Conference: Miscellaneous
 |
Dispensational interpretersoften categorize various prophetic books of the Bible, such as Ezekiel, Daniel,and Revelation, as "apocalyptic literature." By using this category, theseinterpreters simply mean that these books unveil or disclose God's futureprophetic program. Defining apocalyptic literature as biblical material thatunveils is in harmony with the meaning of the Greek word from which"apocalyptic" is derived. This word is apokalypsis and it simply means to unveil ordisclose. However, recent evangelicalinterpreters have begun to vest this term with a new meaning. When they use theterm "apocalyptic literature" they are equating the books of Ezekiel, Daniel,and Revelation with a host of non-canonical, extra biblical writings thatflourished from the intertestamental period and into the second century A.D. Examples include Enoch, Apocalypse of Baruch,Jubilees, Assumption of Moses, Psalms of Solomon, Testament of the TwelvePatriarchs, and Sibylline Oracles. These writings possess a common cluster of attributes.Such attributes include the following: extensive use of symbolism, vision asthe major means of revelation, angelic guides, activity of angels and demons,focus on the end of the current age and the inauguration of the age to come,urgent expectation of the end of earthly conditions in the immediate future,the end as a cosmic catastrophe, new salvation that is paradisal in character,manifestation of the kingdom of God, a mediator with royal functions, dualismwith God and Satan as the leaders, spiritual order determining the flow ofhistory, pessimism about mans' ability to change the course of events,periodization and determinism of human history, other worldly journeys, thecatchword glory, and a final showdown between good and evil (Gregg 10-12;Murphy 130-33). It is argued that Ezekiel,Daniel, and Revelation share many of these characteristics. On this basis,these canonical books are also categorized as apocalyptic literature. The Bookof Revelation in particular is categorized with the apocalyptic writings. Notonly does the Revelation share many features with these extra biblical books,but it also was composed during the same general time period when theapocalyptic writings were composed. There is no doubt that Revelation issimilar to the apocalyptic writings in several respects. However, categorizingRevelation with the apocalyptic writings significantly challenges thetraditional, dispensational interpretation of Revelation. The decision to classify Revelationwith the apocalyptic genre alters the hermeneutical principles that one uses ininterpreting the book. Consequently, numerous hermeneutical doors seem to opento the extent that Revelation's character is viewed as apocalyptic. Forexample, it becomes difficult to approach the text with the same literalapproach that one uses when interpreting other sections of Scripture. Greggcontends that although taking the text literally, unless it yields an absurdresult, is good rule of thumb to follow when dealing with other types ofbiblical material, this approach does not work in the case of apocalypticliterature where literalism is the exception and symbolism is the norm (Gregg11). Apocalyptic writings cannot be interpreted literally because such writingsrepresent crisis literature (Collins 38). In order to highlight the severity ofthe crisis, the apocalyptist spoke in exaggerated terms. Take by way of analogythe statement, "my world has come to an end because my girlfriend has broken upwith me." This statement obviously does not communicate a literal end of theworld. Rather, it is using heightened language in order to communicate thesignificance of a personal event. If John used the same methodology inRevelation, then statements such as half of the world's population beingdestroyed (Rev 6:8; 9:15) and the greatest earthquake in human history (Rev16:18) cannot be construed literally. Rather, they similarly representheightened language communicating a past event that the people of God experienced.Perhaps such an event was oppression by Jerusalem or Rome. UnderstandingRevelation in such hyperbolic terms opens the possibility that the globallanguage may in actuality be descriptive of a localized historical phenomenonthat John has invested with global language. This mindset opens the door tohistoricism and preterism. Moreover,the notion that John used secret codes to disguise the enemies of God's peoplementioned in the book also becomes viable if Revelation is apocalyptic. Attimes, the apocalyptists disguised through symbolic language the entity thatwas oppressing them. The apocalyptic writer sought to give hope to theoppressed people of God by predicting the cataclysmic destruction of the enemythat was persecuting them. However, because of fear of retaliation, theapocalyptist was not free to identify the oppressor. Thus, the message had tobe disguised in symbolic dress (Kallas 70). For example, apocalyptic writingssometimes used Babylon as a code for Rome (Sibylline Oracles V. 143, 159-60, 434). If John was following thispattern, he also does not mean Babylon when he says Babylon. Instead, he isusing the word Babylon as a symbolic disguise to identify an oppressor. Thus,when John mentioned Babylon, he might have