Download - Biblical Apocalyptic
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 1/33
Biblical Apocalyptic
William G. Johnsson
Introduction
Anyone who takes the Bible seriously must seek to understand its apocalyptic element. This
element is significant for both its quantity and its role. Two books of the Bible are almost entirely
apocalyptic in nature—Daniel in the Old Testament and Revelation in the New. Apart from these,
several portions of other books in both Testaments consist of apocalyptic. Further, we find
apocalyptic scattered among the prophetic writings of the OT and assigned in the NT to Jesus
Himself, as well as to the apostles.
Throughout the twentieth century apocalyptic has generated considerable scholarly interestand investigation. Attempts to engage the biblical element often have led students of the
Scriptures on wider quests; they have sought to understand biblical apocalyptic by attempting to
trace its roots in extrabiblical sources. Thus the study that began with biblical apocalyptic usually
has become an investigation of apocalyptic per se—apocalyptic as a literary genre.Despite considerable effort on the part of many scholars, no clear consensus regarding the
meaning and interpretation of apocalyptic has emerged. Even a definition of apocalyptic eludes
universal acceptance.This article has been prepared from the conviction that a study of biblical apocalyptic is both
necessary and possible—necessary because of the importance of the apocalyptic element in the
Bible itself, and possible if presuppositions of interpretation are subjected to close scrutiny and
the biblical text is made the focus of effort. Thus while this essay is written from an awareness of
scholarly efforts to understand apocalyptic as a genre, it concentrates on the biblical text itself
rather than on supposed extrabiblical sources of apocalyptic.
I. The Definition and Characteristics of Biblical “Apocalyptic
A. DefinitionB. Characteristics
1. Revelatory Literature
2. Circumstances and Manner of Revelation
3. Heavenly Beings
4. Times of Crisis or National Tragedy5. Striking Contrasts
6. Vivid Imagery
7. The End of HistoryC. Relation to Classical Prophecy
D. Apocalyptic in the Biblical Pattern
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 2/33
II. The Interpretation of Biblical Apocalyptic
A. Presuppositions
B. Apocalyptic and Nonapocalyptic Predictions1. Nonapocalyptic Predictions2. Predictions in Daniel and Revelation
C. Historicism
D. The Day-for-a-Year Principle
E. Symbolism
F. Recapitulation
III. The Theological Significance of Biblical Apocalyptic
A. The Divine Superintendence of HistoryB. Implications for Daily Life
IV. Historical Overview
A. The Period of the Early Church1. Historicism
2. New Directions
B. The Middle Ages
C. The Reformation1. Reformers’ Historicism2. Counterinterpretations
3. The Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries
D. The Modern Period
1. Revival of Interest in Prophecy
2. Historico-Critical Study of Apocalyptic
3. Contemporary Approaches to Biblical ApocalypticE. Seventh-day Adventist Interpretations
V. Ellen G. White Comments
A. The Call to Study Daniel and RevelationB. The Interpretation of Biblical Apocalyptic
C. Comprehensive Presentations
D. The Divine Superintendence of History
VI. Literature
I.The Definition and Characteristics of Biblical Apocalyptic
A.Definition
The word “apocalyptic” comes from the Greek word apokalypsis, which means “revelation”
or “disclosure.” Although apocalyptic is an adjective, in modern times it has come to function as
a noun to describe revelatory literature. Nouns deriving from apokalypsis are apocalypse (the
revelation itself), apocalypticism (the study of such revelations), and apocalypticist (the seer of
the revelation).The first attested use of the word apokalypsis is in Revelation 1:1: “The revelation
[apokalypsis] of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants what must soon take
place; and he made it known by sending his angel to his servant John.” Here the term appears to
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 3/33
be a title for a specific type of composition; hence the last book of the Bible is frequently called
the Apocalypse.
Other writings of the Bible resemble the Apocalypse, in both manner of presentation andmessage. In particular, the OT book of Daniel shows marked similarities with the revelationgiven to John: common symbolism, common time periods, and a common concentration on last-
day events. On the face of it Daniel and Revelation are twin books that invite the student of
Scripture to study them together.
While Daniel and Revelation provide the clearest profiles of biblical apocalyptic books,
apocalyptic writings occur in several other places as portions of biblical books. Thus in the OT,
Isaiah 24–27; Ezekiel 38; 39; Joel 2; 3; and Zechariah 9–14 resemble the content of Daniel and
Revelation, as do Matthew 24; Mark 13; Luke 17; 21; 1 Thessalonians 4; and 2 Thessalonians 1;2 in the NT.
By biblical apocalyptic, therefore, we mean the books of Daniel and Revelation and these
sections of other biblical works. All these materials exhibit common features that at onceresemble one another and set them apart from the other literature of the Bible. This article
addresses principally these materials, especially Daniel and Revelation—their characteristics,
interpretation, and theological significance.
To grasp the significance of this definition, we note two other understandings of apocalypticin vogue. One concerns apocalyptic as a literary genre; the other, apocalyptic as a worldview.
Although apokalypsis comes from the Bible, this term has been applied in antiquity and in
modern scholarship to other writings that seem to resemble the Apocalypse of John. Especially
since 1832 (see IV. D. 2) noncanonical writings from both Jewish and Christian sources have
been brought together with biblical apocalyptic to form a corpus of works believed to be more or
less distinct from other forms of literature and labeled simply “apocalyptic.”
This approach has led to an extraordinary result: instead of biblical apocalyptic shaping thedefinition of apocalyptic, the larger body of literature now is used to shape the understanding of biblical apocalyptic! For example, several of the nonbiblical apocalypses are obviously
pseudonymous; in consequence, many scholars today call into question the authorship of bothDaniel and the Revelation. Thus we find the primary meaning of “apocalypse” in Webster’s New
World Dictionary as “any of various Jewish and Christian pseudonymous writings (c. 200B.C.-c.
A.D.300) depicting symbolically the ultimate destruction of evil and triumph of good.”
Although the focus of this article is biblical apocalyptic, we are aware of the larger corpus of
literature dubbed “apocalyptic” (although scholars struggle to define its limits and to reduce it all
to a common definition). We believe, however, that the biblical material stands apart. It aloneholds a place in the Sacred Canon, accepted as God-breathed like the rest of Scripture.
Another popular use of apocalyptic involves a particular worldview. Both apocalypse andapocalyptic have been applied as metaphors for the contemporary human condition, which
considers life as a battleground. A broken planet, ravaged by opposing forces and engulfed by
wars and threats of wars, abandoned the idealism generated by idealistic philosophers and liberal
theologians of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries to discover in its own agonies a portrait of
the contending forces reflected in the biblical literature. This trend is evidenced in a spate of
articles, books, and motion pictures that describe our chaotic and anxiety-ridden age moving
toward a cosmic holocaust.
This current use of apocalyptic terminology cannot control our understanding of the scripturalmaterial. Biblical apocalyptic must disclose itself to us on its own terms.
B.Characteristics
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 4/33
Only the last book of the Bible is called an apocalypse; nevertheless Daniel and the other
portions of Scripture we identified above share significant and recurrent features with the
Apocalypse.
1.Revelatory Literature
First and foremost, biblical apocalyptic is revelatory literature. It discloses that which has
been hidden from human sight and knowledge. The curtain that presently hides the heavenly
world and future realities from our view is drawn aside to provide a glimpse of the divine world
and its involvement in the affairs of our planet.
2.Circumstances and Manner of Revelation
The literary forms of both Daniel and Revelation, though complex, spell out the
circumstances. Thus the narrative framework of the book of Daniel (the apocalyptic visions arelimited to chapters 2; 7–12) consists of stories about Daniel and his three companions, their
capture, life in exile, and relationship to foreign kings (Dan. 1; 3–6). It tells us when the various
recorded events or visions occurred (e.g., Dan. 1:1; 2:1; 5:30; 7:1; 8:1; 9:1; 10:1). It also provides
information about the seer’s disposition (e.g., Dan. 7:1, 15, 16, 19, 28; 8:1, 2, 15–18, 27; 12:5– 13).
Similarly, the framework of the book of Revelation, largely in the form of a circular letter
(Rev. 2; 3; 22:7, 16–19), informs the reader that John was in exile on Patmos when the revelation
was given (Rev. 1:9, 10).The apocalyptic sections of Isaiah, Ezekiel, Joel, and Zechariah come in the midst of
prophecies. Ezekiel prefaces his apocalypse with “The word of the Lord came to me” (Eze. 38:1).
Our Lord’s apocalypse was given on the Mount of Olives shortly before the Passover (Matt.24:1–3), while Paul’s came in the middle of a letter (2 Thess. 1:1).
The manner of revelation is expressed in terms of visions and dreams in Daniel andRevelation (e.g., Dan. 2:19; 7:1, 2; 8:1, 2; 10:5, 7, 8; Rev. 6:1–12; 8:2; 10; 12:1–15:7). Some of
thee visions are supplemented by auditions (e.g., Dan. 8:23–25; Rev. 12:10; 14:13; 16:1; 22:8).However, apocalyptic messages elsewhere come by conversation (Jesus), letter (Paul), or
prophetic utterance (Isaiah, Ezekiel, Joel, Zechariah).
Although the content of biblical apocalyptic may appear mysterious, there is nothing
mysterious as to how the messages were conveyed to humanity. Biblical apocalyptic is not secret
literature generated in time and place unknown to us. Christ Himself brings the apocalyptic word
in both the Gospels and Revelation.
3.Heavenly Beings
Though the ultimate source of the revelations is God, heavenly beings may mediate themessages (Dan. 7:16; 8:15; 9:22; Rev. 1:1; 7:13–17; 10; 17; 19:9, 10; 21:9–22:12, 16).
Heavenly beings feature prominently in Daniel and Revelation. In Daniel, Gabriel and
Michael not only mediate the divine communications but also struggle with evil supernatural
powers that represent the interests of Persia and Greece (Dan. 10:13–21). Michael arises at the
end of time to defend God’s people (Dan. 12:1). A heavenly messenger protects Daniel in thelions’ den, and Nebuchadnezzar recognizes that an angel delivers Daniel’s companions from
death in the fiery furnace (Dan. 6:22; 3:28). In Revelation angels deliver messages, stand at the
four corners of the earth, surround the throne of God, sound trumpets, pour out the bowls of
God’s wrath, and minister to John (Rev. 5:2; 7:1; 8:2; 10:1; 12:7–10; 14:6–10).
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 5/33
4.Times of Crisis or National Tragedy
This setting applies particularly to Daniel and Revelation. Daniel received his messages whilein exile. Jerusalem and the Temple lay in ruins, and most of the people of Judah had been
deported to Babylon. John had also been forced into exile. Despair, crisis, and persecution are the backdrop to both books. The purpose of the messages given to both visionaries under such
circumstances was to assure them that, contrary to all appearances, God was still in control of history. Ultimately the divine purpose would triumph, God’s people would be vindicated, and the
divine kingdom established. In a setting of suffering, God’s messages provided comfort and
hope.
Likewise, Ezekiel wrote while in exile, and Joel’s apocalyptic was given at a time of
devastation (Joel 1). On the other hand, Zechariah wrote after the Jews returned from exile. Nor
is it clear that crisis furnished the occasion for Matthew 24/Mark 13/Luke 21 or Paul’s
apocalypse. Rather, Jesus’ words were occasioned by incidental remarks of the disciples (Matt.24), and Paul’s by false ideas that were current among believers (2 Thess. 2:1, 2).
Therefore, we cannot state that biblical apocalyptic always arises out of times of crisis and
national tragedy, although it does for Daniel and Revelation.
5.Striking Contrasts
Biblical apocalyptic is marked by striking contrasts. The writers make unmistakable
distinctions between good and evil, the present and the future, that which is above and that whichis below.
Daniel distinguishes sharply between the present transitory kingdoms of this world and thefuture eternal kingdom of God (e.g., Dan. 2:21, 44; 4:3, 34, 35; 6:26; 7:14, 27). He draws
contrasts between the little horn power and the manlike being, the persecutor and the persecuted(Dan. 7). The revelator differentiates between the seal of God and the mark of the beast, between
the deceptive serpent and the faithful witness, the pure woman and the gaudy harlot, the armies of
heaven and the forces of earth, Jerusalem and Babylon (Rev. 7:2; 9:11–19; 12:1; 13:16; 17:1; 18;21:2).
