the apocalypse

[Guide To The Bible]

<staff edit>
Rev20:6 Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will REIGN with him for a thousand years.

 

[Guide To The Bible]

understanding john
-
Theophilus was responsible for the exile of chrysostom
-Edward Gibbon described him as "...the perpetual enemy of peace and virtue, a bold, bad man, whose hands were alternately polluted with gold and with blood."
-he exchanged letters with jerome
-augustine also exchanged letters with jerome
-chrysostom did not but he did write to the pope
-many exchanged letters with jerome
-jerome is well respected and so is chrysostom
-jerome gave us the vulgate
-jerome clearly defined what the bible would be

In John Chrysostom's: Eight Homilies Against the Jews, he was the first to coin the phrase "Christ Killers". He was very antisemitic.

 

[victorinus]

In John Chrysostom's: Eight Homilies Against the Jews, he was the first to coin the phrase "Christ Killers". He was very antisemitic.

true
-
there were a lot of john the baptist followers hanging around that did not accept Jesus, I'm sure he had a problem with that as well
-
john the apostle had to deal with them in ephesus

 

[Guide To The Bible]

true
-
there were a lot of john the baptist followers hanging around that did not accept Jesus, I'm sure he had a problem with that as well
-
john the apostle had to deal with them in ephesus

Yes, some didn't accept Christ of course. Did John the Baptist's follows go to Ephesus? Do you have a citation?

 

[victorinus]

Yes, some didn't accept Christ of course. Did John the Baptist's follows go to Ephesus? Do you have a citation?

yes to both questions
-
it has been mentioned in this thread

 

[victorinus]

understanding jerome
-
I have often said the church gave us the bible
-but-
it would be more accurate to say jerome gave us the bible
-jerome was commissioned by damasus
-damasus was speaking for the church
-they gave us the vulgate
-
the vulgate
-
"Independent and unauthorized or anonymous translations—especially of the New Testament—aided by the gross carelessness of scribes, made confusion worse confounded."

"it was prepared with great care by the greatest scholar whom Latin Christianity produced"
-
vulgate
-
"Likewise, Damasus' commissioning of the Latin Vulgate edition of the Bible, c. 383, was instrumental in the fixation of the canon in the West."
-
"Most valuable of all from a text-critical perspective is the Vulgate text of the Apocalypse, a book where there is no clear majority text in the surviving Greek witnesses."
-
"In The City of God (begun in 413, but Books 20-22 were written in 426)"
-
augustine quotes the apocalypse for the first time in chapter 7 of book 20 city of God

understanding jerome
-so-
what is my point?
where am I going with this?
-
the apocalypse is in the bible because someone was convinced that john the apostle wrote it
-that someone was jerome
-the only connection we have between jerome and the apocalypse is the commentary by victorinus
-jerome was not happy with it and actually modified it
-so-
who convinced jerome the apostle wrote it?
-I think it was chrysostom

 

[Truthfrees]

MOD HAT

Posts have been split from this thread into a new thread "Apocalypse": Apocalypse

 

[victorinus]

MOD HAT

Posts have been split from this thread into a new thread "Apocalypse": Apocalypse

thank you

 

[victorinus]

understanding john
-
first some questions

to summarize
-
john the baptist wrote the first apoaclypse
he was preparing the way for the Lamb
the time was near
-
john the apostle wrote the second apocalypse
he added Jesus, antipas, and the churches
he was dealing with followers of john the baptist who did not accept Jesus
-
john chrysostom wrote the third one
he added something that would convince jerome that
john the apostle wrote it
he was in ephesus at a critical time
he was one of the big players

 

[victorinus]

before I talk about chrysostom
I want to remind you that
I am an historicist
-
history is really all we have
without it we must rely on the exegete
-and-
we need to find two who agree with each other
-
historians don't agree either
-but-
it is far easier to misinterpret the bible than it is to rewrite history
-
lucky for us there are many historians who are really interested in history
-and-
don't have another agenda
-or-
an ax to grind
-
I admit to having an agenda
-and-
it could be said -
an ax to grind
-but-
I do try to limit myself to what reliable historians present
I make no predictions
I am not a prophet
I just look for history that might fulfill prophecy
I use history to interpret prophecy

 

