1 Concerning the humiliation and the death of Jesus in the Christian confessions of the NT period, see Longenecker, Richard N., New Wine into Fresh Wineskins: Contextualizing the Early Christian Confessions (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1999) 41–2Google Scholar; cf. 129–30, for the prominence of the theme of Jesus' redemptive death in the book of Revelation.

2 I do not discuss here the arguments for a messianic (or human or astral) figure other than Jesus in Rev 12.5. The Apocalypse is in agreement with the Gospels and other NT writings about the identification of the Messiah, and seems homogeneous in this respect. I also reject as speculative the hypotheses suggesting an allusion to ‘another characteristic’ of Jesus, e.g. Ford, Josephine Massyngberde, Revelation: Introduction, Translation and Commentary (AB 38; New York: Doubleday, 1975) 200–201Google Scholar, who maintains here the possibility of ‘mystical experiences’ enjoyed by the ‘son-warrior’. For a series of fanciful explanations from church history, see Brütsch, Charles, Clarté de l'Apocalypse (Genève: Labor et Fides, 4th ed. 1955) 132 n. 10Google Scholar.

3 Collins, Adela Yarbro, The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation (Missoula, MT: Scholars, 1976) 105Google Scholar. Cf. Charles, R. H., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St John, vol. 1 (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1920) 299–300Google Scholar; Bergmeier, Roland, ‘Altes und Neues zur “Sonnenfrau am Himmel (Apk 12)”: Religionsgeschichtliche und quellenkritische Beobachtungen zu Apk 12.1–17’, ZNW 73 (1982) 97–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Müller, Ulrich B., Die Offenbarung des Johannes (GTB 510; Gütersloh: Gütersloher, 1995) 234–5Google Scholar.

4 Yarbro Collins, Combat Myth, 105–7. For a detailed list and criticism of the typical interpretations concerning the woman figure, see Giesen, Heinz, Die Offenbarung des Johannes (RNT; Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet, 1997) 271–4Google Scholar.

5 Yarbro Collins, Combat Myth, 102–3.

6 Mounce, Robert H., The Book of Revelation (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977) 206Google Scholar. Cf. the detailed analysis of Koch, Michael, Drachenkampf und Sonnenfrau: Zur Funktion des Mythischen in der Johannesapokalypse am Beispiel von Apk 12 (WUNT 2/184; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004) 101–8Google Scholar, about the ‘dynamische Struktur’ of Rev 12.

7 Yarbro Collins, Combat Myth, 59–61.

8 Yarbro Collins, Combat Myth, 101–16; cf. 61.

9 Rev 13 relates the deeds of the allies of the dragon. Ch. 17 contrasts the woman and her seed in ch. 12 with the great prostitute and her offspring. The dénouement of the story takes place only in Rev 20, with the final judgment of the devil.

10 I find the criticism of Pierre Prigent, L'Apocalypse de Saint Jean (CNT 14; Genève: Labor et Fides, rev. and augm. ed. 2000) 297, appropriate. ‘Faute de pouvoir produire le modèle juif supposé, cette explication ne doit être retenue qu'en désespoir de cause, en l'absence de toute autre interprétation plus simple et plus économique’.

11 Beale, Gregory K., The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999) 60–2Google Scholar, citing many more instances from Bauckham, Richard, The Climax of Prophecy: Studies in the Book of Revelation (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1993) 29–37Google Scholar, and augmenting it with his own examples. I adhere to their conclusion: these numerical patterns, according to their great number and to the theological importance of the terms occurring 4, 7, 10, 12 times in all probability are not coincidental.

12 Beale, Revelation, 639. Cf. Boring, M. Eugene, Revelation (Interpretation; Louisville: John Knox, 1989) 158Google Scholar. Without any explication, Witherington, Ben III, Revelation (NCBC; Cambridge: Cambridge University, 2003) 169CrossRefGoogle Scholar, also seems to include the death and the resurrection in the narrative.

