Unity of the Apocalypse.

§ 1. Unity of thought and dramatic development. -- When the interpolations of the editor are removed and the dislocations of the text set right (see p. lvii. sqq.), the unity of thought and development in the Apocalypse is immeasurably greater than in any of the great Jewish apocalypses of an earlier or contemporary date. In fact, the order of development is at once logical and chronological save where our author deliberately, as in 79-17 and 10-1113 141-11. 14. 18-20, breaks with the chronological order and in 79-17 141-11. 14. 18-20 adopts the logical, that he may show the blessed future in store for those that were faithful in the tribulations which are recounted in the text immediately preceding these sections. The dramatic movement of the book is independent of all these sections. But the superiority of the Apocalypse to other apocalypses in this respect is not merely relative but absolute, as a short study of the Plan of the Apocalypse (see p. xxiii sqq.) will abundantly prove.

Smaller unities(1) maintained and developed within the Apocalypse might be brought forward, such as: (a) the Seven Beatitudes, 13 1615 (which is to be restored after 33b) 1413 199a 2214 206 227. (b) The judgment demanded by the souls under the altar is dealt with in various stages of fulfilment in 83-4 913 1418 167 (which with 165b-6 is restored in this edition to its original context after 194). (c) The promises of the re-evangelization of the heathen world in 1115 146-7 154 are fulfilled in {lxxxviii.} 219-222. 14-15. 17 when restores to their right context immediately after 203.

§ 2. Unity of style and diction. -- The grammar and the style of our author are unique, as the Grammar which I give, pp. cxvii-clix, amply proves. This unity is discoverable in every part of the Apocalypse save in the sources which our author has taken over in a Greek form (such as 111-13 12. 17. 18; see p. lxii sqq.), and even in these the hand of our author is constantly manifest, as he edits them to serve his main purpose. Moreover, in the introduction to every chapter (save in the case of the sources) its essential affinities of diction and idiom with the rest of the book are given almost in full.

This unity, therefore, does not exclude the use of visions of his own of an earlier date or of sources.

A few examples of the essential untiy of diction between different parts of the Apocalypse may here be added.

     (a) Chaps. 1-3 and 204-22.
11 dei/xai toi/j dou,loij auvtou/ a] dei/ gene,sqai evn ta,cei) 226 dei/xai toi/j dou,loij auvtou/ a] dei/ gene,sqai evn ta,cei)
13 maka,rioj o` avnaginw,skwn kai. oi` ) ) ) tou.j lo,gouj th/j profhtei,aj ) ) ) throu/ntej) 227 maka,rioj o` thrw/n tou.j lo,gouj th/j profhtei,aj)
117 evgw, eivmi o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj) 2213 evgw. ) ) ) o` prw/toj kai. o` e;scatoj)
27 to. pneu/ma le,gei) 2217 to. pneu/ma kai. h` numfh. le,gousin)
228 to.n avste,ra to.n prwi?no,n) 218 o` qa,natoj o` deu,teroj (cf. 206).
311 e;rcomaitacu,) 2212 ivdou. e;rcomai tacu,)
312 th/j kainh/j VIerousalh,m( h` katabai,nousa evk tou/ ouvranou/ avpo. tou/ qeou/ mou) 212 VIerousalh.m kainh.n ) ) ) katabai,nousan evk tou/ ouvranou/ avpo. tou/ qeou/)

     (b) Chaps 1-3 and 4-203.
11 dei/xai ) ) ) a] dei/ gene,sqai) 41 dei,xw soi a] gene,sqai)
16 evpoi,hsan h`ma/j basilei,an( i`erei/j tw/| qew/|) 510 evpoi,hsaj auvtou.j tw/| qew/| h`mw/n basilei,an kai. i`erei/j)
110 evgeno,mhn evn pneu,mati) 42 evgeno,mhn evn pneu,mati)
113 o[moion ui`o.n avnqrw,pou) 1414 o[moion ui`o.n avnqrw,pou)
113 periezwsme,non pro.j toi/j mastoi/j zw,nhn crusa/n) 156 periezwsme,noi peri. ta. sth,qh zw,naj crusa/j)
114 oi` ovfqalmoi. auvtou/ w`j flo.x puro,j) 1912 oi` de. ovfqalmoi. auvtou/ w`j flo,x puro,j)
27 to. pneu/ma le,gei) 1413 le,gei to. pneu/ma)
216 polemh,sw metV auvtw/n) 134 polemh/sai metV auvtou/: cf. 1714.
221 metanoh/sai evk) 920. 21 1611.
223 evn qana,tw| (= "by pestilence"). 68 o` qa,natoj)
227 poimanei/ (= "shall break"). 1915 (125).
37 o` a[gioj o` avlhqino,j( where avlhqino,j (= "faithful"). 610.
39 h[xousin kai. proskunh,sousin evnw,pion tw/n podw/n sou) 154 h[xousin kai. proskunh,sousin evnw,pio,n sou)
310 th/j oivkoume,nhj o[lhj) 129 1614.
310 tou.j katoikou/ntaj evpi. th/j gh/j (in a technical sense). 610 813 138.

