The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown (187 page)

The critical analysis of Revelation and the Fourth Gospel by a third-century bishop of Alexandria named Dionysius (c. 247—65) established a tradition maintaining that the two books could not possibly have come from the same hand. In his work
On Promises,
preserved by Eusebius, Dionysius resolutely denied
chiliasm
(the belief in the millennial reign of Christ), faulting it for its alleged emphasis on carnal indulgence and its basis in a literal interpretation of Revelation
(Eccl. Hist.
7.24.4-6; 7.25.1-2). While Dionysius affirmed Revelation as inspired Scripture, he denied that it was written by the apostle John
(Eccl. Hist. 7.25.1-27).

To this day Dionysius serves as a point of reference for those who deny the Johannine apostolic authorship of Revelation. But none of the arguments used by opponents of the Johannine apostolic authorship of the book have overturned the substantial and unanimous earliest tradition that the author of Revelation is John the apostle, the son of Zebedee.
³²

Date

Scholarly opinion concerning the date of Revelation's composition is divided between an early date (64—69) and a late date (95—96). In addition, some opt for a middle ground, conjecturing that composition began in the 60s and was completed in the late 90s.
³³
Although certainty continues to be elusive, the late date, during the reign of Domitian, has considerably stronger support.

Internal Evidence
The book of Revelation provides the following internal clues regarding its date of composition: (1) the persecution experienced by the churches of Asia Minor; (2) the spiritual condition of these churches; (3) the emperor cult; (4) the reference to the Jerusalem temple in 11:1—2; (5) the “Nero
redivivus
myth” (though not explicitly mentioned in the book); (6) the references to “Babylon” in Revelation; and (7) the seven “heads” mentioned in 17:9—11.

Type of Persecution
One of the most common arguments for dating Revelation pertains to the notion that at the time of composition Christians were experiencing fierce persecution. Throughout church history Domitian has been viewed as a great persecutor of the church (Eusebius,
Eccl. Hist.
4.26.9). But in recent decades this assumption has been increasingly questioned because of the paucity of evidence supporting an empire-wide persecution instigated by Domitian. Therefore, proponents of an early date contend that the persecution of Christians reflected in Revelation best corresponds to Nero's persecution. Others speak of the persecution only as a “perceived crisis.”
³⁴

The book of Revelation indicates various degrees of persecution and anticipates persecution on a much grander scale in the near future. John addressed the persecution experienced by Christians at the time of composition or in the recent past. John's banishment to Patmos came about because of hostility toward the exclusive claims of the gospel (1:9). The letters to the churches in Asia Minor also demonstrate local persecution. The diverse situations reflected in the letters indicate that each church faced challenges unique to their particular locale. Nevertheless, the persecution experienced by Christians in Asia Minor did not result in death, except for one case (Antipas) in the city of Pergamum (2:13).

The beheaded souls under the heavenly altar provide a final indication of persecution against Christians in the recent past (6:9). The breaking of the fifth seal reveals the souls of believers who were executed for their faith and were crying out for justice (6:10).
³⁵
This cry represents a plea for public justice, not private revenge.
³⁶
The reason they demand justice is because they were unjustly condemned on the grounds of their testimony to the word of God and to Jesus. Although these souls may include all the martyrs since the time of Abel (Gen 4:10; Matt 23:29-35), more likely they are Christians slain since the time of Stephen (Acts 7:55—60; 12:2; Rev 2:13).
³⁷
The reference does not address a current persecution because Antipas is the only one specifically mentioned to have been executed for his faith. The only well-documented case of widespread persecution occurred during the reign of Nero.
³⁸
Christians in Asia Minor certainly remembered the excessive cruelty and injustice
inflicted on believers during Nero's persecution. This piece of evidence thus favors a later date, allowing some time to have transpired since Nero's persecution.

At the time of composition, the churches in Asia Minor were experiencing some persecution but nowhere near the extent of what Nero inflicted on Christians. Although they were not currently facing severe persecution, John fully anticipated such in the near future. This is explicitly stated in the answer to the question, How long? until they were going to be avenged (6:10; see 4 Ezra 4:33—37). In response, believers were told to wait until the full number of their fellow-servants and brothers were killed (6:11).

