Biblical Theology Bulletin: A Journal of Bible

and Theology
http://btb.sagepub.com

The Synagogue of Satan Accusation in Revelation 2:9

Mark R. J. Bredin
Biblical Theology Bulletin: A Journal of Bible and Theology 1999; 28; 160
DOI: 10.1177/014610799902800405

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://btb.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/28/4/160

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Biblical Theology Bulletin Inc.

Additional services and information for Biblical Theology Bulletin: A Journal of Bible and Theology can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://btb.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://btb.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

Citations http://btb.sagepub.com/cgi/content/refs/28/4/160

Downloaded from http://btb.sagepub.com by on March 24, 2009

 The Synagogue of Satan Accusation
in Revelation 2:9

Mark R. J. Bredin
Abstract

The accusation that the synagogue was a synagogue, not of Judeans but of Satan is connected with an
internal dispute on how one faithful to Israelite traditions should live with the Roman economic system. The
author of Revelation was arguing that there should be no compromise with Rome, and those who did
compromise were not fit to be called Judean. The Synagogue, on the other hand, argued that peaceful
coexistence with Rome was possible. It is suggested that the synagogue accused members of the church in
Smyrna of not being Judean because they refused to pay the special Judean tax that allowed them to practice
their religion unmolested. For the author of Revelation, however, to pay the tax would be an act of apostasy, as
the tax paid for the rebuilding of the Capitoline temple.

he task of this article is to show that the synagogue of

Satan accusation in Revelation 2:9 reflects an internal dis-
pute between two related Judean groups: the synagogue and
church, and that the dispute is connected with how Judeans
should relate to Rome during the reign of Domitian. It is
proposed that the dispute resulted in one group denying the
other group, and vice versa, the honored title of Judean, and
in the church being considered politically suspect before the
Roman administration (Rev 2:10) .
Distinctive to this study is the evidence that reveals
Domitian in a more positive light. As will be seen, and con-
trary to the scholarly consensus, it is argued that Domitian’s
Judean tax reform, reported by Suetonius in his biography of
Domitian 12.2, was not intended as a bad policy, but was
understandable and beneficial to Gentile and Judean churches
estranged from the synagogue.
To persuade the reader of my argument, I must meet
certain criteria: section one is an analysis of Revelation
2:9-10 for hints of a dispute; section two, is an assessment
of the plausibility of such a dispute in this social setting; and
section three is an examination of evidence for an internal
Judean dispute that has similarities with Revelation 2:9-10.
The article concludes with a reconstruction of events un-
derlying Revelation 2:9-10.
that the sender, described in v 8 as &dquo;The First and the Last&dquo;
(referring to Jesus), knows not only of their poverty and
tribulation, but also of the blasphemy uttered by those who
say that they are the true Judeans. It is because of the syna-
gogue’s blasphemy that they are not Judeans, but rather a
synagogue of Satan.
It is possible that the synagogue was arguing that the
church was not Judean, an accusation that elicited a re-
sponse from the author of Revelation to the synagogue that
&dquo;you are not Judeans but a synagogue of Satan.&dquo; This, firstly,
fits the use of the word Satan. The name can suggest &dquo;one
who accuses falsely (Job 1-2, Zech 3). Secondly, it fits with
&dquo;blasphemy,&dquo; which can indicate slander (Matt 12:31;
15:19; Eph 4:31; Col 3:8; 1 Tim 6:4; Jude 9). Sweet argues
for this usage and suggests that underlying the word is a
charge made against the church (85). In sum, it is suggested
that Revelation 2:9 is understandable against the back-
ground of the synagogue arguing that they are Judeans and
that the church is not.
V 10 anticipates the consequences of the blasphemy
made by the synagogue. The church is expected to suffer
and its members thrown into prison by the devil. The devil
is generally thought to represent Rome. Consequently, the
synagogue had reported the blasphemy to Rome, a step that

