Customer Reviews

The Apocalyptic Literature: Interpreting Biblical Texts Series

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This is simply the most lucid and insightful book on apocalyptic literature I have ever read. I'm so glad I found it!

Stephen Cook first makes the case that events like terrorist attacks and massive hurricanes point to the reality of an apocalyptic chaos just underneath our seemingly placid, stable world. But before diving into that apocalyptic reality, Cook articulates the myriad ways in which all of us, conservative or liberal, mainline or evangelical, Catholic or Protestant completely domesticate the apocalyptic literature of the Bible. We over-spiritualize it; we try to "crack it" like a secret code; we see it as a primitive people's attempt to make sense of tragic historical events.

Cook then explores some of those fundamental questions that every preacher and parishioner asks: Did Jesus consider himself an apocalyptic prophet, and if so, did he really believe that his death would usher in the end of history? How does a prophet like Isaiah "know" the future, particularly as it relates to a final apocalyptic event? Is the book of revelation graphic poetry, or a blueprint for the future, or could there be another option? These questions are just the tip of the iceberg.

For a culture and a church thirsting for fresh insights into the concept of apocalyptic thought, it seems to me that this book is a deep well of cold water.

Stephen L. Cook's new book "The Apocalyptic Literature" is an invaluable asset for preachers, teachers of religion, and any interpreter of scripture who is seeking greater spiritual understanding of apocalyptic writings.

Cook firmly sets aside the limiting stereotyped understandings of the origins and meaning of "end time" writings: that apocalyptic writing is to be understood primarily as consolation for persecuted peoples, or as a coded "timetable" for an imminent end of the world in our times. Instead, he uses cultural and spiritual background to depict a richer context in which the "apocalyptic spirit" is an integral part of faith, not simply an unnecessary and uncomfortable addition.

The book's comprehensive survey of apocalyptic writings offers great material for those teachers and preachers who are willing to take the challenge of enriching the spiritual lives of their students and congregations.

Nowhere is the world of the biblical text stranger than in the apocalyptic literature of both the Old and New Testaments. In this volume, the author makes the puzzling visions and symbols of the biblical apocalyptic literature intelligible to modern readers. He begins with definitions of apocalypticism and apocalyptic literature and introduces the various scholarly approaches to and issues for an understanding of the text. He introduces the reader to the social and historical worlds of the apocalyptic groups that gave rise to such literature and leads the reader into a better appreciation and understanding of the theological import of biblical apocalyptic literature. In the second major section of the book, the author guides the reader through specific examples of the Bible's apocalyptic literature. He addresses both the best-known examples (the biblical books of Daniel and Revelation) and other important but lesser known examples (Zechariah and some words of Jesus and Paul).

Cook's main argument in this work is that the apocalyptic texts should be read as having dual fulfillments, both in history and outside space and time. They should not be squashed flat by inappropriately historicist readings. I am in agreement with this view. Unfortunately, Cook's arguments, especially as applied to the New Testament and the Olivet Discourse, are quite unconvincing. Cook relies on typical form critical understandings of the composition of the Gospels, so Matthew is the product of Jewish Christians who anticipated the rebuilding of the Temple some time in the future(!). Cook deals with the familiar argument that Jesus' statement that all these things will happen to the current generation with the typical response that the "prophetic perspective" doesn't strongly distinguish between the near and the far future. This response isn't any more convincing here than it ever has been. If Jesus prophesied a judgment that did not come, then Caiaphas was right that he was a false prophet under the terms of Deuteronomy. The conventional view, espoused by people like Dale Allison and well represented here, that Jesus was wrong about this particular point is unlikely to convince believers serious about scripture, or skeptics like Bertrand Russell, who expect words to mean what they say. Add various digs against our white, male Christian ancestors presented with all of the myopia of a modern scholar assured of his own moral superiority, you have a work of the academy that is fairly useless to the church.