Tuesday, December 29, 2020

Apocalyptic? #15: An Apathy Sandwich—The Seven Churches (Rev. 2:1-7 and 3:14-22)

“To the angel of the church in Ephesus . . . Smyrna . . . Pergamum . . . Thyatira . . . Sardis . . . Philadelphia . . . Laodicea write . . .” 

(The full text of the Letters to Ephesus and Laodicea is printed in the RSV at the conclusion of this blogpost.)

 


A sandwich is a mirror image.  If one took a mirror and laid it flat, then, placed a slice of cheese in the middle of the mirror, then placed a thin cooked hamburger patty on top of the cheese, then, placed a half bun on top of the hamburger patty, then, looked at the appearance of this concoction above and through the mirror, one would see the appearance of McDonalds’s McDouble sandwich.  In other words, the McDouble sandwich is a mirror image, with 2 bread products on the outside, 2 meat products next inside and a cheese product in the middle.  Another way of saying mirror-image is to say “symmetrical” or “chiastic,” as I discussed in my earlier blogposts Apocalyptic? #2 and #3.  John sees things in mirror-image.  He sees things symmetrically.  He sees chiastically.  To understand Revelation, one needs to see things chiastically, along with John.  So, now, we see John using chiasm in his presentation of Jesus’ letters to the angels of the seven churches.

1.      The first church, Ephesus, and the last church, Laodicea, both had the same problem:  APATHY.

2.      The second church, Smyrna, and the second to last church, Philadelphia, had NO CRITICISMS, but both were spoken of as having to deal with “the synagogue of Satan.”

3.      The three middle churches—Pergamum, Thyatira, and Sardis—were all identified as having to deal with the problem of PORNEIA in, at least, a spiritual, metaphorical sense.

We will consider the “bun” layers (the first and last churches) in this blogpost.  We will consider the second and next to last churches in the next blogpost.  In two blogposts from now, we will consider the middle three churches.


The APATHETIC Churches:  Ephesus and Laodicea                 

Looking, first, at the problem with Ephesus and Laodicea, we see that they have become apathetic.  Apathy is the absence of what the Greeks call PATHOS.  Aristotle suggests that there are three primary means of persuasion that humans develop.  These are ethos, pathos, and logos.  The English word ethics comes from the word ethos.  Ethos means credibility or trustworthiness.  It is the persuasion element that is active when you simply “trust” the person telling you something.  The English word "logic" comes from logos.  Reasoning or logic is of two varieties--inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning. 


PATHOS
:

I write in my book Making Offers They Can’t Refuse (pp. 19-20):

From the Greek word pathos come such English words as sympathy, empathy, apathy, and antipathy.  The "-pathy" element means "emotion," as does the term pathos.

     "Sympathy" adds the element "sym," which means the same as the English word "sum" (the total resulting from mathematical addition).  So, "sympathy" means adding your emotion to someone else's emotion.  For example, if my friend's dog dies, I express sympathy:  "I'm sorry to hear that your dog died.  Although I didn't know your dog, I know that he was very special to you.  I know that you are feeling bad and that makes me feel bad."

     "Empathy" adds the element "em," which means the same as the English word "in."  "Empathy" denotes the situation in which two people have the same emotion in both.  Returning to the example of the death of the dog, I might empathically comment:  "I'm sorry to hear that your dog died.  I remember the day my dog died.  I was in my house when I heard the screeching tires, the dull thud, and my dog's yelping.  I ran as quickly as I could.  She died in my arms.  I know just how you feel."

     "Apathy" adds the element "a," which means the "absence" of something.  Atheism means the absence of a god/theos.  "Apathy" means the absence of emotion/PATHOS.  If I have "apathy," I might comment to the grief-stricken pet owner:  "Your dog died?  Get over it!  There are plenty of dogs in the world.  Go to the pound!  Get another one and quit complaining!"

     "Antipathy" adds the "anti" element which means to be "against" someone or something.  If I hold "antipathy" towards someone whose dog has died, I might say:  "Your dog died?  Good!  I hope your cat dies!  I hope your car dies on your way to work!  I don't like you!"