Dispute Reflected in the Language

of Revelation 2:9-10
The church at Smyrna is described as poor and one
that is experiencing tribulation, yet, because of its tribula-
tion and poverty, is described as rich. The letter informs us
Mark R. J. Bredin, M.Theol. (St. Andrews), is the author of three
articles published by Sheffield Academic Press, Irish Biblical Studies,
and The Friends Quarterly. He is a Distance Learning Tutor in
Theology, and is writing a Ph.D. dissertation on Revelation. He re-
sides at 3 Lindsay Gardens, St. Andrews, Fife, KY 168XB, UK.
KY168XB,

160

Downloaded from http://btb.sagepub.com by on March 24, 2009

engendered the fear of imprisonment. It is supposed by
some that only Rome had the power to incarcerate (Yarbro
Collins: 17). Revelation 12:9 and 20:2 strengthen this con-
nection when the ancient serpent is described as the devil
and Satan. Bauckham suggests they signify the forces of op-
position to God manifested in the contemporary political
power, i.e., Rome (1993: 187). Rome, consequently, be-
comes the beast, the devil, and Satan. &dquo;Synagogue of Satan&dquo;
thus reflects not only a synagogue that accuses falsely, but
also a synagogue in collusion with Rome. Kraybill com-
ments that the use of Satan is &dquo;a way of highlighting com-
mercial or political relationships some Jews had with Rome&dquo;
(170).
In conclusion, the claim of Revelation 2:9 that the syn-
agogue is of Satan can be understood as a response to accu-
sations the synagogue made against the church that it was
not Judean. Moreover, they made such accusations to
Rome, resulting possible punishment. Satan was also re-
in
lated to the beast, an image representing Rome, and so the
church argued that the synagogue was hand in hand with
Rome and, thus, no longer worthy of the name &dquo;Judean.&dquo;
Consequently, Revelation 2:9-10 reflects two groups who
have differing attitudes towards Rome, and those who com-
promise with Rome cannot be considered faithful to the
God of Israel. This suggestion now needs testing against the
social setting.
Social Setting
Smyrna was a prosperous, leading political and reli-
gious city in Asia Minor. Moreover, it was also a faithful ally
of Rome (Caird: 34). The question regarding how Judeans
should live and work in this climate had been tackled long
ago, and varying degrees of compromise and failure to com-
promise are evident. This was also the case for the church
(168). There is evidence in the Second Testament for a
more compromising attitude towards Rome (see Rom 13; 1
Pet 2:13-17; 1 Tim 2:1-2.
A brief assessment of Domitian’s reign and his policies
towards the provinces will facilitate this study. According to
Suetonius, Domitian kept such a tight hold on the city mag-
istrates and provincial governors that the general standard
of honesty and justice rose to an unprecedented high level
(DOMITIAN 8). This fits with Pleket’s observation that ac-
cording to Pliny, after Domitian’s death the provincial gov-
ernors started exhorting money from the provincials (2.11,
12; 3.9; 4.9; 5.20; 6.5, 13; 7.6, 10). Plecket comments that
this could not have happened during Domitian’s reign (301).
Contrary to much scholarship, there is no early evidence to
Downloaded from http://btb.sagepub.com by on March 24, 2009
suggest that Domitian persecuted or church
synagogue
communities. There is much evidence that he was hated by
the senate and ruling classes because he would not tolerate
their laziness and dishonesty (299).
There is, however, one text that may present Domitian
as a tyrant: Suetonius’s reference to Domitian’s Judean tax
policy. Suetonius reports that accusations were made in re-
lation to this tax against those who were either living a Jew-
ish life without professing Judaism, or concealing their Judean
origins in order not to pay the tax (DOMITIAN 12.2). The
Judean tax, according to Josephus, was first imposed by
Vespasian on Judeans, whatever their place of residence,
who had previously paid two drachmae to the temple in Je-
rusalem (WAR 7.218). The implication here is that only
practicing Judeans would be taxed. The tax was established
for the rebuilding of the Capitoline temple, and, according
to Dio Cassius writing 100 years after the events, the amount
was a fee of exemption from imperial cult activities (RO-
MAN HISTORY 66.7.2). Suetonius reports that Domitian
