so vital is this message, in the context of the imminent/impending time of distress, that it is to be preserved and transmitted with the utmost care.

References marked “Koester” above, and throughout this series, are to Craig R. Koester, Revelation, Anchor Bible [AB] Vol. 38A (Yale: 2014).

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 2019EschatologyNT_header1a.png

February 22: Revelation 22:17-18a

Revelation 22:17

In the previous note, I treated verse 17 as the conclusion to the section spanning vv. 6-17; however, it is also possible to view it as transitional to the concluding section (vv. 18-21). I have chosen here to discuss verse 17 along with v. 18a:

“And the Spirit and the Bride say: ‘Come!’ And the (one) hearing must (also) say: ‘Come!’ And (the) one thirsting must come—the (one) willing (to do so), let him take/receive the water of life as a gift [i.e. freely]. I (myself) bear witness to every (one) hearing the accounts of the foretelling [i.e. prophecy] of this scroll…” (vv. 17-18a)

In verse 17 there are three distinct imperatives, exhorting/commanding people to come (vb. e&rxomai). Together these serve as a beautiful communal image of believers in the end-time; their response, as believers, is centered around the book of Revelation itself. Let us briefly consider each statement:

“And the Spirit and the Bride say: ‘Come! [e&rxou]'”

This reflects two aspects of the prophetic visions and messages in the book:

    • Source of the visions—their inspiration by the Spirit (pneu=ma) of God (and Christ), which communicates with the prophetic spirit of the seer
    • Content of the visions—their depiction of the community of true believers as the Bride (of Christ), i.e. the people of God in its exalted, heavenly aspect

It may also be that the community of believers adds its own (inspired) voice to that of the Spirit; certainly this would express the actual dynamic of how the prophetic gift was understood and realized in early Christianity.

“And the (one) hearing must (also) say: ‘Come! [e&rxou]'”

Once the prophetic message had been written down and made available for others, it would have been read aloud in the congregations—in the early Christian setting, such texts would have been heard, rather than read, by the majority of people (cf. the previous note on v. 16). Having received (i.e. heard) this message, true believers in the local congregation would add their voice to the inspired Community—i.e., the people of God in their earthly aspect.

“And (the) one thirsting must come [e)rxe/sqw]…”

Here the verb is a third person imperative, and it elucidates what is meant by the second person command, and how people (believers) respond to the command. The wording alludes to Isaiah 55:1 (as in 21:6b, cf. below), and reflects the true believer’s longing (i.e. “thirst”) for God and desire for eternal life. This is very much a Johannine motif—the verb and idiom occurs in the Gospel Discourses of Jesus (4:13-15; 6:35; 7:37, cf. also Matt 5:6); the exhortation in Jn 7:37 provides a close formal parallel:

“If any (one) should thirst, he must come [e)rxe/sqw, i.e. let him come] toward me and drink.”

Here, however, we are not dealing with a person’s response to the Gospel, but to their faithfulness in following Jesus, even in the face of suffering and testing, during the end-time period of distress. This is the significance of the believer’s response to the message of the book—he/she will take special care to remain faithful, aware of the severe tests and challenges to trust in Jesus that are coming, but also reminded of the promise of God’s ultimate victory over evil.

“the (one) willing (to do so), let him take/receive the water of life as a gift [dwrea/n, i.e. freely]”

The same statement, and allusion to Isa 55:1, occurred earlier in the “new Jerusalem” vision (21:6b, cf. the earlier note). Here the imperative is best rendered as an exhortative (“let him take/receive”, labe/tw), corresponding to the imperative pine/tw (“let him drink”) in Jn 7:37. The verb lamba/nw is often translated “receive”, but here it is perhaps better to render it in its fundamental sense as “take”. The context is that of the Paradise-motifs—river, tree of life—which symbolize eternal life, and which were inaccessible to humankind during the old order of Creation (i.e. the current Age). Now, however, in the New Age (and a new order of Creation), believers are able to come and take (i.e. eat and drink) from the tree and water of Life.

Revelation 22:18-21

Revelation 22:18a

“I (myself) bear witness [marturw=] to every (one) hearing the accounts of the foretelling [i.e. prophecy] of this paper-roll [i.e. scroll]”

Here the exalted Jesus repeats his personal declaration from v. 16—again with the emphatic personal pronoun e)gw/ (“I”)—only this time he makes explicit the significance of his declaration as a witness (ma/rtu$), i.e. one who gives truthful and reliable testimony (cf. the previous note). It is once again the congregational setting, where the written accounts (lo/goi) of the visions in the book of Revelation are heard read aloud. Jesus himself bears witness that they are true; since he himself is the original witness who received the revelation from God (1:1), this confirms the truth of the message in a special way. In the Greek-speaking world of the time, official documents (esp. living wills and other binding agreements) would often begin with the person’s name, followed by marturw= (“I bear witness…”), e.g. P.Oxy. 105.13-14; 489.24-26; 490.15-16; cf. Koester, p. 844.

The remainder of the concluding section, beginning with vv. 18b-19, will be discussed the next few daily notes.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 2019EschatologyNT_header1a.png

The Antichrist Tradition: Part 1

As this series on “Prophecy and Eschatology in the New Testament” begins to come to a close, it is necessary to examine one of the most complicated (and controversial) components of early Christian eschatology—the Antichrist Tradition, which may be defined as follows:

The expectation that an evil world ruler would arise at the end-time, prior to Jesus’ return, the climax of a period of increasing wickedness and corruption. He will be opposed to God and to Christ, and will openly persecute true believers in Jesus; he will deceive people, leading them astray, through supernatural power and influence that may resemble Jesus’ own, a wicked imitation of Christ himself. He is commonly referred to by the title “Antichrist”.

This tradition was reasonably well-established in Christianity by the end of the 2nd century A.D., and continues, with certain variations, into the present day. Many Christians today simply read this tradition into various eschatological passages in the New Testament; to do so, however, is highly problematic, for it assumes that the tradition outlined above had already taken shape, and was widespread, during the first century. As we shall see, the evidence for this is extremely slight. At the same time, there can be no doubt that the seeds of the later tradition are present in at least several of the New Testament writings. We can go back even further—for the roots of the Antichrist tradition can be found in key passages in the Old Testament Prophets, establishing a number of apocalyptic and eschatological motifs which would be developed in Jewish writings of the first centuries B.C./A.D., contemporary with, and prior to, the New Testament texts.

This study will explore the development of the Antichrist Tradition. There have been a number of fine critical studies along this line, going back to Wilhelm Bousset’s landmark Der Antichrist in der Überlieferung des Judentums, des Neuen Testaments, und der alten Kirche (1895, published in English translation as “The Antichrist Legend: A Chapter in Jewish Folklore”). One I have found especially useful is by L. J. Lietaert Peerbolte, The Antecedents of Antichrist: A Traditio-Historical Study of the Earliest Christian Views on Eschatological Opponents, vol. 49 in the “Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism” (Brill: 1996). This work will be cited as “Peerbolte, Antecedents,” followed by page number.

Part 1 of this study will begin with a brief examination of the word a)nti/xristo$—its meaning and significance, etc—followed by a survey of the main Old Testament references and passages that were influential in the formation of the Antichrist Tradition.

anti/xristo$

“Antichrist” in English comes from a transliteration of the Greek word a)nti/xristo$ (antíchristos). It is a compound noun which means, literally, “against the anointed (one)”. There is no evidence that the word was ever used, prior to its adoption by Christians in the mid/late-first century A.D., nor is there any known contemporary usage by non-Christians. Since the “Anointed” (xristo/$, christós) essentially refers to the Jewish Messiah (or Messianic figure-type), anti/xristo$ conceivably could have been applicable in a Jewish context, referring to someone or something that was “against the Messiah”, or to a false Messiah. However, there is no real evidence for this, and, in all likelihood, the word was coined by early Christians, with the specific understanding of Jesus as the “Anointed One” (xristo/$)—on this, cf. my series “Yeshua the Anointed”.

As coined by first-century Christians, the word follows the pattern of similar descriptive titles with the prefixed preposition a)nti/ (antí), cf. Moulton-Milligan s.v., p. 49:

    • a)ntistra/thgo$ (antistrát¢gos), i.e. the leader of the opposing army (used by Thucydides, etc)
    • a)ntisu/gklhto$ (antisýngkl¢tos), an opposing assembly (i.e. senate, su/gklhto$, those “called together”)
    • a)ntixo/rhgo$ (antichór¢gos), an opposing ‘chorus’ leader, i.e. of voices

Perhaps closer in formal meaning to the Christian use of a)nti/xristo$ is the word a)nti/qeo$ (antítheos), when used in the (admittedly rare) sense of a rival God (qeo/$) or something imitating the Deity. The fundamental meaning of the preposition a)nti/ is “against”, but it can also mean “in place of”, and both of these aspects apply to the Antichrist Tradition as it was developed.

Old Testament Background

The background of the Antichrist Tradition is located in the Old Testament Prophetic writings—especially within the specific genre of the nation-oracle, i.e. oracles of judgment against specific nations (and their rulers). This genre has a long history, from virtually the earliest writings as they have come down to us (8th century B.C.), through to the exile and post-exilic periods. Indeed, most of the canonical Prophetic Scriptures contain some form of nation-oracle, the most notable being those in Amos, Nahum, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. Initially these oracles were not eschatological, but referred to the judgment God would bring on a particular nation in the immediate or near future. The genre did not apply only to the surrounding (pagan, non-Israelite) nations—the Prophets regularly gave specific messages of impending judgment for the kingdoms of Israel and Judah which followed a similar pattern.

From the prophetic standpoint, a nation (and its people) was represented by its king, and, occasionally, a nation-oracle would be directed specifically at its ruler. While this symbolized the wickedness of the people as a whole, it had the practical effect of focusing attention on the king as a wicked/corrupt ruler. And, the larger and more powerful the nation, the more conspicuous the ruler is in his worldly ambition, arrogance, and corrupt/brutal use of power. We may call this motif, such as it is highlighted in several key Prophetic passages, that of the “Wicked Tyrant”.

The “Wicked Tyrant” Motif

This motif goes back to at least the late-8th century and the figure of the Assyrian king Sennacherib (r. 704-681 B.C.). At the time, Assyria was the pre-eminent national power in the Near East, having expanded, through brutal conquest, to form an extensive regional empire. After the northern Israelite kingdom had fallen to Assyria (722-721), it was Sennacherib who led a successful invasion of Syria-Palestine, including an expedition against the southern kingdom, in 701. Dozens of cities were captured or destroyed, but Jerusalem survived, in spite of the siege laid against it. The relevant Scriptural accounts of these events are found in 2 Kings 18:13-19:37; 2 Chron 32:1-23; and Isaiah 36-37. In 2 Kings 19:22ff (= Isa 37:23ff) there is a prophetic denunciation (and taunt) against Sennacherib, which may be seen as the earliest instance of the “wicked tyrant” motif. The poetic description emphasizes the arrogance and ambition of the ruler, who, by his actions and attitude, foolishly sought to challenge YHWH Himself:

“Whom have you treated with scorn and attacked (with words)?
And against whom did you raise (your) voice high
and lift up your eyes (to the) high place?
(Was it not) against the Holy (One) of Yisrael?
By the hand of your messengers you treated the Lord with scorn,
and said: ‘With the great number of my riders [i.e. chariots]
I have gone up (to the) high place of the mountains,
(to the) sides of the (snow)-white peaks (of Lebanon),
and I cut (down) the standing cedars (and) chosen fir-trees!
I came to the lodging-place (at) his (farthest) borders,
(to) the thick (forest) of his planted garden!'” (vv. 22-23)

The wording at the close of v. 23 suggests that Sennacherib essentially boasts that he has ascended (and/or is able to ascend) all the way to the Garden of God, according to its traditional/mythic location at the top of the great Mountain. Through his earthly power—by brute strength (i.e. military might) and force of will—he cut his way (using the motif of felling trees) to this highest point. In spite of the ruler’s great boast, his ambitions have been curbed by God (i.e. he has been turned back militarily), leading to his abject humiliation (vv. 21, 27-28).

There are two especially noteworthy examples of this “wicked tyrant” motif in the nation-oracles of the Prophets—(1) the oracle against Babylon in Isaiah 14:3-23, and (2) the oracle against the city-state of Tyre in Ezekiel 28:1-19. Each of these emphasizes the arrogance and ambition of the king, who would dare to put himself in the position of God (on earth), essentially appropriating the divine authority for himself. This follows the basic seminal pattern of the oracle against Sennacherib (above); however, the imagery in these (later) oracles is expanded considerably, no doubt reflecting a significant development in the tradition.

Isaiah 14:3-23: The King of Babylon

This two-part oracle is closer in tone and style to the poem against Sennacherib; indeed, as an Isaian oracle, it may have been originally directed against Assyria. The specific king and nation being addressed is not indicated within the oracle itself, and the target of Assyria is much more appropriate to the overall context (and historical setting) of the first half of the book (chaps. 1-39). It is a bit difficult to explain the sudden shift to Babylon in 13:1-14:23 (at 14:24 the focus is back on Assyria) on historical grounds, and many critical commentators believe that an earlier Isaian oracle has been applied to a later Babylonian setting (i.e. the Neo-Babylonian empire). However, the introduction to the oracle (14:3-4) clearly has it being addressed to the king of Babylon; the oracles in chaps. 13-14 presumably refer to the fall of the city (to the Persians) in 539 B.C.

The oracle itself appears to be comprised of two distinct poems—one, a more realistic description of the king (and city)’s fall (vv. 4b-11), and the other, a more figurative version of the same (vv. 12-21), drawing upon mythological traditions. The second poem is more relevant to our study, and, in its opening lines, we can see how some of the same motifs and themes of the oracle against Sennacherib (cf. above) have been developed:

“How you have fallen from the heavens,
(you) shining (one), son of the Dawn!
You have been hacked (down) to the earth,
(the one) bringing (the same) lowness upon the nations!
Indeed, you said in your heart:
‘I will go up to the heavens!
From the place above the stars of the Mighty (One)
I will raise high my covered seat [i.e. throne];
and I will sit (myself) on the Mountain appointed (for the Mighty)
(there) on the sides of (its) secluded (peak) [‚¹¸ôn]!
I will go up upon the heights of (the) dark cloud(s),
(and so) will I be likened to (the) Highest (myself)!’
(But) how you were brought down to Š§°ôl (instead),
to the side [i.e. bottom] of (the deepest) pit!”
… (vv. 12-15)

As in the Sennacherib-oracle, there is the idea of the king thinking he could ascend all the way to the Mountain where God dwells. This is associated with snow-capped peaks of the Lebanon range (verse 8; cp. 37:24), drawing upon ancient Syrian (i.e. northern Canaanite / Ugaritic) tradition. One such designated mountain was Mt. Casius (Jebel el-Aqra±), but different local sites could serve as a representation of the Mountain of God in religious traditions. Indeed, it is the place “appointed” (du@om) for the divine/heavenly beings to gather, but only those related to the Mighty One (la@, °E~l)—otherwise, it was entirely inaccessible to human beings. This helps to explain the significance of the name /opx* (‚¹¸ôn), essentially referring to a distant and secluded (i.e. inaccessible and fortified) location; directionally, it came to indicate the distant north.

While ascending to the Mountain peak, or so he imagines, the king cuts his way there, felling the tall trees (v. 8; 37:24 par). The cutting down of trees was a suitable representation for the worldly ambitions and grandiose exploits of a king, seen in ancient Near Eastern tradition at least as early as the Sumerian Gilgamesh legends of the late-3rd millennium B.C. (preserved subsequently in the Gilgamesh Epic, Tablets 3-5); and, the “cedars of Lebanon” were among the most valuable and choicest trees a king could acquire. The motif also serves as a figure for military conquest—the ‘cutting down’ of people and cities (vv. 6ff). Ultimately, however, it is the king himself who is “hacked” (vb ud^G`) down to the ground (v. 12). Indeed, instead of ascending all the way to Heaven, he is brought down to the deep pit of Sheol (loav=)—that is, to the underworld, the realm of Death and the grave. In all likelihood this is meant to signify the actual death of the king, as well as the fall/conquest of his city (and empire); as noted above, Babylon was conquered by the Persians in 539 B.C.

Clearly, the oracle is satirical—the claims, etc, of the king are ultimately doomed to failure, and, in the end, his ambitions are foolish, and his fate is appropriately the opposite of what he imagined for himself. To some extent, these divine pretensions merely reflect the ancient beliefs and traditions surrounding kingship. Frequently, in the ancient Near East, divine titles and attributes are applied to the ruler; this was true even in Israel (especially in the Judean royal theology associated with David and his descendants), but never to the extent that we see in the surrounding nations. The symbolism and iconography was, of course, strongest where nations and city-states expanded to the level of a regional empire; the king could virtually be considered a deity himself (cf. especially the Egyptian Pharaonic theology at its peak).

Thus, the declaration in verse 12, calling the king of Babylon “(the) shining (one), son of the Dawn”, plays on this tendency of identifying kings with deity—especially the celestial/heavenly manifestation of deity. The terms ll@yh@ (“shining [one]”) and rj^v* (“dawn”, i.e. the rising of the sun/light) are, in essence, both attested as divine titles (or names) in Semitic/Canaanite tradition. It is also possible that there is here an allusion to a mythological religious (and/or cosmological) tradition involving the disobedience (and fall) of a heavenly being, which has been applied to an earthly ruler. For more on this, cf. below.

Ezekiel 28:1-19

The oracle against Tyre in Ezekiel 28:1-19 is even more complex, part of a series of oracles spanning chapters 26-28. If the Babylonian empire signified military power, the city-state of Tyre embodied commercial power. The product of centuries of Phoenician colonization and trade, the port-city of Tyre, with its fortified island location, was indeed a commercial power, with ambitions to become the center of world trade. Though threatened by the Babylonians, including a lengthy siege by Nebuchadnezzar (c. 585-572?), the city avoided destruction, presumably by way of a surrender treaty or similar agreement. This contrast with the fate of Jerusalem helps to explain Ezekiel’s emphasis on Tyre, devoting several oracles to the city’s expected and impending destruction. As it was envisioned, it would seem that this destruction never did occur, which may be one of the reasons that the book of Revelation chose to use these prophecies for the fate of the end-time “Babylon” (chaps. 17-18), where they could truly find fulfillment.

In this oracle, also in two parts (vv. 1-10, 11-19), many of the same basic themes are repeated, including the overweening ambition (and divine pretensions) of the king, along with his ultimate fate of being cast down into Sheol (here, tj^v^, the place of decay/destruction, v. 8). The arrogance of the king is stated more bluntly, and blatantly, in verse 2:

“…your heart has raised (itself) high, and you said, ‘I am (a) Mighty (one) [°E~l], (on the) seat of (the) Mightiest [°E_lœhîm] I sit, in the heart of (the) seas!’ And (yet) you (are) a man, and not a Mighty (one) [°E~l], and (yet) you give your heart (to be) like (the) heart of (the) Mightiest [°E_lœhîm]!”

This idea of the wicked ruler daring to sit in the very seat of God would play a significant role in the subsequent Antichrist tradition. On the meaning of the titles El and Elohim, and how I translate them, consult the corresponding articles. Even more significant is how this ruler sets his heart to be like the heart of God—this marks his ambition and desire for power in a deeper and more essential way. The Greek term anti/qeo$ (antítheos) could be applied to this attitude, of wishing to function “in the place of God”, or “in imitation of God”; on the parallel between anti/qeo$ and anti/xristo$ (antíchristos), cf. above.

The poem in verses 11-19, like that of Isa 14:12-21, is more figurative in nature, drawing heavily on mythological tradition. We have again the idea of the Garden of God (v. 13), located at the top of the great Mountain (the Mountain of God, v. 14). This Garden-setting was only alluded to in 2 Kings 19:23 (par Isa 37:24), but it is described here in considerably more detail, referring to ancient traditions regarding the primeval ±E~den (/d#u@), the luxuriant locale mentioned in the Genesis Creation narratives (2:8, 10, 15; 3:23-24), containing a garden (/G~)—here called the “Garden of God” (“garden of the Mightiest”, <yh!ýa$-/G~).

The satire, too, is much more expansive, depicting the Tyrian king as a k§rû» (bWrK=), a word of uncertain derivation, but typically referring to a divine or heavenly being, presumably with wings, as in the conventional image of an Angel (cf. Exod 25:20, etc). The richness of the divine Garden, with its jewels (precious stones), reflects the wealth and commercial aspirations of Tyre; moreover, the kerub’s wings provide covering (vb Ek^s*), which may allude to the protected position of the city (as an island-fortress). In spite of Tyre’s privileged position (provided to it by God, “I set you on the holy mountain…”, v. 14), it became arrogant and acted wickedly, corrupting its beauty and desecrating its space. As a result, God declares that it will be cast down and destroyed by fire (v. 18), a suitable image for the destruction of a city by military attack.

Here, more so than in Isa 14:12ff, we are likely dealing with an ancient tradition, regard the sin and punishment of a divine/heavenly being, that is being applied to an earthly king. One can only speculate on the details of such a tradition, as well as its possible relation to the sin and fall of Adam in Genesis 2-3. The idea that these oracles refer to the rebellion of Satan and the fallen Angels surely reads far too much into the text, though many today would accept such an interpretation, albeit rather uncritically. Conflict among deities features in many cosmological and religious myths, including aspects of the fall and punishment of certain divine beings; it is only natural that similar tales and traditions were current in Israel, though only fragments have survived within the Old Testament Scriptures themselves. Ezekiel appears to make rather more use of colorful, extra-Scriptural traditions, than do the other Prophets, but similar instances can be cited in the book of Isaiah and elsewhere. Such use of traditions is no bar whatsoever against the inspiration of these writings.

