Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Question about 1 Peter 5:13
#1
Shlama all,

I have a question regarding this verse:

The chosen church which is at Babylon, and Mark, my son, salutes you. (1 Peter 5:13)

Where was Mar Kaypa when he wrote this epistle? The western church claims that he was in Rome, however the CoE maintains that he was in Seleucia-Ctesiphon, Mesopotamia. I'm definately leaning towards the CoE view here, but how can this be proven, historically? Also what on what grounds does the western church claim that he was in Rome? And where was Mar Marqus at the time?

Toddah,
Christina
Reply
#2
Shlama Christina,

A few observations:

(a) Shimon Keepa was the Apostle to the "Circumcised", and there was no larger population of "circumcised" outside of the Levant, than in Babylonia~Mesopotamia. The great schools of Talmudic heritage at such sites as Nehardea, Seleucia, etc. were immense
(b) Babylon still existed at the time with a large population of Jewish and Gentile Aramaic-speakers
© The areas in modern-day Turkey that are addressed by Shimon in the beginning of his epistle are right up the river Euphrates from Babylonia

[Image: royal_road_map2.gif]

I think all that, in addition to his naming the region explicitly, points to the real Babylon and not Rome.

+Shamasha

PS - ...a nice video from the 2nd Millennium Jubilee Celebration of the Church of the East:

http://peshitta.org/media/kohe-en-cable.ram

The Church of the East regathers in Babylon, at the ancient ruins of the Church of Kohe where the apostle Shimun Keepa wrote his epistle.
Reply
#3
Now that is definitely more believable than saying he was in Rome, as there's nothing in the context of either chapter 5 or the entire epistle to suggest that he was in Rome. What's about this "Rome as a code-name" conspiracy theory? I don't get it <!-- s:dontgetit: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/dontgetit.gif" alt=":dontgetit:" title="Dont Get It" /><!-- s:dontgetit: -->
Reply
#4
Christina Wrote:Now that is definitely more believable than saying he was in Rome, as there's nothing in the context of either chapter 5 or the entire epistle to suggest that he was in Rome. What's about this "Rome as a code-name" conspiracy theory? I don't get it <!-- s:dontgetit: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/dontgetit.gif" alt=":dontgetit:" title="Dont Get It" /><!-- s:dontgetit: -->

There is a strong and early tradition that Shimon Keepa was martyred in Rome, but I think he definitely was in Babylon prior to that (Antioch in Syria as well, of course.)

Paul makes no mention of Peter when writing to the Church at Rome, so that rules out Peter having gotten there before Paul I.M.O.

+Shamasha

PS - the book of Revelation seems to use the code-word "Babylon" for Rome, so that may be where the Roman Church appeals to justify the "Rome" reading in 1Peter 5:13.
Reply
#5
Hmm... interesting so, there seems to be no concrete evidence that Mar Keipa was in Rome, its just based on assumption from Rev 17-18? Me personally (though I won't get heavily into this), I don't hold the preterist view Revelation - apostate Jerusalem & 1st century pagan Rome, nevertheless I think the reasoning is weak either way.
Reply
#6
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
Reply
#7
Shlama akh Andrew,

Thanks for the explanation. Is there more evidence which suggests that Babylon was a code name for Rome in the 1st century? Are there any other writings (i.e. apocalyptic/psuedographia) dating to this period which makes this implication?

I just don't think that interpreting the great harlot of Rev 17 as Rome is sufficient enough to set this idea in stone. Honestly I really don't think that the great harlot is Rome, this is even more unlikely when taking chapter 18 into consideration, but anyway we know the deal with Revelation.

I do accept the possibility of Rev being written earlier, and I think that what you suggest (that John wrote some of it earlier and revised it later) makes a lot of sense, I'll certainly consider it.
Reply
#8
Shlama Khati Christina,

Actually I think there is other evidence: The Dead Sea Scrolls. There is a book called "The War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness", and they describe an enemy known as "Kittim". The identity of Kittim in Hebrew literature is somewhat elusive and flexible. Technically speaking Genesis 10 identifies Kittim/Chittim as a descendant of Japheth, and this same son has been most closely associated with Latins or Romans. However, the Kittim have also been associated with the sons of Asshur, the Macedonians and according to Josephus, the city of Larnaca on the island of Cyprus. Some linguists think the word is from Akkadian meaning "invader"; others that it may refer to Hittites (Khatti). Speculation on the Kittim would continue well into the late Medieval Period (Yosippon, Sefer Ha Yashar, etc).

