Copyright holder: Tyndale University, 3377 Bayview Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada M2M 3S4 Att.: Library Director, J. William Horsey Library Copyright: This Work has been made available by the authority of the copyright owner solely for the purpose of private study and research and may not be copied or reproduced except as permitted by the copyright laws of Canada without the written authority from the copyright owner. Copyright license: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License Citation: Reynolds, Benjamin E. “Introduction.” In The Jewish Apocalyptic Tradition and The Shaping of New Testament Thought, edited by Benjamin E. Reynolds and Loren T. Stuckenbruck, 1-12. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2017. ***** Begin Content ****** TYNDALE UNIVERSITY 3377 Bayview Avenue Toronto, ON M2M 3S4 TEL: 416.226.6620 www.tyndale.ca Note: This Work has been made available by the authority of the copyright owner solely for the purpose of private study and research and may not be copied or reproduced except as permitted by the copyright laws of Canada without the written authority from the copyright owner. Reynolds, Benjamin E. “Introduction.” In The Jewish Apocalyptic Tradition and The Shaping of New Testament Thought, edited by Benjamin E. Reynolds and Loren T. Stuckenbruck, 1-12. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2017. [ Citation Page ] Introduction Benjamin E. Reynolds and Loren T. Stuckenbruck In a frequently repeated statement, Ernst Käsemann famously said that “Apocalyptic was the mother of all Christian theology.”1 Not as well-known is that two years later, Käsemann clar- ified what he actually meant by “apocalyptic”: for him, it referred to “eschatology,” or in his words, “the expectation of an imminent Parousia.”2 Similarly, Philipp Vielhauer contended that “the main interest” of apocalypses is “in eschatology. We may therefore designate Apocalyp- tic as a special expression of the Jewish eschatology... ,”3 More recently, in his award-win- ning and posthumously published monograph on Apocalypticism and the Bible, Frederick Murphy treats apocalypticism and eschatology as one and the same.4 This future-oriented perspective on “apocalyptic” has dominated New Testament studies, and to a lesser extent the study of early Judaism. In this vein, the term “apocalyptic” continues to be used loosely by New Testa- ment scholarship as a reference to future, cataclysmic judgment or to an imminent expectation of the end of time.5 1. Ernst Käsemann, “The Beginnings of Christian Theology,” in New Testament Questions of Today, trans. W. J. Montague, NTL (London: SCM Press, 1969), 82-107 (102). 2. Ernst Käsemann, “On the Subject of Primitive Christian Apocalyptic,” in New Testament Questions of Today, trans. W. J. Montague, NTL (London: SCM Press, 1969), 108-37 (108nl). 3. Philipp Vielhauer, “Introduction,” in New Testament Apocrypha, ed. Wilhelm Schneemelcher, trans. R. McL. Wilson, vol. 2 (London:Lutterworth Press, 1965), 581-607 (587). 4. Frederick J. Murphy, Apocalypticism in the Bible and Its World: A Comprehensive Introduction (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2012). For example, when examining the Dead Sea Scrolls pesharim, Murphy states that he will “point out where something specifically eschatological and/or apocalyptic is foretold” (219). And in his discussion of the kingdom of God, Murphy contends: “The ‘good news’... is that God’s kingdom is near. This is an apocalyptic pronouncement.... It is not here, but it is close” (292). 5. Cf. Adela Yarbro Collins, “Apocalypticism and Christian Origins,” in The Oxford Handbook of Apocalyptic Literature, ed. John J. Collins (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 326-39. In tracing the scholarly history of apocalypticism and Christian origins, Yarbro [ Page ] 1 Within Jesus scholarship, a continuous source of debate has been the question of whether or not Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet6 or a non-apocalyptic figure.7 At stake in this debate, whose language of “apocalyptic” is indebted to Albert Schweitzer,8 has not so much been the broader Jewish apocalyptic tradition, but more narrowly whether Jesus’s proclamation of the kingdom of God was concerned with apocalyptic eschatology. Was Jesus a prophetic figure who announced the coming judgment and end of the world complete with the imagery of fire, angelic beings, and God enthroned on the judgment seat with open books (cf. Dan 7:9-10)? If this was the essential mission of Jesus, then one can argue that he was “apocalyptic”; if not, he was “non-apocalyptic.”9 Similarly, within Pauline scholarship, the question of whether or not Paul proclaimed an “apocalyptic” gospel often centers on the future-oriented perspective of an already-and-not-yet eschatology evident in Paul’s letters.10 Accordingly, Paul’s apparent emphasis on the divide between the two ages—the age before the Messiah and the age after his resurrection—has been described as “apocalyptic.”11 However, some scholars have used the term “apocalyptic” to describe Paul’s theological perspective12 or “God’s expected eschatologi- cal activity” of salvation.13 Unsurprisingly, much of New Testament scholarship’s understanding and use of “apocalyp- tic” tends to be uncritical,14 and at the very least inconsistent,15 often referring somewhat sim- plistically to a future-oriented expectation of end-time judgment. Since the books of Daniel and Revelation are the most familiar writings commonly called “apocalypses,” a primarily future- Collins highlights the frequent interchangeability of the terms eschatology and apocalyptic and has paraphrased Käsemann’s statement as “apocalypticism is the mother of Christianity” (338). 