[victorinus]

understanding chrysostom
-
I never heard of chrysostom before I started my research 20 years ago
-but-
he soon became one of my favorite saints
he was born in antioch in 349, a deacon in 381, a priest in 386
he just wanted to be a monk but was not allowed
he was forced to be patriarch of constantinople in 397
he made many enemies
he was forced out by the pope of alexandria, theophilus
he was loved by the people
he was the greatest orator
-
chrysostom means golden mouth
-so-
how did I find him?
it was real easy
I was looking for what happened in the year 666
islam was about to attack constantinople the capital of a christian empire that was to last one thousand years
-
really
-
I decided to check it out

 

[victorinus]

understanding chrysostom
-
I was not the first to suspect chrysostom
-but-
I had already suspected him before I learned about this russian astronomer morozov who dated the apocalypse based on astronomy
-
september 30, 395
-
I don't know anything about astronomy
-but-
you can't ignore this
I couldn't especially since I already suspected chrysostom
-of course we know the apocalypse existed well before him
-of course we know he never quoted it
-but-
that was before he spent three months in ephesus replacing exactly seven corrupted bishops
-how could he not look around for the originals of this so called apocalypse?
-what did he find?
-and-
-what did he do with them?
at this time jerome was wrapping up his vulgate
-what books did he use?
-what versions did he use?
there were many different copies of each book
jerome decided which ones to use
-and-
what would convince jerome that john the apostle wrote the apocalypse?
did jerome go to ephesus?
I found no record of that

 

[victorinus]

understanding chrysostom
-
chrysostom didn't want to go to ephesus
they didn't want him to leave constantinople
-but-
the problem in ephesus demanded it
the probem was simony
bishoprics were awarded to the hightest bidder
there was only one person who could be trusted with this
no one else in the area had the authority and respect
no one considered the pope in alexandria - theophilus
after just three years in office
john chrysostom had the reputation
only he could fix the problem
it would take the first three months of 401 to do it
it was a big mess
could you spend three months in ephesus ignoring the home of the apocalypse?
I don't think so

 

[victorinus]

understanding chrysostom
-
my source for chyrsostom is
john chrysostom and his time by baur
-so-
why is he so important?
rev 17:10
"There are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet come"
rev 17:8
"The beast that you saw was, and is not"
-these two passages date at least chapter 17
at this point in time we have
the beast that was and is not
-and-
five fallen kings, one is, and one to come
any interpretation must satisfy the above
-and-
still be consistent with the other chapters
-
I have identified the beasts and the kings
-and-
the only time the above would be true is at or near the end of the fourth century
-the time of chyrsostom

 

[victorinus]

understanding chrysostom
-
to understand what was going on within the church at the beginning of the fifth century you need to understand the exile of john chrysostom
-
it has been suggested by historians that this was the beginning of the east-west schism
-
at this time jerome was in the east commissioned by pope damasus in the west to define once and for all the latin bible - the vulgate
-
at this time the jury was still out on the apocalypse
jerome put it in and that ended the argument

 

[victorinus]

understanding chrysostom
-
to help us understand the exile of chrysostom we have his correspondence with pope innocent
-
we also have letters to and from jerome which includes pope innocent and the so called pope of alexandria, theophilus
-
it is clear from the jerome letters that he had the complete respect of all the major players including augustine who also wrote a few letters
-so-
the questions remains
-what could chrysostom have done in ephesus at the beginning of the fifth century that would have convinced jerome that the apocalypse issue was settled?
-what copy did jerome use?
-did he go to ephesus?
I don't think so
-did chrysostom go to ephesus?
I know so

 

[victorinus]

understanding chrysostom
-
chrysostom in ephesus
-
"Following the express invitation of several bishops, Chrysostom, in the first months of 401, had come to Ephesus, where he appointed a new archbishop, and with the consent of the assembled bishops deposed six bishops for simony. "
-
from newadvent
-
he was in ephesus for over three months
he had to look for copies of the apocalypse
what did he do with them?