Nowhere in the Bible are heaven and earth in such close touch as in Revelation. This
relationship between the realms above and realms below has been labeled a vertical continuity.But Daniel also portrays heavenly settings in connection with descriptions of activities taking
place on earth. The prophet beholds events occurring in heaven that are contemporaneous with
events transpiring on earth (e.g., Dan. 7:8–14). The great controversy between the angelic beings
finds its counterpart in the struggles on earth below (e.g., 10:12–20). The meaning of the cross of
Christ is given a cosmic perspective in Revelation 12, manifesting its significance for both pastand future, as well as for the realms above and below.
6.Vivid Imagery
Apocalyptic writings are heavy with imagery. Indeed, the symbols in apocalyptic
compositions are often heightened and composite in nature. Whereas the prophet might refer to
ordinary beasts, the apocalyptic author sees a beast with ten horns and seven heads, resembling a
leopard, with feet like those of a bear, and a mouth like that of a lion (Rev. 13:1, 2).
Composite, vivid, and extensive imagery is woven into the tapestry of the messages of both
Daniel and the revelator. We see winged lions and leopards; a little horn with eyes and mouth;
one like a son of man with hair white like wool, eyes like blazing fire, feet like bronze glowing in
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 6/33
a furnace, a voice sounding like rushing waters; locusts that have the appearance of horses with
faces like human faces, hair like women’s hair, and teeth like lions’ teeth (Dan. 7:4, 6; Rev. 1:12–
16; 9:7–9).In biblical apocalyptic apart from Daniel and Revelation we do not find such heavy use of
symbolism. However, the language is vivid, with graphic word pictures and strong contrasts.
7.The End of History
Biblical apocalyptic discloses God’s long-range plans for history. Predictions of the rise and
fall of kings and kingdoms assert God’s control of history. In Daniel, for instance, God
preordained events in Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylon, which gives way to Medo-Persia and Greece(Dan. 2:38; 8:20, 21). Other powers would succeed until finally the indestructible and triumphant
kingdom of God would supersede all human authorities (2:44; 7:18, 27). Similarly, Revelation
12–14 describes a series of events that take the reader from the conflict in heaven to the death of
Jesus on the cross, through a “time, and times, and half a time” on to the harvest of the earth at
the second coming of Christ.
The dawn of the new age is heralded by physical, political, and moral woes. Signs of the end
consist of an unprecedented time of trouble, earthquakes, war, and bloodshed (Dan. 12:1).
Cosmic disturbances will affect the sun, moon, and stars (Mark 13:24, 25; Rev. 6:12, 13). Toherald the end of the present age, the sky will vanish like a scroll, and mountains and islands will
be removed from their place (Rev. 6:14).Daniel is convinced that “what is determined shall be done” (Dan. 11:36). “Seventy weeks of
years are decreed concerning” Daniel’s people and Jerusalem (9:24). The visions in both Daniel
and Revelation reveal what God has determined shall occur. No conditions are listed in the dream
visions through which humans can alter the divinely ordained course of events. The course of the
universe has been decided, and nothing the hearers or readers of the biblical apocalypses can do
will change this plan.Daniel foresees a judgment preceding the eschaton. The end will come in an unprecedented
time of trouble from which God’s people, “whose name shall be found written in the book,” shall
be delivered. The seer is assured that many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake
and “those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the firmament; and those who turn
many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever” (12:1–3; cf. 7:9–14).
The eschatological scenario in Revelation includes cosmic disturbances and eschatological
upheavals (Rev. 6:12, 13; 16); Christ in the role of a heavenly warrior pressing the battle against
the beast, false prophet, and the kings of the earth and their armies (Rev. 19:11–21); Satan’s
confinement for 1,000 years and subsequent release when he marshals his evil troops against thecamp of the saints (Rev. 20); the destruction of the devil, death, and hades; the resurrection of therighteous and their rule with Christ; the final judgment (Rev. 20); the creation of a new heaven
and a new earth; and the establishment of the Holy City (Rev. 21; 22).
In the other biblical apocalyptic materials we do not find the wealth of detail that Daniel and
Revelation provide. This is not surprising, since these materials are less extensive. However, like
Daniel and Revelation we find in all of them a concentration on the end of human history as God
brings about closure to the present world order and ushers in His reign.
C.Relation to Classical Prophecy
Biblical apocalyptic should be viewed as part of biblical prophecy. The apocalyptic portions
of Isaiah, Ezekiel, Joel, and Zechariah that we have identified occur in the midst of prophetic
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 7/33
messages. The book of Daniel originally found its place in the Hebrew canon among the
prophetic works (Hasel in Holbrook 1986, 2:150), while Jesus referred to its writer as “the
prophet Daniel” (Matt. 24:15). And the final book of the Bible itself, the one that gave rise to theword “apocalypse,” is designated as “the book of this prophecy” (Rev. 22:19).
Excluding the book of Daniel, the literary works that run from Isaiah to Malachi commonly
are termed classical prophecy. They were produced by an extraordinary line of Hebrew figures—
the prophets.
The prophet (nābî’) was a messenger of Yahweh. He or she was raised up, set apart, and
empowered by Yahweh to bring “the word of the Lord” to His people and sometimes to the
surrounding nations. The prophet spoke for Yahweh, proclaiming boldly and often at risk of life
the messages that the Lord revealed.“The word of the Lord,” declaring the divine will, covered a wide range of topics. Many
prophecies dealt with the here and now, rebuking sins such as drunkenness, idolatry and imitation
of their neighbors’ pagan practices, oppression of the poor, injustice, bribery, immorality, andspiritual torpor, thereby calling individuals or the nation to repentance. Such messages were
forthtelling, not foretelling, and they account for much of classical prophecy.
Other prophecies, however, were predictive in nature. They foretold the rise and fall of kings
and priests, or calamities that the Lord would bring upon a city or the nation. Sometimes they proclaimed Yahweh’s judgment on other nations or cities outside Israel. The time involved in the prediction might be short (40 days, Jonah 3:4), a specific number of years (40 years, Eze. 4:6), or
stretch into the indefinite future.
A term of particular significance in predictive prophecy is “the day of the Lord.” It describes
Yahweh’s visitation in wrath on a city, His people, a foreign nation, or the whole earth (e.g., Isa.
2:12; 13:6; Eze. 30:3; Amos 5:18; Zeph. 1:14).
Not all predictions carried messages of doom. The Hebrew prophets foretold not only thecaptivity of Jerusalem or exile of the nation but also the subsequent return from exile andrestoration of the land, as well as Yahweh’s punishment of Israel’s enemies.
The NT has nothing comparable to classical prophecy. However, Jesus of Nazareth proclaimed, taught, and lived in the prophetic mode. Many of the people of His time saw Him as
a prophet or even as one of the ancient prophets raised to life. Jesus may rightly be seen as the
climax and culmination of the OT prophets. Among His messages we also find predictions. In the
NT church, prophecy continued as one of the gifts of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:10; Eph. 4:11);
however, with the church rather than the nation as the recipient of divine messages, the role of the
prophet inevitably changed. (See Gifts IV. A-C; VIII. A, B.)We must place apocalyptic within this fairly large framework of biblical prophecy. Biblical
apocalyptic belongs among the predictive material of biblical prophecy, not as the sum total of this material but as an important and distinctive part.
As we noticed above, the distinguishing characteristics of biblical apocalyptic in part overlap
classical prophecy, but taken together they establish a profile that warrants separate classification.
When we read Daniel and Revelation, we at once sense that we have encountered different
material, both in form and in content. The same happens with Isaiah 24, Ezekiel 38, Joel 2,
Zechariah 9, Matthew 24, or 2 Thessalonians 2. It is not as though we had a new writer, but the
mode of communication has shifted. A rough comparison would be the shift that the reader feels
before a change from prose to poetry within the same book, or even a change from words to pictures.
At the same time, however, no hard and fast line of demarcation between classical prophecy
and biblical apocalyptic can be drawn. We see interconnections on various levels. Thus the
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 8/33
visions of dreams that so characterize Daniel and Revelation also appear to some degree in
prophecy: Amos reports symbolic visions (Amos 7:7–9; 8:1–3). Again, Ezekiel, a contemporary
of Daniel, is accompanied by a transcendent person (Eze. 40:3). In Zechariah 4 an angel appears,dialogues with the prophet, and provides the interpretation of the vision.
The point at issue, however, is not whether some of the features of apocalyptic may be found
in classical prophecy, but rather the predominance of these features in biblical apocalyptic. And
beyond these overlapping features we discern clear discontinuities between classical and
apocalyptic prophecy in terms of the predictive element itself.
Prophecy contains predictions that are primarily local and contemporary. In some cases, these
prophecies expand to find a broader fulfillment at the end of the age. Apocalyptic, on the other
hand, has a continuous perspective that unfolds through time and encompasses the whole of history.
Another fundamental difference lies in the character of the respective predictions. The
nonapocalyptic predictions tend to expect a future that will arise out of the present, whereas biblical apocalyptic by and large predicts a future that will break into the present.
The manner in which conditionality impacts predictions in nonapocalyptic and apocalyptic
also differs (see II. B).
D.Apocalyptic in the Biblical Pattern
The relationship between classical prophecy and biblical apocalyptic that we have describedhere—apocalyptic as part of biblical prophecy, but with distinctive features—differs profoundly
from the view held by historico-critical scholars. Because they have tried to establish a genre of
apocalyptic, drawing together many noncanonical materials, biblical apocalyptic has ceased to
exist in its own right. Rather, it has emerged as something imported into the Scriptures, probably
from unknown writers who took the name of biblical characters to try to obtain credibility for
their material. According to this scenario, Daniel was not written by Daniel but by someone inthe second century B.C.; Jesus did not give the apocalyptic prediction of Matthew 24/Mark 13/Luke 21; Paul borrowed from a Jewish apocalypse when he wrote 2Thessalonians; and the
apostle John did not write Revelation. (See Interpretation IV. F. 1–4.)
When we study biblical apocalyptic in its own right, however, we see a radically different
picture. We see apocalyptic arising within biblical prophecy in preexilic times. During the Exile
the development of apocalyptic goes further, as Daniel presents much of the material of his book
in this mode. Finally, in the NT an entire book—fittingly the final one of the biblical canon in
that apocalyptic focuses on the end-time—is written as an apocalypse.
All attempts to trace the origins of biblical apocalyptic to a noncanonical genre of apocalypticliterature have failed. Instead of the attribution of biblical apocalyptic to noncanonical sources,the more reasonable case is that the nonbiblical was written in imitation of, or influenced by,
biblical apocalyptic.
II.The Interpretation of Biblical Apocalyptic
Biblical apocalyptic manifests distinctive features that call for its own principles of
interpretation. At the same time, however, biblical apocalyptic is part of the larger literature of
predictive prophecy, which calls attention to how apocalyptic predictions compare and contrast
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 9/33
with nonapocalyptic ones. We shall confine our discussion to the principles for interpreting
Daniel and Revelation, the two major works of biblical apocalyptic. (See Interpretation III. E. 3.)
A.Presuppositions
How the interpreter relates to the element of prediction in the Bible becomes a crucialhermeneutical issue.
The Bible writers unabashedly assert that Yahweh knows the future. Indeed, His ability to
foretell events sets Him apart from other gods. “Set forth your case, says the Lord; bring your
proofs, says the King of Jacob. Let them bring them, and tell us what is to happen. Tell us the
former things, what they are, that we may consider them, that we may know their outcome; or declare to us the things to come. Tell us what is to come hereafter, that we may know that you are
gods” (Isa. 41:21–23; see also verse 26; 43:9; 44:7; 45:21; 48:14). In the NT Jesus utters
predictions as do other prophets, while the Apocalypse claims to show “what must soon take
place” (Rev. 1:1) and “what is to take place hereafter” (verse 19).
The presuppositions from which interpretation of biblical apocalyptic proceeds are, therefore,
that God knows the future and that He has revealed it in His Word. All the predictions of
Scripture—including biblical apocalyptic—must be taken seriously as a portrayal of the future
that God has chosen to make known to humanity.Therefore, the predictions cited in biblical apocalyptic are not, as some scholars assert,
historical accounts given in the guise of prophecy (the term used is vaticinia ex eventu, “prophecies after the event”). Daniel, for instance, need not be dated to the second century B.C.
on the assumption that the book mentions historical events in the reign of Antiochus IV
Epiphanes (Dan. 11:31). It is rather a series of predictions that reach, not only from Daniel’s day
through the second century B.C., but to the climax of history at the last day. (See Interpretation
IV. F. 3.)
Jesus Christ so understood Daniel. Referring to Daniel (Dan. 8:9–14; 9:27; 11:31), He stated,“So when you see the desolating sacrilege spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains” (Matt.
