QUESTION:
I think I once heard you say something like, “At the council of (something), they concluded that Revelations should not be used for determining theology. It was to be used for worship, etc.” Where can find resources to back up that statement?
RESPONSE:
Not exactly, but something like that. The idea was the dogma (non-negotiable doctrine) of the ancient church was finalized before Revelation was formally included in the canon of the New Testament. In other words, since Revelation wasn’t officially included as Scripture, it wasn’t a building block of our creedal theology.
That’s not to say Revelation shouldn’t be in the Bible or that previous authors hadn’t included it in their suggested lists. For example, Athanasius of Alexandria had included it in his 39th Festal Letter). But if we’re referring to formal affirmations, it’s just a chronological fact that the councils established Christianity’s non-negotiable dogma before later councils formalized our New Testament canon.
Why was that? There was hesitation about the book of Revelation by some key people for some important reasons. For example, circa 350 AD, Cyril of Jerusalem was unhappy about how the Montanist cult had latched onto it to spread false teachings (https://www.bible-researcher.com/cyril.html). Gregory of Nazianzus, the first eminent chair of the second council (381 AD in Constantinople), which finalized the Nicene Creed, did not include it in his list.
It was only 12 years later that the Council of Hippo canonized Revelation (393 AD), confirmed by the Council of Carthage (397) and the Council of Carthage (419).
So the basic math is that Revelation couldn’t be used to establish creedal dogma if it wasn’t canonized until after the creed was ratified.
But once canonized, the church recognized its use as a call to faithfulness to Christ and to patient endurance through persecution. It also generated beautiful hymnography around Christ our Passover Lamb, who has conquered death and is making all things new. So, I regard Revelation as canonical but would not derive any doctrine from it that we don’t already have in the four Gospels, Acts, and the NT epistles.
But so what? It matters to us for the same reason it mattered to dear old Cyril. We’ve seen the rotten fruit of generations of self-proclaimed prophets and teachers who have perverted this beautiful book into apocalyptic cults that prey on their credulous flocks. The Book of Revelation has been misused to terrorize anxious believers and then exploit them by offering solutions with alleged insider information that you pay dearly for in order to escape what’s coming.
Instead, let us read this book just as it was intended. NOT an End Times Code but as a retelling of the gospel in cosmic imagery, where the Lamb on the Cross in John’s Gospel is one and the same Lamb on the Throne, seen from heaven’s perspective. DOCTRINE & REVELATION (THE BOOK) – BRAD JERSAK
17 comments:
Amen. A well-articulated discourse on the place that this book should play in the Christian Faith, but Armstrongites and other Fundamentalists won't like it! This book always gives the literalists fits too with its abundant symbolism and metaphorical imagery - they just can't handle it!
It is interesting how Revelation is of only marginal importance in the early church. Yet, it is of extraordinary importance in Armstrongism. There is a shift in focus here that tells us that Armstrongism is far afield.
Scout
As my Lutheran Pastor neighbor once said to me when chatting, "Whoever wrote Revelation had some great drugs!" :) After all these years, at least we have come to understand it was never "Unveiled at Last!".
I have personally enjoyed coming to see the astro-theological themes in the text. Patmos, no doubt, must have offered a fantastic view of the night sky. All people had back in the day to imagine and write their tales was NIGHTFlIX and they used it well.
Then there is the concept of the Preterist view, which I share.
"According to preterism, all prophecy in the Bible is really history. The preterist interpretation of Scripture regards the book of Revelation as a symbolic picture of first-century conflicts, not a description of what will occur in the end times. The term preterism comes from the Latin praeter, meaning “past.” Thus, preterism is the view that the biblical prophecies concerning the “end times” have already been fulfilled—in the past.
Preterism denies the future prophetic quality of the book of Revelation. The preterist movement essentially teaches that all the end-times prophecies of the New Testament were fulfilled in AD 70 when the Romans attacked and destroyed Jerusalem."
This I personally believe, and the trouble Revelation has caused over the past 2000 years is a stressful and terrible waste of life-time and has been used to evangelize, finance and control by far too many "isms".
Prophecy is junk. Nobody can get it right. That makes it useless. Herb said the USA and Russia would not go to war. They already are at war, though so far it is a so-called "proxy" war. But the USA supplies money, weapons, training and intelligence. And UK special forces have been in Ukraine conducting operations. Troops from several NATO countries are already fighting as mercenaries. That includes troops from "Israelite" countries like the UK and Canada.
Are they going to send nukes next as the war continues to escalate?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0kSiHaPHlA
"It is interesting how Revelation is of only marginal importance in the early church."
How in the world would you know that? Were you there? If it was so marginal, why was it cannonized?
