Introduction
“The Scroll”
We see here a portrait of worship as John receives a vision about the Scroll. God is holding the scroll, His covenant of the deed of creation and our redemption, His promise and plan, and His destiny of the world, as an angelic voice shouts with all its might, “who is worthy to open the scroll?” Who is commendable and able to pay our debt of sin and give us redemption before God the Father? Who is daring enough to go through what it takes to accomplish this? Who is going to break its sacred seals? But, no one was found that could. No man or beast, no principality or angelic host could come close to being able to open this deed to the redemption of our souls. The scroll’s veracity and importance, its weight and significance were no match for any created being to accomplish. No one in all of creation was even able to read its face or contents. Simply put, no one could open it, just as no one was able to pay the price for sin, give us redemption and forgiveness, or enable us to receive such precious gifts.
John weeps, as we all would weep if no one could help us out of our depravity or give us any hope for the future. It seemed for a time that there was no one who could unfold this scroll and give us new life for the future. Then the elders told John, It is OK. The mighty Lion of Judah and heir to the throne of David is here; He is uniquely worthy and will war against God’s enemies. The gentle Lamb is also here who was slain and purchased our souls by His blood from His atoning sacrifice. He is the Lion and the Lamb and He will open the scroll and redeem us. Yes, no one could read or open the scroll¾no one except The One who is Worthy, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!
This passage reads like an ancient legal document written on “papyrus,” the ancient paper made from said plant. Documents, such as wills or contracts, were normally written on one side, rolled, tied with strings, and then sealed with wax and an impression from a signet ring. Such a document could not be opened until the proper time, such as after the death of the person the will was from. As an exception, this Scroll was written on both sides, which was very rare, giving the document more credence but also being ominous (Isa. 6:8; Ezek. 2:9-10).
Hi, I notice that you are discussing the throne of God. We have been led to believe by our ancestors that when Jesus was resurrected he went up to a throne in heaven. However I just read a fascinating book by the New Testament scholar Stephan Huller that in earliest Christianity that the original gospel writer (St. Mark) might have had a physical throne ON THIS EARTH in mind – one which originally sat in Alexandria and which he rediscovered in Venice – see the photos of the object in the Basilica di San Marco which Italian sailors stole from the Church of St. Mark in Alexandria along with the body of St. Mark in 828 AD – see photos of the throne here – http://www.therealmessiahbook.blogspot.com.
The point of Huller’s book is that St. Mark was the first Pope and that Jesus ruled ‘on his right hand’ as he sat on this throne (it is a universally acknowledged – albeit ignored – fact that the title ‘Papa’ or Pope was originally associated with St. Mark rather than St. Peter and with Alexandria rather than Rome; the bishop of Rome only acquired the title after the fifth century).
I was really fascinated by this book. It wasn’t anything like what I had been taught in Sunday school. It really made me think and learn about the language that Jesus and the original gospel writer (St. Mark) spoke.
For instance in Hebrew or Aramaic (the language of Jesus) there would be no way to distinguish the concepts of ‘divine throne’ or ‘heavenly throne’ – i.e. it would be easy for white Europeans to get misled or confused (like the Gospels of Matthew and Luke speaking about ‘the kingdom of heaven’ and ‘God’ even though the Aramaic would be one and the same).
It is an amazing book and here is some background information on the author http://www.stephanhuller.blogspot.com/
Just thought I would pass this along
Peace
Jacob
The author’s research is extremely sloppy; there is no connection to this chair and Christ the Messiah or Mark the Apostle.