     . . .  Aristotle suggests that emotions are powerful means of persuasion:

  • anger,
  • love,
  • fear,
  • shame,
  • goodwill,
  • pity,
  • confidence,
  • kindliness,
  • envy,
  • emulation,
  • enmity,
  • friendship,
  • shamelessness,
  • being indignant, and
  • shame

 


Jesus would like the church at Laodicea to be SYMpathetic or EMpathetic towards him.  He would even prefer that they were ANTIpathetic towards something—as the Ephesians were antipathetic toward the works of the Nicolaitans, rather than to be what they are: They are Apathetic.  Jesus says: “I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were cold or hot! So, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you out of my mouth.”  Jesus is willing to be their BFF, in the common vernacular.  He says to them: “Those whom I love, I reprove and chasten; so be zealous and repent. Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if any one hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me.”


Likewise, Jesus faults the church at Ephesus for their apathy--their lack of PATHOS, specifically, the emotion LOVE, from Aristotle’s list.  He says to the Ephesians: “I have this against you, that you have abandoned the love you had at first.  Remember then from what you have fallen, repent and do the works you did at first.”  For some other possible identifications of the specific “love” the Ephesians had forsaken (besides that missing love which was similar to the Laodiceans’ apathy), refer back to my blogpost Apocalyptic? #10.  However, as opposed to the Laodiceans, the Ephesians are actually praised for having a different PATHOS:  Hate.  Jesus EMpathizes with the Ephesians, saying that both he and they hate the works of the Nicolaitans.  He says: “you hate the works of the Nicola′itans, which I also hate.”  The Nicolaitans fit in the same bin with the PORNEIA of the middle three churches.  I will address the issue of the Nicolaitans, when I discuss those three churches, but it is significant that the problem with this specific PORNEIA does not affect the churches of Ephesus and Laodicea.  Besides the PATHOS of hate, the Ephesians are also praised for being indignant (from Aristotle’s list).  Jesus praises them, thus: “you cannot bear evil men but have tested those who call themselves apostles but are not, and found them to be false.”  Note that, while the Ephesians lacked PATHOS when it came to their “first love,” they probably strongly relied on LOGOS and ETHOS when being critical of the Nicolaitans and the False Apostles.  How does one “test” someone claiming to be an Apostle?  On pages 202-203 of my book The Logic of Christianity:  A Syllogistic Chain, I answer:


 

Requirements for Becoming an Apostle

 

According to the Revelation to John, Jesus praises the church at Ephesus for testing “those who claim to be apostles but are not” (Revelation 2:2).  Revelation, however, does not spell out how false apostles are detected.  Luke’s writings identified . . .  the method by which spiritual gifts were conferred—by the laying on of apostles’ hands.  It is suitable, then, that we turn to Luke for information regarding how men became apostles.

 

In Acts 1:12-2:4 . . . Luke details the choosing of a new apostle to take the place of Judas Iscariot.  He quotes Peter in listing the qualifications for the office:

 

Therefore, it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us.  For one of these must be a witness with us of his resurrection. (Acts 1:21-22)

 

If, in order to be counted an apostle, one must have been a personal disciple of Jesus for at least three years and an eye witness of his resurrected body, it seems impossible that a modern-day apostle could exist. 

 

The Ephesians’ refusal to “bear evil men” (false apostles) was credited to them by Jesus as their “toil and . . . patient endurance”—they “have not grown weary.”  For those who, like the First Century Ephesians, are now “testers” of those claiming to be modern-day apostles, but are not, Jesus would most likely praise such (LOGOS-related) behavior, as well.  Because of that, I strive to be like the Ephesians and “test” those claiming to be modern-day apostles, but are not.  I have even written a book with that goal in mind—Psychotic Entelechy:  The Dangers of Spiritual Gifts Theology. 


