Latest / Reformed Thinking / ἀποκαλύπτω (Apokalyptō): God Makes What Was Hidden Known

Transcript

ἀποκαλύπτω (Apokalyptō): God Makes What Was Hidden Known · Reformed Thinking

0:00
Welcome back to Reformed Thinking.
0:01
This is the deep dive. Today we have a really
0:04
fascinating task. Our listener has sent us a set
0:08
of sources, all focused on a single Greek term.
0:11
Just one. We're going to be doing a
0:13
linguistic and theological excavation of the verb
0:16
apocalypta and its noun form apocalypsis.
0:20
Right, the word we almost always translate as reveal, or, of
0:23
course, revelation. And that word Revelation is 1.
0:26
Everyone thinks they know. I mean, for most people it
0:28
either brings to mind, you know, visions of the end times from
0:31
the Book of Revelation. Or it just means something like
0:33
surprising piece of information. A celebrity scandal is a
0:37
revelation in the news. Exactly.
0:40
So our mission here is to get past that, the very casual
0:44
general understanding, and really dig into the precise
0:46
theological definition that Scripture uses.
0:49
We want to see how this one word describes a very specific, a
0:52
very dramatic and I would say sovereign action of God.
0:55
An action that runs all through history, and one that actually
0:58
runs contrary to human effort and finds its whole meaning in
1:02
the person of Jesus Christ. So using these lexical entries
1:05
and theological summaries, we're going to try to uncover what
1:09
divine disclosure actually means in its own biblical context.
1:13
OK, so let's start with something that for me was a bit
1:16
of a surprise. The hook in the source material
1:19
is pretty immediate. If you look at this word in
1:22
classical non biblical Greek, it's, well, it's incredibly
1:25
boring. It is.
1:26
It's very mundane. The literal non theological
1:29
meaning of Apocalypse 2 is just to take off the cover to uncover
1:33
something. Like literally taking a lid off
1:35
a pot. Right.
1:36
The historian Herodotus uses it in that way to describe, say,
1:40
uncovering one's head or removing a physical lid from an
1:44
object. It's a very physical, very
1:46
common word. But, and this is the fascinating
1:48
part, that literal physical usage is almost completely gone
1:53
from biblical literature. You don't see it.
1:55
It used to mean I opened a box or I took the cover off the
1:58
well. And that absence is the first
2:00
and maybe the strongest signal of its special status.
2:04
It's been the sacralized sacralized, Yes, When this word,
2:07
this piece of vocabulary enters the language of Scripture, it
2:10
just stops being about physically taking a cover off
2:13
something. It's immediately reserved almost
2:16
entirely for a divine meaning, for supernatural truth, or for a
2:21
sovereign act of disclosure from God.
2:24
So that switch itself signals that the word is now about
2:27
something that is inherently inaccessible, not just something
2:30
that's, you know, casually hidden under a blanket.
2:33
That's a great way to put it. The nature of the concealment
2:35
has changed. OK, let's unpack that shift from
2:38
the physical uncovering to the theological disclosure.
2:41
We have the core route to take off the cover, but when we get
2:45
to the figurative use, the meaning becomes what?
2:48
Intellectual. Spiritual.
2:50
Both, really. The general figurative sense,
2:53
even when it's not strictly about God, is noted in the
2:56
sources as to cause something to be fully known, disclose, bring
3:00
to light. It's an informational action.
3:01
It is. It's the direct opposite of the
3:03
Greek verb calypto, which means to cover or to hide.
3:07
So Apocalypto is an intentional active move to reverse a state
3:10
of hiddenness. And we do see a few examples in
3:12
the New Testament where the subject isn't specifically God,
3:15
but just the general concept of truth coming up.
3:17
Yes, Matthew 10.26 and Luke 12.2 are the key examples there.
3:22
Jesus says nothing hidden that will not be uncovered in that
3:27
context. He's talking about truth in a
3:29
more general way. The truth of his teachings, or
3:32
maybe the ultimate moral reality of the world.
3:35
Right. And while that truth is of
3:37
course rooted in God's knowledge, the disclosure itself
3:40
is framed. Generally.
3:41
It's like removing a temporary cover so that what was always
3:45
true becomes visible. Luke 2.35 is also mentioned as a
3:48
type of non divine disclosure but it's more judicial isn't?
3:51
It it is, Simeon prophesized that through Christ, the
3:54
thoughts of many will be fully known.
