Towards
a new spatio-temporal
macrostructure for Revelation - continued
3) Macrostructures and structural context
There are different interpretations of the term ‘structure’ and these may affect how arguments in this study are understood. In this study, ‘structure’ is used to describe the organisation of discrete parts which, in Revelation, are the passages or groups of verses that have identifiable subjects in common. The passages are like interlocking building blocks that form the framework of the narrative and the shape of the story itself; the groups relate to each other on many levels. The framework is the book outline and this is different from the vision outline, which traces John’s visionary journey through Revelation. Spatio-temporal analysis is a tool which can reconcile both outlines. The term ‘macrostructure’ refers to the unified overall structure of Revelation.
Some literary structures are superimposed upon the two outlines, such as: Revelation’s genres (apocalyptic prophecy with a letter-form throughout);[1] his style and how he expresses himself in the text; the literary arrangement, such as Revelation perhaps being an example of one of Umberto Eco’s ‘open works’ (Mach, 2015: 26-28) i.e. open to interpretation by the reader. New Testament letter introductions (like in Revelation) contain the main themes of the body of the letter in ‘seed form’ (1:1-3:22, or ‘even’ 1:1-20, Beale, 1999: 39), and the connection between characters in the Introduction and the Parousia is of particular interest in this study.
This study proposes a new structural model that indicates that, in addition to a letter form, the structure of Revelation is the structure of the story that is described within the vision (the vision outline). The vision structure does not always correspond to the book outline because the story moves back into the relative past four times in the vision, witnessing new scenes at 4:2, 12:1, 12:13 and 15:1 within the vision’s overall forward movement in time (see Section 4c). This enables John to describe several responses to (i.e. viewpoint of) events and he describes how characters in each space react to, for example, the shedding of the blood of the Lamb or Babylon’s fall. Repetitions, abrupt transitions and paradoxes that are created by the relocations within the story and these are the subject of the Repetitions chapter. How a macrostructure accommodates these features is a major criterion for defining any model.
Richard Bauckham considers Revelation’s literary structure to be a unified whole that is ‘virtually impossible adequately’ to put into a diagram (Bauckham, 1993b: 21; so Mach, 2015:384), so the proposed spatio-temporal macrostructure (see the Macrostructure Model) is a fresh perspective on Revelation’s structure which may be unique. However, it is expected that every macrostructure investigated here contains elements that John might recognise; Ecclesiastes reminds us that ‘what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun’ (Eccl. 1:9b). The macrostructures of extant apocalypses of John’s era are outside the scope of this study but the apocalyptic texts of the Gospels, specifically Lk. 17, Lk. 21, Mt. 24-25, Mk. 13 which were described by Jesus as a series of anticipated events, are comparable with Revelation (this is the subject of a chapter in preparation).
[1] This is compatible with Mach’s comprehensive synopsis of Revelation’s generic complexity (Mach, 2015: 104, 111).
3a) Published macrostructures
The first macrostructures were linear and the first major interpretation of this pattern was the three trinitarian ages described by Joachim of Fiore (c. A.D. 1135-1202),[1] and this was developed into seven ‘days’, i.e. divine responses (‘dispensations’) to human failure by John Nelson Derby (A.D. 1800-82) (Woodman, 2008: 30). Patterned repetitions (recapitulations) were noted in Revelation from the end of the third century (Giblin, 1994: 81) and these evolved into quite complex models. However, the complicated source-critical models of over 100 years ago combined into redaction-critical theories, which in turn changed to simpler models that emphasise Revelation’s language and its structural unity (so Bauckham, 1993b: x, Osborne, 2002: 27-29). Changes from complex to more simple structures in the past 25 years are illustrated by the ‘vision report’ model (Aune, 1997: lxxxii)[2] and the separate ‘stories’ approach suggested by Roman Mach (Mach, 2015: 397-401). Aune proposes two ‘editions’ of Revelation which include twelve independent shorter units in 4:1-22:9 (Aune, 1997: cxx-cxxiii); Mach includes nine transitional sections within four stories (Mach, 2015: 383-393).
