I’ve been reading, reading, reading about the history of Apocalyptic thought in the West (and a little in the East too). And I’ll tell you what’s been revealed to me thus far: it’s fucking complicated!

You sit around normally thinking we’re all just gonna die in a nuclear blast or be lifted bodily up into Heaven - but the “truth” is something rather more complex.

Here’s a little run-down of what I have so far. I won’t get too technical, but this is a general outline. While the Book of Revelations is the most commonly referenced apocalyptic text, it is by no means the only one. It’s the only one which made it’s way into the canonical (official) New Testament though. It is loosely based on and references the only apocalyptic book in the Old Testament: The Book of Daniel (though there are apocalyptic passage in other books). Apocalypses are generally dreams or other divine revelations about the passing of an epoch, and the events which would occur therein.

Daniel is one of those tricky books thought to have been written after the events it describes. It was written either during or after the Jewish revolt of the Maccabees in 165 BC against the Seleucid Greek ruler, Antiochus Ephiphanes. The message of Daniel was basically to “hold out” because help was on the way, and the foreign despot would be deposed, and order restored.

Though people LOVE to complicate it further than this, it seems that the Book of Revelations (also known as the Apocalypse of John) served essentially the same function: as protest literature to give hope to the oppressed. In this case, the oppressed were the Christians under Rome and the cult of the Emperor who demanded to be worshipped as God. John of Patmos, the author of Revelations, is thought to have expected the events described in it to unfold in the next 3.5 years. The timeframe for his writing it seems to be generally placed around 95 AD, if memory serves me.

Like a lot of prophecies that are taken literally instead of symbolically, it didn’t come “true.” But a few years later, it got renewed interest thanks to the Montanists, a heretical Christian sect which began interpreting signs of the end times based on current events. From there it got picked up and continued by various groups - most of which sought to decode the symbolism in it to literally match up with worldly events. St. Augustine eventually seems to have been responsible for introducing the concept that Revelations should be interpreted symbolically, rather than as literal events unfolding in space-time.

There are a bunch of other developments beyond that, but I just wanted to focus on a couple other systems of interpretation which have arisen around it. There seem to be three main schools of thought regarding the events described in the Book of Revelations. First we have what is called Preterism. In addition to a bunch of other nuanced stuff, preterism basically holds that the events described in Revelations already occurred - that is, around the time of their writing. The other big school is Futurism, which is basically the opposite: that these events are yet to happen. Combining the two, we also have what’s called Historicism. It basically suggests that some of the signs and events already occurred, some are occurring now, and some have yet to happen.

The thing that each of these three schools of thought share is a linear perspective of time. Past, present, future - and that the signs must be located along the axis of time. Augustine, of course, suggested something else - that they don’t exist along the timeline at all. Interestingly, I’ve not yet come across any theory that combines all these, or totally does away with the concept of linear time.

What I mean by that is I guess more in line with Philip K. Dick’s quasi-gnostic assertion that time is an illusion - in some sense. It does not flow along a line, but is essentially a continuous “now”. The Book of Revelations takes on a whole new meaning in this light, I think. One which is actually much more in tune with how people really use it nowadays - and which would allow us to reconcile all the differing interpretations. You know how people seem to be constantly looking at this book, and trying to match it’s symbols to outward events? What if that’s the whole point? What if the apocalypse at every moment is happening, has happened and will happen?

It reminds me of that Thomas Jefferson quote where he says something about how each generation ought to fight its own revolution. I can’t remember the exact wording. It’s also very close to Matthew 24:34, where Jesus proclaims: “Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.” This interpretation would basically recast the Book of Revelations as a depiction of the ongoing struggle of the individual Christian everywhere at all times. In times of trouble or doubt, they could turn to this book, and map its symbolism onto their outward life. In doing so, they can experience the psychological mystical transfiguration it implies. The Tribulation is their own struggle through life. The Second Coming of Christ is into their heart, and the New Jerusalem is the person who is made whole by parousia of Christ (sort of like Philip K. Dick’s homoplasmate).

Has anybody seen a historical interpretation of the Apocalypse according to this type of thinking? It seems like it ought to exist, although there is probably some kind of weird jargon to describe it. Any hints, let me know.

Also check out my Psychological Function of the Apocalypse