http://btb.sagepub.

com
and Theology
Biblical Theology Bulletin: A Journal of Bible
DOI: 10.1177/014610799902800405
1999; 28; 160 Biblical Theology Bulletin: A Journal of Bible and Theology
Mark R. J. Bredin
The Synagogue of Satan Accusation in Revelation 2:9
http://btb.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/28/4/160
The online version of this article can be found at:
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
Biblical Theology Bulletin Inc.
can be found at: Biblical Theology Bulletin: A Journal of Bible and Theology Additional services and information for
http://btb.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:
http://btb.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Reprints:
http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav Permissions:
http://btb.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/28/4/160 Citations
by RONALD ROJAS on April 5, 2009 http://btb.sagepub.com Downloaded from
160
The
Synagogue
of Satan Accusation
in Revelation 2:9
Mark R.
J.
Bredin
Mark R.
J. Bredin, M.Theol.
(St. Andrews),
is the author of three
articles
published by
Sheffield Academic
Press,
Irish Biblical
Studies,
and The Friends
Quarterly.
He is a Distance
Learning
Tutor in
Theology,
and is
writing
a Ph.D. dissertation on Revelation. He re-
sides at 3
Lindsay Gardens,
St.
Andrews, Fife, KY168XB,
UK.
Abstract
The accusation that the
synagogue
was a
synagogue,
not of
Judeans
but of Satan is connected with an
internal
dispute
on how one faithful to Israelite traditions should live with the Roman economic
system.
The
author of Revelation was
arguing
that there should be no
compromise
with Rome, and those who did
compromise
were not fit to be called
Judean.
The
Synagogue,
on the other hand, argued
that
peaceful
coexistence with Rome was
possible.
It is
suggested
that the
synagogue
accused members of the church in
Smyrna
of not
being Judean
because
they
refused to
pay
the
special Judean
tax that allowed them to
practice
their
religion
unmolested. For the author of
Revelation, however,
to
pay
the tax would be an act of
apostasy,
as
the tax
paid
for the
rebuilding
of the
Capitoline temple.
he task of this article is to show that the
synagogue
of
Satan accusation in Revelation 2:9 reflects an internal dis-
pute
between two related
Judean groups:
the
synagogue
and
church,
and that the
dispute
is connected with
how Judeans
should relate to Rome
during
the
reign
of Domitian. It is
proposed
that the
dispute
resulted in one
group denying
the
other
group,
and vice
versa,
the honored title of Judean, and
in the church
being
considered
politically suspect
before the
Roman administration
(Rev 2:10) .
Distinctive to this
study
is the evidence that reveals
Domitian in a more
positive light.
As will be
seen,
and con-
trary
to the
scholarly consensus,
it is
argued
that Domitians
Judean
tax reform, reported by
Suetonius in his
biography
of
Domitian
12.2,
was not intended as a bad
policy,
but was
understandable and beneficial to Gentile and
Judean
churches
estranged
from the
synagogue.
To
persuade
the reader of
my argument,
I must meet
certain criteria: section one is an
analysis
of Revelation
2:9-10 for hints of a
dispute;
section
two,
is an assessment
of the
plausibility
of such a
dispute
in this social
setting;
and
section three is an examination of evidence for an internal
Judean dispute
that has similarities with Revelation 2:9-10.
The article concludes with a reconstruction of events un-
derlying
Revelation 2:9-10.
Dispute
Reflected in the
Language
of Revelation 2:9-10
The church at
Smyrna
is described as
poor
and one
that is
experiencing tribulation, yet,
because of its tribula-
tion and
poverty,
is described as rich. The letter informs us
that the
sender,
described in v 8 as &dquo;The First and the Last&dquo;
(referring
to
Jesus),
knows not
only
of their
poverty
and
tribulation,
but also of the
blasphemy
uttered
by
those who
say
that
they
are the true
Judeans.
It is because of the
syna-
gogues blasphemy
that
they
are not
Judeans,
but rather a
synagogue
of Satan.
