Bad copy of this article

7/29/2019 Bad copy of this article

1/9

S A R CA SM IN R E V E L A T I O N 2-3 : C H U R C H E S , C H R I S T I A N S ,T R U E J E W S , AN D SA TA N I C S Y N A G O G U E S

The ju ih oi of ihc Apocahpse can he teifib ly offensive. V oi le chit endears hi *text to tome readers, scholars, lend to be pui u H b* (he i brame . li H I ; ol h :-.MM, I ' 11. 1. - are not MUMWII in ilie acadci m unlet* llic tlandrt itu. kidrtii.nit.Kr, and lull hiM iogtaphv. In (he .-*e ul Revelation, however, ihc dl tton ifu tl1 noi |u> J mailer uf J **de m ulc. There .irr more serious muci l l slake. Therhetors* ul" Revelation ha* hern wtr ld rd m a bewi ldering array of vetting* mf r theurnw rK *. and a dmurbine.lv high penrentagr of ihc*c ha*e been lethal. C hmt ia nhostility toward }c*%, Chri stian imp enal nm, and Ch riwi an sectarian violence are afew ol the example* that spr ing to min d.

Adcla Yatbru C ol li n* w re tiled with these top by treating the aggressive char-atie i of Revelation under the rubric of 'ti uh uri or u* 1 Vilification in Revelation canbe offensive, the noted, but it alto had poti tite func tions in the emerging C hmtian movement. Denuncia tion* ol other )ct* lao lita trd bounda o forn tatkin a* theihun.hr tiicd to divimgii ith il icti ocl tct from the vi nagi |.. I he comic mm turn olRome and of impen d culls hclpc tl define the tongre gatiun* us groups that di d noia>knowledge the di vimtv ) ihc emperor or rhc rm|*rrur' univcrtal b um t kml-tti i fi . Vil ific ation of mal C hmt ia n leader*, on the other hand, helped establish ih rboundane * he twee ( h nttian crnnl rs and the rton- t.hmna n gentile* of mainitrr amculture. The joy of vilification was rnoii ly for that early period in the history of themovement, according to Y irbr o C oll in t. Now that Chri stian self-i dentity and powerare well established, the practice ol vilification should be put away tor more maturestrategics.

Pedrr ! . ii addressed the tame tec ol usucs under the rubr ic ot "polemic."'*and hi t argument tame to a similar conc lutjo n: the polemic of R evelation had the

I. Adeb Y in WC oh W "V UiA cum and M f Difin ii.m in rh* Book of R**l , ' MT/t?vVM-ZO.

1 ic J n Hurgiii. ' m the BcuL Rc cl jiu n. ' inA nn-Sr mir.it f * J / 1 < , * /mm IM Falmui jaj / jrV>{d. C ui [ A. F.vantrd I) nil.) . Haf j w . V I FnnmL IV**.).I1 211.

" 7

S uv i |-kiui.t>

character at an intramural ski rmish. I he tynagogur* and the eUtniM ('churcrtoTer r both cl aiming to be the rightful heir* of lirae l'i tradi tion*, and the polemicresulted from the tcnuon* between competin g J cwith group*. 1 he denun ciati on* b r|ohn arc understandable in that first century letti ng where the churches were imalland vulnerable to persecution*.. In later hitti rical set ings -that it, when churcbetbecame power ful and distinc tly non Te wii h- voch denunc iatio n* are no longer excusable. They are now citr aimira l and anti-S emilM.

|l in a ulutory develop m e n t that Chris tian anli- Sc miiitin ntullv beginningan important ( in Ne w Tcvtamrni siitdir *. a n d Rr vrli iton it trrtainlv one pl it rwhere ihe issue* need to be aired- ll *ecrn to mr, however , lhal s tudi o lik r the twomentione d above are ton concerned with makin g J ohn* Revelation palatable. The el-fort to rionera rc or rebahili tate the text h a * distrac ted u* fr om the b g K a l t v prior taikot describing the text. In other word*, the primary question sho uld not be. 'Are thedenunciation* anti-Semitic?' M e should tu n by asking. "Wh at kind of denunciat ion* are found in the text?" Our answer* to ih b questio n might not be to reassuring,but they tho uld br ing ut closer to understandi ng the text and the ru n century commuri um that listened to it.

Wh en wc take thi t approac h, we tind the categories iliri(.alu>n and polemic loo ague.' Wc tan he ramr prcvivc. Har n Maier has thow n lhat the le il o f Revclai iiiiiat a whole permeated bv i r o n utratrgict. Dealing with ihr whole ten (not |i*lthe mr t u j n of Res' 23). Majtrr defended Rr tcla iio n not againtt the ih.i rgr o f anSemiti tm, but rather against ihc n u u t i o n thai J ohn'* ami-R oman vision* traffickedin the same ideologT of dominati on tha t the text cla imed to oppos e. Mater'* rebuttala t that the dramatic i rony in |ohn't text W J I a dei ubi lii ing strategy that ultimate!)undercut all notions o fpower based on conquest.*

