30.05.2014 Views

Before Jerusalem Fell - EntreWave

Before Jerusalem Fell - EntreWave

Before Jerusalem Fell - EntreWave

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

56 BEFORE JERUSALEM FELL<br />

with ujv&oKdiqJw before him in the Greek text, could not have<br />

been ignorant that ‘ALIOKCilVplC is a feminine substantive. Especially<br />

when contractions were used, vim-s and uium would be easily<br />

confused. It appears to me probable that the somewhat strange vi.wm<br />

e.rt points back to an original ZJisus est. The latter words, if they seemed<br />

difficult, would easily be corrupted into vfium e$t.”45<br />

The third problem with the re-interpretation of Irenaeus is explaining<br />

how Irenaeus could speak of those who saw John toward the<br />

latter end of Domitian’s reign in light of the fact that he also tells us<br />

John lived into Trajan’s reign. In Agaimt Heresies Irenaeus writes that<br />

John “continued with the Elders till the times of Trajan.”4G Surely<br />

Irenaeus would not contradict himself by suggesting in one place<br />

that John lived until the end of Domitian’s reign, while in another<br />

saying that he lived to Trajan’s reign.<br />

The problem, however, is not as diflicult to overcome as might<br />

initially appear. In the first place, Domitian died in A.D. 96 and<br />

Trajan became emperor in A.D. 98 (after a very brief reign by<br />

Nerva). Swete states of Irenaeus’s reference that it speaks of John’s<br />

“having lived to the time of Trajan, i.e. to the year 98 at least.”4 7 Orz@<br />

two years separati th rei~. It is not unreasonable to suppose that<br />

almost a century later the two years’ difference separating the two<br />

emperors could have been blurred by Irenaeus. It must be remembered<br />

that dating then was very imprecise because chronicles were<br />

not kept by Christians. As Robinson notes regarding problems of<br />

chronology during that era: “The sources, Roman, Jewish, and Christian,<br />

are largely uncoordinated and share no common canon of<br />

chronology such as is supposed by any modern historian.”4 8<br />

In the second place, Irenaeus does not say (upon the reconstruction<br />

of his argument as per Chase and others) that John died at the<br />

end of Domitian’s reign. He simply says he “was seen” (bpddq) at<br />

that time, perhaps by those who spoke to him face to face (to whom<br />

lrenaeus refers). Possibly there is a contrast of ideas between these<br />

two references, a contrast that involves John’s advanced age: “Obviously<br />

the statement that the Apostle ‘was seen at the close of Domi-<br />

45. Chase, “Date”, p. 435.<br />

46. Against Heresies 2:22:5 and 3:3:4. Both of Irenaeus’s statements are quoted in the<br />

Greek in Eusebius, Eccle.siustical Hi.rtoty 3:23:3.<br />

47. Swete, Revelation, p. clxxix.<br />

48. Robinson, Redating, p. 32.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!