3:56
That's not just information, that's the deepest internal
3:59
reality, the secret motives of the heart being brought into the
4:01
open. And this usage, this idea of
4:04
removing a cover from something hidden deep inside, brings us to
4:07
a methodological problem the sources highlight right away.
4:10
A really big one. If we want a precise definition,
4:13
we have to get it based only on the biblical data.
4:16
We have to try and set aside external philosophical
4:19
frameworks. Why is that so crucial here?
4:21
Because the fields of dogmatics, so systematic theology and
4:25
philosophy often bring a preloaded understanding of the
4:28
word revelation to the text. What kind of preloaded
4:31
understanding? Well, for example, a post
4:33
enlightenment thinker might come to the Bible asking how can man
4:37
intellectually grasp the concept of God.
4:41
That question assumes God is a kind of object out there waiting
4:44
for us to figure him out. An object to be discovered.
4:46
Exactly. But the entire biblical
4:49
framework rejects that assumption.
4:51
The goal here is to define apocalyptu based on how
4:54
Scripture itself uses it. And what the biblical data shows
4:57
over and over is that the term points to a specific sovereign
5:00
manifestation of deity. A manifestation.
5:03
Yes, and that act inherently involves removing a concealment
5:08
because access to God isn't direct.
5:10
God is not just another thing in the world that we can put under
5:13
a microscope, but Scripture also promises that God will not
5:17
remain permanently hidden from the people He chooses to
5:19
address. So it's not a discovery we make,
5:22
it's an action God performs. It's God breaking his own
5:25
silence. That's a perfect way to describe
5:27
it. The object God Himself or God's
5:29
truth, is fundamentally inaccessible until the sovereign
5:33
subject, God acts to disclose it.
5:36
This definition takes us right back to the Old Testament where
5:39
we see God communicating in many different ways.
5:41
I mean dreams, seers, Urim and Thummim, some of these were
5:45
common in the ancient world, weren't?
5:47
They they were many cultures, had dreams and seers.
5:50
What makes the Old Testament revelation completely unique is
5:53
the identity of the one doing the revealing, Yahweh, Yahweh,
5:56
the living God, El Chai. And he is constantly, explicitly
6:00
contrasted with the empty idols, the Ellulim of the nations
6:03
around Israel. Yahweh is active, he's
6:05
relational, and he is sovereignly involved in actual
6:08
history. But this sets up a huge
6:10
theological paradox. The sources point out that
6:13
Yahweh is both the living God who acts and the hidden God.
6:17
He is. He's called the hidden God
6:19
Elmastatter in Isaiah 45.15, and this hiddenness is absolutely
6:24
essential because it establishes the total sovereignty of
6:26
Revelation. Because if he's naturally
6:28
hidden. Then Revelation can only be his
6:30
sovereign act. He reveals Himself only when He
6:33
wills and how He wills. And here's the defining point.
6:37
No one, not even a covenant Israelite, has a right to it.
6:41
It is entirely a gift of grace. That divine sovereignty seems to
6:45
be what sets Old Testament revelation apart from other
6:48
religious experiences of that time.
6:50
It's not just about getting some supernatural information or
6:52
having an ecstatic feeling. No, not at all.
6:54
In the strict biblical sense, it is Yahweh's action.
6:57
It's his self offering for fellowship, and this action is
7:00
always built on a moral foundation.
7:02
The revelation is never just a spooky display of power, it's
7:05
always tied to his holy character and his desire for
7:07
relationship built on obedience and trust.
7:10
OK, let's look at the three big dimensions of Yahweh's self
7:13
revelation that are laid out in the source material.
7:15
First, His role is the Lord of History.
7:18
This is fundamental. The liberation from Egypt is
7:21
always the primary example. Exodus 14 says that after the
7:25
Red Sea judgment, the Egyptians shall know that I am Yahweh.
7:30
God reveals His character and His glory through a decisive
7:33
public historical event. And this control over history is
7:36
comprehensive. It's not just about Israel.
7:39
The text say Yahweh, the history of all peoples.
7:42
He makes empires rise and fall to fulfill his own decrees.
7:45
Right. This is where the vision of the
7:46
Old Testament is just immense. Think about Isaiah.
7:49
He shows God frustrating the plans of powerful, arrogant
7:53
kings. He named Cyrus the Persian, a
7:55
Gentile king, a century before he was born and calls him to
7:59
carry out his command to restore Israel.
