Envisioning a path forward . . . for all times
Daniel 7:9-14 & Revelation 1:4b-8
I wonder what you think of when you hear the word “apocalypse.” Perhaps you think of the end of the world, and how that might come about. Maybe that word makes you think of a movie, like Apocalypse Now or Don’t Look Up. Maybe you’ve read a science fiction book that envisions humankind fleeing our home planet due to environmental collapse, or a Christian fiction book whose author thinks he’s depicted the play-by-play of the “end times.”
For some folks, the word “apocalypse” might bring to mind the Biblical book of Revelation, or perhaps of Daniel. I’ll discuss both today, but first I want to spend a little more time on the word “apocalypse.”
While we might think of apocalyptic writing as being associated with the end of the world, or at least of humankind, that typically wasn’t the case for the authors of the apocalyptic writings we find in the Bible. They weren’t as interested in speculating about the end of the world as they were in trying to find a way to move forward from the present. Bible scholar Greg Carey, who specializes in ancient apocalyptic scripture, writes that while such writings push “the boundaries of the imagination . . . it also emerges from the common human longing to reconfigure the world. It addresses questions that we begin to ask in our childhood and that hound us throughout our lives. Is the world headed in any particular direction? Does justice win out in the end, or does history lack purpose? How does one account for disaster when meaning seems absent? What realities lie beyond the world as we ordinarily perceive it?” (Carey, 1)
For those living in the midst of the Babylonian exile, which is the setting for the book of Daniel, these questions probably often came to mind. Imagine being pulled from the community in which you’d always lived, being sent to a distant place, being given a new name and a new job and being surrounded by new people and customs, including an entirely unfamiliar religion. It’s likely you’d begin to forget who you were, which was the objective of the Babylonians when they conquered a nation. Reprogramming people to think and live in the Babylonian way was a deliberate practice.
Though the book of Daniel is set during the Babylonian exile, which occurred over 500 years before Jesus was born, it wasn’t written during that time. The stories fit better with the experience of Jewish people under the rule of the Persians, who conquered the Babylonians in 539 BCE, or the Greeks, who showed up in 333 BCE. And the details of Daniel’s vision even show an awareness of events that place it around 167.
The first part of the book of Daniel tells stories of people living under occupation, which applies to all of those historical contexts. It includes the experiences of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednago, who were sentenced to death in a furnace for not worshiping a statue the king built in his honor. It also tells of Daniel being thrown into a den with lions for a similar offense.
The second half of Daniel represents a shift away from such stories, though, instead detailing Daniel’s visions. He sees four strange and powerful beasts emerge from the sea — a winged lion, a bear with tusks, a leopard with four wings and four heads, and another creature with ten heads. These beasts engage in violent acts, seemingly at will. But then Daniel sees an Ancient One on his fiery throne, a court sitting in judgment, and thousands of people serving the Ancient One. The fourth beast is killed, and the dominion of the remaining creatures is taken away, although their lives are prolonged “for a season and a time.” A human-like figure descends from the clouds, and the Ancient One gives him everlasting dominion over all peoples and nations.
Who was this human-like figure who descended from the clouds, you might ask? To the folks who wrote the Daniel musical I saw at a local theater several years ago, that figure is definitively Jesus. Not only that, but during the finale of that production, flags from countries around the world were paraded down the aisles, with the US flag given special fanfare.
What point were they trying to make in their interpretation of this ancient writing? To an extent, you could take away that all things fall under God’s dominion. But to another, their interpretation suggests that the writings in Daniel were meaningless until our present era and the existence of the country we inhabit. But the idea that any country of affluence plays an outsized role in God’s plan for reconciliation of all things is somewhat absurd . . . unless what is being highlighted about that country is its contrast with the Kin-dom of God.
Apocalyptic writings are written for a people in crisis. There are people in this country who are in crisis, but many of us are not. If, like me, you have secure housing, are not in significant debt, make a livable salary, aren’t targeted in hate crimes, and have access to health care and money in your retirement account — Daniel is not written to people like us. But that doesn’t mean it’s not worthy of careful consideration. The challenge is to interpret such texts responsibly, especially when failing to do so leads to othering, indifference, or violence.
