The name Jesus only appears 12 or so times in Revelation. When it does it appears frequently. Any thoughts?
I have read that most of Revelation was written by a Jewish sect facing destruction circa 68CE in Jerusalem. The writings were revamped by adding a prologue and epilogue which mentioned Jesus to 'christianise' the account so that it got completed eventually by the end of the first century.
The occasions where Jesus appears......
1:1 Jesus Christ 1:2 Jesus Christ 1:5 Jesus Christ 1:9 Jesus 12:17 Jesus 14:12 Jesus 17:6 Jesus 19:10 Jesus 20:4 Jesus 22:16 Jesus 22:20 Lord Jesus 22:21 Lord Jesus ... ," etc.
Its garbage but amazing how many Christian belief systems have adopted it when it likely comes from a jewish sect!
The woman (Rev. 12:1) is representation of Israel, not Mary or the WTS! The crown of twelve stars refers to the twelve tribes (Genesis 37:9). The symbolic child brought forth with great pains (Rev. 12:2) is the holy remnant of Israel (Micah 5:3), not Jesus. The remnant represents the sect of the Roman-Jewish war writer.The great dragon (Rev. 12:3) is the Roman Empire (seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns). The seven heads are the seven hills of Rome (Rev. 17:9) and the seven crowns are seven Emperors (Rev. 17:10). "Five have fallen." These were: Julius, Augustus, Tiberius, Gaius, and Claudius. "One is," Nero (666). "The other has not yet come," Vespatian. If the Jews hoped that the death of Nero would end the war, they were mistaken. Vespatian carried on Nero's actions, The focus is now clear. The war is literally between Israel and Rome, with the writer focusing on the remnant of his sect.
The Interpreter's Bible (1957) comments (Vol. 12, pp. 356-359):
Regarding authorship by the Apostle John:
One among many objections to this conclusion is the hesitancy on the part of certain Christians in the second and third century, when the New Testament canon was being formed, to accept Revelation as apostolic in origin. Indeed some went so far as to deny this ascription... In fact, while the author calls himself "John" in four verses...at no time does he assert that he is an apostle...Furthermore, if the dating of Revelation toward the end of the first century is reasonably correct, it is doubtful that it could have been by John of Zebedee. For according to a statement attributed to Papius before the middle of the second century, which is supported by other evidence, John, like his brother James, was killed by the Jews before the year 70.
Regarding alternative sources:
...Revelation contains numerous parallels, more or less close, to the ideas, concepts, patterns, and symbols used in Jewish apocalypses such as 1 Enoch, 2 Esdras, 2 Baruch, the Apocalypse of Abraham, the Sibylline Oracles, and others...There are also striking similarities between Revelation and other Christian apocalypses and apocalyptic passages in other books which show that he represents an apocalyptic movement among the early Christians.
It is historically (and Biblically, I might add) clear that various literatures have coalesced through oral and written tradition, and that certain authors have appropriated or imitated that literature.
My thought: This idea is only a problem for those who insist that every (humanly-written) word of the (humanly-collected) Bible (humanly-approved) canon must be divinely inspired (as evaluated by humans).
This idea is only a problem for those who insist that every (humanly-written) word of the (humanly-collected) Bible (humanly-approved) canon must be divinely inspired (as evaluated by humans).
