Merge branch 'main' of https://git.joeac.net/joeac/msc-dissertation-aug-2026

1 files changed, 104 insertions, 117 deletions

diff --git a/chapter3.md b/chapter3.md
index 094f854..850632a 100644
--- a/chapter3.md
+++ b/chapter3.md
@@ -1,22 +1,63 @@
 ## Chapter 3
 
-In this chapter, I will aim to show that these criticisms would, if they were
-applied to the Apocalypse of St John as it was addressed to its original
-audience, fail to reflect the radical possibilities of that work. Then, in
-chapter 4, I will aim to show that green rhetors even now must make use of those
-radical possibilities of apocalyptic language in order to be politically
-effective, and suggest some ways how they might do that.
-
-The first thing to notice is that, while the first three criticisms enumerated
-above all assume that apocalyptic language is catastrophic, the Apocalypse
-itself is not catastrophic. For St John, there is no impending catastrophe. The
-tribulations have already begun, and are largely in the hands of cosmic forces
-far bigger than his audience. The exhortation is not to avert the bad thing, but
-to endure it.
-
-Rev 2-3 opens John's vision with Jesus' address to seven churches in Asia.
-He exhorts them all to be faithful. For example, to the church in Ephesus, he
-implores:
+In the previous chapter, I explored how contemporary green rhetors use
+catastrophic language, and three reasons why some commentators believe
+that this is counter-productive. Given the close relationship between
+catastrophe and apocalypse in the imaginations of many people in the West, this
+begs the question of whether green rhetors ought also to avoid apocalyptic
+language. Frances Flannery, Professor Emerita of Religion at James Madison
+University, has argued just this.
+
+Flannery emphasises that in popular imagination, 'apocalypse' signifies nothing
+more than the end of the world, ignoring the world-creating aspects of biblical
+apocalypses [@flannery-2024, p. 209]. This may be a legacy of Cold-War era
+nuclear rhetoric and science fiction, which re-purposed the symbol 'apocalypse'
+to describe the consequences of a nuclear war, while deliberately stripping the
+disaster of any redemptive afterward [@wojcik-end-of-the-world, p. 1]. Thus, she
+argues, the result of raising the threat of a 'climate apocalypse' is to 'create
+passivity rather than spur on quick and cooperative climate action' and to inspire
+mass climate anxiety. Such a fatalist narrative can also imply that human action
+is irrelevant, or encourage audiences to put their hope in 'savior figures such
+as inventors, scientists, or governments who might rescue humanity in the nick
+of time.' [@flannery-2024, p. 210]
+
+Flannery's critique would imply that green rhetors ought to avoid apocalyptic
+language. This conclusion rests on two key premises: one, that apocalyptic
+language is catastrophic in the same way which leads to fatalism, conservatism
+and post-politics as described in the previous chapter; and two, that
+catastrophe is the dominant effective symbol associated with apocalyptic
+language.
+
+In what remains of this chapter, I will argue that were these criticisms to be
+levelled against the model of apocalyptic language in the West,
+namely, the Apocalypse of St John, the Apocalypse would resist the force of
+these criticisms. Reading from the perspective of John's original audiences,
+the Apocalypse does not promote fatalism, conservatism or post-politics, but
+works against these responses. Later in the chapter, I'll explore three
+further key apocalyptic features of the Apocalypse which John uses towards
+his rhetorical ends, demonstrating how apocalyptic rhetoric may have worked
+effectively in probably the most influential representative of the genre.
+Then, in chapter 4, I'll extend this argument to the case of contemporary
+green rhetoric, and show how these features of John's ancient rhetoric could
+be reproduced effectively in a contemporary context.
+
+So, what of the criticisms enumerated in the previous chapter, namely, that
+catastrophic language promotes fatalism, conservatism and post-politics? The
+first thing to observe here is that, whereas green rhetors typically position
+the catastrophe as an impending event over which the audience has some measure
+of control, St John, in contrast, discusses tribulations which have already
+begun, and are largely in the hands of cosmic forces far bigger than his
+audience. While John's tribulation discourse surely is catastrophic in some
+respects -- involving a definite period in time where cosmic-scale destruction
+renders former ways of life permanently unsustainable -- his exhortation is not
+to avert the catastrophe, but to endure it. As a result of this very different
+dialectic, John's catastrophism can be against fatalism and promote radical
+politics grounded in an analysis of power relations.
+
+John's alternative catastrophic dialectic is visible from the opening chapters
+of the Apocalypse, which makes explicit John's exhortation to endure. Rev 2-3
+opens John's vision with Jesus' address to seven churches in Asia. He exhorts
+them all to be faithful. For example, to the church in Ephesus, he implores:
 
 > I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not
 > bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are
@@ -67,11 +108,15 @@ rich Christian might have had doing business unless they participated fully in
 the imperial cult \[CITE\].
 
 From this, it seems that the visions John relates are not, or at least not
-merely, about an impending catastrophe, but about events which are already
-unfolding. John's mythological language, among other things, may have functioned
-to situate the local, present contexts of John's audiences within a larger
-cosmic context, covering the whole of both space and time. Thus, as Ben
-Witherington III puts it:
+merely, about an impending catastrophe which he wants his audience to work to
+avoid, but about a catastrophe -- perhaps, as \[SCHOLAR\] suggests, a
+catastrophe only visible as a catastrophe from John's apocalyptic perspective
+-- which is already unfolding, which he wants his audience to endure. Given
+this rhetorical drive, John's mythological language, among other things, may
+have functioned to situate the local, present contexts of John's audiences
+within a larger cosmic context, covering the whole of both space and time,
+helping to motivate his audience to participate in John's self-sacrificial
+ethic. Thus, as Ben Witherington III puts it:
 
 > This material is not _just_ about the future, nor should we have expected it
 > to be since it is narrative forensic rhetoric meant to prepare and exhort
@@ -99,9 +144,17 @@ evil requires a radical subversion of actual power relationships, and John
 conceives of just such a subversion, and calls his audience to participate in
 that event.
 