13 Feuillet, André, ‘La Messie et sa mère d'après le chapitre XII de l'Apocalypse’, Revue Biblique 66 (1959) 55–86Google Scholar; followed by e.g. Prigent, L'Apocalypse, 297–8; and Richard, Pablo, Apokalypse: Das Buch von Hoffnung und Widerstand (Luzern: Exodus, 1996) 152–3Google Scholar. See the similar explanation of Satake, Akira, Die Offenbarung des Johannes (KEK 16; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2008) 284CrossRefGoogle Scholar: ‘Also versteht er [Johannes] unter der Geburt die himmlische Inthronisation Christi, die im Anschluss an dessen Tod stattfindet’.

14 Jürgen Roloff, Die Offenbarung des Johannes (Zürcher Bibelkommentare NT 18; Zürich: Theologischer Verlag, 1984) 127–8; cf. Witherington, Revelation, 169.

15 E.g. Acts 13.33 (wrongly referred to as 15.33 in Feuillet, ‘Messie’, 63; cf. Prigent, L'Apocalypse, 297) cites indeed the seventh verse from the same psalm as the confirmation of Jesus' relationship with the heavenly Father in the context of his resurrection from the dead.

16 E.g. Rissi, Mathias, Was ist und was geschehen soll danach: Die Zeit- und Geschichtsauffassung der Offenbarung des Johannes (AThANT 46; Zürich: Zwingli, 1965) 44 n. 145Google Scholar; Wilcock, Michael, The Message of Revelation: I Saw Heaven Opened (BST; Leicester: Inter-Varsity, 1975) 118Google Scholar. Cf. Aune, David E., Revelation 6–16 (WBC 52B; Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1998) 689Google Scholar. The solution of Kistemaker, Simon J., New Testament Commentary: Exposition of the Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001) 358Google Scholar, is similar: ‘John mentions two main redemptive facts: he stresses Jesus’ birth on earth that includes his ministry and his ascension into heaven that includes his majestic rule' (Kistemaker's italics).

17 Longenecker, New Wine, 42.

18 Beale, Revelation, 639.

19 The introductory function of the messianic appearance in 14.1–5 is perhaps contrary to most scholars' structural conception. The majority consider both Rev 12.1–15.4 and Rev 15.5–16.21 as coherent units. Although one must accept the coherence of the succession of seven bowls in the latter instance, the addition of Rev 14.6–20 to this section seems rational. While chs. 12–13 present us with the leaders of the enemy, from 14.6 we are informed of the judgment coming upon their people.

20 Aune, Revelation 6–16, 809–10, 814; Roloff, Offenbarung, 148–9; Mounce, Revelation, 270–1; Prigent, L'Apocalypse, 333.

21 Beale, Revelation, 741–2. Cf. Eduard Lohse, Die Offenbarung des Johannes (NTD 11; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1988) 84–5: ‘Dieser Weg aber führt auch in das Kreuz hinein, durch Leiden und Sterben zur Herrlichkeit’.

22 For the arguments against the identification of the blood in 19.13 with that of Jesus, see Beale, Revelation, 958–60; Aune, David E., Revelation 17–22 (WBC 52C; Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1998) 1057Google Scholar; and Prigent, L'Apocalypse, 418–19. The contrary view to these, recognizing the blood of the Lord here is supported by, e.g., Rissi, Mathias, Alpha und Omega: Eine Deutung der Johannesoffenbarung (Basel: Friedrich Reinhardt, 1966) 188–9Google Scholar; Boring, Revelation, 196–7; Wall, Robert W., Revelation (NIBC 18; Peabody: Hendrickson, 1991) 230–1Google Scholar; Giesen, Offenbarung, 422.

23 Beale, G. K. and McDonough, Sean M., ‘Revelation’, Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (ed. Beale, G. K. and Carson, D. A.; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007) 1081–161Google Scholar, here 1085.

24 Longenecker, New Wine, 130. See the similar conclusion in Bauckham, Climax of Prophecy, 184.

25 The degree of scholarly support for the identification of these figures with Christ is very different. Probably the majority of commentators rejects the equation of Christ with the rider of 6.2, and perhaps the majority admits it in relation to the ‘one like a son of man’ in 14.14. The widespread adoption of the latter position is in all probability the result of the similarity of this designation with the name ‘the Son of Man’ used in the Gospels for Jesus. However, the expression is anarthrous here, in opposition to its articular use in the sayings of Jesus preserved in the Gospels. See Aune, Revelation 6–16, 840–2, and Marshall, I. Howard, ‘Son of Man’, Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (ed. Green, Joel B. and McKnight, Scot; Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1992) 775–81Google Scholar.