24:15, 16). Obviously Jesus viewed this prediction as still future in His day—He presupposed the
veracity of biblical predictions. We too approach biblical apocalyptic with the same
presuppositions.
B.Apocalyptic and Nonapocalyptic Predictions
Some Bible students assert that all Bible prophecy, both classical and apocalyptic, is
conditional. They see apocalyptic prophecy as a statement of God’s purpose for the future. Goddepends on agencies such as the nation of Israel for the accomplishment of His plans. If Israelfails, the prophecy is moot. According to this view, the prophecies of the book of Daniel
collapsed because of Israel’s national and spiritual disobedience.
In contrast, other Bible students hold that apocalyptic prophecy is a statement of God’s
foreknowledge. Because God sees the future unerringly, these predictions are absolutely certain—
not conditional upon a particular human response.
This critical issue of interpretation can be adjudicated only by a careful study of the various
types of predictive prophecy in Scripture.
1.Nonapocalyptic Predictions
There are at least four groups of predictions in the nonapocalyptic biblical literature.
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 10/33
a.Predictions to Israel that arise out of a covenant context. Probably the large majority of
predictions in nonapocalyptic literature belong here. The eighth- and seventh-century B.C.
prophets rebuke the people of Israel for their sins, calling them back to Yahweh, warning them of impending doom because of their unfaithfulness to the covenant.
Isaiah 1 provides a classic illustration. Israel is arraigned before God, who calls heaven and
earth to witness (verse 2). Yahweh’s complaint is that His people are guilty of gross stupidity.
Although He has nurtured them tenderly, they do not display even the elemental gratitude of an
ox or an ass (verses 2, 3). Their failure to live within the covenant is demonstrated in unethical
practices (verses 4, 15, 17, 21–23) and religious observances that are merely formal (verses 11–
14). Because of Israel’s sins the land has been devastated (verses 5–9) as Yahweh has punished
national transgression. Yet He has not cast them off utterly. He has left a remnant (verse 9). NowHe calls them back to the covenant: “Come now, let us reason together” (verse 18). Because
Yahweh is a covenant-keeping God, one who remains faithful despite humankind’s
unfaithfulness, because His lovingkindness (ḥesed) is at the heart of the covenant, there is hopefor Israel—forgiveness and restoration (verses 25–27).
Israel’s history through the OT exhibits an oscillatory pattern. Prosperity, apostasy, decline,
repentance, restoration—this is the cycle in Judges, Kings, and Chronicles. The principle
governing the pattern is “If you are willing and obedient, you shall eat the good of the land; but if you refuse and rebel, you shall be devoured by the sword; for the mouth of the Lord has spoken”(Isa. 1:19, 20).
Israel’s history in its various fortunes demonstrates the truth of Deuteronomy 28. This
passage sets out the two ways that lie before the young nation. If the people will “obey the voice
of the Lord [their] God, being careful to do all his commandments,” they will be blessed richly—
materially, nationally, spiritually (verses 1–14). If, however, they are unfaithful to the covenant
provisions, terrible curses will come upon them until Israel is a byword among the nations (verses15–68).
Repeatedly the prophets speak to a sinful nation in terms of these blessings and curses. Are
their words, however, to be considered predictive prophecy?The element of conditionality is self-evident: the people’s response determines the outcome.
That the words are “prophecy,” in the sense of a message from Yahweh, is also true—the
prophets are conscious of a divine impelling. But we should not consider such messages
predictive prophecy in the sense of disclosing a future otherwise unknown. Rather, they are
applying the “law” of the covenant, something as fixed as Yahweh Himself.
The element of prediction here is no stronger than an NT parallel: “He who believes in him isnot condemned; he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in
the name of the only Son of God” (John 3:18). We are dealing with certainties, with the very planof God for humankind. It is laid down by Him and cannot be negotiated.
Predictions in this first class are covenant promises or threats rather than “conditional”
prophecy. These remarks also apply to the provisions of the Abrahamic covenant. Like the
promises of Deuteronomy 28, they presuppose an obedient response (cf. Gen. 12:1–3; 13:14–18;
15; 17; 18:17–19; 21:1–13; 22:1–18).
b.Short-term predictions. Many short-term OT predictions do not come within the
promises/threats of the covenant relationship. They involve surrounding nations and, in some
cases, individuals.Although Yahweh has entered into covenant relation with one nation—Israel—He is
nonetheless Lord of the world. He does not condemn wickedness among His special people only
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 11/33
to wink at it among the surrounding nations. Therefore, they too come under judgment (e.g., Isa.
13; Jer. 46–51; Eze. 25–32; Amos 1; 2).
Predictions concerning Israel’s neighbors are not as clear-cut in interpretation as the covenant promises/threats to Israel, however. Conditionality stands in a certain tension with divinesovereignty.
In some cases God’s promises or judgments are linked directly to human decisions.
“If at any time I declare concerning a nation or a kingdom, that I will pluck up and break
down and destroy it, and if that nation, concerning which I have spoken, turns from its evil, I will
repent of the evil that I intended to do to it. And if at any time I declare concerning a nation or a
kingdom that I will build and plant it, and if it does evil in my sight, not listening to my voice,
then I will repent of the good which I had intended to do to it” (Jer. 18:7–10).Omitting mention of a condition does not necessarily negate conditionality. If the prophecy
grows out of the covenant, if it is related to a blessing or a curse where a human response is
involved, then it is conditional, even if not so declared (e.g., Jer. 31:35–37).The Jonah case provides the sharpest example of conditionality. Change in the people leads to
a change in the divine plan (Jonah 3:9, 10). The final verse of the book underscores Yahweh’s
character, which ensures both justice and mercy in all His dealings. “And should not I pity
Nineveh, that great city, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand personswho do not know their right hand from their left, and also much cattle?” (Jonah 4:11).
Yahweh does not destroy capriciously. Although Israel’s neighbors are outside the covenant,
the God of all the earth will deal justly in whatever He brings upon them. We may be sure that
when a nation goes down to ruin, ultimately it is because of its gross wickedness. We should note
that Jonah’s prophecy concerning Nineveh is but one of a series delivered against the city by
messengers of Yahweh. Nahum predicts in graphic detail the final end of Nineveh (cf, Zeph.
2:13–15).The example of Nineveh is not typical of the prophecies concerning the nations. From Isaiah
to Malachi there is no instance of a prophet’s being sent to deliver in person the word of doom.
How the nations heard the divine threatenings (perhaps through ambassadors at times; cf. Isa. 21;Jer. 27) or whether they always heard, we are not told. These dire predictions come in the setting
of divine certainty; Yahweh has determined that retribution cannot be delayed.
Consider two striking examples from Isaiah’s predictions about the nations. In chapter 10 we
meet the dramatic “Ah, Assyria, the rod of my anger, the staff of my fury!” (verse 5). Here
Assyria is God’s appointed instrument to chastise Israel. But haughty Assyria itself will come to
an end after the divine purpose is fulfilled (verses 12–19). With this prediction we have gone beyond conditionality into the realm of divine sovereignty.
The second example is that of Cyrus (Isa. 44:28; 45:1–6). Here a heathen king is called byname (Isa. 45:4) before his birth so that Yahweh’s plan to restore Israel from Babylonian
captivity may come to fruition. This is not a conditional prophecy; it is rather to be interpreted in
terms of God’s foreknowledge and sovereignty.
There are not as many short-term predictions in the NT, but some occur. Agabus foretells the
famine (Acts 11:28); the friends of Paul foresee by the Spirit the bonds that await him in
Jerusalem (Acts 20:23; 21:10, 11). The most significant short-term prediction, however, concerns
the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple (Matt. 24; Mark 13; Luke 21).
Conditionality is mentioned in none of these. With Paul, the only “if” lies in the decision to go or not to go to Jerusalem. There is no hint that the impending fall of Jerusalem is conditional. The
question is only “When will this be?” (Matt. 24:3).
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 12/33
It is obvious, therefore, that when interpreting short-term predictions outside the covenant
provisions, the prophecy may or may not be conditioned on human response. Divine sovereignty
and human decisions intersect and interact.c.Long-term predictions. Occasionally we find long-term predictions—those that have to do
with the very end of time. The expression “the day of the Lord” is a case in point. This term
signifies God’s judgment on a city or nation; it is the day of retribution when justice can no
longer be withheld. While “the day of the Lord” usually refers to impending doom for the nation
of Israel, it gradually takes on a wider aspect. In some prophecies it comes to indicate the end of
all things as Israel’s punishment is extended on a cosmic scale (Joel 1:15; 2:1; 3:14; Isa. 2:2, 12;
34:8; Amos 5:18–20; Eze. 7:19; Zeph. 1:7, 14, 18; 2:2; 2 Peter 3:7–12).
Out of such considerations some prophetic passages may seem to have double focus. While inthe original context their messages addressed the people of Israel, they also apply to conditions at
the close of human time when the judgments on Israel are painted on a worldwide canvas.
The NT contains many apparently long-term predictions. It is difficult to know how long isthe period envisaged by NT writers, since the NT embodies such a strong note of imminence
(e.g., Matt. 24:34; Rom. 13:11, 12; 1 Thess. 4:15; Heb. 10:37; Rev. 1:3; 22:20).; The questions
raised by an awareness of NT imminence have given rise to much discussion among Christians of
all persuasions. (See Second Coming II. D.)Leaving aside Mark 13 (Matt. 24; Luke 21) and Revelation, we see clearly that the NT
predicts developments that will affect the church. For example, the “man of lawlessness” is to
arise before the Second Coming (2 Thess. 2:3); there is to be a rebellion (Acts 20:29, 30); “times
of stress” are to arise (2 Tim. 3:1–9); persecutions will increase (1 Peter 4:12). And the supreme
happening, the event of all events, is the return of Jesus in the clouds (Acts 1:9–11; John 14:1–3;
1 Thess. 4:14–18). This event permeates the entire NT, not merely its apocalyptic parts, imbuing
its messages with hope and expectation.The conditionality principle is nowhere in evidence in these long-term predictions. These
prophecies come with the ring of the divine foreknowledge; as such they are presented as
inevitable. Although none but the Father knows the precise date of the Parousia, the event isfixed, altogether sure.
d.Predictions of the first advent of Christ. Paul wrote to the Galatians, “When the time had
fully come, God sent forth his Son” (Gal. 4:4). Thus, the first coming of Christ, the Incarnation,
was not by chance. Rather, it occurred according to God’s own wisdom. Even though sincere
followers of God had awaited Messiah’s appearance for centuries, God had His own timetable;
when the time had come fully, He appeared. Church historians often have drawn attention to theway “the world” had been prepared for the birth of Jesus; beyond this, however, we should
recognize the divine outworking of the plan of salvation.The coming of the Messiah, the seed of Abraham in whom all nations of the earth would be
blessed (Gen. 12:3), is clearly part of the covenant promises made to Israel. Yet it transcends the
covenant, since the Messiah is for all nations, not Israel alone. In that transcending, the
conditionality principle ruling the covenant promises and threatenings is subjugated. Was the
Messiah’s coming delayed because Israel had not prepared the world for Him? We have no hint
of it. Surely such preparation as they had made was feeble, but the Messiah came. He had to
come! In the fullness of the time God sent Him forth.
It seems impossible to apply the conditionality principle to the prophecies of the Messiah.That He would come of the line of Judah (Gen. 49:10), that He would be the son of David (Isa.
11:1), that He would be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2), that He would be the Saviour, the
substitute for our sins (Isa. 53)—we cannot speak of conditionality in these predictions.
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 13/33
Repeatedly Matthew quotes the OT with the formula “to fulfil what the Lord had spoken by the
prophet” (e.g., Matt. 1:22; 2:15, 17, 23; 4:14; 8:17). Even His name is told to Mary before His
birth (Matt. 1:21)—surely a microcosm of the divine foreordering of the Messiah’s first coming!Beyond the specific prophecies that may be labeled Messianic, the entire OT looks to Him. It is awork of expectation, moving forward and narrowing in upon the birth that is celebrated in the
NT. (In some OT prophecies of the Messiah the two advents merge [e.g., Isa. 11:1–9].)
e.Conclusions. Classification of the nonapocalyptic portions of biblical prophecy reveals the
complexity of the data. Conditionality emerges as an important principle of classical prophecy. It
applies to large portions of the OT that in effect repeat the promises and threats of the covenant;
it also applies to portions of the prophecies about the nations surrounding Israel. However, not all
nonapocalyptic prophecy is conditional: among both short- and long-term predictions we findcertainty of fulfillment regardless of the human response.