I hnd M.ier't argument about irony in Revelation convin cing. I n regard to themessages to the seven churcbet, however. I thi nk we can be even more precise. Theseiiics tagrt arc ccriai nlv ir on n but the clement ot ur va tm paiti tularl v tii ori g ut thesechapters. T he distiivvlioit it impoi tant l ot two reasons. On e it that the recognition o f-.-. >m In the let! tend* lo under none cl loi i t to cioncratc R r>clj(i uii t ml ut .ml hoiTh e author blended sanatm and satire into a volatile form *l>n*MK~hiarhaid>*dli


2/9

s. i m i l l rvn >I I . I V : - i

I fttlNY. S *n . AN I > SARCA SM

I bedenunciation* in Rev- 2- 3 arc best described by as irony, tannr.and tarcaira.These icrrns overlap, bur each desenhet a particular kind o l language practice thaican be isolated conceptually lor (he purpose ol analyus. T he choice ol these termsnukes J i i a .l vtit more compli cated, however. Mans dis cipline* deal W i l l i ihese topicsand I have to decide boss they wil l lie dehned in this studv. Are tlicvc liter J I V terms'Social strategies? Ptvc lio log iul maneusr rvi 1 i u g m t l K figures.' Spcr.h J Llvi

I pMjvtcc to deal with the irony, .itirc. .usd Mr uv n of kt.rl.i n . generallevel I i.ms idrr iNew Yniki Oit\d I'm-waail- Vltm. I W |, H4.

II . Ritf/r I - A I . I . 1 . 4 /'tiuicir, >U.wO-a I nn.jJ Tmm Inrt. anJ atUry*.!*J .. New YeifcKi.tnU.lcr. V'ltT). I ZS iaW Sathi Kumnn-Sakafmira. sass lautkilaec , and Mi ry (Winvr.." I I ahnafAitt.llui F*tccc f f I'iff I h r AUashwal IVcloiw TTbcoif


3/9

fanaaw is Rivtui toN 1-1

or instituti onal folly. I M distance between inter n and practice foims the basis fordenunciation. 1' Se cond, satire does not require the suppression o f the values of tbe

ied author as the case wi th most other for ms o f irony. I hc au thor embraces animplicit or overt moral standard and u s e s it in his " vilification of the vic tim. 'M 'hi rd.satire demands a fantastic or even grotesque de ment is it display* tbc absurdity otpeople, situation*, or organizations- " The l a n t a s i K clement ohen results from t h esatirist's i f i i to po rtia i some aspect ol lite as an absurdity.'

These features ol satire lend thci ii tcl trt to vrveial kinds of *t raicgscs. .value mightbe emplo ml to de*a.rot an oppone nt. Satire'* re lu me on a rmual oamianl can alsolead to a co rmti se (uncii on It can also hate great ent rrta mmrnt value. I n general,though , a satirical strategy subject* wee, folk*, arrogance, or injustice to ridicule f orthe purpose of exposing unacceptable practice or even chang ing it ." In Revel ation,however, we are not deal ing with satirical genre ot li terature. Satire doe* not p rovidea unify ing aspect for the visions of R evelation . Not wo ul d anyone mistake the Seer' 1 J uvenal or Ho rac e. " I am luggesting here, and argue bcki w. that satire and tarcasra describe many of the important features of J ohn's denuncia tions .

Th e other crucial aspect of J ohn* vilification is . . . - . . . . - . . which can be definedas "a sharp and often satirical or ironic uttciaiiLC designed to cut ol g ite pa in .' or "amode ot V I I I I U J I wil depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often num. language ibat is usaialh directed against an indi vidual .""' Academici an* argue whethero r n o i ta r t asm should be Ussiltrd a * a for m of irony. 1 I side with those who definrsarcasm as a special form o f ' . lor without urar imnic dimension a denunciationis simply abusive I he element co mmon to irony, satire, and sarcasm is that all of

11. tmka, r.nnrai firm.. 21414. saaia* ipp-aoinha *p*iallyt mala I O I K J mntr that* ait i n i m r w i*mpU*ia*t"aW) an

i l * * ! ). A. CwddW. id., A /AwAwwarr tfl.terio lt*w> > . . . . - it that it is osen inray inrew/ittwnOi ami ty theuvtire*- 4f m r m f i f M aggmxrt,satd 11 nu t ihut be tuatiraiied with .ithet af/itss i 1I1the aditxc. "Sik to anhao iln gy and Irate Revelation in the experts," Such a itate mrnt wo uld be sarcastic itnce it iscaustK and personal. T he i ronicelement srttrrres my arrogance in cl aim ing to be an autho nry o n R evelation. 1 he satire fun cti oni at a teconda ry level, thou gh, provi din g the irony for what 11 essentially atare as K rejection of my wri ting , mi competence , and indeed my loc ati on .