6. E.g., Dale C. Allison, Jesus of Nazareth: Millenarian Prophet (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1998); Bart D. Ehrman, Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet ofthe New Millennium (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 1999). 7. As, for example, John Dominic Crossan, The Historical Jesus: The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1991). 8. Albert Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus: A Critical Study of its Progress from Reimarus to Wrede, trans. W. Montgomery (New York: Macmillan, 1964). German original, Von Reimams zu Wrede, 1906. 9. For an extensive examination, see Jörg Frey, “Die Apokalyptik als Herausforderung der neutestamentlichen Wissenschaft. Zum Problem: Jesus und die Apokalyptik,” in Apokalyptik als Herausforderung neutestamentlicher Theologie, ed. Michael Becker and Markus Öhler, WUNT II/214 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006), 23-94. 10. Martinus C. de Boer, “Paul and Apocalyptic Eschatology,” in The Encyclopedia of Apocalypticism, Volume l:The Origins of Apocalypticism in Judaism and Christianity, ed.John J. Collins (New York: Continuum, 1998), 345-83. See esp. James D. G. Dunn, The Theology of St. Paul the Apostle (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 461-98, esp. the section on “Eschatological Tension.” 11. Cf. Loren T. Stuckenbruck, “Posturing ‘Apocalyptic’ in Pauline Theology: How much Contrast to Jewish Tradition?,” in The Myth of Rebellious Angels: Studies in Second Temple Judaism and New Testament Texts, WUNT 335 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2014), 240-56, for an overview and critique of this view. 12. J. Louis Martyn, Galatians:A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AB 33A (New York: Doubleday, 1997); Douglas A. Campbell, The Deliverance of God: An Apocalyptic Rereading of Justification in Paul (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009); Beverly Roberts Gaventa, “‘Neither Height Nor Depth’: Cosmos and Soteriology in Paul’s Letter to the Romans,” in Apocalyptic and the Future of Theology, ed. J. B. Davis and D. Harink (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2012), 183-99. 13. De Boer, “Paul and Apocalyptic Eschatology,” 354. 14. Lorenzo DiTommaso, “Apocalypses and Apocalypticism in Antiquity. (Part ]),” CurBR 5, no. 2 (2007): 235-86 (244), observes that the uncritical use of “apocalyptic” terminology is “most acute among New Testament scholars.” 15. For a recent collection that reflects a wide range of approaches, see Paul and the Apocalyptic Imagination, eds. Ben C. Blackwell, John K. Goodrich, and Jason Maston (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2016). [ Page ] 2 oriented eschatological understanding of the term “apocalyptic” is understandable. Both these writings describe signs, events, and historical timeframes that will precede the end of the world and final judgment. Daniel and John the seer experience visions and dreams that include events that take place in the near or ultimate future. Regarding one of Daniel’s visions, the angel Gabriel tells Daniel, “Understand, 0 mortal, that the vision is for the time of the end” (8:17).16 At the conclusion of Daniel’s visions of the end, he is told to seal the book until “the time of the end” (12:4, 9). Similarly, in the book of Revelation, John receives the revelation of Jesus Christ, which was given “to show to his servants what must soon take place” (Rev 1:1; cf. 22:6 and 10). John’s visions occur after he sees a door open in heaven and a voice says to him, “Come up here, and I will show you what must take place after this” (Rev 4:1). Both of these canon- ical works contain visions revealed to their human seers that include information about the events and signs that occur before the end. Those events are typically cataclysmic; they are expected to wreak destruction and havoc on humanity, and will result in the reward of those who remain faithful to God and in the judgment and in the punishment of wicked humanity, as well of demonic forms of evil (cf. Dan 8:2-14,19-26; 9:24-27; 11:2-12:13; Rev 6:1-17; 8:6-9:21; 20:1-15). Two other Jewish apocalypses generally known among New Testament scholars, 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch, may also perpetuate this future-oriented understanding of “apocalyptic.” Fourth Ezra shares many parallels with the book of Revelation,17 and both 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch make extensive use of Daniel and Danielic imagery.18 In particular, 4 Ezra refers to Daniel and the vision of the fourth beast (4 Ezra 12:11-13; cf. Dan 7:7-8, 19-27). Moreover, both apocalypses relate events concerned with a coming Messiah (4 Ezra 7:28-29; 12:31-34; 2 Baruch 29:3-30:5; 39:7-40:3; 70:9-73:7)19 and reinterpret Daniel’s “one like a son of man” (Dan 7:13) as the very figure who will bring judgment for the wicked and prosperity for the righteous (4 Ezra 13; 2 Baruch 39:1-40:4; 72:1-6). In addition, 2 Baruch divides history into various periods leading to the final consummation of time in which heaven and earth will return to their state in the beginning, so that Endzeit corresponds to Urzeit (2 Baruch 54-74; cf. 1 Enoch 93:1-10; 91:11-17).20 If Daniel, Revelation, 4 Ezra, and 2 Baruch were the only extant Jewish apocalyptic texts, the use of the adjective “apocalyptic” in the main as a referent to future-oriented eschatology 16. All translations from the NRSV unless otherwise noted. 