2.Predictions in Daniel and Revelation
To examine biblical apocalyptic is to enter another sphere. Although apocalyptic arises in
Israel or Asia Minor, it bursts the confines of Israel or Asia Minor. Whether it first speaks a
message of God to a nation in captivity (Daniel) or to churches undergoing persecution
(Revelation), it transcends the immediate setting in which it came to birth. Apocalyptic has acosmic sweep, rushing down the continuum of world history to focus on the end-time.
a.Daniel. Between the prophecies of Daniel 2; 7; 8; and 12, and those of Isaiah, Jeremiah, or Ezekiel, stands a marked contrast. In Daniel, the place of Israel has receded, as has the element of
threatenings. In its place is a panorama, a march of the kingdoms leading on to the eschaton. We
have become spectators to events on a world stage; divine foreknowledge unfolds the course of
the future.
Yahweh “changes times and seasons,” removing kings and setting up kings; He “reveals deep
and mysterious things” (Dan. 2:20–22). He unveils mysteries, making known what is to be(verses 28, 29). He “does according to his will in the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth,” and none can thwart His plan (Dan. 4:35). He “rules the kingdom of men, and sets
over it whom he will” (Dan. 5:21).
These ideas center in divine sovereignty and divine foreknowledge. In this presentation, the
human side of history, while portrayed in the ebb and flow of the fortunes of the people of God,
is gathered up within the ruling conception of Yahweh as Lord of history. We search in vain for
the element of conditionality.
The prophetic time periods are laid out before us. They are long ones. In keeping with the
panoramic scope of history in which they are given, they must be such. We hear of 1260 days for the reign of the blasphemous “little horn” power (Dan. 7:25) and of 2300 evenings and morningsuntil the sanctuary shall be vindicated after the evil work of the little horn (Dan. 8:14). Given the
setting, these time predictions cannot be meant literally.
Since our studies of classical prophecy showed the importance of identifying any covenant
setting, we need to take note of this motif in the book of Daniel. The covenant idea in fact occurs
in two lines of prophecy—chapters 9 and 11. But these occurrences do not suggest that
conditionality is in any sense a hidden agenda of the book.
We need, first, to distinguish clearly between Daniel’s own hopes and understanding and the
unfolding of the future that Yahweh, Lord of history, communicates to him. Daniel, though prominent in public life, is a captive—along with his people. Jerusalem is in ruins; the sanctuary
is desolate. Out of this situation Daniel prays for the restoration of his people, his city, his
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 14/33
sanctuary (Dan. 9:1–19). His prayer is based on the covenant: the desolations have come in
fulfillment of the threats “written in the law of Moses” (verse 13); likewise that law provides
hope of Yahweh’s mercy.But predictions given to Daniel far outstripped the history of Israel. Indeed, Daniel could not
comprehend the vision of chapter 8, with its sanctuary references (verse 27). Likewise, the reply
to his prayer went far beyond the restoration of city and Temple, reaching to the Messiah (Dan.
9:24–27).
Israel and covenant are mentioned also in the prophecy of chapter 11 (verses 22, 28, 30–35).
It may be significant that, as in Daniel 9:24–27, the apocalyptic nature of chapter 11 is much less
evident than in chapters 2, 7, and 8. Even if we include chapter 11 under apocalyptic, however,
two observations are valid: the fortunes of Israel are treated in a relatively minor manner—theconcern is with the conflict between “the king of the north” and “the king of the south,” and we
find no hint of conditionality. Indeed, the very nature of the prophecy, detailed as it is and linked
through many generations, speaks strongly against conditionality as a factor in interpretation.b.Revelation. The book of Revelation is similar to Daniel. John is told to write “the things
which are, and the things which shall be [not may be] hereafter” (Rev. 1:19, KJV). He sees the
struggles of the people of God, the final judgment scene (Rev. 20), and a remnant people at the
end of all things who stand faithful and loyal to God—“those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus” (Rev. 14:12). As the world order comes to a total halt in the finaloutworking of the confederacy of evil and in the divine intervention of punishment, God’s people
stand secure in Him. Beyond the turmoil, after the nightmare happenings preceding the Second
Advent, the “new heavens and a new earth,” where righteousness dwells, emerge at last.
So the great controversy, the age-long conflict between Christ and Satan, is ended. It is ended
because God has ended it. Its end is as sure as the lordship of God over time and space. (See
Great Controversy I-V.)c.Conclusion. We conclude, therefore, that except in those passages where the covenant with
Israel is the leading concern, apocalyptic predictions in Daniel and Revelation do not hinge on
conditionality. Divine sovereignty and foreknowledge are the leading ideas.
C.Historicism
According to its self-witness the prophetic messages of the book of Daniel are predictions
given during the Babylonian exile. The terminus of these prophetic forecasts is the establishment
of God’s kingdom. A first-century-A.D. origin of the book of Revelation is a generally accepted
datum. The end point of the NT Apocalypse is the second coming of Christ, the subsequent
millennium, and the setting up of a new heaven and a new earth.The two apocalypses are clearly interrelated. The revelator selects certain Danielic motifs,
amplifies them in his own Christian context (e.g., cf. Dan. 3 with Rev. 13; Dan. 7:13, 14 with
Rev. 4; 5; and 13:1, 2), and parallels much of the history that Daniel describes. Both books end
with the consummation of God’s purpose, although the revelator expands Daniel’s description of
the eschaton.
In contrast with the local and contemporary messages of the prophetic writers, the visions of
both Daniel and the Revelation offer outlines of history that have a universal sweep. Hence,
interpretation of the apocalyptic visions must respect the cosmic range that begins in the writers’
own day and takes the reader down to the end. There is no narrow concentration on the years of Jewish persecution by AntiochusIV Epiphanes. The focus of John is not merely on the
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 15/33
harassment of the Christian church by a first-century Roman emperor. Nor do we find in these
books an exclusive attention to the end of time.
Modes of interpretation that place the fulfillment of these chapters totally in the past (e.g., thehistorico-critical perspective) or entirely or primarily in the future (e.g., futurism), or that maketheir fulfillment no more than the eternal confrontation between the forces of good and evil (e.g.,
idealism) or the presentation of the Christian Age (e.g., amillennialism) fail to do justice to the
intent of these compositions.
A historical continuum in the apocalyptic visions is suggested by temporal indicators such as
numerical adjectives or words such as “after,” “next,” and “another.” Daniel says to
Nebuchadnezzar, “After you shall arise another kingdom inferior to you, and yet a third kingdom
… . And there shall be a fourth kingdom” (Dan. 2:39, 40). In relating the dream of chapter 7, the prophet sees a first animal like a lion, then “another beast, a second one, like a bear” (verses 4,
5). “After this” Daniel saw a leopardlike beast and a “fourth beast” (verses 6, 7; cf. Dan. 8:17,
19, 23, 26; 9:24–27; 11:2, 6, 35, 40; 12:1, 4).Sequential development is also noticeable in the struggles described in Revelation 12–14. In
chapter 12 the woman is pregnant; she gives birth; the child is snatched away; the woman flees to
the desert; she finds protection in the wilderness for 1260 days; the dragon makes war with the
rest of her offspring.In chapter 13 we see a parade of monsters—dragon, sea beast, land beast—the latter two
deriving their existence from the dragon. The dragon, having failed to destroy the holy Child,
pursues the “seed” (KJV) of the woman (Rev. 12:13, 17); in seeking to accomplish this purpose
he gives “his power and his throne and great authority” to the sea beast (Rev. 13:2). The sea beast
receives a mortal stroke, but is healed (verse 3). The sea beast’s supremacy lasts for “forty-two
months” (verse 5).
Chapter 14 forms the counterpart of chapter 13. Here the three angels of Revelation 14:6–12sound a proclamation couched in the setting of the deception of the land beast; their work isconsummated by the Second Coming (verse 14).
Thus the very form of the vision compels us to understand some sort of historicist fulfillment.Revelation 12–14 focuses on the period between the first and second advents of Christ.
Numerical adjectives recur in the seals and trumpets. Revelation 17:10 interprets the seven
heads of the beast as a reference to “seven kings five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has
not yet come, and when he comes he must remain only a little while.”
In contrast with other modes of exposition, historicism—though sometimes marred by
diverse, sensational, speculative, and contradictory approaches—appears as the most validhermeneutical approach to the biblical apocalypses. The temporal markers guide the reader like
signposts on a journey that commences in the writer’s own day and ends in God’s eternalkingdom. The path historicism takes does not disappear after a few short footsteps (as historico-
critical interpretation would suggest), nor does it appear out of nothing (as futurism would argue).
Rather, it advances in a continuous line, sometimes winding, and to all appearances backtracking,
but always heading toward the eschaton.
D.The Day-for-a-Year Principle
The symbolic visions include time elements that are cast in figurative language. According to
Daniel 7:25 the little horn will oppress the saints of the Most High for “a time, two times, andhalf a time.” In the audition of the following chapter one angel tells another that the sanctuary
will be restored after “two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings” (Dan. 8:14).
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 16/33
John writes that the woman who had given birth to the male child fled into the wilderness,
where she was nourished for “one thousand two hundred and sixty days” (Rev. 12:6). Later in the
same chapter the woman is once again pictured as being in the wilderness, where she is takencare of for “a time, and times, and half a time” (verse 14). In the following chapter the beast thatderived its power from the dragon exercises its authority for “forty-two months” (Rev. 13:5).
Since several of these temporal references occur in identical settings, namely, in descriptions
of the oppression of God’s people, it seems evident that the phrases “a time, and times, and half a
time,” “one thousand two hundred and sixty days,” and “forty-two months” refer to the same
period. Both Daniel and John are speaking about the same time interval. What then do these
symbolic time references signify?
At the outset it is important to recognize that these temporal references occur in symboliccontexts. Hermeneutical consistency, therefore, demands that the time elements be treated in the
same way as the rest of the symbolic imagery. The interpreting angel indicated that the ram with
the two horns was symbolic of the kings of Media and Persia (Dan. 8:20). The he-goat signifiedthe king (kingdom) of Greece (verse 21). In the symbolism of Revelation 12 the great dragon
represents Satan, and the woman symbolizes God’s people.
Clearly the imagery is symbolic. The beast, the woman, and the time references should not be
understood literally. It is most reasonable, therefore, to assume that just as the short-livedcreatures symbolize entities whose existence or dominion in history extended over long periodsof time, so also the time elements associated with these symbolic creatures must signify extensive
time intervals.
Daniel 9 provides a key to the nature and meaning of these expressions. The vision of Daniel
9:24–27 begins with a time period that literally reads “seventy sevens” or “seventy weeks.” The
“seventy sevens” commence with the going forth of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem
and continue until the coming of an Anointed One, His death, and the destruction of the city andsanctuary.
Both historico-critical and conservative scholars believe that the period of “seventy sevens”
must be understood in terms of years in order to allow sufficient time for the fulfillment of thevarious aspects specified in verses 24–27. The unfolding of events detailed in this passage
requires more time than the one year, four months, and 10 days that a reading of “seventy sevens”
in terms of days (i.e., 490 days) would allow. It is for this reason that commentators generally and
some Bibles (e.g., the RSV) supply the word “years” after “seventy sevens” and read “seventy
weeks of years.”
This interpretation of the “seventy sevens” or “seventy weeks” receives support from thelarger context. From Daniel 9:2, verse 24 takes up the concept of “seventy years” that Jeremiah
predicted Israel would spend in Babylon (cf. Jer. 25:11, 12; 29:10). In effect, Daniel says that thetime allocated to the events mentioned in Daniel 9:24–27 would amount to seven times “seventy years,” of which Jeremiah spoke. The reference to “seventy years” in Daniel 9:2 therefore
suggests that the word “seventy” in verse 24 should also be understood in terms of years.
Given the interrelationships between the various time references in the visions and the
parallel nature of the visions, it is reasonable to assume with historicist interpreters of the past
that in the apocalyptic chapters of Daniel and Revelation a symbolic day signifies a literal year.
William H. Shea carefully examined the day-for-a-year principle. He advanced 23 biblical
reasons validating the application of this principle to the time periods in the apocalyptic prophecies of Daniel and Revelation. He also established that the year-day principle was known
and applied by Jewish interpreters during the second century B.C. and down to the post-Qumran
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 17/33
period (Shea 56–92; for additional detail on Daniel’s three major time periods, see Judgment III.