T he choice to use tarca im ca l l* certai n features into play tha i are mus ing in verbal and struc tural irony. Saicasm is seldom ambiguous. 1 "he subtle ii**.ontiiiencies ofirony air usualb replaced by a fron tal attack thai it irans parcii l to ih r audience. A itisi ry it unnecessary. *l~hc audience is not left 10 wonder about the values of the tfirokcror about which level of meaning to lake *crsoutlv. ' Thus ihc \< - deni abil iltnoi mall t di*.ip|*r.ir*. allh oiigh ihr hearer tan still chouse to iguo ic ihc t.m. om. ' Forinstance. I might reply to tou r r-mail by saving. "Tha nks lot ihc advice hutu natr lv.my spam filter d idn't prevent your note from reaching mc"* The characterisatio n ofyour e- mail a* spam signals that the entire message means some thing di fferent fromwhat the words sav; my gratitude 11actually iniincere and I consider your opinionto be ol no mor e value than unsol icited , computer generated advertising . I hate renounc ed plausible dcni abil iiy in order to strike back with sarcasm, bu i you might stillchoose 10 ignore my teal message in a way thai wou ld not be possible il I tcnounccdsaicasm and simply demeaned your family lineage.

T o sum Up. we need to he await .if three ir L tr d language practices as wc trodRevelation: i mn i. natirc, ami nan -nm. I define them a* foll ows. is ihe hnu druterm, indnating a ttatemcnt or narrative lhal exploit* the gap between appcaramrand reality. || comr s in two major for mal*: verbal irony lutt rra mcs that mean >mr-

X L Hinun. 1*or It C '#wi/\ 2 .2.1. U,in)xa~.V*n* ltfImy. 16-17.14. Barb*, /ns 27-2. ITSaniahilayK H i n a t i n x t i K j i n a d , I K I W V T W I ,avn wah u u m l l l ia un.

"Sirvasm t rttcim. * >:: J ). Fee example, comi in tbe Mhinc. j k m i and tee if you can determine Mbrtlio the mil l . - hit thtnluttlf .! .is-teMii-.u M M M I . O as 1 ssnasis gtslsis. m p i r u l m* J > oi iruntt uio an ioJ bin ln. Brc-e and I . I V I U I I D a model ai tun .1 H i r o a i v c an iddi innil itsWinawhippafimat-r, 'rtt-itnatdiip afftvt', m amwu lor ilw wiy>inwh.h naturalohswwtniiniwapro \| i n i i l n and .unfJ imania. \* | u . , t . - , l , ih r linril mnniitc* of arcanal found to liitbacntc obacttert' c-. iaiov ir ytetmii hi in i tf ibe itiaaKWthip beimxn tor i lei andhurir. I l w w i , unnpccirdcc*rrai inata SSSS**XfJ ih* re l a i n nt n ar uhk-. au |S T * v l i h n - r- -n . . d-dautaiya-uanr. t ; may n..d ir.b , r aisaulalwd' ISIssjswki and Tuotbull. XIis- B* K i n d . ' .
http://r-mi.il/http://r-mi.il/http://r-mi.il/


4/9

S e n .**t 11 RrviLtiN : - i I

thing other ( ki n what is htrrall v stated): and structural irony (narratives in whi ch thecovin*; o f events Irustrate the intentions of characters). Satire can be viewed as J letvobtuse tarrn o f irony that ridicules sue or tolly. It holds it i oppo nent! up to a mora lstandard ol some sort and highlights their s hortcomings. Sarcasm is often satirical orironi c, but i t characterized especially by bitter personal attack. \Viih these overlappi ng phenomena defined , we can return to Res 2-.1 and highlight ceitain aipecu ofthe let I.

T i l " SaltrASTir C H R I C I

The messages of the rv*en Christ to the seven churches in Rev 2-3 make extru sive uie of satire and sarcasm, and also employ irony at certain important points.I hrec groups bear the brun t of this verbal aggression in this section: congregations ,

church leaders, and synagogues. 1he sarcasm direc ted at congregations is no rmal lyexpressed as cri tici sm of the angel of the church. In the message io Sardis. the church'sangel is told that it hai the reputation of being alive but it is actually dead I v_2-.it.The sarcasm is moderate I hi the ttandardt ol the ApocaKpse l. and the satirical aspectit it long. The tl ioc kiug revelation lhal ihc congregations actual status it the o|>ptiti(cof itt reputation i* followed by imperatives aimed at rel orming the litualto n. " wa keop and s lreng ibrn i he rett of the things that are about I n die!" Th e angel of (hechurc h in I joduea. on the other hand , come* in for a stronger dote of sarcasm, firstcomes a conde mnation fo r lukewarmness Ur lo ) , then comes the revelation of theangel's mistaken opi nion, "hor you say. am wealthv and base enriched myself and Ihave no need.' and you do not realize that you are wretched and piti fu l and poor andblind and naked" (3:17).

The ultimate recipients ot the itirical sarcasm directed at the angels are actualrytbe congregations, of course. Th rough ihe logic of apocalyptic s ymbolis m, the verbalabute ends up as denuncia tion o l. and appeal to. the cuius. The whole purpose otlhee messages is, after al l. rhar al l the churches should know that Chr is t is ihe onewho searches their hearts *rsd minds, and ihc one who tcpavt to all according In then.Iced. (2:23,.

( ertain church leaders qualify for special sarcastic attention in ihe text. Th ebphcsians had encountered individua ls who call ed themselves apostles These were

abb ' innerant saints similar to those discussed in Didache 11".36. In Rev 2, thebphesian congregation -through the angel of the church was commended for testingthese alleged apostles and for di scerning (hat they were liars 12:2). In this case ihereis no discernible satirical mont regarding the tell- procU irncd apoi tles. only ci.ij.tti.denunc iation against them in a thi id person rclcrcnce.

