Benjamin T. Randall

1

Bible-study: 2019/05/05 (St. Matthew’s Episcopal Church, McMinnville) – Revelation: Wk. 2 – 5:11-14 [Ask for a volunteer to read the passage.] So, what’s going on? Let no one be nervous to admit that Revelation is, at first glance, baffling. And at the second glance, and the third! And perhaps upon every reading. And this stems from the fact that what we have in front of us seems like the ‘Chronicles of a Bad Acid Trip’.1 And for good reason. The document is a sort of “dream journal;” the bulk of the material consists of tentative glimpses through “the veil” at events, which were ‘near’,[Rev. 1:3; 22:10] but hadn’t happened yet. “Events” of a worldly nature – ‘lurid’2 and violent, but also events outside of time and space – events that by their very nature stretch and warp human faculties.

And the problem for us (Episcopalians), I think, is especially acute because as a church that relies on the Revised Common Lectionary, we’re presented with only a fraction of the book – less than six chapters from a total of twenty-two, in fragments, on a handful of Sundays, and almost entirely in Year “C” only. (Eight verses on a single weekend in Year “A,” and about ten split between two occasions in Year “B.”) (Which is why private-study of the Scriptures is so important!) Consequently, what we might “know” about Revelation is probably not very much, and pertains to little of the book’s contents indeed. And this has left us wide-open to speculation and hearsay. Finally, commonplace haphazard and irreverent “borrowings” for popular media – the incorporation of some of its imagery and language in movies like The Omen [1976], Terminator 2 [1991], and Dawn of the Dead [2004]; in comics;3 in music [Johnny Cash, ‘The Man Comes Around’]; and for television serials. And rife misquotation and misrepresentation in such, renders the average layperson at a profound disadvantage vis-à-vis other sections of the Bible.

Well, I suggested to you before that the author of Revelation was likely John the Evangelist, which is to say the “beloved disciple.” Author of the Gospel of John and of two epistles. I acknowledged that, in the modern era, many doubted this – and explained that their doubts stemmed mainly from an undeniable difference in the quality of the language used between these texts: the Greek in John is ‘elegant’,4 whilst in Revelation, ‘vulgar’.5 But this divergence can easily be explained (away) by the fact that John probably used a ‘freely working amanuensis’ in his earlier days – which was wise, given that he was a

1 Wagner, Richard and Helyer, Larry R. (2008), The Book of Revelation For Dummies, Hoboken, N. J.: John Wiley & Sons, 305. 2 Gage, Warren Austin (1st of May, 2001), ‘St John's Vision of the Holy City’, Phd Thesis, Dallas, T. X.: The Braniff Graduate School of the University of Dallas, 1. 3 See, for example: Morrison, Grant and Burnham, Chris (January, 2013), Batman Incorporated (New 52), No. 5: Asylum, Burbank, C. A: DC Comics, 11. 4 Ibid., 31. 5 Deissmann, Adolf (1910), Light from the Ancient East: The New Testament Illustrated by Recently Discovered Texts of the Graeco-Roman World, London: Hodder & Stoughton, 91.

Sunday

Benjamin T. Randall

2

Palestinian Jew, who spoke Aramaic – and had been a mere – possibly illiterate – fisherman [see Mt. 4:21]; but, in his “silver years,” on ‘Patmos’ – the location of his work on Revelation, had begun to do more with his own hand.6

In fact, more and more scholars are discovering fundamental, ‘remarkable literary and thematic patterns interweaving the two great Johannine books.’7 And I shared with you that one commentator, Peter Leithart, a Presbyterian, argues that the central plot which runs from one to the other concerns a search for a bride for the Messiah.8 Which brings us to this morning’s passage: Here, what we see is, quite simply, a celebration – a party! In Heaven; in the throne-room of the palace of God. John was transported there – spiritually – at the beginning of the previous chapter, by an angelic being whose voice was ‘like a trumpet’ – imperious, loud! [4:1] But we have not yet heard enough to understand what it is that he sees being celebrated (there). To find that out, we must “rewind” just a bit – and I quote: ‘I saw in the right hand of the one seated on the throne’ – God – ‘a scroll written on the inside and on the back, sealed with seven seals’: [5:1]. Ooo, intriguing!