Published structural models for Revelation considered in this study have similar book outlines which often include the four classic literary patterns (linear; repeated or recapitulated; developed, encompassed or telescopic; chiasms) and changes of subject matter (i.e. interruptions, intercalations or interludes, Bauckham, 1993a: 9-22, 258) within the seal, trumpet and bowl series, usually between the sixth and seventh events (see Framework 2A.b). These patterns tend to emphasise the seal, trumpet and bowl septets (series of sevens), which are only parts of the story. Chiasms can cover the whole book, for example Collins extends the three septets to ‘five series’ (Collins, 1979: xiii). One of the most influential models is Elizabeth Schüssler Fiorenza’s ABCDC’B’A’ surface chiasm for all Revelation. It includes the broken-cycle form of the three ‘plague’ septets overlying a deeper ‘architectonic’ pattern of inclusion or symmetry within a prophetic-apostolic letter (Fiorenza, 1998: 175-176). Mark Wilson notes the ‘obvious’ chiasm of promises in the seven victor sayings of chapters 2-3 being fulfilled in chapters 19-22 and his own model is a seven-fold chiasm (Wilson, 2007: 30, 25). Chiasms illustrate John’s literary sophistication and they are consistent with the cosmic setting and John’s journey, in that they maintain a strict verse order, and they give the story additional layers of meaning. Spatio-temporal analysis of the classic patterns is considered shortly.
Alan Bandy suggests macrostructure definitions are ‘as diverse as the images found within the book’ (Bandy, 2009: 470), which implies that every interpretative approach creates its own structure. This diversity is particularly noticeable in ideological or topical studies, for example when comparing the descriptions of the celestial mother, Babylon and the Bride (New Jerusalem). There is a second type of macrostructure which considers the arrangement of verses relative to one another, with units defined by their subject matter or literary features, and each verse is like a piece of a literary jigsaw puzzle. The macrostructures defined by Aune and Mach are examples of this approach and they accommodate repetitions, abrupt transitions and paradoxes within separate literary units or subdivisions (recognised as separate reports or stories). Within this type are also the chiasms and other repeated literary patterns that were mentioned earlier (recapitulation etc.). For Grant Osborne, the structure of Revelation has both Unity (like Aune) and Structure (which accommodates the literary patterns) (Osborne, 2002: 27-31);[3] in other words, it has a macrostructure. A more recent example of unity is Mach’s model and structure is as diverse as chiasms, 3- or 7-act plays, series of sevens or liturgy.
[1] Historical events in three trinitarian ages from Adam: Abraham to the birth of Christ (Father/ Law); the age of the Gospels to Joachim’s own time (Son/ Gospel); ending with the millennium and return of Christ (Spirit), (Woodman, 2008: 28-29).
[2] Aune entitles his analysis ‘diachronic composition criticism’ rather than source criticism (Aune, 1997: cxviii).
[3] For structural synopses, see Fiorenza, 1991: 159-164; Osborne 2002: 29; Mach 2015: 23-26.
3b) Classic literary patterns
There are four classic structural patterns: a) linear; b) recapitulation, repeated or patterned repetitions; c) telescopic, developed or encompassed; d) chiasms. The three septets (seals, trumpets, bowls) are very frequently used to determine the structure of Revelation and these patterns were investigated using the proposed spatio-temporal method:
a) Linear models were the original structural choices and linear plot progression in Revelation is recognisable (Resseguie, 2009: 59), but not as the overall macrostructure. The many repetitions, abrupt transition and paradoxes in the text make a linear macrostructure untenable (see the Repetitions chapter). None of the eighteen time-parallels noted in the proposed macrostructure model are recognisable in the simple linear model. The spatio-temporal analysis in this study indicates that Revelation tells a single story, from Creation to the New Order, that reflects the biblical meta-narrative but its chronology is only partly linear because the story steps back in relative time at 4:2, 12:1, 12:13 and 15:1. This enables John to see again events that he has already witnessed, but from different perspectives, as two inter-linked dramas (4:1-11:19 and from 12:1) (see Framework 1A). The structure is parallel because the events in two or more time-lines are different but concurrent, and there are one-to-one correlations between events in the time-parallels and each time-line ‘possesses its own content’ (Lambrecht, 1998: 205); this phrase is used about the seventh seal but I suggest the term has a wider value.