It is
possible
that the
synagogue
was
arguing
that the
church was not
Judean,
an accusation that elicited a re-
sponse
from the author of Revelation to the
synagogue
that
&dquo;you
are not
Judeans
but a
synagogue
of Satan.&dquo;
This, firstly,
fits the use of the word Satan. The name can
suggest
&dquo;one
who accuses
falsely (Job 1-2,
Zech
3). Secondly,
it fits with
&dquo;blasphemy,&dquo;
which can indicate slander
(Matt 12:31;
15:19; Eph 4:31; Col 3:8; 1 Tim
6:4; Jude 9).
Sweet
argues
for this
usage
and
suggests
that
underlying
the word is a
charge
made
against
the church
(85).
In
sum,
it is
suggested
that Revelation 2:9 is understandable
against
the back-
ground
of the
synagogue arguing
that
they
are
Judeans
and
that the church is not.
V 10
anticipates
the
consequences
of the
blasphemy
made
by
the
synagogue.
The church is
expected
to suffer
and its members thrown into
prison by
the devil. The devil
is
generally thought
to
represent
Rome.
Consequently,
the
synagogue
had
reported
the
blasphemy
to
Rome,
a
step
that
Mark R.
J. Bredin, M.Theol.
(St. Andrews),
is the author of three
articles
published by
Sheffield Academic
Press,
Irish Biblical
Studies,
and The Friends
Quarterly.
He is a Distance
Learning
Tutor in
Theology,
and is
writing
a Ph.D. dissertation on Revelation. He re-
sides at 3
Lindsay Gardens,
St.
Andrews, Fife, KY 168XB,
UK.
by RONALD ROJAS on April 5, 2009 http://btb.sagepub.com Downloaded from
161
engendered
the fear of
imprisonment.
It is
supposed by
some that
only
Rome had the
power
to incarcerate
(Yarbro
Collins:
17).
Revelation 12:9 and 20:2
strengthen
this con-
nection when the ancient
serpent
is described as the devil
and Satan. Bauckham
suggests they signify
the forces of
op-
position
to God manifested in the
contemporary political
power,
i.e.,
Rome
(1993: 187). Rome, consequently,
be-
comes the beast,
the
devil,
and Satan.
&dquo;Synagogue
of Satan&dquo;
thus reflects not
only
a
synagogue
that accuses
falsely,
but
also a
synagogue
in collusion with Rome.
Kraybill
com-
ments that the use of Satan is &dquo;a
way
of
highlighting
com-
mercial or
political relationships
some
Jews
had with Rome&dquo;
(170).
In
conclusion,
the claim of Revelation 2:9 that the
syn-
agogue
is of Satan can be understood as a
response
to accu-
sations the
synagogue
made
against
the church that it was
not
Judean. Moreover, they
made such accusations to
Rome, resulting
in
possible punishment.
Satan was also re-
lated to the
beast,
an
image representing Rome,
and so the
church
argued
that the
synagogue
was hand in hand with
Rome and, thus,
no
longer worthy
of the name
&dquo;Judean.&dquo;
Consequently,
Revelation 2:9-10 reflects two
groups
who
have
differing
attitudes towards
Rome,
and those who com-
promise
with Rome cannot be considered faithful to the
God of Israel. This
suggestion
now needs
testing against
the
social
setting.
Social
Setting
Smyrna
was a
prosperous, leading political
and reli-
gious city
in Asia Minor.
Moreover,
it was also a faithful
ally
of Rome
(Caird: 34).
The
question regarding how Judeans
should live and work in this climate had been tackled
long
ago,
and
varying degrees
of
compromise
and failure to com-
promise
are evident. This was also the case for the church
(168).
There is evidence in the Second Testament for a
more
compromising
attitude towards Rome
(see
Rom
13;
1
Pet
2:13-17;
1 Tim 2:1-2.
A brief assessment of Domitians
reign
and his
policies
towards the
provinces
will facilitate this
study. According
to
Suetonius,
Domitian
kept
such a
tight
hold on the
city mag-
istrates and
provincial governors
that the
general
standard
of
honesty
and
justice
rose to an
unprecedented high
level
(DOMITIAN 8).