Picture it: a coil of papyrus, locked shut with hard, red puddles of cold dripped-wax, “crying” out to be “snapped” open. Like a milk-chocolate-chip-cookie-jar with “DO NOT OPEN” emblazoned on the side. ‘Then’, says our guide, he ‘saw’ standing among the various “courtiers” attending on God, a ‘lamb’ – a ‘lamb’ that looked like it had just been ‘slaughtered’, that is to say, looking like it had been prepared for sacrifice as in the Temple (in Jerusalem) on the Day of Atonement: [v.6]. And yet, paradoxically, this sorry-looking ‘lamb’ – mangled and covered in blood – is identified to John as a ‘lion’ – ‘the lion of the tribe of Judah’ – that’s King David’s tribe; Jesus’ tribe. And it is acclaimed as a “conqueror.” Although it isn’t specified what victory this ‘lamb’ has supposedly won. But you can probably guess… In the fourth gospel – and only there(!) – which is significant as a clue for establishing common authorship – Christ is called ‘the lamb…who takes away the sins of the world.’[1:29]

It – He(!) – approaches the ‘throne’ – a bold move(!) – the sort of thing that only royalty could do – a relative, such as, say, a son – a prince [“…of peace” Is. 9:6], and “takes” the aforementioned scroll and goes to unroll it [v.7], at which point excitement just “explodes” upon those present, which is exactly what we heard being described just now: today’s verses are a fanfare, in other words, for the lamb’s reading of the scroll aloud to all of creation. What [name] read for us a moment ago was, essentially, then, the cheer that goes up when the players run out onto the field for a football game: finally, this is it – the kick-off! What is on the scroll? (That’s the question, right?) What does it say? Interestingly, we never find out. Not explicitly. However, John’s host in Heaven does say that only ‘the lamb’ is ‘worthy’ to read it: [5:4-5]. And since this hasn’t happened yet – the occurrence is eschatological – at the end of history - in the farthest future, it is certainly deliberate that the details are kept from us. But we sense that they concern the Final Judgement – maybe the names of who will enjoy the bliss of God’s company in ‘the new heavens and the new earth’,[21:1] 6 See: Beckwith, Isbon Thaddeus (1919), The Apocalypse of John: Studies in Introduction with a Critical and Exegetical Commentary, New York, N. Y.: The MacMillan Company, 362. 7 Gage (2001), x. 8 Revelation 1-11 (International Theological Commentary) (2018), London; New York, N. Y.: Bloomsbury / T. & T. Clark, 22.

Benjamin T. Randall

3

and who will be cast into ‘the lake of fire and sulfur’ with Satan and his minions?[20:10] (And that decision – that division – remains, my friends, “in the balance.” For, when that fateful day comes, looking back – with hindsight – it will seem like some people were (always) destined to be only ‘objects of wrath’,[Rom. 9:22] but we know that ‘anyone’ might change their course and accept the gift of new life through the Savior’s death on the cross: [Jn. 3:16]. That opportunity is ours as long as we have breath.) This is the view of Leon Morris: ‘The [scroll] surely is that which contains the world’s destiny’.9

Now, retuning to the issue of authorship: Leithart sees in this episode – in the handing of the scroll (with the “seven seals”) from God to Jesus – a continuation of the story – the metaphor – about the divine bachelor in need of a wife. John’s gospel, in this respect, ended on a “cliff-hanger:” After the resurrection, Jesus ascended (back up) to Heaven not having found a suitable candidate, for the one to whom He was “betrothed”/promised – Israel – hadn’t exactly thrown herself at Him: chapter 1, verse 11 – from the gospel’s prologue: ‘He came to what was His own,’ – His intended fiancé since the covenant with Abraham, thousands of years earlier – ‘and His own did not accept Him.’ Instead of confetti, tears of joy and a resounding, “I do.” It was floggings for Jesus, sweating blood and calls to “Crucify Him!” What a terrible shock! Thus, a new candidate is needed. A willing partner; but honor demands that the previous arrangement be publicly terminated; resolved. We wouldn’t want any accusations of impropriety or indecency – even if the initial wife-to-be has acted shamefully. What is needed, then, is (1) a “certificate of divorce” (as commanded in Deuteronomy 24[v.1]), and (2) a new contract of marriage with a blank space into which my name could be written or yours. And this is what the ‘scroll’, specifically, represents.10

Massingberd Ford argues this is ‘the most likely interpretation’:11 ‘the Apocalypse scroll’ is ‘the get mekushshar, the tied deed’ that bound a high-profile Jewish couple together under the law in Talmudic (post-Babylonian-exilic) times. It was finalized by being folded multiple times, each fold glued down by a witness’s signet ring pressed into hot wax. At a trial of adultery – which would end, of course, with the (painful) execution of the accused by stoning – ‘[t]his type of document’ would be broken open to symbolize the severe and irreparable rupture caused to the relationship by that sin, but having been bound shut in such an intricate fashion – it ‘was supposed to protract the proceedings in order to give the husband’ – the cuckold – ‘time to change his mind.’12

9 Morris, Leon (1987), Revelation (Tyndale New Testament Commentaries: Volume 20), Downers Grove, I. L.: InterVarsity Press, 96. 10 See: Leithart (2018), 254; or, Gentry, Kenneth L., Jr. (2009), He Shall Have Dominion: A Postmillennial Eschatology, Draper, V. A.: Apologetics Group Media, 402. 11 Ford, J. Massingberd (1971), ‘The Divorce Bill of the Lamb and the Scroll of the Suspected Adulteress: A Note on Apoc. 5:1 and 10:8-11’, Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman Period, Volume 2, No. 2, pp. 136-143, 136. 12 Ibid., 136-138.