17. For a focus on such a comparison, see the still important study by Ulrich B. Müller, Messias und Menschensohn injüdischen Apokalypsen und in der Offenbarung des Johannes, SNT 6 (Gütersloh: Gerd Mohn, 1972). 18. On the influence of Daniel on these texts, respectively, cf. Michael E. Stone, 4 Ezra, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Press, 1990), 347-49 and 383-85, and Matthias Henze, Jewish Apocalypticism in Late First Century Israel: Reading Second Baruch in Context, TSAJ 142 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011), 175-76, 268-70, and 309-11. 19. For an overview, see Loren T. Stuckenbruck, “Messianic ideas in the Apocalyptic and Related Literature of Early Judaism,” in The Messiah in the Old and New Testaments, ed. Stanley E. Porter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 90-113. 20. Cf. Matthias Henze, “Time Made Visible: Second Baruch’s Eschatology,” in Jewish Apocalypticism in Late First Century Israel, 253-320, for a nuanced discussion of this evidence. [ Page ] 3 would—though in need of considerable qualification21—be warranted. However, these works are not our only examples of apocalyptic literature, nor are apocalyptic texts, when taken as a whole, primarily concerned with future eschatology. More fundamentally, Christopher Rowland has argued that the heart of Jewish apocalyptic literature consists in the disclosure of hidden knowledge.22 This essentialist description is rooted in the words “apocalypse” and “apocalyptic” and derives from the Greek word apokalupsis, which means “revelation” or “unveiling.”23 Rather than eschatology being the centerpiece of Jewish apocalypses, the point of departure, whether in relation to time or space, may have been a matter of hidden mysteries being revealed through mediator figures to human beings. For example, compared to the writings mentioned above, some of the earliest apocalypses, the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1-36) and the Book of the Luminaries (1 Enoch 72-82),24 are not overwhelmed by a concern for eschatology.25 Rather, it could be argued that these two works reflect a particular interest in the revelation of heavenly mysteries.26 In the Book of the Watchers, Enoch ascends to the heavenly throne room of God (1 Enoch 14) and is also given tours of the cosmos by archangels (chs. 17-36). Most of the Book of the Luminaries is taken up with Enoch’s learning of the movements of the sun, moon, and stars. This unveiling of heavenly secrets does not altogether do away with an interest in the end of time or the fate of the dead in the Book of the Watchers and the Book of the Luminaries, since they mention the gathering places of the dead (1 Enoch 22) and “the days of the sinners” (1 Enoch 80:2-8; cf. 72:1), respec- tively27; however, these two works suggest that eschatology is not necessarily a point of depar- ture in apocalyptic writings and that the revelation of heavenly mysteries may, more broadly, be regarded as more central to their content. The common equation of “apocalyptic” with eschatology often depends upon whether one 21. On 4 Ezra in this respect, see Karina Martin Hogan, Theologies in Conflict in 4 Ezra: Wisdom, Debate, and Apocalyptic Solution, JSJSup 130 (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2008). 22. Christopher Rowland, The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity (London: SPCK, 1982; repr. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2002), 14, 49-72; Christopher Rowland and Christopher R. A. Morray-Jones, The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, CRINT 12 (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2009), 13-27. 23. Morton Smith, “On the History of Apocalypt and Apocalypsis,” in Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World: Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Apocalypticism, Uppsala, August 12-17,1979, ed. David Hellholm (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983), 9-20. 24. George W. E. Nickelsburg and James C. VanderKam, 1 Enoch 2: A Commentary on the Book of l Enoch, Chapters 37-82, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2012), 339-45. 25. This should not imply, however, that eschatology is neglected per se. Michael E. Stone, “Apocalyptic Literature,” in Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period: Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, Qumran Sectarian Writings, Philo, Josephus, ed. Michael E. Stone, CRINT 2 (Assen, Netherlands: Van Gorcum, 1984), 383-441, states: “The content and character of these oldest fragments of apocalyptic literature are far from exclusively or even predominantly eschatological” (391). 26. Michael E. Stone, “Lists of Revealed Things in the Apocalyptic Literature,” in Magnolia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God: Essays on the Bible and Archaeology in Memory of G. Ernest Wright, ed. Frank Moore Cross, Werner E. Lemke, and Patrick D. Miller (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1976), 414-52; Rowland, Open Heaven, 23-48; Cf. DiTommaso, “Apocalypses and Apocalypticism in Antiquity. (Part l)”; Lorenzo DiTommaso, “Apocalypses and Apocalypticism in Antiquity. (Part II),” CurBR 5, no. 3 (2007): 367-432. 27. Nickelsburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch 2,523-29. VanderKam states: “None of these topics figures elsewhere in the Book of the Luminaries” (529). [ Page ] 4 focuses on the form of apocalypses or on the content of what is revealed in them.28 If one focuses on form or content, the semantic range of the adjective “apocalyptic” is extended, although in different directions. When scholars emphasize form, they tend to include mystical, mantic, and other revelatory literature.29 When content is emphasized (i.e., eschatological con- tent), various texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls and other eschatological compositions are described as “apocalyptic” despite the obvious differences of genre. Thus, in his emphasis on form, Rowland has claimed that eschatology is not a “constitutive feature” of apocalyptic liter- ature or apocalypticism.30 By contrast, Lorenzo DiTommaso, who takes the analysis of content as his starting point, contends that “eschatological matters are frequently the primary but by no means the exclusive subject of apocalypses.”31 Future events are revealed in some apocalyp- tic literature, but Rowland’s critique has highlighted that eschatology need not be considered the main point of departure in the apocalypses, so that a casual equation of “apocalyptic” with “eschatology” cannot be upheld.32 One of the challenges to achieving any sort of consensus regarding the use of the term “apoc- alyptic” is that many New Testament scholars continue not to differentiate between apoca- lypses (apocalyptic genre), apocalypticism (apocalyptic worldview), and apocalyptic eschatol- ogy or regard each of the three as somehow eschatological.33 Though the expression “apoc- alyptic eschatology” clearly refers to an eschatological outlook as it occurs in apocalypses, apocalyptic eschatology is primarily understood in New Testament scholarship through the eschatology of the “historical” apocalypses, especially Daniel, Revelation, and 4 Ezra. Apoca- lypticism as a term should reflect the worldview of the apocalypses in general, but it is almost entirely used as a reference to a worldview shaped by the eschatology of the historical apoc- alypses, as Klaus Koch’s definition of “apocalypticism” has highlighted (dualism, end of the world, etc.).34 28. See, John J. Collins, “What Is Apocalyptic Literature?,” in The Oxford Handbook of Apocalyptic Literature, ed. John J. Collins (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2014), 1-16 (1-6), who responds to recent criticisms regarding the use of form and content to define the literary genre “apocalypse.” 29. See the breadth of material included in Rowland and Morray-Jones, Mystery of God; also note the focus on prophetic material in Lester L. Grabbe, “Prophetic and Apocalyptic: Time for New Definitions—and New Thinking,” in Knowing the End from the Beginning: The Prophetic, the Apocalyptic, and Their Relationship, ed. Lester L. Grabbe and Robert D. Haak, JSPSup 46 (London; New York: T & T Clark International, 2003), 107-33. 30. Rowland, Open Heaven, 48. 31. DiTommaso, “Apocalypses and Apocalypticism in Antiquity. (Part l),” 241. 32. Rowland, Open Heaven, 71: “Any attempt, therefore, to use the term apocalyptic as a synonym of eschatology must be rejected.” Contra Murphy, Apocalypticism, 7: “although apocalyptic literature demonstrates a wide range of interests, eschatology is always present in some form and is often central.” 33. David E. Aune, “Understanding Jewish and Christian Apocalyptic,” in Apocalypticism, Prophecy, and Magic in Early Christianity (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2008), 1-12. 34. Klaus Koch, The Rediscovery of Apocalyptic, trans. Margaret Kohl, SBT 2.22 (London: SCM Press, 1972), 24-30; cf. Murphy, Apocalypticism, 8-14; cf. Stone, “Apocalyptic Literature,” 393, who speaking of Koch’s characteristics, states: “All these features bear upon eschatology.” [ Page ] 5 In Semeia 14, John Collins presented the Society of Biblical Literature genre project’s defin- ition of the literary genre “apocalypse.” This definition considered both form and content of apocalypses,35 and it has served as a useful starting point for many definitional discussions.36 According to the definition, apocalypses are narratives in which angelic beings reveal hidden mysteries to humans. The mediated revelation may include both temporal transcendence (i.e., eschatological salvation) and spatial transcendence (i.e., the existence of otherworldly beings and regions) without requiring the preeminence of either. The revelation of temporal tran- scendence has, more often than not, been emphasized at the expense of the revelation of spa- tial transcendence. The revealed temporal transcendence as it relates to the consummation of time is a contingent part of many apocalypses, yet it is worth noting that when the Semeia 14 definition of apocalypses mentions “eschatology,” it does so in terms of “eschatological salva- tion” or what John Collins has referred to as the “transcendence of death.”37 In other words, the temporal transcendence of the Jewish apocalypses includes the fate of the dead, whether that is the punishment of the wicked or the vindication of the righteous. It answers the question: “What happens to the wicked and the righteous when they die?” Eschatological salvation does not require an end-of-the-world scenario; instead, it may describe the way that apocalyptic lit- erature gives hope to the righteous by looking beyond death (cf. 1 Enoch 22:1-14; 94:6-104:838). Such a temporal transcendence offers hope that the righteous will eventually be saved and their enemies will be punished. Eschatology is common to