{lxxxix.} The above examples could be increased indefinitely. But there is still weighter evidence. The recurrence of idioms -- in many cases idioms unique and peculiar to our author's style -- throughout theh Apocalypse, from the earliest chapters to the last, presents still stronger proofs of the unity of authorship. Since these are recorded in the introduction to each chapter and summarized in the Grammar, I shall not dwell further on them here.

§ 3. But this unity in the dramatic movement of the Apocalypse does  not necessitate the assumption that all and every part of the Apocalypse is our author's own creation. As a matter of fact this is not the case. Our author has, as we have seen elsewhere, used sources. -- These sources, together with earlier visions of his own, he has re-edited and brought in the main into harmony with their new contexts. But the work of editing has not been thorough. Certain incongruities survive in the incorporated sections, which our author would no doubt have removed if he lived to revise his work. Traces of an earlier date and often expectations of an earlier generation still survive. Thus in vol. i. 43-47 I have shown that our author wrote the Seven Epistles under Vespasian, when the Church had no apprehension of a universal martyrdom of the faithful, but expected to survive till the Second Advent of Christ. By various additions and changes this expectation is changed for the expectation that pervades the rest of the book, and the letters to the Seven Churches are transformed into letters to entire Christendom.(2) But traces of {xc.} earlier date survive. As I have elsewhere shown, these letters came from our author and from none other.

Again in 41-8 our author re-edits a vision of his own, 42b-3, 5-8acde. See vol. i. 104-106 and the commentary in loc. In the course of incorporation certain infelicities have been incurred. It is said of the Seer in 42a evgeno,mhn evn pneu,mati -- a phrase which denotes the state of trance as in 110. But according to 41 he was already in this state, as the words meta. tau/ta ei=don show. See vol. i. 109-111, 106-107. Again 44 is a later addition from our author's hand; but the grammar is wrong, and the subject-matter does not harmonize well with the context. The Apocalypse is clearly a first sketch and needed revision: see vol. i. 115-116.

In 71-8 our author makes use of traditional  material, but the language is his own. See vol. i. 191-199. The four angels and the four winds, which are here introduced and introduced in terms that lead us to expect their subsequent appearance in the way of judgment (73mh. avdikh,shte th.n ) ) ) a;crisfragi,swmen( ktl)), are not directly referred to again.

In 111-13 our author has made use of two sources (111-2 113-13), both written before 70 A.D., in which, if the text is taken literally, the historic Jerusalem is supposed to be standing (112. 8), and the Temple to be inviolable (111). These references have been taken literally by many scholars as determining the date of the whole Apocalypse, especially by those who accept its absolute unity and its composition by one author. But to construe such statements literally implies a complete misconception of our author's attitude to the earthly Jerusalem. Our author could not possibly have regarded the earthly Jerusalem as th.n po,lin th.n a`gi,an (112). Such a definition he reserves for the New Jerusalem, the eternal abode of the saints (212), and the Jerusalem coming down from heaven to be the seat of the Messianic kingdom for 1000 years (2110). This latter he calls also th.n po,lin th.n hvgaphme,nhn (209). But for him the actual city is that h[tij kalei/tai pneumatikw/j So,doma kai. Ai;guptoj o[pou kai. o` ku,rioj auvtw/n evstaurw,qh (118). But our author has re-edited this section by the addition of 114 (?). 8bc. 9a and the recasting of 117, according to his own thought and in his own diction, and thus the inviolable security which the Jews attached to the Temple is reinterpreted by our author as meaning the spiritual security of the Christian community despite the attacks of Satan and the Antichrist. But such spiritual security does not exclude martyrdom, as 113-13 makes clear. See  {xci.} vol. i. 269-270. 111-13 has so far as possible to be reinterpreted from the later standpoint of the Apocalypse as a whole. But in some cases this is hardly possible.