The Book of Daniel

The book of Daniel had an immense influence on Jewish and early Christian eschatology, a subject which will be dealt with more in Parts 2 and 3 of this study. Here space will only allow for a relatively brief survey of the passages most directly relevant to the development of the Antichrist Tradition. To some extent, the precise nature of the book’s influence depends on how one dates the text as it has come down to us. Most critical scholars would date the book (as certainly chapters 7-12) to the mid-2nd century B.C., placing it fairly close in time with other Apocalyptic writings, and even contemporary with some the earlier Qumran texts and parts of the book of Enoch, etc. This would allow the possibility that the book of Daniel is part of a wider apocalyptic tradition. On the other hand, if one takes the book at face value, as coming ostensibly from Daniel’s own time (in the early-mid 6th century), then it is much more likely that it is the primary source of the later lines of tradition.

The book of Daniel was certainly important to the Community of the Qumran texts, as is indicated by the number of manuscript copies, but also by the various “Pseudo-Daniel” writings that have survived. Among these may be considered the famous Aramaic “Son of God” text (4Q246), on which see my earlier article; I will touch on the Qumran texts in Part 2 of this study. A brief survey of the Pseudo-Daniel writings can be found in the article on “New Testament eschatology and the book of Daniel”.

There can be no doubt that much of early Christian eschatology was inspired by the book of Daniel. Of the many signs of this influence (cf. the aforementioned article), the following may be noted especially:

    • The idea of the end-time appearance of the “Son of Man” (Dan 7:13-14), best known from Jesus’ statements in Mark 13:26-27 par; 14:62 par, and the other eschatological “Son of Man” sayings.
    • The tradition regarding the “disgusting thing of desolation” (Dan 9:27; cf. also 11:31; 12:11), as interpreted in Mark 13:14 par, and likely alluded to elsewhere; this will be discussed further in Part 3.
    • The early Christian concept of the end-time period of distress (qli/yi$) appears to have been shaped significantly by Dan 12:1ff [LXX]; cf. Mark 13:19 par; Rev 7:14, etc.

Many of the prophecies in the second half of Daniel (chapters 7-12) build upon the same “wicked tyrant” tradition found in other Prophetic nation-oracles (cf. the discussion above). It appears prominently in three main sections (cf. also the survey in Peerbolte, Antecedents, pp. 226-37):

1. Daniel 7—The Horn of the Fourth “Beast”

Chapter 7 is built around a vision of four “beasts” (lit. “living [creature]s”, Aram. /w`yj@) that come up out of the sea, each with fabulous, hybrid animal attributes (vv. 1-8). The fourth of these was the most deadly and terrifying in appearance (v. 7), with ten horns, among which another smaller horn arose (v. 8). This latter horn is described as having eyes “like the eyes of a man”, and also a mouth, which was speaking “great things”. These specific attributes indicate the shrewdness and bold ambition of this “horn”, whose very rise suggests violence—with three of the previous horns being “pulled (up) by the roots”.

Following a theophanic vision of God (the “Ancient of Days”) and the heavenly “Son of Man” (“[one] like a son of man”) in vv. 9-14, an explanation of the vision of the four creatures is given (vv. 15-27). As in the vision of the statue (chap. 2), these four beasts symbolize a sequence of four great kingdoms, the last of which will be the fiercest and most powerful, a conquering empire that shall “devour all the earth and trample it and crush it (to pieces)” (v. 23). As befitting the motif of the horn (symbol of strength and power), each of the ten horns is a king who will rule over the empire. The horn that comes after them is described more extensively, in verses 24-26, prophesying his character and actions; it is in verse 25 that we find the “wicked tyrant” motif:

“And (thing)s spoken against the High (One) will he speak,
and he will wear out the holy (one)s of the Highest;
and he will think to change (the) appointed (time)s and decrees,
and they will be delivered in(to) his hand
until a (set) time, and times, and a division [i.e. half] of a time.”

Each of these lines reflect a key theme or motif that would help shape the Antichrist tradition:

    • Opposing, attacking, or insulting God, especially by the things he says—i.e. boastful, arrogant, and impious words
    • Persecution of the righteous/believers (“he will wear out the holy ones”, also v. 21 “he made war on the holy ones”)
    • Replacement of true religion with false/wicked practices
    • He will be allowed to attack God’s people and institute false religious practice, i.e. he will have the power to do so, and God will permit it
    • This will last for a relatively brief period of time— “a time, times, and half a time”, usually understood as a symbolic period of 3 ½ years.

The wicked rule of this king will be cut short by God’s Judgment, when both the kingdom (the beast) and its king (the horn) will be destroyed (vv. 11f, 26). In its place there will be an eternal kingdom, that of God himself, a kingdom belonging to the holy ones (i.e., the people of God). The “Son of Man” figure is central to this dominion, and features in the vision as a singular figure that is parallel to the collective people of God (vv. 14, 22, 27).

2. Daniel 8—The Horn of the He-Goat

There is a similar vision in chapter 8, of a horned ram, followed by a male goat (he-goat) with a series of horns (vv. 1-14). A single great horn is broken, replaced by four others (v. 8), among which a smaller horn rises up (v. 9). The horn-symbolism is identical, only here the actions of the “little horn” are narrated in much greater detail (vv. 10-15), reflecting both the historical events associated with this king, and the wickedness and arrogance of his conduct. An interpretation of the vision follows in vv. 15-26. This expanded prophetic description means that the “wicked tyrant” motif is also given a significant development, in verses 10-12:

“And it became great, until (it reached the) army of heaven,
and it made to fall (down) to earth (some) from (the) army,
and from (the) stars, and he tread them (down);
even until (reaching) the prince of the army did he grow great,
and from him the continual (offering) was lifted (away),
and the established place of his holiness was thrown down;
and an army was given against the continual (offering), in rebellion,
and it threw down truth (itself) to the earth—
and it did (this), and pushed ahead (with success).”

The elements of the “wicked tyrant” motif are applied to a specific action—an attack against the Temple and its sacrifice. Additional aspects are brought out in the subsequent interpretation of the vision (vv. 23-25); these may seen by highlighting the particular expressions and phrases:

    • “a king strong of face”, i.e. of a harsh and fierce countenance
    • “understanding (the tying of) knots”, reflecting his shrewdness, skill in political intrigue, etc.
    • “his strength shall be mighty (indeed)”; the MT includes the phrase “but not by his own strength”, i.e. his wicked power is allowed/permitted by God, who represents the true source of strength.
    • “he shall do wondrous things (that) bring ruin” —the phrase is a bit uncertain textually, and in terms of its meaning
    • “he shall bring the mighty ones to ruin”, presumably his military conquests
    • “his cleverness (will be) against the holy ones”, i.e. his plans to attack (“make war” against) the righteous; this translation follows a reconstruction of v. 24-25, based in part on the LXX.
    • “deceit will (be) push(ed) forward in his hand”, i.e. he will act with deceit and will promote the use of deception
    • “he shall become great in his (own) heart”, reflecting his ambition and self-delusion, implying pretensions to deity, etc.
    • “with (a sense of) security he will bring many to ruin”, i.e. he will destroy them when they feel themselves safe and secure
    • “he shall take a stand against the Prince of princes”, that is, against God and his heavenly representative(s), esp. the prince of the heavenly army Michael
    • “by the end of a hand [i.e. without use of a hand] he will be broken (to pieces)”, this difficult idiom indicates Divine Judgment, without use of any human intermediary (“without a [human] hand”)
3. Daniel 11:21-45—The Rise of a Wicked Ruler (Antiochus IV)

Nearly all commentators are agreed that the “horn” of chapters 7-8, the wicked ruler who will appear, refers primarily (if not exclusively) to the Seleucid king Antiochus IV Epiphanes (r. 175-164 B.C.). The details and context of the visions of chaps. 7-8 seem to bear this out, but the historical scenario becomes much more precise, and specific, in the great vision of chapter 11. Even traditional-conservative commentators generally recognize that these are prophecies relating to Antiochus IV, while allowing for the possibility of a secondary application to a wicked ruler in the more distant future. The wicked ruler described in verses 21-45 of chapter 11 is unquestionably Antiochus IV—his military exploits, political intrigues, and persecution of the people of God (the faithful ones of Israel/Judah). Special attention is given to his desecration of the Jerusalem Temple—including the elimination of the daily sacrifice, and the setting up of “the disgusting thing [JWQv!] bringing devastation [<m@v)m=]” (v. 31, also 9:27; 12:11) in the sanctuary.

This ruler’s self-exaltation, impiety, and opposition to God is described vividly in verses 36-39, providing the most developed form of the “wicked tyrant” motif in the Old Testament, a portrait that would exert an enormous influence on subsequent eschatological and apocalyptic tradition.

The Judgment of the Nations

A separate line of tradition, within the Prophetic nation-oracles, involves the idea of the Judgment of the Nations, collectively. While the nation-oracles normally focused on one specific nation, and the judgment that was expected to come against it in the near future, these collections of prophecies (against different nations) led to the image of all the nations being judged, together, in a setting that was more properly focused on the end-time—that is to say, eschatological.

The idea of the hostility and opposition of the surrounding nations was a basic component of Old Testament tradition and ancient Israelite theology, deriving fundamentally from the distinction of Israel as God’s chosen people, in contrast to all other peoples. The very nature of God’s Covenant with Israel, and the binding terms of this agreement (the Torah regulations), drew a sharp line demarcating the holy from the profane, pure from impure, true worship of God and false, which corresponded closely to the ethnic distinction (i.e. Israel vs. the Nations). This sense of opposition only sharpened within the contours of the Israelite/Judean royal theology, expressed and preserved primarily in the Scriptural Psalms, with their repeated references to the protagonist being surrounded by enemies; often these enemies are more or less equated with the “wicked” and the “nations”. The royal context of this motif is perhaps clearest in Psalm 2, which depicts the new king as being surrounded by potentially rebellious vassals, as well as rulers from the nearby nations, eager to gain greater power and freedom for themselves. The portrait of these wicked/rebellious rulers in vv. 1-3 is justly famous:

“For what [i.e. why] do the nations throng together,
and for (what) do the peoples mutter empty (threats)?
The kings of the earth set themselves,
and the honored (one)s are set (firmly),
against YHWH and against his Anointed.
‘We shall pull off their (cord)s binding (us)
and we shall throw away their ropes from (off of) us!'”

For more, cf. my earlier study on Psalm 2.