many apocalypses, but by fixating on Daniel, Revelation, and historical apocalypses, scholars have often inappropriately equated apocalyptic eschatology with the entirety of the Jewish apocalyptic tradition. As Michael Stone has aptly stated in his famous essay over forty years ago, “As long as we remember that by explaining ‘apocalyptic eschatology’ we have not explained the apocalypses, there is hope for the future of the discussion.”39 The disclosure of spatial transcendence or “speculative material”40 is just as relevant as tem- 35. John J. Collins, “Introduction: Toward the Morphology of a Genre,” Semeia 14 (1979): 9-10. The question of function was intentionally left unmentioned, but it was addressed later by others. See especially, Adela Yarbro Collins, “Introduction: Early Christian Apocalypses,” Semeia 36 (1986): 1-11. 36. Recent criticism of the definition has come from Carol A. Newsom, “Spying out the Land: A Report from Genology,” in Seeking Out the Wisdom of the Ancients: Essays Offered to Honor Michael V. Fox on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday, ed. Ronald L. Troxel, Kelvin G. Friebel, and Dennis R. Magary (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2005), 437-50; and Crispin Fletcher-Louis, “Jewish Apocalyptic and Apocalypticism,” in Handbook for the Study of the Historical Jesus, vol. 2, 4 vols. (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2011), 1569-1607; however, the definition remains an important starting point for discussions of “apocalyptic,” see DiTommaso, “Apocalypses and Apocalypticism in Antiquity. (Part l),” 241; Todd R. Hanneken, The Subversion of the Apocalypses in the Book of Jubilees, EJL 34 (Atlanta: Society of Bibli- cal Literature, 2012); Timothy Jay Johnson, Now My Eye Sees You: Unveiling an Apocalyptic Job (Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix, 2009); Bennie H. Reynolds, III, Between Symbolism and Realism: The Use of Symbolic and Non-Symbolic Language in Ancient Jewish Apocalypses 333-63 B.C.E., JAJSup 8 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011). 37. John J. Collins, “Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendence of Death,” CBQ 36, no. 1 (January 1,1974): 21-43. 38. Of course, an end-time scenario is depicted in the Epistle of Enoch (cf. 1 Enoch 100:1-4), but this is not immediately connected with the discussion of the post-mortem existence of the righteous and the wicked (as in 102:1-103:8). 39. Stone, “Lists of Revealed Things,” 443. [ Page ] 6 poral transcendence for understanding Jewish apocalyptic thought, and perhaps even more so.41 The revelation of otherworldly beings and otherworldly regions draws attention to the revelatory form as well as the spatial content. Angelic beings either come from heaven to earth or they function as guides for humans who have entered heaven. These otherworldly beings reveal knowledge of the heavens and earth, the numbers and types of angels, even the throne room of God. Additional speculative material is included in the “lists of revealed things” found in a number of Jewish apocalypses.42 The revelation of spatial transcendence is part of the reve- lation given to a human recipient and should be considered in understanding the Jewish apoc- alyptic tradition. An evenly focused understanding of “apocalyptic” as revelation of temporal and spatial tran- scendence opens the possibility for considering the disclosure of the cosmos and of wisdom as “apocalyptic.” Wisdom and the revelation of wisdom have long been recognized as contribut- ing, in some way, to Jewish apocalyptic tradition.43 In the Enochic literature, wisdom consti- tutes a portion of the revelation given to Enoch which he then passes on to his son Methuselah. In the Book of the Watchers, Enoch is shown the Tree of Wisdom from which the holy ones eat and learn wisdom (1 Enoch 32:l-6).44 In the Book of the Luminaries, the angel Uriel tells Enoch, “Wisdom I have given to you and to your children and to those who will be our children so that they may give this wisdom which is beyond their thought to their children for generations” (82:2; cf. 5:8). As Randall Argali contends, “The phrase ‘to give wisdom’ is a technical expres- sion for Enoch’s revelation.”45 Enoch, who is referred to as the wisest of humans in the Aramaic Enoch texts (4QEng 1 ii 23; cf. 1 Enoch 92:1),46 has wisdom revealed to him in all the various texts of 1 Enoch, and, in turn, he reveals that wisdom to others through his own writings (82:1; 83:1; 92:1).47 In the book of Daniel, the prophet is presented as the recipient of wisdom, a kind of wisdom that is only revealed to the wise (9:22; 12:10).48 Likewise, 4 Ezra’s conclusion concern- 40. Stone, “Apocalyptic Literature,” 393-94. 41. Fletcher-Louis, “Jewish Apocalyptic and Apocalypticism,” 1578-79, states, “there remain swathes of material in the apocalypses which have nothing to do with eschatology, nor an obviously ‘transcendent’ kind of eschatology.” 42. Stone, “Lists of Revealed Things,” 414: “astronomy and meterology, uranography and cosmology, the secrets of nature and Wisdom as well as other aspects of esoterical lore not easily classified in accepted categories.” 43. There is, however, less agreement about the nature of that contribution. See Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology, 2 vols. (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2001); Hans-Peter Müller, “Mantische Weisheit und Apokalyptik,” in Congress Volume: Uppsala 1971, VTSup 22 (Leiden: Brill, 1972), 268-93; Jonathan Z. Smith, “Wisdom and Apocalyptic,” in Religious Syncretism in Antiquity: Essays in Conversation with Geo Widengren (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1975), 131-56; Benjamin G. Wright and Lawrence M. Wills, eds., Conflicted Boundaries in Wisdom And Apocalypticism, SymS 35 (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005). 44. Randal A. Argali, 1 Enoch and Sirach: A Comparative Literary and Conceptual Analysis of the Themes of Revelation, Creation, and Judgment, EJL 8 (Atlanta: Scholars, 1995), 33-35. 45. Ibid., 20. 46. Michael A. Knibb, “The Book of Enoch in the Light of the Qumran Wisdom Literature,” in Essays on the Book of Enoch and other early Jewish Texts and Traditions, SVTP 22 (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2009), 94. 47. Alex P. Jassen, Mediating the Divine Prophecy and Revelation in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Second Temple Judaism, STDJ 68 (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2007), 265, 268, 269. 48. Ibid., 274-75, notes that the wisdom revealed to Enoch and Daniel “relates to eschatological speculation.” [ Page ] 7 ing the books Ezra is given to dictate suggests that their content is revealed wisdom since 70 of these 94 books are only intended for the wise (14:46).49 Revealed cosmology is closely related to wisdom. Information about nature is itself consid- ered wisdom that is revealed (job 38:1-4; Ps 19:1-2; Sir 1:3; Wis 7:17-21).50 Stone draws atten- tion to the historical apocalypses 2 Baruch 59 and 4 Ezra 4:5-8, which include speculation on the revelation of natural phenomena.51 But this revelation of nature only scratches the sur- face of the revealed cosmologies in the Jewish apocalypses. Throughout the Jewish apocalypses, the movements of the celestial bodies, the realms of the earth, the levels of heaven,52 the hier- archies of angels and their authorities, and other cosmological wonders are revealed.53 In the Book of the Watchers, the opening chapters present creation as an example of consistency and describe how creation carries out God’s work and obeys his word in contrast to humanity’s sin- fulness and lack of consistency (1 Enoch 2:l-5:4).54 Enoch ascends to heaven and sees the heav- enly temple (14), and he is taken on a journey and shown various aspects of earth and heaven (17-1955; 20-36). Enoch, Levi, and Baruch are figures who experience ascending to heaven and see the mysteries of the heavenly realm. Enoch and Levi even catch glimpses of God (1 Enoch 46-48, 62; Testament of Levi 4-5; 2 Enoch 1-9; 3 Baruch). In 2 Enoch and 3 Baruch, the revealed cosmologies include the levels of heaven and what is contained in them, such as various classes of angels and the rebellious Watchers. Often, as in the Book of the Watchers, naming the angels consists of describing the aspects of creation over which they have authority.56 Even the sym- bolic use of numbers in the Jewish apocalypses reveals aspects of cosmology in their descrip- tion of an ordered cosmos.57 If revealed wisdom and revealed cosmology are part of the revelation in the Jewish apoca- lyptic tradition alongside a revealed consummation of time, why are wisdom and cosmology not likewise considered “apocalyptic”? Since both temporal and spatial transcendence make up what is revealed in the Jewish apocalypses, is it worth considering how the Jewish apoca- lyptic tradition has shaped New Testament thought with regard to revealed wisdom, revealed 49. See Michael A. Knibb, “Apocalyptic and Wisdom in 4 Ezra” in Essays on the Book of Enoch and Other Early Jewish Texts and Traditions, SVTP 22 (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2009), 271-88, especially 277-80. 50. Martha Himmelfarb, Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses (New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), 77-91. 51. Stone, “Lists of Revealed Things,” 414-21. 52. Adela Yarbro Collins, Cosmology and Eschatology in Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism, JSJSup 50 (Leiden; New York: Brill, 1996). 53. See Martinus C. de Boer, The Defeat of Death: Apocalyptic Eschatology in 1 Corinthians 15 and Romans 5, J SNTSup 22 (Sheffield:] SOT, 1988), 182, who refers to “cosmological Jewish apocalyptic eschatology” in which the “two ages” are temporal and spatial since “the two ages are fundamentally two confrontational or conflicting spheres of power.” 54. Himmelfarb, Ascent to Heaven, 55. Kelley Coblentz Bautch, A Study of the Geography of l Enoch 17-19: “No One Has Seen What I Have Seen,’’JSJSup 81 (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2003). 56. Stone, “Lists of Revealed Things”; Himmelfarb, Ascent to Heaven, 80-93; Edward Adams, “Graeco-Roman and Ancient Jewish Cosmology,” in Cosmology and New Testament Theology, ed. Jonathan T. Pennington and Sean M. McDonough, LNTS 355 (London: T & T Clark, 2008), 5-27, esp. 24-26. 