12 is a source, or rather a combination of two sources, which our author has borrowed in its Greek form and re-edited. Thus we find in 121 evpi. th/j kefalh/j where our author would have used evpi. t) kefala,j: in 123 evpta. diadh,mata instead of diadh,mata e`pta,: in 127 tou/ before the infinitive -- not elsewhere in Jap: in 1212ouvranoi, instead of iyvrane,: in 1214 avpo. prosw,pou = "because of." Contrast 616 2011. Hence I here withdraw the thesis maintained in vol. i. 300 sqq. § 3, that our author translated this source himself. See also p. clviii. n.

1213-15, though full of significance in their original context and at their original date, do not admit of interpretation from the standpoint and date of our author's work (see vol. i. 330).

In 17-18 our author has edited two sources already existing in a Greek form (see p. lxiii sq., vol. ii. 56-58, 88 sqq.) But traces of the original date of their composition survive in 1710-11 and 184. See vol. ii. 59 sq., 93. Another trace of 18 being a source survives in 182, where it is stated that Rome has become katoikhth,rion daimoni,wn kai. fulakh. ) ) ) pa,ntoj ovrne,ou avkaqa,rtou, whereas our author himself in 193 represents the smoke of her burning as ascending age after age to the end of the world.

Such incongruities as the above do not affect the main movement of thought and development in the book. Without the sources, in which these incongruities occur, the book would suffer irreparably. These sources, with the exception of 10-1113 which is a proleptic digression, form organic members of the whole. The survival, therefore, of such incongruities requires they hypothesis that our author not only used sources but also did not live to revise his work.

1. In respect to the angels sent to instruct the Seer with the revelation of God, there is  no unity observed in the Apocalypse. Our author apparently set out with the intention of committing this revelation to one angel. To this intention he holds fast (as I now see) in 11. 10-11 41 104. 8. In 1011 it is possible that le,gousin is an oversight for le,gei, which 025 Tyc Pr gig vgdfv s arm bo eth attest. But the adoption of sources (111-13 12-13. 17-18), where this angelic guide is not mentioned, interfered with his original purpose, and hence there is no reference to him till 199a 229. But even in 1-10 various other heavenly beings instruct the Seer -- one of the Elders in 55 713-17, the Cherubim in 61. 3. 5. 7. This fact prepares us for the intervention of one of the Seven Angels of the Bowls in 171 219. 10 221. But there is a special fitness in this intervention. These angels have to execute judgment on the world now subject to the Antichrist, and so it is one and the same angel that shows the Seer the destruction of Rome (171-10), the capital of the Antichrist on earth, and that shows the city that is to replace it -- the Heavenly Jerusalem coming down to be the capital of Christ's kingdom on earth for 1000 years (219-222. 14-15. 17 204-6).
      But the above phenomena are not inconsistent with unity of authorship, though on revision the author would, no doubt, have removed some of the incongruities. In other apocalypses there are several angelic guides. Thus in Dan 1010sqq. one of the holy watchers, 816sqq. Gabriel, and possibly in 101sqq.. Many angels act in this capacity in 1 Enoch 21-36: two angels in 2 Enoch.
2. Their inclusion in this work has given them this new meaning. The fact that there are seven letters and only seven, suggests that the Seer is now addressing himself -- not merely to Seven Churches out of the many others to which he could have written with authority, nor yet to all the Churches of the province of Asia, but -- through these Seven Churches to all the Churches of Christendom. The approaching struggle, as the entire Apocalypse presupposes, is not between the Christian Churches of a single province and the Empire, but between Christendom and the Antichrist impersonated in the Empire and its head, though the storm is threatening to break first on the Churches of Asia.
       This suggestion gains support from the following considerations. Seven is a sacred number with out author and is capable of symbolic meaning. That the Seven Churches embrace all the Churches, appears to follow from 112. 13 combined with 116. 20. In 112 seven candlesticks and only seven are visible, and in 116 seven stars and only seven stars. Now, since from 120 we learn that the seven candlesticks are the Seven Churches -- i.e. the Churches in their actual condition -- and that the stars are the angels of the Seven Churches -- i.e. the Churches as they should be ideally, and since in 113 the Son of Man stands in the midst of these Churches, and holds in His hands the seven stars or the ideals they have to achieve, the natural conclusion is that it is all the Churches of Christendom in the midst of which Christ stands, and not an insignificant group, and that the stars which He holds in His right hand are the ideals which they are summoned through his  help to realize. As all Christians, according to the rest of the Apocalyse, are to share in the {xc.} coming tribulation,they are all here addressed in these letters. After the first chapter the numeral is dropped and our author speaks only in his later additions to the letters (27. 11. 17. 29 36. 13. 22 (see vol. i. p. 45)) of evkklhsi,ai. The larger thought of all the Churches seems to be here before him


Scanned and edited by Brad Johnson