Jesus Remembered: Christianity in the Making, vol. 1

§12.3 The Kingdom of God
phrase dor wador, 'generation upon generation', could be used as equivalent to
'for ever' 108 should give us pause. But there is still a further potential confusion
in language to be considered.
Throughout the twentieth century the issue has been obscured by a persistent
confusion between the terms 'eschatology' and 'apocalyptic'. Two attempts
were made in the 1980s to clarify the latter, though so far with uncertain success.
One takes seriously the unsatisfactory use of 'apocalyptic' as a noun 109 and offers
a threefold distinction: 'apocalypse' as a literary genre, 'apocalypticism' as a
social ideology, and 'apocalyptic eschatology' as a set of ideas present in other
genres and social settings. 110 The other has protested against treating the two
terms as though they were synonyms: 111 'apocalypse' (revelation) denotes the
unveiling of heavenly mysteries; most of these 'revelations' concern 'final
events', but by no means all. 112 If we are to observe such distinctions, then the
items of Second Temple expectation can be called 'apocalyptic' insofar as they
have been 'revealed' to the writers. The more popular use (also beyond theological
circles) of 'apocalyptic' for a future scenario of supernatural interventions in
human history involving unprecedented violence and horror should be resolutely
avoided. 'Eschatological' is much the more appropriate term, even if it leaves us
with the unclarity just discussed. Here again when we turn to the Jesus tradition
we will need to scrutinise the hope expressed with care and use our own descriptive
language circumspectly.
c. Literal, Symbol, Metaphor, or What?
The degree of fragmentation in the stories told and the lack of clarity in key
terms (not least 'eschatology' itself) reinforce the question raised by Perrin. Is
'the kingdom of God' a concept or a symbol? Should kingdom talk and the content
of eschatological expectation be unpacked in literal or symbolic terms? The
issue is nicely posed by Wright's treatment. He sees apocalyptic language as 'an
elaborate metaphor-system for investing historical events with theological signif-
108. Exod. 3.15; Deut. 23.2-3; Pss. 33.11; 61.6; 72.5; 79.13; 89.4; 100.5; 102.12;
106.31; 119.90; 135.13; 145.13; 146.10; Isa. 34.17; 51.8; Joel 3.20.
109. See, e.g., the objections of T. F. Glasson, 'What Is Apocalyptic?', NTS 27 (1980-
81)98-105.
110. See particularly Collins, Apocalyptic Imagination ch. 1 (1-42).
111. C. Rowland, The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early
Christianity (London: SPCK, 1982); also Christian Origins 56-64.
112. We need only mention, for example, Paul's use of the term 'apocalypse' in Gal.
1.12 and 2.2, and 'The Astronomical Book'or 'Book of Heavenly Luminaries' which makes up
I En. 72-82.
401