Towards a new
spatio-temporal
macrostructure for Revelation - methodology
2) Methodology
Defining the method to be used in this study is difficult because, as an oceanographer/ marine geologist and then a theologian, the present author’s mind went to the Scientific Method for the methodology, i.e. observe the situation, define the question, research the topic, formulate and test an hypothesis, analyse the data and report the conclusions. This is particularly appropriate for Revelation because it is a piece of prophetic and apocalyptic (revelatory) literature that represents a transcendental reality which moves through the cosmos, i.e. through space and time (Thompson, 1990: 31); so a spatio-temporal methodology is appropriate.
Theological methodology, on the other hand, describes how a person approaches an interpretation of the Bible and its doctrinal implications. Underlying the theological methodology in this study is the philosophical approach of the theological variant of critical realism, i.e. recognising that every reader cannot help but put their own interpretations on what John’s intentions may have been when he wrote Revelation (Beale, 1998: 53; Wright, 1992: 35; Knowles, 2010: 99).
This study follows both the Scientific Method and a traditional theological approach by being a literary-historical study of the text that is exegetical (the systematic search for ways to comprehend the text) and hermeneutical (the theory of how to interpret the text on a higher level of reflection) – in this case the hermeneutic of spacetime because it is the spatio-temporal analysis that yields the macrostructure which is designed and interpreted in this study.
Superimposed upon this is the hermeneutical ‘triad’ of history, literature and theology, which is the ‘proper grid’ for biblical interpretation and critical realism (which implies ‘the notion that texts can and do accurately represent external objects, properties, and events’) (Köstenberger and Patterson, 2011: 23, 27; 24) – notwithstanding John’s relationship to history and the surrounding culture is ambiguous. ‘History’ is used in a modern sense here; how Jews in the first century A.D. understood history is uncertain but Maurice Halbwachs distinguished it from collective memory, which is how the first Christians outside Palestine would have remembered Jerusalem and the Temple and its traditions (rituals etc.) (Halbwachs, 1992: 222).
This study aims to uncover a methodology and macrostructure that are objective (i.e. independent and reproducible), chronologically and spatially consistent, theologically sound and accessible to the current generation. The works of Leonard Thompson, Steven Friesen and Richard Bauckham are particularly influential; Thompson because his approach is so different to the method used in this study that it challenges preconceptions, Friesen because his emphasis is on the local culture and the different kinds of space and time in Revelation and Bauckham emphasises a literary and contextual approach.
This study follows Bauckham’s advice about Revelation’s images (Bauckham, 1993a: 451) by trying to understand John’s prophecy by making the structure (rather than only the images themselves) more accessible today. It is hoped others will investigate the method and macrostructure and use them as a basis for their own interpretations or literary investigations.
2a) The cosmic setting
The cosmic setting within Revelation is widely accepted and linear plot progression is recognisable (Resseguie, 2009: 59) but this study is unusual in proposing that the relative timing and location of events within John’s visionary cosmos are the controlling structural components of its macrostructure.
This methodology is not unexpected; both a first century A.D. understanding of the cosmos and its modern equivalent describe the same physical observations. This proposed macrostructure supports the traditional view that Revelation follows chronological time, specifically the immediate ‘present age’ (in John’s day) and events surrounding the Parousia (the appearance of Christ, or his ‘coming’ in Revelation) and ‘the age to come’ (and its precursor the eschaton or ‘last days’ or ‘end times’) (see Towards … 6). However, this study interprets Revelation using the spacetime discipline.
2b) Spatio-temporal analysis and spacetime rules
Spatio-temporal analysis maintains the relationships between location and relative time, and spacetime is a modern metaphor or mental image for John’s visionary cosmos. In a non-physicist’s interpretation of a mathematical concept, spacetime considers the cosmos as a 3-dimensional volume and the passing of time moves in one direction only, like an arrow into the future. An event in one place cannot be witnessed in another place before that event occurs so, in the physical cosmos, consequences follow causes.
There are a few simple rules for this type of spatio-temporal analysis; notations and interpretations can change but verse order (the possible chronology) remains unchanged and verses and chapters cannot interrupt or inter-weave earlier or later chapters in the same space because this creates temporal paradoxes. In other words, verses behave like beads on a piece of string within each space and they cannot jump over one another. For example, events in chapters 12-14 either occur after chapters 1-11 or they must be in separate spaces/ dimensions. This is the ‘spacetime rule’ and it was used to trace John’s journey through the cosmos and verses were allocated to the spaces according to their literary cosmic location.
The proposed macrostructure is a product of using the spacetime rule to eliminate every temporal paradox in a way that is justifiable theologically and according to concepts of ancient Near East cosmology. The study follows the advice to keep it simple when developing a theory, because the simplest solution is probably the best one (Occam’s Razor); this supports using the least possible number of columns (spaces) to illustrate the structure.
Generic spatio-temporal modelling guidelines indicate that: if there is no recorded activity in a space, until John states or implies that the last event in that space ceases, that event may continue. The absence of a space from the model does not imply the space vanishes. For example, there is no activity recorded in heaven’s environs after 15:1, but the space does not disappear (see the Macrostructure Model).
2c) In practice ...
In practice, the verses were copied into an MS Excel spreadsheet, key words denoting subjects and locations were highlighted and text sections moved along the horizontal axis into the column which represented their cosmic location. Space is the x axis and each column represents a location in John’s literary cosmos; the y axis is Relative Time. Verses were moved up and down the column until those with the same subject matter were on the same row and verse order was strictly maintained.
If Revelation follows a chronologically linear structure, the first actions John writes about (from 1:1) are at the top and the last ones (22:21) are at the bottom of the diagram, so the text “flows” down the page. Maintaining verse order is important so any relationship between a relative chronology and the verses is preserved, and so space and time can remain in tension. The sequence of events happening within each column (space) is the time-line.
The structural analysis began with the search for the first and last unique events which impact every cosmic space in the story and then see how all the other events fit into this pattern. The method is iterative, like an hermeneutical circle i.e. a series of repeated attempts to understand the whole structure by investigating how its parts relate to one another. An operational aim of the analysis is to avoid temporal paradoxes by moving verses up and down the y axis within each space, so that all references to the same event (such as the immediate consequences of the shedding of the blood of the Lamb or Babylon) are on the same row on the y axis.
There is only one occasion in this spatio-temporal analysis when allocation of verses to a space is uncertain: the appearance of the Lamb on Mt Zion plus the harvests (14:1-20) can be either biblical allegories (Option 1) or physical-spiritual events (Option 2) or there is a spatial transition at 14:6 (biblical to physical-spiritual earth; Option 3). All the time-parallels are present in all three options but the simplest version is chosen as the proposed model. It is appropriate that this spatio-temporal analysis is open to interpretation at this point in the story because if there was a definitive answer to which image of the Parousia is ‘correct’, this would have been settled by earlier generations. The option chosen has implications for how 14:1 onwards is interpreted and this is discussed in Framework 4A.d.
2d) The outcome
By tracing the story’s journey through the cosmos, a map of the cosmic spaces was uncovered and it is illustrated by the proposed macrostructure model. It became clear that multiple references to the same event in Revelation are the result of the story stepping back in relative time four times during John’s visionary journey (at 4:2, 12:1, 12:13 and 15:1). These relocations reveal that there are two earth-like spaces (dimensions) and heavenly events are separated into the throne-room and its environs. Below-the-earth is represented by events that occur at its boundary with the two earths. Further details are given in Towards … 4.
Multiple references to the same event are contemporaneous and they are like text parallels that have a chronological component; I call them ‘time-parallels’. These are shaded in the proposed macrostructure (Macrostructure Model, Figures 1-5). Only three events impact the whole cosmos: the Cross (i.e. the crucifixion, resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ); the fall of Babylon and the Final Judgement. Creation is not the first time-parallel because 4:11 represents celebration at the point John enters the throne-room and it affirms that worship is the ongoing response to Creation. Eighteen time-parallels are recognised but the exact number is not significant because some may be sub-divided or combined.
After 16:12 (Figure 4 in the model), the story-line follows a spiral pattern, which is the result of John witnessing events in multiple spaces from vantage points, and describing them in a few consecutive verses (see Towards … 4g and Framework 4).
2e) Validation
Throughout the study the proposed macrostructure was validated by comparing it with events described within the Gospels, particularly Lk. 17 and Lk. 21/ Mt. 24/ Mk. 13 and Acts 1 because these describe sequences of anticipated eschatological events (see Towards … 6). Some references to Daniel and Isaiah are included but a comprehensive comparison with eschatological texts in the Hebrew Bible or with other extant apocalypses is not attempted. This spatio-temporal method was tested on the classic models (linear /recapitulation/ telescopic/ chiasms) but each one created paradoxes (see Towards … 3b).