diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | chapter3.md | 83 |
1 files changed, 51 insertions, 32 deletions
diff --git a/chapter3.md b/chapter3.md index f5ea78f..5d2f11e 100644 --- a/chapter3.md +++ b/chapter3.md @@ -24,21 +24,28 @@ 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 above; and two, that catastrophe is the dominant -effective symbol associated with apocalyptic language. In the next chapter, I -will argue against both of these premises, using the Apocalypse of St John as -a model of apocalyptic language. - -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: +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 against both of these +premises, using the Apocalypse of St John as a model of apocalyptic language. + +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 @@ -89,11 +96,15 @@ 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 @@ -121,9 +132,17 @@ 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 @@ -169,15 +188,15 @@ 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]. +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]. What about the accusations that apocalyptic language is destructive, violent, and vindictive? From the above discussion, it should hopefully be clear that |