Apocalyptic

Apocalyptic thought and writing was prevalent in Second Temple Judaism, most frequently presented in the form of visions and dreams with cryptic and symbolic language. Daniel 7-12 and Revelation offer the best biblical examples of apocalyptic, however apocalyptic influence is also evident in Isaiah 24-27, Ezekiel 38-39, Joel 2:28-3:21, and Zechariah 1-6 and 9-14. Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21 and 1 Thessalonians 4:16 also include a cluster of eschatological ideas seen in Jewish apocalyptic. Contemporary Jewish writings such as 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch and 1 Enoch exemplify this genre.

The first word of John’s Revelation (apokalupsis from apokalupto, meaning “to disclose” or “to unveil”) provided the traditional name for John’s book: The Apocalypse. Similar biblical and non-biblical writings have become known as “apocalyptic literature.” A widely endorsed definition of apocalypses comes from John Collins:

“Apocalypse” is a genre of revelatory literature with a narrative framework in which a revelation is mediated by an other worldly being to a human recipient, disclosing a transcendent reality which is both temporal insofar as it envisages eschatological salvation, and spatial insofar as it involves another, supernatural world.[1]

The nature of apocalyptic as divine disclosure of what is destined to take place sets it apart from other biblical genres. It has gained popular and scholarly fascination, often perverted by exegesis based on “scissors-and-paste patchworks of garments of biblical texts.”[2] The potential dangers of such abuse and a literal reading of apocalyptic literature have caused uneasiness, especially about the book of Revelation. Many scholars are devoted to clarifying obscure points in Daniel and Revelation and to studying them in connection with extra-biblical works that appear to belong to the same literary category.

As Minear cautions, failure to penetrate perspectives of apocalyptic prophecy will “guarantee that the churches misunderstand their mandate and mission.”[3]Below I offer a brief survey of the historical background and key features of apocalyptic literature, followed by principles of interpretation to avoid such catastrophe.

Historical Background of Apocalypticism
Following the national crisis of the Babylonian exile in the sixth century B.C. many Jews returned to resettle in Palestine. They prospered semi-independently for approximately three centuries. The second century B.C. brought political and religious oppression, which the Jews met with fierce resistance under the leadership of Maccabees. It was this phase of collective suffering under a dominant world power that led to the composition of numerous apocalypses. Later, when Christians found themselves in a similar position of being the persecuted minority within the Roman Empire, they resorted to the apocalyptic genre drawing from existent Jewish apocalypses and developing new works of the same type.

The apocalypses, written over a period of four centuries (approximately 200 B.C. - A.D. 200), are as varied in form and content as the authors who wrote them, and the changing times during which they were written. Yet there are some reoccurring traits that are worth noting.

Key Features of Apocalyptic Literature
Written during times of political oppression and religious persecution, apocalyptic sought “to convince the suffering faithful that their seemingly hopeless plight was only one phase in the cosmic battle between good and evil; that while evil had the upper hand during their lifetime, it would be decisively conquered by supernatural intervention at the end of the age.”[4]

Temporal dualism of two ages features, this age and the one to come; and a day of judgement divides the two ages. During this age people are divided into two groups, the wise and the wicked. A radical discontinuity is also found between this world and the next. This age is conceived as being under the reign of Satan and his human accomplices. Angels and demons are introduced to explain historical and eschatological conditions. The expectation of a new mediator with royal functions (Messiah) is introduced; in many but not all apocalyptic scenarios. An eschatological political or spiritual antagonist is also portrayed. God is believed to intervene cataclysmically to win the battle against Satan to establish his reign; judging all people and banishing evil. God saves the righteous and restores creation. Despite recognition of Satan’s power, there is not doubt that he is subordinate to God.

Prophecy vs. Apocalyptic
For many scholars, “the announcement of an impending end time is a sole and sufficient definition of apocalyptic thought, a definition that makes apocalyptic thought wholly different from prophetic.”[5] Though the line between prophecy and apocalyptic is still often blurred, the following highlights features that set them apart.[6]

Prophecy
-Repentance from sin
-God’s displeasure with his evil people
-Call for God’s people to repent
-Divine intervention by natural or human means
-Direct speech by God
-Prediction of imminent, future events

Apocalyptic
-Sin too great, destruction inevitable
-People’s displeasure with evil, desire for God’s intervention
-Call for a faithful remnant to persevere
-Direct divine intervention by supernatural means
-Mysterious symbolic, indirect speech by intermediary
-Prediction of cosmic, final solutions

