Showing posts with label Biden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Biden. Show all posts

Friday, January 8, 2021

Apocalyptic? #16: Are the 2 Good Churches Anti-Semitic? (Rev. 2:8-11 and 3:7-13)

 

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

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

 

Layer #2 of the Apathy Sandwich:  The GOOD Churches   




Jesus lists no problems with Smyrna and Philadelphia. 
Jesus acknowledges Smyrna’s “poverty,” but, using the trope of irony, he reverses the meaning of the term, claiming that they are actually “rich.”  The trope of irony is also active, referring to certain individuals who “slander” the Christians claiming that they (the slanderers) are “Jews.”  Jesus reverses the meaning of the term “Jews,” claiming that they are actually “a Synagogue of Satan.”  In the ONLY other use of the term “Synagogue of Satan” in the Bible, Jesus tells the church at Philadelphia, “I will make those of the synagogue of Satan who say that they are Jews and are not, but lie—behold, I will make them come and bow down before your feet, and learn that I have loved you.”  Some have claimed that Revelation is anti-Semitic because of such language, but they fail to realize that John is (as is Jesus) a Jew, himself. 

He is not slandering Jews, per se, because that would be self-slander.  I write in my book Revelation:  The Human Drama (pp. 131-132):

     What is the sociopolitical problem which the Apocalypse of John addresses?  Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza claims:  "New Testament scholars generally agree that . . . Rev[elation] . . . depict[s] the . . . political struggles of the churches in Asia Minor at the end of the first century." According to this context, the sociopolitical struggle would be between Christianity and the Roman Empire.  Revelation's negative reference to Jews would open John to a charge of Anti-Semitism.  While Fiorenza's claim that "New Testament scholars generally agree" concerning this is true, the general agreement is not necessarily correct.  Fiorenza notes:  "After reviewing scholarly efforts to arrive at a definite interpretation of Rev[elation], [E. Lohmeyer] concludes that the proposed interpretations are so diverse that the true meaning of Rev[elation] still remains hidden."  . . .


     As was Luke T. Johnson, I personally am indebted to [my Jewish major professor at Indiana University] Henry Fischel, who, as he did for Johnson, "introduced me to the Talmud and whose pioneering work on Judaism as part of the Hellenistic world is a model." Hence, I have a sensitivity to the anti-Semitism that has unfortunately been at least a part of the history of Christianity throughout the past two millennia.  Like Johnson, I have no desire to support anti-Semitism in any form.  Johnson's explanation of what has been called "anti-Jewish slander" in the New Testament refers to the rhetorical climate which was a part of the Greco-Roman milieu, in line with the basic methodological tenets which Fischel taught.  Johnson suggests "that the slander of the N[ew] T[estament] is typical of that found among Jews as among other Hellenists." According to Johnson, the problem with many approaches to the "anti-Jewish" issue is that "they isolate 'Christianity' over against 'Judaism' as though each was [sic] a well-defined entity when the polemic was written." Johnson argues that Christianity was merely one of a number of rival Jewish groups:  "So-called normative Judaism was not normative in the period of the N[ew] T[estament].  The question Who is a real Jew? was then an open question, debated fiercely and even violently by rival claimants."

     Apparently, this intra-Jewish rivalry is operative in Revelation, as well.  R. H. Charles argues and most subsequent scholars agree that the author of Revelation is Jewish.  The author holds great respect for the twelve tribes of Israel.  He applies the terms Mt. Zion and Jerusalem to his heroes with a healthy respect for such terms.  His 144,000 are identified not as gentiles, but as being from the twelve tribes of Israel (minus Dan).  If anything, he is jealous of the Jewish terminology, and unwilling to apply what he considers to be prestigious nomenclature to those whom he considers unworthy to be called "Jews."  Yet, it seems clear that at least some of John's villains are Jews. 


Nevertheless, using the trope of irony, those who say that they are Jews are recast as non-Jews (i.e., the synagogue of Satan).  This was an intra-Jewish rivalry move.  The non-Christian Jews were actually slandering the Christian Jews.  Often, as will be explained in the next post, this slander resulted in the Christian Jews being “black-balled” from the economic system of Asia Minor.  Hence, Jesus can say to the Christian Jews:
“I know your tribulation and your poverty (but you are rich) and the slander of those who say that they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan.” To get an idea how this anti-Christian economic pressure might work, consider this scenario:  How many Christians in America, in 2021, fear that they would suffer financially were they to make certain “Christian” comments regarding issues of killing innocents or the elderly or certain forms of sexual immorality?  The suggestion, in Revelation, that those who claim to be Jews are not Jews is fairly similar, rhetorically, to presidential candidate Joe Biden, in 2020, saying to blacks in America: “If you have a problem figuring out whether you're for me or Trump, then you ain’t black!”  I write further in Revelation:  The Human Drama (pp. 164-165):