No t so with certain prophets in ihe churches. One or rwo in paitic ulai take thebi uni o f canst in I re that it bated on scripture. Th e rkisi cner o l the first victi mt actually questionable: the name Balaam might le fet to a parlKi il.i r prophet fro mtVrgamiim, but this isot tcri. n since the mcvxigr let hnnal ly o htr tt* to "tbo*e whohold to the teaching of Balaam* 12:14). whi ch mig ht not necessarily refer directly to

1 1 I Srxvi Iu tt iK

a contempor ary church pniphet. I he ancient Hi bam was a foreign p ntphr t creditedwith causing the Israelites to worship foreign gods and wi th convi ncing the Israel-lie men to have illic it icxual relations wi th Moabite women i Nu m 22:1 25:31. If acontemporary i ndivi dual prophet is meant in Rev 2:14. the comparis on wit h Balaamsuggests that be was male and was promo tin g a more lenicnc attitude than [oh n toward polytheistic s acrificial practices. If ihe phrase does no i reltr to a contemporarychurc h prophet, rhc plita*c mat simply be a wat ol satiris ingcertain members of thechi nch through bihln al all ution . Th e salite suggests, lliey paitici palcd i n gciililc u-n f i c rt to tome ex ten I, at Ir . itt by J ohn't deli nil tori , ami u i wrrc unfa it h tol In l -od Ineither case, scriptural alluvion brxomct ihe means by whic h preiensc is exposed.

1 he second pnphrtn example it clearly an imlitt.ln.il fp .. a. " #1'* r.'AtiiiMWi, /*-. VinViii'm luu 1t*f


5/9

StUUM IH RrVI It|i>N l-J m

One ether alternative to this iJcniirKJiion in recent scholarship is thai the synagogue of S iun referred not to |ew but rather to churth member* who had musedback toward *cwith synagogue practice.- " hit, alternative pos ition was championedby Hci nric h K ral't. He asserted that ihr vvrugogue ol' Sa un had to icier to churchmember* who had adopted a synagogal identity lor three reasons: because 'titanic *in Revel . 1 . . describes someone who entices others away from failh and confession:because one . . i on . : imagine - 'i n denying that the J ewish communiti es wete ' i pcipl c: aisd tir uutc J ohn was lo iHcl l icd about Christians and not about J ews. No neol tbrse .1 1 inirnu i* tn mi mi ng : ihr first too k! I*c true of J ews or o f anvonc esse-,and the lis t tsso cannot be supported bo m Rorl ain- n Nevertheless, Kraft ins okeda hs'pothetical scenario in whic h Chris tians might base abandoned the churches toseek refuge in the legal itatui of the J ewish communi ty. To the lews these wou ld haveappeared as God- fearer*. Io |ohn they* wou ld have been a syncrctis tic gro up, ready tocompromise wi th polytheistic and imperia l cult insti tutions, and capahle o: dil utin gthe commitment of the churches."

Mo re recendy. David frankfurte r has made the case that the synagogue of S atanii>iad have lelciied to pi.' Moniich Kiafi, a*** Hffmk in-ng '" /uwv I llardbuoS l um Scwcri TcsuaHoil Kwi , Nt.hr Sachet k. 19741. bl.

I I . DavUFrankivure.. * *. Nt-? Rnun-ais ning theOilst*.'* rfTK A I2QU1): 4Q}2\' I n ' \l .r .(.ii! ir ;u . .1 fie a ai mi r a ia ifk H I ; lha yrtip> C * >4 Sjian >ra ginlJ r t-"d-ta-arrr*ah .i Hiirwdifar ihurcU* ind dairrW iW a,iinm;r jSludut In O l . I Hi n-I f and |uJaofn I I I . >W*ird. ntmn lo l a j . r - i n d m t nl ihr

11 SlttVl ! . . .

It is much raner to accept the rruionrs- opinion o n ibis mane r the synagogueof Saun references were directed at some members ol the lewis h communiti es inSmyrna and Philadelphia. Ih e message I D ihe Smyrniote church suggctts that thesynagogue of Satan woul d be responsible for tendons wi th the author ities . 1'he d o u ble relerence to Satan and ihe devil makes the connecti on. " and it is more likcbthat tome members of the lew ish co mmuni ty (rather than former church members)wou ld be in a posi tion to carry out such aciiviii es against I -

T he piottlern with the Conclusion lhat J ohn was L a l l i n g M i i a g o g u c * uUntc,however, it thai it makes J ohn's meu-igr cttr cmcl i il ivtattr lul nowsxlaw. Nineteenccnturset bter. with a I mp hiiiors- of Chri stu oppre*vH>n of J ews to take intoaccount, such statement canrsoi paw without l ommr nt V>me have poi nted to mit i gating circumstances. The synagogues may have been under great pressure after theJ ewish MtJr with Rome (66 -70 C I L ) to define themselves as loyal, stable ins titutionsin the Roman worl d and may have been more aggressive toward the churcbet for ihr*reason." Or perhaps the denuncia tion of these particular ivnaguguei was a pari o f| o h n * brgcr bias against anyone with h igh social standing in tbe cities of Asia .'

