Sunday, September 20, 2026

Situating those Two Witnesses of Revelation 11

 



“So John [the Evangelist] and Josephus both described two individuals

in Jerusalem who were hated, basically invincible for a while, finally killed,

and not allowed to be buried”.

 Adam Maarschalk

 

 

Adam Maarschalk, who has written, from a preterist point of view, some compelling articles on the Book of the Apocalypse, has gone a long way towards identifying the Two Witnesses: The Two Witnesses Killed by the Beast (Revelation 11:3-13) – Pursuing Truth

….

 

Revelation 11:4

 

In Revelation 11:4, the two witnesses are identified as “the two olive trees and the two lampstands standing before the God of the earth.” As many scholars have recognized, this description draws on Zechariah’s “Vision of the Lampstand and Olive Trees”:

 

Now the angel who talked with me came back and wakened me, as a man who is wakened out of sleep. And he said to me, ‘What do you see?’ So I said, ‘I am looking, and there is a lampstand of solid gold with a bowl on top of it, and on the stand seven lamps with seven pipes to the seven lamps. Two olive trees are by it, one at the right of the bowl and the other at its left.’ … Then I answered and said to him, ‘What are these two olive trees …?’ So he said, ‘These are the two anointed ones, who stand before the Lord of the whole earth’” (Zechariah 4:1-3, 11, 14).

 

This vision came on the heels of Zechariah’s “Vision of the High Priest,” concerning the high priest, Joshua (Zechariah 3), who served alongside the governor, Zerubbabel (Zech. 4). As Albert Barnes said in his 1834 commentary on Revelation 11:4,

 

“This representation, that the ministers of religion “stand before the Lord,” is one that is not uncommon in the Bible. Thus it is said of the priests and Levites: ‘The Lord separated the tribe of Levi, to stand before the Lord, to minister unto him, and to bless his name,’ Deuteronomy 10:8; compare Deuteronomy 18:7. The same thing is said of the prophets, as in the cases of Elijah and Elisha: ‘As the Lord liveth, before whom I stand,’ 1 Kings 17:1; also, 1 Kings 18:152 Kings 3:142 Kings 5:16; compare Jeremiah 15:19. The representation is that they ministered, as it were, constantly in his presence and under his eye.”

 

In Zechariah’s vision, he saw one lampstand (Zech. 4:2). In Revelation 1:12 John saw seven lampstands, which he was told were the seven churches (Rev. 1:20). Here in Rev. 11:4 there were two lampstands, the two witnesses.

 

Ananus ben Ananus and Jesus ben Gamaliel



I would like to propose that the two witnesses were two first century high priests, Ananus ben Ananus and Jesus ben Gamaliel (also known as Joshua). According to Josephus, they led the peace movement in Jerusalem when the Zealots were determined to rebel and incite war with the Romans, hoping to gain full independence for Israel. As we will see, their roles, deaths, the aftermath of their deaths, and the timing of their deaths line up with a number of details John saw in Revelation 11.

 

Here is a short summary of these two men.

 

1.       Ananus: The appointment of Ananus as high priest is recorded in Antiquities 20.9.1. He was appointed in 62 AD. Josephus called him “the ancientest of the high priests” and “a very prudent man” (Wars 4.3.7), “a prodigious lover of liberty” who “preferred peace above all things,” and “a shrewd man in speaking and persuading the people” (Wars 4.5.2). Ironically, in December 66 AD he was appointed as a general over Jerusalem, one of 10 generals appointed to prepare for war with Rome (Wars 2.20.3). A long speech given by Ananus against the Zealots is recorded in Wars 4.3.10.