57. Yarbro Collins, Cosmology and Eschatology in Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism, 110-11,135. [ Page ] 8 cosmology, and revealed consummation of time? What happens when we reconsider the New Testament’s relationship to the revelatory aspect of the Jewish apocalyptic tradition rather than solely apocalyptic eschatology? Might Jesus’s statement, “for nothing is covered up (kekalummenon) that will not be uncovered (apokaluphtheisetai), and nothing secret that will not become known” (Matt 10:26) reflect the hidden and revelatory essence of Jewish apocalyptic thought? What of Paul’s statement that he speaks the wisdom of God that has been hidden in mystery, which was not known to the rulers of this age but was revealed through the Spirit (1 Cor 2:6-10; apekalupsen, 2:7)? Or Paul’s own experience of being caught up to the third heaven (2 Cor 12:2-6)? Is the reference to the gospel as “the mystery that has been hidden throughout the ages and generations but has now been revealed (ephanerothei) to his saints” (Col 1:26) indica- tive of some shaping of early Christian tradition by Jewish apocalyptic thought? It is the placing of these and similar questions in conversation with Jewish apocalyptic writings to which the chapters of the present volume are devoted. The contributors to this volume have been asked to address the question of whether a reve- latory understanding of the Jewish apocalyptic tradition sheds any light on understanding the shaping of New Testament thought. Or said another way, was Käsemann more correct than he knew? Is Jewish apocalyptic thought the mother of early Christianity not merely regard- ing the resolution of time but also regarding hidden cosmology and wisdom that is revealed to the righteous? This volume’s contributors approach the New Testament documents from one or more of three areas of exploration relevant to current scholarship on the Jewish apoc- alyptic tradition: (1) revealed wisdom, (2) revealed cosmology, and (3) revealed resolution of time. What is striking about the following contributions is the way that comparing New Tes- tament texts with a revelatory understanding of Jewish apocalyptic thought brings new per- spectives to light. Texts that have not been traditionally considered “apocalyptic” because they lack an apocalyptic eschatology indicate some shared motifs and features of Jewish apocalyp- tic thought (e.g., John, Hebrews, and James). On the other hand, texts previously considered “apocalyptic” because of their future-oriented eschatology point to other connections with Jewish apocalyptic tradition. For example, the so-called apocalyptic discourse in the Synop- tic Gospels, Mark 13 in particular, is obviously evidence of apocalyptic eschatology, but Mark, Matthew, and Luke also include evidence of revelatory material—angelic appearances, teaching of hidden mysteries in the parables, and cosmological insights. The book of Revelation also inti- mates revealed wisdom apart from its description of the consummation of time, particularly since wisdom is needed to understand its message (13:18; 17:9). The chapters that follow clearly effect these connections and seek to reverse what has too often been a lopsided perspective in New Testament Studies. [ Page ] 9 The first set of chapters addresses Jesus and the Gospels. In the first essay on “Jesus the Revealer and the Revealed,” Leslie Baynes highlights the concern of the Synoptic Gospels to present Jesus both as the content of revelation and as the revealer of content. Jesus receives heavenly revelation at his baptism and transfiguration, and yet, he also becomes the content of the revelation in these events. Baynes contends that Jesus’s parables serve as evidence for his revealing and concealing of heavenly mysteries and that the Synoptic Gospels present Jesus in a way that can be compared to depictions of angelic mediators in the Jewish apocalypses. Kristian Bendoraitis traces the scholarly discussion of “apocalyptic traits” in Matthew and demonstrates Matthew’s interest in angels, as illustrated in the Matthean redaction of received tradition. Bendoraitis contends that Matthew’s recognizable emphasis on angelology corre- sponds to the role of the Son of Man at the judgment, illustrates the presence of God’s activity in Jesus’s life, and reflects a certain diversity within Matthew’s symbolic universe. Concerning the Gospel of Mark, Grant Macaskill deftly draws attention to the significance of the revelation of heavenly mysteries in the opening narrative of Mark, Jesus’s parables, and even the so-called apocalyptic discourse. Macaskill helpfully offers four isolated findings, one of which includes an understanding of Jesus in Mark as both revealer and revealed. Kindalee Pfremmer De Long surveys the extensive role of angels in Luke-Acts, highlighting how the angels are depicted, including how they function as revealers and the content of what they disclose as divine agents. She also includes discussion of the angels’ roles in cosmic war- fare and the angelic praise of God. She concludes that the apocalyptic scenes in Luke-Acts not only anticipate eschatological restoration but also underscore a tension between apocalyptic glory and suffering. Benjamin E. Reynolds maintains that, contrary to scholarly consensus, the Gospel of John should be recognized as representative of Jewish apocalyptic thought, particularly in the Gospel’s revealed cosmology, its vision of God in the person of Jesus, and what he describes as “visionary showing.” Adding to his already prolific writing on the subject of Paul and Jewish apocalyptic thought, Christopher Rowland contends that Paul’s own visionary experiences shaped the apocalyptic dimensions of his writing. Rowland presses the importance of the “apocalyptic element” in Paul and offers a valuable contribution to the discussion of the “apocalyptic Paul.” Karina Martin Hogan brings her expertise in Second Temple Judaism to Romans and argues that the concepts of creation, resurrection, judgment, and glory in Romans have “unexpected points of contact” with Jewish apocalyptic literature, especially 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, and some texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls. Matthew