had in mind Jerusalem or Rome. Multivalence is anotherhermeneutical door that opens when Revelation is classified as belonging to theapocalyptic category. Becausethe Babylonian crisis furnished the paradigm for perceiving later crises,Jewish apocalypses emphasized repetitious patterns rather than individualhistorical circumstances (Collins 51). If John employs apocalyptic multivalencein Revelation, it is possible that the events of the book cannot be anchored toone event but rather can recur repeatedly throughout history. For example, somemaintain that Babylon not only refers to a future empire but to historicalJerusalem as well. It is also argued that the beast of Revelation 13 referssimultaneously to both Nero as well as a future antichrist (Pate and Haines 42-44). Categorizing Revelation asapocalyptic also influences how one interprets Revelation's numbers. Otherapocalypses typically used numbers to convey concepts rather than count units(Gregg 11-12). Thus, categorizing Revelation as apocalyptic literature movesthe interpreter away from a literal understanding of Revelation's numbers andmore toward a symbolic interpretation. Many conclude that the number 1000mentioned six times in Revelation 20 refers to an extended period of timerather than a literal 1000-year time period. Others show a similar reluctanceof taking the number 144,000 (Rev 7) literally. Still others have questioned aliteral interpretation of the numerical measurements of the eternal citydescribed in Rev 21-22. However, opening these hermeneutical doors on thebasis of categorizing Revelation with the apocalyptic books is unjustified. Acloser scrutiny demonstrates that the differences between Revelation and theapocalyptic works outweigh any similarities between the two (Thomas, EvangelicalHermeneutics, 323-38). Forexample, although apocalyptic literature was typically pseudonymous, Revelationbears the name of its author (Rev 1:1, 4, 9; 22:8). Moreover, Revelation failsto share the pessimism of the apocalyptists who despaired of all human history.Rather, Revelation reflects the optimism of God working redemptively throughthe lamb presently as well as in the future. Furthermore, apocalyptic literature contains no epistolarymaterial. By contrast, seven ecclesiastical epistles are found in Revelation2-3. In addition, non-canonical apocalyptic literaturedid not emphasize moral imperatives. Although there are occasional exceptionsto this rule (1 Enoch 91:19), the apocalyptists are not generally motivated bya strong sense of moral urgency. The reason for this is the apocalyptists'conviction that they were part of the righteous remnant. They saw their role asone of encouraging the remnant to endure, remain faithful, and have hope ratherthan persuade people to turn from known sin (Ehrman 227). By contrast,Revelation utilizes moral imperatives. Humanity's need for repentance is notonly found in Christ's exhortations to the seven churches (Rev 2:5, 16, 21, 22;3:3, 19), but the exhortation to repent is found throughout the book as a whole(Rev 9:20-21; 16:9, 11). Moreover, the coming of messiah in apocalypticliterature is something that takes place exclusively in the future. By contrastRevelation portrays Christ as having already come and laid the groundwork forHis future coming through His redemptive death. Finally, Revelation makesnumerous self-claims to be prophecy (Rev 1:3; 22:7, 10, 18, 19). In fact,Revelation employs the term prophētēs or its cognates eighteen times. Thesedifferences between Revelation and apocalyptic literature are summarized in thefollowing chart (Thomas, Evangelical Hermeneutics, 338).
Additional dissimilarities can be observed. Forexample, apocalyptic literature has a different view of suffering than thatportrayed in Revelation. In apocalyptic writings, suffering is something thatemanates from God opposing forces rather than from God Himself. Theapocalyptists did not see suffering as something good that is to be submittedto. By contrast, in Revelation, suffering comes from the hand of God (Rev 5:5).Therefore, at times, suffering is something good and must be submitted to(Kallas 69-80). Moreover, apocalyptic literature is pseudo-prophecy or vaticiniaex eventu, which means"prophecies after the fact." In other words, apocalyptists typically portray ahistorical event as future prophecy. However, this is not so in Revelationwhere John looks from his own day into the future (Morris 94). In addition,Revelation is dominated by an already not yet tension as John looked to theneeds of his own day as well as the distant future Yet, this same tension isnot evident in other apocalypses (Morris 94). Furthermore,other apocalypses typically use numbers to convey concepts rather than countunits. By contrast, Revelation appears to use many numbers to indicate specificcount units. For example, many futurist scholars believe that various numbersfound in Revelation, such as 1260 days (Rev 12:6) or 42 months (Rev 11:2;13:5), are direct references to the unfulfilled aspects of Daniel's seventyweeks prophecy (Dan 9:24-27). Hoehner's calculations indicate that thefulfilled aspects of this prophecy had the potential of being accurate to theexact day (Hoehner 115-39). Therefore, it stands to reason that the prophecy'sunfulfilled