Book Notice: Baker Books on Revelation and Apocalyptic Thought

Baker has a couple of cool books out on Revelation and Apocalyptic thought:

James L Resseguie
The Revelation of John: A Narrative Commentary
Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2009.
Available at Amazon.com.

Resseguie opens with a primer on narrative analysis and examines John's usage of metaphors [my NT101 students might find that useful for their essay], verbal threads, chiasms, inclusios, two-step progressions, and other rhetorical devices like use of numbers, geography, etc. The book proceeds chapter by chapter on Revelation providing a narrative over view and description rather than a verse by verse commentary. He treats John as an organic and unified narrative (e.g., the issues facing the churches in Revelation 2-3 are developed and elaborated in Revelation 13 and 17). Resseguie also focuses on the literary and theological complexities of the text. He comments on Rev 20:4-6, "Throughout the Apocalypse the call to endure, persevere, and hold fast to the faith of Jesus is embedded with narratives of distress (e.g., 13:10; 14:12). Christians have lost their lives because they have held fast to the faith of Jesus (6:10), and from a below point of view the beast appears to be victorious. But from an above point of view God's are vindicated adn the martyrs are victorious. This is the meaning of the millennium" (pp. 245-46). This is a good book and would a good counter-point to a source critical book on Revelation like David Aune's.

Robert J. Daley, SJ (editor)
Apocalyptic Thought in Early Christianity
Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2009.
Available via Amazon.com.

This volume in the Holy Cross Studies in Patristic Theology and History Series, explores how early Christian understandings of apocalyptic writings and teachings are reflected in the theology, social practices and institutions of the early church. The highlight for me wasBernard McGinn's piece on "Turning Points in Early Christian Apocalypse Exegesis" where he notes ambivalence towards the Book of Revelation by many groups (eastern churches thought it flirted with Montanism and Marcionites considered it a Jewish book). A critical turn comes with Hippolytus as his christological and ecclesiological reading of Revelation 12, i.e. he read it about the present and not about the future, became the baseline of "orthodox" readings of the Apocalypse. Brian Daley also thinks that the Apocalypse ceased to be read as "a revelation of unknown things to come [and more as] an affirmation of the victory of Christ and a representation of the life of the church, his body, in its present time of struggle".

Centrum Paulinium and the Mother of Paul's Theology

When people speak of the centrum Paulinium (the centre of Paul's theology), they usually mean the centre of his soteriology: justificaiton by faith, union with Christ, reconciliation, etc. But perhaps the answer lies elsewhere. I'm struck by two "mothers" each claiming to be the maternal progenator of NT Theology. Martin Kahler said that "mission" was the mother of all theology, while Ernst Kasemann said that "apocalyptic" was the mother of all theology. Much like Solomon, how can one identify who the real mother of NT theology. In this case, much like a surrogate pregnancy, I think we have to have two mothers, esp. for Paul.

I think mission is the mother of Pauline theology insofar as Paul's call to go and be the apostle to the Gentiles is the central driving force of his theology. What is more, Paul's theology is done on the mission field (not in a seminary, college, university, or academy) and on the move and he has to literally walk and talk his way through several challenges (relating to pagans and Jews) and many crises (Antioch, Galatia, Corinth, Jerusalem).

Yet apocalypticism is the mother of Pauline theology to the extent that just about everything in the NT is pervaded by eschatology. Now, when Kasemann said "apocalyptic" he meant the shadow of the parousia casting itself upon the present time. But since Paul believed that Christians were the one's upon whom "the end of ages had come" (1 Cor. 10.11) then this eschatological perspective permeates everything. Now all apocalypticism is eschatological, but not all eschatology is apocalyptic. The apocalyptic aspect of his thinking comes through in Galatians, 1 Thessalonians, Romans (and I would even say Colossians). That is defined, chiefly, by a pessimistic view of the current age, a dualism of good/evil and now/then and heaven/earth etc. Paul believed that the God of Israel had radically acted in Jesus to save persons from the current evil age (Gal. 1.4; Rom. 1.17; Col. 1.12; 1 Thess. 1.10 etc.).

Are these the are the two "mothers" of Pauline theology?

I should also say that the centre of Paul's soteriology is a different matter, but with Marshall, Martin, and Stuhlmacher I'd probably say that "reconciliation" is the most elastic and comprehensive description of it. Although something participationistic based on being "in Christ" (and not to discount other metaphors too like sacrifice and justification) is also quite important.

Martyn on Galatians (2) Paul and Apocalpyticism

1. In his Galatians commentary, J.L. Martyn refers to the "Apocalyptic Theology in Galatians," and he mentions to two different tracks of Jewish apocalytpicism: (1) Cosmological apocalyptic eschatology which focuses on how evil anti-God powers have taken over rule of this world leading human beings into idolatry and thus slavery, and God will fight a glorious apocalyptic war against these powers and save his elect from their wicked machinations; and (2) Forensic apocalyptic eschatology where things have gone wrong because human beings have rejected God, thereby bringing corruption, death, and pervsion on the world. Thus, God sets before the people Two Ways: the way of death and the way of life. Human beings must chose one over the other and thus give an account of themselves on the final day. In Martyn's thinking the Galatian intruders held to forensic apocalyptic eschatology and Paul held to cosmological apocalyptic eschatology. The problem I have is: (1) I think we can find evidence of cosmological and forensic apocalyptic eschatology in Paul's letters. (2) I think part of the problem of the Galatian intruders was that they lacked the eschatological framework of Paul and saw the Mosaic/Sinaitic era as continuing on into the era of the Messiah, whereas Paul infers a far more radical and abrupt disjunction between these two eras.

2. To you all you young theological students and Ph.D candidates remember this: don't ever talk about "apocalyptic". The word "apocalyptic" is an adjective not a noun. You can have an apocalyptic worldview (i.e. apocalyptic eschatology), you can have apocalytpicism (i.e. a sociological phenomenon like Waco or the Qumran community), you can have apocalyptic writings (i.e. an apocalypse) - but do not refer to "apocalyptic" as an actual entity in and of itself.

3. Also, for an introduction to Apocalyptic Literature, I imagine Stephen Cook's new volume on the subject will be a worthwhile read.

An Invasive Story: Pauline Theology

Gal. 1.3-4 says: "Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins to rescue us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father" (TNIV).

I am gradually becoming convinced that Paul's theology must be understood as a mixture of salvation-history and apocalypticism. That is to say, that Paul's theology presumes a certain telling of history from Creation to Abraham to Israel to Christ and to the Church. Yet at the same time, in the coming of Jesus Christ there is a staccato burst of God's power that invades human history and this event is singular and discontinuous from all that has gone before. In other words, Paul narrates an invasive story of God's dealings with the world through Jesus Christ. For me, Galatians displays this mix of salvation-history and apocalytpic worldview the most clearly. The epistolary opening (Gal. 1.3-4) make references to Paul's understanding of Christ's work as redeeming believers from an old age and transferring them into the new; at the same time, Paul argues that this perspective is in accordance with Israel's sacred traditions which makes Jesus the promised seed of Abraham and sees the Law as a guardian provided to lead us to Jesus Christ.

I've tentatively begun arguing this in the first chapter of Saving Righteousness of God and hope to pursue it further at some stage. In the late 1970s there was a big debate between Krister Stendahl and Ernst Kasemann about savlation-history and apocalypticism concerning Paul and I think the answer lies somewhere between them. This semester I'm teaching Pauline theology which includes an hour of exegesis of Galatians every week and as part of my preparation I intend on reading systematically through J.L. Martyn's commentary which takes this apocalyptic approach.