Here is my point: It seems to my mind that, depending on the enemy of the moment, ANYONE can be Kittim. I have met Orthodox Rabbis who insist Hitler was a direct descendant, or Stalin. This is what we Jews do when faced with those who would destroy us, from Exodus to Esther to the Final Solution, we re-cast current enemies with ancient villains. So all could be Philistines, or Haman or whomever has arisen in a generation to commit these horrible things.

I think therefore that something like the Kittim phenomenon was well established as a Jewish storytelling/midrashic technique well before Messiah's time. There was certainly not the concern for misidentification or historical precison that we have now. Nowadays a Kittim identified group might protest, talk about how their history didn't apply or how the traditional associations with other groups in other locations and times put them off the hook. But 2000 years ago, Masters of the World were Kittim, and others were Kittim who were completely different from them in centuries past.

And so, this is the exact kind of thing we find the Nazarenes and Christians doing, and we know apocalyptic literature began to peak in the last third of the first century, from the destruction of the Temple to its close, the exact period we are talking about. "Babylon" as it was then--as opposed to Mar Keefa's day decades earlier--meant a world system/power who had set itself up as the agent of the destruction of the righteous. It still is just that, but we know the real Babylon didn't sit on seven hills (Revelation 17:9). Only ROME does. Rome had inherited the mantle of the bad guy on the block not just because it destroyed the Temple as Babylon did before, but also because her Emperors used their full might and resources to kill the early leadership of the Nazarenes. They became Kittim but were called "Babylon" instead.

In fact, I would be surprised if this kind of substitution was NOT going on given the extreme persecution of the times of both Jews and Christians.

It probably was also convenient that both the Kittim and Babylon could in some systems be applied to the same general area of land in the Middle East, with the dual usage also that Kittim was from Japheth and Japheth was Rome.

As for the whole preterist-futurist debate on Rev, I have little use for it. To me it seems very clear that symbolisms from Yochanan's day regarding Rome were also used at the same time as a template for the End of Days. I see no reason why BOTH cannot be true, but I also shy away from extensive interpretation on Rev in general, and will do so here. All I will say is that Daniel is model for Rev in many aspects and we know Daniel does this kind of present-future toggling without a doubt.

Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth
Reply
#9
Andrew Gabriel Roth Wrote:Shlama Khati Christina,

Actually I think there is other evidence: The Dead Sea Scrolls. There is a book called "The War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness", and they describe an enemy known as "Kittim". The identity of Kittim in Hebrew literature is somewhat elusive and flexible. Technically speaking Genesis 10 identifies Kittim/Chittim as a descendant of Japheth, and this same son has been most closely associated with Latins or Romans. However, the Kittim have also been associated with the sons of Asshur, the Macedonians and according to Josephus, the city of Larnaca on the island of Cyprus. Some linguists think the word is from Akkadian meaning "invader"; others that it may refer to Hittites (Khatti). Speculation on the Kittim would continue well into the late Medieval Period (Yosippon, Sefer Ha Yashar, etc).

Here is my point: It seems to my mind that, depending on the enemy of the moment, ANYONE can be Kittim. I have met Orthodox Rabbis who insist Hitler was a direct descendant, or Stalin. This is what we Jews do when faced with those who would destroy us, from Exodus to Esther to the Final Solution, we re-cast current enemies with ancient villains. So all could be Philistines, or Haman or whomever has arisen in a generation to commit these horrible things.

Yes I've noticed that too with the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan associating the Edomites with the Romans.

Andrew Gabriel Roth Wrote:I think therefore that something like the Kittim phenomenon was well established as a Jewish storytelling/midrashic technique well before Messiah's time. There was certainly not the concern for misidentification or historical precison that we have now. Nowadays a Kittim identified group might protest, talk about how their history didn't apply or how the traditional associations with other groups in other locations and times put them off the hook. But 2000 years ago, Masters of the World were Kittim, and others were Kittim who were completely different from them in centuries past.

And so, this is the exact kind of thing we find the Nazarenes and Christians doing, and we know apocalyptic literature began to peak in the last third of the first century, from the destruction of the Temple to its close, the exact period we are talking about. "Babylon" as it was then--as opposed to Mar Keefa's day decades earlier--meant a world system/power who had set itself up as the agent of the destruction of the righteous. It still is just that, but we know the real Babylon didn't sit on seven hills (Revelation 17:9). Only ROME does. Rome had inherited the mantle of the bad guy on the block not just because it destroyed the Temple as Babylon did before, but also because her Emperors used their full might and resources to kill the early leadership of the Nazarenes. They became Kittim but were called "Babylon" instead.

