Apocalypse No

Apocalypse! It's amazing how much ink and energy has been spilled on apocalyptic themes. It's a word that means "unveiling" in the sense of revealing something hidden. From what I've been able to learn the literature that has informed our western conversation about apocalypse has its origins in the 3rd century or so. Apocalyptic writing begins with Jewish texts responding to severe and traumatic suffering brought on by repressive leaders. The Book of Daniel is an early and important example.

In an interesting irony a leader by the name of Antiochus IV wanted to Hellenize the world under his jurisdiction, which included Palestine. Hellenize is another word for "civilize." His love of Greek culture was apparently matched by a cruel and tyrannical streak along the lines of, say, Stalin. When he introduced his proposal to make Greeks out of pious Jews of the time, they said no. That was enough to release his abusive tendencies and the bloodletting began. As an added touch he decided to make an animal sacrifice in the Jewish Temple to Zeus. And, to top things off, he banned the practice of Judaism in Palestine. Add some torture and death and you get the idea. For a people whose faith was rooted in their liberation by God from the tyranny of the Egyptian Pharaoh, this was a major problem. Where was God in the midst of such agony? What would become of them? Could they survive it? Daniel was written to bring comfort and to assure the people that God had not abandoned them and that they would be vindicated, their enemies destroyed, or, as we tend to say, "brought to justice."

Reading Daniel, particularly from chapter 7 forward, is to be immersed in dark and nightmarish images. This is the nature of apocalyptic writing, an expectation of the form. It isn't dissimilar to science fiction in the kinds of images it conjures. In Daniel's case we are given the pretext of prediction, as if it were written during the 6th century Babylonian captivity and could see several hundred years into a 3rd century world. Internal evidence from the text indicates that it was written during the reign of Antiochus IV, around 165 BCE. We are served with a lion, a bear and an empire that is symbolized by metallic images, the better to destroy others with. The author of Daniel is signifying the various empires of that had exercised power over the Jews since the southern kingdom of Judah was conquered in the 6th century. We are taken to the divine throne room in all of its glory and strangeness. The empires of destruction are ephemeral, we learn, and God is in control. Persevere and trust in God. Things will come out alright, despite all appearances.

At the end of the 1st century, during a period of Christian persecution, the author we know as John was exiled on the isle of Patmos. There he wrote down an apocalyptic vision using the images of Daniel and adding a couple of his own. Of course, his context was not the same as it was in 165 BCE. He wrote down his vision around 100 CE/AD. But the feeling of terror and destruction is the same. John recycles the images of Daniel for a new time and place and for the same purpose: to comfort and assure people who were suffering persecution. These texts address fear with the assurance that God will vindicate the righteous. The violence of Daniel is mitigated by the images of the Lamb (Jesus Christ) who seeks the redemption of all nations and not their destruction. But that's another topic in itself with plenty of room for discussion about violence vs. non-violence in the text.

Fast forward to the 1960's and we meet Hal Lindsey, former Campus Crusader for Christ turned best-selling author and peddler of a new apocalyptic text based on Revelation and Daniel. Lindsey doesn't offer a vision but rather an "interpretation" about the modern meaning of the images used in Daniel and John. Dragging the texts from their own geographies and histories he places them in the context of contemporary history. He helpfully decodes them for us. He decided, on the basis of a tradition from the 19th century, that these ancient texts predict the future, a future already part of God's plan and therefore a script for the future of the planet and of humanity. The short version: there will be, at some point in the not so distant future, a "rapture" or moment when believers in Christ on earth will be taken up into the clouds to meet Jesus, who will take then them into heaven to witness the events about to occur on earth. For those who missed the first cut, that is, those who are "left behind," they will have to endure years of suffering and violence, the appearance of the feared Anti-Christ (on the QT, he is both male and a Democrat who believes in world government) and a final battle at Armageddon in the Middle East. If you are working for world peace, or even peace in the limited terrain of Palestine and Israel, you are wasting your time, according to Lindsey. God intends to battle it out there with the devil. You may assume here that God is not a pacifist. The enemies of God will be destroyed and the righteous, those who believe in Christ, will finally be joined with God and Christ for eternity in heaven. In this scenario earth doesn't fare so well and is, well, left behind.