A consensus abo appears to be formng thai ihe synagogue ol Satan referencesshould he . : i. : . -; . ni as an intramural J ewish iku muh between ihe svnagoguci andihr . Ii . i . Ixii h of which wcr ecb imin g the tight t o he sailed ihc iruc Israel, I hcstudies by Varbro Co ll in* and fcirgen mrnl ton rd at ih r beginning of this paper ei -pl.uncd the "synagogue o f Satan* ntuprr ats in as an argument between vompeti nggr oup who both claimed the exclusive right to call themselves "Jew-s " ,arhro I *focused o n the social func tio n of John's denunci ation, descr ibing it as an attempt toclaim the tetm "lew* for the churches. J ohn, aco ird ing to YanSro Colli ns, consideredtbe churches to be the (rue hraxrl. ''

Borgcn argued the case somewhat dilrercni lv. He agreed thai the 'ques tion behin d the phrase 'synagogue of Saun* is: whete are the iruc J ews (o be found, in (be/ ' - ,.; or in (he synagogue.''" He placed this tpcvihi. |vil cniic about those whofalsely cla im to be J ewt (Rev 2:9; 3 ) in a broader context of J ewish in tramuralargument*. A tutvev o f relevant test* fn>m Phiki and tmm the Dead Sea Strolls led

phuar Kill * M i l l - ( 'bu i nSiy las mil"I innp ni in 'ihaaa svttn call ihama-n-n |a- * a . " 1 do nc< igm ban etn crnaaih-* -J irii iU.*lirrs Thrupotrtt is "ti l taken

M. tl..Hc.h S.hu-lci Ft. Kitr a rr*a/r M l (Pntabrnaaicw Cntsusuniar-n ; Minnaup.*a*-r rWtras*. I

y. I asmard Th..mp*..r. TaV rU4 a/fJ>*ltntm. 4} ,*>.. aarf~r INaw Vrel: . ..' Uni-veisatr Press. 19901.171

>> YaibmCnBaiM. ValaWannn." \\4. .119. !


6/9

SPt MM IH RfVILatlil*" -(

Kim iii oin clu dc thai J ohn buill an * " i wdi tmn*. especially (hose dealing withihr denunciation ol" pagan worship, national priesthood, and pro teiyui m. Hoigcnconc luded that J ohn M l lewori ung these tradi tions to support ihr idea thai thechurch was ihr true Israel tounded on the salvinc death ol" Irsus. ihe escha iohigical. mm units' in which were found the Hue J ews. "

One ptobl cm with this argument is thai it does not suhScienth account lor ihedim. . i n n f | . n i audit IM C . It is no I cleat what kind of intramural aigunieiit is in volved hctc it" the churches werr o.inipoed moslh ' of genlil et. T he churchct tc rt.i ii ihilr rv. on l ii .trl 'i hrrirage , hur what prrcrni age ol the sain is tame In no J ewish parents*O r wha i pcnen iageof the saints kept Torah to the extent th.ii the* would have hernperceived by neighbors as J ewi sh*" Althou gh n is impossible to uii. inntv an answer,(ohn's impli ed audience is mostly gentile. Thi s it what we wou ld expect from theearlier history* of churches in western A li a M ino r, and texts like Ke* V' 1 provideconnr-n i - Moreoser. as itai ed above. Ke sebtion does not deal with ttanda idissues Torah observance, such at sabbath, circumcisaon. washings, or food regulations{except for meat sacriheed to other deiti et). No r does Revelation portra y dvil oie dhumani ty in terms of J ews and Creeks or jews and gentiles as in Acts or the Paulineletlers. Revelation lual li shows 1st tic concern tor issaacs that wou ld be invol ved inan intramural J cwnh polemic.

Another probl em wuh the iiiea thai J nhn w* t (aiming that ihe th on h w ihriruc Israel is ih.u J ohn never hiuhcred to write such a thing. '" Resetatii'n is a long tr itwu h ample tpace for J ohn to describe ihe churchc t by calling them J ewt or ihe trueIsrael. Bu i he did no t do to. 1 he lynagogue of Satan references will not s upport suchan elaborate hypothesis. A simpler solu tion is available, li on ly becomes evident onc ewe are attuned to the sarcastic tendency of the ten and begin notic ing its presence inthe messages io Smyrna and io P hib dcl phu .

One nagogue ol S aun reference comes from ihe message io ihe angel of thechurch in Smyrna (Rev 2:8-11).