 

2.  Jesus: The appointment of Jesus as high priest is recorded in Antiquities 20.9.4. He was appointed in 63 or 64 AD, but only for about a year (Ant. 20.9.7). From that time on, Josephus said, Jerusalem was “greatly disordered” and “all things grew worse and worse” (Ant. 20.9.4). Josephus referred to Jesus as “a friend and companion” (Life 41.204), and called him “the eldest of the high priests next to Ananus.” Josephus added that “although he was inferior to [Ananus] upon the comparison, he was superior to the rest” (Wars 4.5.2). Jesus also gave a long speech against the Zealots, which is recorded in Wars 4.4.3.

 

The Zealot Temple Siege

 

Ananus and Jesus were both killed at the same time during the Zealot Temple Siege of February-March 68 AD. This siege took place after the Zealots appointed a fake high priest, Phannias, who “did not well know what the high priesthood was” (Wars 4.3.6-8), and he unworthily presided over that post until Jerusalem was destroyed. In a sense, Ananus and Jesus represented the final lampstands, the final oil-bearing olive trees, of the temple before it was destroyed.

 

Phannias was a fraud, and the people of Jerusalem finally had enough of the Zealots. Ananus and Jesus led them in an uprising:

 

“And now the people could no longer bear the insolence of this procedure, but did altogether run zealously, in order to overthrow that tyranny… The best esteemed also of the high priests, Jesus the son of Gamalas, and Ananus the son of Ananus, when they were at their assemblies, bitterly reproached the people for their sloth, and excited them against the zealots…” (Wars 4.3.9).

 

In his speech (Wars 4.3.10), Ananus said that he would lead the people in an all-or-nothing attack against the Zealots, and that he would not spare his own body in that effort. In that battle, Ananus and his followers actually gained the upper hand against the Zealots, forcing them into the inner temple and gaining control of the rest of the city (Wars 4.3.12). Ananus then chose 6000 armed men to keep the Zealots surrounded and under guard. Unfortunately, as we will see, this strategy came undone because of the trickery of John Levi of Gischala (Wars 4.3.13-14).

Revelation 11:5-6

 

In Revelation 11:5 we read that fire would proceed out of the mouths of the two witnesses to devour their enemies who would try to harm them. Compare this to what Jeremiah was told:

 

Because you speak this word, behold, I will make My words in your mouth fire, and this people wood, and it shall devour them” (Jeremiah 5:14).

 

For more on God’s word being like a fire, and having the power to “slay” people, see Jeremiah 23:29 and Hosea 6:5.

 

Revelation 11:6 says that the two witnesses would “have power to shut heaven, so that no rain falls in the days of their prophecy…” Note that during the days of Elijah “it did not rain for three years and six months” (James 5:17; Luke 4:25). This matches the duration of time that the two witnesses would prophesy (Rev. 11:3). During the Roman siege in 70 AD, Josephus gave a speech to the Zealots in which he mentioned that the springs of water were “almost dried up” while Jerusalem was in the hands of the Zealots, but suddenly had more than enough water once the Romans arrived. This indicates that there was a lack of rain during the time that the Zealots controlled Jerusalem:

 

“…and as for Titus, those springs that were formerly almost dried up when they were under your power since he is come, run more plentifully than they did before; accordingly, you know that Siloam, as well as all the other springs that were without the city, did so far fail, that water was sold by distinct measures; whereas they now have such a great quantity of water for your enemies, as is sufficient not only for drink both for themselves and their cattle, but for watering their gardens also” (Wars 5.9.4.409-410).

 

Josephus said that Ananus had “the mastery of those that opposed his designs, or were for the war” (Wars 4.5.2). Josephus didn’t give many details about how he mastered his opponents, but this indicates that Ananus remained untouchable for a significant period of time even while the Zealots had their way in Jerusalem.

 

Revelation 11:7-9

 

Revelation 11:7-9 says this about the two witnesses:

 

Now when they finish their testimony, the beast that ascends out of the bottomless pit will make war against them, overcome them, and kill themAnd their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. Then those from the peoples, tribes, tongues, and nations will see their dead bodies three and a half days, and not allow their dead bodies to be put into the graves.

