umbertoecho: It seems obvious that an author of say.......Revelations, would be warning against any change made to this book in order to protect it's contents. This book of prophecy is very different in language to just about any other book in the bible.
So I believe it would be to maintain the integrity of this prophecy.
But surely, any writer wants to maintain the integrity of what they write, particularly if they believe they are writing something important.
Revelation can be described as being three things, first a letter, then prophecy and thirdly it has typical characteristics of Jewish apocalyptic literature. And, I suggest you have to examine the book in the framework of these genres.
Some other examples of apocalyptic literature in the Judeao-Christian tradition are, The Ascension of Isaiah, The Apocalypse of Peter and The Shepherd of Hermas.
All were in circulation in the first century when there was no New Testament. When the time came that the church wanted to certify that some documents were more important than others, The Shepherd of Hermas was very nearly included as scripture, whereas there was argument over Revelation and it was (some argue) not certified finally as 'scripture' until 419 CE. Even then some Asian churches (who were then the most important churches) rejected it.
It is the only biblical book for which John Calvin did not write a commentary, and Luther commented that it was "neither apostolic nor prophetic." To this day,the Eastern Orthodox church does not include it in readings for their Divine Liturgy.
umbertoecho: What do you think fulltimestudent? I do realize that questions can be used as a form of teaching.........but at this stage I am interested in opinions
What do I think? I'm inclined to the view that it was written at a time of persecution of the young church to persuade believers that God was in control and would make everything OK in the end. Vivid imagery and fantastic events were part of the propaganda techniques of the time.
The other interesting thing to me, is the very accurate description of the huge East-West trade market (i.e. The Silk Road) in Ch. 18. Precisely why the author attacks the trade is unclear. Possibly he was hostile toward the Jews who were involved in that trade and were possibly living (by this time) in many cities across Asia (Acts 2:5-11). Most of them were probably descended from the Jews who had not returned to Jerusalem after Cyrus (God's Christ) had given them permission to do so. The Babylonian Jews (after 70 CE) were becoming more important also in Judaism.
Another interesting point is that the holy city (New Jerusalem) of Revelation 21 is described in terms that are so similar to the Amitahba Buddha's "western paradise". Was there an influence from Afghanistan, then part of the Greek colonial Empire, and strongly Buddhist at that point? One could call on the name of Amitahba and he would save you into his western paradise.