was concerned, in addition to practicing Judeans, to tax two
particular groups: those living a Judean life but who did not
profess it formally, and those who were Judean by origin but
concealed the fact. The proposal of this article is that the
two groups did not see themselves as liable to the tax as they
were not officially practicing synagogue Judeans. since many
within this group were not participating in the imperial cult,
however, accusations were made against them (as reported
by Suetonius). It is plausible that church members would
fall into these categories because they still maintained out-
ward practices associated with being a Judean group. Con-
sequently, Domitian gave the churches their own right to
exemption independently of the synagogue. This is not sur-
prising, as in L. L. Thompson’s words, &dquo;Domitian’s policy of
rigor merely fits with his general administrative principles of
rationality and consistency&dquo; (134). This also coheres with
what is known of Domitian according to Suetonius: i.e., he
is a rigorous and honest administrator. Thus the Judean tax,
as reformed during Domitian’s reign, was quite an under-
standable policy in that an emperor would be expected to
receive something in exchange for allowing a people to fol-
low their religious customs as well as making money for the
treasury. The tax was therefore extended for legitimate rea-
sons to embrace groups who had not previously been envis-
aged in Vespasian’s tax: namely, gentiles who had shown
sympathy with Judaism and those who were circumcised
ethnic Judeans yet did not participate in the cult; in addi-
tion, they did not pay the tax as in many cases they did not
belong to the synagogue and were not officially practicing
Judeans. Many Judean Christians would fit this category.
161
Consequently, Domitian’s reformulation of the Judean tax
legitimated the churches and exempted them from partici-
pation in the cult as long as they paid the tax. Previously,
they had not paid because they were not eligible. In the eyes
of many Gentile and Judean followers of Christ, therefore,
the extension would be welcomed.
The synagogue ... was seen by the
church as being in collusion with
Rome
The more usual understanding is that Domitian estab-
lished a ruthless and unfair system that taxed those who
were not liable. It is argued that the Nerva inscriptiion: fisci
iudaici calumnia sublata (the calumnies of the Judean tax
were removed) reveals Domitian’s policy as ruthless, calumnia
implying &dquo;misrepresentation&dquo; or &dquo;false accusation,&dquo; and that
Domitian’s reforms were removed by Nerva.
It could be argued that the Nerva inscription would
suggest that Domitian’s tax policy had led to abuses and
false accusations and thus prove my argument erroneous.
The tax did give rise to some unfortunate abuses. The two
new groups identified for payment by Suetonius could be in-
terpreted widely by informers from both the synagogue and
gentile groups. M. Goodman has shown that Judean cus-
toms were popular in the first century CE among Gentiles
(41). It is to be expected that Domitian’s policy gave rise to
false accusations against people who really were not consid-
ered Judeans; this was, however, not the intention of the
policy. Today’s laws towards child abuse may serve to illus-
trate the point. Government agencies are rightly concerned
to develop laws to detect any abuses committed against
children, and so relevant government agencies have to in-
vestigate all reported incidences of child abuse and are em-
powered to act even to the extent of placing a child in care.
Even though this can lead to abuses in which false accusa-
tions are made, the parents and guardians must still suffer
the stigma of being accused, and possibly having their child
taken away. Most would agree that this is an abuse of a good
policy.
In sum, the social setting has not deteriorated for the
church because of specific policies introduced by Domitian.
Rather, it has improved if the understanding of the Judean
tax presented here is correct. Moreover, according to Thomp-
son, it is supported by the provincial tradition that portrays
162
Downloaded from http://btb.sagepub.com by on March 24, 2009
Domitian as a benevolent emperor towards synagogue and
church (172).
In spite of the freedom to practice their religion, how-
