| Similarly, the Gospel naturally stresses signs of grace whereas the Apocalypse stresses signs of judgment; but it may be more than coincidence that the first of John " s seven signs, turning water to wine (2:9), reflects the first of Moses» signs in Exodus, turning water to blood (Exod 7:20; cf. Jub. 48:5), 1071 a prominent source of judgment imagery in two of Revelation " s three sets of seven plagues (8:8–11,16:3–4). John does not mention the marriage supper (Rev 19), but this concept provides part of the eschatological backdrop for John 6 and perhaps also chs. 2 and 21. The new Jerusalem naturally occurs only in Revelation (3:12, ch. 21), but the idea complements well the Fourth Gospel " s emphasis on the genuine Jewishness of the true people of God, as well as his negative portrayal of the earthly Jerusalem. The new Jerusalem " s dimensions probably simply represent the presence of God (a cube, like the holy of holies, 21:16); 1072 its gates (Rev 21:12–13) are part of the imagery of the renewed city (Isa 60:18; Ezek 48:30–34 ), and are thus not incompatible with (though neither are they identical to) the sheepfold image of Jesus as the way and door ( John 10:7, 9; 14:6 ). John " s «dwelling» motif, expressed by his characteristic menö, is replaced by katoicheö and the motif of the heavenly temple (e.g., Rev 21:3); but this fits the contrasting eschatological perspectives of the two books. Revelation " s temple imagery (e.g., 3:12, 4:6, 5:8, 8:3, 15:2) is apocalyptic, but fits well theologically with John " s portrayal of Jesus» replacement of the temple (2:21, 8:35,14:2); they function in a roughly equivalent manner on the theological level (Rev 21:22; cf. the tabernacle in 7:15,13:6,15:5; John 1:14 ). Only Revelation includes the common Jewish image of the book of life (Rev 3:5, 20:12), but an apocalyptic image is hardly mandatory for a gospel; John, unlike the Synoptics, does stress eternal life as a possession in the present. White robes (Rev 3:4–5; 4:4; 6:11; 7:9; but cf. John 19:40; 20:12 ), the «new name» (Rev 2:17; 3:12; 7:3; 14:1; 22:4; cf. 17:5; 19:16; cf. John 1:42; 10:3 ), the crown imagery (Rev 2:11; 4:4; 12:1; 14:14; 19:12), angels (Rev passim; cf. John 20:12 ), the morning star (Rev 2:28; 22:16), the «nations» (Rev 2:26; 11:18; 12:5; 15:4; 19:15; 21:24; 22:2; but cf. John " s kosmos), thunder (Rev 4:5; 8:5; 11:19; 16[Exod 19:16; Ezek 1:4,13 ]; cf. John 12:29 ), a cry for vengeance (Rev 6[reflecting the OT; cf. 4 Ezra 4:33–37]), darkness (Rev 6:12–14; John omits the Synoptic tradition " s darkness at the cross), trumpets (1:10; 4:1; 8:2), locusts (9:3–11 [ Joel 2:4–5 ]), and antichrist imagery (Rev 13; though cf. 1 John 2and possibly John 5:43; 10:1 ), are examples of apocalyptic motifs that play little or no part in the Fourth Gospe1. But this should simply be expected on the basis of different genres. |
| We have noted the divergent eschatological perspectives above, which probably constitute the strongest argument for distinct authors. Beyond this primary and pervasive distinction, however, most theological differences are more relative. The extreme theological discrepancies some have alleged to exist between undisputedly Johannine literature and Revelation presuppose a reading of these works that does not appear entirely coherent with the data within them. 1082 Differences in vocabulary and syntax may sometimes obscure deeper relationships on the level of meaning. Moreover, a writer or community may express different emphases in different works without assuming that those emphases are mutually exclusive. One can use surface inconsistencies to deconstruct even a unified letter (for instance, Paul speaks of the Corinthian Christians as «sanctified in Christ» [ 1Cor 1:2 ] yet calls their behavior fleshly on the basis of an internal theological coherence deeper than the apparent contradiction; cf. 6:8–11). To argue that a document rejects what it omits or does not emphasize is to argue from silence, and such arguments are always tenuous. 1083 Theological Similarities. The two books have similar pneumatologies, 1084 although the Fourth Gospel develops the theme much more fully. The Spirit and prophets play an important and connected role in both (cf. Rev 1:3, 10; 2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, 22; 11:6, 18; 14:13; 16:6; 18:20, 24; 19:10; 22:6, 17; perhaps 1:19). 1085 The divine breath gives life (Rev 11:11; John 20:22 ). Spiritual worship is vital (Rev 1and repeated scenes of worship in the heavenly temple; John 4:24 ), and Jesus and the Father are worshiped equally (Rev 5:13–14; John 9:38 ; contrast Revelations worship of the beast), even using similar wording (cf. Rev 4with John 20:28 ). The sealing idea is common to both, although Revelation develops the nuances in several directions, perhaps in typical Johannine double entendre (Rev 5–7; 20:3; John 3:33; 6:27 ). Both documents share the water of life (Rev 7:17; 21:6; 22:1,17; John 7:38 ), following the Lamb (Rev 7:17; 14:4; John 10:4 ) and the Lamb guiding them (Rev 7[Isa 49:10]; John 16:13 ), although, in typically Johannine fashion, the terms are developed in different temporal directions. |