 

Here “the beast” is mentioned for the very first time in the book of Revelation. (As we discussed in the previous post, it seems evident that John expected his readers to be familiar with Daniel’s description of the fourth beast in Daniel 7.) Here is also the first mention of “the great city” (later mentioned in Rev. 14:8; 16:19; 17:18; 18:10, 16, 18-19, 21). “The great city” is clearly defined as Jerusalem, the place where Jesus was crucified (e.g. Luke 9:31).

 

It’s significant that the beast oversees the deaths of the two witnesses in Jerusalem. This has a bearing on whether the beast was Roman, as many suppose, or Jewish, which is the view I’m presenting in this series. As we saw in our study of Daniel, the Romans were not in Jerusalem from August 66 AD until April 70 AD, except for a few days in November 66 AD when Cestius Gallus led a failed attack on the city. If the events of Revelation 11 took place anytime between late 66 AD and the spring of 70 AD, the beast that overcame the two witnesses was Jewish, not Roman. The events which I believe fulfilled this prophecy took place in February-March 68 AD.

 

In February 68 AD, Ananus urged the people of Jerusalem to oppose the lawless Jewish Zealots who had taken over the temple as “blood-shedding villains.” John Levi of Gischala was a Zealot leader who had recently come to Jerusalem, but he pretended to be on the side of Ananus and was invited to be an ambassador to the Zealots (Wars 4.3.13). John quickly betrayed him and falsely claimed that Ananus had invited the Roman general Vespasian to conquer Jerusalem (Wars 4.3.14).

 

In response, the Zealot leaders Eleazar ben Simon and Zacharias ben Phalek requested help from the Idumeans, who lived south of Judea. The Zealots told the Idumeans that “unless they would come immediately to their assistance… the city would be in the power of the Romans.”

 

Even though the Zealots were trapped in the inner temple, they somehow managed to sneak out two messengers to deliver this message to the Idumeans (Wars 4.4.2-3). In fulfillment of Revelation 9:13-16, the Idumeans quickly prepared an army of 20,000 directed by four commanders (Wars 4.4.2):

 

“Now these [Idumean] rulers were greatly surprised at the contents of the letter, and at what those that came with it further told them; whereupon they ran about the nation like madmen, and made proclamation that the people should come to war; so a multitude was suddenly got together, sooner indeed than the time appointed in the proclamation, and everybody caught up their arms, in order to maintain the liberty of their metropolis; and twenty thousand of them were put into battle-array, and came to Jerusalem, under four commanders, John, and Jacob the son of Sosas; and besides these were Simon, the son of Cathlas, and Phineas, the son of Clusothus.”

 

When the Idumeans came to Jerusalem, at first Ananus’ guards prevented them from coming into the city. Jesus gave a speech in which he denied that anyone had betrayed Jerusalem to the Romans. He invited the Idumeans to help deliver the city from the real enemies, the Zealots, but the Idumeans were not persuaded (Wars 4.4.3-4).

 

In the midst of a terrible storm and an earthquake that night, most of the guards were allowed to go home and some of the Zealots managed to come out of the temple and use saws to cut through the gates. This allowed the Idumeans to enter the city, and the Zealots joined them in slaughtering the guards (Wars 4.5.1). The next day the Idumeans, working on behalf of the Zealots, hunted down and killed Ananus and Jesus, who had long tormented the Zealots by opposing their war and working for peace:

 

“[The Idumeans] sought for the high priests, and … went with the greatest zeal against them; and as soon as they caught them they slew them, and then standing upon their dead bodies, in way of jest, upbraided Ananus with his kindness to the people, and Jesus with his speech made to them from the wall.

 

Nay, they proceeded to that degree of impiety, as to cast away their dead bodies without burial … I should not mistake if I said that the death of Ananus was the beginning of the destruction of the city… He … preferred peace above all things; …h e was a shrewd man in speaking and persuading the people, and had already gotten the mastery of those that opposed his designs, or were for the war… And this at last was the end of Ananus and Jesus” (Wars 4.5.2).