b) Recapitulation (repeated or patterned repetitions) was noted in Revelation from the end of the third century (Giblin, 1994: 81) and these evolved into quite complex models. The most common pattern proposes that the seals, trumpets and bowls represent the same series of torments, with each event describing different aspects of the same torments, often described with heightening ferocity. The composite seventh event in this option is a single event described in three ways. Using this spatio-temporal analysis, a recapitulation macrostructure requires three earth and two heaven’s throne-room time-lines to avoid most of the spatio-temporal paradoxes that it creates but, despite this, the beast rises before the abyss opens and the heavenly sanctuary opens twice in this option. The seals, the Lamb appearing on Mt Zion and the harvests are part of the physical-spiritual earth; and the celestial mother, beasts and bowls are part of the biblical earth; and the trumpets sound and the two witness appear in a third earthly dimension. Only six of the eighteen time-parallels noted in the proposed macrostructure model are recognisable in the recapitulation model. The new spaces appear to have no theological or cosmological justification so recapitulation is structurally unsound from this spatio-temporal perspective. In the proposed macrostructure, there are one-to-one correlations between events in the time-parallels and each time-line has unique events so the structure is parallel rather than recapitulation.
c.i) Telescoping within the sixth seal implies that the sixth seal heralds the true Day of God’s Wrath (6:12-17) and it encompasses the seventh seal and all the trumpets and bowls, but this option creates unresolved spatio-temporal complications. The abrupt change in the text at 12:1 cannot be part of the telescoping sixth seal time-line so it requires three earth time-lines: physical-spiritual earth for the first four seals, trumpets, the Lamb appearing on Mt Zion and the harvests; the biblical earth for the beasts and the bowls; and a third earth for the sixth seal. In spite of its complexity and the additional time-line, only ten of the eighteen time-parallels noted in the proposed macrostructure model are recognisable in this model. The sixth seal telescopic model creates theological questions such as why the Day of God’s Wrath, which is described as a cosmic and earthly catastrophe, begins with waiting (the four angels wait and the 144,000 are sealed) and the silence in heaven (the seventh seal), and before the trumpets sound? What might be the theological purpose for structuring the vision with three earthly time-lines?
c.ii) Telescoping the trumpets and bowls within the seventh seal creates a temporal paradox in this spatio-temporal analysis because the text indicates the trumpet and bowl preparations (from 8:2) occur after the silence of the seventh seal ends (8:1). This paradox can be avoided by introducing a second heavenly throne-room space so that the seventh seal’s silence continues in one time-line whilst the trumpet and bowl preparations occur in the second one. The new space appears to have no theological or cosmological justification and, from a spatio-temporal modelling point of view, there is a simpler option available (the proposed model).
c.iii) Seventh trumpet/ bowls telescoping requires the trumpets and bowls to be in separate spaces because all the bowls are encompassed within the seventh trumpet (as the third woe, which is imminent when the seventh trumpet sounds; 11:14-15). The structure is telescopic if several events occur in one time-line during the time in which one event happens in another. In this option, the Lamb appears on Mt Zion on one earth (14:1-5) and the bowls are part of a second earth time-line. This option is technically viable if the Lamb appears on the physical-spiritual earth after the trumpets, and the bowls empty onto the biblical earth. In this model, the bowls are the third woe (which is also true as a linear structure in the proposed macrostructure). The proposed macrostructure does not require telescoping because the narrative steps back in time for a fourth time at 14:20/ 15:1 (see the Macrostructure Model Figures 3and 4, and Framework 1A) and the progression between the trumpets/ bowls is linear on the physical-spiritual earth. The seventh trumpet/ bowls telescoping option is considered again when the last three bowls are emptied (Framework 4).