ever, the church at Smyrna was economically poor in an
economically rich city and was experiencing tribulation. It
is suggested here that the &dquo;tribulation&dquo; is connected with
economic poverty. Scholars are right to point out that the
&dquo;tribulation&dquo; could mean persecution. The letter to Smyrna,
however, indicates that the experience of suffering or perse-
cution was not a present factor. Extreme poverty was, and
the consequences of such poverty, as many economically
poor people know, can be described as a tribulation in
which individuals and groups are divested of power.
The church, therefore, is very poor and powerless, a
view suggested in the first section. The synagogue, in con-
trast, was seen by the church as being in collusion with
Rome, suggesting that the setting was right for a debate on
the correct attitude towards Rome and its policies. Kraybill
points out that during the early Roman imperial era, Judean
merchants reached the far corners of the Roman Empire
selling wine, spices, perfumes, and perhaps textiles (186).
There is evidence that provincial Judeans cooperated closely
with the Roman government in administrative affairs (188).
Rabbinic tradition holds that Johanan ben Zakkai spent
forty years in trade (SIFRE 35 7.14) . M. Tamari comments
that &dquo;Judaism never had any religious or ethical objections
to buying and selling goods for profit&dquo; (65-66). But it can-
not be assumed that all synagogue members were doing well
and all church members were doing badly. As Bauckham
points out, &dquo;Revelation’s first readers, as we know from the
messages to the churches in
seven chapters 2-3, were by no
means all poor and persecuted like the Christians at Smyrna.
Many were affluent, self-satisfied, and compromising ...&dquo;
(1993: 377). It has been observed that there was potential
for improving one’s financial situation, and Asia Minor had
a flourishing economy. Although Oakman concludes from
his observations of the economy during Domitian’s reign
that there was great prosperity, he points out that there was
also an unequal spread in the distribution of this wealth
(213). Petronius’ first-century novel recounts the deeds of
Trimalchio, a slave in Asia Minor who, through wheeling
and dealing becomes a very rich man. Given this situation,
one could conclude that the churches should not compro-
mise in any way with the Roman system. It may be added
that Revelation may also be against the so-called wheeling
and dealing that was needed to make money. It can be seen,
therefore, that the question of wealth gained from involve-
ment with Rome could be an issue in a dispute between syn-
agogue and church.
 It wasthe church’s attitude towards Rome that led to
its poverty. The ability to earn would be considerably re-
duced. A modern illustration may be that of a physics gradu-
ate’s refusing to work in the arms trade and her consequent
poverty possibly leading to association with others in
like-minded groups. Also, Wilson, in his observations of Afri-
can millenarian groups, saw groups arising out of a dissatis-
faction with the current social order. Underlying the groups’
belief system is their longing for the millennium to dawn in
the present. In terms of the church at Smyrna, however,
they had to deal with a delay in God’s establishing his king-
dom on earth. This could result in a sense of doubt or dis-
comfort regarding previously held beliefs. According to
Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance, this sense of
doubt could lead to an intensification of belief, leading in
turn to a group’s refusal to comply, and, possibly, result in
poverty and tribulation. Moreover, as Gager has pointed
out, the intensification of belief could result in increased
missionary activity, thus increasing the sense of group be-
longing and lessening the individual’s sense of discomfort
(37-49). This would lead to even greater separation be-
tween synagogue and church. Goodman points out, in Lieu
et al., that there is much evidence that the early church set
out to convert members of the synagogue and that the syna-
gogue was hostile-or at least ambivalent-to proselytizing
(1992: 70). The desire to proselytize is therefore connected
with an uncompromising attitude to Rome or society as a
whole. This attitude is most clearly seen in Revelation 18, in
