chp3: remove discussion of apocalyptic violence

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 44 deletions

diff --git a/chapter3.md b/chapter3.md
index 5d2f11e..f2ac525 100644
--- a/chapter3.md
+++ b/chapter3.md
@@ -198,50 +198,8 @@ the earth flood in to worship and to receive life and healing. 'It is an ethic
 for martyrdom,' as John J. Collins, a leading scholar on biblical apocalyptic,
 puts it [@apocalyptic-imagination, chp. 9].
 
-What about the accusations that apocalyptic language is destructive, violent,
-and vindictive? From the above discussion, it should hopefully be clear that
-although John's visions are certainly extremely violent, it is not the case that
-John encourages wanton destruction and violence. It is the evil, idolatrous
-powers of the world which have disfigured God's good creation, and so long as
-they refuse to repent of their destruction and violence, they justly bring
-destruction and violence upon themselves.
-
-Many critics insist that it is impossible to apologise for the violence of
-John's Apocalypse. Lorenzo DiTommaso argues that 'apocalypticism is an unhealthy
-worldview, particularly in its biblical form. It is inimical to a mature vision
-of human destiny, or any social order founded on humanistic ideals. It is
-hostile to life on Earth, especially in light of the nature and needs of
-contemporary society' [@apocalyptic-other, p. 236; quoted in
-@apocalyptic-imagination, Epilogue]. David Frankfurter dismisses attempts to
-apologise for the violence of John's Apocalypse as 'canonical special pleading
-for a very problematic text' [@sectarian-rage; quoted in
-@apocalyptic-imagination, Epilogue]. In his review of scholarship on violence in
-the Apocalypse, David Barr admits that 'the Apocalypse shows little concern
-about employing images that are both violent and ethically offensive,' which is
-'especially problematic in a time when many Christians and Muslims regard each
-other as wholly evil, and violent apocalyptic groups have emerged in both
-traditions' [@violence-in-apocalypse].
-
-On the other hand, it is important to read the violence of John's vision in
-the context of the author's social location. As Alan Breck puts it in _Kidnapped_:
-
-> 'Opinion here or opinion there,' said I, 'it's a kennt thing that Christianity
-> forbids revenge.'
->
-> 'Ay,' said he, 'it's well seen it was a Campbell taught ye! It would be a
-> convenient world for them and their sort, if there was no such a thing as a
-> lad and a gun behind a heather bush!' [@kidnapped, chp. 12]
-
-John wrote from the perspective of the poor and oppressed \[QUOTE FIORENZA\],
-exhorting them not to vindictive violence but to resist violent powers and trust
-God to deliver justice. So, while apocalypticism can be used to inspire
-violence, it can also be used, as John uses it, to inspire resistance to
-oppressive regimes.
-
-\[EXAMPLES OF APOCALYPTICISM IN RESISTANCE MOVEMENTS\]
-
-So if John's Apocalypse is not catastrophic, and cannot be reduced to the
-violence and destruction which it features, how does John use apocalyptic
+So if the catastrophism of John's Apocalypse works not for, but against
+fatalism, conservatism, and post-politics, how else does John use apocalyptic
 language to achieve his rhetorical goals? I will focus on three key features:
 revealed knowledge, tribulations, and the end times, as well as the use of
 mythological language throughout each of these.