aspects will also be fulfilled to the minutest detail. Thus, thenumbers 1260 days and 42 months should not be taken as merely communicatingconcepts but rather should be interpreted as specific count units. According toThomas, Revelation contains no verifiably symbolic numbers. Rather,non-symbolic utilization of numbers is the norm (Thomas, Revelation 8 to 22, 408). Moreover,Revelation's heavy dependence upon on Ezekiel and Daniel also raises questionsas to whether the book should be categorized as apocalyptic. Ezekiel and Danielprophesied 400 years before apocalyptic literature became dominant in theintertestamental period. Also, Revelation 12:1 borrows imagery from Genesis37:9-10, which took place in the patriarchal era nearly 1800 years beforeapocalypticism began to flourish. Finally, some apocalyptic writings fail topresent a precise eschatological scheme (Collins 56). Yet, many have argued thatRevelation 6-19, with its telescoping and fixed seven-year duration, doescommunicate a fixed eschatological scheme. A chronology of events also seems tobe employed in Revelation 20-22. Insum, although Revelation has many affinities with apocalyptic literature, it isdifficult to classify the book as apocalyptic because these similarities seemoutweighed by the differences between the two. A better classification for thebook is prophecy rather than apocalyptic. This classification best takes into accountRevelation's numerous self claims to be prophecy. It also takes into accountRevelation's similarity to the pattern exhibited by the Old Testament prophetswho not only called God's people to repentance but also comforted them throughvisions of victory to take place in the distant future (Isa 40-66; Ezek 36-48;Amos 9:11-15). Revelation fits this identical pattern by not only repeatedlycalling the seven churches to repentance but also providing these oppressedchurches with a prophecy to be fulfilled in the distant future regarding thebeliever's ultimate triumph (Rev 4-22). Categorizing Revelation as prophetic isalso substantiated upon observing that Revelation alludes to the Book of Danielmore than any other Old Testament book. Yet, Jesus specifically referred toDaniel as a prophet (Matt 24:15). Because Revelation's content relies soheavily upon Daniel, it stands to reason that the material found in Revelationshould also be categorized as prophetic. The existence of the Greek word apokalypsis that appears in the opening verse of the bookdoes not disqualify Revelation from being categorized as prophecy. This wordsimply means unveiling and does not have the meaning that modern scholarsattach to the term "apocalyptic." Thedecision to categorize Revelation as of the prophetic genre rather than theapocalyptic genre significantly changes the hermeneutical landscape. IfRevelation is prophecy, then one interprets Revelation just as he wouldinterpret any other section of prophetic material. The same literal,grammatical, historical method that is used to understand other sections ofprophetic material is also what is needed in order to understand Revelation.Therefore, a new set of hermeneutical principles is not needed to properlyinterpret Revelation (Thomas, Revelation 1-7, 38). The previously described hermeneuticaldoors associated with apocalypticism close to the extent that the genre of thebook is prophetic rather than apocalyptic. Instead, the interpreter is confinedto literalism, which can be defined as attaching to every word the same meaningthat it would have in normal usage. A consistent application ofa literal approach to Revelation logically leads the interpreter away fromviewing the book's contents as being fulfilled in the past and instead leads tothe futurist interpretation (Tenney 139, 142). A relationship exists betweenliteralism and futurism because the ordinary import of Revelation's words andphrases makes it impossible to argue that Revelation's contents have already beenfulfilled. The destruction of half of the world's population (Rev 6:8; 9:15),and the greatest earthquake in human history (Rev 16:18) obviously has nevertaken place. By using the literal approach,the interpreter takes Revelation's content in its ordinary sense until heencounters some obvious clue in the text alerting him to the fact thatfigurative or symbolic language is being employed. How does the interpreterrecognize when figurative or symbolic language is being used? One clue involveslooking for overt textual indicators alerting the interpreter to the use offigurative language. One such situation is found in Rev 11:8, which notes thatJerusalem "is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt." Here, the use of the adverb"spiritually" is designed to alert the reader to the fact that an allegoricalor spiritually application is being made. Another clue involves the use of the word sign (sēmeion). When John uses this word, italerts the interpreter to the fact that he is speaking figuratively orsymbolically rather than literally. For example, because John uses sēmeion to describe the woman inRevelation 12:1, it is obvious that the woman is symbolic or representative ofsomething. Another clue involves the words "like" (homoios) or "as" (hōs). When John employs suchlanguage, he is indicating a correspondence between