And in the iivgel of ihe church in Smyrna write* Thus sars the first asd the bit. whowas dead and came to lire. I koto* your oppress iu* aavd your poverty but yuu areisdi*and the blupbcniy tbene who tar they aie Jews and arc nut bul arc irwigtiguc at .Satan. IX isot fear ihe ihings which vuu are ahum to iiilT rr Biraokl,ihe Ihrnl is abocii in thmw tunurof sou into prmm H I lhal yuu might be trsicJ . andyou wtll have oppression hit ren days. Br lairhlul until drain and I wil l grre you rh*

W. H-irv-is /IVtLmk. -40 Thu it hated ft Shaft Cohrx't argument asVuu "to" ON -aniuldhivr been 11Mined a J *" oh

arta rina ccmuir uissae dlno-ei id ling Since eihni . |e*** ir tii-diutrtjUinhedbr ththlng. vpeech. a nun. or li t cup a u n a . poipc i>aud have i K Sac e d uihrr ihupta a u i h at StXfJ M aaB o t aH WR wah .I>vii> >a J aoisb pan nf -we. nomad ft' a |**w. irrae/i'ad aiwutly hh n i h r r Wa c re par (zoningJraritk nftaab and palate; as shays] l> v'- fin i, *"" f l r f taaaaniaari / / ^ a/tarn f\ >y*Uj'*i. VmunI'weruiniwv llterkdiy Unitfrtai, oftallfumw I*. 19991. ^ ,

41. See also Rev 7il -17.di MU w*d Utam.* . The wa. i i - . u d an |.. ..^ byW il - . n r|udala*ra,* 61.*).

H i SlBVl I * .

cauwn uf bfe- las: the one wi th an en heat sthal the uviiil M I S to the churches. The 1 . 1 wil l be haimed by ihr tecund death.Ih e focus m this message it on severe suffer ing: Chri st tu ie t thai he knows

the angels oppression loAiiii l1?! and that more is to come. Here the second pers onun gu br address to the angel breakt down and the congregation it addressed due* titthro ugh the use of plurals . Since this is obscured in standard fcnglith, I translate instandard Texan: ' Beh.- ld. the Devi l is about to can some of y'all into priso n that r'allmight he tetied. and 'all will have oppression lor ten dai s' 12.1111.

"with in this general context ut ongo ing oppress ion. Chr itl tats he also knows"the blasphemy of those who M V ibr t ai r J ewt and aie not. bul (aic | a synagogue ofSatan" (2:""1. Ini inlet li> uridrrtta nd (hi t phrase, it is important lo note the t.intidenlironic lame atf the irtcv-cagr. The angel of ihe longtr gatt in is la ll rd poo*, yrl ilcsLirealrich; some addretseei are about to sulTrr hut shou ld not be fearful : whoever is f aithfulun io death wil l rrcerse the crown of life. Thes e ttarements imply a structural irony inwhi ch present "reali ty" it decersme. Poverty*, a griiesome future , and physical deathare not what they seem to be. This ironic context makes it unnecessary to supposethat John's use of ihc phrase 'synagogue of Sa un' implied that someone else deservedthe tide of J ew. After al l, no other congre gaiion was iruly poor i n contrast to ihe- mote congtcgation; nu other saints were Hub afraid: no other indi viduals wcietruly fai thful un to death: and, 1 esi rapo bte. no one else was cla iming to be ihe ti ueIsrael.

Thu s, the sanaclic phrase " M nagogue of Satan" did not .pir sl mn who coul dclai m Io be Jewidi*. it alentcil the upp ir ie nl *' allegiance to C od . Il sali tircd theirpi-r-hahlc claims to phrases like "svnagogue of the Lor d" (cf N um 16:3), '" but i hcreare no signs thai the offending phrase encapsulates an attempt to outline the reU-iwnsh ip of Israel and ihe churches. In ihc message io ihe church i n Smyrna we aredealing with sarcasm. not with systematic theology. Denunciation was the goal, notihe byproduct.

The message to the congrega iion in P hilade lphia (Res' 3:7- 13) t*j*>nJurai andextends this inierpieution.

And to the angel .< the church i n Philadelphu write: Thus says the holy one. rherrue one. the on* - tu . hat the Let nl David, rhe une whn oprtss and no ot-seshalldot*, vvfto tk'tcs aasd nu one pews I kasuw men deeds. Hehuld. I hate placed anopened duel before you "bach nu une it able to close. f-r yuu hate little power, andyuu ml any wind and hate noc drwtrd my name Hebokl . I give from the * a .ul Satanihittr saying ihry air Jrwt and are nnt hm mey Irebehnld I ihall makethem to that they will and will pen t rat* ihesnsebet at tour iret and wwll knowthai I love you. Siasce you kept the word of my cssduiaevcc. 1 also will keep yuu fromthe hum ' icsling which at abuut lu cone tapon ibe *h . le world ta urdcr lu lesthose da-r iling tipon die caith. I come uuhkly l b Id a t.. what yuu haac (hatno tine takes aimi tmwn. The ttcmr I wdl mike Io be a caikumn an ihr temple of

4. la.o-R.di.it lWl \-ffmwiaCt.lt\\u | i t i iH uw . 4m
http://th.ii/http://la.o-r.di.it/http://la.o-r.di.it/http://th.ii/


7/9

Saw sstt it RtvriA iioN i- i

II Cu d and be Call neicr dep-ail. Ao J I ill wirir ufnui hini the name oaf myCud aatd ihe >J I M uaf die nlv uf* my t.ud , die neat J etuulra i whu.h tnn in dnwtiImiri heaven (mm my Ciod, and my tew tume. I rt the our who hat an ear hearw+ui the spirit m i 10 the churches.It it imrtossable to understand this message wi thout re cognizing iti ironic ap

pi op ru iu m ol Itaiania. oraclct. The message comprises j collage ol phrases ir la icd toIsaiah th il i nteip iel ihc caitigrcgoriairit contempurary experience a* ihe tiisi pan o i lLinger 4 . 1 . 1 % - ,1 .the . i ti n 13*12-131. The promiseat ihc end of the message aff irms that the vic tor wi ll become a permanent fixture inthe temple and wil l never ever leave again. The name of G od . the name of the newle ruu lc m, and the risen one's new name will be written upo n the ssctor/co lumn. T hetext makes clear that the earth h* J erusalem is noi in view here. It ii the new Ic rusale m.the one thai comes down fr om G od .

