split chp2 into chp2, chp3

1 files changed, 332 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/chapter3.md b/chapter3.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..03d7720
--- /dev/null
+++ b/chapter3.md
@@ -0,0 +1,332 @@
+## 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:
+
+> 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
+> apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars: and hast borne, and hast
+> patience, and for my name’s sake hast laboured, and hast not fainted.
+> Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first
+> love. Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the
+> first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy
+> candlestick out of his place, except thou repent. (Rev 2:2-5)
+
+What are those trials which the churches might be patiently enduring? John
+doesn't give us the full picture, but there are windows, such as this complaint
+against the church in Pergamum:
+
+> But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold
+> the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the
+> children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit
+> fornication. (Rev 2:14)
+
+In contemporary Greek society, temple sacrifices were important civic events,
+and upstanding citizens were expected to show face and take the meat which had
+been sacrificed. \[CITE SCHOLAR]\ Jews were exempted from eating the meat, but
+as early Christian communities sometimes had difficult relationships with local
+Jewish leaders, they may have struggled to benefit from the Jewish exemption,
+and therefore had to face a serious dilemma in whether or not to eat the meat.
+\[CITE SCHOLAR\] John is not the only New Testament author to grapple with this
+issue. Paul seems to have taken an irenic approach in 1 Cor 8 and Rom 14, while the
+author of the Epistle to the Hebrews suggests a stricter approach in Heb
+13:8-16. The reference to 'fornication' in Rev 2:14 may be a literal reference
+to fornication, but it may also be symbolic, echoing prophets such as Ezekiel
+who used fornication as an image for idol worship. \[CITE SCHOLAR\]
+
+So it seems that John is taking a hardline stance on the issue of eating food
+sacrificed to idols. As Schüssler Fiorenza points out \[CITE\], failing to fully
+participate in the imperial cult could be costly, particularly for rich
+Christians who had the most to benefit from fitting in to mainstream Greek
+society. In this context, it makes sense that John's Jesus has the most praise
+for the poorest churches, such as Smyrna and Philadelphia, and the harshest
+condemnation for the richest, such as Pergamum and Thyatira \[CITE\].
+
+John's stance on food sacrificed to idols also makes sense of the vision of two
+beasts in Rev 13. The second beast instructs people to worship an image of the
+first, and to receive a mark of the beast on their right hand or forehead. If
+they refuse to take the mark, they aren't able to buy or sell. The number of the
+beast is 666. The number 666 is most likely a reference to the emperor Nero
+\[CITE\], and the references to buying and selling suggest the difficulties a
+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:
+
+> 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
+> John's audience. \[…\] It is hard to escape the impression that John believed
+> he was living in the midst of the inauguration of these judgments or put
+> another way in the age when the seals were being unsealed. [@ncbc-rev, p. 131]
+
+What then, of the criticisms of apocalyptic language which followed on the basis
+of its supposed catastrophism, that it is fatalistic, neutralises radicalism,
+and flattens out power relationships?
+
+It is true that most of the events of John's vision unfold without much input
+from the saints. The saints aren't able to stop the seven seals from being
+unsealed, or the seven trumpets from being blown, or the seven goldens bowls of
+God's wrath from being poured out. The saints have no part in the fall of
+Babylon, and when Satan besieges them, they do not fight him in battle, but
+Satan and his army is overthrown by fire from heaven.
+
+However, it would be wrong to accuse St John of fatalism, and worse still to
+accuse him of neutralising radicalism and flattening out power relationships. At
+the core of his message is an exhortation to endure. John's promise is that
+those who endure will participate in God's final fulfilment of the creation. But
+what must be endured is a result of human powers distorting God's creation. This
+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:
+
+> 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
+> as blood; and the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree
+> casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind. And the heaven
+> departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island
+> were moved out of their places. And the kings of the earth, and the great men,
+> and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every
+> bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of
+> the mountains; and said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us
+> from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the
+> Lamb: for the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?
+
+The sun and moon blocked out, the stars plucked from their place, the heavens
+erased, the land disfigured: the key symbols of God's creation in Gen 1 are
+being robbed of their ability to support life. Chester also notes that in
+ancient cultures, all these events would have been interpreted as portentous
+omens, explaining why the people of the earth all hide, knowing that the day of
+the Lamb's wrath is come.
+
+But, as Chester shows, this disfigurement of the creation is not random. Rev 6
+(and a similar vision in Rev 8) shows that the astral powers which were
+worshipped by mainstream Greek society are 'under divine control, and not at the
+service of emperors.' Rev 9:1-11 suggests that the supposedly great god of
+healing, Apollo, is a master only of tormenting locusts, and is anyway a mere
+servant of God's angel. The woman in Rev 12 is presented as having dominion over
+the sun, moon, and stars, and thus being superior to Artemis and Isis. Jesus
+himself appears with the brightness of the sun and the stars in his hand in Rev
+1, suggesting that he is in control of all the gods worshipped by Greeks.
+[@chaos-new-creation, p. 344] The big idea: Jesus, the Son of Yahweh, the
+creator-God, is Lord, and when people reject him and his life-giving creative
+power, they tragically bring death and destruction on themselves and the world.