| The symbolic use of «woman» might also be parallel, although this is more questionable (Rev 12vs. 17:3; cf. John 2:4; 4:21; 19:26 ); until one presupposes the connection between John and Revelation, it is not clear that the narrative should be read metaphorically. If John 14:1–3 refers to the coming of Jesus in the Spirit after the resurrection, as the context suggests, the «place prepared» may be a verbal connection between the books, meaning the same in both (Rev 12:6; John 14:3 ). The devil is an opponent in both, though described differently (Rev 2:10,13; John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11 ). While one would not expect exorcisms in an apocalyse, the rarity of demons in the Gospel is harder to explain (Rev 9:20; 16:14; John 7:20; 10:20–21 ; apocalyptic texts portrayed them more as fallen angels, but the other extant gospels emphasize exorcisms). In both, the devil is thrown down at the cross (Rev 12:9, cf. 20:3; John 12:31 ), is a deceiver (Rev 12:9; 20:10; John 8:44 ; cf. 1 John 2:26–27 ) and accuser (Rev 12:10; cf. Jesus» enemies in John and the opposite role of the Paraclete). «Lying» refers to speaking falsehood about Jesus Christ in Revelation (3:9; 14:5) as well as in John (8:44; 1 John 2:22). Satan is connected with heresy (Rev 2:24; John 8with 1 John 2:22 ), and idols, which are connected with heresy (Rev 2:14, 20; 1 John 5:21 ), are connected with demons in Revelation (9:20; 16:14). 2C. Conclusion on John and Revelation None of these parallels (some of which are stronger than others) prove or come close to proving common authorship. They do, however, illustrate that common authorship is not impossible, a possibility which may commend itself on other grounds (such as Revelation " s probably explicit and the Gospel " s possibly implicit claim to authorship by a prominent leader named John, and early Christian tradition). The case is considerably weaker than the argument for unity of authorship of Luke and Acts (two volumes of one work) and of the Gospels and Epistles of John, but perhaps similar to the case that can be made for Pauline authorship of the so-called deuteropauline works, and perhaps better than the case for common authorship of 1 and 2 Peter. |
| Revelation " s syntax reflects more traditional Semitic rhythms 1057 because it imitates the style of Ezekiel, 1058 revelatory parts of Daniel, and other prophetic syntax. 1059 Punctuated with such common phrases as «I looked, and behold, I saw,» it is visionary language, 1060 and hence utterly different from the style of a gospel (though John also emphasizes seeing and hearing the eschatological revelation of Jesus in the present). 1061 But the nature of this book so permeates its language that, once this is taken into account, differences in language between the two books are hardly decisive. As Caird point out, «because a man writes in Hebraic Greek, it does not inevitably follow that this is the only Greek he is capable of writing.» He may deliberately adopt such a style, as Luke apparently did with Septuagintal idiom in his infancy narrative. 1062 There is evidence that the writer of Revelation was also capable of writing more sophisticated and less Semitic Greek. 1063 Common Language in Both. Revelation and the other Johannine documents exhibit many common features of vocabulary and sometimes, despite the distinct syntactical characteristics of the respective genres, style as wel1. 1064 «Witness» is prominent in both (Rev 1:2, 5,9, 3:14,6:9,11:3, 7,12:11,15:5,19:10, 20:4); 1065 it is often associated with faithfulness, sometimes to the death (Rev 1:5, 2:10,13, 3:14,12:11, 17:14,19:20; cf. the Semitic sense of «true» in the Fourth Gospel, e.g., 1:14). The «word,» as in the rest of the NT, is normally the prophetic witness of the gospel (cf. Rev 3:10, 6:9, 17:17, 20:4). God or Jesus is true (Rev 3:14,19:11; John 3:33 ), righteous (Rev 16:5; John 17:25 ), and holy (Rev 4:6; John 17:11 ), and his works are «manifested» (Rev 15:4; John 1:21, 3:21, 5 [δεικνω, cf. 2:11, 10:32], 7:3, 9:3, 14:21, 17:6, 21:1). «Works» play a major role in both, referring to human deeds but also to divine acts (Rev 2:2, 5–6, 19, 22–23, 26, 3:1–2, 8, 15, 15:3, 16:11, 18:6, 20:12–13, 22:12; John passim). «Glory» in Revelation is often praise ascribed to God (4:9, 11,5:12,11:13,14:7,15:4,19:7,21:24,26; vs. 16:9,18:7), but is also equivalent to the Jewish idea of the divine yekara or shekinah (15:8,21:11,23). Its semantic range is thus similar to that of «glory» in the Fourth Gospel, although the revelatory Christological sense is lacking in Revelation. |