Nice try.
I have doubts about the Book of Revelation. It has a checkered history and at the time of Athanasius only about half the churches regarded the Book of Revelation to be scripture. I think its status is somewhere in between the Deuterocanon and the accepted Canon. Even if the Book of Revelation were solid, I would still regard it from a Partial Preterist perspective – most of it is now history with the last couple of chapters yet future. I would agree that the church should not form any dogma solely from the Book of Revelation.
My highly subjective, personal opinion about Revelation is that anything that prophecy weenies go ape over cannot be all good. Just my intuitive reaction. I know that my reaction is unfounded. Why should we let prophecy weenies be the determining factor for anything.
The Bible, moreover, is incarnational. It is kenotic in its history. It has been subjected to human curation. God let his children tell the story. Surprisingly, this view is supported in The Good News Magazine in an article by Lester Grabbe:
“Yet the state of things can only remind us that no one can "prove" the correct text or canon. We have too little information even to begin such a process. There is still an element of faith involved in using the Bible. One has to accept on faith that God has preserved His written Word for mankind - that He has made the way to salvation clear to us.” (Grabbe, Lester. “How We Got the Bible”, The Good News Magazine, October, 1976)
I agree with Grabbe’s view. I am surprised it was published in The Good News Magazine. The New Testament functions at the salvific level not at the level of finest narrative granularity. You don’t read the Bible to support your faith with certainties. You read the Bible to support your faith with your reasonable heart. To learn what is important and what Is not. I believe that the Jewish Midrashic approach has always acknowledged this.
Scout
Lessee: the 1000 years of Rev 20 must have been 931 BCE to 70 CE.
Prophecy of any type in the Bible is not to be some sort of "insider knowledge" for you to predict the future per se. Its purpose is to show that God is in control, that "the good guys will win eventually" and to currently repent and be close to God and his ways.
This has been one of the better posts on Banned. Too many professing Christians outside the Catholic faith are unaware that the books comprising the New Testament were not officially accepted as canonical until the 4th century. Until that time, there were hundreds of Gospels, epistles, and books that were read in Masses. Many of these books contained gnostic heresies or, at best, pious fictions. The Church decided to pare the number of books down by this criteria. Were the books written by an apostle or somebody who was known to by an associate of one. And did the books contain any fictions or heresies. This eliminated all of the books except the ones we now have in the New Testament.
Well, I could see that. Around 100CE there was no bound copy of "the NT" that every congregation had. There must have been many copies of various epistles from various figures that probably varied somewhat from area to area. If a John wrote it on Patmos, how did it get to the outside world? How long did it take? And did anyone recognize the author? It must have been viewed with some degree of suspicion...
If you examine thr teachings of Jesus, they are plain, simple, and don't lend themselves readily to someone orchestrating a scam. Revelation does. We know that one scammer was able to utilize the scary aspects and tie protection from them into obeying him, all the while convincing the victims that obeying his picked and chosen rules was in fact obeying God. Also, that paying tithes and giving offerings to him was giving them to God.
8:11 wrote, "Lessee: the 1000 years of Rev 20 must have been 931 BCE to 70 CE."
I am a Partial Preterist and I regard this period of time to be future. But I am not sure it is 1,000 years in length. Hank Hannegraff makes and persuasive argument that this is a figure of speech and just means a long time. Like saying a "gazillion". Christians will reign with Christ for a gazillion years.
Scout
6:22 wrote, "How in the world would you know that? Were you there?"
You might investigate the concept of a written history. In particular, for this purpose have a look at:
Pagels, Elaine. "Revelations: Visions, Prophecy, and Politics in the Book of Revelation",
pp. 159-169.
Scout
Elaine Pagels would destroy most Armstrongites when it comes to the Bible, yet none of them have an interest in reading her writings. Because she is a woman she is considered incapable of teaching COG men. Women are still considered to be unclean for certain weeks of the month due to the myths of the church.
Great article! I've always been a fan of Brad.
10:04
This is due to unfounded Patriarchism within Armstrongism. The Old Testament, mind you, the Old Testament personifies wisdom as a female in the book of Proverbs. Women had an active role in New Testament events. Men who reject the participation of women reject one of the main themes of the Bible.
Scout
Even if Revelation did not exist, having been lost to antiquity, all the little ChurchofGoddians would be basing their existences on the book of Daniel, making their guesses, and placing their bets. Philosophies are chosen and adapted because they suit certain personality types. Plague enthusiasts, and apocalypticists, would find reason to exist even if their basic materials did not exist. All HWA did was to resonate with their souls. And, then he owned and controlled them.
Post a Comment