I encourage others to join me in continuing this same toil and patient endurance, without growing weary.  Nevertheless, hating the works of evil men is still no substitute for the PATHOS of loving.  We need to have empathy with God—who so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever believes on him should not perish, but have everlasting life (John 3:16).  As Jesus encouraged the Laodiceans, we need to let Jesus be our BFF (LITERALLY, “BEST FRIEND FOREVER).  When he stands at our door and knocks, we need to hear his voice and open the door so that he will come in to us and eat with him, and he with us . . . to conquer and to sit with him on his throne, as he himself conquered and sat down with his Father on his throne.

The Message to Ephesus . . .

“To the angel of the church in Ephesus write: ‘The words of him who holds the seven stars in his right hand, who walks among the seven golden lampstands.

“‘I know your works, your toil and your patient endurance, and how you cannot bear evil men but have tested those who call themselves apostles but are not, and found them to be false; I know you are enduring patiently and bearing up for my name’s sake, and you have not grown weary. But I have this against you, that you have abandoned the love you had at first. Remember then from what you have fallen, repent and do the works you did at first. If not, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place, unless you repent. Yet this you have, you hate the works of the Nicola′itans, which I also hate. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To him who conquers I will grant to eat of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.’

The Message to Laodicea

14 “And to the angel of the church in La-odice′a write: ‘The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God’s creation.

15 “‘I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were cold or hot! 16 So, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you out of my mouth. 17 For you say, I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing; not knowing that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked. 18 Therefore I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire, that you may be rich, and white garments to clothe you and to keep the shame of your nakedness from being seen, and salve to anoint your eyes, that you may see. 19 Those whom I love, I reprove and chasten; so be zealous and repent. 20 Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if any one hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me. 21 He who conquers, I will grant him to sit with me on my throne, as I myself conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne. 22 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.’”

Monday, December 7, 2020

Apocalyptic? #14: Morphing Jesus—Which Jesus do YOU see? (Rev. 1:9-20)

 

I, John, your brother and companion in the suffering and kingdom and patient endurance that are ours in Jesus, was on the island of Patmos because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus. 10 On the Lord’s Day I was in the Spirit, and I heard behind me a loud voice like a trumpet, 11 which said: “Write on a scroll what you see and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea.”

12 I turned around to see the voice that was speaking to me. And when I turned I saw seven golden lampstands, 13 and among the lampstands was someone like a son of man, dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest. 14 The hair on his head was white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyes were like blazing fire. 15 His feet were like bronze glowing in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of rushing waters. 16 In his right hand he held seven stars, and coming out of his mouth was a sharp, double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance.

17 When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: “Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. 18 I am the Living One; I was dead, and now look, I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.

19 “Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is now and what will take place later. 20 The mystery of the seven stars that you saw in my right hand and of the seven golden lampstands is this: The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches.

 

 

(Revelation 1:9-20  NIV)

 



Everyone you know has morphed and is currently morphing.  When I think of my children, I remember each one of them, individually, as a baby bump, a sonogram, a newborn infant, a toddler, kindergartener, elementary-, middle-, high-schooler, collegian, young adult, worker, spouse, parent, etc.  When I “see” them, which one of these iterations of their personhood do I see?  I love to remind my kids and grandson of their phrases and expressions from their childhood, but in a real sense, each iteration of each child appears to be at least a little different.  Yet, it is the same person! When I have looked in the faces (and even the height) of my kids at various points in their life, I have seen my wife, myself, their grandmothers, their grandfathers, their great grandparents, and even their great great grandmother Faust, who, at age 105, chewed her tongue in the same manner as my younger daughter Auburn.  Furthermore, I can project, based on family resemblances what they might look like in the future.  In the world to come, what will each of us look like?  By the “image” we possessed at which stage in our lives will we be represented forever?  It’s a conundrum, but the principle of a trope called synecdoche is operative, here.  I’ll explain it momentarily.