From the standpoint of the Prophetic nation-oracles, the theme of the collective Judgment of the nations, by God, finds its earliest form in the oracle of Joel 3. While not strictly eschatological, the oracle does envision a future time when Israel (Judah and Jerusalem) has been restored (vv. 1), and this restoration follows the great Judgment of the nations (vv. 17-21). The Judgment is depicted as taking place in a great valley, where all the nations have been gathered together (v. 2)—it is the valley where they will be “judged by YHWH” (fp*v*ohy+, Y®hôš¹¸¹‰).

While there is a definite military aspect to this imagery (vv. 9-11), there is no clear sense that the nations are actually engaged in battle. In light of the traditional motif of the hostility of the nations (to Israel), and their opposition to God, it is no great surprise that this scene of the gathering of the nations for Judgment would eventually develop into a gathering for battle—and that they would seek to make war against the people of God (Israel/Judah, and Jerusalem). This is expressed in two primary visions—the closing vision of Zechariah (chap. 14), and the great vision-set of Ezekiel 38-39. In both visionary scenes, the nations gather to make war against Israel, advancing on the city of Jerusalem, before they are defeated through the power and intervention of YHWH.

These Judgment-visions and oracles are not directly related to the Antichrist tradition, as such; however, they are relevant (and worth noting here) for several reasons:

    • The hostility/opposition of the nations (and their kings) to God and His people is placed within a clear eschatological setting—in the context of the Judgment (but prior to it) and the ultimate restoration of God’s people; indeed, their salvation is expressed in terms of deliverance from the wickedness and violence of the nations.
    • The wickedness of the nations (and their rulers), in this Judgment setting, has been expanded in scope, now depicted on a worldwide and cosmic scale; this has significance for the development of the Antichrist tradition.
    • The Ezekiel vision, in particular, has the coalition of nations being effectively led by a great king named “Gog” (goG), and, while this specific detail is only marginally related to the Antichrist tradition, it does provide an Old Testament parallel for the concept of wicked world-ruler—a menacing figure who exercises rule over all the nations, in opposition to God.

In Part 2, we will focus on the subsequent development of these lines of tradition in Jewish eschatological and apocalyptic writings of the first centuries B.C./A.D.

February 21: Revelation 22:8-9, 16-17

Revelation 22:8-9, 16f

This is the last of the four components in vv. 6-17—a personal declaration by the seer Yohanan (John) and the exalted Jesus, respectively. Each begins with the emphatic personal pronoun e)gw/ (“I, Yohanan/Yeshua…”). The parallelism relates to how each person is a witness of the divine message being delivered, the prophecy recorded in the book (vv. 6, 10). On the relation between the two, and the place each holds within the overall inspired witness, see esp. the opening verses of the book (1:1-2); thus, again, the conclusion of the book of Revelation corresponds to its introduction. On the identity of this “Yohanan”, cf. my earlier note on 1:9; I will discuss the question of authorship a bit further at the conclusion of this series.

There is also a clear contrast between the two figures; this is indicated both by the content of the declaration (vv. 8, 16a), but also by the response that follows (vv. 9, 16b): in one, it is emphasized that John is a mere servant, while Jesus is exalted as the Messiah and a divine being deserving of worship.

Verses 8-9

“And I [ka)gw/], Yohanan, (am) the (one) hearing and looking at [i.e. seeing] these (thing)s. And when I heard and looked, I fell (down) in front of the feet of the Messenger, the (one) having shown these (thing)s to me, (in order) to kiss toward [i.e. worship] (him). And he says to me, ‘See (that) you do not (do this)! (For) I am a slave together with you, and (with) your brothers the foretellers [i.e. prophets], and (with) the (one)s keeping watch (over) the accounts of this paper-roll [i.e. scroll]—(it is) God you must kiss toward [i.e. worship]!'” (vv. 8-9)

In prophetic and apocalyptic texts, it is often the case that the seer, the one witnessing the divine message and visionary experience, announces his name. The most immediate parallel comes from the conclusion of the book of Daniel (12:5, “I, Daniel…”). This an essential aspect of the person serving as a witness (ma/rtu$, 1:2, etc), as the prophet formally testifies to the truth of what he saw and heard.

Also traditional is the prophet’s response to the heavenly Messenger (Angel)—i.e. falling down in fear and reverence, as would be fitting toward a divine/heavenly being. However, the parameters of Israelite/Jewish and Christian monotheism, strictly speaking, do not permit worship of any being other than God (YHWH); this means that worship or veneration of Angels is quite inappropriate, as the Messenger himself declares, stating that he is only another slave (i.e. servant) of God, just like all faithful human believers. The same thing happened in an earlier encounter (19:10, cf. the prior note). By contrast, the seer fell down to venerate the exalted Jesus in 1:17, who was deserving of such worship. This is important, in light of the parallel here with Jesus in v. 16.

Verses 16-17

“I [e)gw/], Yeshua, sent my Messenger to give witness (of) these (thing)s to you [plur.] upon the (gathering)s of (those) called out [e)kklhsi/ai]. I am (both) the root and the (thing) coming to be (out) of David, the radiant first star (of the morning).” (v. 16)

A conjunction of the two I-statements, by John and Jesus, perfectly replicates the initial statement in 1:1, illustrating the role of each in the prophetic witness (vb marture/w):

“(The) uncovering of Yeshua (the) Anointed, which God gave to him, to show to his slaves…sending (it) forth through his Messenger to his slave Yohanan…”

The chain of relationship is explicit:

    • God gives the revelation to the exalted Jesus =>
      • who gives it to his Messenger (Angel) =>
        • who gives it to the prophet Yohanan =>
          • who gives it to the other believers

The use of the plural u(mi=n (“to you [pl.]”) and the phrase e)pi\ tai=$ e)kklhsi/ai$ (lit. “upon the [gathering]s of [those] called out”) fills out the last two stages of the chain of transmission:

    • the Messenger gives it to the prophet Yohanan =>
      • who makes it available (in written form) to other ministers =>
        • who have it read (out loud) in the congregations [e)kklhsi/ai]

The first phrase of verse 16b is a Messianic inflection of the earlier identification of Jesus as the “Alpha and Omega” —Messianic in its association with David (i.e. the Davidic Ruler figure-type). It is also a key Christological statement within the book of Revelation: Jesus is both the descendant of David (humanity) and the source of his own life and existence (deity). Note the parallelism:

    • Alpha [first/beginning]—the Root (r(i/za) of David, from which he comes to be
    • Omega [last/completion]—the ge/no$ of David, i.e. one who comes to be (born) from him

The language derives from Isaiah 11:1, 10 (an important Messianic passage), along with other references to the Davidic line (2 Sam 7, etc); for more on this, cf. Parts 68 of the series “Yeshua the Anointed”, and also the earlier note on Rev 5:5. The second phrase of v. 16b alludes to a different Messianic tradition, that of Num 24:17 etc, using the image of a star that will rise (i.e. the morning star) to bring the light of salvation and deliverance to God’s people. I discuss this line of tradition in prior articles.

“And the Spirit and the Bride say: ‘Come!’ And the (one) hearing must (also) say: ‘Come!’ And (the) one thirsting must come—the (one) willing (to do so), let him take/receive the water of life as a gift [i.e. freely].” (v. 17)

This communal declaration summarizes the entire section, reflecting the dynamic of the prophetic witness and how it relates to the people of God as a whole. It will be discussed further in the next daily note.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 2019EschatologyNT_header1a.png

February 18: Revelation 22:7b, 14-15

Revelation 22:7b, 14-15

This is the third component within the parallel sections of vv. 6-17. Following the exalted Jesus’ announcement of his imminent return (vv. 7a, 12-13, cf. the previous note), there is a beatitude, or “macarism”, marked by the opening adjective maka/rio$ (makários, “happy”). The background of the beatitude-form is essentially eschatological, as I discuss in an earlier article (part of a series on the Beatitudes of Jesus). Here, of course, at the end of the book of Revelation, it is unquestionably so, referring to the blessed happiness that awaits for believers who remain faithful through the end-time period of distress. Ultimately, the source of this blessedness is the eternal life that the true believer is to experience, dwelling with God and Christ in the heavenly “Jerusalem” of the New Age (21:1-22:5).

The beatitude in verse 7b is brief and concise:

“Happy [maka/rio$] (is) the (one) keeping watch [thrw=n] (over) the accounts [i.e. words] of the foretelling [i.e. prophecy] of this scroll.”

As in vv. 6, 10, the reference is literary, i.e. to the book (bibli/on, “paper-roll, scroll”) of Revelation as a whole—all of the visions and messages contained in it. The beatitude thus relates to how people respond to the book (when they hear it read aloud, etc), and treat its contents. The verb thre/w means to “keep watch” over something; it is often used in an eschatological sense in the New Testament, as part of ethical instruction and the exhortation to remain faithful as the end comes nearer (cf. earlier in 2:26; 3:3, 8, 10). This reproduces the beatitude in the opening of the book (1:3), where this aspect of imminence is clearly stated (“…for the moment [is] near.”).

The beatitude in verse 14 is more extensive:

“Happy (are) the (one)s washing their robes, (so) that their e)cousi/a will be upon the tree of life, and (that) they should enter into the gate-ways of the city.”

Here “keeping watch over” the prophecy is parallel with the expression “washing their robes” (plu/nonte$ ta\$ sto/la$ au)tw=n); however, in many (later) manuscripts, and some versions, the reading is instead the similar sounding poiou=nte$ ta\$ e)ntola/$ au)tou= (i.e., “doing His commands”, cp. 12:17; 14:12). The idiom of washing one’s robe (stolh/, a long ceremonial garment) was used earlier in 7:14, specifically in the context of believers who have remained faithful during the end-time period of distress (“…coming out of the great distress [qli/yi$]”). The implication of the parallelism, between verses 7b and 14, is that the true believer will accept the prophecies in the book, and will guard them with care. The verb thre/w is combined with the motif of keeping one’s garments clean in the beatitude of 16:15.

The idea of “washing” (vb plu/nw) alludes to the flowing (i.e. living, eternal) waters of the great river (of life) in the “new Jerusalem” (22:1), indicating a reward that corresponds to the believer’s actions. Here the same Paradise-setting is indicated by the motif of the “tree of life” (22:2, also 2:7); cf. the earlier note on 22:1-3a.

English translations tend to obscure the actual wording of the Greek in v. 14, as the subject of the second verb is not the believers themselves, but their e)cousi/a. The noun e)cousi/a is notoriously difficult to render accurately (and consistently) in English. Literally, it indicates something that comes out of a person’s own being, i.e. something he/she is able to do; however, it can specifically connote an ability that is given to the person from a superior, in which case, we might understand it in terms of permission. The word “authority” is perhaps the best option for capturing this semantic range in English. Here, the context is the ancient tradition of humankind being barred from access to the “tree of life”; in the New Age, for believers, this ‘curse’ is removed (v. 3), and we have the ability to come into the Garden of God and eat from the fruit of this tree. This access is part of the wider image of entering into the heavenly “city”, through the gate-ways that always stand open (21:25).