8:01
So the ends of the world are not random.
8:03
They are a continuous, powerful revelation, forcing all peoples
8:07
to see Yahweh's dominion. The directing of history is an
8:10
act of revelation. The second dimension is the
8:12
moral 1 Yahweh's revealed as both holy and gracious.
8:16
His Holiness is seen first and foremost in his moral demands,
8:20
the 10 Commandments being the clearest expression and
8:23
obedience to that moral law is demanded over the cultists.
8:26
The cultists being the religious rituals.
8:28
Yes, the prescribed rights and sacrifices.
8:30
The prophets like Amos and Micah are constantly hammering this
8:34
point home. All your religious activity, if
8:36
it's not paired with justice and righteousness, is an abomination
8:39
to God. It's a revelation that insists
8:41
on moral action, not just checking off religious boxes.
8:45
But, and this is the other side of the coin, despite this strict
8:48
moral demand, he is revealed as gracious.
8:52
Exodus 34 is key here, stressing that he exercises mercy and
8:55
forgives sin. So the revealing word, even when
8:58
it brings judgment, is meant to lead through that judgment to
9:01
blessing. You see this so clearly in
9:02
Isaiah 40, where the comfort of God's people is tied to the
9:06
coming of the Lord Himself. The relationship is based on his
9:09
righteous character, but it's sustained by his covenant mercy.
9:12
Well said, and the third dimension, which is the
9:15
necessary background for all of this is Yahweh as Creator and
9:18
Sustainer. The sources draw a really sharp
9:20
contrast here with Greek thought.
9:23
It's a defining contrast for this whole deep dive.
9:25
The Old Testament insists that the world exists entirely by
9:29
Yahweh's will and by His word. Psalm 33 is a great example.
9:32
He speaks and it is done. And how is it different from the
9:36
Greek model? The Greek philosophical goal was
9:39
in many ways to master the world through human thought, to extend
9:43
the human ego into the cosmos by figuring out all the underlying
9:46
causes. Their movement is described as
9:49
katultaneno. From below upwards, man is
9:52
trying to unveil the divine. So for them, revelation is
9:55
something man achieves with his intellect.
9:57
Correct, but the biblical view, even when talking about
10:00
creation, is always inno thing kata from above downwards.
10:04
God speaks and the world comes into being.
10:07
He gives man dominion, certainly, but man's proper
10:10
posture is one of praise, always aware of the huge unbridgeable
10:14
distance between the Creator and the creature.
10:16
The sources mentioned comparing Psalm 8 with Sophocles Antigone.
10:19
It's a telling comparison. The righteous man in the Old
10:22
Testament praises God for creation and his small place
10:25
within it. The hero and Greek tragedy often
10:28
celebrates man's own ingenuity in subduing his environment.
10:33
Biblical revelation requires submission to the revealed will
10:36
of the Creator. Finally, within the Old
10:38
Testament, this concept of revelation gets a special
10:41
orientation toward the future. It becomes eschatological.
10:45
Yes, because Yahweh directs history, His revelation is
10:48
always pointing toward that which is to be.
10:50
And in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old
10:53
Testament, the word Apocalypse show starts to mean to appear.
10:58
To appear specifically of things that are transcendent, pre
11:01
existent realities that are about to become present.
11:04
Right salvation that is currently hidden in God's
11:06
counsel is about to break into time.
11:08
Isaiah 56.1 is the cited example where God's salvation is about
11:12
to be revealed. Apocalypton I.
11:15
This is the key conceptual bridge that sets the stage for
11:17
the New Testaments intense focus on the coming of Messiah.
11:21
OK, so we've established the Old Testament standard.
11:23
Revelation is a sovereign descending act from God.
11:27
Now let's look at the surrounding world to see just
11:29
how different that was, starting with the Hellenistic model of
11:33
natural theology. The Greek philosophical
11:36
tradition was intensely rational.
11:38
They were looking for a ratio, a cosmic reason or logos, to
11:42
explain how the world worked. The big turning point came when
11:46
they projected their own individual thinking, their new
11:48
sooths or mind, onto the whole cosmos.
11:51
The idea being that if the universe is rational, our
11:54
rational minds can understand it.
11:56
And not just understand it, but gras the hidden deity through it
11:59
by contemplating the world's order.
12:01
They believed they could reason their way U to God.
12:04
This is a classic argument from design.
