Gonzalo Rojas-Flores, «The Book of Revelation and the First Years of Nero’s Reign», Vol. 85 (2004) 375-392
In this article I try to demonstrate that the Book of
Revelation was written in the first years of Nero’s reign, because (a) there
is an important patristic tradition in favor of Nero and (b) the internal
evidence shows that the text was redacted after Nero’s ascension to the throne
in 54 and before the earthquake of Laodicea in 60.
382 Gonzalo Rojas-Flores
Titus camped in front of the city with four legions and numerous allied
and auxiliary troops, the internal fights ceased for a while. But one
day, while many pilgrims were preparing the celebration of the
Passover of the year 70 in Jerusalem, the troops of John of Gischala
displaced the zealots of Eleazar by surprise from the sancta
sanctorum. Although the zealots escaped unscathed, they soon gave
up their fight against John of Gischala by joining their forces with him
against Simon bar Giora. Shortly after, however, a massive assault of
the Romans took place in one of the walls of the city, and John and
Eleazar accepted to join their forces with Simon in order to defend
Jerusalem together. But their reckless courage could not check the
slow and steady advance of the Romans. On August 29th, the final
assault took place. The interior atrium of the Temple was captured and
completely destroyed after being set on fire (24).
If John had prophesied during or after these events, could he have
written that believers were in the Sanctuary while the exterior court
had surrendered to the gentiles and that the Holy City will be trampled
on for 42 months (11,1-2)? But, John not only wrote that the believers
stayed in the Sanctuary of Jerusalem. He also warned the people of
God to escape from Rome, not from Jerusalem (25), before it is
(24) Josephus, Bell. Iud. 2-6.
(25) Arguments in favor of Rome as Babylon the Great (Rev 17–18) can be
found in: J.E. BRUNS, “The Contrasted Woman of Apocalypse 12 and 17â€, CBQ
26 (1964) 459-463; A.Y. COLLINS, “Revelation 18: Tount-Song or Dirge?â€,
L’Apocalypse johannique et l’Apocalyptique dans le Nouveau Testament (ed. J.
LAMBRECHT) (Leuven 1980) 185-204; C.P. THIEDE, “Babylon, der andere Ort:
Anmerkungen zu 1 Petr 5,13 und Apg 12,17â€, Bib 67 (1986) 532-538; R.
BERGMEIER, “Die Erzhure und das Tier: Apk 12,18 –13,18 und 17f.: Eine quellen-
und redaktionskritische Analyseâ€, ANRW II 25.5 (1988) 3899-3916; MOBERLY,
“Revelationâ€, 383-389; R. BAUCKHAM, The Climax of Prophecy. Studies in the
Book of Revelation (Edinburgh 1993); A.Y. COLLINS, “Feminine Symbolism in
the Book of Revelationâ€, Biblical Interpretation 1 (1993) 20-33; H. GIESEN, “Das
Römische Reich im Spiegel der Johannes-Apokalypseâ€, ANRW II 26.3 (1996)
2501-2614; J.N. KRAYBILL, Imperial Cult and Commerce in John’s Apocalypse
(Sheffield 1996); D.E. AUNE, Revelation 17–22 (Nashville 1998); G.K. BEALE,
The Book of Revelation. A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids 1999).
Arguments in favor of Jerusalem as Babylon the Great can be found in: J.S.
RUSSELL, The Parousia. The New Testament Doctrine of Our Lord’s Second
Coming (Grand Rapids [1878] 1999); W. MILLIGAN, Lectures on the Apocalypse
(London 1892); J.M. FORD, Revelation (New York 1975); GENTRY, Before; D.K.
PRESTON, Who is this Babylon? (Ardmore, OK 1999). But Rev 17,18 is too
conclusive to have doubts about Rome as Babylon the Great: “And the woman
which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earthâ€.