For the blessings described in v. 14, there is a corresponding curse in verse 15, defined in terms of being left outside (e&cw) the city (cp. Matt 8:12; 25:11-12, 30, etc):

Outside (are) the ‘dogs’ and the drug-handlers and the prostitute-(seek)ers and the murderers and the image-servers—indeed, every (one) being fond of, and doing, (what is) false.”

This more or less reproduces the vice-list of 21:8 (cf. also 9:20-21; 21:27), with the addition of the deprecatory label ku/ne$ (“dogs, hounds”); as a traditional term of opprobrium, it suggests both that a person is unclean and is deserving of contempt. On the idea of dogs (the actual animals) being excluded from the holy city, cf. the Qumran text 4Q394 fr. 8 iv. 8-9 (Koester, p. 843). The four terms, taken together, serve as a summary of human wickedness, traditionally associated (in Judaism and early Christianity) with the pagan culture of the “nations”:

    • fa/rmakoi (drug-handlers, drug-users)—a label for any kind of magical practice, perhaps best understood here, more generally and figuratively, for evil and mind-altering deception.
    • po/rnoi (those engaged in, or seeking, prostitution)—a traditional catch-term for any kind of immorality, sexual or otherwise.
    • fonei=$ (murderers, killers)—generally covering any kind of violent and lawless action.
    • ei)dwlola/trai (lit., ones serving images)—representing, not merely the idolatrous aspects of pagan religion, but false religion of any kind, and even, we may say, of pagan culture as a whole (i.e. the surrounding Greco-Roman world).

These are all summarized under the aspect of people “being fond of” (filw=n), as well as actually “doing” (poiw=n), what is false (yeu=do$).

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 2019EschatologyNT_header1a.png

February 17: Revelation 22:7a, 12-13

Revelation 22:7a, 12-13

This is the second component from the two parallel sets that make up verses 6-17 (cf. the previous note on vv. 6, 10-11). It is a declaration, by Jesus, of his imminent end-time appearance:

“And, see! I come quickly [taxu/]!” (v. 7a)
“See! I come quickly [taxu/]…” (v. 12)

This repeats the message of the exalted Jesus in 2:16; 3:11; the corresponding expression e)n ta/xei (“in [all] haste”) occurs in 1:1 and 22:6 (cf. the previous note). This is a clear indication, again, that, from the standpoint of the author and readers of the book, the end-time return of Jesus was imminent. On the specific use of taxu[$] / taxo$ with this eschatological meaning among early Christians, cf. my study on the imminent eschatology in the New Testament.

The message in vv. 6ff and 10ff is spoken by the heavenly Messenger (Angel); that it shifts here to the first person voice of Jesus is simply a reflection of the book’s understanding that the exalted Jesus is the true source of the message (cf. the discussion on 1:1 in the opening note, and the one previous).

Verses 12-13

The declaration by Jesus in vv. 12-13 is expanded beyond the simple announcement of his imminent return:

“See! I come quickly [taxu/]! and my wage is with me to give forth to each (person), as his work is (deserving). I (am) the Alpha and the O(mega), the first and the last, the beginning and the completion [te/lo$].”

In many ways, this statement provides a concise summary of early Christian eschatology, as may be illustrated by an exegesis of each phrase.

 )Idou\ e&rxomai taxu/ (“See! I come quickly”)—This reflects the early Christian belief that Jesus’ return is imminent (cf. above); it was something that believers at the time would have expected themselves to see.

kai\ o( misqo/$ mou met’ e)mou= (“and my wage is with me”)—This alludes to the coming end-time Judgment, which will be ushered in at Jesus’ return; as God’s appointed (and Anointed) representative, he will also oversee the Judgment—thus the payment (misqo/$) is “with him”, and is his to give (“my wage”).

a)podou=nai e(ka/stw| w($ to\ e&rgon e)sti/n au)tou= (“to give forth to each [person] as his work is [deserving]”)—The noun misqo/$ is often translated “reward”, but “wage” is the proper rendering, referring to service done for payment or hire. Thus, here it specifically denotes payment that is due to a person, appropriate to the work (e&rgon) they have performed. Again, as God’s divine representative, Jesus as the authority to give out (vb a)podi/dwmi, “give from, give forth”) the payment at the time of Judgment. Jesus’ parables involving workers/laborers generally carry this eschatological aspect.

e)gw\ to\ a&lfa kai\ to\ w@ (“I [am] the Alpha and the O[mega]”)—The exalted Jesus identifies himself by this conjunction of the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet, which, elsewhere in the book of Revelation, functions as a Divine title applied to God (1:8; 21:6, cf. the earlier note). Since the exalted Jesus rules alongside God the Father, he shares the same divine position and authority; beyond this, we should be cautious about reading into the wording and symbolism of the book of Revelation a more precisely-developed Christology (regarding divine pre-existence, etc).

o( prw=to$ kai\ o( e&sxato$, h( a)rxh\ kai\ to\ te/lo$ (“the first and the last, the beginning and the completion”)—These two expressions both relate to the motif of “alpha and omega”, expounding it in similar ways. The expression “the first and the last” was used specifically of the exalted Jesus in earlier scenes (1:17; 2:8), while “the beginning and the completion” was applied to God in 21:6. The expressions are eschatological, but also cosmological, in that they refer to the beginning and end of the current Age (and, indeed, of all Ages, all Creation). Jesus is the a)rxh/ (“beginning”) in the sense, certainly, that he serves as the “chief ruler” over Creation (3:14), alongside God the Father; whether this also indicates his role in the original act of Creation itself is harder to say, but I think it likely, given the contours of early Christology as it developed in the latter half of the first century (cp. 1 Cor 8:6; Col 1:15-17; Heb 1:2; John 1:1-4, cf. Koester, p. 841). The term te/lo$ (“completion”) is unquestionably eschatological, and the exalted Jesus plays a central role in the completion of the current Age, and the formation (beginning, a)rxh/) of the New.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 2019EschatologyNT_header1a.png

February 16: Revelation 22:6, 10-11

Revelation 22:6-21

Verses 6-21 form the conclusion to the book of Revelation, and, as might be expected, they run parallel in many respects with the introduction (1:1-3ff). Many of the same words, phrases, and motifs occur here. Verses 6-17 have a parallelistic structure that may be outlined as follows:

    • Angelic declaration (“And he said to me…”), involving the words of the prophecy (the book) as a whole—vv. 6 / 10-11
    • Announcement of the exalted Jesus (“See! I come quickly…”)—vv. 7a / 12-13
    • Beatitude declaring happiness/blessings for those who remain faithful—vv. 7b / 14-15
    • Closing personal statement, by the seer (John) and the exalted Jesus, respectively (“I, Yohanan…”, “I, Yeshua…”)—vv. 8-9 / 16f

It makes sense to discuss each component, as it occurs in each part, together.

Revelation 22:6, 10-11

Each part begins with a declaration by the heavenly Messenger who is speaking with the seer (John), cf. 21:9, 15; 22:1. Let us compare the two statements:

“And he said to me: ‘These accounts [i.e. words] (are) trustworthy and true; and the Lord, the God of the spirits of the foretellers [i.e. prophets], se(n)t forth His Messenger to show to His slaves the (thing)s that are necessary to come to be in (all) haste [e)n ta/xei]’.” (v. 6)

“And he says to me: ‘You shall not seal (up) the accounts [i.e. words] of the foretelling [i.e. prophecy] of this paper-roll [i.e. scroll], for the moment is near [e)ggu/$]’.” (v. 10)

Clearly the statements are similar, involving a common set of verbal and thematic elements: (1) the opening phrase, (2) reference to the “accounts” (lo/goi, i.e. the words) in the book, (3) that it is prophecy (foretelling what is to come), and (4) the things described in the book are imminent.

22:6—Verse 6 is quite close to the introductory statement in 1:1 (words in italics):

“An uncovering of Yeshua (the) Anointed which God gave to him, to show to His slaves the (thing)s that are necessary to come to be in (all) haste…”

To this is added a specific reference to the words of the prophecy as being “trust(worthy) and true” (pistoi\ kai\ a)lhqinoi/), which repeats the wording in 21:5; elsewhere, the same dual expression is used of God and Christ himself (3:14; 19:11; cf. also 6:10; 15:3), indicating here the divine source and character of the prophecy.

There is also an emphasis on the spirit (pneu=ma) of the prophecy. From the standpoint of early Christian religious psychology and anthropology, the spiritual dimension of prophecy was rather complex, with certain conceptions that are generally foreign to us today. The word pneu=ma (“[life-]breath, spirit”) is used in three distinct, but interrelated ways, in regard to prophecy:

    • The deity as a spirit-being—this applies not only to the Spirit of God (and Christ), i.e. the Holy Spirit, but to the opposite: evil/unclean or deceptive “spirits” (spirit-beings)
    • The “spirit” (inner-most breath and source of life) within the human being; it represents the point, or level, at which people relate to the Spirit of God (and other spirit-beings); this is especially true for those gifted as prophets
    • The prophetic gift or ability is also referred to as a “spirit” (pneu=ma); early Christians saw it as a specific gift from the Spirit of God—this is a uniquely Christian development of the conception in the ancient Near East and Greco-Roman world, etc, whereby such giftedness was due to the indwelling presence of a personal deity (or semi-divine being), i.e. a genius, in the original sense of the word.

This spiritual aspect of prophecy is described several ways in the book of Revelation:

    • On certain occasions, the seer (John) is said to be “in the spirit” (e)n pneu/mati) when he receives his visions (1:10; 4:2; 17:3; 21:10); since he is in contact with the Spirit of God at these moments, he is certainly “in the Spirit“, but he is also engaged “in the spirit (of prophecy)”
    • In 19:10 there is the statement that “the witness of Yeshua is the spirit of prophecy” (or “…of the prophecy”); the primary meaning here is that the exalted Jesus, through the Spirit, is the source of the message (cf. 1:1, above, and my earlier note on 19:10)
    • This message is also communicated (by God and Christ) through heavenly Messengers (i.e. Angels), themselves spirit-beings who are specifically called “spirits” (pneu/mata) in 1:4; 4:5; 5:6; by contrast, false prophecy is inspired by evil/unclean spirits (16:13-14, cf. also 13:15; 18:2).

