09-16-2008, 09:29 PM
Shlama Khati Christina,
Actually I think there is other evidence: The Dead Sea Scrolls. There is a book called "The War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness", and they describe an enemy known as "Kittim". The identity of Kittim in Hebrew literature is somewhat elusive and flexible. Technically speaking Genesis 10 identifies Kittim/Chittim as a descendant of Japheth, and this same son has been most closely associated with Latins or Romans. However, the Kittim have also been associated with the sons of Asshur, the Macedonians and according to Josephus, the city of Larnaca on the island of Cyprus. Some linguists think the word is from Akkadian meaning "invader"; others that it may refer to Hittites (Khatti). Speculation on the Kittim would continue well into the late Medieval Period (Yosippon, Sefer Ha Yashar, etc).
Here is my point: It seems to my mind that, depending on the enemy of the moment, ANYONE can be Kittim. I have met Orthodox Rabbis who insist Hitler was a direct descendant, or Stalin. This is what we Jews do when faced with those who would destroy us, from Exodus to Esther to the Final Solution, we re-cast current enemies with ancient villains. So all could be Philistines, or Haman or whomever has arisen in a generation to commit these horrible things.
I think therefore that something like the Kittim phenomenon was well established as a Jewish storytelling/midrashic technique well before Messiah's time. There was certainly not the concern for misidentification or historical precison that we have now. Nowadays a Kittim identified group might protest, talk about how their history didn't apply or how the traditional associations with other groups in other locations and times put them off the hook. But 2000 years ago, Masters of the World were Kittim, and others were Kittim who were completely different from them in centuries past.
And so, this is the exact kind of thing we find the Nazarenes and Christians doing, and we know apocalyptic literature began to peak in the last third of the first century, from the destruction of the Temple to its close, the exact period we are talking about. "Babylon" as it was then--as opposed to Mar Keefa's day decades earlier--meant a world system/power who had set itself up as the agent of the destruction of the righteous. It still is just that, but we know the real Babylon didn't sit on seven hills (Revelation 17:9). Only ROME does. Rome had inherited the mantle of the bad guy on the block not just because it destroyed the Temple as Babylon did before, but also because her Emperors used their full might and resources to kill the early leadership of the Nazarenes. They became Kittim but were called "Babylon" instead.
In fact, I would be surprised if this kind of substitution was NOT going on given the extreme persecution of the times of both Jews and Christians.
It probably was also convenient that both the Kittim and Babylon could in some systems be applied to the same general area of land in the Middle East, with the dual usage also that Kittim was from Japheth and Japheth was Rome.
As for the whole preterist-futurist debate on Rev, I have little use for it. To me it seems very clear that symbolisms from Yochanan's day regarding Rome were also used at the same time as a template for the End of Days. I see no reason why BOTH cannot be true, but I also shy away from extensive interpretation on Rev in general, and will do so here. All I will say is that Daniel is model for Rev in many aspects and we know Daniel does this kind of present-future toggling without a doubt.
Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth
Actually I think there is other evidence: The Dead Sea Scrolls. There is a book called "The War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness", and they describe an enemy known as "Kittim". The identity of Kittim in Hebrew literature is somewhat elusive and flexible. Technically speaking Genesis 10 identifies Kittim/Chittim as a descendant of Japheth, and this same son has been most closely associated with Latins or Romans. However, the Kittim have also been associated with the sons of Asshur, the Macedonians and according to Josephus, the city of Larnaca on the island of Cyprus. Some linguists think the word is from Akkadian meaning "invader"; others that it may refer to Hittites (Khatti). Speculation on the Kittim would continue well into the late Medieval Period (Yosippon, Sefer Ha Yashar, etc).
Here is my point: It seems to my mind that, depending on the enemy of the moment, ANYONE can be Kittim. I have met Orthodox Rabbis who insist Hitler was a direct descendant, or Stalin. This is what we Jews do when faced with those who would destroy us, from Exodus to Esther to the Final Solution, we re-cast current enemies with ancient villains. So all could be Philistines, or Haman or whomever has arisen in a generation to commit these horrible things.
I think therefore that something like the Kittim phenomenon was well established as a Jewish storytelling/midrashic technique well before Messiah's time. There was certainly not the concern for misidentification or historical precison that we have now. Nowadays a Kittim identified group might protest, talk about how their history didn't apply or how the traditional associations with other groups in other locations and times put them off the hook. But 2000 years ago, Masters of the World were Kittim, and others were Kittim who were completely different from them in centuries past.
And so, this is the exact kind of thing we find the Nazarenes and Christians doing, and we know apocalyptic literature began to peak in the last third of the first century, from the destruction of the Temple to its close, the exact period we are talking about. "Babylon" as it was then--as opposed to Mar Keefa's day decades earlier--meant a world system/power who had set itself up as the agent of the destruction of the righteous. It still is just that, but we know the real Babylon didn't sit on seven hills (Revelation 17:9). Only ROME does. Rome had inherited the mantle of the bad guy on the block not just because it destroyed the Temple as Babylon did before, but also because her Emperors used their full might and resources to kill the early leadership of the Nazarenes. They became Kittim but were called "Babylon" instead.
In fact, I would be surprised if this kind of substitution was NOT going on given the extreme persecution of the times of both Jews and Christians.
It probably was also convenient that both the Kittim and Babylon could in some systems be applied to the same general area of land in the Middle East, with the dual usage also that Kittim was from Japheth and Japheth was Rome.
As for the whole preterist-futurist debate on Rev, I have little use for it. To me it seems very clear that symbolisms from Yochanan's day regarding Rome were also used at the same time as a template for the End of Days. I see no reason why BOTH cannot be true, but I also shy away from extensive interpretation on Rev in general, and will do so here. All I will say is that Daniel is model for Rev in many aspects and we know Daniel does this kind of present-future toggling without a doubt.
Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth