My Google Alerts (from a defunct Google account; Google asleep at the switch) for the combination of "Torah Christian OR Christianity" notified me this morning of a CNN review of Prof. Elaine Pagels' new book on "Revelation." Since I've researched the source documents and earliest extant original language in my 1994 book, The Unveiling, I tried to post the following comment there. I don't think CNN posted it. Perhaps readers can go chide them to post it.
Prof. Pagels (PhD Harvard, Prof. at Princeton) is no historical slouch like many anonymous 3rd-graders who have posted [to the CNN article]. She has made a greater effort than any other Christian historian I can think of, aside from Oxford historian James Parkes, to develop a respectable insight into the first-century Jewish world (of RibꞋ i Yәho•shuꞋ a and his fellow Yәhud•imꞋ Pәrush•imꞋ —as contrasted against the Hellenist Roman gentile world (out of which Christianity was born). And her conclusions reflect that insight. The points in this article appear to corroborate and confirm many of the findings of my research, which I published in 1994 (The Unveiling, schuellerhouse.com). Even on one point that we disagree, the decrypting of 666, Prof. Pagels landed close: on my second choice (Nero). All in all: excellent!
My research into "Revelation" (actually, Greek Αποκαλυψις, Apokalupsis = Apocalypse) examined the earliest extant sources and language to compare and contrast the Hellenist Greek versus Judaic Hebrew elements (updating the work I'd already done—having earlier completed this analysis for the entire Christian New Testament).
Αποκαλυψις correlates (via LXX to Hebrew Ta•na"khꞋ ) to the Hebrew term äÇäÄúÀâÌÇìÌåÌú. (Periodic insertions of hot wax, rolled into the scroll as it was being written, hardened to form seals, permitting unscrolling and reading only to the point of the seal, until the seal was broken.)
In fact, the inclusion of the Unveiling ("Revelation") in the Christian Bible (not THE Bible, which is the Jewish Ta•na"khꞋ ) was so "iffy" during the period of transition from Judaism to Roman Hellenism (135 CE onward) that it is entirely absent in one of the two earliest extant source codices (Vaticanus, 4th century). The only complete source by the 4th-century was the Codex Sinaiticus. Aside from about 5 scattered chapters found in Papyrus-47, there is no other substantial source (exhaustive citation of source texts in The Unveiling).
Prof. Pagels is also correct that the first-century followers of RibꞋ i—a title referring EXCLUSIVELY to a Pharisee Jew—Yәho•shuꞋ a believed him to be the Messiah within the Tor•âhꞋ constraints of purely Pharisaic Ha•lâkh•âhꞋ (for which, see, inter alia, Dead Sea Scroll 4Q MMT and later Tal•mudꞋ ). They were NOT Christians, which was a movement conceived by Paul and (earliest extant Church historian Eusebius recorded) born as Christianity with the forcible ousting, in 135 CE, of the last Pharisaic Jewish leader (Pâ•qidꞋ ). These original, Tor•âhꞋ -keeping Pәrush•imꞋ Jews who followed RibꞋ i Yәho•shuꞋ a are widely documented to have been called Nәtzâr•imꞋ (later Hellenized to "Nazarenes")—and Eusebius further documented that they refused the Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) as Hellenizing apostasy.
Regarding the encrypted number, 666, whoever authored Αποκαλυψις had bigger—other-worldly theological—fish to fry than the far-off Roman—worldly politician—Nero, despite his infamous deeds. It is clear from much of Αποκαλυψις (and my book) that its author was dealing in large measure with interpreting Dâniy•eilꞋ and Yәkhëz•qeilꞋ in light of (but not limited to), as Prof. Pagels pointed out: his immediate theological situation. No scholarly interpretation of Dâniy•eilꞋ and Yәkhëz•qeilꞋ can be constrained within a 1-2, or even 4 century period. This disqualifies Nero as the solution to the encrypted 666. A far more compelling solution, identifying a much more historically significant "fish," is laid out in detail in my 1994 book: Who Are The Nәtzâr•imꞋ ? (schuellerhouse.com)