which a verbal attack on Rome is made and the evident
manifestations of her rule listed in verses 11-13. Of particu-
lar interest to this discussion regarding the synagogue of Sa-
tan is one group described as compromising with Rome
(Rev 18:15). Philo reports the cessation of Judean business
in the east due to the stirring up of hatred against Judeans.
The result, writes Philo, was that &dquo;those [i.e., Judeans] who
had let money lost what they lent, and no one was permit-
ted, neither farmer, nor captain of a ship, nor merchant, nor
artisan, to employ himself in his usual manner&dquo; (FLACCUS
57). The word for merchant used in Revelation 18 is the
one used for the Judean merchants in Philo. It is not sug-
gested that Revelation has only synagogue merchants in
mind in 18:15; rather, all who compromise with Rome. Still,
the evidence suggests that many, both in the synagogue and
in the church, were among the merchants.
Pliny’s trial of Christians in 112 CE suggests that the
church could be in a vulnerable position before Rome, not
for being Christian, but for being anti-Rome. Downing
points out that there are really no accounts of the trials of
Christians for being Christians before 112 CE and thus the
Downloaded from http://btb.sagepub.com by on March 24, 2009
Judean tax had not resulted in arrests or trials (118). Surely
if Christians were being arrested or put on trial over the last
twenty or so years, Pliny would not have needed to write to
Trajan asking him for advice; he would have found prece-
dents for his situation in the archives. Pliny acknowledges,
moreover, that he is not even sure whether being a Chris-
tian is punishable~nly the crime associated with being a
Christian was to be punished; he writes that &dquo;I am not at all
sure whether it is the name of Christian which is punish-
able, even if innocent of crime, or rather the crimes associ-
ated with the name&dquo; (96). It is proposed here that before
Trajan’s reign being a Christian was not punishable, al-
though anti-social behavior would have been. Law-abiding
Christians would be left in peace, but not troublemakers.
In sum, the situation was right for a dispute between
the synagogue and the church regarding who had the right
to be called a Judean. Moreover, Revelation reveals an atti-
tude that could lead to punishment for being anti-social: for
example, its attitude towards wealth and its desire to stand
firm against the Roman system.
Evidence for an Internal Conflict .
Borgen points out that the Qumran community harshly
criticized other Judeans (282). The Damascus Document il-
lustrates this point:
During all those years Satan shall be unleashed against Is-
rael, as He spoke by the hand of Isaiah ... saying: terror and the
pit and the snare are upon you, 0 inhabitant of the land.... Inter-
preted, these are the three nets of Satan with which Levi son of
Jacob said that he catches Israel by setting them up as three
kinds of righteousness. The first is fornication, the second is
riches, and the third is profanation of the temple [CD 4.14-20].
The three nets, especially the one regarding riches closely
resemble the argument I am making about the synagogue
being rich. An issue involved in this dispute was the perni-
cious nature of wealth which would result in alienation
from God. The instrument of this alienation is Satan. The
Qumran text is suggesting that Israel will be of Satan. It
might also be interesting to consider this text in light of the
view of some Qumran scholars who suggest that the Damas-
cus Document was not intended for the group living at
Qumran but for others who adopted similar beliefs and
practices and yet had not exiled themselves to Qumran.
Their main argument for this is based on the author of CD’s
mention of &dquo;camps&dquo; (7.6), &dquo;the camp&dquo; (10.23), &dquo;the assem-
bly of the towns of Israel&dquo; (12.19), and &dquo;the assembly of the
camps&dquo; (12.23).
163
 Similarly, in 1 QH (The Thanksgiving hymn) 2.22
Bauckham observes that the Qumran community denounced
their fellow Judeans using the phrase &dquo;a gathering of Belial&dquo;
(1994: 124). The word for &dquo;gathering&dquo; could be renderred
synagogue. Belial is used as a proper name for Satan in CD
and the War Scroll. Thus they are a synagogue of Satan.
In sum, there is evidence not only for disputes between