Now, when you “see” Jesus, what Jesus do YOU see?  Do you see a baby in a manger, a carpenter’s assistant, a twelve-year-old boy questioning the Jewish scholars in the Temple, a young man whose mother asked him (before his time) to solve a problem with the lack of wine at a wedding feast in Cana, a man coming to John the Baptist to be baptized, a healer of diseases, a preacher to 5000 on the side of a mountain, a form walking on water at night, an individual being transfigured into a brilliant image, a shamed convict being crucified, a corpse being wrapped in a shroud and laid in a tomb, a resurrected man whose hands, feet, and sides show the crucifixion wounds?  Or do you see the “lion from the tribe of Judah” (Revelation 5:3) or the “lamb that had been slain” (Revelation 5:6)?  Now, morph your picture of Jesus into what John, in chapter 1 of Revelation, is “seeing”?   John seems to borrow some descriptions from Daniel 10:5-6:

I looked up and there before me was a man dressed in linen, with a belt of fine gold from Uphaz around his waist. His body was like topaz, his face like lightning, his eyes like flaming torches, his arms and legs like the gleam of burnished bronze, and his voice like the sound of a multitude.


Note the following, for example, from John:

1.      Whereas Daniel says, “a man dressed in linen, with a belt of fine gold from Uphaz around his waist,” John says: “someone like a son of man, dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest” (1:13).

2.      Whereas Daniel says, “his eyes like flaming torches,” John says: “his eyes were like blazing fire” (1:14).  Jesus also introduces himself in the letter to the Church at Thyatira with these words about fiery eyes (2:18).

3.      Whereas Daniel says, “his arms and legs like the gleam of burnished bronze,” John says: “His feet were like bronze glowing in a furnace” (1:15).  Jesus also introduces himself in the letter to the Church at Thyatira with these words (2:18).

4.      Whereas Daniel says, “his voice like the sound of a multitude,” John says: “his voice was like the sound of rushing water” (1:15)

5.      Whereas Daniel says, “his face like lightning,” John says:His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance” (1:16).  Matthew 17:2 describes Jesus’ face as “shining as the sun” at the time of his Transfiguration.  See also Mark 9:3 and Luke 9:29. Jesus’ facial morph at the time of his “Transfiguration” (the common English translation of the Greek term “metaMORPHosis”) looked identical to the vision John saw of his face.

To Daniel’s description of the Son of Man, John in Revelation borrows the following element from (Daniel 7:9 NIV): “the Ancient of Days took his seat. His clothing was as white as snow; the hair of his head was white like wool.”  John, however, in Revelation 1:14, says concerning the Son of man: “The hair on his head was white like wool.”  Thus, John describes Jesus in language that Daniel had formerly used to describe God Himself (the Ancient of Days) whom Daniel states in 7:13 is subsequently joined by “one like the Son of man [who] came with the clouds of heaven . . . to the Ancient of Days” (KJV).

Furthermore, John adds the following descriptions of Jesus’ scene and “artifacts”:

1.      He stands “among” the “seven golden lampstands” (1:12-13).  Jesus also introduces himself in the letter to the Church at Ephesus with these words (2:1).  Jesus explains the meaning of the lampstands in verse 20: “The mystery of the . . . seven golden lampstands is this: The . . . seven lampstands are the seven churches.”

2.      “In his right hand he held seven stars” (1:16).  Jesus also introduces himself in the letter to the Church at Sardis with these words (3:1). Jesus also introduces himself in the letter to the Church at Thyatira with these words (2:18), further commenting that these seven stars are (?) the seven spirits of God.  Jesus explains the meaning of the lampstands in verse 20: “The mystery of the seven stars that you saw in my right hand . . . is this: The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches.”  Hence, we have the equation: 7 stars = 7 spirits = 7 angels.  Jesus holds stars/spirits/angels in his right hand.  I will explain further how synecdoche is operative in these stars=spirits=angels at the end of this blogpost.

3.      “Coming out of his mouth was a sharp, double-edged sword” (1:16).  Jesus also introduces himself in the letter to the Church at Pergamum with these words (2:12).  See Hebrews 4:12 to see that the Word of God is sharper than a two-edged sword.  See Ephesians 6:17 to see that our spiritual armor should include the sword of the Spirit (the Spirit being the Word of God).

