You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘apocalypse’ tag.
Properly understood, apocalyptic rhetoric is not the language of despair, but the language of hope. In theological terms, the apocalyptic is not so much the end of the world as the beginning of the breaking through of truth and justice into the world we live in. To say that “we are living in the end of the world” — whether because of economic exploitation, environmental collapse, or devastating consumerism — is not to say that everything is dying but that everything must change. To employ apocalyptic rhetoric is not to say that the world is doomed but that another world is possible.
Again, in religious terms: The apocalyptic task has always been the work of the prophets, not the priests. The priests say that if the current system ended, everything would be over; the prophets say that if the current system ended, the new one could at last begin. Perhaps the prophets are “unrealistic”; perhaps they are “naïve”. That’s what was said of MLK, of Gandhi, of Milk — but these men and others like them, though dismissed as ignorant and idealistic and unworthy of being taken seriously, are the very prophets who have given us hope and brought us change. It takes an act of daring and dreaming to listen to their visions; but when we do, we see suddenly not the end of the world, but the true beginning.
[note: my posts on Palestine will resume soon, but I am withholding them currently, as I may seek to publish them in another forum first.]
Properly understood, apocalyptic rhetoric is not the language of despair, but the language of hope. In theological terms, the apocalyptic is not so much the end of the world as the beginning of the breaking through of truth and justice into the world we live in. To say that “we are living in the end of the world” — whether because of economic exploitation, environmental collapse, or devastating consumerism — is not to say that everything is dying but that everything must change. To employ apocalyptic rhetoric is not to say that the world is doomed but that another world is possible.
Again, in religious terms: The apocalyptic task has always been the work of the prophets, not the priests. The priests say that if the current system ended, everything would be over; the prophets say that if the current system ended, the new one could at last begin. Perhaps the prophets are “unrealistic”; perhaps they are “naïve.” That’s what was said of MLK, of Gandhi, of Milk — but these men and others like them, though dismissed as ignorant and idealistic and unworthy of being taken seriously, are the very prophets who have given us hope and brought us change. It takes an act of daring and dreaming to listen to their visions; but when we do, we see suddenly not the end of the world, but the true beginning.