+
+> The whole earth, and the seas, already corrupted, polluted, and distorted by
+> human wickedness and exploitation, now have divine destruction, desolation
+> and despoliation brought on them in a dreadful manner. The scenario thus
+> created, repeatedly, is one of utter chaos, with the earth torn apart and made
+> into a twisted and terrible mess. It is a dystopian vision of the world as it
+> might become – as indeed it inevitably will be if the consequences of human
+> wickedness simply take their course. Hence if life is to continue, and be
+> sustainable, there has to be radical newness. So also the heavens, corrupted
+> in order to serve the ruthless and idolatrous ambitions of the great and
+> 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
+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.
+
+One is the use of revealed knowledge. For biblical scholars, this, along with a
+concern with the end times, is a key feature of ancient apocalyptic literature
+[@semeia-14-intro]. The book is framed as an epistle – likely a traditional form
+for Christians by the time John was writing, following the Pauline models – and
+is also presented as prophecy, which was a common feature of early Christian
+life [see e.g. @apocalyptic-imagination, chp. 9]. But within those framings,
+John recounts a vision. At first, he sees Jesus, who dictates an address to the
+seven churches in Asia, and after this, an angel shows him a series of visions
+of 'things which must be hereafter' (Rev 4:1). Visions are not a necessary
+component of early Christian prophecy, but they do follow the model of works
+such as 1 Enoch, Daniel, 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and numerous other ancient Jewish and
+Christian works, which likewise contain fantastic visions related via a heavenly
+intermediary, and is thus regarded by scholars as a marker of the genre,
+'apocalypse.' [@apocalyptic-imagination, chp. 1].
+
+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].
+
+Early Christian communities led distinctive lives on the basis of exclusive
+sources of knowledge: apostolic authority, prophecy, eyewitness testimony,
+interpretation of tongues, innovative interpretations of ancient Hebrew
+Scriptures. Meanwhile, mainstream Greek society had its own authorities. When
+the two came into conflict, Christians would have found themselves wedged
+between the pull of their community and the overwhelming weight of majority
+epistemic norms. As a result, early Christians would have needed to develop
+defensive strategies if their minority cognition were to survive.
+
+By adopting the form of an apocalyptic prophecy, and, no less, an apocalypse of
+Jesus Christ, John claims authority beyond any mainstream Greek
+authority. In the course of his apocalypse, he also subtly undermines majority
+epistemology. As already explored, he mocks top Greek gods such as Apollo and
+Artemis. He also highlights the material benefits on offer for the rich to
+collude with Babylon (Rev 18), and highlights the power of Satan to 'deceive'
+the nations (Rev 20:7). The cognitive majority might want to dismiss John as a
+crackpot. But John can defend himself: they have an interest in lies, their gods
+are lies, and they listen to the Devil's lies.
+
+Thus, the apocalyptic motif of revealed knowledge helps John's rhetoric to
+convince his audience.
+
+A second apocalyptic motif in John's Apocalypse is the theme of tribulations.
+Humans, and in particular the saints, experience suffering in John's visions,
+but this suffering is not meaningless: it is a test of endurance. Those who
+endure, triumph. A crucial part of how this works is what Thompson calls
+'nesting contexts,' whereby John 'nests' his audiences' local contexts in Asian
+churches inside a bigger, cosmic context \[CITE\]. Their suffering at the hands
+of local elites is part of a wider resistance against an idolatrous imperial
+cult, and that in turn is just the human face of an eschatological battle
+between Jesus and Satan. John's call for his audience to persevere is made more
+compelling if he can convince his audience that their struggles are part of a
+much bigger fight, and one that, because they're on God's side, they cannot
+lose, even if they suffer death.
+
+Thirdly, like most ancient apocalypses, John's vision explores the end times,
+and this feature also works to strengthen his rhetoric. If the tribulations are
+to be worth enduring, his audience need to know what it's all for. Thus John
+concludes his account of his vision with a utopia in Rev 21-22.
+
+The New Jerusalem descends from heaven (21:2). It has twelve gates, one for each
+tribe of Israel (21:12), signifying that it is a place for all God's people. The
+sun and moon, those gods so cherished by the Greeks, are redundant, as are all
+temples, and the gates will never be shut, because the city is filled with the
+light of God's direct presence, and there is no more night and day (21:23-25).
+The nations and their kings, instead of usurping God's place and distorting
+God's world, bring their glory to God's city (21:24-26). The tree of life, from
+which Adam and Eve were cut off, is open for all to receive healing (22:2).
+Instead of the mark of the beast, God's servants will bear the name of God on
+their foreheads (22:4). Standing in unresolved tension with this total
+redemption, John warns that evildoers will remain outside the city (20:15,
+21:7-8,27, 22:14-15).
+
+Although John's vision is surely mythological, it is not merely fanciful. Given
+John's case, made throughout the book, that God is sovereign but the world is
+currently distorted by evil, it is natural to conclude that eventually, things
+will be transformed, to remove evil and reveal God's perfect plan for his
+creation, as he has promised. John's utopian vision, then, although it may not
+be an accurate prediction of the future, does function as a way of
+mythologically 'naming' the eschaton which God will surely bring about. Rather
+than being left with an abstract theological definition, we have a
+representative picture. Hope in this, John says, and your hope will not be
+disappointed, even if things don't turn out exactly in this way.
+
+Thus, the way John treats the end times gives his audience hope, a sure grasp of
+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.