God's Problem (30 page)

But the angel goes on to say that the dominion of this one “shall be taken away to be consumed and totally destroyed.” And then the saints of Israel will inherit the kingdom of earth:

And that’s where the angel’s explanation of the vision ends.

The Interpretation of the Vision

How are we to understand this vision and the explanation of it given by the angel? Scholars have long recognized that Daniel 7 presents us with one of the first instances (or arguably
the
first instance) of a Jewish “apocalypse.” The term
apocalypse
refers to a kind of literature—a literary genre—that started becoming popular during the Maccabean period and continued to be popular for centuries afterward, among Jews and eventually among Christians. Most people today are aware of at least one apocalypse—the Apocalypse (or Revelation) of John, the final book of the New Testament. Like the vision of Daniel 7, the Apocalypse of John looks very odd indeed to modern eyes. But it would not have seemed at all odd to its ancient readers: it was an apocalypse that shared with other writings of the same genre certain well-recognized literary conventions. The genre seems odd to us only if we are not accustomed to reading ancient apocalypses; but a
lot of them still exist (outside the Bible). We have apocalypses written in the names of Adam, Moses, Elijah, Enoch, Baruch, Isaiah, Peter, John, Paul, and others. As with any kind of literature, it is possible to analyze the apocalypse
as a genre
(i.e., a
kind
of literature) and to classify its various genre characteristics.

Apocalypses were literary works in which a prophet described visions he had seen. These visions are almost always couched in bizarre symbolism that is hard to interpret (horrifying wild beasts and the like). But invariably an angelic interpreter is nearby who can provide some of the keys of explanation. Some apocalypses describe a journey that the seer is given through the heavenly realms in which what he sees in heaven reflects what happens on earth (there is some of this in the book of Revelation). In other instances, the seer is shown a sequence of events that are interpreted as a kind of historical time line of what will happen in the future (as here in Daniel). As was true with the Hebrew writing prophets, the apocalyptic prophets are speaking to their own day—they are not crystal-ball-gazing into times thousands of years removed. In most instances (not all), the apocalyptic seers write their accounts pseudonymously—claiming to be some famous religious figure of the past. This provides some authority for their accounts—for to whom else would heavenly secrets be revealed than those closest to God, the great men of God of old? And so, as I’ve pointed out, we have apocalypses allegedly written by Moses, and Elijah, and even Adam; later we get apocalypses allegedly written by Isaiah, Peter, and Paul.

One of the virtues of having a famous person of the past write an apocalypse is that the future events that he sees are, in fact, from the time of the actual writer, already past. As a result, the “predictions” that the pseudonymous author allegedly makes are certain of being fulfilled: they have already happened!

The book of Daniel gives us, then, an apocalypse. It is written pseudonymously during the time of the Maccabean Revolt, when Antiochus Epiphanes was defiling the sanctuary, trying to force the Jews no longer to obey the Law, and persecuting those who refused
to cooperate. It is a vision with bizarre symbolism, explained by an angel, in which the “future” is allegedly predicted to a sixth-century prophet; in reality, though, most of the “future” events that are described are
past
events for the actual second-century writer. The value of this kind of fictitious prediction is that when the author then goes on to describe what is to happen next, in his own time, it does not seem that he has shifted from talking about what has already happened, historically, to what he anticipates is going to happen now, in the future. The reader reads
everything
as a future prediction; and since everything else described has already come true (as well it should have, since the author knows what happened in the past), then the predictions of what comes next seem to be sure to come true as well.

The angel in this case explains that each of the beasts represents a king or a kingdom that will arise on the earth and do great damage to its inhabitants. Since the book is set in the time of the Babylonians, scholars have recognized the series of four kingdoms as Babylon, Media, Persia, and Greece. The fourth terrible beast has ten horns—these are rulers coming in the wake of Alexander the Great. The final little horn who “speaks arrogantly,” attempts to change the sacred laws, and persecutes the saints (see Dan. 7:25) is none other than Antiochus Epiphanes, who, according to 1 Maccabees, “spoke with great arrogance,” tried to force Jews no longer to observe the Law, and persecuted to the death those who disobeyed him.

Who, then, is this “one like a human being” (or “one like a son of man”) to whom the eternal kingdom is given? Christians, of course, have traditionally taken this to refer to Jesus, who at his second coming will inherit the Kingdom of God and rule it as the future messiah. But it is important to ask not only how this passage in Daniel came to be interpreted in later times, but also how it was read in its own context. And here we are given considerable help, because the angel interpreter gives a clear indication of who the “one like a human being” is. The humanlike one is set up to contrast with the wild beasts. They are animals; this one is human.
They came from the turbulent sea (the realm of chaos); this one comes from heaven. If the contrast is between beasts and a humanlike one, and if the beasts each represent a kingdom, what does the humanlike one represent? Probably a kingdom. And in fact the angel tells us who the “one” is who receives the eternal kingdom: it is the “people of the holy ones of the Most High” (Dan. 7:27; also in 7:18). In other words, it is the holy ones of Israel, previously persecuted and slaughtered by their bestial enemies, now exalted to the rulership of the earth.
⁴

Suffering in the Apocalyptic Tradition

It is interesting to compare the understanding of suffering presented in Daniel’s vision with the views of the classical writing prophets such as Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah. This can best be done by raising some of the fundamental questions of suffering.