John also adds the following self-identifications from Jesus:

1.      “I am the First and the Last” (1:17).  Jesus also introduces himself in the letter to the Church at Smyrna with these words (2:8). Jesus introduces himself in the letter to the Church at Laodicea with words identifying himself as the “beginning of the creation of God” (3:15).  In Revelation 22:13, “beginning” is equated with “First”: “first and the last, the beginning and the end.”

2.      “I was dead, and now look, I am alive for ever and ever!” (1:18).  Jesus also introduces himself in the letter to the Church at Smyrna with these words (2:8).

3.      “I hold the keys of death and Hades” (1:18).  Jesus introduces himself in the letter to the Church at Philadelphia with words about a “key”—this time, specifically, he is holding the “key of David” (3:7).  See Isaiah 20:20-22 to understand that the key represents the ability to open and close things.  Jesus can open the doors of death and he can open doors of opportunity for the Church at Philadelphia.

So, which Jesus do YOU see?


The trope synecdoche (primarily, the sense in which the part represents the whole, and vice versa) is essential in order to understand this.  Synecdoche is of great significance in interpreting Revelation in other areas, as well.  According to classical use of synecdoche, each part of a whole represents (or stands for) the whole, or for that matter, it represents (or stands for) any other part.  So, when we sing the old song, “Beautiful, beautiful brown eyes,” we mean that the “brown eyes” part represents the entire/whole woman, but it also represents the other parts of that woman—her hair, arms, legs, smile, etc.  Likewise, if I refer to someone as “giggles,” I refer to the entire person who has a tendency to giggle.  If Tevya in the song “Sunrise, Sunset” from the musical Fiddler on the Roof asks, “Is this the little girl I carried?”, he is referring to a young woman on her wedding day.  In other words, specific parts of our lives represent and are interchangeable with other parts of our life, and thence with our singular identity as a whole.  THIS is synecdoche.

I have just delineated many “parts” of the “whole” that is Jesus:

1.       a baby in a manger,  

2.       a twelve-year-old boy questioning the Jewish scholars in the Temple,

3.       a young man whose mother asked him (before his time) to solve a problem with the lack of wine at a wedding feast in Cana,

4.       a man coming to John the Baptist to be baptized,

5.       a healer of diseases,

6.       a preacher to 5000 on the side of a mountain,

7.       a form walking on water at night,

8.       an individual being transfigured into a brilliant image,

9.       a shamed convict being crucified,

10.   a corpse being wrapped in a shroud and laid in a tomb,

11.   a resurrected man whose hands, feet, and sides show the crucifixion wounds,

12.    the “lion from the tribe of Judah,

13.    the “lamb that had been slain,

14.   someone like a son of man, dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest” (1:13),

15.   eyes . . .  like blazing fire” (1:14), 

16.   “feet . . .  like bronze glowing in a furnace” (1:15), 

17.   voice . . . like the sound of rushing water” (1:15),

18.    “face . . .  like the sun shining in all its brilliance” (1:16)

19.   “hair . . .  white like wool,” 

20.   standing “among” the “seven golden lampstands” (1:12-13),

21.   “In his right hand [holding] seven stars” (1:16), 

22.   “a sharp, double-edged sword” “coming out of his mouth” (1:16). 

23.   the First and the Last” (1:17),

24.   Having been “dead, and now . . . alive for ever and ever!” (1:18),

25.   holding “the keys of death and Hades” (1:18). 

 

We are not expected to recognize Jesus by his physical traits.  I write in my book Revelation:  The Human Drama (p. 64):

The Gospels provide virtually no physical attributes of Jesus whatsoever.  There is no clue concerning his height, weight, relative handsomeness, color or length of hair, etc.  Whatever exceptional physical feats he accomplishes (walking on water, healing, calming storms) are attributed in no way to his physical attributes.