d) Chiasms [1] lose their structural integrity during this spatio-temporal analysis of very large chiastic models, such as Elizabeth Schüssler Fiorenza’s conic spiral (Fiorenza, 1991: 35-36), and all the time-parallels disappear in the model. However, chiasms are important surface features that enhance the meaning of the text and they illustrate how John honed his text before distribution of his letter. Small chiasms often highlight structures in the text, such as changes in subject matter or spatial or temporal relocations.
e) ‘Progressive parallelism’ was introduced in 1940 by William Hendriksen. This model divides Revelation’s text into seven ‘vertically’ parallel sections, each of which span the story in ‘ascending, climactic order’ from Christ’s first coming to his second appearance, culminating with the final judgement and new order in the seventh section (Hendriksen, 1998, 1940 edn: 34-36). The macrostructure structure proposed in this study is not exactly like that introduced by Hendriksen, but 16:12-19:6 tells the same story as 14:6-11, but from different viewpoints and with more details. The major differences between progressive parallelism as envisaged by Hendriksen and the structure in this spatio-temporal analysis are that consecutive verses are not always part of the same cosmic space (time-line) in this analysis, and contemporaneous events in the (vertical) time-lines are linked by (horizontal) time-parallels. Hendrikson’s model is a form of recapitulation but the proposed model tells a single, chronologically linear story which unfolds in the cosmic spaces. Given that the relationship between chapters 14 and 16-19 is not recapitulation, telescopic, chiasms or Hendrikson’s progressive parallelism, this study proposes that “parallel progression” is a good term for it because of its greater emphasis on chronological progression.[2]
Other structural models are separate reports or stories models, literary layers or webs, frameworks or dramas, literary and linguistic patterns, and ideological or theological interpretations. This study suggests that literary or linguistic patterns are important surface textural features that provide additional layers of meaning to the text. Their structural integrity is often destroyed using the spatio-temporal analysis but it is hoped proponents of other macrostructures will investigate their model using the proposed spatio-temporal analysis. Sometimes a text parallel uncovers a time-parallel, for example time-parallel 6 (11:11-18/ 15:2-4; see Figure 3), or vice versa.
The proposed macrostructure illustrates a chronologically linear Creation to New Order story but it includes a form of parallel progression (a one-to-one correlations between time-parallels in which events in one space (14:1-20, on the biblical earth) outline events and the other spaces infill the details (16:12-19:21) (see Framework 4 and 5). There is some telescoping (a one-to-many correlation): while everybody is marked on the biblical earth (13:16-18), John interacts with the ‘mighty angel’ and he measures the temple, he sees the two witnesses, hears the seventh trumpet and sees the heavenly sanctuary open, on the physical-spiritual earth (10:1-11:19) (see Framework 3). There is no major recapitulation in the structure because every time-line has its own story and some events are viewed from different perspectives but they are not repeated. The many chiasms in the text are surface, literary features.
Revelation has two structural layers in Figure 4 (Framework 4). The primary, continuing, chronologically linear layer is most clearly seen in heaven’s throne-room (from 19:1) and the physical-spiritual earth (from 14:1). The secondary layer consists of the parallel progression which binds the four spaces together (time-parallels 8 to 15); this layer is generated by John stepping back in relative time in the vision to witness new scenes at 4:2, 12:1, 12:13 and 15:1. The literary spiral seen in Figures 4 and 5 is a surface literary feature of the secondary layer; it is like an eddy in the overall flow of the vision structure. Both the primary and secondary layers follow the spacetime rule, so there are no paradoxes.