B. 1. a. (2).)
E.Symbolism
The long-range predictions of Daniel and Revelation are replete with symbols which,although at times perplexing, are not unintelligible. The interpretations provided in Scripture
neither stress nor attempt to explain every detail, but clarify the thrust of the messages. Thus the
manlike image of Daniel 2 signifies a succession of empires and rulers without attempting to
spell out the significance of the number of toes of the image or their precise identity.
Similarly, John does not dwell upon all the details associated with the symbolic imagery heuses. The evocative power of these details is utilized but not fully explored. It would be
presumptuous and probably unproductive—if not counterproductive—for modern interpreters to
advance meanings that have not been revealed. In fact, fanciful interpretations often have
attracted—occasionally justifiably—the opprobrium of scholars who reject the historicist
approach.
The interpretation of apocalyptic symbols should be sought primarily within Scripture itself.
Sometimes interpretations are given within the very passage, as when Daniel is told the meaning
of the ram and of the goat he has seen in vision (Dan. 8:3–5, 20, 21), or John learns that the“waters” on which the great prostitute sits are “peoples and multitudes and nations and
languages” (Rev. 17:1, 15, NRSV). Beyond such specific explanations, apocalyptic drawsheavily upon biblical imagery, which may be explored for its meaning. Thus Revelation echoes
the symbolism of Daniel; it also pulls in symbols and allusions from classical prophecy. The
historical background of Daniel and Revelation also may help in the interpretation of apocalyptic
symbols; however, meaning should first be sought within the Bible.
F.Recapitulation
Both Daniel and John juxtapose their visions. At the same time the visions recapitulate and
expand the subject matter already given. Thus Daniel 7 goes over the ground covered by Daniel 2 but adds details not present in the previous account. Similarly, the structure of the book of
Revelation suggests that sequences like the seven seals and seven trumpets are parallel and take
the reader from apostolic times to the second advent of Christ. This recapitulatory nature of the
various sequences precludes a continuous or straight-line reading of the chapters as if the events
of Daniel 8 followed chronologically those of Daniel 7 or the seven trumpets of Revelation
succeeded the seven seals.
Occasionally the visionary either repeats himself or rushes ahead of his subject matter (e.g.,Rev. 14:1–5; 20:9). He does not pretend to give a comprehensive account in which he detailsevery feature of history. Rather, he selects events that best serve his purpose. None of these
practices, also characteristic of other biblical writers, invalidates the sequential historical process.
III.The Theological Significance of Biblical Apocalyptic
Biblical apocalyptic reveals a universe in which heaven and earth are in close touch with each
other. The cosmos is suffused with a sense of the divine. Humanity is not left ignorant of the
transcendent, for the Sovereign of the universe communicates with us. Because it is God who
speaks to humanity, His messages have a supernatural authority. Thus apocalyptic not only
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 18/33
discloses the divine superintendence of history but suggests implications for daily life in the here
and now.
A.The Divine Superintendence of History
These divine revelations lift the curtain that limits our view of reality. They disclose aheavenly world that constantly intersects with the world of humankind. The revelations portray a
vision of God, whose existence and dominion are eternal, whose wisdom is unfathomable, whose
power is absolute, whose grace is matchless, and whose purposes are for the best good of
humanity. Because He knows the end from the beginning, He can be trusted for the present and
the future. The God of the apocalypses is not some absent, unpredictable landlord of the hoary past or distant future; rather, He is Lord of present history. Believers can rest assured that God is
in control of life today.
Biblical apocalyptic exposes the world of heavenly beings. Angels are sent to further the
divine plan, to instruct, and to protect humanity. But demons also are intent on frustrating God’s
purpose.
Biblical apocalyptic affirms God’s control of the course of events. The orderly sequence in
the rise and fall of human powers portends that this is, after all, a managed universe. Apocalyptic
history is not limited geographically, nationally, or racially, for God’s purposes encompass thetotality of human history and embrace both the world above and the world below.
Biblical apocalyptic traces a sequence of sacred history that focuses particularly on the lastdays. It reveals that the course of this world is preordained and, therefore, under divine
management. God’s hand is in all, and nothing can frustrate the outworking of His ultimate will.
History has been measured out, and therefore hearers and readers of the Apocalypse can
locate their generation in the stream of time. Since few events remain to be fulfilled, the modern
reader is reminded that time has almost run out. In this respect biblical apocalyptic represents a
path between the past and the eschaton, along which the devout travel to the kingdom. They aresure that the path will take them to their destination because of the landmarks they have already passed.
Biblical apocalyptic provides a meaning that transcends the pain and agony of this world.
Though the hues of conflict and persecution deepen as time progresses, the apocalypses relativize
the power of pagan rule. In spite of all appearances, the pilgrims are left neither to the whims of
their fellows nor to the accidental forces of chance. Hope alternates with despair and oppression,
and the divine purpose of peace and joy triumphs in the end. The assurance of God’s control in
history proscribes the cause of evil. Though the blight of evil seems to be ubiquitous, it will be
removed inexorably.Biblical apocalyptic accepts the legitimacy of human governments. Kings and kingdoms
come and go, and so do their threats and their victories. They rise and fall at their appointed
times. Ultimately, however, they must give way to the kingdom of God. God overrules and
judges in the affairs of men. Rather than rejecting human powers, the apocalypses subsume them
under the providence of God. Interestingly enough, apocalyptic also teaches that faithfulness to
God is not incompatible with service to the king. Indeed, it is fidelity to the divine Lord that
becomes the ground for success in the service of human lords.
Biblical apocalyptic proclaims that humanity lives under judgment. No one can escape the
moment of individual accountability. When Jesus returns, He will bring His recompense withHim and “repay every one for what he has done” (Rev. 22:12). Though individuals may not
change the course of history that divine grace has preordained, they can choose to be members of
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 19/33
His kingdom in the present and triumph with the kingdom in the future. The judgment both
clarifies moral values now and reveals human choices and destinies then.
Biblical apocalyptic confirms Jesus’ prediction that the gates of hell will not prevail againstHis church. The revelator declares that in the death of Christ God has already attained the victory(Rev. 12:10, 11). Presently God’s people await the visible appearance of the King and their own
ultimate vindication.
Though only God knows the day and hour of the consummation, signs of the end herald the
impending denouement. In the face of end-time pressures, the test of last-day loyalty will be
close. Yet God’s people responding to divine grace will remain true and upright in their inmost
souls. Buoyed up by the apocalyptic promises, admonitions, and consolations, they anticipate the
divine intervention into human history, through which the world will be changed forever. Theyhave no faith in the present to beget the future.
God’s ultimate triumph begins with Jesus’ return, the resurrection of the dead in Christ, and
the translation of the righteous living. The millennium demonstrates unquestionably the truemotives of God’s enemies and ends with the removal of all evil. The apocalyptic visions close
with the ushering in of a new heaven and a new earth, in which God’s people will dwell in the
presence of God forever (cf. Rev. 21:1–4).
B.Implications for Daily Life
Although biblical apocalyptic lifts our sights to the realm of God, where angels sing inworship, it impacts life on this earth. Although it carries us away to the consummation of all
things, it affects how we live and work now.
Biblical apocalyptic is not literature of withdrawal from the world. It does not deny the world;
rather, it shows how God’s followers are to live in the world.
The book of Daniel provides a striking illustration of this truth. Half the book is apocalyptic
on a grand scale: the rise and fall of nations, the sufferings of the saints, the reign of evil powers,cruelty, deception, and God’s intervention at last to vindicate His people and His rule as Heoverthrows the forces of evil and brings in everlasting righteousness. The other half tells the story
of Daniel himself—his tests, service in the court of kings, and counsel and wisdom. The message
is this: apocalyptic goes hand in hand with service to God and humanity.
Although Daniel shows most clearly the interplay of apocalyptic with life in the here and
now, the other biblical apocalyptic writings make the same point. Isaiah 24–27 falls in the midst
of a series of prophecies against the nations surrounding Israel. The apocalyptic interlude, while
it sweeps beyond national boundaries to describe the desolation of the whole earth, is nonetheless
rooted in the practical concerns that shape the entire book. Ezekiel 38, 39 likewise are tied to therestoration of Israel: when Yahweh destroys their enemies, “the house of Israel shall know that Iam the Lord their God, from that day forward” (Eze. 39:22). In Joel 2, 3 we also find the
prediction of doom impacting daily life as the prophet calls for national repentance (Joel 2:12–
17). And Zechariah 9–14 comes as a message of hope to the Jews who, returned from exile,
struggle against enemies and discouragement as they try to rebuild the Temple and restore
society.
In the NT, Matthew 24/Mark 13/Luke 21 dovetail with daily life. In Matthew Jesus
immediately follows the apocalyptic prediction of the end of the age with instructions on how His
followers are to live during the waiting time (Matt. 25). We do not find them withdrawing fromthe world; rather, they are to be busy, improving every talent and opportunity, and manifesting
the grace of Jesus in unstudied deeds of mercy and compassion. Again, Paul’s apocalypse (2
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 20/33
Thess. 2) is preceded and followed by practical concerns. Finally, the Apocalypse is cast in letter
form and brings specific, practical counsel to seven actual churches of Asia Minor.
If biblical apocalyptic is otherworldly, then its implications are altogether this-worldly. Itreassures, encourages, and warns God’s people as they go about their tasks in this life. In manyrespects they seem to be just like other people, but they are not, because they have the confidence
that God is in control of the flow of history and of their lives.
IV.Historical Overview
Limits of space permit only a brief and selective survey. Throughout the Christian Era
biblical apocalyptic has continued to be an unending source of inspiration to a wide variety of
believers. Intervals of vigorous interest in and study of biblical apocalyptic include the early
period of the Christian church, the later Middle Ages, the Reformation Era, the nineteenthcentury, and the contemporary period since the 1960s.
A.The Period of the Early Church
1.Historicism
During the first centuries of the Christian church the abiding influence of biblical apocalyptic
is found in the works of Papias (c. 60-c. 130), Justin Martyr (c. 100-c. 165), Irenaeus (c. 115-c.
202), Tertullian (c. 160-c. 225), Hippolytus (c. 170-c. 236), Commodius (third century),
Victorinus (d. 304), Methodius (d. c. 311), and Lactantius (c. 250-c. 325).
Chiliasm, or millenarianism, though varied in interpretation, was prominent in theeschatological conceptions of the postapostolic church. Papias taught that during the millennium,
following the resurrection from the dead, Christ would reign with His saints on earth. JustinMartyr took a similar premillennial stance and taught that the climax of prophecy was the literal
Second Advent, at which the resurrection would occur. This would be followed by the 1,000
years of Revelation 20 and the subsequent judgment of all humankind.
Irenaeus appealed to the prophecies of the Bible to demonstrate the truthfulness of
Christianity. He believed that the events predicted in Daniel 2 and 7 were closely related. In hisview the Roman Empire was the fourth kingdom, which would break into 10 divisions as
predicted in the symbols of the 10 horns of Daniel 7 and Revelation 17. Irenaeus identified the
antichrist with Daniel’s little horn, Paul’s “man of sin” (KJV), and the first beast of Revelation13.
During the second Christian century highly propagandist works resembling the historicalapocalypses came to be popularly used by Christians. Known as the Sibylline Oracles, the
documents consisted of a conglomerate of writings composed in imitation of the pagan sibyls
(aged prophets credited to different parts of the world, especially ancient Greece and Rome).Both Jews and Christians composed writings in imitation of the heathen sibyls and pressed these
curious composites of pagan, Jewish, and Christian writings into the service of propagating their
faiths, especially their eschatological hopes.
The most significant analogy between these oracles and apocalyptic literature lies in their division of history into generations and named successive kingdoms. The sequences are followed
by the destruction of the earth, the resurrection, the judgment, and the blessed state of the new
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 21/33
earth. The Sibylline Oracles continued to be consulted down through the Middle Ages and
exerted a powerful influence on millenarian thinking.
Tertullian commented on both the books of Daniel and Revelation. He believed that theRoman state delayed the appearance of antichrist as predicted by Paul (i.e., Rome was therestrainer of 2 Thessalonians 2:6, 7). At the beginning of the third century Tertullian espoused
Montanism, a movement also characterized by chiliastic beliefs and extremes that brought
discredit to millennial interpretation.
Hippolytus wrote the earliest complete Christian commentary on the book of Daniel to come
down to us so far. According to Jerome and other sources, Hippolytus also authored a treatise on
the book of Revelation. He regarded the prophecies as a sacred calendar of the future. For him the
fourth empire in both Daniel 2 and 7 was Rome. In harmony with prophecy he expected thedissolution of Rome into 10 kingdoms. Antichrist would appear among these divisions, but his
reign would be terminated by the Second Advent, which he considered to be the goal of
prophecy. Hippolytus identified the concluding events of Daniel and Revelation and applied themto the Second Coming.