According to Hugo Odeberg’s analysis of The Fourth Gospel, those who have been “born again” are those who can “see” certain things when they look at (any part of) Jesus:


Most importantly, they can “see” the “glory of God” in Jesus.  Odeberg (p. 36) says concerning John 1:51, in explaining the “angels of God ascending and descending upon the son of man”:  “they will see the connexion being brought about between the celestial appearance, the Glory, δόξα [DOXA], of Christ, and his appearance in the flesh.”  John 1:14 states: “we beheld [= saw] his glory, the glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.”  John 2:11 states that the changing of water into wine in Cana “manifested his glory; and his disciples believed on him.”  When Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, John 11:4 states: “This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God, that the Son of God may be glorified thereby.”  In John 11:40, Jesus says to Lazarus’s sister Martha: “Said I not unto thee that if thou believedst, thou shouldest see the glory of God?”  In John 12:39-41, Jesus explains Isaiah’s prophecy about the Jews seeing-and-yet-not-seeing: “These things said Isaiah, because he saw his glory; and he spake of him [Jesus].” John 17:1-5 (NIV) records Jesus’ prayer:

“Father, the hour has come. Glorify your Son, that your Son may glorify you. For you granted him authority over all people that he might give eternal life to all those you have given him. Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. I have brought you glory on earth by finishing the work you gave me to do. And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began.”

John 17:20-24 (NIV) records Jesus’ prayer for those who believe in him, that they also will share his and God’s glory:

20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.”

24 “Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world.”

So, we may ask, in the same way we “see” ourselves and our parents, etc., in our children, do YOU see the likeness (glory) of God in Jesus, from his miraculous birth to his miraculous signs and wonders to his transfiguration to his (greatest love) crucifixion for the world to his resurrection, ascension, and his glorification at the right hand of God?  We’ll “see” more of the attributes of Jesus as we continue.  Given his last prayer that I mentioned, can others see his glory (the glory of God) in YOU?  In the various parts of your life?  As Jesus is in God, are you in Him, that we may be brought to complete unity?

In other words, are you a PART of the WHOLE that is Jesus and God?  Is there synecdoche that can be detected in your life?

Regarding the stars=spirits=angels, I write in my book Revelation:  The Human Drama (p. 72):

Even if John is not to be viewed as consciously and deliberately using a synecdochic art, by the time John wrote, synecdoche was an explicit trope used by rhetoricians.  It may have been either an intuitive or a deliberate form of language use for John.  Certainly, Jews of John's time thought of God's word (a linguistic, not "physical" concept) from a synecdochic perspective.

     G. F. Moore links the terms of Caird's conundrum of the "seven stars" together quite easily.  In his chapter entitled, "The Word of God.  The Spirit," Moore states, "God's will is made known or effectuated in the world not only through personal agents (angels), but directly by his word or by his spirit" (emphases mine).  Here all three terms of Caird's puzzle fit neatly together.  If the seven stars represent "angels," then "angels" are a part of the whole.  If the stars "represent" "spirits of God," then spirits are a part of the whole.  If "the spirit" is "say[ing]" things to the churches, then what "the spirit says" (or in other words, the word) is a part of the whole.

Now, before I conclude this post, I have a little housekeeping to do.  First, I have already explained Revelation 1:19 (NIV): “Write, therefore, what you have seen, what is NOW and what will take place later” in my post Apocalyptic?  #5. Please refer back. Second, I have already explained which John I take to be the “author” of Revelation in my post Apocalyptic?  #10. Please refer back.  Third, I have already explained what we know about the seven churches in my post Apocalyptic?  #10. Please refer back.  Fourth, concerning John’s supposed banishment to Patmos by Domitian, I have already stated that I don’t believe John was writing at the time of Domitian, and furthermore, Adela Yarbro Collins (55-56) points out: “Commentators have disagreed about whether this tradition of John's banishment is reliable historical information or a legendary motif inspired by Rev. 1:9.”  I believe it is the latter.  Nevertheless, John was on the Isle of Patmos when he wrote, whether or not he was banished there.  Finally, I take the clause, “On the Lord’s Day I was in the Spirit,” to mean that John was receiving a vision concerning the “Day of the Lord,” something we will discuss later.  Interpreting “The Lord’s Day” as a reference to Sunday is anachronistic.  No one prior to 69 A.D. had used the expression that way.