The Book of Revelation
Morris offers eight key differences between Revelation and typical apocalypses. In his words they are: regular references to the book as prophecy; typically prophetic warnings and calls repentance; lack of pseudonymity; an optimistic worldview; no retracing of past history in the guise of prophecy; realized eschatology (the end times have begun with the First Coming of Christ); little interpretation by angels; and belief that the Messiah has already come and made atonement.[7]

Principles of Interpretation
Despite the differences mentioned above between Revelation and other apocalypses, apocalyptic from both the New and Old Testaments presents similar unique challenges to the interpreter. Minear begins by seeking to answer how readers, often non-charismatic, can do justice to apocalyptic messages given by early charismatic Christian prophets. He offers a fivefold solution stating that interpreters must: believe in the God of the prophets as He who calls and gives specific tasks to individuals; belong to community called into existence and given a distinctive vocation by that same God; be conscious of the conflicts which vocation brings ? conflicts within the prophets themselves, and within communities and their neighbours; become highly sensitive to the extent which these conflicts result from warfare between God and hostile heavenly forces; and become acutely aware of how these conflicts are linked to the beginning and end of God’s purpose for His people and His creation as a whole.

The following principles help readers meet the challenge of interpretation.
1. Seek the author’s and the Holy Spirit’s original intent. Fee expands on this principle in regards to Revelation saying “the primary meaning of Revelation is what John intended it to mean, which in turn must also have been something his readers could have understood it to mean.”[8]
2. Simply try to grasp as much as possible from the text, rather than trying to understand everything it says. Be encouraged that even Daniel found apocalyptic visions difficult to understand at times (Dan 8:27; 12:8).
3. Take symbolism and numbers seriously but not literally. Consult a Bible dictionary, encyclopaedia, and commentary regarding biblical symbols and numbers to understand their significance.
4. By reading Old Testament apocalyptic in connection with New Testament apocalyptic the latter will indicate “the fulfilment of the former prophecies or will supplement their predictions.”[9]
5. Take into account the prophet’s pastoral concern for his audience. The roots of apocalyptic lie in a crisis of Israel’s faith and the necessary encouragement of the suffering saints.
6. Restraint is important when interpreting hapax (instances where a teaching only appears once in the Bible).
7. Apocalypses seldom intend to give a detailed chronological account of the future. Rather their concern is that despite present appearances, God is in control of the history and the church, and despite suffering and death the church will be triumphant in Christ who will judge the wicked and save the righteous.
8. Move past details to determine what the text is about as a whole.
9. Derive applications from the text’s main points.
10. The more acquainted the interpreter is with apocalyptic thought and writings, the more comfortable they will feel when dealing with this imaginative literature.

Despite these guidelines, interpretations of apocalyptic continue to diverge greatly. So, it is crucial that readers determine any major theological principles, and avoid getting lost in the details. Interpreters must watch for a variety of doctrinal teaching, not just eschatology. Even in relation to eschatology, we can agree to disagree on many details while still affirming the reality of Christ’s return to judge all humanity. If, based on the lessons of Matthew 24:36 and Acts 1:6-8, we can stop trying to guess whether we are living in the final generation, or how the latest world news fits into the odd apocalyptic verse, we will be able to focus on the grand theological themes that point to God’s love, sovereignty, and justice.

[1] J.J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998):5.
[2] M.A. Inch & C.H. Bullock eds., The Literature and Meaning of Scripture (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981):270.
[3] P.S. Minear, New Testament Apocalyptic (Nashville: Abingdon, 1981):11.
[4] Inch & Bullock eds., The Literature and Meaning of Scripture, 272.
[5] Minear, New Testament Apocalyptic, 49.
[6] Features taken from: Klein, Blomberg & Hubbard, Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, 385. Minear also cites several other differences including the way prophecy “concentrates on the historical realm,” while apocalyptic “deals with a realm beyond history”; prophecy is “basically optimistic with regard to God’s power to redeem the time,” while apocalyptic is “totally pessimistic”; prophecy “confers on people the power to shape their own future”, while apocalyptic is “wholly fatalistic.” New Testament Apocalyptic, 49.
[7] Klein, Blomberg & Hubbard, Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, 445.
[8] G.D. Fee & D. Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003):254.
[9] Klein, Blomberg & Hubbard, Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, 386.