i. _Sources of Apocalyptic._--The origin of Apocalyptic is to be sought
in (a) unfulfilled prophecy and in (b) traditional elements drawn from
various sources.
(a) The origin of Apocalyptic is to be sought in _unfulfilled prophecy_.
That certain prophecies relating to the coming kingdom of God had
clearly not been fulfilled was a matter of religious difficulty to the
returned exiles from Babylon. The judgments predicted by the pre-exilic
prophets had indeed been executed to the letter, but where were the
promised glories of the renewed kingdom and Israel's unquestioned
sovereignty over the nations of the earth? One such unfulfilled prophecy
Ezekiel takes up and reinterprets in such a way as to show that its
fulfilment is still to come. The prophets Jeremiah (iv.-vi.) and
Zephaniah had foretold the invasion of Judah by a mighty people from the
north. But as this northern foe had failed to appear Ezekiel re-edited
this prophecy in a new form as a final assault of Gog and his hosts on
Jerusalem, and thus established a permanent dogma in Jewish apocalyptic,
which in due course passed over into Christian.
But the non-fulfilment of prophecies relating to this or that individual
event or people served to popularize the methods of apocalyptic in a
very slight degree in comparison with the non-fulfilment of the greatest
of all prophecies--the advent of the Messianic kingdom. Thus, though
Jeremiah had promised that after seventy years (xxv. 11., xxix. 10)
Israel should be restored to their own land (xxiv. 5, 6), and then enjoy
the blessings of the Messianic kingdom under the Messianic king (xxiii.
5, 6), this period passed by and things remained as of old. Haggai and
Zechariah explained the delay by the failure of Judah to rebuild the
temple, and so generation after generation the hope of the kingdom
persisted, sustained most probably by ever-fresh reinterpretations of
ancient prophecy, till in the first half of the 2nd century the delay is
explained in the Books of Daniel and Enoch as due not to man's
shortcomings but to the counsels of God. The 70 years of Jeremiah are
interpreted by the angel in Daniel (ix. 25-27) as 70 weeks of years, of
which 69-1/2 have already expired, while the writer of Enoch (lxxxv.-xc.)
interprets the 70 years of Jeremiah as the 70 successive reigns of the
70 angelic patrons of the nations, which are to come to a close in his
own generation.
But the above periods came and passed by, and again the expectations of
the Jews were disappointed. Presently the Greek empire of the East was
overthrown by Rome, and in due course this new phenomenon, so full of
meaning for the Jews, called forth a new interpretation of Daniel. The
fourth and last empire which, according to Daniel vii. 10-25, was to be
Greek, was now declared to be Roman by the Apocalypse of Baruch
(xxxvi.-xl.) and 4 Ezra (x. 60-xii. 35). Once more such ideas as those
of "the day of Yahweh" and the "new heavens and a new earth" were
constantly re-edited with fresh nuances in conformity with their new
settings. Thus the inner development of Jewish apocalyptic was always
conditioned by the historical experiences of the nation.
(b) Another source of apocalyptic was _primitive mythological and
cosmological traditions_, in which the eye of the seer could see the
secrets of the future no less surely than those of the past. Thus the
six days of the world's creation, followed by a seventh of rest, were
regarded as at once a history of the past and a forecasting of the
future. As the world was made in six days its history would be
accomplished in six thousand years, since each day with God was as a
thousand years and a thousand years as one day; and as the six days of
creation were followed by one of rest, so the six thousand years of the
world's history would be followed by a rest of a thousand years (2 Enoch
xxxii. 2-xxxiii. 2). Of primitive mythological traditions we might
mention the primeval serpent, leviathan, behemoth, while to ideas native
to or familiar in apocalyptic belong those of the seven archangels, the
angelic patrons of the nations (Deut. xxxii. 8, in LXX.; Isaiah xxiv.
21; Dan. x. 13, 20, &c.), the mountain of God in the north (Isaiah xiv.
13; Ezek. i. 4, &c.), the garden of Eden.
ii. _Object and Contents of Apocalyptic._--The object of this literature
in general was to solve the difficulties connected with the
righteousness of God and the suffering condition of His righteous
servants on earth. The righteousness of God postulated according to the
law the temporal prosperity of the righteous and the _temporal_
prosperity of necessity; for as yet there was no promise of life or
recompense beyond the grave. But this connexion was not found to obtain
as a rule in life, and the difficulties arising from this conflict
between promise and experience centred round the lot of the righteous as
a community and the lot of the righteous man as an individual. Old
Testament prophecy had addressed itself to both these problems, though
it was hardly conscious of the claims of the latter. It concerned itself
essentially with the present, and with the future only as growing
organically out of the present. It taught the absolute need of personal
and national righteousness, and foretold the ultimate blessedness of the
righteous nation on the present earth. But its views were not systematic
and comprehensive in regard to the nations in general, while as regards
the individual it held that God's service here was its own and adequate
reward, and saw no need of postulating another world to set right the
evils of this. But later, with the growing claims of the individual and
the acknowledgment of these in the religious and intellectual life, both
problems, and especially the latter, pressed themselves irresistibly on
the notice of religious thinkers, and made it impossible for any
conception of the divine rule and righteousness to gain acceptance,
which did not render adequate satisfaction to the claims of both
problems. To render such satisfaction was the task undertaken by
apocalyptic, as well as to vindicate the righteousness of God alike in
respect of the individual and of the nation. To justify their contention
they sketched in outline the history of the world and mankind, the
origin of evil and its course, and the final consummation of all things.
Thus they presented in fact a theodicy, a rudimentary philosophy of
religion. The righteous as a nation should yet possess the earth, even
in this world the faithful community should attain its rights in an
eternal Messianic kingdom on earth, or else in temporary blessedness
here and eternal blessedness hereafter. So far as regards the righteous
community. It was, however, in regard to the destiny of the individual
that apocalyptic rendered its chief service. Though the individual might
perish amid the disorders of this world, he would not fail, apocalyptic
taught, to attain through resurrection the recompense that was his due
in the Messianic kingdom or in heaven itself. Apocalyptic thus forms the
indispensable preparation for the religion of the New Testament.
iii. _Form of Apocalyptic._--The form of apocalyptic is a literary form;
for we cannot suppose that the writers experienced the voluminous and
detailed visions we find in their books. On the other hand the reality
of the visions is to some extent guaranteed by the writer's intense
earnestness and by his manifest belief in the divine origin of his
message. But the difficulty of regarding the visions as actual
experiences, or as in any sense actual, is intensified, when full
account is taken of the artifices of the writer; for the major part of
his visions consists of what is to him really past history dressed up in
the guise of prediction. Moreover, the writer no doubt intended that his
reader should take the accuracy of the prediction (?) already
accomplished to be a guarantee for the accuracy of that which was still
unrealized. How, then, it may well be asked, can this be consistent with
reality of visionary experience? Are we not here obliged to assume that
the visions are a literary invention and nothing more?
However we may explain the inconsistency, we are precluded by the moral
earnestness of the writer from assuming the visions to be pure
inventions. But the inconsistency has in part been explained by Gunkel,
who has rightly emphasized that the writer did not freely invent his
materials but derived them in the main from tradition, as he held that
these mysterious traditions of his people were, if rightly expounded,
forecasts of the time to come. Furthermore, the visionary who is found
at most periods of great spiritual excitement was forced by the
prejudice of his time, which refused to acknowledge any inspiration in
the present, to ascribe his visionary experiences and reinterpretations
of the mysterious traditions of his people to some heroic figure of the
past. Moreover, there will always be a difficulty in determining what
belongs to his actual vision and what to the literary skill or free
invention of the author, seeing that the visionary must be dependent on
memory and past experience for the forms and much of the matter of the
actual vision.
iv. _Apocalyptic as distinguished from Prophecy._--We have already dwelt
on certain notable differences between apocalyptic and prophecy; but
there are certain others that call for attention.
(a) _In the Nature of its Message._--The message of the prophets was
primarily a preaching of repentance and righteousness if the nation
would escape judgment; the message of the apocalyptic writers was of
patience and trust for that deliverance and reward were sure to come.
(b) _By its dualistic Theology._--Prophecy believes that this world is
God's world and that in this world His goodness and truth will yet be
vindicated. Hence the prophet prophesies of a definite future arising
out of and organically connected with the present. The apocalyptic
writer on the other hand despairs of the present, and directs his hopes
absolutely to the future, to a new world standing in essential
opposition to the present. (_Non fecit Altissimus unum saeculum sed
duo_, 4 Ezra vii. 50.) Here we have essentially a dualistic principle,
which, though it can largely be accounted for by the interaction of
certain inner tendencies and outward sorrowful experience on the part of
Judaism, may ultimately be derived from Mazdean influences. This
principle, which shows itself clearly at first in the conception that
the various nations are under angelic rulers, who are in a greater or
less degree in rebellion against God, as in Daniel and Enoch, grows in
strength with each succeeding age, till at last Satan is conceived as
"the ruler of this world" (John xii. 31) or "the god of this age" (2
Cor. iv. 4). Under the guidance of such a principle the writer naturally
expected the world's culmination in evil to be the immediate precursor
of God's intervention on behalf of the righteous, and every fresh growth
in evil to be an additional sign that the time was at hand. The natural
concomitant in conduct of such a belief is an uncompromising asceticism.
He that would live to the next world must shun this. Visions are
vouchsafed only to those who to prayer have added fasting.
(c) _By pseudonymous Authorship._--We have already touched on this
characteristic of apocalyptic. The prophet stood in direct relations
with his people; his prophecy was first spoken and afterwards written.
The apocalyptic writer could obtain no hearing from his contemporaries,
who held that, though God spoke in the past, "there was no more any
prophet." This pessimism and want of faith limited and defined the form
in which religious enthusiasm should manifest itself, and prescribed as
a condition of successful effort the adoption of pseudonymous
authorship. The apocalyptic writer, therefore, professedly addressed his
book to future generations. Generally directions as to the hiding and
sealing of the book (Dan. xii. 4, 9; 1 Enoch i. 4; Ass. Mos. i. 16-18)
were given in the text in order to explain its publication so long after
the date of its professed period. Moreover, there was a sense in which
such books were not wholly pseudonymous. Their writers were students of
ancient prophecy and apocalyptical tradition, and, though they might
recast and reinterpret them, they could not regard them as their own
inventions. Each fresh apocalypse would in the eyes of its writer be in
some degree but a fresh edition of the traditions naturally attaching
themselves to great names in Israel's past, and thus the books named
respectively Enoch, Noah, Ezra would to some slight extent be not
pseudonymous.
(d) _By its comprehensive and deterministic Conception of
History._--Apocalyptic took an indefinitely wider view of the world's
history than prophecy. Thus, whereas prophecy had to deal with temporary
reverses at the hands of some heathen power, apocalyptic arose at a time
when Israel had been subject for generations to the sway of one or other
of the great world-powers. Hence to harmonize such difficulties with
belief in God's righteousness, it had to take account of the role of
such empires in the counsels of God, the rise, duration and downfall of
each in turn, till finally the lordship of the world passed into the
hands of Israel, or the final judgment arrived. These events belonged in
the main to the past, but the writer represented them as still in the
future, arranged under certain artificial categories of time definitely
determined from the beginning in the counsels of God and revealed by Him
to His servants the prophets. Determinism thus became a leading
characteristic of Jewish apocalyptic, and its conception of history
became severely mechanical.