 

So John and Josephus both described two individuals in Jerusalem who were hated, basically invincible for a while, finally killed, and not allowed to be buried.

 

Revelation 11:10 (Festival of Purim?)

 

Revelation 11:10 describes the reaction of those who were glad to be rid of the two witnesses:

 

And those who dwell on the earth will rejoice over them, make merry, and send gifts to one another, because these two prophets tormented those who dwell on the earth.”

 

The word “earth,” as we discussed earlier, often means “land,” i.e. the land of Israel. This is certainly the case here, as the two witnesses were based in, and killed in, Jerusalem.

 

In the previous verse we read that “peoples, tribes, tongues, and nations” would see the dead bodies of the two witnesses. Why was there such a diverse population at that time? Was it because it took place during a festival, when Jews from various nations would be gathered in Jerusalem? If so, the description in verse 10 sounds like the festival of Purim:

 

“Purim is a Jewish holiday that commemorates the saving of the Jewish people from Haman, who was plotting to kill all the Jews. This took place in the ancient Persian Empire … The day of deliverance became a day of feasting and rejoicing. Based on the conclusions of the Scroll of Esther (Esther 9:22): “…that they should make them days of feasting and gladness, and of sending portions one to another, and gifts to the poor.” Purim is therefore celebrated among Jews by: Exchanging reciprocal gifts of food and drink… Eating a celebratory meal… Other customs include drinking wine or any other alcoholic beverage, wearing of masks and costumes, and public celebration (Wikipedia: Purim).

 

The deaths of Ananus and Jesus are commonly said to have taken place in February or March 68 AD. The Fast of Esther and Purim are typically celebrated from the 13th – 16th of Adar. In the year 68 AD, the last day of Adar was March 22nd, according to our modern calendar (“The Jewish war: a new tr.,” p. 191). Therefore, since each Jewish month was 29 or 30 days, we can know that the Fast of Esther and Purim took place around March 4-7 in 68 AD.

 

It appears that when the Zealots celebrated Purim in March 68 AD, they not only celebrated the deliverance from Haman that took place in Esther’s day, but they also celebrated being free from Ananus and Jesus and all their efforts to oppose the Zealots and achieve peace with Rome. 

 

After all, they believed the lie told by John of Gischala – that Ananus had invited Vespasian to capture Jerusalem, and that Ananus intended for them all to be captured by the Romans.

 

A short while later, another Zealot leader, Simon Bar Giora, found out that Ananus was dead. He was at Masada because Ananus had previously driven him away from Acrabattene, a toparchy of Judea, because of his tyranny there (Wars 2.22.1-2). When Simon “heard of the death of Ananus, he … went into the mountainous part of the country. So he proclaimed liberty to those in slavery, and a reward to those already free, and got together a set of wicked men from all quarters” (Wars 4.9.3). This is just one example of how the Zealots behaved as if they were free of the “torments” of Ananus and Jesus.

 

Revelation 11:11-12

 

Now after the three and a half days the breath of life from God entered them, and they stood on their feet, and great fear fell on those who saw them. And they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, ‘Come up here.’ And they ascended to heaven in a cloud, and their enemies saw them” (Revelation 11:11-12).

 

….

 

Revelation 11:13

 

Revelation 11:13 reads this way:

 

In the same hour there was a great earthquake, and a tenth of the city fell. In the earthquake seven thousand men were killed, and the rest were afraid and gave glory to the God of heaven.”

 

In Wars 4.4.5 Josephus described an earthquake that took place the night the Idumeans broke into Jerusalem, the day before Ananus and Jesus were killed:

 

“[F]or there broke out a prodigious storm in the night, with the utmost violence, and very strong winds, with the largest showers of rain, with continued lightnings, terrible thunderings, and amazing concussions and bellowings of the earth, that was in an earthquake … anyone would guess that these wonders foreshowed some grand calamities that were coming.”