This fits with Plekets observation that ac-
cording
to
Pliny,
after Domitians death the
provincial gov-
ernors started
exhorting money
from the
provincials (2.11,
12; 3.9; 4.9; 5.20; 6.5, 13; 7.6, 10).
Plecket comments that
this could not have
happened during
Domitians
reign (301).
Contrary
to much
scholarship,
there is no
early
evidence to
suggest
that Domitian
persecuted synagogue
or church
communities. There is much evidence that he was hated
by
the senate and
ruling
classes because he would not tolerate
their laziness and
dishonesty (299).
There
is, however, one text that
may present
Domitian
as a
tyrant:
Suetoniuss reference to Domitians
Judean
tax
policy.
Suetonius
reports
that accusations were made in re-
lation to this tax
against
those who were either
living
a
Jew-
ish life without
professing Judaism,
or
concealing
their
Judean
origins
in order not to
pay
the tax
(DOMITIAN 12.2).
The
Judean tax, according
to
Josephus,
was first
imposed by
Vespasian
on
Judeans,
whatever their
place
of
residence,
who had
previously paid
two drachmae to the
temple
in
Je-
rusalem
(WAR 7.218).
The
implication
here is that
only
practicing Judeans
would be taxed. The tax was established
for the
rebuilding
of the
Capitoline temple, and, according
to Dio Cassius
writing
100
years
after the
events,
the amount
was a fee of
exemption
from
imperial
cult activities
(RO-
MAN HISTORY
66.7.2).
Suetonius
reports
that Domitian
was
concerned,
in addition to
practicing Judeans,
to tax two
particular groups:
those
living
a
Judean
life but who did not
profess
it
formally,
and those who were
Judean by origin
but
concealed the fact. The
proposal
of this article is that the
two
groups
did not see themselves as liable to the tax as
they
were not
officially practicing synagogue Judeans.
since
many
within this
group
were not
participating
in the
imperial cult,
however, accusations were made
against
them
(as reported
by Suetonius).
It is
plausible
that church members would
fall into these
categories
because
they
still maintained out-
ward
practices
associated with
being
a
Judean group.
Con-
sequently,
Domitian
gave
the churches their own
right
to
exemption independently
of the
synagogue.
This is not sur-
prising,
as in L. L.
Thompsons words,
&dquo;Domitians
policy
of
rigor merely
fits with his
general
administrative
principles
of
rationality
and
consistency&dquo; (134).
This also coheres with
what is known of Domitian
according
to Suetonius:
i.e.,
he
is a
rigorous
and honest administrator. Thus the
Judean tax,
as reformed
during
Domitians
reign,
was
quite
an under-
standable
policy
in that an
emperor
would be
expected
to
receive
something
in
exchange
for
allowing
a
people
to fol-
low their
religious
customs as well as
making money
for the
treasury.
The tax was therefore extended for
legitimate
rea-
sons to embrace
groups
who had not
previously
been envis-
aged
in
Vespasians
tax:
namely, gentiles
who had shown
sympathy
with
Judaism
and those who were circumcised
ethnic
Judeans yet
did not
participate
in the
cult;
in addi-
tion, they
did not
pay
the tax as in
many
cases
they
did not
belong
to the
synagogue
and were not
officially practicing
Judeans. Many Judean
Christians would fit this
category.
by RONALD ROJAS on April 5, 2009 http://btb.sagepub.com Downloaded from
162
Consequently,
Domitians reformulation of the
Judean
tax
legitimated
the churches and
exempted
them from
partici-
pation
in the cult as
long
as
they paid
the tax.
Previously,
they
had not
paid
because
they
were not
eligible.
In the
eyes
of
many
Gentile and
Judean
followers of
Christ, therefore,
the extension would be welcomed.