22:10-11—If verse 6 resembles 1:1, the statement in verse 10 is correspondingly similar to 1:3, as it specifically emphasizes the need for believers to read (i.e. hear read aloud) the words of the prophecy, along with the declaration that “the moment (is) near” (o( kairo\$ e)ggu/$). Here the reading of the book is expressed negatively: “You shall not seal (up) the accounts [i.e. words] of the foretelling [i.e. prophecy] of this scroll”. The verb sfragi/zw (“seal”), along with the related noun sfragi/$, is used repeatedly in the book of revelation, mainly as an idiom for a message that is meant to be kept hidden until it is revealed at some future time (5:1-2ff; 6:1ff; 7:2; 8:1; 10:4). Generally, in the visionary narrative, seals are being opened—that is, the message is finally being revealed (and fulfilled) in the end-time, which is also the present time (and/or the near future) for readers of the book. This is also the reason here for the injunction not to seal the prophecy—the events described do not refer to things that will take place at some time in the distant future, but are about to be fulfilled now.

On the use of the adverb e)ggu/$ (“near”), and the expression e)n ta/xei (“in [all] haste”), as clear indications of the imminent eschatology of early Christians, cf. my earlier study on the subject. It is probably this sense of imminence that informs the proverbial declaration in verse 11:

“(For) the (one) being without justice [i.e. unjust], he must yet be without justice; and the (one who is) dirty, he must yet be dirty; and the (one who is) just, he must yet do justice [i.e. act justly]; and the (one who is) holy, he must yet be holy.”

The pairs of opposites are precise: just(ice) vs. without justice, holy [i.e. clean/pure] vs. dirty. The book of Revelation has a strong sense throughout of the wicked as belonging to evil, while the righteous (true believers) belong to God and the Lamb. Little hope is held out for the repentance and conversion of the wicked. The end-time was seen as a period of ever-increasing wickedness, a time of testing that will reveal a person’s true character and identity—i.e. whether he/she belongs to God, or to the forces of evil. As the end draws nearer, this dynamic will only intensify further, to the point that, even in the face of God’s Judgment, the wicked will scarcely repent (9:20-21; 16:9, 11). Believers will genuinely repent of their sins (2:5, 16, 21-22), but not the wicked. There is also in the book of Revelation an emphasis on what we would call predestination, which corresponds to the aforementioned sense of person’s essential religious identity (which cannot be changed). The form and language in verse 11, with its poetic parallelism, is similar to that earlier in 14:9-10; it also resembles certain proverbial statements in the Old Testament (e.g., Ezek 3:27; Dan 12:10).

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 2019EschatologyNT_header1a.png

Prophecy & Eschatology in the New Testament: 2 Peter and Jude

Second Peter and Jude

Of all the New Testament writings thought to be pseudonymous by some commentators, the letter of 2 Peter is unique in that it is the only such writing about which doubts were expressed (regarding its stated authorship) in the early centuries. These doubts were based on clear differences in language and style between 1 and 2 Peter, together with the basic assumption that the Petrine authorship of 1 Peter was genuine. The author presents himself as an eye-witness to Jesus’ transfiguration in 1:16-18, but such a specific reference could just as well serve as an intentional pseudonymous detail meant to establish apostolic authorship (cf. also the apparent self-reference to 1 Peter in 3:1). Critical commentators would also point to the author’s mention of an early authoritative collection of Paul’s letters (3:16), and to the passing of the first generation of believers (3:4), as signs of a later date. On purely objective grounds, the arguments cannot be considered decisive, one way or the other.

If the letter is genuinely from Peter, then it must have been composed in the early-60’s A.D., not long after 1 Peter was written. If pseudonymous, then most likely it was composed nearer to the end of the first-century (c. 90 A.D.?). Regarding the eschatology of 2 Peter in particular, certain aspects do seem more consonant with a post-70 A.D. date; this will be discussed with the relevant passages below.

Commentators often treat the letter of Jude in tandem with 2 Peter, since the two letters share many similarities of subject matter, outlook, style, and emphasis (cp. Jude 2, 3, 5a, 5b-19, 24 with 2 Pet 1:2, 5, 12, 2:1-3:3, and 3:14, respectively). In terms of their eschatology, it also makes sense to discuss the letters together. The precise relationship between these two letters remains a matter of considerable debate among New Testament scholars. Perhaps the best explanation is that they stem from a common Tradition, much as we see with the Johannine writings, sharing a basic religious and theological approach, mode of expression, vocabulary, and so forth. Most critical commentators would date the letters to roughly the same period, c. 90 A.D. Some of the obvious parallels between 2 Peter and Jude, noted above, will be mentioned again in the notes below.

Second Peter

Chapter 1

The eschatological emphasis of 2 Peter can be seen already in the introduction (exordium), 1:3-11, if only brought out clearly in the final verses:

“Therefore (all the) more, brothers, you must act with speed to make secure your calling and gathering out [i.e. being chosen] (by God); for (in) making these (thing)s (secure) you shall (certainly) not ever fall. For so it shall be led round upon you, the way into the kingdom of the Age(s) [i.e. eternal kingdom] of our Lord and Savior Yeshua (the) Anointed.” (vv. 10-11)

In the following section (verses 12-21), the historical or autobiographical narration (narratio) and main proposition (propositio) of the letter are essentially combined, since they are wrapped up in the apostolic identity and authority of the author. The longstanding questions regarding the authorship of 2 Peter—whether pseudonymous or genuinely by Peter—were mentioned above. However one views the matter, there can be no doubt that in 1:12-21 the author purposely emphasizes the theme of apostolic authority; this is established in three parts:

    • Verses 12-15—The author, who identifies himself as Peter (v. 1), is nearing the end of his life, and feels it necessary to deliver one final message (as an inspired apostle) to believers. With regard to the critical view that the letter is pseudonymous, it may be worth noting that this sort of “last testament” setting is typical of many Jewish and early Christian apocalyptic writings (which tend to be pseudepigraphic).
    • Verses 16-18—Just as the author (as Peter) was eye-witness to Jesus’ manifestation in glory during the Transfiguration (Mk 9:2-8 par), so he is also a reliable (prophetic) witness to the glorious end-time appearance of Jesus.
    • Verses 19-21—The reliability of inspired prophecy is emphasized, and thus that the author’s own message (in the letter) is similarly inspired. The Prophets of the old Covenant and Apostles (missionaries) of the new Covenant were frequently joined together in early Christian thought—Luke 11:49; Eph 2:20; 3:5; Rev 18:20ff; cf. also Matt 5:12; 11:13; 23:29-37 par; Acts 10:41-43; 13:27, 31; Rom 16:26; 1 Thess 2:15; 1 Pet 1:10-12.

The central proposition is implicit, being alluded to most directly in verse 16, when the author indicates that his apostolic witness is reliable, and that “we made known to you our Lord Yeshua (the) Anointed’s power and (his com)ing to be alongside [parousi/a]…”. The noun parousi/a was a well-established technical term in early Christianity for the end-time return of Jesus, as has been noted many times in this series. Thus, the author’s apostolic message (in the letter) is eschatological, referring to the end-time and the impending return of Jesus Christ.

Chapter 2

2 Peter 2:1-3

In chapter 2, the eschatological message takes the form of a warning against the “false teachers” (yeudodida/skaloi) who will appear at the end-time, implying that they are already present, but will become a more dangerous and pervasive force as the end draws nearer. This reflects a development in the eschatological tradition of the “false prophets” (yeudoprofh=tai) who will exert an influence over humankind during the end-time period of distress (qli/yi$), cf. Mark 13:22 par. This time of distress is marked by an increase in wickedness, that will include intense persecution and suffering by believers in Christ (Mark 13:9-13 par, etc); the faith of believers will be tested, with the danger that they might even be led astray by these “false prophets” and false Messiahs.

First Peter assumes this period of increasing wickedness and suffering/persecution among believers (cf. the previous article in this series), by which their faith will be tested, part of a fiery ordeal within the great end-time Judgment. Second Peter draws on the same basic tradition, but with a significant difference: in 1 Peter, the attacks come from the surrounding (pagan) population, while in 2 Peter they are from “false teachers” within the Christian Community itself. This may well reflect a somewhat later situation, corresponding to what we find in the Pauline Pastoral Letters and the Letters of John. Especially in 1 John (often dated c. 90 A.D.), the end-time “false prophets” are would-be fellow believers who hold (and teach) an erroneous view of Christ (2:18-19ff; 4:1-3ff). The idea of false teachers infiltrating the congregations is particularly prominent in the Pastorals (dated variously, 60-100 A.D., according to different views of authorship)—2 Tim 2:17-19; 3:1-9, 13; 4:3-4; 1 Tim 1:3-7; 4:1-5ff; 5:15; 6:3ff, 20-21; Titus 1:10-16; 3:9-11.

In the case of 2 Peter, it is clear that the author has in mind supposed Christians, since he tells his readers that such “false teachers” are (and will continue to be) “among you” (e)n u(mi=n), and that they have “brought in alongside”, i.e. surreptitiously, ruinous and destructive teachings, etc, by which they would lure others in the congregations to follow after them. This is the significance of the noun ai%resi$, preserved in English as a transliterated loanword (“heresy”). The word fundamentally means “taking hold” of something, figuratively in the sense of choosing to follow or trust in something, often with the partisan connotation of aligning oneself with a particular group or side. This is only such instance in the New Testament of this technical (negative) connotation which would become so prominent in early Christianity (cp. Acts 5:17; 15:5, etc; 1 Cor 11:19; Gal 5:20).

It is not clear precisely what these “false teachers” say and do, though at least a partial portrait emerges from the illustrations and expositions in the remainder of the chapter. Here, it is indicated that they are both greedy and deceptive in their speech, by which they would exploit and take advantage of believers (v. 3). Their actions are tantamount to denying the Lord (Jesus) himself, and are such that they would cause the “way of truth” to be defamed and insulted (v. 2). God’s end-time Judgment is very much in view when the author speaks of them “bringing ruin/destruction swiftly upon themselves” (v. 1). Even more explicit is the declaration in verse 3b:

“…these (person)s (for) whom the judgment of old is not idle (in coming), and their (final) ruin/destruction does not nod (off) [i.e. go to sleep].”

2 Peter 2:4-14

The eschatological warning of vv. 1-3 is developed by a pair of Scriptural illustrations (vv. 4-9, 15-17), each of which includes an exposition (vv. 10-14, 18-22) that applies it to the current situation, in the context of the coming Judgment. The first illustration brings together the two most famous episodes from the Old Testament which represent and depict the judgment of God upon the wickedness of humankind—the Great Flood (vv. 4-5) and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (vv. 6-7). As it happens, each of these judgment-scenes came to serve as an illustrative type-pattern for the coming end-time Judgment. Jesus makes use of them together in an eschatological context (Luke 17:26-29; par Matt 24:37-38, where only Noah and the Flood is mentioned). Noah’s Flood is used in a similar fashion in 1 Peter (3:20ff, cf. the previous article). Of course, destruction by water and fire are the most common means by which the current Age is expected to come to an end, as seen in many eschatological traditions worldwide; this is a basic point of which the author was well aware (cf. below on 3:5-7).