12:06
I look at the incredible clockwork of the cosmos, so I
12:08
must conclude there's a clockmaker.
12:09
That's it. Cicero is used as the prime
12:11
example. He argued that anyone who
12:13
contemplates the order of the world, the seasons, the stars,
12:17
how nature is perfectly adapted, has to conclude there's a
12:20
creator or a governor. This whole approach, this
12:23
physico theology, is entirely Kitano from below upwards.
12:28
Man tries to ascend to God through his own reasoning.
12:31
Which is the complete opposite of the biblical entertain cut
12:34
model where God has to initiate the encounter.
12:36
OK, moving from reason to religious experience, we have
12:41
mysticism and Gnosticism. How did they think about
12:45
disclosure? Mysticism generally assumes that
12:48
man can, through some kind of ritual or technique, control the
12:52
divine. The deity is concealed, sure,
12:54
but only because you lack the proper initiation or you don't
12:57
know the right magical formula. The mystery can be removed by
13:01
human effort and. Gnosticism takes that idea of
13:04
secret knowledge or nuisance to a whole other level.
13:07
It does. Gnosticism, which we see in
13:09
writings like the Hermetic texts, believe that knowledge
13:12
was this esoteric wisdom passed down only to the initiated, and
13:16
the object of this revelation is always the ground of the world,
13:19
the secrets of how the universe was made.
13:22
So it's not news or gospel that brings salvation.
13:24
No. It's information for personal
13:26
regeneration, and it's hidden because it's kept secret by
13:29
people, not because it's intrinsically hidden by divine
13:32
sovereignty. Anyone with the key can unlock
13:34
it. It's really striking that Philo,
13:36
the Hellenistic Jewish thinker who tried to merge biblical
13:39
thought with Greek philosophy, seems to have completely avoided
13:42
the words Apocalypto and apocalypsis.
13:45
That absence is so instructive. It shows that the specific
13:49
theological weight of this word, this idea of sovereign
13:52
covenantal disclosure, was just alien to the Hellenistic system
13:56
he was trying to build. He used other, more neutral
13:59
Greek terms for unveiling. Which supports what Jerome said
14:02
centuries later. Yes, Jerome's observation that
14:05
Apocalypsis is proprius scripturarum estit belongs
14:09
properly to the Scriptures. It was a biblical concept
14:12
through and through, not a philosophical 1.
14:14
And finally, let's look at what happened to this idea within
14:17
Judaism itself in that period between the testaments.
14:20
Well, General Judaism at that time held that direct living
14:23
prophecy was over first. Maccabees 4.46 is often cited
14:27
for that. So Revelation was now seen as
14:29
being completely codified, completely contained within the
14:31
Torah. And that led to a more
14:33
intellectual approach. It did.
14:35
The focus shifted to earning merit by meticulously fulfilling
14:38
the law rather than expecting a spontaneous living action from
14:42
God in the present. And it's into that vacuum, that
14:45
apocalyptic literature, like the book of Daniel Steps.
14:47
In exactly apocalyptic writing becomes a kind of substitute for
14:51
living prophecy. The focus shifts dramatically to
14:54
the future, the disclosure of future glory that already exists
14:58
in God's hidden counsel. The whole aim was to strengthen
15:01
the struggling community with these visions of God's
15:04
inevitable, imminent world dominion.
15:06
And that tradition, with its focus on transcendent realities
15:09
breaking into our world, is the immediate conceptual ram up to
15:13
the New Testament. It is.
15:14
It sets the stage perfectly. To the New Testament takes this
15:17
Old Testament concept of sovereign moral revelation, and
15:21
it takes the intensified apocalyptic expectation, and it
15:24
centers it all on one person, Jesus Christ.
15:27
That's it. The sources show that the
15:29
revelation of God is coming out of his previous concealment
15:32
right at the very start of Jesus's ministry, Mark 1.5.
15:36
It's not just a message Jesus is bringing.
15:38
He himself is the living revelation.
15:40
And he claims total authority to be that revelation.
15:43
He does. Matthew 11.27 is the key text.
15:47
He has full power to reveal the Father to whomever He wills, and
15:51
the synoptic Gospels give us the absolute core Apocalypto moment
15:55
in Peter's confession. When he says you are the Christ.
15:58
Right. And Jesus's response is that
16:00
Peter didn't get this from flesh and blood, not from human
16:03
observation or intellect, but because the Father performed a
16:06
direct sovereign act of revelation for him.