Judean groups, but also that compromise with Satan was
part of the accusation, an accusation that perceived wealth
as an attribute and sign of belonging to Satan.
Conclusion
In the first section, it was concluded that underlying
the language and themes of Revelation 2:9-10 was a dis-
pute regarding who had the right to be called a &dquo;Judean.&dquo; In
the second section, it was concluded that under Domitian’s
reign, the setting was right for a dispute between synagogue
and church on the extent to which a Judean could compro-
mise with Rome. In the third section, it was shown that
such a conflict was not unfamiliar in first-century Judaism.
It would seem that a dispute concerning how a true Judean
should relate to Rome influenced the writing of Revelation
2:9-10.
Therefore, the events underlying Revelation 2:9-10
can be established. The synagogue’s blasphemy that they
were Judeans and not the church is connected with the
church’s uncompromising attitude towards Rome. It would
seem that the synagogue would be concerned to distance it-
self from the church insasmuch as it attached great impor-
tance to maintaining good relations with Rome. Moreover,
the desire of the church to make converts would be threat-
ening to the synagogue, perhaps some synagogue members
were being persuaded that the church was right, especially
the less wealthy of the synagogue community. For the syna-
gogue, Domitian’s policy on the tax was crucial as it gave
the church its own right of exemption from participating in
the imperial cult. A refusal to pay, however, would be seen
as the church’s confession that they were not &dquo;Judean,&dquo; but
troublemakers. Consequently, Domitian’s tax led to the
synagogue’s declaring both to the Roman authorities and to
the church itself that &dquo;they are Judeans.&dquo; Revelation 2:9 is a
response in which John protests that &dquo;they are not, but are a
synagogue of Satan.&dquo; Ultimately it could result in church
members being detained (Rev 2:10) . This would be wel-
164
Downloaded from http://btb.sagepub.com by on March 24, 2009
comed by the synagogue and would make synagogue mem-
bers think twice about joining the church. It helped draw a
distinction, moreover, between synagogue and church in
the eyes of Rome. But from Revelation’s perspective, to pay
the tax would be to participate in the cult and the conse-
quences of Rome’s economic policy, and thus the syna-
gogue would be of Satan and not Judean.
Works Cited
Bauckham, R. 1994. THE THEOLOGY OF THE BOOK OF REVELA-
TION. Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press.
1993. THE CLIMAX OF PROPHECY. Edinburgh, UK: T. & T.
Clark.
Borgen, P. 1996. EARLY CHRISTIANITY AND HELLENISTIC JUDA-
ISM. Edinburgh, UK: T. & T. Clark.
Caird, G. B. 1984. THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN THE DIVINE.
London, UK: A. & C. Black.
Downing, G. 1988. Pliny’s Prosecution of Christians: Revelation and
1 Peter, JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
34: 105-23.
Gager, J. A. 1975. KINGDOM AND COMMUNITY. Englewood, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Goodman, M. 1989. Nerva, The Fiscus Judaicus and Jewish Identity,
JOURNAL OF ROMAN STUDIES 79: 40-44.
Kraybill, J. Nelson. 1996. THE IMPERIAL CULT AND COMMERCE IN
JOHN’S APOCALYPSE. JSNT Supplement Series, 132. Shef-
field, UK: Sheffield Academic Press.
Lieu, J., J. North, and T. Rajak, editors. 1992. THE JEWS AMONG
PAGANS AND CHRISTIANS IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE. London,
UK/New York, NY: Routledge.
Oakman, D. E. 1993. The Ancient Economy and St. John’s Apoocalypse,
LISTENING JOURNAL OF RELIGION AND CULTURE 28/3: 200-14.
Plecket, H. W. 1961. Domitian, the Senate, and the Provinces,
MNEMOSYNE, 4th series, 14: 296-315.
Sweet, J. P. M. 1990. REVELATION. London, UK: SCM Press.
Tamari, M. 1987. WITH ALL YOUR POSSESSIONS: JEWISH ETHICS
AND ECONOMIC LIFE. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Thompson, Leonard L. 1990. THE BOOK OF REVELATION: APOCA-
LYPSE AND EMPIRE. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Wilson, B. R. 1973. MAGIC AND THE MILLENNIUM: A SOCIOLOGI-
CAL STUDY OF PROTEST AMONG TRIBAL AND THIRD-WORLD
PEOPLES. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Yarbro Collins, A. 1979. THE APOCALYPSE. Dublin, Ireland: Veri-
tas Publications.