apocalyptic preaching
i am reading a book called "Everyday Apocalypse" by david dark. it's funny in parts and i like it. the first chapter talks a bit about the pathetic excuse for apocalyptic language in what he calls "its-hard-to-be-me" music. funny. he says that apocalyptic must be less controlled by the author, quoting tolkien who says that allegory is domination by the author, whereas apocalyptic is not to parallel reality, but to shatter "reality."
combo this with my reading of Revelation for a Sunday night series i'm doing at my church. i wonder if john the seer just started writing one day and out came this beautiful message of comfort to those facing persecution? the work's repletion of OT references suggest to me no; but, then again, if john is conditioned well, then these references might simply be "natural."
either way, it leaves me wondering what i perceive incorrectly. what harlots do i weep for? what beastly marks are on my hands? what would john the seer see today? what letter would he write? what sermon would he preach?
in doing my own research for this class (and in teaching it), it is becoming increasingly obvious that i don't know how to read apocalyptic literature. i mean, i know a little about interpreting Revelation, but i don't know how to see this world apocalyptically. if i can't read it, then i can't preach it. i suppose it starts with ears to hear...and how will i hear without a preacher?
combo this with my reading of Revelation for a Sunday night series i'm doing at my church. i wonder if john the seer just started writing one day and out came this beautiful message of comfort to those facing persecution? the work's repletion of OT references suggest to me no; but, then again, if john is conditioned well, then these references might simply be "natural."
either way, it leaves me wondering what i perceive incorrectly. what harlots do i weep for? what beastly marks are on my hands? what would john the seer see today? what letter would he write? what sermon would he preach?
in doing my own research for this class (and in teaching it), it is becoming increasingly obvious that i don't know how to read apocalyptic literature. i mean, i know a little about interpreting Revelation, but i don't know how to see this world apocalyptically. if i can't read it, then i can't preach it. i suppose it starts with ears to hear...and how will i hear without a preacher?
posted by Aaron Perry at
11:31 AM
5 Comments:
Which is why Revelation is the only book Calvin did not comment on or preach from. And also why it's the last book in the Bible. Calvin didn't understand it; the early Church was not entirely conviced it was canon. So you're in good company.
H'was and co. along with numerous liberationists of various stripes, of course, read this world apocalyptically, with America as the beast and capitalism as the harlot. I take it you're not going to read the world apocalyptically such as they do.
Curious use of Rom. 10:14, btw. But that's the subject of another blog entirely.
SGFMB
i think the closest thing we may have to apocalyptic preaching today may be a really good political cartoonist. but i agree, reading it is a challenge. i think finding and reading extra-biblical apocalyptic literature may help, but (as you said) it's not the easiest stuff to find.
i'm not sure America can be the beast or capitalism the harlot in themselves, but as far as they are considered the world's guiding light and the world's economic hope respectively, then they exhibit beastly and harlotish qualities most certainly.
i'm not sure you get to choose how to read apocalyptically. you either do or don't.
i think rom. 10:14 is a hint to paul's own vocation--and is fleshed out in rom. 15 by asking the Roman church to share their material blessings with Jewish believers just as the Jews have shared (even unwittingly) their spiritual blessings with the Gentiles. Rom 10:14 occurs in the middle of Rom 9-11, the part of God's widening the covenant, even while condemning Israel (as was his plan), which raises sympathy and softens hearts of the Roman readers esp to have them repent and share in the covenant of God through the preaching of one sent (Paul, whose gospel is first to the Jew and who starts his preaching in temples!).
now, that preacher is needed to be apocalyptically driven (rather than covenantal-inclusion-ly driven)--to reorient the way we see the world.
very true, matt, about cartoons. i wonder if muslims read apocalyptic read better than Christians by this (maybe not so) ridiculous outrage at the recent cartoon. (it would be not so ridiculous if the cartoon truly does strip down false realities and present the truth.)
I can't help you read apocolyptically because I generally take Revelation for how it appears - a vision with a promise instead of an explanation. It's a promise that the world will be in uproar, that the rich and powerful will eventually lose both riches and power, and a promise that the Lord will reign eternally. Otherwise, I'll keep checking back to your blog for ideas. :)
hey lynn: "a vision with a promise" is a decent partial def'n of apocalyptic--which is how i'm trying to read the world! :) in other words, who are the rich and powerful now? how do they get "read" and "interpreted"? what is the promise that they need to hear? how do they get confronted and extended the embrace of the church? i am not looking for explanation of Revelation--i can interpret Revelation alright; i am looking for apocalyptic reading of where i now exist.
i agree with Some Guy that some apocalyptic preachers may oversimplify the issue--but i applaud their attempt, at least.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home