16:09
This points to that great paradox, doesn't it?
16:11
One that really speaks to Reformed ideas of divine
16:14
sovereignty and election. You're talking about Matthew
16:16
11.25. You have hidden these things
16:20
from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little
16:23
children. Yes, the knowledge of salvation
16:25
is concealed from those who rely on human systems of knowledge or
16:28
religious piety. The rabbinic models are in view
16:31
there, and it's instead given to the ignorant.
16:33
It shows that human wisdom, far from being a help in the process
16:36
of revelation, often acts as a hindrance.
16:39
It encourages pride and self-reliance.
16:42
God chooses to bypass human achievement entirely in the act
16:45
of disclosure. OK, so if the Synoptics focus on
16:48
the person of Christ as the unique source of revelation,
16:51
Paul seems to use the term apocalypsis to define the
16:54
dramatic unveiling of the whole divine plan connecting the end
16:58
times with history. Paul's usage is very much
17:01
eschatological. It often means to appear so.
17:04
When he talks about the apocalypses Izuchristu, as in
17:07
First Corinthians 1, he often means the future revealing of
17:10
Christ. The second coming, the Perusia.
17:13
The Perusia, the exalted Christ, who is now hidden with God, will
17:17
appear in total glory, and believers will appear with Him.
17:21
Paul applies this idea of future revelation to several things.
17:23
The glory of believers in Romans 8, the judgement of God in
17:26
Romans 2, and even the revealing of the lawless 1.
17:28
The Antichrist in Three Thessalonians.
17:31
So that's all future oriented. But he also uses the word for a
17:34
present reality, doesn't he? The gospel itself is the mystery
17:37
disclosed. This is the critical dual nature
17:40
of how Paul uses the term. Grace is a mystery which was
17:44
hidden from eternal ages, but which is now revealed.
17:47
That's from Romans 16. The plan was always there,
17:50
inaccessible in God's counsel, but it has now been historically
17:54
unveiled through the life, death and resurrection of Christ.
17:57
And Paul's own ministry is rooted in this.
17:59
Absolutely. He insists he received his
18:02
gospel not from any man, but directly by revelation elations.
18:06
One makes that case strongly. That revelation is what
18:09
convinced him that the crucified Jesus was in fact the
18:11
resurrected Lord. And this connects back to
18:13
Christ's pre existence, showing that the whole sweep of
18:16
salvation history is lit up by Christ's revelation.
18:19
Yes, Paul really drives this home by showing that Christ was
18:22
active even in Israel's past. He was the Sacramento rock that
18:25
followed Israel in the wilderness.
18:27
In 1st Corinthians 10 and First Peter, one says that the Spirit
18:30
of Christ was inspiring the Old Testament prophets all along.
18:34
So the entire Old Testament history stands ends under the
18:36
light of who Christ is. It confirms that salvation
18:39
history before the Incarnation was truly the work of the
18:41
preexistent Christ. Now, you noted earlier that Paul
18:45
doesn't really use apocalypsis for the earthly life of Jesus.
18:49
Why is that? Why does he categorize Jesus's
18:51
time on earth as a time of concealment?
18:53
Because for Paul, Jesus's earthly life is defined by a
18:57
paradox of concealment. He came in the likeness of
19:00
sinful flesh, as Romans 8 says, or he took the form of a
19:03
servant. According to Philippians 2.
19:05
God reveals himself through this concealment, through humility
19:08
and weakness. The wisdom of God appears as
19:11
foolishness to the world. So the full glarious disclosure
19:15
that corresponds to that initial concealment.
19:17
That begins with the resurrection and finds its
19:19
completion at the Parisia. OK, finally we have John's
19:22
writings. The terms apocalyptic and
19:24
apocalyptic are basically absent from his gospel and epistles,
19:27
but his whole theology is about revelation.
19:29
To the highest degree, John uses the term logos, the Word, and he
19:33
stresses both its cosmic reference.
19:35
Through him all things were made and its intense personal nature.
19:39
The central statement in John 1.14, the Word became flesh,
19:43
transfers all divine dignity to this historical mediator.
19:47
And this shifts the focus away from a future unveiling to a
19:49
present one. We have seen his glory.
19:52
For John, the earthly work of Jesus is the revelation.
19:56
John's Gospel shows how all religious longings, both Jewish
19:59
and Hellenistic, find their fulfillment in the person of
20:02
Christ. He makes the deepest
20:03
significance of Jesus's self witness explicit.