Hippolytus seems to have been the first to develop the theory that the 69 weeks of Daniel
9:24–27 led up to the First Advent, while the seventieth week of the same prophecy ushers in the
Second Coming. Also, it would appear that he succumbed to the temptation of setting a date for our Lord’s return.
In his expositions of Revelation 12 Hippolytus applied the symbol of the woman to the
church and that of the man-child to Christ. He identified the fourth kingdom of Daniel 7 with the
first beast of Revelation 13, while he claimed that the second beast typified the kingdom of
antichrist.
Theologically the Latin poet Commodius was a chiliast. He also wrote about antichrist.
Victorinus, who died a martyr under the emperor Diocletian, is the author of the oldest preservedcommentary on Revelation. Jerome classified him as a millenarian. Victorinus established the principle that the Apocalypse is not to be read as one continuous and progressive line of
prophecy, but rather that its various parts return and repeat the ground already covered.Methodius, although influenced by Origen’s allegorical interpretations of Scripture,
contended against Origen for the resurrection and identified the woman and the child of
Revelation 12 with the church and the saints respectively. Lactantius, tutor of the emperor
Constantine’s son, was a zealous and sometimes fanciful chiliast who made use of the Sibylline
Oracles.
Although Jerome (c. 340–420) was a militant antimillenarian and warned that the Apocalypsewas a book of mysteries, he wrote a significant commentary on the book of Daniel. In this
volume he sought to counter the criticisms of the book by the third-century-A.D. Neoplatonist philosopher Porphyry. Jerome identified the Roman state with the fourth empire in Daniel 2 and
7 and claimed that Christ represented the stone that smote the image of Daniel 2. In his view the
Second Advent would occur after antichrist, who was identical with Daniel’s little horn, had
appeared.
2.New Directions
Several forces began to undermine the dominant prophetic understanding of the early church
and to suggest new directions in apocalyptic interpretation. One of these was the spiritualizingand allegorizing of Scripture by Origen (c. 185-c. 254). Having stressed the manifestation of
God’s kingdom in the believer’s soul rather than in the real world, he shifted attention from the
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 22/33
historical toward the spiritual. As a result, Origen undermined the early church’s belief in the
doctrines of a personal coming of Christ, the resurrection, and a literal millennium.
Another factor contributing to a shift in exposition of biblical apocalyptic was the conversionof the emperor Constantine (d. 337). Whereas prior to Constantine, Christians had entertainednegative views toward the Roman Empire, Christianity now became the main religion of the
empire. With this new policy of toleration and imperial favor Christianity developed an “imperial
theology.”
However, the most profound influence to eclipse the prophetic and historic understanding of
the early church must be attributed to Augustine (354–430) . Augustine and subsequent medieval
exegesis followed the hermeneutical principles of Tyconius (d. c. 400). According to subsequent
medieval authors, Tyconius wrote on the Apocalypse, producing a commentary that assignedfulfillment of the book’s prophecies to subjective spiritual development rather than historical
events.
Tyconius claimed that the first resurrection, mentioned in Revelation 20:6 in connection withthe millennium, was spiritual (that of the soul when awakened from the death of sin), while the
second resurrection was the general resurrection of all. In his view the millennium was not the
reign of the righteous on earth for 1,000 years after the resurrection. Rather, Tyconius identified
it with the Christian dispensation beginning at the first advent of Christ. For Tyconius the book of Revelation does not speak so much about coming historical events as it depicts the spiritualcontroversy between the diabolical powers and the kingdom of God.
This mystical, spiritual, and nonhistorical approach to the Apocalypse is reflected and
developed in the allegorical interpretations of Augustine. For the bishop of Hippo the millennium
was a round number designating an indeterminable time interval spanning the period between the
ministry of Christ on earth and the end of the world. Augustine reacted particularly to the
extremes and carnal expectations of millenarians, some of which he himself had once shared.For Augustine the first resurrection was spiritual and allegorical and occurred as the soul dead
in trespasses arose to the life of righteousness. The second resurrection was that of the body at the
end of the world. Between these two events the kingdom of heaven was identical with the churchon earth. The church was the kingdom of Christ reigning with her Lord in the present. Those
sitting on the thrones of judgment in Revelation 20:4 were the prelates of the church.
Whereas many historical interpreters had identified the first beast of Revelation 13 with the
Roman state, Augustine interpreted it as the wicked world. In this way Augustine disallowed any
attempt to find in the canonical apocalypses information about contemporary historical events.
Although Augustine held to belief in the second coming of Christ, his system relegated theAdvent hope to the distant future and thus undermined the imminent expectation of the end.
Augustine profoundly affected the life of the church and the cause of prophetic interpretation. Hisrevolutionary philosophy of the millennium as the reign of the church in the present made a deep
impact on the thinking of subsequent church history. In fact, Augustine’s spiritual and allegorical
interpretation of the biblical apocalypses became the doctrine of the official church throughout
the Middle Ages.
B.The Middle Ages
As long as Augustine’s symbolic view remained dominant during the next 1,000 years, the
prophetic and premillennial notions that characterized the period of the early church remaineddormant and were only occasionally revived by chiliastic groups.
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 23/33
In the twelfth century Joachim, of Fiore (c. 1135–1202), became one of the most significant
apocalyptic authors of the Middle Ages. Historians suggest that Joachim and his followers
pioneered a new stage in the history of apocalyptic tradition.Joachim, abbot of Fiore, used allegorism freely, and his exegesis was amazingly imaginative
and original. Using the Trinity as a model, he divided history into three great ages that flow into
one another. The age of God the Father, largely coincidental with the period of the OT, was the
interval during which men lived according to the flesh. The age dominated by God the Son was
an era when carnal and spiritual things were interwoven. Characterized by the ecclesiastical
hierarchy, the second age spanned a period of 42 generations of approximately 30 years each,
beginning with the rise of Christianity. Joachim expected the age of God the Holy Spirit to begin
shortly, possibly even in his own day. The last would be a new age led by a new monastic order and a new society without prelates and clerics.
Joachim commented on both Daniel and the Revelation, offering certain fantastic expositions.
He combated the chiliastic ideas of an earthly kingdom of 1,000 years and identified themillennium of Revelation 20 with the age of the Spirit.
The abbot appears to have been the first Christian to interpret the period of the 1260 days of
Revelation 12 as 1260 years, although three centuries earlier Jewish expositors had already
considered the 1290 days of Daniel 12 as years. By comparing letter with letter in bothTestaments, Joachim found events in the past, present, and future clearly revealed in Scripture.
During the following centuries Joachim’s ideas captured the imagination of individuals and
groups, some of whom, however, carried his notions to revolutionary conclusions (e.g., the
Spiritual Franciscans).
Subsequent to Joachim, concern with biblical apocalyptic appeared across Europe but was
particularly evident in Britain (e.g., John Wycliffe, c. 1320–1384, and his friend John Purvey, c.
1353-c. 142 8), as well as in Bohemia (e.g., John Milic, d. 1374; his disciple Matthias, of Janow,d. 1394; and later John Huss, c. 1372–1415).
C.The Reformation
1.Reformers’ Historicism
The Reformation’s stress on the Bible was accompanied by a revival of interest in apocalypticinterpretation. Among the publications produced in the sixteenth century was a large volume of
polemical literature written in forthright, and to twentieth-century ears, often crude and vulgar
language. Many of the tracts and commentaries were illustrated with powerful cartoons and
satire. Political and social frustrations injected themselves into the volatile religious atmosphere
and caused outbursts of violence beyond the control of the religious Reformers. The directionProtestantism took in one geographical region was often very different from the course it took in
another.
While the views of Augustine continued—even if in modified form—in the interpretations of
some writers (e.g., John Calvin), the historical interpretation of and literal approaches to biblicalapocalyptic became dominant during the Reformation. The application of the time prophecies of
Daniel 2 and 7 to the four kingdoms of Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome, followed by
the breakup of Rome, continued to lend weight to the long-held view of the historical fulfillment
of the prophecies. Similarly, the application of the literal-year-for-a-prophetic-day principle in
apocalyptic was widely applied during this period, particularly to the 1260 prophetic days, three
and one half prophetic times, and 42 prophetic months. The prophecies of Daniel and Revelation
were held by many to be a panorama of the Christian Era.
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 24/33
While exposition was not uniform, there was widespread agreement among the Reformers on
identifying the predicted antichrist with the Papacy, in some cases with the Turk, and by still
others with both. The antichrist was identified with the little horn of Daniel, the “abomination of desolation” of Matthew 24 (KJV), the “man of sin” of Paul (KJV), the beast, Babylon, and theharlot of Revelation. These identifications with the Papacy contributed largely to a widespread
exit from the church of Rome during this period.
Even though Martin Luther and Ulrich Zwingli depreciated the Apocalypse and John Calvin
remained uncertain about the identity of many of the apocalyptic symbols, none of them hesitated
to identify the Papacy or the Turk with the apostate and oppressive system referred to in Daniel
and Revelation.
The end was believed to be drawing near. Though Reformers like Luther and Zwingli weresuspicious of millennial speculations, several violent outbreaks, such as the ones among the
radical Reformers in Münster and the Fifth Monarchy men during the Puritan Revolt, could not
be prevented.
2.Counterinterpretations
During the second half of the sixteenth and the first half of the seventeenth century, Catholic
counterinterpretations intended to meet the Protestant eaxposition of biblical apocalyptic weredeveloped. Three learned Jesuits spearheaded Rome’s attack on the historical approach, with the
book of Revelation as the main focus.The first of the alternative expositions was developed by Francisco Ribera (1537–1591).
Ribera related the first few chapters of the Apocalypse to Rome in John’s own time and applied
the remaining chapters to a future three-and-a-half-year reign of an infidel antichrist at the end of
the Christian dispensation. Subsequent commentators suggest that Ribera was the founder of the
modern futurist system of interpretation, which later was developed by writers such as Samuel R.
Maitland (1792–1866) and JohnN. Darby (1800–1882).Robert Bellarmine (1542–1621), brilliant theologian and controversialist, augmented the
work of Ribera, attacking particularly the prophetic day-for-a-year principle. Bellarmine sought
especially to exploit the differences in the interpretations among his Protestant adversaries.
The second challenge was mounted by Luis de Alcazar (1554-c. 1613). Alcazar proposed that
the book of Revelation addressed the victorious war of the church in the early centuries against
the Jews and Roman paganism. Since Alcazar’s method applied the entire book of Revelation to
the past, his system of interpretation has been labeled preterism.
Though Alcazar probably was the first to apply a preterist approach to the whole of
Revelation, thhe third-century adversary of Christianity, Porphyry, already had subjected the book of Daniel to a preterist approach, limiting it to the period of AntiochusIV Epiphanes. In asense, therefore, Porphyry and Alcazar became forerunners of the present mode of historico-
critical interpretation, which limits the meaning and significance of the biblical apocalypses to
the past.
The proposals of Ribera and Alcazar diverted support from the Protestant application of the
antichrist to the Papacy. The first consigned antichrist to the distant future; the second, to the
remote past. Although these approaches were mutually exclusive, they deflected attention from
the historical period of papal dominion.
3.The Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 25/33
Despite these counterinterpretations the historical application of apocalyptic continued in the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries as hundreds of commentaries appeared in Britain, Europe,
and the New World. Expositors of note during this period include Joseph Mede (1586–1638),Isaac Newton (1642–1727), and Johann A. Bengel (1687–1752). Though varying in detail,clarity, and understanding, these expositors basically continued their application of biblical
apocalyptic to fulfillment in the course of history.
The chiliastic views of this period were challenged by a new millennial theory formulated by
Daniel Whitby (1638–1726). Whitby placed a spiritual millennium, consisting of the universal
triumph of the gospel and the conversion of all nations, in the 1,000 years of Revelation 20 before
the coming of Christ.
Whitby envisioned a society in which Judeo-Christian values would be the predominantinfluence. He believed the millennium to be a “golden age” of paradisiacal righteousness and
peace, during which the nations would be converted to Christianity prior to Christ’s return.
Unfortunately, such postponement of Christ’s advent into the distant future beyond themillennium tended to dilute the sense of the imminent coming of our Lord and lull people into a
false security.
