09-16-2008, 04:30 PM
Shlama all--
The other main factor is that of TIMING. When we hold to the books of the NT being the historical products of the actual apostles, we obviously also root the autographs of those works to prior to their deaths. For Mar Keefa, historical sources are extremely clear that he died NO LATER than CE 67, which is to say, prior to the Temple being destroyed in CE 70.
Now, in both John's Gospel and part of Revelation (John 5:2; Revelation 11:1-2) we see references to the earthly Temple and her surrounding structures in the PRESENT TENSE. In the case of the latter, and this is admittedly a long story, I believe these references point to Revelation being in process for almost 30 years. It literally seems to me that Revelation has one half written pre-70 and the other half in the mid 90's and that John actually went back to revise his first chapter, rooting it in the later time when he was exiled from Ephesus to Patmos.
So my point here is that when Revelation was finished, Babylon as a code for Rome made a lot more sense than it did in Mar Keefa's day, when 1 Peter 5:13 would have been literal. Once Rome destroyed the Temple however after Mar Keefa's death, SHE THEN AND ONLY THEN BECAME BABYLON BECAUSE BABYLON DESTROYED THE FIRST TEMPLE.
But prior to the destruction I don't think this made sense. The rabbinic record more than bears this out. We know for a fact that after the Second Temple was also destroyed on Tisha B'Av (maybe the day before per Josephus, but close enough) that the rabbis made huge attempts to link the two events and bring up concordances, some of which were true and others which were legend. If such was happening on the rabbinic side, how could this same idea not have also influenced Nazarenes and early Christians?
I hope this makes sense!
Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth
The other main factor is that of TIMING. When we hold to the books of the NT being the historical products of the actual apostles, we obviously also root the autographs of those works to prior to their deaths. For Mar Keefa, historical sources are extremely clear that he died NO LATER than CE 67, which is to say, prior to the Temple being destroyed in CE 70.
Now, in both John's Gospel and part of Revelation (John 5:2; Revelation 11:1-2) we see references to the earthly Temple and her surrounding structures in the PRESENT TENSE. In the case of the latter, and this is admittedly a long story, I believe these references point to Revelation being in process for almost 30 years. It literally seems to me that Revelation has one half written pre-70 and the other half in the mid 90's and that John actually went back to revise his first chapter, rooting it in the later time when he was exiled from Ephesus to Patmos.
So my point here is that when Revelation was finished, Babylon as a code for Rome made a lot more sense than it did in Mar Keefa's day, when 1 Peter 5:13 would have been literal. Once Rome destroyed the Temple however after Mar Keefa's death, SHE THEN AND ONLY THEN BECAME BABYLON BECAUSE BABYLON DESTROYED THE FIRST TEMPLE.
But prior to the destruction I don't think this made sense. The rabbinic record more than bears this out. We know for a fact that after the Second Temple was also destroyed on Tisha B'Av (maybe the day before per Josephus, but close enough) that the rabbis made huge attempts to link the two events and bring up concordances, some of which were true and others which were legend. If such was happening on the rabbinic side, how could this same idea not have also influenced Nazarenes and early Christians?
I hope this makes sense!
Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth