The fashioning of Apocalyptic was influenced by many different causes, but the most marked and significant [pg 258] of them all is to be found in the existing national conditions of the time. By the captivity in Babylon Judah had been brought within the sweep of the great tide of history; the world became vaster; prophecy had a new and broader outlook, and its thought was forever after interpenetrated by an element of Apocalyptic. The strange figures of Babylonian imagery were absorbed by the Hebrew mind, and enshrined in their subsequent literature. On the other hand the nation itself was in decay; the power of the past had been broken and destroyed; and “it was terror and oppression”, in good part at least, as Stevens has well said, “that gave this new trend to their thought”. They had drunk deeply of the bitter cup of national distress; the encroachment of the world-empires had envenomed the past, embittered the present, and overshadowed the future; the glorious promises of God had thus far failed of any substantial realization, and the contrast between promise and fulfilment was too wide to be overlooked. But the Hebrew with sublime courage did not lose faith in God because of the delay. Apocalyptic voiced his answer to the problems of the time, and it, like Prophecy and the Wisdom Literature, was rooted in certain ethical conceptions which are fundamental to its thought, such as that God is holy, that the world in which we live is a moral world, and that righteousness must win.[599] And this gave to the apocalyptist his theme:—the Fortunes of the Kingdom of God, and how they are to be reconciled with all that God has said; for God must be vindicated, he is forever true, and his word cannot fail. This thesis was maintained in two ways. First, by attempting a wider view of the problem of sin and righteousness. That became the question no longer of a single nation, but of the whole race—for under the stimulus of new and wider conditions, a great enlargement of the Hebrew spirit took place. There must be a providential and moral order in the universe which if sought out will give the true meaning of history. The divine purpose must be interpreted through the broader sphere of the world's life. This standpoint had now become possible through the wider world-view produced in later Judaism by contact and intercourse with other nations. And thus Apocalyptic came to express [pg 259] both a deeply wrought theodicy and a Semitic philosophy of history. Second, the apocalyptist completed his vindication of God by shifting the center of attention from the present to the future. The more certain it became that no present realization of his hopes was possible, the more surely he turned to a future age that would abundantly recompense all the pain and disappointment of the past. It was this that made the outlook of Apocalyptic essentially eschatological. Beginning with the history of the past veiled under the form of prophecy, the apocalyptist rushes on to predict the future, for there he finds the victory. The End! The End! is his cry,—the End that victory may come—for God is to be vindicated only by the consummation of all things, and history can only be read aright in the light of its finality. The answer of the End is the key that Apocalyptic offers to the mystery of all that “which was and is and is to come”; and it is this persistent effort to read the mind of God concerning the future that gives to Apocalyptic an element of peculiar interest. For though it is often like the voice of “an infant crying in the night * * * * and with no language but a cry”, it has yet a deep significance all its own; it was a form of thought by which God led his people into clearer views of truth, and to new and larger vision.[600] Upon the other hand the shifting-point in every apocalypse from history to prediction can usually be made out without essential effort; for beneath the form of symbols and symbolic actions can ordinarily be discovered the chief actors and principal events of the past and present which correspond to history; while the things of the future which are predicted, reach out at once to extravagant proportions. Thus each Jewish apocalypse by its content and movement, serves to mark out its own horizon and reveal its own environment.
The general prevalence of the Apocalyptic form in the period in which it was used may be accounted for [pg 260] partly by its suitability to the theme which it treated, and partly by the prevailing conditions of national surveillance. Its visions and symbols and dream-movement were peculiarly adapted to meet the conditions of a writing which did not dare to make plain its bitter reproaches of the foes of Israel. Its hidden meaning, also, answered well to hint darkly what lay in the future; and its fantastic imagery appealed to the imagination.[601] The pervasive element of mystery served to invest these writings with a subtle charm that all the intervening lapse of centuries and even the present temper of a scientific age have wholly failed to dissipate. The effort of most modern Jewish scholars to attribute the Apocalyptic Literature to Essenism cannot be sustained; neither can we accept the gratuitous assertion of Montefiore, that “the Apocalyptic writings lie for the most part outside the line of the purest Jewish development”. Schürer and Charles reflect the opinion of the majority of Christian scholars in maintaining its nearer relation to Phariseeism, though admitting it to be “a product of free religious thought following older models”, and showing distinctive marks of Phariseeism in some of its parts and of Sadduceeism in others. At the same time most authorities are willing to grant the probability of Wellhausen's suggestion, that “the secret literature of the Essenes was perhaps in no small degree made use of in the Pseudepigrapha, and has through them been indirectly handed down to us”.
The value of Apocalyptic is increasingly recognized as a storehouse of Jewish and Jewish-Christian thought in the age preceding and in the early part of the Christian era. It forms the necessary connecting link between the Old Testament and the New, and is especially rich in messianic and eschatological conceptions. It is the chief source of information through which we can trace the changes that occurred in Jewish belief, and the later development of Jewish thought, in the period immediately preceding the time of Christ. It carries us back, in effect, to the thought-world of the first century, and enables us, as Schürer aptly says, “to reconstruct the thought, the aspiration, and the hopes of pious Jews [pg 261] in the generation that first heard the gospel, and even of the Apostles themselves; for however Christ's thought transcended the thought of his time, that of the Apostles did not, except so far as the Holy Spirit illumined them for special ends.” And, as Charles remarks, “If the Apocalypses were edited later they only reflect more fully the thought of that age, and they exhibit what is subsumed throughout in Christ's teachings.” We can see in these writings not only a transition stage in Judaism preparatory to the gospel, but how this modified Jewish thought fits in with the gospel teaching. They show, for example, how the Old Testament idea of the future life grew in depth and compass in those centuries which precede the Christian era; and how this advance was retained and enlarged, modified and exalted, by Christ himself and by the Apostles; and how, also, the expansive growth of the messianic hope, which was sometimes almost wholly submerged, but which always contrived to reappear with increasing clearness, contributed to that popular expectancy, though in some degree also to that general misapprehension, of the Messiah's mission which the New Testament everywhere reveals. And they enable us to appreciate how the divine method of gradual advance in spiritual knowledge was operating during those prevening centuries which have so often been regarded as barren and fruitless; and how this advance contributed its due proportion to the marvellous results attained in the life of our blessed Lord and in the period of the apostolic church. The force of this conclusion is, of course, partially annulled if we assume, as has been done by some, that many of the clearer messianic references in the Apocalyptic writings are Christian interpolations. But the present tendency of critics is toward a less destructive view than formerly prevailed. Charles, for example, maintains that the possibilities of Jewish thought should be given full scope, and nothing attributed to Christian interpolation, or to Persian or other external origin, except that which cannot be reasonably accounted for from Jewish sources. The general independence of Israel's religious development has certainly come out more clearly from the investigation. As has been pointed out by Fairweather, “With the exception of certain modes of thought and expression, [pg 262] including the visionary style so much employed by Ezekiel, the patriotic Jew apparently brought back with him from Babylon no new literary possession.... Many scholars explain the eschatological development of the Apocryphal period on the theory of the contact of Judaism with foreign systems of thought.... But, as Nicolas has said, ‘Ideas do not pass ready made and complete from one nation to another like the fruits of industry which are transported in caravans.’... There may be, however, stimulus without transference, and this appears to be what really happened in the case before us.”[602]
The Apocalyptic Literature undoubtedly served a splendid purpose, for its effects were both wide-spread and in many respects beneficial. It served to rebuke sin, to maintain righteousness without any present prospect of reward, to keep alive the rich hopes of the future, to comfort God's children in the midst of distress, and to cultivate a patriotic spirit that cherished the nobler ideals of the past; while at the same time it formed a secure depository for those new concepts of truth that sprang up during the long era of preparation for the Messiah, and it thereby contributed a rich quota of thought and phrase to that greater future which was then drawing near to its birth. “In general Apocalyptic furnishes the atmosphere of the New Testament. Its form, its language, and its material are extensively used.... The simplest way to describe the relation is to say that Jesus and the writers of the New Testament found the forms of thought made use of in Apocalyptic Literature convenient vehicles, and have cast the gospel of God's redemptive love into these as into moulds. The Messianism of the apocalyptists has thus become unfolded into the Christology of the New Testament.”[603] But upon the other hand Apocalyptic reveals a type of thought that can scarcely be regarded as healthful. It had no deep or abiding sympathy with the great overshadowing world-sorrow which it measurably apprehended, and it proposed no present remedy for the unhappy fortunes of Judaism. It dealt too largely with the future hopes of the nation, and did not like prophecy address itself to the immediate possibilities of the present; [pg 263] and it thereby robbed life of one of its chief incentives to action, viz. the hope of present success. For it gave up hope of the world as it was, and thereby produced a world-despair that could not be counteracted by the prospective world-joy which glowed in the messianic promise. According to Apocalyptic perspective, “the present served mainly as a back-ground of shadow for developing the richer light of the coming age;” and, “the proper design of the world was to be found in its ending and not in its longer continuance.” Even with the wider world-view which the apocalyptists possessed, history lost its value; for they at least partially misread the providential order of the world. As Stevens has forcibly said, they “viewed the method of God as ictic and sudden, and not detailed and patient”,—the very opposite of the divine method in history. And such an interpretation of life produced its inevitable results in dreams of an hallucinary but impossible future. It developed and cultured a form of mysticism that has left a permanent impression upon the Christian church—a mysticism that takes refuge from present evils, and from worse that are deemed impending, in the hope of an ultimate and protracted future of blessing wrought by cataclysmic revolutions, and leading up to a new manifestation of the divine Person upon earth, and to new conditions of life in the world of nature.[604] For it is in Apocalyptic rather than in Scripture that we find the source of that pessimistic view which has prevailed in various circles of the church in all ages, that looks for the world to grow continually worse as the centuries go on, until by a great climax of the future a new order of things shall be introduced that is essentially different in its divine manifestations and in its spiritual ordering from all the past. But notwithstanding the many defects of this class of writings, and their manifest extravagancies, they were yet divinely used, and evidently filled an exceptionally large place in the far-reaching providential plan of God for the education of the Jewish nation, and through them of the world, just as God is ever using human and imperfect means for wise and beneficent ends.