26 The rider in 19.12 has ‘many diadems’ (διαδήματα πολλά): John uses the same word here as at 12.3 and at 13.1 concerning the dragon and the beast!

27 Cf. Stuckenbruck, Loren T., Angel Veneration and Christology: A Study in Early Judaism and in the Christology of the Apocalypse of John (WUNT 2/70; Tübingen: Mohr, 1995) 232Google Scholar: ‘If several angelological texts in Revelation are reminiscent of motifs found in the opening epiphany, this does not occur at the expense of an emphasis that Christ is superior to God's angels’.

28 Herzer, Jens, ‘Der apokalyptische Reiter und der König der Könige: Ein Beitrag zur Christologie der Johannesapokalypse’, NTS 45 (1999) 230–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar, argues for a possible Christological approach to the rider in Rev 6.2. For other detailed treatments of the figure with different conclusions, see Bachmann, Michael, ‘Noch ein Blick auf den apokalyptischen Reiter (von Apk 6.1–2)’, NTS 44 (1998) 257–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Poirier, John C., ‘The First Rider: A Response to Michael Bachmann’, NTS 45 (1999) 257–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Giesen, Heinz, ‘Im Dienst der Weltherrschaft Gottes und des Lammes: Die vier apokalyptischen Reiter (Offb 6:1–8)’, Studien zur Johannesapokalypse (Stuttgarter Biblische Aufsatzbände 29; Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 2000) 260–85Google Scholar; and Taeger, Jens-W., ‘Hell oder dunkel? Zur neueren Debatte um die Auslegung des ersten apokalyptischen Reiters’, Johanneische Perspektiven: Aufsätze zur Johannesapokalypse und zum johanneischen Kreis 1984–2003 (FRLANT 215; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006) 139–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

29 For arguments defending the messianic identification, see Beale, Revelation, 522–6; and Gundry, Robert H., ‘Angelomorphic Christology in the Book of Revelation’, SBLSP 33 (1994) 662–78Google Scholar, who recognizes Jesus in the angelic beings of Rev 7.2–3; 8.3–5; 18.1–3, 21; 20.1–3; 22.6 as well.

30 See Giesen, Offenbarung, 336–7; Beale, Revelation, 770–2; and Prigent, L'Apocalypse, 347–8 for the reasons in support of the equation with Christ. I agree with Beale that the parallelism in the description of this heavenly being with that of 10.1 is important. However, contrary to him, I think that this link rather weakens the messianic identification. Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration, 240–5, 261–73, and Hoffmann, Matthias Reinhard, The Destroyer and the Lamb: The Relationship between Angelomorphic and Lamb Christology in the Book of Revelation (WUNT 2/203; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005) 30–104Google Scholar, suggest the presence of an ‘angelomorphic Christology’ in this passage.

31 Moreover, the birth of the son of the woman, in front of the dragon, the ancient serpent, perhaps signals the eagerly expected fulfilment of the divine promise in Gen 3.15.

32 See the similar conclusion of Mounce, Revelation, 239: ‘The significant point is that the evil designs of Satan were foiled by the successful completion of Christ's messianic ministry, which culminated in his ascension and exaltation’. Cf. the comment of Beale, Revelation, 639: ‘One purpose for these omissions is to highlight the victory at Christ's resurrection and ascension’.

33 Moreover, the crucifixion of Jesus has cosmic significance even before the incarnation according to Rev 13.8.

34 Kovacs, Judith L., ‘“Now Shall the Ruler of This World Be Driven Out”: Jesus’ Death as Cosmic Battle in John 12:20–36', JBL 114 (1995) 227–47Google Scholar, here 230, states that the following verse in John 14 further strengthens the same point: ‘Verse 31, however, makes clear that Satan is not the most important actor in the drama. In the end, Jesus’ death comes about only because it is the will of the Father…which is willingly accepted by the Son… The ἄρχων is allowed to “come” so that Jesus' love and obedience to the Father may be known'.

35 Erich Tiedtke and Colin Brown, ‘Snatch, Take Away, Rapture: ἁρπάζω’, The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. Vol. 3, Pri–Z (ed. Brown, Colin; Carlisle: Paternoster, 1992) 601–5Google Scholar.