Mark was a popular name. The images used are messianic and Apocalyptic (Apocalyptic Literature) and these images were very popular from 200 BC to 200 AD. Most Southern European kings, Persian, Arab and Canaanite Kings used these images as of course the Greeks. This chair was perhaps a prince or king throne possible of the period of Christ, probably a few centuries later due to its carvings. But again, it is nonsense and Non Sequitur to connect this to our Lord. The only conceivable connection is someone in the early Catholic Church tool the chair back to Rome and used it as a centerpiece. Artifact discovery was just beginning its fever pitch then and anything that seemed connected to Jesus and the Apostles was brought back. If Mark sat on this chair, it is no big deal as it is where George Washington slept during the American Revolution which was of prime concern for people in the 19 century… And the notion that the Pope was originally associated with St. Mark down line rather than Peter, there is no evidence. Except for some fringe cults groups, this is fantasy not reality. Stick to the real Book and not nonsense works…
This author gets it totality wrong! “heavenly” and “Divine throne” means God’s dwelling place and earthly home where people may approach, worship, and sacrifice, also called Zion. It refers also to the Lord’s heavenly throne, His innermost sanctuary, represented by the Temple in Jerusalem, which sits on a hill. This is all about God’s dwelling place and earthly home where people may approach, worship, and sacrifice, also called Zion. It refers to the Lord’s heavenly throne, His innermost sanctuary, represented by the Temple in Jerusalem, which sits on a hill. (Psalm 2:6; 3).
Throne… dwelling of God, meaning, “God is among us!” refers to the Tabernacle—how God resides among His people, and the theme of “Immanuel.” Tabernacle and Sanctuary are images of the Old Testament Tabernacle tent that was God’s heavenly dwelling. As a throne, this refers to the inner sanctum of God’s most holy of holies where the Ark, with the two tablets of the Testimony Moses brought from Mount Sinai dwelt. This represented God’s home on earth as a “copy” of God’s Throne Room, made for His presence in the inner chamber of Jewish Temples and the Tabernacle, a tent used before the Temple was built by Solomon. Now, John sees the real heavenly version being brought down to us. This is very significant in Christian redemption (Ex. 24:9-11; 25:8-9, 40; 29:45; 32:15; 37: 24-28; 43:7-10; Lev. 26:11-12; Deut 10:5; 1 Kings 6:12-13; 22:19; Is. 8:8-10; 51:16; Ezek. 37: 24-28; Zech. 2:11; Dan. 7:9-10; Matt. 1:22-23; 13:38; John 8:42-45; 2 Cor. 6:16; Heb. 8:1-6; 9:1-14; Rev. 3:12; 4:1; 7:15; 11:19; 14:15-17; 15:5-16:1, 16:17; 21:22). This calls to mind an image of worship, and the portrayal of God’s heavenly throne (Ex. 24:10; 27:2; Deut. 11:11; 1 Kings 7:23-25; 2 Kings 16:17; 2 Chron. 4:2-6,15, 39; Psalm 11:4; Isa. 51:9-11; Jer 27:19; Ezek. 1:22; Rev. 8:3-5; 11:19; 14:15, 17; 15:2-6, 8; 16:1, 17). This was also an image of refuge and a place of repentance to those fleeing judgment, and/or providing safety measures from an avenging person. They could ask the priest for clemency before God by taking hold of the horns (1 Kings 1:50-53; 2:28; Amos 3:14). The theme is also the beckoning of the wayward to repentance; grace is offered, but will it be taken? These images indicate that all that exists is submissive to God’s supremacy, He who reigns in all of history and time and has victory over all that oppose Him. In conjunction, this also means that He supplies us with all we need.
be blessed!
Be careful ! The research found in Huller’s book is usurp and ridiculous. There is no shred of evidence in archeology or in the pages of Scripture for the points he brings up. It is a bad work that is best to be ignored and thrown out and it is best for us to stick to the reading of the Word and not in vain self grandstand speculations!
Biblicaleschatology staff
Hi, I notice that you are spamming people’s blogs promoting Stephan Huller’s idiotic book. I just read and picked apart his book and found it to be full of half-truths, obfuscations, poor reasoning, and insufficiently documented claims. A bunch of us are discussing Huller’s nonsense here:
http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=130969
The point of the thread is to expose Huller as the fraud that he is. Huller is a circus performer by trade, and we can believe that, given the sort of gymnastics he uses in the book.
I was really digusted by his book. It wasn’t anything like what serious scholars have to offer, which I guess is why he can only get fringe nutcases like Robert Price and Robert Eisenman to endorse it. It really made me think Huller needs some psychotherapy and exposure to serious historical scholarship and critical thinking.
It is a goofy book and it belongs in the trash can.
Just thought I would pass this along