[1] Chiasm: a symmetrical repetition of phrases, for example phrases A, B, C whose meanings are repeated using different words in A’, B’, C’ – often with a climactic center (D); see Towards… 3a – it is like a symmetrical literary sandwich. See Towards … 3a.
[2] The term “parallel progression” is used in other disciplines (especially medical), but its use in a theological spatio-temporal study is unlikely to cause confusion between the disciplines. ‘Two-step progression’ is a much more localised repetition that is not on the scale recognised in this study (Resseguie, 2009: 23-25).
3c) Composition and Framework
Bandy’s proposal (that Revelation’s images yield diverse macrostructures) emphasises topics, ideologies, philosophical literary theories, theological or linguistic structural features. In this approach, structure is often defined as the book outline, with repetitions, paradoxes and abrupt transitions accommodated as later explanations, anticipatory statements or duplicated visionary events. For example, a unique event such as Babylon’s fall cannot happen at two different times in a single space (14:8, 16:17-21) and to overcome this complication Stephen Smalley suggests that 14:8 is a ‘proleptic’ (anticipatory) announcement (Smalley, 2005: 363). Composition is perhaps a good descriptive term for this type of macrostructure because it emphasises descriptions, style, literary or linguistic arrangements, or meaning within an ideological or topical approach.
Osborne’s unity-structure approach also considers literary or linguistic patterns as well as relationships between the text units (text passages, reports or stories) as part of the overall construction of the text. The starting point for most of these macrostructures is the book outline and Commentaries are examples of this type, so perhaps Framework is a good term for a non-ideological or non-topical type of macrostructure.
Descriptions and literary features provide emphases in the Framework approach which may reflect the order in which John describes his visionary journey, and in the Composition approach they may reflect attributes, themes, motif and the meaning of the text; both approaches are valid. For example, similarities and differences between the three magnificent women may reflect their times and locations in John’s journey as well as their roles and attributes, and both are highlighted in literary, linguistic and ideological patterns. Interpreting Revelation in an ideological or thematic way is not part of this study but Leonard Thompson’s model of Revelation as a landscape seen from the air with fields and boundaries that delineate differences between the different sorts of spaces/ categories (Thompson, 1990: 76; see Section 1b)) was influential here as an encouragement to continue the mapping approach. Thompson’s suggestion that Revelation’s structure is like a series of centre-less and bound-less multi-dimensional layers of meaning may be valid, but it is outside the scope of this study (Thompson, 1990: 188).
This study suggests that there is a symbiotic relationship between the Composition and Framework approaches because John does not explain why there are repetitions, paradoxes or abrupt transitions on his visionary journey. Instead, explanations within Revelation are often functions of the words chosen by John to describe the images, and descriptions of the characters and events enhance the message and meaning of Revelation (so Thompson, 1990: 52); they also highlight the underlying construction of the text. There are only a few occasions when John gives overt explanations of the symbolism he witnesses: John is told the Warrior with whom he interacts is Christ (‘the First and the Last’) who holds seven stars (angels of the seven congregations) in his hand while he (Christ) walks among seven lamp stands (congregations) (1:17-2:1); an angel explains the mystery of Babylon (a magnificent woman; a harlot who is also a great trading, hedonistic city) and the beast upon which she sits (an eighth king) and the water surrounding them (humanity) (17:7-18); another voice tells John why Babylon must fall (18:4-24). At times John knows the meaning of the symbolism: he knows the number of the beast (666) and he expects others to work out its name (13:18), and he knows who the dragon and his two beasts represent (12:9, 17:11, 19:20-20:2; satan, the king and his false prophet). On another occasion, John appears confused (he worships the angel, thinking him to be Jesus, 19:10). John’s actions, for example eating the little scroll and measuring the temple (10:8-11:2), are prompted by angels or a voice from heaven. Explanations are usually given to John in the story and they are embodied within the images.
