Skip to main content

Apocalyptic Imagery and Daniel Part 1

One of the trickiest parts of studying apocalyptic literature is interpreting the imagery and symbolism used. This will be the first of three parts dealing with apocalyptic imagery and numerology in which we will make some general observations and also deal with a few specific passages.

I think that one of the most important things to consider when reading texts like Daniel 7-12 is that the meaning of the symbols has two components; sense and referent. Referent is the object that the symbol stands for (e.g., the four hybrid/distorted beasts in Daniel 7 stand for four kingdoms). The sense is the interpretation of the referent that the symbol provides (more on this later). Unfortunately, within the Evangelical church I think that the sense has been a bit ignored. Most lay people (and more than a few pastors) come to a text like Daniel and have lots of questions about the historical referents but not many about the sense. Apocalyptic texts get treated as a code that we need to unravel. That, though, runs into two problems. One is that not every symbol has a clear historical referent. Take the wind in 7:2 as an example. The wind symbolizes God's power, that is the sense of the symbol, but I don't see what clear historical referent it has. The second, and the more obvious problem is that by focusing on just the referent you're missing out on what is in my opinion the more important aspect of meaning, the one from which we can draw out theology, the sense, or God's interpretation of history.

How do we know the sense of the symbols? They're very foreign to us because they come from another culture. Thus to understand them we need to understand the culture and the genre of apocalyptic. Here, nothing but hard work will suffice. The vast majority of Jewish apocalyptic literature did not make it into the canon (in fact Daniel is the only OT text that can formally be called an apocalypse, though portions of Zechariah and Isaiah are precursors to the genre that would later develop). Thus we have to do some reading outside of the Bible to get a better sense of how it was used. Probably the most helpful for comparisons with Daniel is 4 Ezra which is found in 2 Esdras 3-14. Fortunately, since it is part of the Apocrypha, you can find it online for free in the NRSV. If you want to read more Jewish apocalyptic, you should probably purchase a copy of the Pseudepigrapha, now thankfully published in softcover for half of the price of the hardcovers! Reading broadly within the genre will help you get a feel for how symbolic imagery is used. A second step would be to get your hands on a good introduction to apocalyptic literature. I personally found The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature by John Collins to be extremely helpful. This will help you get a general lay of the land when it comes to Jewish apocalyptic and does some of the comparative work for you. It's very helpful for getting a macro level look at what's unique or not unique about each apocalypse. Finally when you study the specifics of any passage you must have at least one of (preferably both) the following commentaries: Daniel: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel by John Collins and Word Biblical Commentary Vol. 30, Daniel by John Goldingay. They wade through all of the relevant data and lay out clearly the background and meaning of the symbols. As a general comment, while both Jewish sources and other ANE (in particular Canaanite) sources can be the source of the sense of any given symbol, priority must be given to prior biblical usage (which, as one would expect, often is related to its sense in non-Jewish ANE sources).

Earlier I mentioned that the four beasts stand for four kingdoms. That is their referent. What is their sense? First we must consider that crossbreeding animals was outlawed in the Torah so at minimum we can say that they symbolize something unholy. When you look more deeply into the symbolism, though, it seems that to Jews the fact that these beasts are hybrid would suggest demonic control. Thus from the sea (the place of opposition to God) we have four kingdoms that oppose God's people that are demonic, they embody evil. The fourth kingdom in particular is so grotesque and hence evil that it can't even be described.

In our next post we will look at the sometimes multivalent nature of apocalyptic imagery as well as discuss how the literature speaks to us today.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

More Calvinist than Calvin?

I'm working on a paper on the topic of divine sovereignty and human freedom. Occasionally on this topic (or the subtopic of election) you will hear people through out the barb at strong Calvinists that they're 'being more Calvinist than Calvin.' After having read Calvin carefully on the issue I don't think that there's any validity to that charge. I don't see a material difference here between Calvin and say John Piper. Here are several quotes from the Institutes to prove my point. 'All events are governed by God's secret plan.' I.xvi.2 'Governing heaven and earth by his providence, he also so regulates all things that nothing takes place without his deliberation.' I.xvi.3 'Nothing happens except what is knowingly and willingly decreed by him.' I.xvi.3 Calvin explicitly rejects a limited providence, 'one that by a general motion revolves and drives the system of the universe, with its several parts, but which does not specifc

Galatians 2:11-14: The circumcision group

11 When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray. 14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs? (TNIV) There's an important issue that we need to wrestle with in this passage, and it's the question of whether or not the people from James and the circumcision group are the same group. I am not inclined to think that they are. The ensuing discussion is drawn from Longenecker's commentary pp 73-5

Dating Galatians and Harmonization with Acts

We've gotten to the point where how we date Galatians and where we fit it into the narrative of Acts will affect our interpretation in a significant manner. The first question that we have to address is, which visit to Jerusalem is Paul recounting in Galatians 2:1-10 ? Is it the famine relief visit of Acts 11:27-30 or the Jerusalem council of Acts 15 ? First, I think it's worthwhile to point out that it's not all that obvious. Scholars are divided on this issue (even Evangelical scholars). In favor of the theory of Galatians 2:1-10 referring to the Acts 11 visit are the following: This visit clearly is prompted by a revelation by the Holy Spirit. The Acts 15 gathering seems to be a public gathering, where the one described in Galatians is private. Paul never alludes to a letter sent to the diaspora churches which could have definitively won the case for him. The issue of food laws was already decided by James. Why would men coming from him in Galatians 2:11-14 be advocat