| There are important relationships on the level of ecclesiology. The people of God are portrayed in both documents as those who believe in Jesus. Both the Fourth Gospel (see below) and Revelation are obsessed with this ecclesiology. Revelation uses Jewish Israel-symbolism such as lampstands to portray the churches (1:20). 1086 The lampstand was the most prominent symbol of ancient Judaism, 1087 frequent in the Diaspora (certainly including Asia) 1088 and as far west as Rome. 1089 Revelation also applies OT language such as Exod 19 to believers in Jesus (Rev 1:6; 5:10; 20:6); Revelation " s reading of Exod 19as «kingdom and priests» (1:6; 5:10; 20:6) may presuppose the Jewish interpretation later found in the Targum, possibly suggesting engagement with extrabiblical Jewish people-of-God traditions. The twenty-four elders, probably representing the priesthood of believers (Rev 4:4), 1090 and the 144,000 (Rev 7:3–8; 14:l-5), 1091 may further represent the people of God in Christ. Believers are «chosen» (Rev 17:14; John 15:16 ) «children of God» (Rev 21:7; John 1:12; 3:5; 20:17 ), following Jewish people-of-God motifs that remained dominant in early Christianity. The «servants» in Revelation (1:1; 2:20; 7:3; 19:2, 5, 10; 22:3) are primarily prophets of Jesus, whereas in John (13:16; 15:20; not 15:15) discipleship is meant. But both apply the language to all believers, and both stress the prophetic character of the church " s witness. «Church» appears only in Revelation, but there refers only to local congregations, an unsuitable subject for John (of the four extant gospels, only Matthew employs the term, and only twice). The Fourth Gospel does have a highly developed ecclesiology and 3 John 9 uses «church» the same way Revelation does. «Children» of a church or doctrine (Rev 2:23) may not appear in the Fourth Gospel (the usage of 13:33; 1 John 2and passim; 2 John 4; 3 John 4 , probably related to discipleship, is somewhat different), but one need not look beyond 2 John 1 to recognize that it was used by the Johannine community. 1092 |
| 5549 In the Pauline churches, worship empowered by God " s Spirit probably included songs in tongues and interpretation ( 1Cor 14:14–16 ), 5550 and perhaps other sorts of Spirit-inspired singing ( 1Cor 14:26 ; Eph 5:19–20 ; Col 3:16). 5551 Early Christians similarly affirmed Spirit-empowered prayer (Jude 20; Eph 6:18 ). 5552 If Revelation reveals anything about the Johannine circle of influence, it provides some insight into how Johannine Christians would have understood «worship in the Spirit.» John was caught up in visionary inspiration while «in the Spirit» 5553 on the Lord " s day, perhaps in worship (Rev 1:10). 5554 As in other circles, worship often included prostration (Rev 4:10; 5:14; 7:11; 11:16; 19:4; cf. 3:9; 19:10; 22:8). John " s visions of heaven are visions of a heavenly temple (Rev 7:15; 11:19; 13:6; 14:15, 17; 15:5–16:1; 16:17; 21:3), complete with ark of the covenant (11:19), altar of incense (5:8; 8:3–5; 9:13; 14:18), altar of sacrifice (6:9; 16:7), and even a sea as in 1 Kgs 7:23–25 (Rev 4:6; 15:2). But while the earth worships the beast and slaughters the saints (e.g., Rev 13:4, 8, 12, 15; 14:11; 16:2; 19:20; 20:4), the scenes of the heavenly temple are mostly scenes of worship toward God and the lamb (e.g., 4:10; 5:14; 7:11; 11:16; 14:7; 15:4; 19:4), complete with biblically allusive songs (4:8, 11; 5:9–10, 12–14; 7:10, 12; 15:3–4; 16:7; 19:1–7). If John " s ecstasy in the Spirit allowed him to join the heavenly chorus, it is probable that he expected the Spirit to align the churches in which his revelation was being read with heavenly worship as wel1. This expectation appears elsewhere in early Judaism. 5555 While Revelation does not provide details on such practices as worship in tongues (though it might be inferred from the practice of the Lukan and Pauline circles of churches), it depicts a charismatic, heavenly worship against the backdrop of a life and death struggle. The earthly temple and Holy Land may be temporarily possessed by the world (Rev 11:2), but true worship is continuing in the heavenly temple, as noted above. |