Goff discusses the scholarship on the “apocalyptic Paul” and draws attention to [ Page ] 10 existing problems with this debate in light of contemporary research on Jewish apocalyptic thought. Goff skillfully makes the case that the Corinthian correspondence shares similarities with Jewish apocalyptic texts. Notably, Goff discusses the emphasis on the parousia in 1 Corinthians and Paul’s ascent to the third heaven in 2 Corinthians. Since Galatians is often at the heart of the “apocalyptic Paul” debates, James Scott makes a point of avoiding definitions. Instead, he provides an extensive textual comparison between Galatians and the Epistle of Enoch (1 Enoch 92-105) and argues that the resemblances between the texts allow for Galatians to be described as an “apocalyptic” writing. Benjamin Wold moves beyond the myopic focus on eschatology in the “apocalyptic Paul” debates. Wold notes that Colossians opens with an emphasis on the revelation of mysteries, conflict expressed with dualities, otherworldly features, and future rewards and punishments. He asserts a relationship between the “Colossian heresy” and heavenly ascents. Regarding Eph- esians, Wold highlights its evident Jewish apocalyptic thought, noting the apocalyptic themes it shares with Colossians (e.g., revelation and heavenly ascent) and addressing its cosmological portrayal of evil. Angela Standhartinger maintains that apocalyptic motifs—transformation within the heav- enly world, resurrection, and the heavenly book of life—are noticeable throughout Philippians, even though the epistle does not figure into many “apocalyptic Paul” discussions. In comparing Paul to a teacher of wisdom, she makes a case for understanding Paul as an apocalyptic prophet who reveals to the Philippians an apocalyptic hope of heavenly transformation. John Byron reasons that confining discussions of apocalyptic thought in 1 Thessalonians to 4:13-17 and 5:3-11 (i.e., Paul’s eschatology) is too limiting. He contends that in 1 Thessalonians, Paul functions as an apocalyptic seer who discloses to the Thessalonians aspects of heavenly mysteries which are relevant—not for a promised future paradise but for how the Thessaloni- ans live in the present. In his chapter on the Pastoral Epistles, Mark Harding provides an informative introduction to apocalyptic thought in the New Testament, and especially, in Paul. Harding, arguing against scholarly consensus, asserts that the Pastoral Epistles’ revelation of apocalyptic eschatology, use of apocalyptic rhetoric, disclosure of the mystery of faith, and the epiphany of Jesus Christ serve as evidence of Jewish apocalyptic thought in 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus. Eric F. Mason describes the speech of God in Hebrews as divine revelation. He addresses each place in Hebrews where God speaks. Then Mason concentrates on Hebrews 1:5-14 and main- tains that God’s proclamation in these verses resembles apocalyptic revelation found in Jewish apocalyptic literature. Mariam Kamell Kovalishyn admits that while the Epistle of James indicates little evidence [ Page ] 11 of Jewish apocalyptic thought, James does portray wisdom functioning as an intermediary between God and humanity. The epistle is also interested in the division between the righteous and the wicked. These observations contribute to Kovalishyn’s argument that James offers an example of “apocalyptic wisdom.” Concerning 1-2 Peter and Jude, Chad Pierce examines the evidence of revealed consumma- tion of time, emphasis on glory, and depiction of angels found in these epistles. He interprets 1 Peter 3:18-22 in relation to apocalyptic fallen angel traditions and contends that 3:18-22 “serves as the fulcrum for the apocalyptic elements of the epistle.” With 2 Peter and Jude, Pierce notes the role of revelation in the respective defenses against opposing revelations offered by the false teachers. Bennie H. Reynolds, III, centers on the manner in which the Johannine epistles use opposi- tional language to express their demonology and eschatology. He compares 1-3 John’s binary rhetorical contrast of truth and lies with that of Jewish apocalyptic texts—IQS; 4QVisions of Amran; 4QCatena; Daniel; Epistles of Enoch. By doing so, Reynolds draws attention to these texts’ shared apocalyptic worldview, particularly with respect to their articulation of eschatol- ogy and demonology. Loren Stuckenbruck’s contribution on the Book of Revelation takes the use and function of “wisdom” as a point of departure. Stuckenbruck argues that although the term occurs only four times in the work, a close reading of the contexts in which it is found opens up the way for larger portions of the book to be read not only as a disclosure of knowledge but also as a call to interactive discernment of the seer’s visions among its recipients. The findings in these chapters present new horizons in the study of the New Testament and Jewish apocalyptic tradition. The contributors push the boundaries of current discussions concerning the influence of Jewish apocalyptic tradition on the shaping of New Testament thought. As a whole, the contributions also underscore the significance of the fundamentally revelatory nature of the Jewish apocalyptic tradition—a tradition that could both lead to and embrace the rise of the Jesus movement, in all its diversity, during the first century. [ Page ] 12 ***** This is the end of the e-text. This e-text was brought to you by Tyndale University, J. William Horsey Library - Tyndale Digital Collections *****