Benjamin T. Randall

4

In Revelation, of course, it is not just the “stiffed-necked” people of the Old Covenant in the dock,[Ex. 32:9] but all of humanity, and the “lamb,” having done everything He could – by His miraculous ministry and death as a young Galilean rabbi – to ensure we atone, proceeds to break the seals, one by one; which unleashes a “tidal wave” – a flood [see: Mt. 24:37-38; Lk. 17:26-27] – of punishment on the unrepentant that begins in chapter six with the appearance of four horsemen. And this is why the scene seems to end in silence, with the group called, ‘the elders’,[Rev. 5:14] falling down on their knees: they can’t watch. What happens next won’t be pretty, and they don’t relish it. Even though the “lamb” – Jesus – is fully justified in taking action against His enemies, it is a terrible tragedy – and one that was always avoidable.

But who are they – ‘the elders’? Well, if we look back at chapter four we hear that there are twenty-four of them, and that they sit in thrones too, flanking God’s own, as if ‘allies’.13 George Ladd, in his commentary, warns us that they ‘have been very diversely understood.’14 So, we can’t hope to settle the matter now. But let us consider some of the possibilities: Morris thinks ‘These are probably a superior order of angels’; although, he concedes, it is interesting that there were also twenty-four priestly families – descended from Aaron and Zadok – who served in the Temple on Mount Zion since the earliest days of the Israelite monarchy in 1 Chronicles: [24:1-4]. As such, he tentatively wonders, could the “elders” be the worship-leaders of Heaven?15 Supernatural versions of Matt Redman or Tim Hughes?

‘One of the oldest interpretations is that they represent the ideal church in Heaven in anticipation of the final state. The number twenty-four is said to represent the twelve patriarchs and the twelve Apostles...’16 And it should be noted that, in the text, ‘these elders are always distinguished from the angels [proper]’.17 Larry Hurtado, for instance, makes the case that ‘the elders are probably not particular saints, such as Old Testament heroes, but are symbolic representations of the elect.’18 And he points out that the accompanying ‘regalia’ – the crowns and white tunics [Rev. 4:4] – are exactly those things promised to the seven Asian congregations in the preceding letters (with which Revelation began), if they ‘[b]e faithful until death’: [2:10, 3:11].

If they are human beings, are they the raptured Church? – to some degree? (The “Rapture,” of course, if you’re not familiar with the term, refers to a moment during the Second Coming, which Saint Paul alone mentions in 1 Thessalonians, that ‘we who are alive, who are left [at that point in history], will be caught up in the clouds together with [those saints already deceased] to meet the Lord in the air [as He descends to wrest control of the world…’ [4:17]) The

13 Gallusz, Laszlo (2018), The Throne Motif in the Book of Revelation (Library of New Testament Studies), London; New York, N. Y.: Bloomsbury / T. & T. Clark, 184. 14 Ladd, George Eldon (2018), A Commentary on the Revelation of John (Eerdmans Classic Biblical Commentaries), Grand Rapids, M. I.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 73. 15 Morris (1987), 89. 16 Ladd (2018), 73. 17 Witherington, Ben, III (2009), Revelation (The New Cambridge Bible Commentary), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 117. 18 Hurtado, L. W. (1985), ‘Revelation 4-5 in the Light of Jewish Apocalyptic Analogies’, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, Volume 8, No. 25, pp. 105-124, 114.

Benjamin T. Randall

5

Pretribulationist premillennialist John Walvoord argues that the lack of an explicit mention of the Church in Revelation ‘tends to support the concept that…[she]…is raptured before [the] events pictured in the book…beginning in chapter 4.’19 And certainly some commentators think that the “elders” are ‘resurrected and raptured believers.’20 Their leaders, perhaps? Prominent bishops, maybe? Some have even seen in the invitation to John a ‘faint hint’ of it.21 Other theologians, however, locate the Rapture at very different junctures in Revelation’s sequence, which would exclude this possibility: Keith Essex counts ten options (altogether) – and likes one of the others.22 [Show on diagram]. Robert Gromacki, on the other hand, admits that, in actual fact, ‘the exact time is nowhere explicitly stated’, which is a curious little “nugget” to remember.23) Richard Guthrie, in his study of the topic, says: ‘There is no doubt that the 24 [sic.] elders are believers (men) that have been redeemed…[But John] does not establish the era or age they represent.’24

Even more ambiguous are ‘the four living creatures’: [Rev. 5:14]. Also seen by John as he entered the throne-room, their appearance to him is monstrous: ‘the first living creature like a lion, the second living creature like an ox, the third living creature with a face like a human face, and the fourth living creature like a flying eagle. And the four living creatures, each of them with six wings, are full of eyes all around and inside. [A better translation is the N. I. V’s: ‘…covered with eyes all around, even under [their] wings’ .] Day and night without ceasing they sing, “Holy, holy, holy, the Lord God the Almighty, who was and is and is to come.”’[4:7-8].