| Both documents reflect some knowledge of sayings of the Jesus tradition behind the Synoptics (e.g., Rev 2:7; 3:3,5; 1066 John 12:25 ). «After these things» serves a literary function in each (Rev 4:1; 7:9; 15:5; 18:1; 19:1; cf. 7:1; 20:3; John 5:1; 6:1; 7:1 ). 1067 The normal expression «come and see» in John 1:39, 46 , may find apocalyptic expression in Rev 4:1; 11:12; 17:1; 21:9. 1068 Similar metaphors (such as the OT linkage of bridegroom with joy, Rev 18:23; John 3:29 ) appear. Although such examples are not decisive by themselves, they are at least as significant as the often-acclaimed differences, once the respective settings and genres of the two works are taken into account. Differences Due to Situation or Genre. Revelation " s omission of significant Johannine vocabulary often relates to the genre and subject matter the document addresses. For instance, Revelation makes a much more direct assault on emperor worship and presupposes a more cosmopolitan, Roman setting. While the Gospel advocates a high Christology against its opponents and naturally addresses the life of Jesus in a purely Jewish context, these factors are not sufficient to explain the difference. The Gospel and Apocalypse seem to address different situations in the circle of Johannine readership. Similarly, Revelation, set in a context of public worship, includes more liturgical language (e.g., «amen,» 1:7; marana tha, cf. 22:20). 1069 The difference in genre is perhaps more significant than the difference in life-setting. Although «walk» in the halakic sense is at best rare in Revelation (3is only slightly helpful), in contrast with its dominance in 1 John and much early Christian paraenetic tradition, this is to be expected because Revelation includes little paraenesis; its exhortations are primarily prophetic and apocalyptic. Still, Jesus» commandments are as crucial for his followers in Revelation as in the undisputed Johannine texts (Rev 12:17,14:12; John 13:34, 14:15, 21 ). This apparently includes the love commandment (Rev 2:4; 1070 John 13:34–35 ). |
| But Jewish piety recognized that God might help those who were otherwise alone, 9370 and in this Gospel, Jesus has affirmed that he is not alone (8:16) because the Father is with him (8:29; 16:32). 9371 This affirmation might reflect the consistent portrayal of Jesus as triumphant in John " s Passion Narrative, as opposed to the tradition in the Synoptics, or might even answer theological questions raised by Mark. Whereas, in Mark, Jesus» cries in anguish can be interpreted as a sign of the Father " s temporary abandonment ( Mark 15:34 ), here Jesus affirms that the Father is with him without interruption ( John 16:32 ; cf. Luke 23:46). Finally, Jesus encourages his followers with a summary: great hardship awaits them, but in going to the Father through his death and consequent resurrection, Jesus has overcome the world (16:33). 9372 In the context of John " s Gospel and early Christian eschatology, this note of triumph is not merely the Stoic notion of being unconquered no matter what the suffering 9373 but a promise that evil and suffering do not ultimately prevail for Christ " s followers. Jesus had spoken to them the words of this final discourse (cf. «spoken these things» in 14:25; 15:11; 16:1,4,6; 17:1) to bring them encouragement. Even so, the «peace» he promises here (16:33; cf. 14:27) would become more fully theirs only at Jesus» resurrection appearances; this «peace» (16:33) would come through Jesus» defeat in the eyes of the world, through which God brings victory in the resurrection (20:19, 21, 26). 9374 The summons to be of good courage, θαρσετε, was a general exhortation and comfort, 9375 appropriate, for instance, to wish-prayers, 9376 exhortations before battle, 9377 promises of God " s faithfulness to his people, 9378 and burial epitaphs. 9379 The disciples would face tribulation in Jesus» death (16:21) and in sharing his sufferings afterwards (Rev 1:9), but this did not mean defeat. In the theology of the canonical Johannine corpus, believers overcome the evil one and the world by faithful obedience (1 John 2:13–14; 4:4), trusting in the accomplished victory of Christ (1 John 5:4–5). Such overcoming also demands persevering (Rev 2:7,11, 17, 26; 3:5,12, 21; 21:7), especially achieved through martyrdom (Rev 5:5; 12:11; 15:2). 9380 Ironically–quite in contrast with the world " s view of victory 9381 –it is accomplished even when the forces of the world «overcome» the saints in a worldly sense (Rev 11:7; 13:7), in view of Christ " s future defeat of the world " s forces (Rev 17:14). |