The
synagogue ...
was seen
by
the
church as
being
in collusion with
Rome
The more usual
understanding
is that Domitian estab-
lished a ruthless and unfair
system
that taxed those who
were not liable. It is
argued
that the Nerva
inscriptiion: fisci
iudaici calumnia sublata
(the
calumnies of the
Judean
tax
were
removed)
reveals Domitians
policy
as
ruthless,
calumnia
implying &dquo;misrepresentation&dquo;
or &dquo;false
accusation,&dquo;
and that
Domitians reforms were removed
by
Nerva.
It could be
argued
that the Nerva
inscription
would
suggest
that Domitians tax
policy
had led to abuses and
false accusations and thus
prove my argument
erroneous.
The tax did
give
rise to some unfortunate abuses. The two
new
groups
identified for
payment by
Suetonius could be in-
terpreted widely by
informers from both the
synagogue
and
gentile groups.
M. Goodman has shown that
Judean
cus-
toms were
popular
in the first
century
CE
among
Gentiles
(41).
It is to be
expected
that Domitians
policy gave
rise to
false accusations
against people
who
really
were not consid-
ered
Judeans;
this
was, however,
not the intention of the
policy. Todays
laws towards child abuse
may
serve to illus-
trate the
point.
Government
agencies
are
rightly
concerned
to
develop
laws to detect
any
abuses committed
against
children, and so relevant
government agencies
have to in-
vestigate
all
reported
incidences of child abuse and are em-
powered
to act even to the extent of
placing
a child in care.
Even
though
this can lead to abuses in which false accusa-
tions are
made,
the
parents
and
guardians
must still suffer
the
stigma
of
being accused, and
possibly having
their child
taken
away.
Most would
agree
that this is an abuse of a
good
policy.
In
sum,
the social
setting
has not deteriorated for the
church because of
specific policies
introduced
by
Domitian.
Rather,
it has
improved
if the
understanding
of the
Judean
tax
presented
here is correct.
Moreover, according
to
Thomp-
son,
it is
supported by
the
provincial
tradition that
portrays
Domitian as a benevolent
emperor
towards
synagogue
and
church
(172).
In
spite
of the freedom to
practice
their
religion,
how-
ever,
the church at
Smyrna
was
economically poor
in an
economically
rich
city
and was
experiencing
tribulation. It
is
suggested
here that the &dquo;tribulation&dquo; is connected with
economic
poverty.
Scholars are
right
to
point
out that the
&dquo;tribulation&dquo; could mean
persecution.
The letter to
Smyrna,
however,
indicates that the
experience
of
suffering
or
perse-
cution was not a
present
factor. Extreme
poverty was,
and
the
consequences
of such
poverty,
as
many economically
poor people know,
can be described as a tribulation in
which individuals and
groups
are divested of
power.
The
church, therefore,
is
very poor
and
powerless,
a
view
suggested
in the first section. The
synagogue,
in con-
trast,
was seen
by
the church as
being
in collusion with
Rome, suggesting
that the
setting
was
right
for a debate on
the correct attitude towards Rome and its
policies. Kraybill
points
out that
during
the
early
Roman
imperial era, Judean
merchants reached the far corners of the Roman
Empire
selling wine, spices, perfumes,
and
perhaps
textiles
(186).
There is evidence that
provincial Judeans cooperated closely
with the Roman
government
in administrative affairs
(188).
Rabbinic tradition holds that
Johanan
ben Zakkai
spent
forty years
in trade
(SIFRE 35 7.14) .
M. Tamari comments
that
&dquo;Judaism
never had
any religious
or ethical
objections
to
buying
and
selling goods
for
profit&dquo; (65-66).
But it can-
not be assumed that all
synagogue
members were
doing
well
and all church members were
doing badly.
As Bauckham
points out, &dquo;Revelations first
readers,
as we know from the
seven
messages
to the churches in
chapters 2-3,
were
by
no
means all
poor
and
persecuted
like the Christians at
Smyrna.
Many
were
affluent, self-satisfied,
and
compromising
...&dquo;
(1993: 377).
It has been observed that there was
potential
for
improving
ones financial
situation,
and Asia Minor had
a
flourishing economy. Although
Oakman concludes from
his observations of the
economy during
Domitians
reign
that there was
great prosperity,
he
points
out that there was
also an
unequal spread
in the distribution of this wealth
(213).