 

[victorinus]

understanding john
-

this from newadvent
"We cannot conclude without mentioning the theory advanced by the German scholar Vischer. He holds the Apocalypse to have been originally a purely Jewish composition, and to have been changed into a Christian work by the insertion of those sections that deal with Christian subjects. From a doctrinal point of view, we think, it cannot be objected to. There are other instances where inspired writers have availed themselves of non-canonical literature. Intrinsically considered it is not improbable. The Apocalypse abounds in passages which bear no specific Christian character but, on the contrary, show a decidedly Jewish complexion. Yet on the whole the theory is but a conjecture."
-
conjecture?
-
how can you say any interpretation of the apocalypse is anything more than conjecture?
-when it makes sense
-and-
who besides john the baptist could be considered the writer?

 

[Bible2+]

victorinus quoted newadvent in post #638:

The Apocalypse abounds in passages which bear no specific Christian character . . .

It is said that Martin Luther went even further, saying about the Apocalypse/Book of Revelation that "Christ is neither taught nor known in it".

But note that the entire book of Revelation is from Jesus Christ to the church (Revelation 1:1, Revelation 22:16). And Jesus Christ is taught and known throughout the book. For Revelation 1 is about Christ's appearance and his speaking to John the apostle while John was on Patmos. And Revelation chapters 2-3 are letters which Christ spoke directly to seven churches. And Revelation 5 is about Christ as the Lamb (cf. John 1:36, Acts 8:32; 1 Peter 1:19), now in heaven. And Revelation 6 is about how Christ will unseal the seven seals of the tribulation. And Revelation 7:9-17 is about Christ comforting the souls of dead believers in heaven. And Revelation 11:8 refers to Christ as our Lord. And Revelation 11:15 refers to Christ, in our future, taking legal possession of all the kingdoms of the world away from the Antichrist. And Revelation 12:10 mentions the power of Christ. And Revelation 12:11 refers to Christian martyrs overcoming Satan by the blood of Christ. And Revelation 12:17 refers to Christians having the testimony of Christ (Revelation 12:17). And Revelation 13:8 mentions Christ. And Revelation 14:1 refers to Christ standing on the heavenly Mount Zion (cf. Hebrews 12:22). And Revelation 14:4 refers to how the 144,000 will be Christ's followers (Revelation 14:4).

And Revelation 14:10 refers to those in hell being tormented in the presence of Christ. And Revelation 14:12-13 refers to Christians keeping the faith of Christ even unto martyrdom. And Revelation 14:14-16 refers to Christ reaping their souls into heaven after their death. And Revelation 15:3 refers to the song of Christ. And Revelation 16:15 quotes something Christ says. And Revelation 17:6 refers to those martyred for Christ. And Revelation 17:14 refers to Christ's future victory over the powers of the unsaved world, as Lord of lords and King of kings. And Revelation 19:7 refers to Christ's future marriage to the church. And Revelation 19:9 refers to the marriage supper of Christ. And Revelation 19:10 refers to those who have the testimony of Christ, and says that the testimony of Christ is the spirit of prophecy. And Revelation 19:11-21 describes Christ's future, second coming. And Revelation 20:4-6 refers to Christ's subsequent millennial reign on the earth with the physically resurrected church. And Revelation 20:11-15 refers to when Christ will resurrect and judge (cf. John 5:22,28-29) all of the unsaved people of all times. And Revelation 21:9 refers to how the city of New Jerusalem pictures Christ's bride, the church. And Revelation 21:14 mentions Christ's apostles.

And Revelation 21:22 refers to Christ himself and God the Father as the temple of New Jerusalem. And Revelation 21:23 refers to Christ being the light of New Jerusalem. And Revelation 21:27 refers to Christ's book of life. And Revelation 22:1,3 refers to the throne of Christ and of God the Father. And Revelation 22:3 refers to the servants of Christ and of God the Father. And Revelation 22:7,12-13,16,20a quotes Christ. And Revelation 22:17,20b refers to the church calling for Christ's (still unfulfilled) second coming. And Revelation 22:21 closes the book with "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen", just as the book had opened with "The Revelation of Jesus Christ" (Revelation 1:1). So it does not seem possible that anyone could say that Christ is neither taught nor known in the book of Revelation.

 

[victorinus]

understanding chrysostom
-
this from newadvent
-
"Perhaps the most telling argument against the apostolic authorship of the book is its omission from the Peshito, the Syrian Vulgate."
-
"In the West the Church persevered in its tradition of apostolic authorship. St. Jerome alone seemed to have been influenced by the doubts of the East."
-
so who changed jerome's mind?
-
it had to be chrysostom