Thursday, November 12, 2020

Apocalyptic? #13: 2020 Vision and Hearing (Rev. 1:7, 2:7, 11, 17, 29, 3:6, 13, 22)

 

“every eye will see him, even those who pierced him”; (1:7)

 Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. 
(2:7, 11, 17, 29, 3:6, 13, 22)

 

 

(Revelation 1:7, 2:7, 11, 17, 29, 3:6, 13, 22  NIV)

                                                                                                                                              


Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. 
As I write this blogpost, the 2020 U.S. Election voting has just taken place (one week ago, this past Tuesday) and the American electorate see and hear the election results in two entirely different ways.  The vast majority of mainstream media outlets have called the Presidential Election for Joe Biden.  Talk Radio, Real Clear Politics, and NewsMax--have not yet chosen to call the Presidential Election.  Seventy percent of those who voted for President Trump (roughly ½ of the country) believe that the election process was fraught with fraud.  Why do such large portions of the electorate “see” things so differently?  For one thing, each half of the population refuses to hear or see what the other half sees.  They choose which news media they will watch or listen to.

What does this election have to do with the Church?

It serves as what Kenneth Burke calls a “representative anecdote.”  One’s conclusions depend on how one “sees” things.  According to an exit poll conducted by CBS, 76% of the voters who identified themselves as White evangelical or white born-again Christian voted for Donald Trump.  That group represents 27% of the voters sampled.  73% of the voters who identified themselves as Protestant and other Christian, among whites, voted for Donald Trump.  That group represents 30% of the voters sampled.  56% of the voters who identified themselves as Catholics voted for Donald Trump.  That group represents 17% of the voters sampled.  On the other hand, 63% of the voters who identified themselves as having No Religion or Something Else voted for Joe Biden.  That group represents 18% of the voters sampled.  It would appear that the vast majority of Christians “saw” the issues in favor of Donald Trump.


Can so many Christians have been so wrong on the issues?  Could they not SEE?  Or was it the opposing voters who could not SEE?

One of Jesus’ favorite formulas, found in Matthew 11:15, Luke 8:8, and 14:35, is the cry: “He that has ears to hear, let him hear!”  John, in Revelation, records Jesus making the same cry to each of the Seven Churches.  But, what does this formula mean?  Hugo Odeberg, in his book The Fourth Gospel, notes that the verb HORAŌ/ὁράω/TO SEE in the Gospel of John “always refers to the spiritual sight, the spiritual perception” (40).  The parallel expression of the verb TO HEAR most likely indicates the same sort of spiritual hearing, the spiritual perception.  Hence:

John 1:18: “No man has SEEN God . . . the only begotten Son . . . has declared him.”

John 1:34: (John the Baptist’s statement) “I have SEEN and born witness that this [Jesus] is the Son of God.”

John 1:51: “You shall SEE the heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of man.”

John 3:11: “We speak that which we know, and bear witness of that which we have SEEN.”

John 4:45: “The Galileans received him, having SEEN all the things that he did in Jerusalem at the feast.”

John 6:2: “And a great multitude followed him because they SAW the signs which he did on them that were sick.”

John 8:38: “I speak the things which I have SEEN with my Father; and you also do the things which you have HEARD from your father [the devil].”

John 9:37-38: “You have both SEEN him and it is he who SPEAKS with you.  And he said, Lord, I believe.”

John 11:40: “Said I not to you that if you believe, you will SEE the glory of God?

John 14:9: “He that has SEEN me has SEEN the Father.”

John 15:24: “but now they have both SEEN and hated both me and my Father.”

John 16:16: “A little while and you behold me no more; and again a little while and you shall SEE me.

John 19:35: “And he that has SEEN has born witness, and his witness is true.”

John 19:37: “Scripture says, ‘They shall SEE him whom they pierced.’”