Especially important are the figures of Noah and Lot, each of whom maintained his upright character in the face of the pervasive wickedness in the surrounding society, and, as a result, they were among the very few who were saved from the Judgment. The eschatological implications, and the application to believers (i.e. the readers of the letter), are obvious; these illustrations serve as an exhortation (and warning), vv. 8-9. Moreover, the wicked in the present day (from the standpoint of the letter) follow the pattern of those human beings (and Angels) who sinned in olden times, and are about to face a similarly destructive Judgment (vv. 10-14). The implication is that the “false teachers” are among this group of corrupt and evil persons, depicted so graphically (with some hyperbole) here; however, in this section, it is primarily the wickedness of society (humankind) as a whole that is in view.

2 Peter 2:15-22

The illustration in verses 15ff more properly relates to the false Christian teachers, utilizing the figure of Balaam from Old Testament and Israelite history (cf. similar references in Revelation 2:14 and Jude 11 [below]). Balaam, in the original matrix of traditions, is a complex character, featuring in chapters 22-24 of the book of Numbers. Ultimately, it was the negative aspect of this tradition—particularly, his apparent association with the incident at Peor (cf. Num 31:8, 16)—that came to dominate in subsequent Jewish tradition. Early Christians simply inherited Balaam as a representative figure for wickedness, idolatry, and false prophecy. Covetousness and greed is implied in this portrait (v. 15b), though it is not entirely clear how this relates specifically to the “false teachers”. The author caricatures them savagely, drawing upon the image of Balaam and his donkey (v. 16), and calling them

“fountains without (any) water, (cloud)s of fog being pushed under a storm-wind, for whom the gloom of darkness has been kept (waiting)” (v. 17)

In verses 18-19 we have the first real indication of what these persons may have taught, but it remains quite obscure (to us, at least). It may be that they were advocating social unrest among believers. If the letter was genuinely written by Peter, and/or written in the same setting and time-frame as 1 Peter, then it may reflect a situation of opposition and persecution by segments of the established (pagan) society in the region. Conceivably, these “false teachers” were giving the opposite advice of 1 Peter—instead of patience and humble, law-abiding behavior, they may have advocated a more aggressive approach, promising “freedom” and security by revolutionary means. On the other hand, this e)leuqeri/a (v. 19) could be understood more properly in moral/ethical terms, indicating a ‘false freedom’ that promoted corrupt and licentious behavior. Was the message political, social-ethical, or some combination of the two? What is certain is that these “false teachers” would consider themselves (and/or pretend to be) genuine Christians, and that they, whether intending to or not, would lead other believers away from the true faith (vv. 20-21). They face the same impending Judgment as do the wicked in the rest of society.

Chapter 3

Chapter 3 forms the second part of the eschatological message. Alongside the warning of the “false teachers” of the end-time (chap. 2, cf. above), the author now assures his readers of the promise of Jesus’ return, that it is yet imminent.

2 Peter 3:3-7

After reiterating his main point—the reliability of the inspired apostolic witness (the author identifying himself as the apostle Peter, cf. above)—he proceeds to address the eschatological subject of the exalted Jesus’ return to earth. Verse 3 echoes the theme in chapter 2, of those wicked and deceptive “false teachers” who appear at the end-time, prior to Jesus’ return. Now they are turned (rhetorically) into mockers and skeptics who express doubt that Jesus will ever return, that this central Christian belief is itself foolish and misguided. The point as issue is set in their mouths as a question, followed by a taunt:

“Where is the (fulfillment of) the message about his (com)ing to be alongside [parousi/a]? For, from the (time in) which the fathers laid down (to sleep), all (thing)s remain so throughout, (as they have) from (the) beginning of (the) formation (of the world)!” (v. 4)

The taunt in v. 4b actually serves to frame an apparently quite reasonable observation, and one which would only have had meaning for the early Christian Community. The central issue is the fact that, from the standpoint of the time when the letter was written, the first generation of believers (including the leading figures and apostles, “the fathers”) had passed away (“laid down [to sleep]”), and yet Jesus had still not returned. This reflects a concern over what is referred to by New Testament scholars as “the delay of the parousia” (on the term parousi/a, “[com]ing to be alongside”, cf. above).

As I have discussed throughout this series, virtually all Christians in the earliest period held an imminent eschatology—i.e., that the end, and the return of Jesus, was about to occur soon, generally within the lifetime of most believers. The idea that the first generation of believers would not (or might not) pass away until the end had come is expressed at several points in the Gospels and early Christian tradition, including the famous eschatological saying by Jesus in Mark 13:30 par. Concern over the passing of the generation of the apostles seems to underlie the tradition in John 21:22-23 as well. I discuss these passages in a separate note, as part of the study on imminent eschatology in the New Testament.

The historical and/or literary setting of 2 Peter is centered around Peter’s (impending) death, much as the death of the ‘Beloved Disciple’ informs the appendix (chap. 21) of the Johannine Gospel. Most critical commentators recognize that the reference to the passing of the first generation (“the fathers”) is the mark a somewhat later date (post-70 A.D.), and thus the letter was likely not written by Peter. Traditional-conservative commentators would not be so quick to disregard the indications of Petrine authorship in chapter 1, and might explain the issue of the ‘delay of the parousia’ rather differently. Be that as it may, this sense of ‘delay’ is at the heart of the message in chapter 3. As a point of religious psychology, nearly all adherents—individuals and groups—with a strong eschatological orientation believe that they are the final generation, and that they will live to see the coming of the end. When that generation passes, when the expected moment comes and goes, it is then necessary to explain the apparent delay. We see this, for example, with the Community of the Qumran texts—cf. especially the commentary (pesher) on Habakkuk (1QpHab 7.6-14, commenting on Hab 2:3).

The explanation offered in 2 Peter to the problem follows in verses 8ff; however, it is preceded by a warning against all such doubts (i.e. that the return of Jesus may never come), aligning such skeptics with both the “false teachers” of chap. 2 and the earlier wicked generation that perished in the great Flood (2:4-5ff, cf. above), the implication being that they, too, will perish in the coming end-time Judgment. The author makes a clear parallel between the ancient destruction by water (the Flood) and the modern destruction by fire. This suggests an adaptation of the traditional cycle of Ages so common to the eschatology of the ancient world. At the very least, there is a sequence of two Ages: (1) the antediluvian world, destroyed by water, and (2) the current Age that followed, and still exists, which will be destroyed by fire. This is expressed quite clearly in verses 6-7. The idea that the current world would be consumed by fire was prominent, for example, in contemporary Stoicism, but it can be attested in many cultures and traditions of the period.

2 Peter 3:8-10

The author’s explanation of the ‘delay’ is rather simple, though many readers today would probably not find it particularly convincing. The first point, made in verse 8, draws upon the statement in Psalm 90:4:

“For a thousand years in your eyes (are) as (the) day before, for it passes over and (is as) a watch in the night.”

“But this one (thing) must not be hidden from you, (be)loved (one)s, that ‘a single day alongside (the) Lord (is) as a thousand years, and a thousand years as a single day’.” (v. 8)

In other words, God’s way of measuring time is very different from that of humans. The correspondence of “day” and “thousand years” was utilized in other apocalyptic/eschatological writings of the period, as a way of describing the time-frame of the current Age (and the Age to Come) according to the pattern of the seven days of Creation (cf. my recent article on the “thousand years” in Revelation 20). However, this does not seem to be in view here; rather, the comparison (day vs. thousand years) merely serves to open the possibility that the apparent delay is part of the wider plan of God, which we are not fully able to comprehend (cp. 1QpHab 7.7-8, 12-14).

The second explanation (v. 9) is more traditional (and ethical), based on the idea that God’s actions are aimed at giving humankind every opportunity to repent:

“For (the) Lord is not slow (regarding) the (fulfillment) of (His) messages about (the end), as some would lead (forth the idea) of slowness, but He is long in (His) impulse unto us, not wishing any(one) to go to ruin, but (rather) for all to make space [i.e. come over] into a change-of-mind [i.e. repentance].”

In spite of this apparent “slowness” (bradu/th$), the author maintains the imminence of Jesus’ return, emphasizing that it could yet occur at any moment:

“But the day of the Lord will arrive as (one) who steals [i.e. a thief], (a day) in which the heavens will go along [i.e. pass away] with a whir, and the (part)s of (its) arranged order will be loosened [i.e. dissolved], burning (with fire), and the earth, and the works in her, will be found (exposed).” (v. 10)

This is a graphic and colorful depiction of the end-time Judgment, though not without certain difficulties of vocabulary and syntax, using the imagery of the dissolution of the universe through fire, at the end of the current Age. The illustration of the day of the Lord coming unexpectedly, as a thief, is traditional, going back to the eschatological sayings of Jesus (Matt 24:43 par; cp. 1 Thess 5:2, 4; Rev 3:3; 16:15).

2 Peter 3:11-18

The message of vv. 1-10 leads into a closing exhortation, emphasizing again the coming Judgment and return of Jesus. The eschatological emphasis features in verses 11-14, transitioning from v. 10 with the opening phrase (v.11) that establishes the context of the exhortation: “All these (thing)s thus being loosened [i.e. dissolved]…”. In other words, with the end of the world still imminent, how are we to live as believers in Christ? In particular, Christians, in their thoughts and actions, should always be “looking toward (receiving)” (prosdokw=nta$) and “speeding oneself (toward)” (speudo/nta$) the return (parousi/a) of Jesus (v. 12). His return corresponds with the great Judgment and the dissolution of the universe, from which believers will be rescued. In turn, there is the promise of “a new heavens and a new earth” in which justice and righteousness dwells (v. 13). This is the coming New Age, described as a “new creation”, with an allusion to Isaiah 65:17; 66:22. What is mentioned briefly here is expounded in more precise visionary and symbolic detail in Revelation 21:1-22:5 (cf. the current notes on Revelation); but the basic eschatological concepts and traditions are the same.

The eschatological exhortation sharpens, reaching its climax in verse 14:

“Therefore, (be)loved (one)s, looking toward (receiving) these (thing)s, you must act with speed to be found without spot and without fault (before) Him, in peace.”

The verb speuda/zw, like the related speu/dw in v. 12, indicates the urgency for believers, in light of the impending return of Jesus (and end of the Age). It means acting with speed, or haste, but often connotes striving to accomplish something or to reach a particular goal; it may also reflect the eagerness with which we await the coming of Jesus.

The Letter of Jude

This short letter is said to have been written by one  )Iou/da$ (Heb. hd`Why+, Yehudah, “Judah, Juda[s]”); the intended person in question should probably be identified as the brother of Jesus (and James) mentioned in Mark 6:3 par, however, scholars debate whether this detail of verse 1 is authentic or a mark of pseudonymity (cf. on 2 Peter, above). The letter is quite similar in style, tone, and emphasis to 2 Peter—in particular, the bulk of Jude (vv. 5b-19) resembles chapter 2 (2:1-3:3) of 2 Peter. As noted above, the relationship between the two letters has been explained various ways; in my view, the best explanation is that they stem from a common line of tradition—here, primarily, an eschatological tradition regarding “false teachers” (= “false prophets”) who are to appear at the end-time, prior to Jesus’ return. As in 2 Peter, the implication is that they are already present among believers, having infiltrated the congregations; this, of course, serves as another sign (and reminder) that Jesus’ return and the end-time Judgment are imminent.