Thi rd, ihc meaning ol the open dour in Rev ):*> is cruc ial . *vt n-t do or is open

44- Isa 22i20-J l (*.v|.41. Ita 12 22 Mi l ixx acsdiical - ' . . . - i | . f i> J n i n ii - . i . "and I si J ]git lu kaast thegky

ol Davad.* In ihr Las. I T . I I and 2 retar m ihc remutjl and hrtimvanaj ol a ox-am. wkarh prihrptiiunnnaxi an.nh.r cH_ rit. >n ihr o i u r . lai ihr Philaaklpaaun . , i . :.. n . i .

i i s v i 1-kiiT.ti.it

before the l*nil i.le lphian congreganon.' It does nor refer to a missionary opp ortunitylike the open-door imagery of I Co r \ h% 2 Cot 2:12. Co l VJ .o r Acts 14:27. Such areading woul d be foreign io R esvL tion's portrayal ol the relations between churchesand their social setting-..~ Ii wou ld alto be alien i o this par ticuL r message in whichihe congregation was exhorted to ho ld onto what ihey h ad. I net* were not t . - l d toextend ibemscKes in micti on ac tivity.

In lu 22. the opening and ibuiting o f ih r door baa t o do wiih a u t h n n i i overJ eruu len i and the house of Jualah. and this i t the root meaning in Rev \ at well.'" Ii.i pa i t s c v t e t authority over access t o the new J eruule ni, the right ol entry i hec M h . i t o k i g K - . i l city of God.** The idea recurs in Rev 22*14. where a blessing it pnt-noii nccd u pon those who hate washed their robes so that ibev may eai of the tree o flire and so thai they may enter ihe new J erusalem pf the gates (wh ich are named afterthe twelve tribes ot Ura cil " He wil l guarantee their admission tince the congrega tionhad little power but had remained foyal (3:9).

Fina lly, one other phrase i n the P hiladelph ia message makes an importan t connection wuh l uu h . The one who has ihe key of David says he will in the lunateforce the synagogue o f Saun . the ones who say the are J ews and are not. to co meand ptmiraic ihrintcko, at the leet ! the saints. T h i * is an ei li cn id i unusual ideam R evela tion, tince ebew here In using dot* n to an tone hot Go d eve n l o angelstsuna xiepuhl e. "' The reason for ihe prostration moti f in 3*9 is lhal Revelation herereuses a standard *lc fn>m Sccaind ami 1 hud lu ia li t o build on the aHuiion to thekevv o f Dav id


8/9

S.i. . M I is |inr> i i K i v : -

p a n I n the orjclc o f the risen Chr ist, the irony of ihr Isatanic raion turns intoJ double roerxe. I hc risen * '.nrvrr * XlhrMian" hit 'tram L inrrtl. Crnac-i ihr AniMvhain ul rhr nrrn asplainiIfnanui't -


9/9

5**-. RlVf LAtlON . -1

ihc level oftr imtnol ogv. Revelation ckrar enough. T he n*ovcmem in which|ohn was a prophet was composed o f churches. I h c churches made up some ton ofnetwork, for ihe text o l Revelation it a communicanon to them a l l . " J ohn* term fo r(hit network o f churchet was *kingdom.'"s* lire kingdom wa tmade up ol prirtu toG o d . bu l they are more often called tainu" or servants of God.'"

Ai the level of cor>c~eptuala/arion. three images fro m Revela tion help us gain tomeclatirt on ihe rexiiironthip hetween ivitagngucs and the kingdom o l pricttt envtcioncdby J ohn . Thes e imugct tuggcsl that J ohn perceived a liaiistcisdcnt realm which hepol luted at a woman, a crowd, and a city. Some o f Itrarl ami tome ol ihr churchesparti- ipitcil in thi transcendent reality, which wat in some tentr their origin, theircontemporary experience, an d their destinytimultaneoutly.

The first image it the woman o f Rev 12. Without solving all the problems in volved with th uvirion (and thev are many), it it sate to say that the text suggests aconnection between the churches and ancient Israel A heavenly woman gives birthto the mcssiah. and to other offspring aswell. The other offspring aie 'those keepingthe commands o f G od and having ih e testimony o l J esus" (12:17). so ihe womanis in some sense the source o l the saints and iheii mcssiah. !-.. is no talk liete olGhlittunity, o f due J ews, m o l Israel, and i h r relationships between synagogues andshuts he* are mi l defined.