I am not suggesting that predestination is involved, but the kind of SEEING to which John’s Gospel refers is a “perfected” kind of sight (even better than 20-20 vision).  Indeed, some who have physical 20-20 vision cannot SEE at all in spiritual matters!  As Kenneth Burke says, "A way of seeing is also a way of not seeing--a focus upon object A involves a neglect of object B" (PC 49).  He considers this a type of psychosis.  I understand, as Burke suggests, that all seeing is partial, perspectival.  If I look at a soda can from only the side perspective, I see only a rectangle.  If I look at it only from a top or bottom perspective, I see only a circle.  If I look at it from an exterior perspective, I may believe it is solid.  If I look at it from an internal perspective, I see that it is hollow or filled with liquid.  No single perspective provides the full picture, that it is a hollow or liquid filled cylinder.  Every perspective is important.  This applies to the representative anecdote of the 2020 election.  (The perspectives of looking at the tabulated vote counts, recounts, Supreme Court interventions, ballot processing issues,” vote-counting software glitches, etc.)  This also applies to one’s knowledge of the world as it exists.  If one relies only on the perspective of sense data (sight, hearing, touch, taste, smell), that one has personally experienced, one would not even know whether one even had great grandparents.  We learn that we had great grandparents from the testimony of our parents.  If a person says that s/he has accepted the “word” of others (which, of course, we do!), that person enters a new world of SEEING, tremendously larger than anything associated with the perspective of sense data that one has personally experienced.  Frankly, it must be said, we SEE what we want to SEE.  We HEAR what we want to HEAR.  We have what communication scholars call “selective perception.”


In my book Psychotic Entelechy:  The Dangers of Spiritual Gifts Theology, pages 11-12, I observe:

A proverb that runs throughout the gospels and Acts in the New Testament reflects the same observation:  "Though seeing they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand" (Matthew 13:13 NIV; Cf., also Mark 4:12 and 8:18, Luke 8:10, John 9:39, and Acts 8:26).  Matthew attributes the proverb to the Old Testament book of Isaiah (6:9-10):

" . . . In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah:  'You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.  For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes.  Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them' . . . ." (Matthew 13:14-15 NIV)

Thus, the Bible combines the two-sense-perception forms of SEEING and HEARING—as I have combined in this post.  To the churches, Jesus is saying:  You need to have EARS that actually HEAR.  Not everyone in the churches of Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea actually had EARS to HEAR.  As an example, not everyone who HEARS or READS my commentary on Revelation will SEE or HEAR what I SEE and HEAR.  That, of course, does not mean that I am SEEING incorrectly; nor does it mean that I am SEEING correctly.  Therefore, I aim at SEEING Revelation from MANY perspectives.


In my book Revelation: The Human Drama, I state that I specifically view the book from four primary perspectives:

1.      Poetics

2.      Psychological

3.      Socio-Political

4.      Rhetorical

Furthermore, I specifically view the book from several other perspectives (that many other interpreters do not use):

1.      The critical studies approach of renown liberal biblical scholars,

2.      The conservative, bible-believing, perspective of Evangelical scholars,

3.      The Greek and Hebrew language analysis of the original text,

4.      Old Testament studies

5.      The Rabbinic Jewish background of the New Testament

6.      Jewish Historical approach

7.      Church Historical approach

8.      Kenneth Burke’s rhetorical approach

9.      Aristotle’s rhetorical approach

10.  Contemporary Historical approach

11.  Premillennialism

12.  Postmillennialism

13.  Amillennialism

14.  Preterist views

Many liberal scholars refuse to consider many of these perspectives, because they are committed to a perspective that rules out the possibility of divine inspiration or predictive prophecy.  Many evangelicals refuse to consider many of these perspectives because their individual religious creeds commit them to a particular view.

The goal and objective is to have EARS to HEAR and EYES to SEE.  By viewing Revelation from as many perspectives as possible, we have a better chance of SEEING and HEARING as Jesus would have us SEE and HEAR!