The eschatological orientation of the letter is indicated in the opening greeting (v. 1), as well as the closing doxology (vv. 24f). In verse 1, the description of believers as those “…having been kept watch over [i.e. guarded/preserved] in Yeshua (the) Anointed”, i.e. guarded until they are united with Jesus at his return. This is stated more clearly in the conclusion (v. 24):

“And to the (One) being able to guard you and to stand you in the sight of His splendor, without fault, in a leaping (for joy)…”

This is a depiction of believers standing before God at the Judgment, and able to pass through, delivered from the Judgment by our union with Jesus Christ and our participation in his saving work, i.e., “through Yeshua the Anointed our Lord”.

The idea of the “false teachers” is introduced in verse 4, being contrasted with “the trust [i.e. faith] (hav)ing been given along once to the holy (one)s” (v. 3)—that is, being received by the first witnesses, and passed down through a single, authentic and reliable chain of tradition. In 2 Peter, these “false teachers” are similarly contrasted with the inspired witness of Peter (and the other apostles), 1:16-21 (cf. above). The basic setting and premise (propositio) of the two letters is very similar, as is the expository development (probatio) that follows, in 2 Peter 2 and Jude 5ff, respectively. The Old Testament scenes of judgment—Israel in the wilderness, the Angels and the Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah—serve as a type-pattern for the coming end-time Judgment (“the Judgment of the great Day”, v. 6); they also serve as a warning to God’s people today, of the need to remain faithful and alert, in the face of the increasing wickedness and deception in the last days.

The ‘false teachers’ are compared with those earlier wicked generations (v. 8). As in 2 Peter, we cannot be certain of exactly what they taught or did; the description is specific, but (to us) no longer clear; they are said to be:

“(one)s being (caught) in dreams—(on the one hand) they pollute the flesh, but (on the other) they set aside (the) honored (one)s and insult (them).”

Their lack of real knowledge, according to Jude, is declared harshly in verse 10. They are compared again with the wicked Angels, as well as key disobedient and rebellious figures from Old Testament and Israelite tradition—Cain, Balaam, Korah and his followers (verse 11, on Balaam, cf. above). They will be struck by the impending Judgment (vv. 12-13, note the similarity in thought and language with 2 Pet 2:17), the coming of which was prophesied already in the most ancient times, by Enoch (citing 1 Enoch 1:9, apparently, as authoritative Scripture). This is a common feature of apocalyptic literature of the period—events of the current time (or which are about to occur) are presented as prophecies made by famous figures of the past, i.e. as things which will take place in the distant future. Jude 14ff illustrates something of how such pseudepigrapha might develop.

The author (Jude) is more direct in his eschatological message, in verses 17-19:

“But you, (be)loved (one)s, you must remember the utterances, the (one)s having been spoken before(hand) under [i.e. by] the (one)s sent forth by [i.e. apostles of] our Lord Yeshua (the) Anointed, (the way) that they related to you [that] ‘Upon [i.e. in/at] the last time, there will be (the one)s acting as children in (all things), traveling (about) according to their own impulses (focused) upon (thing)s without reverence’. These are the (one)s marking themselves off (completely), (away) from (the truth), (one)s with (only) a soul, (but) not holding the Spirit.”

The sense of these ‘separatist’ Christians as false believers (“not holding the Spirit”) is reminiscent of the famous descriptions in 1 John (2:18-19; 4:1-3, etc). Though the situation in the two letters is no doubt quite different, they seem to share a common way of referring to other Christians whom they regard as having departed from the truth. The emphasis on preserving the common Tradition, and the danger from those who do not adhere to it (for whatever reason) is quite clear in these writings (as also in 2 Peter and the Pauline Pastoral letters). Most critical commentators would hold that Jude and 1 John, though stemming from different lines of tradition, were written at about same time (c. 90 A.D.).

The exhortation in verse 21 well summarizes the eschatological outlook of Jude, with its directive to “keep watch over [thrh/sate] yourselves”, and the emphasis on “looking toward (receiving) the mercy of our Lord Yeshua (the) Anointed, unto the life of the Age[s]”. This points out once again how, for early Christians, their understanding of salvation (“our common salvation”, v. 3) is primarily (and fundamentally) eschatological. The end-time Judgment is likely in view in verse 23 as well, with the reference to “snatching out of the fire”, and the urgency surrounding the author’s exhortation. On the eschatological aspect of the closing doxology (vv. 24-25), cf. above; we should note, in particular, the important distinction made between “all the Age, even now” (i.e. the current Age), and the Age(s) to come (“into all the Ages”). Early Christians were quite cognizant of living on this threshold (“the last days/time/hour”) between the current Age and the Age to come—the coming Age being a “New Age” that opens into the fullness of eternal life.

February 14: Revelation 22:3b-5

Revelation 22:3b-4

“And the ruling-seat of God and of the Lamb will be in her, and His slaves will perform service for Him” (v. 3b)

In the first part of this section (vv. 1-3a, cf. the previous note), the imagery from the Genesis Creation narratives (chaps. 2-3) was applied to the “new Jerusalem” as a way of capturing the specific idea of a new Creation (21:1). The old order of Creation, bound as it was under a ‘curse’ by God (Gen 3:16-19), is no more, and, as a result, the curse has been removed (v. 3a). The remainder of the section (vv. 3b-5) summarizes the new situation for humankind (believers) in the holy city. It is possible to view verse 3 as a chiasm, reflecting this change (from old to new):

    • There will no longer be anything of the curse (on humankind)
      • The Divine Presence: The throne of God and the Lamb is in the city
    • Humankind (believers) will serve God, ruling alongside Him

Moreover, there is a formal contrast indicated by the Greek, speaking to how the manner of existence has changed:

    • The curse will not be [ou)k e)stin] any longer
    • The throne of God and the Lamb will be [e)stin] in her

The curse of the old Creation was marked the removal of human beings from God’s Presence (Gen 3:22-24), but in the new Creation they have returned and have direct access to God (vv. 4-5, below). The rendering of dou=loi as “slaves” can be misleading, due to the associations of the word “slave” in English with oppression and suffering. Many translators prefer “servant”, especially when used in the context of believers (who certainly are not being oppressed by God); however, “slave” is the more accurate translation of dou=lo$. Here, the idea is that of one who performs (obligatory or hired) service for a superior, using the verb latreu/w. When God is the object (of the service), this verb can refer to priests performing their required duties. The only other occurrence of the verb in the book of Revelation is in the vision of chapter 7 (v. 15), of the multitude of believers gathered around the throne of God in heaven; the meaning (and context) here is the same. The noun dou=lo$ is used repeatedly of believers in the book of Revelation (1:1; 7:3; 19:2, etc), even as it occurs similarly throughout the New Testament; sometimes it refers specifically to Christians as ministers—missionaries and preachers, etc—who are performing special service for God.

“…and they will look with (open) eyes at His face, and His name (is) upon the (space) between their eyes.” (v. 4)

To see God directly, with our eyes, is the supreme goal for humankind, and it is only realized (for believers) in the New Age. The impossibility of such a visionary experience in the old Creation, the current Age, is noted at many points, in the Old Testament, Jewish tradition, and in the New Testament—cf. Exod 33:20-23; John 1:18; 6:46, etc. Indeed, to see the face of God meant death to the person, and the “face of God” was frequently used as an idiom for the manifestation of divine Judgment (e.g., Rev 6:16). At the same time, it could reflect the positive aspect of experiencing blessings from God, as in the traditional priestly benediction (Num 6:25-26). The hope of a blessed afterlife, dwelling with God in heaven, gave to the idiom a distinctive eschatological emphasis (Psalm 17:15; Matt 5:8; Heb 12:14; 2/4 Esdras 7:98, etc). In the New Testament, the clearest references to the eschatological hope of a direct vision of God, seeing Him face-to-face, are in 1 Cor 13:12 and 1 John 3:2. Here, the hope is depicted as being fulfilled for believers in the “new Jerusalem”.

Believers are able to see God because they/we belong to Him, and this is indicated specifically by the motif of God’s name being written on the forehead (lit. space “between the eyes”). It is almost as though our vision is enabled by this mark between our eyes. The motif has been used repeatedly in the book of Revelation. Believers have the name of God (and of Christ, the Lamb) written or stamped on their forehead (7:3; 9:4; 14:1); by contrast, the wicked (non-believers) bear the name/mark of the evil Sea-creature (servant of the Dragon/Satan), 13:16; 14:9; 20:4; cf. also 17:5. The name on the forehead corresponds to the names that are written down on the citizen-roll of the “new Jerusalem”, i.e. the “scroll of Life” (13:8; 17:8; 21:27). Thus, believers truly belong to the holy city where God Himself dwells.

Revelation 22:5

“And there will not be night any longer, and they hold no business with [i.e. have no need for] (the) light of a lamp and (the) light of (the) sun, (in) that [i.e. because] the Lord God (Himself) will give light upon them, and they will rule as king(s) into the Ages of Ages.”

The statement in verse 5b essentially repeats that of 21:23-25, in the description of the “new Jerusalem” (the city proper, cf. the earlier note). Here, the focus has shifted from the city to the people (believers); instead of the divine Light of God illuminating the city, here it shines on God’s people. This merely demonstrates the nature and meaning of the symbolism itself—the “new Jerusalem” is not a city per se, but represents the people of God. The reference to both a “lamp” (lu/xno$) and the sun is an allusion to 21:23, where God is the ultimate source of light (i.e. the sun), and Jesus Christ (the Lamb) is the ‘lamp’ that illuminates/radiates this same light. For a similar idea, expressed more in Christological terms, cf. Hebrews 1:3; Col 1:15; 2 Cor 4:6.

While believers are called “slaves” who serve God, they/we are also said to “rule as king(s)” (vb basileu/w), together with God and Christ. This reflects the earlier visionary scene of 20:4-6 (cf. the earlier note, and my separate study on the “Thousand Years”). Elsewhere in the book, the verb is used of the exalted Jesus (the Lamb), or of God Himself. The same wording occurs in 11:15:

“The kingdoms of the world came to be of [i.e. belonging to] our Lord and His Anointed, and He will rule as king into the Ages of Ages.”

As the exalted Jesus rules alongside God the Father, so believers now rule alongside them both together. This image (and that in 20:4-6) may be influenced by (Daniel 7:18), with the (eschatological) promise that God’s people—the “holy ones of the Most High” —will receive the Kingdom and possess it forever.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is 2019EschatologyNT_header1a.png