 

That same night the Idumeans slaughtered those who had prevented them from coming in:

 

“The zealots also joined in the shouts raised by the Idumeans; and the storm itself rendered the cry more terrible; nor did the Idumeans spare anybody; for as they are naturally a most barbarous and bloody nation, and had been distressed by the tempest, they made use of their weapons against those that had shut the gates against them… Now there was at present neither any place for flight, nor any hope of preservation; but as they were driven one upon another in heaps, so were they slain… And now the outer temple was all of it overflowed with blood; and that day, as it came on, they saw eight thousand five hundred dead bodies there” (Wars 4.5.1).

 

Did 7000 die in the earthquake, and another 1500 die by the swords of the Idumeans? In any case, John’s prediction of 7000 deaths is very close to the 8500 deaths mentioned by Josephus. Furthermore, this earthquake and the deaths of Ananus and Jesus were less than 24 hours apart, certainly qualifying as taking place “in the same hour.”

 

Typically, estimates of Jerusalem’s population in the first century range from 30,000 to 100,000 people, so it’s very reasonable to conclude that 7000 deaths in 68 AD represented a tenth of the city falling. Even if the normal population was closer to 30,000, it would have been higher at the time of that earthquake if it took place around the festival of Purim. This was a minor festival, so the population may have doubled, but it wouldn’t have swollen to 250,000 or more as it would during the major festivals.

 

Jerusalem Took a Turn for the Worse

 

The deaths of Ananus and Jesus marked a significant turning point for Jerusalem, according to Josephus:

 

“I should not mistake if I said that the death of Ananus was the beginning of the destruction of the city, and that from this very day may be dated the overthrow of her wall, and the ruin of her affairs, whereon they saw their high priest, and the procurer of their preservation, slain in the midst of their city… to say all in a word, if Ananus had survived they had certainly compounded matters… And the Jews had then put abundance of delays in the way of the Romans, if they had had such a general as he was” (Wars 4.5.2).

 

After their deaths, the Zealots and the Idumeans “fell upon the people as upon a flock of profane animals, and cut their throats.” Others endured “terrible torments” before finally meeting their deaths. At least 12,000 died in that massacre (Wars 4.5.3). Then one of the Zealots told the Idumeans that they had been tricked, and that Ananus and the high priests never did plot to betray Jerusalem to the Romans. So the Idumeans regretted their actions, saw “the horrid barbarity of [the Zealots who] had invited them,” and they left Jerusalem (Wars 4.5.5). The Zealots, no longer hindered by the high priests or even the Idumeans, then increased their wickedness:

 

“[T]he zealots grew more insolent, not as deserted by their confederates, but as freed from such men as might hinder their designs, and put some stop to their wickedness. Accordingly they made no longer any delay, nor took any deliberation in their enormous practices, but made use of the shortest methods for all their executions, and what they had once resolved upon, they put in practice sooner than anyone could imagine …” (Wars 4.6.1).

 

In summary, Ananus and Jesus were two former high priests, and the most prominent of the high priests during the Jewish-Roman War. As such, they fit the Old Testament imagery of olive trees and lampstands representing those who stood before the Lord in the service of the temple. Until the time of their deaths, they were immune to the harm that their enemies wanted to inflict upon them. They gave speeches predicting the destruction that would come to Jerusalem because of the Zealots and due to the rejection of their message of peace. Jerusalem experienced a drought during that time.

 

They were killed by the Zealots (and their cohorts, the Idumeans) just as the Zealots gained full control of the city. They were not allowed to be buried, and their enemies rejoiced over their deaths. This happened at the same time as an earthquake and the deaths of 8500 people.

 

Thursday, September 17, 2026

The False Prophet

 



by

Damien F. Mackey

  

 

There they met a Jewish sorcerer and false prophet …”.

