Revelation & Acts
I really enjoyed the range of topics that was covered in our class discussion tonight. The conversation about commerce and the mark of the beast reminded me of another biblical book that seems opposite to Revelation in many ways: Acts of the Apostles, which tells the hopeful story of the formation and unification of the early Christian community. Wealth and possessions are shared evenly for the good of the community (it's very communistic). At one point, a man named Ananias and his wife Safira withold some profits from the sale of her property and are struck dead by God (4:32-5:12). Their sin was in not being wholly devoted to the community and therefore to God.
I guess in that sense, their killing in Acts can be seen to foreshadow the death in Revelation that awaits those who do commerce with corrupt Rome, which is an act that sunders the purity and unity of the church.
What's more interesting, though, is that Acts is perhaps the only book in the bible in which women who play an active role are considered "good," as opposed to Revelation, where women like Jezebel are "bad" or "deadly." The women of Acts are primary organizers of churches, which were run from homes, and the kinds of domestic and commercial labor they performed was crucial to the success of the community. I just think it's interesting that, as we discussed in class, the ideal or "good" woman in Revelation is the passive virgin type who passively suffers or is redeemed at the hands of male figures (the dragon and then the angels).
Just a point I had wanted to raise before the topic moved on.
- Login to post comments
Overall, their has been much debate over the inclusion of the book of revelations into the new testament. The supposed author was a man by the name of John, however was this John the Apostle supposed author of the rest of the gospel, or just another preacher from the island of Patmos. The gospel preaches hope, and salvation, while revelations takes on a much darker and vengeful tone. The book of revelations speaks of apocalyptic battle on heaven and earth, the return of Christ in the mold of a warrior king. While in John 18, Christ supposedly stated to Pontus Pilate: "My kingdom is not of this world", and in Matthew 22 Christ supposedly stated: "Render, therefore, unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things which are God's." These are two verses within the new testment, that tend have contradicting messages. The overall key would be the Roman influence on the consolidation of the new testament, and the need to legitimize the emperors rule over a new Christian empire.
I think that the depiction of women in general is crucial when analyzing biblical texts, but before I start getting carried away and writing about the sacred feminine in Pagan religions and the Council of Nicaea, I definitely want to read what Kirsch has to say about this subject in the next few chapters, and then come back to it. The historical roots of the organized church and how this council (and others like it) systematically choose specific scriptures for the bible to create unilateral power for themselves while portraying Jesus not as a man, but as a God, is really fascinating. I think its important to realize that while the Catholic church is obviously a religious institution, it's also arguably the most powerful political institution in Western history. And as Napoleon Bonaparte said, "Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet." And while the Church certainly hoarded power and goods for themselves, often doing more harm than good, Jeff brought up the Acts of the Apostles, which seems almost socialist/communist in nature in our modern terms, and as I brought up in class when referring to Thomas Jefferson, the bible also has many ethical undertones and morals behind many of the stories.
Also while reading The Book of Revelation, I couldn't help think what Dan mentioned in his blog and I mentioned in class, which is that while I don't find the text as disturbing but more fantastical - it's REALLY SCARY to think that many fellow Americans - namely those literally in charge of our Government (or heading the "power elite" as C. Wright Mills would say) take this book as the literal word of God and something that we are on the brink of witnessing at all times. More to come soon...
You mention that you find it "REALLY SCARY" that some people believe that Revelations is the word of God, especially those in government. I myself have no problem if they do think this, I doubt a bit that they really do but I wouldn't have any concern if they did. The way I see it is that everyone is entitled to their beliefs because no one will ever know the truth and so long as they don't force their views on anyone else let them believe what they want. It seems though that being scared about other people's beliefs and ways of thinking is exactlly why Revelation was written in the first place and being concerned about who believes in Revelations might stem from the apocalyptic tradition itself.
I always thought Jesus was a communist. there are verses in the gospels in which Jesus preaches for men to give up their aquisitions, especially the uber-wealthy because (something along the lines of) "(something large. a camel?) has a better chance of walking through a needle than a wealthy man through the gates of heaven." this is because the wealthy have made Wealth (Mammon- the god of wealth) their personal God, and there is no God but YHWH. However, I think a better argument for the causation of some proto-communist ideology in Jesus' sermons might be that Jesus was of the sect of the Essenes (scholars have argued this, i promise), and one would have to forfeit his wealth to the community before entering the Essene sect. Though, perhaps, the morality and the reason behind the initiation right are intimately intertwined.
Sort of like scientology today...