Jeff Jenkins

Hebrew Bible
Critical Article Review
10.9.08

In “The Apocalyptic Literature of the Old Testament’ George Berry gives his
interpretation of OT apocalyptic literature in terms of its classification, dating, motivation
and its relationship to prophetic literature. Berry starts the article by stating that most
scholars agree that quite a bit of the material from the book of Ezekiel was actually
written at a much later time than the rest of the text. He argues that it is now possible to
understand and evaluate apocalyptic literature as a result of the differentiation that has
been established between the different types of writing it Ezekiel, once though of as “the
father of apocalyptic literature”.
Berry claims that “apocalyptic literature is the outgrowth of prophecy”(9) but that
there are clear distinctions between the two. He describes prophets as men whose “feet
were on the earth”(9). The prophets focused on real conditions and looked forward to the
fulfillment of God’s will as being brought about by humans in natural means. Berry
classifies prophets as preachers who just happened to predict the future as part of their
main focus which was to reconcile people to God. He contrasts the apocalyptic writers to
the prophets by saying they were men who’s “heads were in the clouds”. Apocalyptic
literature points the reader to expect God’s will to be carried out in fantastic and
extravagant ways through God’s direct intervention. Berry claims that apocalyptic
literature born out of a time of severe depression experienced by the Jews. He says that
the apocalyptic literature was meant to encourage the Jews and that it came in a timely
fashion along with the Torah to bolster national identity and moral.
Next, Berry begins to explain the classification of apocalyptic literature in relation
to symbolism and literary contend. He points out that much of the apocalyptic literature
talks about the destruction of other nations as well as a time when God will bring all
nations under the control of Jerusalem. Berry walks his readers through a process of
transformation from prophetic text to apocalyptic texts along the timeline of the
experience of the nation of Israel during the Exodus. He says there is a fluid change
starting with pre-exilic prophecy of doom to pos-exilic prophecy and apocalyptic visions
of hope.
 Finally, Berry says that all the apocalyptic literature is pseudonymous, meaning
that they are written later than the surrounding text by anonymous authors. He mentions
that the only completely apocalyptic book is Daniel, and that all others are composites of
prophetic books. Berry points out that Daniel is thought to have been written in 165BC,
and by that time prophecy was understood to have ceased and that apocalyptic literature
replaced prophetic literature by 300BC.
Berry does not cite any sources beside the bible in his article which leads the
reader to understand that he is giving his own personal interpretation of the different
types of biblical literature. Even though he speaks on behalf of the scholarly community,
he never references any other works or authors, but simply speaks of “recent writers” (9).
For the most part Berry’s article is convincing and rational, except for the section which
he uses a more strong personal interpretation to cast apocalyptic literature as an idealistic
and unrealistic response to Jerusalem’s struggles, making apocalyptic literature seem less
legitimate. Overall, Berry takes a quick look at apocalyptic literature and helps his
readers differentiate it from prophetic literature as well as understand how to was mixed
in to prophetic writing later.