A History of Malleability, and in turn, Controversy

The beauty of Revelation, and much of the discourse that surrounds it, is linked to its innately moldable, incredibly unspecific language.  It is all at once a faceless, amorphous text and a vivid portrait of the hellish and uncertain.  I came across the Tertullian quote in A History of the End of the World, and it immediately reminded me of hyper right-wing, neo-conservative jargon from the likes of Ann Coulter, whose mere mention in most contexts automatically retracts some level of credibility, so pardon the reference.  However, her link between the Christian End of Days and themes of environmentalism (or lack thereof) and radical beliefs about our physical world, not to mention her success and visibility in the contemporary world, make the quote in many ways a modern response to Tertullian’s own assertion.  Much of Chapter 4 in Kirsch’s book is devoted to the diverging paths of Revelation as it was implemented into sects, but the most interesting fact that the Chapter brings to light is the simple truth that the book now is canon, despite a history of controversy.  It wasn’t until the 10^th century that Revelation was widely printed as part of the Bible – its road to authority was a rocky one, to say the least.  Then, it comes with no surprise that the readings touch on David Koresh and other Revelation addicts of his ilk.