36 Matt 12.29; 13.19; John 10.28–29; Acts 8.39; 23.10 clearly use the same verb in the sense of the forceful termination of a relationship.

37 This juxtaposition is strikingly similar to 12.4–5. In both passages we are informed about the intention of the enemies (17.14 is in the future tense!) and of the failure of their purposes.

38 In the context of the book of Revelation, πολεμέω and particularly πόλεμος mostly refer to the intentions and the activity of God's enemies (e.g. 11.7; 12.17; 13.4, 7; 16.14; 19.19; 20.8).

39 Antoninus King Wai Siew, The War between the Two Beasts and the Two Witnesses: A Chiastic Reading of Revelation 11.1–14.5 (JSNTSup 283; London: T&T Clark, 2005) 166, states: ‘The dragon, as powerful as he is depicted in Rev. 12–13, is only an angel. He meets his match in his encounter with Michael, an angel’. This perspective of the book practically turns the pretentious question asked by the worshippers of the dragon's agent, the beast, in 13.4, into ridicule.

40 For the various forms of the combat myth, see the presentation of Yarbro Collins, Combat Myth, 61–71; Busch, Peter, Der gefallene Drache: Mythenexegese am Beispiel von Apokalypse 12 (TANZ 19; Tübingen: Francke, 1996) 75–85Google Scholar; and Koch, Drachenkampf, 144–50.

41 Morris, Leon, The Book of Revelation: An Introduction and Commentary (Tyndale; Leicester: Inter-Varsity, 2d ed. 1987) 151Google Scholar.

42 The remark of Schreiber, Stefan, ‘Die Sternenfrau und ihre Kinder (Offb 12): Zur Wiederentdeckung eines Mythos’, NTS 53 (2007) 436–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar, is very useful. He urges consideration of both the author's intentions and the probable reception of the first readers (444). It is all the more important that John seems to know the addressees of the book very well, as the ‘letters’ in chs. 2–3 demonstrate his familiarity with the situation of the churches in Asia Minor.

43 Richard, Apokalypse, 152: ‘Möglicherweise kannte der Verfasser der Johannesapokalypse diese Mythen und verwendete sie mit neuer Sinngebung’. See the arguments leading to a similar conclusion in Aune, Revelation 6–16, 670–2.

44 Following the expression used by Witherington, Revelation, 166, it is an ‘antiestablishment mythology’. He continues thus: ‘Christianity reworks its biblical heritage and transforms pagan material in line with its own aim of communicating truth in its cultural context’. Cf. Henten, Jan Willem van: ‘Dragon Myth and Imperial Ideology in Revelation 12–13’, SBLSP 33 (1994) 496–515Google Scholar.

45 Though the pertinence of these versions is dubious: the Ugaritic parallels for the protagonist's death cited by Yarbro Collins, Combat Myth, 61–2, are too distant in time from the composition of the book of Revelation to be relevant here; moreover, both these and the Egyptian texts concerning Osiris' fate (62–63) are quite dissimilar from the storyline in Rev 12.

46 Yarbro Collins, Combat Myth, 245–52 asserts the presence and the central importance of the Apollo cult and the knowledge of the myth relating the birth of the deity in the region. We can find another hint of the polemics against Apollo in Rev 9.11, cf. Aune, Revelation 6–16, 535; Beale, Revelation, 502–4.

47 Schreiber, ‘Sternenfrau’, 446–50, suggests the influence of the Horus and Typhon myth. However, Busch, Der gefallene Drache, 75–81, argues convincingly on the basis of contemporary accounts that the birth of Horus apparently disappeared from this myth before the first century C.E.

48 See van Henten: ‘Dragon Myth’, 505–14; Kalms, Jürgen H., Der Sturz des Gottesfeindes: Traditionsgeschichtliche Studien zu Apokalypse 12 (WMANT 93; Neukirchen–Vluyn: Neukirchener, 2001) 122–6Google Scholar; and Omerzu, Heike, ‘Die Himmelsfrau in Apk 12: Ein polemischer Reflex des römischen Kaiserkults’, Apokalyptik als Herausforderung neutestamentlicher Theologie (ed. Becker, Michael and Öhler, Markus; WUNT 2/214; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006) 167–93 (184–92)Google Scholar.