 |
| God: Slain Lamb or Golem |
This
is the beginning of what might become several posts on the topic of Revelation
since I will be spending some time here over the next couple of months. So I thought I probably needed something of a
preface that explains how I could come to the conclusions I will about various
aspects of the book. I say this
primarily because this is one area of the Bible where I (as do an increasing
number of theologians, Biblical academics and so forth) strongly disagree with the
prominent scholars, pastors and mainline evangelicals on its interpretation. It
is often read as some straight-forward vision of future events without
consideration for its literary genre. So if you are looking for bible codes, blood
moons, or any astrological fortune-telling interpretation, it is not here. If
you are looking for the return of a violent Jesus and/or blood-thirsty vengeful
god, well I’m afraid John subverts all that too. However, if you want to see a
letter with a prophetic critique of church and Roman Empire (and all empires to
come) with an apocalyptic construction, well then stay tuned my friend!
Since I am mostly utilizing Richard Bauckham’s work here I want to
begin with what is his take (amid all the negativity that gets put) on the book.
He says, “The method and conceptuality of the theology of Revelation are
relatively different from the rest of the New Testament, but once they are
appreciated in their own right, Revelation can be seen to be not only as one of
the finest literary works of the New Testament, but also one of the greatest theological
achievements of early Christianity.”[1]
To begin, the literary composition of Revelation actually has three
categories: prophetic, apocalyptic and letter.
Its “prophetic” aspect is actually not normal given that Christian-prophecy
was primarily an oral practice in the New Testament church. Bauckham makes the point that the vision
itself was a private and spontaneous event which was orally reported to the
church after it occurred, even if it happened while they were gathered
together.[2] While John’s Revelation does
depict an oral vision (of critique, judgment and energizing-hope), we cannot
overlook that it was a skilled and sophisticated literary composition that is
more complex than most visions. This would mean that it was an altered
depiction based off of a visionary experience, but do not think that this
falsifies or detracts from its authenticity. Rather, as Bauckham suggests,
after careful reflection on the revelation John could only convey the message of
the vision by creating a literary composition dense with themes, images and
meaning, rather than just retelling the actual vision.[3] This is to say that our average words are
insufficient for the task and cannot bear the weight of what God has revealed
to us in our consciousness, visionary capacity and/or feelings.
Revelation as an “apocalyptic” work, however, carries close ties
with its prophetic elements and is often cited as an apocalyptic-prophecy. John uses a narrative framework common in the
apocalyptic tradition for this revelation in a way that reveals a vision of the
unseen world’s relationship with physical reality. Its generic relationship to other
Jewish apocalypses is seen in how “a narrative framework, in which a revelation
is being mediated by an ‘otherworldly-being’ toward 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” (as J.J. Collins defines it).[4] The point here being that the apocalyptic
imagery that John constructs is how he thought it best to utilize words in a
way that would paint the vision he had: A vision of overwhelming and cosmic
perspective and one that speaks directly into the early church’s world.
While it is often debated as to where specifically apocalyptic-theology
originated, its function, as Gorman says, does seem to consistently work to “sustain
the people of God, especially in times of crisis, particularly evil and
oppression.”[5] This is pertinent as it
reiterates the point that while in one aspect it uses vivid and inflated
imagery to make the vision visible to the church, it simultaneously acts as an
expression of hope for the oppressed and a critique of both the oppressors and dualist
Christians trying to be on both sides of the issue (God and church vs evil and governing-powers).
This leads us to the “letter” aspect of Revelation. It was also a
circular letter addressed to seven churches within Asia who lived under Roman
occupation: Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and
Laodicea. Bauckham suggests that while John would have probably known this
letter would find its way to other churches (to which he offers an indirect
“and this goes for you too”) he blatantly addresses the situations and failures
of each church in the seven messages (Rev. 2:1-3:22).[6]
Thus, John’s introductive acknowledgment of these church’s
situation is set up because John believes (or was told) his vision expresses an
important relation to their situations. Moreover, with a pre-determined
audience, John’s pointed imagery probably wasn’t mysterious in the
first-century minds of his hearers, just as the imagery of something like our
political cartoons isn’t mysterious in our minds. Because of this it will again
require more from us, who are removed from the first-century, while
interpreting.
To conclude here, while this apocalyptic-prophetic-letter is full
of meaning for the church in every time period, it was not written to us, so
prepare to take nothing at face value and interpret everything through another
world’s current events, symbols, contrasts, parallels and cross-references. The barrage of imagery John uses is drawn
from several well established literary traditions, but it is applied to his own
contemporary time. Therefore, the books character is formed by all that is
happening around them which is essential to understanding its meaning.
Consider these ideas to see how this might change interpretation:
1.
The
serpent/dragon (Rev. 12:3-9) can be compared with the serpent in Eden (Gen. 3:14-15)
as both symbolize sources of evil who aim to thwart God’s work (Adam in the Genesis
verses and Jesus in the Revelation verses).
2.
In Rev.
17:8, when the Eastern invaders ally with the last “beast”, which the
serpent/dragon has raised up from the bottomless pit, it is echoing their myth
about Emperor Nero’s future return as head of the Parthian hoards to conquer
Rome (historically the Parthian Empire was a constant threat to the Roman
Empire).[7] Nevertheless, Nero is pointedly rooted in the serpent here.
3.
The
common theme in both of these is that the evil serpent can only raise beasts to
govern and be followed, while God rose up a “slain Lamb” (Messiah) for the
world to follow. The slain Lamb’s followers will be an army that “defeats” by
their testimony (not military action or WMDs, Rev. 12:11) and they will be
known by doing the works Jesus taught rather than what the violent beast demands
of them (Rev. 2:2, 19, 23; 9:20-21; 14:4, 12; 16:11; 19:8; 20:12-13; 22:11).
In essence John establishes
symbols (old and current) to develop the notion that all that is seen is
intrinsically tied to all that is unseen and we need to wake-up to who and what
we are following. Anti-creator will beget Antichrists and Creator begets
Christ; one steals and one heals. So, while I say all this to set up whatever
else I write about Revelation, these genres and themes are something to think
about while setting out to read it for yourself.
[2] Ibid, 3.
[3] Ibid, 10.
[4] J.J. Collins. ‘Introduction: Towards the Morphology of a Genre’, Semeia 14 (1979), 9.
[5] Michael J. Gorman. Reading Revelation Responsibly: Uncivil Worship and Witness: Following the Lamb into the New Creation (Kindle Locations 505-506).
[6] R. Bauckham, 14-15.
[7] Ibid, 19.
No comments:
Post a Comment