“Too often the apocalypse excites our curiosity, unbridles our imagination, arouses our appetite for mystery, and finally hides from us the central truth which ought to be revealed.”—Jacques Ellul
This quote certainly highlights the apparent irony of the Book of Revelation: its very title suggests a truth to be revealed, yet the highly symbolic diction makes any “hidden truth” impossible to glean with conviction. If you consider the extent to which Revelation differs in its approach to theology from the remainder of the New Testament, and take into account the mystique of the text, all in light of the controversy surrounding its authorship—it is not too difficult to imagine the profound effect the text has had on the early Christians of the time period. Comfortable with the image of a peaceful, forgiving, all-loving and all-knowing God, they are no doubt surprised to find no traces of such a benign creator in Revelations. Neither is Revelations a spiritual text, in the sense that no word is given on how to AVOID the coming prophecies of doom. No reasons are given beyond virginity and abstinence from intercourse with women, for why the gifts of salvation and everlasting life have been bestowed on the “144,000 which have been redeemed from the earth”. (Revelations 14:3) In fact it is phrases like these, coupled with hints of the authors views on sex as defilement, that lead me to believe Revelations to be a highly subjective work of secular origin. John the Revelator’s status as a non-Disciple also lead to questions regarding its nature as the written word of God. How are we to know that this book doesn’t merely represent the delusions of an elderly man cast ashore on the deserted island of Patmos?
If we are to take the word of the first 26 books of the New Testament as the word of God, then how are we also able to take John’s ramblings on a vengeful God—a God who believes the very act of conception is defilement, a God who will torture those who were not Martyrs for the Christian cause (but associated themselves with Roman coinage, or pagan traditions) for eternity, despite their overall good intentions, as truth as well?
I particularly enjoyed the Ayn Rand reference – it’s somewhat refreshing to see an objectivist take on Kirsch’s work as a whole, but even more so on the doomsday issue with regards to Revelation specifically. Kudos. But, do you truly believe the work to be babble?
No, No i meant that the canonization of the Book of Revelations has made it harder for the general audience (or rather, general religious audience) to disregard it (as babble), not that i particularly thought it was babble…
Do we have another objectivist in the house? I didn’t think anyone would pick up on the minute Rand reference….
Does empiricism have anything to do with objectivism? Based on a cursory glance, the two seem to coexist. Just wondering, because the concept is intriguing to me. I do think that the canonization of Revelation inevitably changed its impact as a text. I keep coming back to the perplexing nature of “canon” in religion because texts like Revelation are so incredibly difficult to standardize or interpret collectively. I suppose in some ways, a group of people agreeing completely on a book’s intention and meaning is quite dangerous – in the instance of the Branch Davidians, for example, who seemed to be in a quite steadfast agreement on the text. Engaging in discourse is a much healthier route to pursue that joining a cult, in my opinion.