| According to Christ, the powers of death shall not prevail against his Church (Mt 16:8) with its conciliar integrity and fullness, and only Christ can remove a lampstand of any Local Church (cf. Rev 2:5; 3:3). However, this has been happening fr om apostolic times to the present day only when members of the Church would not repent of sins, would renounce the true faith and deviate into heresy (cf. Rev 2:14-16), would not live according to the fundamental principles of Christian morality (cf. Rev 2:20), and become lukewarm in their faith (cf. Rev 3:15-18). Those who in defiance of the gospel truth want to do away with the Church can actually do away with themselves and bury their own state in a grave fr om which it will not be able to rise like a mythical vampire, much less to come to life. Unfortunately, all the above facts are not the worst in spiritual and moral sense. Truly frightening is the prevailing silence of the post-Christian West, which does not denounce the anti-Christian, or, rather, anti-Christ efforts of modern anti-Russia. Although its ideologists are breaking their hearts over the allegedly threatened rights of the “LGBT population” and other categories of people and animals, including stray dogs, they “take no notice” of the suffering people in Ukraine (whatever that word means!) and are almost oblivious to the suffering of the population in the Middle East, not to mention the suffering of the Serbs, who have been slandered and marginalized by the “international community” of the collective West. But the worst thing is silence or, at best, incoherent blathering of the Christian world, including a substantial part of the Orthodox world. – To what extent the process of Romanianization of the Moldovan population and attempts to exclude Moldova from the Russian world are linked with Ms Maia Sandu’s revealing statements that the challenging times demand one Church, namely, the Bessarabian diocese of the Romanian Orthodox Church in her view? The Moldovans themselves declared outright that they want to remain as before. Although they speak a dialect of the Romanian language, they do not want to join Romania. Besides, there are many Russians living in Moldova, as well as representatives of other nationalities, including the Gagauz, a Turkic ethnic group, who profess the Orthodox faith. |
| The common authorship of the two works remains plausible for those who respect highly the earliest available traditions on authorship. Indeed, if the Fourth Gospel is assigned to the Apostle John, Revelation claims to be written by a well-known John (Rev 1:1, 4,9; 22:8), 1114 and arguments for its pseudonymity are weak. 1115 Since John could call himself simply «John» without other marks of identification, I am inclined to think that the evidence for Johannine authorship of Revelation may exceed that for the Gospel itself. 1116 If one protests that the author of Revelation speaks of apostles without identifying himself as one in 18:20, it should be noted that he speaks in the same place of saints and prophets without identifying himself as one. Did John the seer not then regard himself as a prophet or saint? Those who are not persuaded by such arguments to accept or entertain common authorship may at least recognize a common circle in which John, an apostle and eyewitness of Jesus, provided the basis for the traditions on which these documents are built. Revelation will be used in this commentary to help reconstruct the situation presupposed in the Fourth Gospel, but it should be noted that, if the two works do not share common communities, the case for a destination of the Gospel in the Roman province of Asia (Rev 1:4,11) is substantially reduced. This would leave Syria-Palestine, especially Galilee, as a most likely destination for the Gospe1. If the reader opts for a primarily Galilean audience, the earliest Pharisaic-rabbinic materials become of more direct importance for reconstructing the life-setting of the Gospe1. But there do seem to be parallels between the opponents of certain communities in Revelation and those of the Gospels audience (Rev 2:9; 3:9), and possibly also of schismatics within the community (Rev 2:6, 14–15, 20; 1 John). Whether these parallels are attributed to a situation shared by Christians in various cities of Asia, or to a situation shared by Christians in Asia and Palestine, 1117 must be decided by other factors such as those surveyed above. |
|
|