For centuries, people have been trying to overlay their contexts onto apocalyptic writings. For instance, when interpreting Daniel 7 they’ll designate a different country or politician as the actual identity of the winged lion, bear with tusks, leopard with four wings, and creature with ten heads. Then they’ll then use this interpretation to justify some sort of action. If the four beasts represent politicians we don’t like, then those who support those politicians are enemies, and our othering of them is divinely ordained. If the four beasts represent disliked countries, then the inhabitants of those countries are enemies, and God’s intent is for them to be destroyed (by military force if necessary). If the visions depicted in these writings are going to happen in our lifetimes, then action toward social justice or climate justice or other systemic change is unnecessary, according to the interpreters.
I’ve seen books, conferences, and even entire churches devoted to such narrow interpretations of scripture. And sadly, the interpreters often profit from their predictions, but there’s no threat of accountability when those predictions don’t come to pass.
Recently a friend shared a blog post about the coming of the Antichrist. In it, Benjamin Corey pulls verses from different books of the Bible, identifies each as a prediction about the Antichrist, and then connects the details of each prediction with a characteristic of a present-day politician. For instance, from Revelation 13 he pulls the phrase “and they received a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads.” His interpretation of this is that “The Antichrist’s most devoted followers will wear a sign of their allegiance to him on their foreheads.” (Corey) Then the post shows a graphic of people wearing MAGA hats.
The post makes for interesting reading, and thankfully Corey is not urging any sort of harmful action by those who are convinced by his reasoning, but his predictions suffer from many of the other shortcomings you’ll find in such writing. He’s pulling single lines out of context from different books of the Bible. He’s rephrasing scripture to more closely align with our present reality, even though the characteristics he’s identifying match with those of countless wealthy and powerful people from the past 2,000 years. And many of the lines he’s using to identify the Antichrist were written before Jesus was born. How can you have an Antichrist when there’s no Christ?
The Greek word for “antichrist,” ἀντίχριστος, actually appears only a few times in the Bible, all in the letters of John. Yet none of Corey’s predictions are based on those verses! Nonetheless, I appreciate his extensive research, which does highlight negative characteristics often found when corruption and power converge.
Now to continue our exploration of the apocalyptic, let’s take a look at Daniel’s counterpart from the New Testament.
You probably won’t find the word “apocalypse” in your Bible, but you’ll find the Greek word ἀποκάλυψις in the first verse of Revelation. It’s the word that gives that book its name since it is translated as “revelation” in English, and you’ll find that word elsewhere in the New Testament as well.
Today’s passage from Revelation bears some resemblance to what we found in Daniel. Again we see a figure emerging from the clouds, and this time we know it is Jesus, he who loves us, freed us from our sins, and made us a kingdom. Again eternal dominion is mentioned, and for those readers who need reassurance of who has ultimate authority, the passage is bracketed with a reminder: God is the one who is, who was, and who is to come.
The context of the author this time is the Roman empire, which had controlled Jerusalem and its surroundings for over a century by the time these words were written, and who would continue to control it for centuries to come. Revelation is attributed to an author named John, but we’re not certain whether this is the same person as the disciple with that name. Regardless, the people were struggling in a time when they held little influence and their identity was at risk by those in power. The temple where they had worshiped was destroyed by the Romans in 70CE, and Revelation was probably written in the wake of that momentous event.
In Roman culture, Caesar was considered to be the son of God, so a marginalized group that claimed someone else as their king and God’s son had to keep their ideas veiled. Thus the term “Babylon” is used in Revelation when referring to Rome. The author makes an effort to explain why Christianity is incompatible with Roman values. Years later, after Christianity had become the official religion of the Roman Empire and Revelation was being considered for inclusion in the Bible, its political statements against Rome almost eliminated it from contention. (Carey, lecture)
The words of Daniel ran into similar trouble when considered by Roman authorities, and historian “Josephus found himself attempting to tone down the rhetoric” of those writings in order to placate those in charge. (Smith-Christopher, 725)
There’s a difference between “separation of church and state” and “separation of the Bible and politics.” While a marriage between government and religion always leads to trouble, so does stripping the Bible of its political context. I’ve heard people say that we shouldn’t talk about politics in church, but it’s hard to talk about the Bible without considering politics. Our spiritual ancestors didn’t separate those things. The authors of Revelation and Daniel didn’t. And Jesus certainly didn’t — in fact, the countercultural way of life he offered proved so threatening to the Romans and their collaborators that he was executed.
