100 Iwan M. Whiteley Hays wrote a useful work on the relationship between Paul’s writings and the OT.36 His starting point is that Paul’s words are in referential relationship with the OT. Consequently, he is sensitive to the OT antecedent contexts in his interpretation of Paul’s words. His work provides a responsible methodology for the analysis of texts that refer to earlier works. However, his terminology is problematic, he acknowledges that he does not use “intertextuality” in the same way as Kristeva37 and so adopts words/phrases like “echo”, “intertextual reference” or “intertextual echo”38 according to his own definitions. Although Hays’ form of exegesis is an example to follow, yet it appears that commentators of Revelation have focused upon following his terminology, rather than his hermeneutic. The result is that the exact relationship between Revelation and its antecedent texts is unclear. While one occasionally reads the word “echo” in the context of Revelation studies, the most common term to refer to the relationship between the book and its antecedent is “allusion”. The difficulty with this term is that it focuses on the form rather than the function of a unit of text. Paulien is aware that the term “allusion” is ambiguous and may not imply the intentional formation of a relationship between two texts on the part of the author. Therefore, he suggests the term “direct allusion”39. The reason that this area of terminology is so confusing in the Revelation field is because there is a lack of consensus regarding the exact relationship between the book and its antecedent texts. Stagg states that John “...freely borrows words, phrases, and imagery from the Old Testament; but he uses them creatively, turning them into new formulations”40. Therefore, he deduces that Revelation cannot be understood by ascertaining the purpose of the OT text, while he acknowledges that there is value in understanding the source of the allusion. Moyise, following Julia Kristeva,41 argues that when an author alludes to a text, a relationship is established between both contexts. The reader has a responsibility to have both contexts in mind while reading and this creates tension. He says, “By incorporating the words and 36 R. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (London 1989). 37 Hays, Echoes, 15. 38 These words appear right through his work. 39 J. Paulien, “Elusive Allusions: The Problematic Use of the Old Testament in Revela- tion”, BR 33 (1988) 40. 40 F. Stagg, “Interpreting the Book of Revelation”, RevExp 72 (1975) 333; also Hen- driksen, More than, 42; Beckwith, The Apocalypse, 174; J. Michaels, “Old Testament in Revelation”, Dictionary of the Later New Testament & its Developments (eds. R. Martin and P. Davids) (Leicester 1997) 853. 41 Kristeva, Word, Dialogue.