Digest urth.v028.n186

Paul C Duggan · 19 Apr 2000, 14:33 · from urth-v0028.mbox · original

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: Paul C Duggan <pduggan at world.std.com>
Subject: (urth) Re: Digest urth.v028.n186
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 14:33:53
Message-ID: <urth-v0028-0920 at digest.urth.net>
X-Urthmirror-Source: http://www.urth.net/urth/archives/v0028/0920.shtml
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, 19 Apr 2000 alga wrote:

> The scholarship is not that "contemporary" regarding Revelation. It was
>suspect from the gitgo, with several more sober bishops strongly
>objecting to it when the 4th century canon was put together. It crawled
>in because of popular superstition that John the gospeleer wrote it,=20
>though  more educated folk with a good "ear" even at that early time
>found this highly unlikely, and said so. There were lots of similarly
>apocalyptic texts around, this one being an anti-Rome rant with
>historical references to Babylon, Israel's prior primo peeve.

Its also been suggested that the main enemy, and actual identity
of Babylon (besides Rome) is non-Christian Judaism ("those who say they
are Jews and are not", and all) I would think "modern scholarship" would
find that fits right in with the Johnaine "anti-semitism" (as if that term
had any contextual utility, which I think it probably doesn't [but that
doesn't stop US News and World Report from mentioning it])

> Modern
>textual analysis makes the two completely incompatible.=20

I wonder how on earth anyone goes about proving something like that.
John's gospel is structurally based abound sevens (seven "I am's", seven
miraculous signs, a "seven day creation" in the first chapter) and
everyone is well aware of the seven-fold structure of Revelation. Seems
that would make them quite compatible.

Paul


*More Wolfe info & archive of this list at http://www.urth.net/urth/

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net