That’s the Jesus we celebrate this Sunday, the last Sunday of the liturgical year: A Jesus who turns himself over to an earthly kingdom, knowing he will suffer humiliation and pain at their hands. A Jesus who keeps his power in check rather than protecting himself. A Jesus who gave all he possibly could to demonstrate what greatest love looks like.
In the coming weeks, we’ll remember the beginning of his life, but today we observe what the church calls “Christ the King Sunday.” It’s a time to consider big questions, such as Who was Jesus? Who is Jesus? What does he mean to us? What does he mean to me? Why is he called a king?
During the past few weeks, a number of people have approached me with concerns about the future. I’ve been asking them about their greatest fear, and that has led to discussions that have been a gift. I’ve found reason for concern, and I’ve found reassurance. I’ve come to better understand threats that are a reality for people who don’t enjoy my level of privilege, and I’ve witnessed a revitalized determination among many to protect the vulnerable.
Those discussions have also led to bigger questions, such as those that apocryphal writings were intended to address. Where do we go from here? “Is the world headed in any particular direction? Does justice win out in the end?” (Carey, 1)
A question answered by both passages we’ve looked at today is that of who has dominion. Daniel writes that the one “coming with the clouds of heaven” is given everlasting dominion, and John points to a dominion for Jesus that will last “forever and ever.”
Are the end times around the corner? Is the Antichrist already among us? If the answer to those questions is yes, does that mean you change the way you live your life? If there’s a sense of urgency created by writings like Daniel and Revelation, or by modern writings like Benjamin Corey’s, how should that urgency be directed?
The better way of life Jesus lived and taught, the kin-dom of God he proclaimed, does not change with the seasons or the political climate. He challenges us to envision a better world, and to take steps to realize that better world. Those steps don’t include violence or marginalization or inaction; they involve peacefully, humbly, and boldly pursuing love and justice by continuing his mission and reconfiguring the world in accordance with God’s kin-dom.
For me, the way forward is to follow the attainable and sustainable path forged by Jesus. It’s not a path championed by the influencers or powers that be, but it has outlasted every influencer, ruler, and country of the past two thousand years. Prioritizing the needs of the marginalized versus the desires of the dominant is not profitable, nor is it likely to make you famous. It might even lead to conflict with friends and loved ones. But in a time when the rich are taking a greater share of global wealth, when the corruption of corporations and politicians is barely veiled, when disinformation can be created by AI and widely spread almost instantly, and when we’re encouraged to treat our neighbors as enemies, I’ll choose that narrow path.
In the name of the one who is, who was, and who is to come.
Amen.
Works Referenced
Carey, Greg. “Revelation.” NT100: Introduction to the New Testament (class lecture, Lancaster Theological Seminary, Lancaster, PA, February 7, 2020).
Carey, Greg. Ultimate Things: An Introduction to Jewish and Christian Apocalyptic Literature. St. Louis, Missouri: Chalice Press, 2005.
Corey, Benjamin L. “Could American Evangelicals Spot the Antichrist? Here Are the Biblical Predictions.” Formerly Fundie. Accessed November 23, 2024. https://www.benjaminlcorey.com/could-american-evangelicals-spot-the-antichrist-heres-the-biblical-predictions/
González, Catherine Gunsalus and Justo L. González. Revelation. (Westminster Bible Companion). Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1997.
Gowan, Donald E. Daniel. (Abingdon Old Testament Commentaries). Nashville, Tennessee: Abingdon Press, 2001.
Rowland, Christopher C. “Revelation.” In New Interpreter’s Bible, Volume X. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2015.
Smith-Christopher, Daniel L. “Daniel.” In New Interpreter’s Bible, Volume VI. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2015.
