Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon Jan 31, 2022 3:34 am
Well, to be fair, it could have been a lucid dream or episode of psychosis he had. Thrones, books, and such were the highest technology of the time and they couldn't have imagined what we have or see in the world today. If there is an afterlife, I'm sure it doesn't use books or thrones to administrate things, that would be kind of primitive if God used those things, don't you think.
Sure.
But let's imagine John's situation: you get a vision of things people haven't even seen yet, and can't imagine. How do you convey it in such a way that for the next 2000 years, people are going to be able to get some meaning from it, even though you can't really fully explain?
Wouldn't you use metaphors from what people DID know, to try to explain to them the kinds of things the cannot even imagine? I think that's pretty much all you could do. So, for example, if you, like John, foresaw a worldwide credit system, you couldn't say to an an ancient audience, "and one day there will be things called computers and the internet, and everybody will use them." People would never have understood that. So you put it in terms that they can grasp, and you write something like that nobody can buy or sell without a "number." Numbers are things the ancient world DID have. And it awaits the future until people can really tell what that implies.
But as time went along, more and more of the metaphorical would be likely to be replaced by literal understanding, if what you were saying was the truth. So it might have been impossible, in, say, 70 AD, for people to imagine a worldwide war or a global plague...you might have had to try to express it in metaphorical language; but how hard is it for us to do that today?
And you sense this, I guess. For you write,
...if John did see the afterlife, then perhaps "book" was the closest thing he could use to describe his experience.
Well, and the closest thing to ANY experience that was possible in John's day. Even books were comparatively new and rare technology in those days. Most of what was available were loose manuscripts, tablets and scrolls. The idea of a bound volume was yet to happen, perhaps the most noteworthy exception being
Torah itself. But the concept "book" as you and I know it, was actually very new.
Since he saw books and thrones I would venture to guess that he didn't really see the afterlife or whatever.
Metaphorically, "throne" speaks of dominion, rule, power. And metaphorically, "book" speaks of memory, record, fact. And that's because once you put ink to paper, it does not morph. It sits where you put it. Naturally, that makes it a metaphor for a permanent record.
So these things are still very much with us. Not the mere metaphor, but the actuality they represent.
My guess is that it was some sort of illusion or psychosis or perhaps it was entirely metaphorical to a real-life experience.
People have suggested that, if for no other reason than that the depicted scence in John's vision seem to us so foreign and odd. The problem is that everything John spoke of keeps coming true. And that doesn't happen with mere illusions, dreams or psychoses. In fact, that's how we tell a prophecy from a mere delusion.
But I'm pretty skeptical that there are books or thrones in an "afterlife" that follows our material decay and end.
That's because death is ordinarily unidirectional. Not having been through such an experience, we're in a poor position even to imagine what may come.
But our lack of imagination hardly constitutes an impediment to what God says will happen. So we have to decide Whom to believe.