Often taken – especially by artists – as physical embodiments of the four gospels – Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, the interpreter Robert Mounce says this is ‘groundless.’25 The number is a coincidence: ‘A consistent interpretation of the entire throne-room vision requires us to understand the living creatures as an exalted order of angelic beings’.26 That is to say, either John is seeing real things or representations of real things; it can’t be a mixture of both. These ‘angelic’ “creatures,” then, are only themselves; not a puzzle hiding some deeper meaning. But this makes them no less intriguing! Maybe even more so? The Lutheran Gerhard Krodel calls them ‘God’s pets’. Which is an endearing image: like Martian spaniels, ‘attentive and ready to serve.’27 And yet also one that is overly anthropomorphic for my tastes.

19 The Revelation of Jesus Christ: A Commentary (1989), Chicago, I. L.: Moody Press, 33. 20 Morris, Henry M. (1983), The Revelation Record, Wheaton, I. L.: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 133. 21 See: http://www.acts1711.com/rapture.pdf 22 See: Essex, Keith H. (2002), ‘The Rapture and the Book of Revelation’, T. M. S. J., Volume 13, No. 2, pp. 215-239. The possibilities he lists are these: 3:10-11; 4:1-2; 4:4 and 5:9-10; 6:2; 7:9-17; 11:3-12; 11:15-19; 12:5; 14:14-16; and 20:4. 23 ‘The Imminent Return of Jesus Christ’ (1965), Grace Journal, Volume 6, No. 3, pp. 11-23, available at https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/grace-journal/06-3_11.pdf (accessed March 15, 2019), 11. 24 The Rapture: From the Ground Up (2014), Bloomington, I. N.: WestBow Press (Thomas Nelson & Zondervan), 226. 25 Mounce, Robert H. (1998), The Book of Revelation: Revised (The New International Commentary on the New Testament), Grand Rapids, M. I.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 125. 26 Ibid., 124. 27 Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament: Revelation (1989), Minneapolis, M. N.: Augsburg Fortress, 156.

Benjamin T. Randall

6

One author, Richard Lenski, refers to twenty-two (different) options.28 But many have noticed their passing similarity to something that, much earlier, the prophet Ezekiel had seen when ‘the hand of the Lord was on him’:[1:3f.] he had had a vision of God – who seemed like a burning coal that issued lightning – in a chariot, which was being drawn not by horses (as you might’ve expected), but by ‘four living creatures’ – there’s that strange phrase again – possessing bizarre

form – mostly ‘human’ in shape, with ‘hands’; but their “feet” were hooves, and they each had four faces. (It’s not clear whether these faces each had a head, “sprouting” from a singular “trunk” – as in the image (above); or if the beasts were akin to the Roman God Janus, here:

Yes, both sets have multiple wings and there are many eyes involved too. But we must be careful not to exaggerate the comparison;

not to conflate these visions. There are also obvious ‘important differences’ that emerge upon a careful reading.29 Indeed, reflecting upon these divergences, Ben Witherington, a marvelous – and prolific – Methodist author, says: ‘This means we are to take this’ – the throne-room “visit” as a whole – ‘not as a picture of what Heaven looks like but as a vivid description of God’s character and influence. The images cannot and were not meant to be pressed to yield information on the inhabitants or nature of Heaven. … This is not an exercise in satisfying overly curious piety. Notice…how often in this section John uses the term homoious. He keeps saying, “it was like.” He is grasping for images that may approximate an experience that was so much greater than any combination of images he could assemble.’30

And this would be a great conclusion to this talk, except that a counter-argument “pops” immediately into my head, which is that, in an expanding cosmos of a billion or so galaxies, each having a billion or so stars, isn’t it possible that there are animals out there somewhere (i. e. on other planets), which would resemble life on earth in this or that feature – having evolved universally necessary structures like limbs and eyes and claws and so on – but, in their entirety, would be to us fantastical and outlandish? And so being part of God’s ‘good’ creation,[Gen. 1:4,10,12,18 etc.] they would thus be present in God’s “throne-room” – though their appearance surprise us – along with ‘every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea’ that worships Jesus as John witnessed?[Rev. 5:13]. What do you think?

28 Lenski, R. C. H. (2008), The Interpretation of St. John's Revelation, Minneapolis, M. N.: Augsburg Fortress, 179. 29 Morris (1987), 91. 30 Revelation (2009), 116.