D.The Modern Period
1.Revival of Interest in Prophecy
The violent uprooting of social and political institutions in Europe during the FrenchRevolution aroused an unprecedented concern with biblical apocalyptic. A new epoch in the
study of the books of Daniel and Revelation opened on both sides of the Atlantic. Expositors andexpositions of apocalyptic seemed to multiply on an unparalleled scale.
Some writers began to call this period the time of the end and regarded the period as thefulfillment of events predicted in the apocalypses. There was intense expectation, especially
among groups such as the Millerites, of the second advent of Christ and the subsequent
commencement of the millennium.Insistence on the letter of Scripture and eagerness to vindicate the OT prophecies about Israel
led some premillennialists to extremes of literalism, introducing a Judaizing chiliasm. This
tendency, which grew in popularity and continues until today as the dominant form of premillennialism, came to be known as dispensationalism.
In contrast with premillennial expositions of Scripture, throughout the remainder of the
nineteenth century, postmillennialists continued to proclaim their doctrine of universal
improvement and world conversion before the second coming of Jesus.
In a parallel development the rationalist views of prophecy mediated initially by Porphyryand Alcazar became popularized by Hugh Broughton (1549–1612), Hugo Grotius (1583–1645),
Henry Hammond (1605–1660), and the German rationalists. The latter approach relegated
biblical apocalyptic to the distant past, depriving it of its predictive elements and cosmic sweep.
This form of preterism is better known today as the historico-critical school. Apart fromoccasional writers who continue to regard the apocalyptic predictions as panoramic forecasts of
events, the historico-critical approach has come to dominate apocalyptic exposition into the
present. It soon broke down the distinction between biblical and nonbiblical apocalypses and
began to study the apocalyptic documents merely as historical phenomena.
2.Historico-Critical Study of Apocalyptic
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 26/33
The first comprehensive description of Jewish and Christian apocalyptic was published by
Friedrich Lücke in 1832. He began his study with an investigation of the book of Revelation and
then turned to other apocalyptic compositions. The subtitle of the work is significant: An Attempt at a Comprehensive Introduction to the Revelation of John and to the Complete Apocalyptic Literature.
Lücke believed that Jewish apocalyptic was best represented in the book of Daniel (though he
dated it to the second century B.C. with other critics of his day) and Christian apocalyptic in the
book of Revelation. Throughout, he still sought to preserve the uniqueness of revealed religion by
distinguishing between canonical and noncanonical apocalypses. He concluded that apocalyptic
is essentially prophetic, though he recognized that not all prophecy in Scripture is apocalyptic. In
his view the essence of apocalyptic was its universal conception of history.In a brief article published in 1843 Eduard Reuss proceeded from the conviction that the
Apocalypse of John should be considered part of apocalyptic literature. Unlike Lücke, however,
Reuss abandoned the distinction between the canonical Apocalypse of John and other apocalypses, which has since become the accepted norm in historico-critical study. Reuss decided
to examine the compositions from a rationalistic standpoint, studying them as they made their
appearance in history.
The first monograph dealing specifically with Jewish apocalyptic was published by Adolf Hilgenfeld in 1857. Hilgenfeld attempted to discover the nature of apocalyptic through a study of its historical development. He sought to displace Lücke’s distinction between inspired and
noninspired writings and applied Hegelian constructs as he traced the development of
apocalyptic.
Apart from occasional signs of interest, the study of apocalyptic declined for almost a century
after Hilgenfeld. Historians trace this change to the powerful influence of Julius Wellhausen’s
monumental reconstruction of Israelite religion published in 1878.Wellhausen and his students denied any authentic prophetic spirit in the apocalyptic works,
considering their authors to be imitators of the preexilic prophets and borrowers of foreign,
especially Persian, materials. Whereas previous scholars had regarded the apocalyptic works aslinks between prophecy and New Testament Christianity, Wellhausen claimed that the classical
prophets were the spiritual predecessors of Jesus. This notion gave rise to the “prophetic
connection” theory. Accordingly, any link between prophecy and apocalyptic was denied, and
little value was placed on the apocalyptic writings.
Among the notable exceptions was British scholar Robert H. Charles. At the beginning of the
twentieth century he developed an absorbing fascination with apocalyptic. Although Charles usedthe tools that Wellhausen had developed, he devoted a lifetime to collecting apocalyptic and
apocryphal texts. He prepared critical editions and translations of these works and endeavored todiscover the intrinsic qualities of apocalypticism. Among his many publications is the
monumental two-volume work The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, an
indispensable tool to scholars for 70 years.
Like Wellhausen, Charles followed literary and source-critical principles that presupposed
standards of coherence, consistency, and Aristotelian logic largely foreign to the apocalyptic and
biblical materials. Expecting a consistent point of view and uniformity in content and style,
Charles was intolerant of the inconsistency and repetition noticeable in apocalyptic. His dating of
apocalyptic documents was greatly influenced by his evolutionary perspective. The Hegelian“rational spirit” clearly lives on in his historical reconstruction of apocalyptic.
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 27/33
Unlike Wellhausen, Charles saw an organic connection between prophecy and apocalyptic.
He thus countered the prophetic connection theory proposed by Wellhausen and resolutely stood
for a close relationship between apocalyptic and NT Christianity.The continuity between prophecy and apocalyptic proposed by Lücke, Reuss, Hilgenfeld,
Charles, and others was maintained in the writings of Harold H. Rowley (The Relevance of
Apocalyptic, 1944), David S. Russell (The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic, 1964),
Peter von der Osten-Sacken ( Die Apokalyptik in ih rem Verhältnis zu Prophetie und Weisheit
[Apocalyptic in Its Relationship to Prophecy and Wisdom], 1969), and more “recently in Paul D.
Hanson (The Dawn of Apocalyptic, 1975), and Joyce G. Baldwin ( Daniel, 1978).
At the turn of the century another historico-critical approach to apocalyptic was pioneered by
Hermann Gunkel (Schöpfung und Chaos in Urzeit und Endzeit, 1895). Gunkel attempted toisolate what he believed were mythic fragments embedded in apocalyptic. Since, according to
Gunkel, these fragments could not be identified with historical events, he sought to discover their
significance in the larger pattern of ancient Near Eastern mythology.While Gunkel turned to Babylonian mythology, more recent studies typifying this approach
have tended to focus particularly on Canaanite literature. Historians of religion suggest that the
royal cult in Jerusalem absorbed Canaanite motifs and concepts into the religion of Israel until
they reemerged in the apocalyptic writings.The methodology and comparative approach suggested by Gunkel were further developed by
writers such as Sigmund Mowinckel ( He That Cometh, 1954), Frank M. Cross (Canaanite Mythand Hebrew Epic, 1973), and John J. Collins (The Apocalyptic Imagination, 1984). Rather than
searching for historical identifications in apocalyptic, this approach prefers to investigate the
alleged mythological roots of apocalyptic imagery and then give them symbolic and allusive
meanings.
A third direction in contemporary apocalyptic research is to understand the literature in thecontext of Hellenistic and Eastern religious syncretistic writings.
The lively current interest in apocalyptic had its beginning in a programmatic essay by Ernst
Käsemann written in 1960, in which he made the claim that “apocalyptic was the mother of Christian theology.”
Systematic theologians like Wolfgang Pannenberg ( Revelation as History, 1968) and Jürgen
Moltmann (Theology of Hope, 1967) also drew attention to the importance of apocalyptic
literature for the early stages of Christian theology. This link between apocalyptic and
Christianity is particularly startling in view of previous scholarly rejection of a bond between
apocalyptic and early Christianity. For an increasing number of contemporary scholars, Jewishapocalyptic is essential for an understanding of early Christianity and Christian theology.
3.Contemporary Approaches to Biblical Apocalyptic
Approaches to biblical apocalyptic in the second half of the twentieth century, though diverse
and complex, may be grouped into two broad categories—spiritual and allegorical approaches,
and literal and historical interpretations.
Postmillennialism (i.e., the notion that Christ’s second advent takes place after the
millennium), stemming from the writings of Daniel Whitby, dominated eschatological thought
among conservative Protestants during much of the nineteenth century. It has now lost popularity.
Worsening social conditions throughout the world today have robbed postmillennialism of itsformer strength. Apart from the increasing precariousness of our times, Scripture also militates
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 28/33
against the postmillennial stance, for contrary to Whitby’s position, the revelator clearly positions
the Second Advent before rather than after the millennium (Rev. 19:11–20:10).
a.Spiritual or allegorical approaches. Applying the historico-criticcal method to biblicalapocalyptic, many scholars see Daniel and Revelation, not as forecasts of what is to be, buta assuggestions of the inner meaning of the universe and of human experience.
Though this position on biblical apocalyptic is increasing in popularity, particularly among
scholars who trace apocalyptic imagery back to ancient Near Eastern mythology, it is not shared
by all historical critics. The tendency to view apocalyptic imagery as code words for historical
entities (even though these entities are limited to the past) has been and still is widely accepted
among historico-critical scholars.
Another form of the allegorical or spiritual interpretation of biblical apocalyptic is found particularly in the amillennial understanding of Revelation 20:1–10. Amillennialists do not all
share the presuppositions of historico-critical scholarship; however, they do agree that the 1,000
years of Revelation 20 are a symbolic representation of the Christian Era between the first andsecond coming of our Lord. Accordingly, we are now in the millennium, for the kingdom of God
began with Christ’s birth and will end at His second advent.
Amillennialism, first articulated by Augustine, is suspect, because it is hermeneutically
inconsistent and because it defies the position of the millennial period in the book of Revelation.For this approach there is no consistency in the application of hermeneutic principles toRevelation 20 and to other parts of Scripture.
The literary structure of John’s Apocalypse divides into two major sections. The first half of
the book deals with historical sequences from apostolic times to Christ’s second advent. The
second division of the book portrays the eschatological consummation. If the amillennial view
were correct, the millennium should have been placed in the first rather than second division of
the book. By positioning the 1,000 years in the second, or eschatological, section, John placed themillennium in the future and anchored Revelation 20:1–10 firmly to the series of events thatconstitute God’s final and ultimate activity.
b.Literal interpretations. The second dominant contemporary approach to biblicalapocalyptic is typified in premillennialism (the notion that Christ’s second coming will occur
before the 1,000-year period of Revelation 20). Premillennial interpretation has roots in the first
few centuries of the Christian church. After Augustinian amillennialism became official church
doctrine at the beginning of the Middle Ages, premillennialism remained dormant and revived
periodically through the past 20 centuries, particularly after the decline of postmillennialism at
the beginning of the twentieth century.Premillennialism, like historicist interpretations of apocalyptic prophecy, is characterized by a
wide variety of views, although all premillennialists agree that the second advent of Christ precedes the 1,000 years of Revelation 20.
For the most part, premillennialists view the biblical apocalypses as forecasts. The sequences
of events in Daniel and Revelation lead up to the end and form part of a long, sacred history that
God has predetermined. This sacred history may be known to those who study the books of
Daniel and Revelation. The biblical apocalypses complement each other, and their messages may
be understood on the principle of the unity of Scripture. The images of the visions stand for real
things, and the sequences of events correspond to historical happenings.
Historic premillennialism was modified with the rise of dispensationalism in the nineteenthcentury, and presently dispensational premillennialism is numerically dominant among
premillennialists. Edward Irving, John N. Dartlirby, Lewis S. Chafer, and C.I. Scofield
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 29/33
(particularly the Scofield Reference Bible) all contributed to the shape of present
dispensationalism, which represents a number of schools rather than a movement.
Though contemporary dispensational premillennialism is far from uniform, many still agreewith Darby that Christ’s second coming consists of two stages. The first involves a secret rapturewhen all Christian saints will be “caught up” to be with Christ, and the second focuses on
Christ’s return seven years later to rule on earth for 1,000l years.
Darby believed that during the future seven years, or “age to come,” mass conversions would
occur, even though the gospel age would have come to an end and the Holy Spirit would have
been withdrawn. During the subsequent millennium Jewish Temple worship would be
reestablished in Jerusalem, and the OT kingdom prophecies would be finally fulfilled. This
insistence on a literal fulfillment of the OT kingdom prophecies in a restored Jewish nation hasled to a Judaizing form of chiliasm. (See Millennium III. B. 7.)
E.Seventh-day Adventist Interpretation
Seventh-day Adventists also are premillennialists, but like most premillennialists of the early
nineteenth century, not dispensational. Given their historicist understanding of biblical
apocalyptic, Adventists believe that history has run most of its course and that the second coming
of Christ is imminent.Whereas Adventists understand Scripture to teach a cataclysmic return of our Lord prior to
the millennium, they see no biblical support for the bifurcation of the Second Advent into a“rapture” and an “appearing.” The scriptural vocabulary used to describe our Lord’s return
suggests that the Second Coming will be an indivisible, single, literal, audible, and visible event.
