by
Damien
F. Mackey
“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)”.
Adam Maarschalk
Adam Maarschalk has wonderfully laid the foundations for us to resolve
the intriguing matter of the two witnesses of Revelation 11.
I based my recent article:
Situating
those Two Witnesses of Revelation 11
(3) Situating those Two Witnesses of Revelation 11
on Adam’s work, beginning with: “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”.
Adam’s choice for the two witnesses, following the testimony of Flavius
Josephus (Wars), are the courageous characters below, Ananus and Jesus, who
perfectly fit the terms of Revelation 11 chronologically, and also in various
other most important ways, e.g. their
deaths without burial. Adam has written:
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 them. And 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.
[End of quote]
Without my intending to be specific about the “beast” at this point,
Adam’s argument otherwise would appear to me to be a perfect foundation for the
two witnesses.
On an earlier occasion when considering all of this, I believe that I
wrote briefly to Adam congratulating him on his work. My only query was then,
and would still be now, who are the pair, Ananus and Jesus, in terms of the New
Testament? For I would expect the exalted pair to be biblically identifiable –
the Bible tends to interpret itself.
I wrote to Adam something along such lines.
Well, it is my purpose in this present article to attempt to do just
that, to suggest biblical identifications for Josephus’s Ananus and Jesus.
Ananus and Jesus in biblical terms
The Names
What I would like to propose here is that Ananus was John the Evangelist
and that Jesus was James the Less, two Apostles of the Lord.
Ananus, or Annas, is a name related to John (my emphasis):
Annas
| The amazing name Annas: meaning and etymology
Related
names
•
Via ×—× ×Ÿ (hanan): Ananias, Anna, Baal-hanan, Ben-hanan, Elhanan, Elonbeth-hanan, Hanan, Hananel, Hanani, Hananiah, Hannah, Hannathon, Hannibal, Hanniel, Hanun, Hen, Henadad, Jannai, Jannes, Jehohanan, Joanna, Joanan, Johanan, John, Jonan, Tahan, Tehinnah
Moreover, John “was known to the High Priest” (John 18:16).
Thus, he may have been a Levite.
Jesus had told Peter that John would still be alive when He came back
(21:22): ‘If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to
you? You must follow me’.
This was the Coming in that generation to which Jesus had referred, when
some of the disciples would still be alive (Matthew 16:28).
Now, He was about to return to destroy the unfaithful harlot city of
Jerusalem and all of its environs, and to take up his martyred saints, like
John, to Himself (what is called the Parousia) (Revelation 11:11-12):
But after the three and a half days the breath of life from God
entered them, and they stood on their feet, and terror struck those who
saw them. Then they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, ‘Come
up here’. And they went up to heaven in a cloud, while their enemies
looked on.
Paul had referred to Peter, John and James as “the three pillars
(Galatians 2:9): “… James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars …”. By
now, however, Peter and Paul had been martyred, and so had John’s brother, James,
who could not be the James intended here.
No, this was James the Just (the Less), the holy Patriarch of Jerusalem.
Admittedly, the name of the fellow witness of Ananus, Jesus/Joshua, or
Joses, is not a good fit with the name James. The latter is supposed to have
had a brother with that name, Joses, the pair being relatives of Our Lord (Mark
6:3): “‘Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of
James, Joses, Judas and Simon? Aren’t his sisters here with us?’ And
they took offense at him”.
Possibly the Evangelist Mark may have intended us to read here, “… James
(that is) Joses …”, as we would get in a Hebrew waw-consecutive
construction.
It is possible, again, that Flavius Josephus confused the names. He
would, for instance, according to my view, badly confuse Judas Maccabeus:
Josephus
has four versions of Judas Maccabeus thinking they were all different persons
(2) Josephus has four versions of Judas Maccabeus thinking they were all
different persons
John the Evangelist, who envisioned the Apocalypse (Revelation), may even have
been a key player for half of it, up to Chapter 11. As a leader of the
Christians, like a Bishop, he may have been accepted by them, and by any
peace-loving Jews, as their leader, both spiritual and martial. As Jesus would
have required of him, John would have been a peace-maker, “a prodigious lover of liberty” who “preferred peace above all things”.
Whereas other great Apostles had by now been martyred,
John and James the Just had both survived until the eve of the destruction of
the Temple, until the spiritual return (Coming) of the Lord Jesus Christ.
James the Just
The most complete description of James the Just is found in Saint
Jerome's De Viris Illustribus, which quotes from the fifth book of
Hegesippus' lost Commentaries:
After
the apostles, James the brother of the Lord surnamed the Just was made head of
the Church at Jerusalem. Many indeed are called James. This one was holy from
his mother's womb. He drank neither wine nor strong drink, ate no flesh, never
shaved or anointed himself with ointment or bathed. He alone had the privilege
of entering the Holy of Holies, since indeed he did not use woolen vestments
but linen and went alone into the temple and prayed in behalf of the people,
insomuch that his knees were reputed to have acquired the hardness of camels'
knees.
Although some parts of this passage may not be accurate, it does confirm
the idea that James was called the Just because of his piety and ascetic
lifestyle. James died in 62 AD, apparently as a result of conflicts with the
Jewish authorities in Jerusalem. According to the historian Josephus, a Jewish
council condemned him "on the charge of breaking the law," then had
him executed by stoning. Josephus says that this action was very unpopular with
many of the citizens of Jerusalem, and that many of them viewed it as a
political murder.