Th e . I image it the crowd from Rrv 7. I hi t ibiublr vision, interjected between the tixih and tevcntb seals, ile-scrihrt the compotilstin o f the kingdom.T h efirst part o f the vitson 'Rev7;2-) describes one part o f ihe kingdom as the faithful144.00(1 o f Israel, twelve thousand from each o f the twelve inbet. This is a reworkingol hreluels vision o f the sealing o f the faithful lerutalemites rseforc the ftibylonianassault o n that ci ty [hack I According to J ohn's visi on, just as G od hadsaved thetaithlul Ot his people in that earlier catastrophe, to G od would always protect theremnant o l h u people. T he picture it filled out with the second pa n o f the vision (Rev7:17). A multitude lo o Urge to number appeart around ih c throne. These come"fftiin every nation, and tribe and people and tongue" (7 ; - J ) . T be imagcri suggests atitioii o l the shun bet as a touiem|torarv an destliatoliple from i h r twelve tribes o f Israel anil a k< o fpeople from al l theoiberinbet o f ihe worl d. Again, "J ew," "Israel," and "Christian" are no tappropriate termsfor this movement.

I he third image is the new lerusalcm. I he oblique useo f this image was alreadyhighlighted fntm ihe message to the angel o f the church in Philadelphia. In Rev3:7- 13.a largclv Gentile congregation is guaranteed admission to thecity where G od

NWe the ritual sxttxsx brs" in 1:11x231and 2216V. Re* 1.-1-6;1-4-10. J ohn did U W 'chunk* in uni vnu l nmw tortheLarpri m c - cmi t i . l U v M i M - i i l l d e i l i d O i - e .61. RevRi ll ? J - |H :7|*rc. Fnrasnrvnn nntih.. i and gunny, to* -ay fm r tmCmt* W

air Apstbr* /* fr^f aVnoViM ,m is*r iScw Yk; Oifuid Lmvwici 1'iess. 2UB1).l l l - I U .t c ! . Sor*.hn.Call.nc W- SVc a t s n r c *

Sts-vr. 1-kiLsis.

and the Lamb will dwell wuh humanity. Their vindication will be .u know ledgrd bytheir antagonists from the local nagogue. I he later vinon o f the new lerusalcm inRev 2I**'> 22:S ismore elaborate than ihe image in Rev 3 :7-13, and does no tneed tobe detenbed fully here. IW o aspects touch o n the character o f the churches in theirrelationship Io Israel, however, and deserve comment. One aspect is the prcexislciilcharacter ol'ihe new J erusalem, which is only "new"to humanity. Tb e new J cruaulernis a preexiiieni lealui which the tainu encounter ai the end i duoini.il bitton (Rev21:2-4). Habitation in the t i l l filial':, ihc l u l l , iimiicdulrd presence ol God and theend o l human tullrring.

rhe wvond .upcci nf the new )rriicikrrn thai touches on our topic is the description o f the walls of ihe cnv. Rrseti'ion 21:12-14 remodelt ihe vrsion o f theeschatological J erusalem fou nd ai the end o f Eiektel's oraclrt (trek 4 8 : 3 0 - 3 5 1 . E ie -kiel haddetenbed the future J erusalem at having twehv gates, one for each of theinbet. In J ohn's vinon . the gaiet are also named after ihe twelve inbet o l the torn o lIsrael, but a new feature is added. I h c twelve courses o f foundation stones for thewall ol the city arc named after the twelve apostles ot ihe lamb.

It would be di tan lo ut to u> to tqurexe these several ullages into one schema,as it ihe hrutriilv woman, ihe |44(klL>, the unnumbered multitude, and ihc newJ ciutalcrii were inlerkicki ng purls In the same - I, J ohn's itnagrtt impirssivrand fumlionul, bi n hardly systcmalic. There is acoherentr to i l, however, thai iiiti-firt ihis briel review In none ol these images wrre rhe churches porayrd at Israel,at the true |rwt, o r as Chnttians. It would be more accurate to sav that [ohn textdr < bet lirael an d the churches at panicipating in a larger transcendent reality,ftoth tynagoguet andchurchet claimed the same scnptural traditions, bu t according to |ohn, ihe larger reality did noi include al l lews nor di d it include al l thosewho called themselves saints. C hr is iu n, true hrw. and Israel arc inadequate termsfor it* description. That reality was an cschaiokigical kingdom, a heavenly woman,an unnumbcied multitude, a heavenh ciiv that cu t across boundaries ot cihnicitv.language, and culture."

These were grand claims, ; . . - . . 1 1 . lor a nrtwork o f -n- all lulnerahle groupslike tbr t hun hev Fnim the outside, ihr hunhev h.irdlv kinked like ihe esthaiokigj- .I lulfillmeni o f God's dealing wu h the world (nor d-i churches (ttd.iv) These tollsof grand claims, juxtaposed wuh more modest earthly appearances, provided thematrix within which the ironies o f J ohn's text flourished. The paradoiical experiencemade irony, satire, and sarcasm appealing strategics. I he gaps between aspiration andachievement gave ihe propbei room I D maneuver.

I V * . Cf. I . . . i, /-vrrw/taAx l e i l - ' l s .
http://uoini.il/http://ttd.iv/http://ttd.iv/http://uoini.il/

Documents

Bad copy of this article