Fabricating the Fall of Satan: Revelation 12:7–9 and its Interpretation in Early Christianity
Some interpreters understand Rev. 12:7-9 as a depiction of (1) a primeval literal war between Michael and Satan that resulted in the subsequent expulsion of Satan from heaven or (2) Satan’s defeat (represented metaphorically as an expulsion) at Jesus’ death. Although these interpretations are common...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Oxford University Press
2023
|
| In: |
The journal of theological studies
Year: 2023, Volume: 74, Issue: 1, Pages: 240-273 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
Bible. Offenbarung des Johannes 12,7-9
/ Oecumenius ca. 6./7. Jh.
/ Andrew of Caesarea -637
/ Devil
/ Overthrow
|
| IxTheo Classification: | HC New Testament KAB Church history 30-500; early Christianity KAD Church history 500-900; early Middle Ages NBH Angelology; demonology NBQ Eschatology |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Summary: | Some interpreters understand Rev. 12:7-9 as a depiction of (1) a primeval literal war between Michael and Satan that resulted in the subsequent expulsion of Satan from heaven or (2) Satan’s defeat (represented metaphorically as an expulsion) at Jesus’ death. Although these interpretations are common in contemporary exegetical works, early interpreters of Revelation explained these verses differently. This prompts the question of who were the innovative interpreters who first read the texts as we do today? Accordingly, tracing a history of interpretation of the passage, in this article I will argue that (1) Oecumenius was the first interpreter who understood Rev. 12:7-9 as a portrayal of a primeval war between Michael and Satan which resulted in the expulsion of the devil from heaven because of his pride and apostasy. (2) Oecumenius did not reach this conclusion by exegeting Rev. 12:7-9. Rather, he connected traditional patristic exegesis and reflection on Satan—condensed mainly from interpretations of texts like Ezek. 28:11-19, Isa. 14:12-15, and Luke 10:18—with Revelation 12. (3) Andrew of Caesarea not only replicated Oecumenius’ exegesis of the pericope but argued that this passage also portrayed Satan’s defeat at the cross of Jesus, due to the influence of the patristic exegesis of John 12:31. (4) Given that Andrew’s commentary was widely copied (whereas Oecumenius’ was not), Andrew is ultimately the catalyst for the dissemination of Oecumenius’ exegesis of this pericope as well as his own. (5) Therefore, Oecumenius and Andrew are the originators of the explanations of Rev. 12:7-9 present in many contemporary exegetical works. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1477-4607 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: The journal of theological studies
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1093/jts/flad002 |