(See Second Coming I. E. 1–5.)
At the second advent of Christ believers will meet the Lord in the air and follow Him back to
the heavenly places prepared for them, while the impenitent are slain (cf. John 14:2, 3; 1 Thess.
4:16, 17; Rev. 19:11–21). The millennium therefore begins with a depopulated earth. Inability tocontinue his nefarious activity because of the depopulation of the earth causes Satan’s binding(Rev. 20:1–3, 7, 8; see Millennium).
Since Revelation 20 is the only passage in Scripture that explicitly depicts the 1,000-year
period, any valid description of the millennium must be derived from or be in accord with this
passage. There is therefore no reason to read into it the unfulfilled OT kingdom prophecies,
which originally applied to the Jewish nation. Neither is there evidence that conversions will
occur after the coming of Christ, for all destinies have been sealed with the return of our Lord.
Likewise, the idea that the Temple ritual will operate once more, even if only in the sense of
memorial services and sacrifices, is misguided in the light of the efficacy and nonrepeatablenature of the death of our Saviour.
At the end of the 1,000-year reign of Christ with His saints in heaven, the impenitent on earth
are revived, Satan is able to resume his activity of deception, the final judgment takes place, all
evil is eliminated, and a new heaven and a new earth are established (Rev. 20:7–21:4; see
Judgment III. B. 3; Millennium I. C. 3).
Seventh-day Adventists, therefore, stand in continuity with the historical and premillennial
interpretation of biblical apocalyptic, believing that the fulfillment of the predictions covers the
entire history of pagan empires from Daniel’s day down to the final setting up of God’s kingdom.
Adventists do not accept the total application of the apocalyptic visions of Daniel and Revelationto the past. They also avoid the “spiritualizing” tendency of postmillennialism or amillennialism
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 30/33
and the “over-literalizing” that has led dispensational premillennialists to a Judaizing form of
chiliasm.
The Adventist vision of the imminence of Christ’s return and the finality this event brings tothe offer of salvation challenges the notions of a “golden age” and an “age to come.” Adventist prophetic interpretation also steers clear of the pitfalls of speculation and sensationalism so
popular among premillennialists.
Adventists long for a new world yet endeavor to take seriously the social, cultural, and
ecological responsibility to the present world. Nevertheless, their prayer at all times is “Amen.
Come Lord Jesus!”
V.Ellen G. White Comments
Ellen White’s extensive writings reveal a person who was profoundly influenced by, and hadthe highest regard for, biblical apocalyptic, especially the books of Daniel and Revelation. She
saw these books as having particular import and value for God’s people in the last days and
recommended their careful study. As an interpreter, she remained a consistent advocate of the
historicist approach, understanding the visions of Daniel and Revelation as unfolding the
successive stages of history, which is to climax in the second coming of Jesus and the restoration
of all things.
Because of the diffuse nature of her use of Scripture, it is impossible to quantify EllenWhite’s references to biblical apocalyptic. She wrote no book specifically on Daniel or Revelation, nor an eschatology per se. But we may gauge something of the profound influence of
apocalyptic on her thinking by two measures. First, the Comprehensive Index to the Writings of
Ellen G. White lists the biblical references in her main works. Each page of this listing gives
several hundred references, and for the book of Daniel the Index covers more than two full pages,
while for Revelation it stretches to eight complete pages. Second, a compilation of Ellen White’s
writings relative to the end-time was published in 1992 under the title Last Day Events. It runs
330 pages.The following citations are typical of the many that might be brought to bear from Ellen
White’s writings.
A.The Call to Study Daniel and Revelation
“Read the book of Daniel,” she counseled. “Call up, point by point, the history of the
kingdoms there represented … . The light that Daniel received direct from God was givenespecially for these last days” (4BC 1166). “The book of Revelation opens to the world what has
been, what is, and what is to come; it is for our instruction upon whom the ends of the world are
come. It should be studied with reverential awe. We are privileged in knowing what is for our learning” (RH Aug. 31, 1897).
To ministers she advised: “Ministers should present the sure word of prophecy as the
foundation of the faith of Seventh-day Adventists. The prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation
should be carefully studied, and in connection with them the words, ‘Behold the Lamb of God,
which taketh away the sin of the world’ ” (GW 148).
B.The Interpretation of Biblical Apocalyptic
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 31/33
Ellen White nowhere uses the word “apocalyptic,” nor does she evince any interest in the
speculations of historico-critical scholarship regarding the relation of biblical apocalyptic to
apocalyptic literature in general. Her focus is on Daniel and Revelation and to a lesser extent onother apocalyptic chapters such as Matthew 24.
She identifies Daniel, the Hebrew captive taken to Babylon, as the author of the book by that
name (PK 553, 554; 7T 161). Further, she states that he wrote about 500 years before Christ, thus
implicitly rejecting the second-century-B.C. date for the book (DA 98). For Revelation she
identifies John the beloved, one of the original 12 apostles, as the author and places the writing of
the book late in his life during the reign of the emperor Domitian, who banished John to the
island of Patmos (AA 568–571).
Ellen White called for Revelation to be studied in connection with Daniel. In 1902 she wrote,“It was my idea to have the two books bound together, Revelation following Daniel, as giving
fuller light on the subjects dealt with in Daniel. The object is to bring these books together,
showing that they both relate to the same subjects” (TM 117).Her many references to Daniel and Revelation reveal a consistently historicist hermeneutic,
although she never uses the term. For her the prophecies of these books unroll in historical
panorama from the days of Daniel and John until the establishment of the eternal kingdom of
God. Just as she knows nothing of a second-century-B.C. date for the writing of Daniel, so sheknows nothing of a preterist interpretation of Revelation. Nor is she an idealist or a futurist: those parts of biblical apocalyptic whose fulfillment lies in the future are only the conclusion of the
unfolding course of history that God has predicted through vision and symbol.
The following statements reveal Ellen White’s understanding of the sequential fulfillment of
the prophecies of these books:
“In the Revelation are portrayed the deep things of God … . Its truths are addressed to those
living in the last days of this earth’s history, as well as to those living in the days of John. Someof the scenes depicted in this prophecy are in the past, some are now taking place; some bring toview the close of the great conflict between the powers of darkness and the Prince of heaven, and
some reveal the triumphs and joys of the redeemed in the earth made new” (AA 584).“The book of Revelation opens to the world what has been, what is, and what is to come; it is
for our instruction upon whom the ends of the world are come” (7BC 954).
Although some have endeavored to find support for a double fulfillment of prophecy from a
few of her statements, the weight of evidence militates against this viewpoint. Warning against
such approaches, she wrote, “Events in the train of prophecy that had their fulfillment away in the
past are made future, and thus by these theories the faith of some is undermined” (2SM 102).Ellen White speaks of the prophetic chain running through history, with God revealing history
“from eternity in the past to eternity in the future” (PK 536). She states, “The prophecies presenta succession of events leading down to the opening of the judgment. This is especially true of the
book of Daniel” (GC 356). Rather than suggesting that Ellen White indicated that prophecy
should be repeated, we can conclude that history will be repeated (Rice 145–161).
C.Comprehensive Presentations
Not only do Ellen White’s writings give evidence of an abiding interest in biblical
apocalyptic, but also in some places she elaborates apocalyptic, fleshing out indications in the
book of Revelation to paint a scenario of events just prior to the Second Coming and beyond.Thus the entire second half of her important work The Great Controversy Between Christ and
Satan focuses on the period from the Advent awakening of the early nineteenth century through
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 32/33
the Second Coming and on to the final restoration of all things. The first chapter of this section
(chapter 18) deals with William Miller, who, she wrote, was called like Elisha “to leave his plow
and open to the people the mysteries of the kingdom of God” (GC 331). The final chapters in this presentation deal with events that are still future.
In this comprehensive presentation Ellen White gives a clear interpretation of the little horn
of Daniel 7, the dragon of Revelation 12, the leopard beast of Revelation 13, and the two-horned
beast of Revelation 13. She presents the 1260 days of prophetic time in Daniel and Revelation as
being the same as the three and one-half years and the 42 months, and as fulfilled in 1260 years
of papal supremacy (538–1798). Looking beyond her day, she foresaw the final conflict over the
Sabbath and God’s law, symbolized by the enforcement of the “mark of the beast” by the “image
of the beast.”
D.The Divine Superintendence of History
For Ellen White the great message of biblical apocalyptic was the divine superintendence of
history. The God of Daniel and Revelation, the God of the entire Scriptures, is Lord of time and
space. He sees all, He knows all, He controls all. He does not coerce the human will—essential
freedom is a reality—but ultimately He works all things to accomplish His eternal purpose.
Chaotic and meaningless though life may seem to humanity, God is in charge, and ultimately Hewill resolve all and restore the world to perfect peace and harmony.
Speaking of the first coming of Jesus, Ellen White wrote: “But like the stars in the vast circuitof their appointed path, God’s purposes know no haste and no delay … . So in heaven’s council
the hour for the coming of Christ had been determined. When the great clock of time pointed to
that hour, Jesus was born in Bethlehem” (DA 32).
That focuses her understanding of the course of divine history: ultimately God retains control.
Although humans cooperate and interact with the divine plan, they cannot frustrate it.
She pictures the calm, controlled, divine superintendence of history: “In the annals of humanhistory, the growth of nations, the rise and fall of empires, appear as if dependent on the will and prowess of man; the shaping of events seems, to a great degree, to be determined by his power,
ambition, or caprice. But in the Word of God the curtain is drawn aside, and we behold, above,
behind, and through all the play and counterplay of human interest and power and passions, the
agencies of the All-merciful One, silently, patiently working out the counsels of His own will”
(PK 499, 500).
This, of course, is the portrayal of history that biblical apocalyptic presents. In Daniel
Yahweh sets up kings and removes kings; in Revelation He watches over the apple of His eye,
the church.And, at last, He makes a new heaven and a new earth, wherein righteousness dwells.“The great controversy is ended. Sin and sinners are no more. The entire universe is clean.
One pulse of harmony and gladness beats through the vast creation. From Him who created all,
flow life and light and gladness, throughout the realms of illimitable space. From the minutest
atom to the greatest world, all things, animate and inanimate, in their unshadowed beauty and
perfect joy, declare that God is love” (GC 678).
VI.Literature
7/28/2019 Biblical Apocalyptic
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/biblical-apocalyptic 33/33
Charlesworth, James H., ed. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. 2 vols. Garden City, N.Y.:
Doubleday, 1983–1985.
Collins, John J. The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to the Jewish Matrix of Christianity. New York: Crossroad, 1984.
Froom, LeRoy E. The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers. 4 vols. Washington, D.C.: Review and
Herald, 1946–1954.
Holbrook, Frank B., ed. The Seventy Weeks, Leviticus, and the Nature of Prophecy. Daniel and
Revelation Committee Series. Vol. 3. Washington, D.C.: Biblical Research Institute, 1986.
———. Symposium on Daniel . Daniel and Revelation Committee Series. Vol. 2. Washington,
D.C.: Biblical Research Institute, 1986.
———. Symposium on Revelation—Book 1. Daniel and Revelation Committee Series. Vol. 6.Silver Spring, Md.: Biblical Research Institute, 1992.
———. Symposium on Revelation—Book 2. Daniel and Revelation Committee Series. Vol. 7.
Silver Spring, Md.: Biblical Research Institute, 1992.Koch, Klaus. The Rediscovery of Apocalyptic. Studies in Biblical Theology, second series. No.
22. London: SCM, 1972.
McGinn, Bernard. Visions of the End: Apocalyptic Traditions in the Middle Ages. New York:
Columbia University Press, 1979.Rice, George E. “Ellen G. White’s Use of Daniel and Revelation.” In Symposium on Revelation—
Book 1. Ed. Frank B. Holbrook, Daniel and Revelation Committee Series. Vol. 6. Silver
Spring, Md.: Biblical Research Institute, 1992.
“The Role of Israel in Old Testament Prophecy.” In The SDA Bible Commentary. Washington,
D.C.: Review and Herald, 1955. Vol. 4, pp. 25–38.
Rowland, Christopher. The Open Heaven: The Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early
Christianity. New York: Crossroad, 1982.1
1Raoul Dederen, vol. 12, Handbook of Seventh-Day Adventist Theology (electronic ed.;, Logos Library
System; Commentary Reference Series Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association,
2001), 784-814.