Petronius
first-century
novel recounts the deeds of
Trimalchio,
a slave in Asia Minor
who, through wheeling
and
dealing
becomes a
very
rich man. Given this
situation,
one could conclude that the churches should not
compro-
mise in
any way
with the Roman
system.
It
may
be added
that Revelation
may
also be
against
the so-called
wheeling
and
dealing
that was needed to make
money.
It can be
seen,
therefore,
that the
question
of wealth
gained
from involve-
ment with Rome could be an issue in a
dispute
between
syn-
agogue
and church.
by RONALD ROJAS on April 5, 2009 http://btb.sagepub.com Downloaded from
163
It was the churchs attitude towards Rome that led to
its
poverty.
The
ability
to earn would be
considerably
re-
duced. A modern illustration
may
be that of a
physics gradu-
ates
refusing
to work in the arms trade and her
consequent
poverty possibly leading
to association with others in
like-minded
groups. Also, Wilson,
in his observations of Afri-
can millenarian
groups,
saw
groups arising
out of a dissatis-
faction with the current social order.
Underlying
the
groups
belief
system
is their
longing
for the millennium to dawn in
the
present.
In terms of the church at
Smyrna, however,
they
had to deal with a
delay
in Gods
establishing
his
king-
dom on earth. This could result in a sense of doubt or dis-
comfort
regarding previously
held beliefs.
According
to
Festingers theory
of
cognitive dissonance,
this sense of
doubt could lead to an intensification of
belief, leading
in
turn to a
groups
refusal to
comply, and, possibly,
result in
poverty
and tribulation. Moreover,
as
Gager
has
pointed
out,
the intensification of belief could result in increased
missionary activity,
thus
increasing
the sense of
group
be-
longing
and
lessening
the individuals sense of discomfort
(37-49).
This would lead to even
greater separation
be-
tween
synagogue
and church. Goodman
points out,
in Lieu
et al.,
that there is much evidence that the
early
church set
out to convert members of the
synagogue
and that the
syna-
gogue
was hostile-or at least ambivalent-to
proselytizing
(1992: 70).
The desire to
proselytize
is therefore connected
with an
uncompromising
attitude to Rome or
society
as a
whole. This attitude is most
clearly
seen in Revelation
18,
in
which a verbal attack on Rome is made and the evident
manifestations of her rule listed in verses 11-13.
Of particu-
lar interest to this discussion
regarding
the
synagogue
of Sa-
tan is one
group
described as
compromising
with Rome
(Rev 18:15).
Philo
reports
the cessation
of Judean
business
in the east due to the
stirring up
of hatred
against Judeans.
The
result,
writes Philo,
was that &dquo;those
[i.e., Judeans]
who
had let
money
lost what
they lent,
and no one was
permit-
ted, neither farmer,
nor
captain
of a
ship,
nor
merchant,
nor
artisan,
to
employ
himself in his usual manner&dquo;
(FLACCUS
57).
The word for merchant used in Revelation 18 is the
one used for the
Judean
merchants in Philo. It is not
sug-
gested
that Revelation has
only synagogue
merchants in
mind in
18:15; rather,
all who
compromise
with Rome.
Still,
the evidence
suggests
that
many,
both in the
synagogue
and
in the
church,
were
among
the merchants.
Plinys
trial of Christians in 112 CE
suggests
that the
church could be in a vulnerable
position
before
Rome,
not
for
being Christian,
but for
being
anti-Rome.
Downing
points
out that there are
really
no accounts of the trials of
Christians for
being
Christians before 112 CE and thus the
Judean
tax had not resulted in arrests or trials
(118). Surely
if Christians were
being
arrested or
put
on trial over the last
twenty
or so
years, Pliny
would not have needed to write to
Trajan asking
him for
advice;
he would have found
prece-
dents for his situation in the archives.