 

Acts 13:6

 

 

  

Several times have I noticed biblical critics expressing a certain degree of frustration when a story that they have been keenly following suddenly peters out, leaving a lot of unanswered questions. This was most notably the case for me with Andrew E. Hill, about whose expressed annoyance in this regard I wrote in my article:

 

Frustration arises for critics when a gripping biblical drama can seem to end without any hoped-for resolution

 

(4) Frustration arises for critics when a gripping biblical drama can seem to end without any hoped-for resolution

 

He had embarked upon a thrilling commentary on the devious rôle of the shrewd counsellor, Jonadab, in the 2 Samuel 13 account of the rape of Tamar, only to feel being short-changed in the end.

 

In that article I wrote:

 

Andrew E. Hill had, in the course of his terrific commentary,

“A Jonadab Connection in the Absalom Conspiracy?”,

expressed a certain frustration due to what he called

“the almost annoying paucity of material

for careful analysis” regarding Jonadab.

 

Both of the two instances of biblical stories seeming to fall short due to the apparent lack of follow-up material, to be considered here (there are plenty of others), involve Tamar, the beautiful virginal sister of Absalom, son of David (2 Samuel 13:1-2).

Just when the story surrounding Jonadab, Absalom, Amnon and Tamar (2 Samuel 13:1-39), has begun to get really fascinating, Jonadab, qua Jonadab, disappears abruptly from the scene after making some Machiavellian comments to King David (vv. 32-33, 35) - these suggesting that Jonadab was more of an insider in Absalom’s plot than first thought.

And, secondly, in the same story, we take leave of Tamar in a very miserable state, shattered for having been raped by Amnon (v. 20): “And Tamar lived in her brother Absalom’s house, a desolate woman”.

 

Of course, we would love to know more.

 

And critics like Andrew E. Hill can express their frustration for not knowing more. His brilliant unfolding of the machinations of the shrewd Jonadab must come to an early halt due to the Bible’s failure to continue with the history of Jonadab, qua Jonadab, of whom he writes there is “the almost annoying paucity of material for careful analysis”.

 

We can feel with Andrew Hill, after he has done so clever a job of analysing the character of this Jonadab.

 

And female commentators in particular, full of sympathy for Tamar and her plight, would dearly love to know what became of her.

Did her later life take a turn for the better?

 

Thankfully, the Bible is more accommodating in this regard than one might have imagined. For, as we shall find, the history of Jonadab is carried through, further on in 2 Samuel, right to its bitter end. And, indeed, it is a bitter end.

And we also come to learn much about the incredible life story of Tamar after her horrible years of confinement in the house of Absalom.

 

The fact is that the drama of, now Jonadab, now Tamar, as known from 2 Samuel, is taken up and continued in the same book, or in Kings and Chronicles, in which the two protagonists are re-presented under different names. ….

 

I was able to continue that story right through, so I believe, thanks to my extension of the shrewd counsellor, Jonadab, as the mirror-image shrewd counsellor, Achitophel.

 

David L. Eastman has, for his part, “been harassed by a nagging question” regarding the New Testament figure of Simon Magus.

 

He summarises his “nagging question” in the Abstract of his article:

 

Simon the Composite Sorcerer

 

(5) Simon the Composite Sorcerer

 

“….

Yet over the years of studying the figure of Simon, I have been harassed by a nagging question: where does this narrative Simon come from? The Simon of the Acts of Peter, and certainly the Simon of the combined Peter and Paul martyrdom accounts, seems quite far from the Simon of the Acts of the Apostles”.

 

My own reaction to the brief account of Simon Magus in Acts 8:9-24 has been, considering the significance of the man, once again, to look for his extension elsewhere – this time in the New Testament.

