Two Idolatries

In a 1998 article in VT, Giancarlo Biguzzi argues that John describes two different forms of idolatry in the book of Revelation. The first is the traditional idolatry of idols; the second is the beast idolatry that is the focus of the book.

John “speaks explicitly of that given to idols only in two verses, while, through the septet of the cups, explicit and multiple references are made to the Beast-idolatry and to its image, its mark, the adorers of its statue, its throne and its reign. Further, the seven trumpets, namely the punishments against the first idolatry, have neither antecedents nor consequents, while the septet of the cups is preceded by a section that introduces the protagonists (the Dragon, the two Beasts) and the situation (their idolatry), which occupies three whole chapters (Rev. 12-14). Furthermore, it is followed by a description of the Beast and its accomplices (Rev. 17), and finally by the account of its defeat and its being thrown down into the lake of fire and sulphur (Rev. 19:19-20)” (277-8).

Not only do the two forms of idolatry appear in different parts of the book. They are characterized differently: “The idolatry of the idols is described in conventional and stereotyped terms taken from the OT, sins such as robbery and homicide (9:20-21). But the idolatry of the Beast is depicted by John with an inexhaustible richness of images, formulated by him or creatively remade by re-elaborating biblical prece- dents and extra-biblical myths. John then further qualifies such idolatry and is associated with common crimes and as a satanic emanation, speaking of its blasphemous character and of its parody and rivalry that oppose the reign of God and the Lamb. He goes on to speak of the city in which this idolatry is centred, and of the political and military structures of which it takes advantage; of the propaganda activity and the techniques of persuasion and mystification with which it gains the consensus of the whole world. Finally, he points out the danger it represents to believers in their fidelity to God, and speaks of the bloody, violent persecution unleashed against them.”

Even the vocabulary is different. 9:20 mentions eidola, while in verse 13:14 . . . the reference is to an eikon, with three characteristics that are useful to elucidate. In the first place, while the plural of eidola  speaks of multiplicity and generality, the singular of eikon, on the contrary, speaks of uniqueness. Therefore, the inhabitants of the earth, who are to be considered as geographically dispersed, are led by the second Beast to construct a single image that they are to adore. Somehow we are led to think that they are moving from the vast region they inhabit and are gathering together in the place where the eikon of the Beast is adored. Secondly, while it is never said who is represented by the eidola, it is explicitly stated that the είκών is the idolatrous image of the therion who comes from the sea.”

The beast is the Roman empire, and its worship is at least the imperial cult, perhaps the more general devotion to all things Roman. For John, the threat of political idolatry is real, and quite literally a form of idolatry.

(Giancarlo Biguzzi, “Ephesus, Its Artemision, Its Temple to the Flavian Emperors, and Idolatry in Revelation,” Novum Testamentum 40 (1998): 276-290.)