Pliny acknowledges,
moreover,
that he is not even sure whether
being
a Chris-
tian is
punishable~nly
the crime associated with
being
a
Christian was to be
punished;
he writes that &dquo;I am not at all
sure whether it is the name of Christian which is
punish-
able,
even if innocent of
crime,
or rather the crimes associ-
ated with the name&dquo;
(96).
It is
proposed
here that before
Trajans reign being
a Christian was not
punishable,
al-
though
anti-social behavior would have been.
Law-abiding
Christians would be left in
peace,
but not troublemakers.
In
sum,
the situation was
right
for a
dispute
between
the
synagogue
and the church
regarding
who had the
right
to be called a
Judean. Moreover,
Revelation reveals an atti-
tude that could lead to
punishment
for
being
anti-social: for
example,
its attitude towards wealth and its desire to stand
firm
against
the Roman
system.
Evidence for an Internal Conflict .
Borgen points
out that the
Qumran community harshly
criticized other
Judeans (282).
The Damascus Document il-
lustrates this
point:
During
all those
years
Satan shall be unleashed
against
Is-
rael,
as He
spoke by
the hand of Isaiah ...
saying:
terror and the
pit
and the snare are
upon you,
0 inhabitant
of
the land.... Inter-
preted,
these are the three nets of Satan with which Levi son of
Jacob
said that he catches Israel
by setting
them
up
as three
kinds of
righteousness.
The first is fornication, the second is
riches,
and the third is
profanation
of the
temple [CD 4.14-20].
The three
nets, especially
the one
regarding
riches
closely
resemble the
argument
I am
making
about the
synagogue
being
rich. An issue involved in this
dispute
was the
perni-
cious nature of wealth which would result in alienation
from God. The instrument of this alienation is Satan. The
Qumran
text is
suggesting
that Israel will be of Satan. It
might
also be
interesting
to consider this text in
light
of the
view of some
Qumran
scholars who
suggest
that the Damas-
cus Document was not intended for the
group living
at
Qumran
but for others who
adopted
similar beliefs and
practices
and
yet
had not exiled themselves to
Qumran.
Their main
argument
for this is based on the author of CDs
mention of
&dquo;camps&dquo; (7.6),
&dquo;the
camp&dquo; (10.23),
&dquo;the assem-
bly
of the towns of Israel&dquo;
(12.19),
and &dquo;the
assembly
of the
camps&dquo; (12.23).
by RONALD ROJAS on April 5, 2009 http://btb.sagepub.com Downloaded from
164
Similarly,
in 1
QH (The Thanksgiving hymn)
2.22
Bauckham observes that the
Qumran community
denounced
their fellow
Judeans using
the
phrase
&dquo;a
gathering
of Belial&dquo;
(1994: 124).
The word for
&dquo;gathering&dquo;
could be renderred
synagogue.
Belial is used as a
proper
name for Satan in CD
and the War Scroll. Thus
they
are a
synagogue
of Satan.
In sum, there is evidence not
only
for
disputes
between
Judean groups,
but also that
compromise
with Satan was
part
of the
accusation,
an accusation that
perceived
wealth
as an attribute and
sign
of
belonging
to Satan.
Conclusion
In the first
section,
it was concluded that
underlying
the
language
and themes of Revelation 2:9-10 was a dis-
pute regarding
who had the
right
to be called a
&dquo;Judean.&dquo;
In
the second section,
it was concluded that under Domitians
reign,
the
setting
was
right
for a
dispute
between
synagogue
and church on the extent to which a
Judean
could
compro-
mise with Rome. In the third section,
it was shown that
such a conflict was not unfamiliar in
first-century Judaism.
It would seem that a
dispute concerning
how a true
Judean
should relate to Rome influenced the
writing
of Revelation
2:9-10.
Therefore,
the events
underlying
Revelation 2:9-10
can be established. The
synagogues blasphemy
that
they
were
Judeans
and not the church is connected with the
churchs
uncompromising
attitude towards Rome. It would
seem that the
synagogue
would be concerned to distance it-
self from the church insasmuch as it attached
great impor-
tance to
maintaining good
relations with Rome. Moreover,
the desire of the church to make converts would be threat-
ening
to the
synagogue, perhaps
some
synagogue
members
were
being persuaded
that the church was
right, especially
the less
wealthy
of the
synagogue community.