I suppose this depends greatly on how one approaches Revelation. For "Babylon" in 1 Peter, I think you and akhan Paul did well to demonstrate that there's no reason to interpret it as a secret reference to Rome. As for "7 hills of Rome" argument, well...I won't get into that now, all I'll say is I doubt those "7 mountains" are literal, I'll gladly explain why if you're interested, otherwise we'll leave it at that.

Andrew Gabriel Roth Wrote:In fact, I would be surprised if this kind of substitution was NOT going on given the extreme persecution of the times of both Jews and Christians.

Well Targum Pseudo-Jonathan certainly supports this with "Edom" for Rome, so that probably wasn't the only "code word", yeh why not "Babylon" or "Kittim" too?

Andrew Gabriel Roth Wrote:It probably was also convenient that both the Kittim and Babylon could in some systems be applied to the same general area of land in the Middle East, with the dual usage also that Kittim was from Japheth and Japheth was Rome.

As for the whole preterist-futurist debate on Rev, I have little use for it. To me it seems very clear that symbolisms from Yochanan's day regarding Rome were also used at the same time as a template for the End of Days. I see no reason why BOTH cannot be true, but I also shy away from extensive interpretation on Rev in general, and will do so here. All I will say is that Daniel is model for Rev in many aspects and we know Daniel does this kind of present-future toggling without a doubt.

Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth

In agreement with you there, this "switching between time frames" is frequent in the books of the Nevi'im, including the Messianic prophecies, how else did the early rabbinical interpretation come up with the "Suffering Messiah & Reigning Messiah" paradigm? Daniel & Revelation are no exception, practically every verse of Revelation "quotes" at least one Tanakh passage. I guess that serves to confirm that Revelation was penned by a 1st century Jew if anything else, and examining the historical and cultural background of the author is essential. But at the same time I'm very reluctant to attribute "rabbinical story-telling", to the author of Revelation, Daniel or any other prophecy writer. Simply because I believe this is the inspired word of God (faith-based I know, but doesn't belief in the resurrection or anything at all require faith too?). For me the prophets (and John) simply recorded what they saw, what YHWH told them to write and I think that attributing "implications" to them is taking things too far. Your point above however is a valid one, that you see no reason that BOTH cannot be true, I get what you're saying. We have no hope in gehenna of ever recognizing fulfillment of prophecy if we don't interpret the author's symbolism on his own terms.

Prophecy a big interest for me, but I think I'll get off my soapbox now, LOL. Your explanation was very insightful, toddah.
Reply
#10
This isn't just a Hebraism.....we've got a certain west-coast city here in the U.S. that is often referred to as "Gomorrah" <!-- sWink --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/wink1.gif" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /><!-- sWink -->

+Shamasha
Reply
#11
Haha <!-- sTongue --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/poketoungeb.gif" alt="Tongue" title="Poke Tounge" /><!-- sTongue -->

You gotta admit this "end times" talk is fun sometimes. But man there's alotta unScriptural junk out there (mostly to make pots of money).
Reply
#12
Christina Wrote:Haha <!-- sTongue --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/poketoungeb.gif" alt="Tongue" title="Poke Tounge" /><!-- sTongue -->

You gotta admit this "end times" talk is fun sometimes. But man there's alotta unScriptural junk out there (mostly to make pots of money).

The Van Impes gotta pay for the hairspray somehow. <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/laugh.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laugh" /><!-- s:lol: -->
Reply
#13
That was too funny Paul! <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/laugh.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laugh" /><!-- s:lol: --> You're gonna have to create an emoticon whose head is doing somersaults for that remark!!!

-Ryan
Reply
#14
In the meantime howz these <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/laugh.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laugh" /><!-- s:lol: --> <!-- s:rockedover: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/rockdover.gif" alt=":rockedover:" title="Rocked Over" /><!-- s:rockedover: --> <!-- sConfusedtupid: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/withstupid.gif" alt="Confusedtupid:" title="Stupid" /><!-- sConfusedtupid: --> ?

I once read on some website that Hal Lindsay is described as the "modern Jeremiah", what a joke! How many of his predictions have come to pass? According to the Torah he should've stoned years ago. <!-- s:crazy: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/crazy.gif" alt=":crazy:" title="Crazy" /><!-- s:crazy: -->
Reply
#15
Christina Wrote:II once read on some website that Hal Lindsay is described as the "modern Jeremiah", what a joke! How many of his predictions have come to pass? According to the Torah he should've stoned years ago. <!-- s:crazy: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/crazy.gif" alt=":crazy:" title="Crazy" /><!-- s:crazy: -->

It would be nice to know the exact timing already, so I can max out the credit cards!
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)