Chapters 12—13 graphically portray the completion of this number as the outcome of a holy war between God and Satan played out on earth. Once expelled from heaven, Satan, the accuser, proceeds to make war against those who obey God's commands and hold to the testimony of Jesus (12:17). In 13:1—8, the dragon endows the beast with authority to mandate the worship of his statue and to wage war against believers. This depicts the forced participation in the imperial cult by a future emperor who, like Nero, would savagely persecute the church. Believers are exhorted to persevere and wait for the time when God would vindicate them (13:9-10; see 17:6; 18:24; 19:2; 20:4).

If these examples accurately reflect the situation of Christians in Asia Minor at the time of writing, the evidence favors the time of Domitian. First, the persecution is not severe enough to be associated with Nero. Second, while the notion that Domitian instituted an empirewide persecution has been exaggerated,
³⁹
the fact that he did not systematically persecute Christians does not mean that he was favorably disposed toward them. To the contrary, believers were despised throughout the empire. Not all believers in Asia Minor faced the same level of antagonism; it seems that persecution was more intense in cities competing for Rome's favor. This also suggests the time of Domitian.

The State of the Churches in Asia Minor
Regarding the state of the churches in Asia Minor as described in Revelation, many of these churches were clearly in a deteriorated moral and spiritual condition. The Christians in Ephesus had forsaken their “first love” (2:4 KJV). The churches in Pergamum and Thyatira had permitted, and even succumbed to, false teaching (2:14—15,20—24). Believers in Sardis had become spiritually lethargic (3:1—2). The Laodiceans had indulged in “lukewarm” and arrogant self-sufficiency (3:15-17).
⁴⁰
While it may be argued that developing this kind of spiritual apathy would have taken some time, thus supporting a late date, this piece of evidence is inconclusive by itself,
especially since some of Paul's churches developed comparable problems already in the 50s and 60s.
⁴¹

The Emperor Cult
The emperor cult is significant since many have suggested a Domitianic date because of the anti-imperial rhetoric in the book.
⁴²
The phrase “our Lord and God” (4:11; see 19:6), in particular, parallels the Latin
dominus et deus noster,
a title applied to Domitian during his reign (Suetonius,
Dom.
13.2). Faithfulness to the one true God in the midst of an idolatrous society is one of the major themes in the book. Thus 4:11 likely contrasts the imperial claim of divinity with the only true God who is seated on the heavenly throne.

Evidence abounds from Domitian's critics and supporters that he arrogated titles of divinity beyond what was culturally acceptable. In 42 BC, after the death of Julius Caesar, the senate officially declared him
divius Iulius
(“divine Julius”). Soon thereafter Octavian, Caesar's nephew and successor, was called
divi filius
(“son of a divine being”).
⁴³
At most, an emperor, usually after death, could attain the status of
divius
(“divine”) but not
deus
(“god”).
⁴⁴
Aside from Caligula's excessive claims to divinity,
⁴⁵
Domitian was the first Roman emperor to adopt and even mandate the title
deus,
⁴⁶
a claim his critics found repulsive.
⁴⁷

While the reference to “our Lord and God” in 4:11 does not conclusively pinpoint the emperor at the time of composition, of all the emperors Domitian is the most likely candidate. To be sure, all the emperors were afforded some measure of divinity, but this practice seems to have reached a new level under Domitian. What is more, in the accounts of Nero's conflict with Christians there is no evidence that Nero claimed to be divine. The same is true for all other emperors prior to Domitian. If 4:11 represents two competing claims for “our Lord and God,” the evidence favors the time of Domitian for the date of the book.

The State of Temple Worship
The reference to the Jerusalem temple in 11:1—2 has been taken by some to support a pre-70 date since it appears to suggest that the temple was still standing at the time Revelation was written. If Revelation represents a prophecy against Jerusalem, as preterists hold, 11:1—2 must refer to the literal temple. Yet two plausible alternative interpretations exist supporting a date subsequent to the destruction of the Second Temple in the year 70.

One alternative is to interpret 11:1—2 as a reference to a literal reconstituted temple in Jerusalem to be built in the future prior to the return of Christ in fulfillment of Ezekiel 40—48.
⁴⁸
According to this view, the reference must be to a literal temple because its location is said to be in Jerusalem, “the holy city” (11:2) where the Lord was crucified (11:8). What John envisions is a future rebuilt temple in Jerusalem which will serve as the locus of events surrounding the tribulation. This temple will be the place where the Antichrist pretentiously claims divine prerogatives (Matt 24:15; 1 Thess 2:4). If so, Revelation may have been written either prior or subsequent to the destruction of the Second Temple.

Another alternative is to interpret the reference to the temple as symbolic.
⁴⁹
Since Revelation frequently employs symbolic language, this would be in keeping with the general nature of the book. According to this view, the reference to the temple in 11:1—2 is symbolic of the people of God. Thus K. H. Easley relates 11:1—2 to 21:9—10 where “the holy city,” the new Jerusalem, represents the people of God fully glorified and maintains that “the holy city” in 11:2 represents the people of God not fully glorified during their earthly pilgrimage.
⁵⁰

If so, the purpose of measurement would be to demonstrate that believers are divinely protected from the judgment of God depicted throughout the vision. The casting out from the outer court to be trampled by the Gentiles would indicate that while the people of God are not subject to God's wrath, they are not immune to the reality of persecution. The purpose of 11:1—2 would be to encourage believers to faithful endurance in the midst of the extreme persecution described in chap. 13. Again, the reference to the temple in 11:1—2 would not be a conclusive internal datum regarding the date of composition because the temple could either have been still standing or already have been destroyed at the time of writing. For these reasons 11:1—2 does not provide clear evidence for a particular date of composition.

The “Nero
Redivivus
Myth”
Another fascinating piece of evidence is the “Nero
redivivus
myth”
(redivivus
is Lat. for “revived”). Shortly after Nero committed suicide on June 9, AD 68, Roman historians recount how a belief emerged throughout the empire that Nero
had not actually died but was going to return with the Parthian army (Suetonius,
Nero
49.3; see 57.1). The fact that few saw Nero's corpse, coupled with uncertainty regarding the location of his tomb, gave credence to this belief.
⁵¹

The Nero
redivivus
myth surfaced in several apocalyptic Jewish and Christian writings toward the end of the first century.
⁵²
The Christian apocalypses also associate Nero with Beliar and cast him as the paradigmatic persecutor of the church.
⁵³
Toward the end of the first century, two distinct traditions developed regarding Nero's supposed return.
⁵⁴
One stems from the idea that Nero never died and that he was going to return with the Parthian army to conquer Rome. The other envisions a demonically empowered Nero figure that would attack God's people.
⁵⁵

Revelation appears to reflect an awareness of the return of Nero legend.
⁵⁶
Chapter 13 describes how the dragon gives rise to the beast and endows him with authority.
⁵⁷
In 13:3 one of the beast's heads receives a fatal wound but is miraculously resuscitated. As a result, the entire world worships him as he proceeds to slaughter faithful Christians (13:4—10). Although Nero is not mentioned by name, the language in 13:1—7 suggests that John may have adapted the form of the Nero myth that alludes to the enemy of God's people in Dan 7:2—25,
⁵⁸
though it is possible that the reference here is not to an individual but to an empire.

In addition, 17:10—12 may reflect parallels with the other form of the Nero
redux
(“never died”) myth depicting Nero's attack on Rome.
⁵⁹
John's portrayal radically differs
from other expectations of Nero's return because in Revelation the beast actually rises from the dead
(redivivus),
whereas elsewhere it is assumed that Nero never died
(redux).
⁶⁰
The reason John departs from the tradition is that in his vision the beast mimics Christ who died and rose again and will return to conquer the world's kingdoms.
⁶¹