what he saw in the visionand what he was trying to describe. For example, Revelation 8:8 says, "Andsomething like a great mountain burning with fire was thrown into the sea" Theword "like" alerts the interpreter to the fact that John is simply usingcomparative language to describe what he saw and the mountain is not to be interpretedliterally. Another clue involves anidentical correspondence in the Old Testament. Because the leopard, lion, andbear in Revelation 13:2 are also used in Daniel 7 to depict nations, theinterpreter is alerted to the fact that John is employing symbolic language.Thus, the leopard, lion, and bear also represent nations in Revelation 13 justas they did in Daniel 7. Yet another clue involves an interpretation in theimmediate context. If something is interpreted for the reader, then the thing interpretedis obviously a symbol. The woman in Revelation 17 is obviously a symbol becausethe immediate context interprets her to be a city (17:18). A final clueinvolves looking for absurdity. For example, if the woman in Revelation 12:1were literally clothed with the sun the heat would destroy her. Because aliteral interpretation yields an absurd result, symbolic language must be inuse. After identifying figurative or symboliclanguage, how is such language to be understood? Sometimes the immediate contextinterprets the symbol. For example, the dragon of Revelation 12:3 isinterpreted as Satan in 12:9. Walvoord identifies twenty-six instances in whicha symbol is interpreted in the immediate context (Walvoord 29-30). Anothermethod is to see if the same symbol is employed elsewhere in the Old Testament.For example, the same symbol of the woman used in Revelation 12:1 is also usedin Genesis 37:9-11 to depict Israel. Thus, the woman of Revelation 12 issymbolic of Israel. This strategy is useful because 278 of Revelation's 404verses allude to the Old Testament. A final method for understandingRevelation's symbolic language is to note that John through his use of "like"or "as" is attempting to describe futuristic events that are beyond hislinguistic ability. Thus, he communicates through language of correspondence. Inother words, in order to communicate the contents of his vision, he usessimiles or language of comparison by equating things from his own world to thefuturistic events that he sees in his vision. Inconclusion, probably the most significant decision that the interpreter canmake regarding what hermeneutic he will use in interpreting the Book ofRevelation is determining if Revelation's character has more in common with theprophetic or apocalyptic genre. Viewing Revelation as apocalyptic opensnumerous hermeneutical doors such as code theories, multivalence, symbolicnumbers, and viewing Revelation's global language as local language.Conversely, those who see Revelation as belonging to the prophetic genre arebound by the literal, grammatical, historical method of interpretation, whichtakes Revelation's words or phrases in their ordinary sense unless a convincingtextual clue informs the reader to do other wise. While Revelation has some affinities with apocalypticism,these similarities are overshadowed by vast differences between the two. Thebook has far more in common with prophecy. Thus, the similarities betweenRevelation and apocalypticism are not sufficient to cause the interpreter todispense with a consistent application of literalism when deciphering the book.
BIBLIOGRAPHY ADDIN EN.REFLIST
Collins, John J. The Apocalyptic Imagination:An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature. 2d ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998.
Ehrman, Bart D. The New Testament: AHistorical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings. 2d ed. New York: OUP, 2000.
Gregg, Steve, ed. Revelation: Four Views, AParallel Commentary. Nashville:Thomas Nelson, 1997.
Hoehner, Harold W. Chronological Aspects ofthe life of Christ. GrandRapids: Zondervan, 1977.
Kallas, James. "The Apocalypse-An ApocalypticBook?" Journal of Biblical Literature 86 (1967): 69-80.
Morris, Leon. Apocalyptic. 2d ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980.
Murphy, Frederick J. Early Judaism: The Exileto the Time of Jesus. Peabody,MA: Hendrickson, 2002.
Pate, C. Marvin, and Calvin Haines. DoomsdayDelusions. InterVarsity Press:Downers Grove, Ill, 1995.
Tenney, Merrill C. Interpreting Revelation. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957.
Thomas, Robert L. Revelation 1 to 7: AnExegetical Commentary. Chicago:Moody Press, 1992.
________. Revelation 8 to 22: An ExegeticalCommentary. Chicago: MoodyPress, 1992.
________. Evangelical Hermeneutics: The NewVersus the Old. Grand Rapids:Kregel, 2002.
Walvoord, John F. The Revelation of JesusChrist. Chicago: Moody Press,1966. FOR FURTHER READING
Alexander, Ralph. "Hermeneutics of Old Testament ApocalypticLiterature." Th.D. diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, 1968.
Thomas, Robert L. "A Classical Dispensationalist View ofRevelation." In Four Views on the Book of Revelation, ed. C. Marvin Pate. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998.
Varner, William. "Apocalyptic Literature." In Dictionary ofPremillennial Theology, ed. Mal Couch. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1996. |