Why do the people of God suffer? According to a passage like Amos 3–5 (to pick a classical example), horrendous suffering comes upon the people of God because they have violated his will and he is punishing them. According to Daniel 7, suffering comes to God’s people because of evil forces in the world (the beasts), forces that are opposed to God and those who side with him.

Who causes the suffering? In Amos, God brings suffering. In Daniel, it is the forces opposed to God who bring it.

Who is at fault for suffering? For Amos, the people are responsible for their own suffering: they have sinned and God punishes them. For Daniel, it is the forces aligned against God who are at fault: they are persecuting those who do God’s will.

What causes the suffering? In Amos, it is the sinful activity of God’s people. In Daniel, it is the upright behavior of those who side with God.

How will the suffering end? For Amos, it will end when the people of God repent of their sin and return to God’s ways. For
Daniel, it will end when God destroys the evil forces that oppose him in the world and sets up his good kingdom for his people.

When will it end? For Amos, it will end at some undisclosed future time, when the people of God see the error of their ways and repent. For Daniel, it will end very soon, when God intervenes in history to overthrow the forces of evil.

The Underlying Tenets of Apocalypticism

At the time the book of Daniel was being written, Jewish thinkers and authors took up such ideas and developed an entirely new worldview that could explain why there is such pain and misery in a world allegedly ruled by the God who created it. In addition to being aware of the literary genre of “apocalypse,” we need to become familiar with the worldview lying behind it, the worldview I have called “apocalypticism.” For the sake of clarity I should emphasize that even though the Jews and Christians who produced literary “apocalypses” were all apocalypticists, not all apocalypticists produced apocalypses (any more than all Marxists have produced a Communist Manifesto). As we will see, two of the most famous apocalypticists of the ancient world—Jesus and the apostle Paul—did not do so. But they were nonetheless firmly committed to apocalyptic views. What can we say about these views, as expressed in apocalyptic writings both within the Bible and outside it?

Jewish apocalypticists, as a rule, subscribed to four major tenets. (1)
Dualism.
Jewish apocalypticists maintained that there were two fundamental components of reality in our world, the forces of good and the forces of evil. In control of the forces of good, of course, was God himself. But God had a personal opponent, an evil power in control of the forces of evil—Satan, the Devil. We earlier saw that in the book of Job, “the Satan” was not God’s archenemy but a member of his divine council, one who reported to God with the other “sons of God.” It is with Jewish apocalypticists that Satan
takes on a different character and becomes the archenemy of God, a powerful fallen angel who has been forced out of heaven and wreaks havoc here on earth by opposing God and all that he stands for. It was ancient Jewish apocalypticists who invented the Judeo-Christian Devil.

For apocalypticists, everything in the world is divided into the two camps, good and evil, God and the Devil. On God’s side are the good angels; on the Devil’s are the wicked demons. God has the power of righteousness and life; the Devil has the power of sin and death. In the apocalyptic system, “sin” is not simply a human activity, a disobedient act. Sin is actually a power, a kind of demonic force, that is trying to enslave people, to force them to do what is contrary to their own interests and contrary to the will of God (and it is obviously succeeding). Why is it that some people just “can’t help themselves” and do what they know is bad or wrong? For Jewish apocalypticists, it is because the power of sin has overwhelmed them. So too “death” is not simply something that happens when our bodies cease to function; it is a demonic power in the world that is trying to capture us. And when it succeeds, it annihilates us, removing us from the land of the living and from all that is good—and from the presence of God.

The world is filled with demonic forces aligned against God and his people; it is a stage for an ongoing cosmic conflict. Human suffering is created in the course of battle, as evil forces in the world have their way with relatively powerless human beings, who suffer horribly as a result. For some unknown reason, God has relinquished control of this world to the forces of evil—for the time being. Pain, misery, anguish, suffering, and death are the result.

This cosmological dualism between the forces of good and evil has a historical component as well. Apocalypticists thought of history itself in dualistic terms: there is a radical disjunction between this age and the age to come. This age—for unknown, mysterious reasons—is given over to the forces of evil: the Devil, his demons, sin, suffering, and death. Why are there so many di
sasters in this world, earthquakes, famines, epidemics, wars, deaths? Because the powers of evil are in control. But not forever. God is going to intervene in this world, overthrow the forces of evil, and set up a new kingdom on earth, in which everything opposed to him is destroyed and his people are given lives beyond pain and suffering.

(2)
Pessimism.
Apocalypticists did not think that we would be able to make progress in bringing in this Kingdom of God ourselves. We cannot, in fact, improve our lot in this age, an age of evil, misery, and anguish. God has relinquished control of this world to the forces of evil, and things are simply going to get worse and worse, until the end, when literally all hell breaks out. We should not think, therefore, that we can make things better by improving our welfare programs, placing more teachers in the classroom, or putting more cops on the beat; we cannot make matters better by developing new technologies for making life easier, devising new plans for implementing world peace, or devoting enormous resources to fighting malaria, cancer, and AIDS. We can
do
these things, of course, but they won’t matter. Ultimately, it is the forces of evil that are in control of this world, and they will continue to assert their power and gain the ascendancy, until God himself intervenes.