The importance of some knowledge of Apocalyptic to the student of John's Revelation cannot well be overestimated, for it is only in the light of Apocalyptic Literature that it can be rightly interpreted. It reproduces the author's native horizon, and reveals the sources of his mode of thought; it provides the key to the method of vision and symbol and dream-movement; and it makes clear the inevitable limitations as well as the recognized possibilities of this unique style when it becomes the vehicle of a true instead of an assumed revelation. For although the source of much of the imagery of the Apocalypse is to be found in the Old Testament, yet it is often materially changed by passing through the medium of later Jewish thought as reflected in the Pseudepigrapha; and although New Testament ideas everywhere prevail in, through, and above, those of the Old, yet the whole spirit and movement of the Apocalypse is moulded by certain underlying pre-Christian conceptions that belong to Jewish Apocalyptic. We find, for example, that the divine method in history is uniformly viewed as in the Apocalyptic Literature, and contrary to general experience, as chiefly one of crisis and catastrophe rather than of gradual development—the sudden and striking hiding from view the continued and ordinary. And we cannot but inquire how far this conception is with John the result of literary form and spiritual mood, rather than intended to set forth the intimate nature of the divine method; and how far it is designed to portray vividly the effects to be accomplished, rather than to signify the manner of their accomplishment. We find, too, that John, in common with the apocalyptists, dwells more upon the future hopes of the kingdom than upon its present possibilities, keeping his eye ever fixed above the conflict upon the far future of promise. And we cannot but inquire how far this aspect of his world-view was divinely designed as a message of comfort to a people in distress, rather than as a comprehensive presentation of the progressive world-plan of the ages; and how far it is given only as one point of view, rather than as designed to express the fulness of the divine purpose. To these inquiries there can properly be but one answer, the view-point is characteristic of and peculiar to Apocalyptic. It does not present the normal aspect of [pg 265] life; it is the product of adverse conditions and breathes the spirit of pain; its vision is forever saddened by the overwhelming world-sorrow that darkens the horizon of thought. And while all Hebrew literature is essentially grave, and devoid of the element of humor, yet Apocalyptic is abidingly overshadowed by a weight of world-woe from which men seek to escape into another sphere and into new and better conditions of life.
The larger study of Apocalyptic Literature must continue to have its effect upon the interpretation of the Apocalypse which is indisputably its greatest masterpiece. For by attentive consideration of the peculiarities of this form of composition we are gradually led to perceive that only in so far as we invest ourselves with the atmosphere which produced so strange a coloring of thought, can we hope to interpret aright that peculiar view of the world, growing out of the conditions of Jewish depression, which regards it as the arena of an all-pervasive conflict, and involved in prevailing sin and suffering, in order that through these seemingly adverse experiences it may by sovereign control be divinely made ready for the future glory of the Messiah's kingdom. And we are thus amply assured that a correct apprehension of the form and fashion of Apocalyptic thought will undoubtedly guide us in all that pertains to the material framework of the Apocalypse, though certainly we should not forget that we must always go to the Old Testament and to the New when we would reach its inner heart. The present general consensus of opinion among modern scholars, therefore, seems to be, that having measurably exhausted inquiry concerning the Old Testament references, whatever progress we are to make in the immediate future in unfolding the thought of the Revelation must be through a further study of the thought-forms of the century that gave it birth, which so richly abound in the Apocalyptic writings, but which so long escaped the scholarly and attentive consideration of Christian thought.
[Transcriber's Note: Obvious printer's errors have been corrected.]