     What is strange in Revelation is that John is not willing to call ANYONE a Jew.  The fact that the word Jew is in his vocabulary is evident by two citations (2:9 & 3:9), but it occurs nowhere else in Revelation.  The word Israel occurs in three locations.  In 2:14, Balaam caused the Israelites to sin, but these Israelites were from past ages.  In 7:4, the 144,000 saved from the earth are clearly Christians, but are identified as the tribes of Israel.  In 21:12, the gates of the city (New) Jerusalem are inscribed with the names of the twelve tribes of Israel.  John uses the term "Jerusalem" three times (3:12, 21:2,10), but all three instances refer to the "New Jerusalem," not the old Jerusalem.  "Mount Zion" occurs once (14:1), but it refers once again to the 144,000.  If, as Ford [also] understands, the harlot Babylon is faithless Jerusalem, John is continuing his rejection of the villains' nomenclature.  Thus, he renames "the holy city" (11:2) in which the "Lord was crucified" (11:8), "Sodom and Egypt."  If he refers to Jews who dwell in Judea, he calls them the "inhabitants of the land" and leaves off the words "of Israel."

     At least some of John's villains are Jews by the weight of the language used in 2:9 and 3:9. In terms of scholarly support for this conclusion, Fiorenza . . . concludes:  "Therefore, the so-called Jews . . . do not seem to represent a Christian group, but the Jewish citizenship of these cities."  Kiddle also understands the villains in Smyrna and Philadelphia to be literal Jews.  Caird concurs, as does Charles. (164-165)


In his message to the church in Philadelphia, “the hour of trial” that is coming upon “the inhabitants of the earth/land” (actually, meaning Judea, throughout the seven-year war between the Jews and the Romans from 66-73 A.D.), the NIV translation incorrectly translates what should be translated as “the inhabitants of the land” as “those who dwell upon the earth.”  “The inhabitants of the land/earth” is the exact terminology used to refer to the (non-Jewish) inhabitants of the (Promised) Land (before Israel dominated it) throughout the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges, I and II Samuel, and I and II Chronicles, and even later.  Genesis 34:30, 50:11, Exodus 23:31, 34:12 & 15, Leviticus 18:25, 25:10, Numbers 13:32, 14:14, 32:17, 33:52 & 55, Joshua 2:9, 7:9: 9:24, Judges 1:32 & 33, 2:2, I Samuel 27:8, II Samuel 5:6, I Chronicles 11:4, 22:18, and II Chronicles 20:7 all use the expression “the inhabitants of the land” when referring to the non-Jewish population of the (Promised) Land.  The word translated “land” in every one of these instances is the word ארץ/ARETZ, in the Hebrew, the equivalent of γῆ/GE in the Greek, which virtually all Bible versions incorrectly translate as “Earth,” in Revelation.  A tremendous amount of confusion regarding what Revelation is predicting is removed once one realizes that the prophecies directed against the so-called “earth” (and the “inhabitants of the earth” and the “kings of the earth”) in Revelation are actually only directed against the “land” (of Israel).

I surmise that one of the principal errors of those in Smyrna and Philadelphia who say that they are Jews but are actually a synagogue of Satan is that they were guilty of the same PORNEIA that the three churches in the middle of the Apathy-Porneia sandwich were guilty of.  That subject will be discussed in the next post.

The Message to Smyrna

“And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write: ‘The words of the first and the last, who died and came to life.

“‘I know your tribulation and your poverty (but you are rich) and the slander of those who say that they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan. 10 Do not fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be tested, and for ten days you will have tribulation. Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life. 11 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who conquers shall not be hurt by the second death.’

The Message to Philadelphia

“And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: ‘The words of the holy one, the true one, who has the key of David, who opens and no one shall shut, who shuts and no one opens.

“‘I know your works. Behold, I have set before you an open door, which no one is able to shut; I know that you have but little power, and yet you have kept my word and have not denied my name. Behold, I will make those of the synagogue of Satan who say that they are Jews and are not, but lie—behold, I will make them come and bow down before your feet, and learn that I have loved you. 10 Because you have kept my word of patient endurance, I will keep you from the hour of trial which is coming on the whole world, to try those who dwell upon the earth. 11 I am coming soon; hold fast what you have, so that no one may seize your crown. 12 He who conquers, I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God; never shall he go out of it, and I will write on him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem which comes down from my God out of heaven, and my own new name. 13 He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.’

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!