You can call this a "pop culture apocalypse" because that is what it has become. It continues to be a religious side show that parodies itself with book after book and sermon after sermon spreading chicken-little words of wisdom and taking it to the bank. If it has anything to do with the texts it purports to "interpret" it is hard to find. Any reasonable reading of the ancient texts will not lead to the absurd conclusions of Lindsey and company. Texts intended to comfort become, in their hands, something akin to slasher movies with everyone in fear for their lives. The loving Christ of the scriptures is strangely absent. Their Christ is a warrior and out to get his enemies, though he still loves his friends. The Risen Christ who says, repeatedly, "Do not fear," now says, "Have fear. I am here." The enemies list includes Muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs, unrepentant Jews, workers for world peace, secular humanists and liberals in general. Absurd is the right word to describe this contemporary apocalyptic worldview.

The question it raises for me is the way it teaches millions of people that being concerned about this world is a waste of energy. This, they seem to say, is a dying enterprise. Heaven is the goal, to be with Jesus. We have inherited this worldview and have heard it in songs like "This world is not my home, I'm just passing through" and "In the Sweet Bye and Bye." It encourages people to turn their gaze away from our problems, away from possible solutions and away from the hard work of caring for this world and its people. It places God firmly in heaven, where God wants us to be. It is fundamentally anti-ethical. It ignores science and grounded rational thinking. It puts people in ethical retreat. Further, it advocates, as part of the divine plan for our future, for the special treatment of Israel over the claims for justice by the Palestinian people, whose suffering God does not hear. It casts a cynical glance at those who work for peace in that region, believing that God has predetermined their failure. Pitiful are the peacemakers, they are inclined to say, who are possibly in league with the devil himself. They trade a fantasy, a created fiction for the real world that needs compassionate human hands to steward and preserve it.

Apocalyptic thinking is not the province of Christians only. Doomsayers in general tend towards the apocalyptic. Ecological, financial or cultural doomsayers are similar and all traffic in some manner in fear and despair, or retreat into a world of their own devising. Apocalyptic thinking saps us of energy and makes us ineffective in solving the problems we face. For that reason I am inclined to reject the apocalyptic project entirely. I surprise myself with that conclusion because I haven't until recently really looked at these texts and the consequences of their thought. I have read them as somehow essential to Christian belief and essential to a Christian understanding of history. It's in the creed: Christ will come again to judge the living and the dead.

I think we should say, paraphrasing the film, "Apocalypse No!" This thinking has had its time in history and in religion. If as a culture we continue to latch onto this kind of thinking, we will not get serious about the problems we face together. It doesn't matter whether it's the Christian version or the Mayan version or the latest words from Nostradamus. It's escapist and ethically and rationally bankrupt. I think it needs to be rejected out of hand for our contemporary situation.

Having said that I think there is a place for the creed's affirmation of Christ coming again to judge the living and the dead. But that doesn't have to unpack as an apocalyptic narrative. Apocalypse simply means unveiling. It exposes the truth of what is and affirms God's ultimate vindication and therefore our vindication. The apocalyptic authors have at least indirect roots in the prophets, who also unveiled the truths others would keep hidden. But once the unveiling takes place, the work begins to heal and transform. This is the heart of Christ's work, if we are using a positive and theologically responsible Christology. Judgment can be understood, not as a violent response to sin, but as a moment of truth in which the sinner/transgressor is confronted with the truth about themselves and their actions and consequences of their actions, but is then forgiven, redeemed and reconciled. It is the tears of confession and the true beginning of new life. there is plenty that needs unveiling in our world, including our own contributions to its problems. A little judgment is needed in order to move forward.

Instead of Christ coming in the clouds to take us away, Christ is with us to empower and move us towards loving service in the world. The prayer remains: "Your kingdom come, on earth, as in heaven." Earth is to be a reflection of heaven. We are the ones who have wanted to escape to the sky beyond. We are called, though, to the earth here and now. That is ultimately the call of all religions, when not distorted to become pious escape routes or fire insurance security. I think that is hard, given what we face. I think it means looking to science and rational thinking more than to Daniel and Revelation for answers to our problems. They carry messages of hope and work on us as poetry works on us, in the interior life where good things, new things begin. But to solve our problems, the problems of climate change and global warming, population exploding at 7 billion and counting, violence as an accepted means to solve political disputes, racism that continues to find new forms of expression and so many other issues, we are going to have to do some unveiling. We will need to study, discuss, vote and look for solutions in the real world. Otherwise we will fritter away our intelligence and moral capacity on escapist thinking and entertainment.

Apocalypse No. Collective problem solving and ethical action for the transformation of the world, yes.