 

Well, that is what David L. Eastman, coming from a different viewpoint, has proposed as a solution to his problem. And he even goes so far as to identify an extension:

 

“In this article I will propose that we understand the literary Simon of late antiquity as a composite character, forged in the fires of reception, refraction and memory primarily from two separate villains in the Acts of the Apostles: Simon himself and the sorcerer who opposes Paul, Elymas/Bar-Jesus”.

This appealed to me because, as in the case of the Old Testament’s Jonadab, suitably extended into Achitophel, we may now have a most suitable extension for Simon Magus of Acts 8 in this Elymas of Acts 13 - two sides of the one coin, I would suggest, rather than David L. Eastman’s composite of two separate entities.

 

He will proceed to draw the appropriate comparisons:

 

….

 

3. The Other Sorcerer

 

After many years of contemplating my questions about the apocryphal Simon, a rather simple solution occurred to me that had for some reason eluded me previously: the magus of the apocryphal acts is not just Simon; he is in some ways a combination of Simon and another magus that had an encounter with an apostle in Acts, namely Elymas or Bar-Jesus.

 

In Acts 13, Paul39 and Barnabas arrive on Cyprus and come to the city of Paphos. This passage is worth quoting in its entirety:

 

When they had gone through the whole island as far as Paphos, they met a certain magician, a Jewish false prophet, named Bar-Jesus. He was with the proconsul, Sergius Paulus, an intelligent man, who summoned Barnabas and Saul and wanted to hear the word of God. But the magician Elymas (for that is the translation of his name) opposed them and tried to turn the proconsul away from the faith. But Saul, also known as Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked intently at him and said, ‘You son of the devil, you enemy of all righteousness, full of all deceit and villainy, will you not stop making crooked the straight paths of the Lord? And now listen– the hand of the Lord is against you, and you will be blind for a while, unable to see the sun.’ Immediately mist and darkness came over him, and he went about groping for someone to lead him by the hand. When the proconsul saw what had happened, he believed, for he was astonished at the teaching about the Lord.40

 

If we return to the general plot progression surrounding the narrative Simon in the apocryphal acts, we see a number of parallels.

(1) Elymas is identified as a ‘a certain magician, a Jewish false prophet’. Like the Simon of the Acts of Peter, Elymas is a ‘sorcerer’ (μάγον). He is also ‘Jewish’ (ουδαον), although at that point he is active on Cyprus. Finally, he is a false prophet (ψϵυδοπροwήτην) who is leading people away from the true message of Christ.41 Like Elymas, Simon uses his sorcery in the apocryphal acts to lure believers away from the teaching of first Paul, then Peter, in the Acts of Peter, and of both apostles in the joint accounts.

(2) Elymas has earned the trust, and is a close confidant of, a prominent member of the Roman government, the proconsul Sergius Paulus. The apocryphal Simon is in some texts closely attached to the emperor Nero.42

(3) Elymas opposes the messengers of Christ, which leads to a meeting in the presence of that leader. In the same way, Simon denounces Peter or Peter and Paul, causing Agrippa or Nero to bring them all together for an in-person confrontation.

(4) Elymas is identified as ‘a son of the devil’ (υἱὲ διαβόλου), just as Simon is accused of doing the work of Satan or the devil. In the Acts of Peter, in Peter’s vision when he is still in Jerusalem, God tells him that Simon is undermining Paul’s preaching ‘by the power of Satan’ (energia Satanae). Similarly, Pseudo-Marcellus tells the reader that Simon ‘was raging in the service of the devil’ (diaboli ministerio bachabatur).43

(5) Paul declares that Elymas is ‘full of all deceit and villainy’, and the apocryphal Simon deceives many by his sorcery and fraudulent so-called miracles, including a faked resurrection that fools Nero.

(6) Elymas is characterised as ‘making crooked the straight paths of the Lord’. This is especially true of Simon in the acts, who goes as far as claiming that he is the Christ. What could be a great perversion than enticing people to follow a false Christ?