For the
syna-
gogue,
Domitians
policy
on the tax was crucial as it
gave
the church its own
right
of
exemption
from
participating
in
the
imperial
cult. A refusal to
pay, however, would be seen
as the churchs confession that
they
were not
&dquo;Judean,&dquo;
but
troublemakers.
Consequently,
Domitians tax led to the
synagogues declaring
both to the Roman authorities and to
the church itself that
&dquo;they
are
Judeans.&dquo;
Revelation 2:9 is a
response
in which
John protests
that
&dquo;they
are
not,
but are a
synagogue
of Satan.&dquo;
Ultimately
it could result in church
members
being
detained
(Rev 2:10) .
This would be wel-
comed
by
the
synagogue
and would make
synagogue
mem-
bers think twice about
joining
the church. It
helped
draw a
distinction, moreover, between
synagogue
and church in
the
eyes
of Rome. But from Revelations
perspective,
to
pay
the tax would be to
participate
in the cult and the conse-
quences
of Romes economic
policy,
and thus the
syna-
gogue
would be of Satan and not
Judean.
Works Cited
Bauckham,
R. 1994. THE THEOLOGY OF THE BOOK OF REVELA-
TION.
Cambridge,
UK:
Cambridge University
Press.
1993. THE CLIMAX OF PROPHECY.
Edinburgh,
UK: T. & T.
Clark.
Borgen,
P. 1996. EARLY CHRISTIANITY AND HELLENISTIC
JUDA-
ISM.
Edinburgh,
UK: T. & T. Clark.
Caird, G. B. 1984. THE REVELATION OF ST.
JOHN
THE DIVINE.
London, UK: A. & C. Black.
Downing,
G. 1988.
Plinys
Prosecution
of
Christians: Revelation and
1
Peter, JOURNAL
FOR THE STUDY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
34: 105-23.
Gager, J.
A. 1975. KINGDOM AND COMMUNITY.
Englewood, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Goodman,
M. 1989.
Nerva, The Fiscus
Judaicus and Jewish Identity,
JOURNAL
OF ROMAN STUDIES 79: 40-44.
Kraybill, J.
Nelson. 1996. THE IMPERIAL CULT AND COMMERCE IN
JOHNS
APOCALYPSE.
JSNT Supplement Series,
132. Shef-
field,
UK: Sheffield Academic Press.
Lieu, J., J. North, and T.
Rajak,
editors. 1992. THE
JEWS AMONG
PAGANS AND CHRISTIANS IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE. London,
UK/New York,
NY:
Routledge.
Oakman, D. E. 1993. The Ancient
Economy
and St. Johns Apoocalypse,
LISTENING
JOURNAL OF
RELIGION AND CULTURE 28/3: 200-14.
Plecket,
H. W. 1961. Domitian, the Senate, and the
Provinces,
MNEMOSYNE, 4th series, 14: 296-315.
Sweet, J.
P. M. 1990. REVELATION. London, UK: SCM Press.
Tamari,
M. 1987. WITH ALL YOUR POSSESSIONS:
JEWISH
ETHICS
AND ECONOMIC LIFE. New
York,
NY: The Free Press.
Thompson,
Leonard L. 1990. THE BOOK OF REVELATION: APOCA-
LYPSE AND EMPIRE. New
York,
NY: Oxford
University
Press.
Wilson,
B. R. 1973. MAGIC AND THE MILLENNIUM: A SOCIOLOGI-
CAL STUDY OF PROTEST AMONG TRIBAL AND THIRD-WORLD
PEOPLES. New York, NY:
Harper
& Row.
Yarbro
Collins,
A. 1979. THE APOCALYPSE.
Dublin,
Ireland: Veri-
tas Publications.
by RONALD ROJAS on April 5, 2009 http://btb.sagepub.com Downloaded from