The way John writes Jesus' words feels like I'm not reading Jesus' words at all. They seem completely out of whack with what Jesus taught on earth and they're in a completely different literary style.
I can understand if they're paraphrased, but if that's so then should people be so hung up on the meaning of every single letter?
2007-12-26 21:37:15 · 8 answers · asked by grassfell 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The book of relvilation is a very contriversal book, first 3 centuries many Bishops did not include it in their canon the Bishops who did tended to be like Polycarp who entered the Church through John. The Orthodox church only reads it before the paskaha (easter) Litrugy. When the canon was becoming more established by the early Church in councils Revelation just barly made it by the bare minum of required votes.
The book is regularly taken out of context and missunderstood which was one of the reasons it is so contriversial and seem out of whak as you have noted. I would recomend asking on Orhtodox and catholic forms about the meanings as the book was not intended for people outside of the Church to read.
2007-12-26 23:07:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You said the key thing! It's literary style. Revelation is a composite of genres that include poetry, narrative, letter, prophesy and apocalyptic. These are not normally found in our day-to-day readings and so, we are not accustomed to their format.
The Book of Revelation is also full of metaphor and simile which lead us to a somewhat incomprehensible jumble of words and meanings. Like most other things that we don't understand we usually walk away from it not wanting to look stupid or vain.
This is God's inspired Word for it is Truth. Take some time and search for meaning in it. It is full of color and story and life and death. It is the culmination of Jesus story and you're part of it!
Come, Lord Jesus.
2007-12-27 05:54:26 · answer #2 · answered by craig b 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
John uses a lot of Symbolic terms to describe the events of the Apocalypse. Many of the things John saw in vision were probably foreign to him. He probably just tried to describe them with what seemed more suitable to his learning.
EDIT: in response to Cindy (top answer) - the pope did not decide what was in the bible, Emporer Constantine did with his pagan council of Nicea. Also Constantine invented the idea of a Pope. Where is a Pope mentioned in the Bible? All I can see are Apostles, Prophets, Pastors, Teachers, Evangelists, Bishops. Sorry, no Popes there.
2007-12-27 05:43:45 · answer #3 · answered by endavis02 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Interesting concept.
I'm not quite sure who this John of Patmos was, I don't think he is the previous writer of the book of John or one of Jesus' twelve. But anyway, his form of writing was very popular at the time he wrote the book of Revelation.
Most writers used this type of writing signed their work with an anonymous name, Zeus or something like it. But John signed his real name to this body of work, that was unusual.
You have to remember that at the time John wrote the book of Revelation, Christianity was under great persecution and that may be why John chose this style of writing as to be ambiguous, yet clear at the same time.
With Jesus telling parables all the time, this type of writing doesn't necessarily seem that out of whack with His previous teachings.
But, I do see what you mean, but I do think that John's choice of writing style has more to with the way the body of writing sounds to the reader.
But regardless, I think your question is very interesting and gives us something to ponder.
Ps: Averell A termed the writing correctly (I couldn't remember how to spell it).
May God Bless You!
2007-12-27 06:08:10 · answer #4 · answered by B Baruk Today 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Jesus' words have a bit of a different tone to them in Revelation than they do in the gospels, but keep in mind here that His role had changed by the writing of Revelation. In the gospels, He was the lamb, meek and humble, here to "seek and to save that which was lost." In Revelation, He is a ruler, coming to reward His subjects and execute judgment against His enemies.
2007-12-27 05:48:42 · answer #5 · answered by jeffersonian73 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The book of revelation and John's sequel The Apocryphon of John are indeed the real deal. the natural man cannot know as they are spiritually dscerned. Be smart, believe Jesus, not Moses.
2007-12-27 05:42:30 · answer #6 · answered by single eye 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You have to understand that Revelation is an apocalyptic literature, not a gospel. They are two different literary genres.
2007-12-27 05:41:21 · answer #7 · answered by Averell A 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I understand your point.
( SHARP THINKING )
Maybe Revelations Should
Be in the old Testement
The Pope decided which books should be in the Bible and where they should go in 350 A.D.
2007-12-27 05:40:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