-Andrew Chester [@chaos-new-creation] has explored this idea in detail, noting,
-for example, that in Rev 6:12-17, God's life-sustaining creative acts of Gen 1
-are threatened with total annihilation:
+St John's rhetoric therefore is against fatalism: he motivates and calls his
+audience to political action. It is against conservatism: he asks his audience
+to subvert dominant power structures and build a radical alternative society
+and value system. It is ardently political: his rhetoric is rooted in a
+analysis of power structures within Greek society, and particularly between the
+rich and poor among Asian Christian churches.
+
+Andrew Chester [@chaos-new-creation] has explored John's radical subversion of
+the dominant Greek value-system in detail, beginning with the observation that
+in Rev 6:12-17, God's life-sustaining creative acts of Gen 1 are threatened
+with total annihilation:
 
 > And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great
 > earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became
@@ -147,60 +200,18 @@ power, they tragically bring death and destruction on themselves and the world.
 > powerful, now hover on the edge of losing completely what distinguishes
 > them – the great lights and source of all life. [@chaos-new-creation, p. 346]
 
-Fatalistic? Conservative? Far from it. The destructive events of John's vision
-are the result of human powers distorting God's creation for their own ends. We
-can be complicit and accept the mark of the beast, or we can resist. Those who
-resist will conquer, but not in the way of God's enemies, who raise up armies to
-fight battles: the saints will conquer through the blood of the Lamb, and win
-pride of place in God's new creation, while the nations of 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
+Fatalistic? Conservative? Post-political? Far from it. The destructive events
+of John's vision are the result of human powers distorting God's creation for
+their own ends. We can be complicit and accept the mark of the beast, or we can
+resist. Those who resist will conquer, but not in the way of God's enemies, who
+raise up armies to fight battles: the saints will conquer through the blood of
+the Lamb, and win pride of place in God's new creation, while the nations of
+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].
+
+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.
@@ -222,9 +233,12 @@ intermediary, and is thus regarded by scholars as a marker of the genre,
 
 Why might John have used this genre? While it is perfectly plausible that John
 had a genuine visionary experience [@visions-in-apocalyptic-handbook, pp.
-115-116], this would still not explain why he chose to publish an account of his
-experience using the apocalyptic genre. One reason may be that John inhabited,
-as Leonard Thompson described it, a 'cognitive minority' [@thompson-revelation].
+115-116], this would still not explain why he chose to publish an account of
+his experience using the apocalyptic genre. If a typical Western middle-class
+person were to have a visionary experience today, they might choose to find a
+more scientifically respectable framing before sharing their insights with
+others. One reason that John used the apocalyptic genre may be that John
+inhabited, as Leonard Thompson described it, a 'cognitive minority' [@thompson-revelation].
 
 Early Christian communities led distinctive lives on the basis of exclusive
 sources of knowledge: apostolic authority, prophecy, eyewitness testimony,
@@ -295,41 +309,14 @@ what it is they are suffering for, and thus encourages them to endure their
 tribulations.
 
 In summary, the apocalyptic form is crucial to the rhetorical force of John's
-Apocalypse. By adopting the form of an apocalyptic prophecy, he defends his
-cognitive minority community from the overwhelming weight of the cognitive
-majority which surrounds them. Through exploring the symbol of tribulations,
-John steels his audience for suffering, and reassures those who are already
-suffering that their troubles are part of a cosmic context. And with his
-treatment of the end times, John inspires his audience with hope that their
-sufferings will not be wasted.
-
-\[TODO: see if next three paras are relevant.\]
-
-John's apocalyptic imagination uses mythological language to reveal the world of
-appearances for what it really is. The ideology of Empire is a pretender God,
-and the suffering of the martyrs is in fact God's way of conquering evil. John
-may have created a crisis for a people that didn't see one, a people that needed
-'waking up'. So, while catastrophism imagines that all humanity approaches the
-catastrophe more or less from the same perspective, and thus works to kill
-politics, John's apocalyptic imagination imagines precisely the opposite: he
-enlivens political criticism and active resistance to dominant structures by
-identifying how people relate unequally to them.
-
-So people today, when they equate apocalypticism with catastrophism, are cutting
-out most of the apocalyptic imagination and distorting its message. This is now
-new. This is a very traditional move which functions to shut down radical
-dissent against dominant structures.
-
-Meanwhile, those who have read the Apocalypse 'from below' tend to emphasise how
-it has a visionary interpretation of the tribulations of this world, and a
-visionary expectation of this world being transformed, and use this vision to
-motivate movements for transformational social change.
-
-The apocalyptic form is therefore not the reason that green rhetoric is failing.
-As explored in chapter 1, green rhetoric is failing because it is failing to
-diagnose the root causes of the problem, present a credible route to a credible
-solution, and address an audience that could be persuaded to make a difference.
-Were rhetors to solve these problems, they could use apocalyptic effectively.
+Apocalypse. The catastrophic aspects of his vision work against, not for,
+fatalism, conservatism, and post-politics. By adopting the form of an
+apocalyptic prophecy, he defends his cognitive minority community from the
+overwhelming weight of the cognitive majority which surrounds them. Through
+exploring the symbol of tribulations, John steels his audience for suffering,
+and reassures those who are already suffering that their troubles are part of a
+cosmic context. And with his treatment of the end times, John inspires his
+audience with hope that their sufferings will not be wasted.
 
 ## TODO