(7) Sergius Paulus is ‘astonished’ (κπλησσόμϵνος) and convinced by the words and actions of Paul. Although Nero ultimately kills Peter or Peter and Paul out of vengeance for the death of Simon, the narratives make it clear that the emperors confidence in Simon is severely shaken. In Pseudo-Marcellus’ Passion, Nero is ‘astounded’ (Nero his auditis obstupuit)44 by Paul’s teaching and even concedes that they are beaten by the apostles.

(8) Paul and Barnabas’ encounter with Elymas ends with the punishment of the sorcerer for his wicked ways. By Paul’s word, the Lord moves against Elymas and strikes him blind ‘for a while’.45 Christ also moves against the sorcerer Simon in the apocryphal acts. While the words of Peter and, in some texts, the prayer of Paul play a role in striking down Simon from the sky, Christ is the true actor. In the Acts of Peter, the apostle fears eternal consequences for the deceived believers if Simon is allowed to fly into heaven and asks Christ to intercede: ‘If you permit this man to do what he has set out to do, then now all those who have believed in you will be made to stumble, and the signs and wonders that you gave to them through me will be disbelieved. Hurry, Lord, to demonstrate your grace, and after he has fallen down, let him be manifestly broken to pieces but not die.’46 In the Pseudo-Marcellus Latin Passion, we have already seen that Nero foresees possible divine judgement for Simon: ‘If I am not able to do anything to you, then the God who is able will do it.’47 When the moment of Simon’s attempted flight arrives, Peter cries out to the demons carrying him: ‘I command you through God, the creator of all things, and through Jesus Christ, whom he raised from the dead on the third day, not to carry him any longer but to let him go.’48 In the other Latin Passion (a section that does appear in Pseudo-Hegesippus), Paul tells Peter: ‘Ask the omnipotent God to show his power and thwart the craftiness of the enemy.’ In his prayer, Peter proclaims: ‘I rebuke you, you demons who are carrying him, through God the almighty Father and Jesus Christ his Son. Let go of him right now, and all will say that Christ is the Saviour of this world.’49 Just as with Elymas in Acts 13, the punishment of Simon comes not from the apostles themselves, but from God. 43

This dense cluster of comparisons between Elymas and the apocryphal Simon may lead us to conclude that the literary Simon is rooted more in Elymas than the biblical Simon. Such a conclusion would not be without merit, but I would like to propose a more complex model of development for the figure of Simon.

 

4. The Composite Sorcerer

 

The Simon of the apocryphal acts should be most accurately understood as a composite figure, a sort of pastiche of various traditions, of which Elymas and the Simon of Acts 8 are key components. ….

Nero may be quite irrelevant, anachronistic, to all of this:

 

Nero Caesar can be likened to king Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’, to the emperor Hadrian

 

(10) Nero Caesar can be likened to king Antiochus 'Epiphanes', to the emperor Hadrian

 

Conclusion

 

Simon Magus was the “false prophet” (ψευδοπροφήτην), Elymas.

 

Just as in the case of my identification of the Old Testament’s Jonadab with Achitophel, the names have changed. However, “Elymas” (Elymaean/Median) apparently means broadly the same as Magus (Acts 13:8): “But Elymas the sorcerer (for that is what his name means) …”.


He is a most reviled biblical character.

 

Saint Peter denounces him in strong terms:

 

Acts 8:20-23:

 

Peter answered: ‘May your money perish with you, because you thought you could buy the gift of God with money! You have no part or share in this ministry, because your heart is not right before GodRepent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord in the hope that he may forgive you for having such a thought in your heart. For I see that you are full of bitterness and captive to sin’.

 

Saint Paul even more strongly:

 

Acts 13:9-11:

 

Then Saul, who was also called Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked straight at Elymas and said, ‘You are a child of the devil and an enemy of everything that is right! You are full of all kinds of deceit and trickery. Will you never stop perverting the right ways of the Lord? Now the hand of the Lord is against you. You are going to be blind for a time, not even able to see the light of the sun’.