3d) Layers and webs
Bandy introduces a three-layer macrostructure which distinguishes between what can be recognised by listeners (surface or discourse layer) and scholars (an intertextual layer with echo and allusion texts, and an intratextual interpretive layer); themes, recapitulation, chiasms, intercalations and interweaving are functions of the third (intratextual) layer (Bandy, 2009: 474, 481, 487). Bandy’s layers reflect how John describes events and this study proposes that the cosmic context is like a fourth layer in Bandy’s model. Other scholars consider Revelation as a 3- or 7-act drama (Osborne, 2002: 29) and John’s references to ‘being in the Spirit’ (Filho, 2002: 215) and the ‘seven victor sayings’ (Wilson, 2007: 30) are important indicators of a liturgical interpretative framework and ethical or power dimensions (Filho, 2002: 214, 217). Rather than considering the macrostructure as layers, Mach suggests the story structure is an example of one of Umberto Eco’s ‘open works’ (Mach, 2015: 26-28), i.e. open to interpretation by the reader. Mach’s literary-open model is like a ‘web’ of macro-sections/ transitions and sub-patterns within the four stories (Mach, 2015: 384).
3e) Spatial approaches
This study is based upon a spatio-temporal analysis in which space and chronological time are equally important but there are spatial approaches that do not have a chronological temporal dimension. For example, for Steven Friesen time is defined by its ‘qualities’: ‘vision time’ (i.e. ‘present’, ‘vindication’, ‘new time’) mediated in ‘worship time’ (Friesen, 2001: 161),[1] and Michael Gilbertson uses ‘temporal categories’ (‘present’, ‘primordial’ and ‘historical past’, ‘penultimate future’ and ‘ultimate future’) but he rejects an active chronological component (Gilbertson, 2003:110-111). Post-structuralist approaches, such as Critical Spatial Theory and Geocriticism, also minimise the temporal dimension or consider it from a cultural perspective so these are not part of this study. Critical Spatial Theory emphasises the nature of space as a product of human relationships or activity (Kilde, 2013: 194) and Geocriticism considers literary texts as maps which reveal ‘aesthetic as well as political dimensions’ (Pippin, 2020:187). In the proposed macrostructure, the chronology is as important as the spatial component of the story.
[1] ‘Present time’: before the destruction of the Roman Empire; ‘worship time’: spans heaven and earth; ‘vision time’: ecstatic experience; ‘vindication time’: in the 1000 year earthly reign of Christ; ‘new time’: in the New Order (Friesen, 2001:157-161).
3f) New views on an old mystery
This study proposes that a single, underlying cosmos-based macrostructure binds all other macrostructures together and the cosmic setting underlies the separate reports or stories models, literary layers or webs, frameworks or dramas, literary and linguistic patterns, and ideological or theological interpretations. This study suggests that literary or linguistic patterns are surface textural features that provide additional layers of meaning to the text.
In the Repetitions chapter (5C), it is suggested that Revelation’s macrostructure is independent of the nature of John’s experience (vision(s)/ dream(s)/ imagination/ solely theological insight) and John may have experienced a waking vision; this is indicated by his description of the fall of Babylon (Repetitions 3). Babylon’s fall is described in a text spiral (16:12-21:9) which is created by an interweaving of text passages which record events in multiple spaces in a few consecutive verses; it may trace the path of John’s eyes as he watches contiguous events unfold from a visionary vantage point, first near Jerusalem (11:3-17:2, see Framework 3B.c) and then from two locations in the wilderness (17:3, 21:9; see Framework 4D).
This study suggests that ideology or topic based macrostructures and unity-structure models are more aptly described as Composition and Framework because both approaches describe structures and both are unified, in their own ways. The proposed macrostructure is a spatio-temporal analysis which follows the second approach because it is a unified, non-ideological, non-topical model that accommodates the literary features. The macrostructure is illustrated in the Macrostructure Model chapter, described in the shorter Repetitions chapter and detailed descriptions of the construction and interpretation of the macrostructure are published in the Framework chapter.
Page updated 8 February 2024