Floyd O. Parker, «‘Our Lord and God’ in Rev 4,11: Evidence for the Late Date of Revelation?», Vol. 82 (2001) 207-231

This article challenges a commonly-held belief that the title ‘our Lord and God’ (Rev 4,11) served as a Christian counter-blast to the claim of the emperor Domitian to be dominus et deus noster. Despite the claims of several scholars that the title ‘our Lord and God’ does not appear in the OT, the data collected favors the view that the title in Rev 4,11 does indeed have its origin in the divine title ‘Lord and God’ found in the LXX and other Jewish sources. Consequently, the title is of no use in helping to determine the date of the book of Revelation.

These details, coupled with some of the ‘greater arguments’ for the late date (e.g. Irenaeus’ mention of Revelation’s composition in the time of Domitian and Domitian’s reputation as persecutor of Christians) constitute an impressive case. This paper will investigate each of these claims in order to determine whether the title in Rev 4,11 is a counter-claim to Domitian’s title and can therefore serve as a tool for determining the date of the book.

1. Usage of ‘Our Lord and God’ by Domitian

        Four ancient authors record that the title ‘lord and god’ was used when addressing the emperor Domitian: Martial (Epig. 5.8.1; 7.34.8; 9.66.3), Suetonius (Dom. 13.2), Dio Cassius (67.4.7; 67.13.4), and Dio Chrysostom (Or. 45.1). Both Suetonius and Dio Cassius noted Domitian’s insistence on being called ‘our lord and god’. Suetonius writes:

With no less arrogance he began as follows in issuing a circular letter in the name of his procurators, "Our Master and our God [dominus et deus noster] bids that this be done". And so the custom arose of henceforth addressing him in no other way even in writing or in conversation (Suetonius, Dom. 13.2)⁵.

        Dio Cassius writes, ‘for he even insisted upon being regarded as a god and took vast pride in being called ‘master’ and ‘god’ (kai_ despo/thj kalou/menoj kai_ qeo_j u(perhga/lleto). These titles were used not merely in speech but also in written documents’ (67.4.7)⁶. Other passages simply record examples of subjects addressing him by this combined title. Dio Chrysostom records that Greeks and barbarians addressed Domitian as despo/thj kai_ qeo/j (Or. 45.1), while Dio Cassius tells of how Juventius Celsus, condemned for taking part in a conspiracy, saved his own life by addressing the emperor as both ‘lord’ and ‘god’ (despo/thn te kai_ qeo/n), terms that many others had already used (67.13.4). Martial himself addressed Domitian as noster ... dominoque deoque (Epig. 9.66) and domini deique noster (Epig. 5.8; 7.34). Writers from a later period claim that Domitian had gone so far as to order this use of the title (Aurelius Victor, De Caes.11.2; Epist. de Caes.11.6; Eutropius 7.23; Orosius, 7.10).