20:07
The reality of the living God is shining into this world right
20:10
now, in this person. With one major exception, of
20:13
course, the book that actually takes its name from the noun
20:16
form. Right.
20:17
The Book of Revelation calls itself the Apocalypses Ayusu
20:20
Christu, and there the meaning is intensely future oriented,
20:24
much more aligned with Jewish apocalyptic It uses visions to
20:28
unveil the heavenly world and strengthen the church as it
20:30
waits for God's final dominion. We have to address the tension
20:33
in Paul's writings about natural revelation.
20:36
How does he square his statement in Romans, One that God has made
20:39
himself knowable to Gentiles with a statement in First
20:42
Corinthians, one that they cannot know God?
20:44
It's a critical question. In Romans 1, Paul is very clear
20:48
that God has made himself known to Gentiles of pocketies.
20:51
Cosmo, from the creation of the world, the order of creation and
20:55
the moral law written on their hearts provides A sufficient
20:58
witness. They know what can be known of
21:00
God. But then he turns around and
21:02
denies that they can know God or that they can fulfill the law.
21:06
The resolution is in the distinction Paul makes between
21:09
the knowledge God imparted and what humanity did with that
21:12
knowledge. God's self witness in the world
21:15
is a fact. The sources suggest that if man
21:17
had handled this divine self offering correctly, he could
21:20
have known God. But he didn't.
21:22
He didn't. Humanity actively frustrated
21:24
this original design by resistance and suppression of
21:27
the truth. So the knowledge is there, but
21:29
the human response is broken. That's it.
21:31
So the knowledge of God that remains accessible through
21:33
nature now serves as humanity's most terrible indictment, as
21:36
Romans 1.2. As he says, Paul uses this fact
21:39
polemically, like a prosecutor in a courtroom demonstrating
21:42
guilt. He's closing off every excuse
21:45
and condemning humanity. He's not using it as an
21:48
apologetic support to gently lead people to the gospel.
21:51
So what is revealed or Apocalypto from heaven is God's
21:55
wrath and then also his righteousness for salvation.
21:58
Yes. The broken line of human knowing
22:01
is answered by the direct descending line of God's action.
22:04
We also need some criteria for testing genuine supernatural
22:07
claims, because the New Testament is clear that miracles
22:10
and signs are not foolproof. Not at all.
22:12
Satan can perform signs and wonders and can even appear as
22:16
an Angel of light. So miracles are not the final
22:19
Test. The real tests for genuine
22:21
revelation have to focus on the content and the source.
22:24
The sources layout 2 essential tests.
22:27
First, a commitment to the person of Christ.
22:29
Yes. The specific criterion given is
22:31
the confession Jesus is Lord from First Corinthians 12.
22:35
Any claimed revelation, any prophecy or vision has to
22:38
confirm and exalt the historical crucified and resurrected person
22:42
of Christ. Any supposed disclosure that
22:44
tries to bypass him or diminish him is false.
22:47
And the second test is moral fruit.
22:48
Revelation has to verify itself by its consequences.
22:51
The message has to be tested by its moral orientation.
22:54
Jeremiah talked about this. Does it lead people to true
22:57
righteousness and obedience? And the test of a person's life
23:01
has to be love, as first John says.
23:03
And the two criteria work together.
23:05
They do. The test of life protects the
23:07
confession of Christ from becoming a rigid dead doctrine,
23:11
and the confession of Christ protects the moral expression
23:14
from just becoming human effort or moralism.
23:17
This brings us to a final lexical point.
23:19
There are other words for disclosure like no rezeng which
23:22
is to impart or delone, to declare or fan around to make
23:27
manifest. How is Apocalypta different from
23:30
these? Words like norizine and fan
23:31
around are pretty common in secular and even gnostic
23:34
writings. They can imply that the
23:36
knowledge being a shared is controllable by human intellect,
23:39
or that something is just neutrally visible, but
23:41
Apocalypto is reserved. It's special.
23:43
It's almost exclusively a Jewish and early Christian religious
23:47
term, and that reservation is significant.
23:49
What does this signify? It implies that the truth being
23:52
disclosed is fundamentally super temporal.
23:54
It's inaccessible to human reason, it's a truth that
23:58
belongs to God's hidden counsel, and it's disclosed only by a
24:01
special sovereign act of His divine will.
24:04
Apocalypto corresponds perfectly to the strict biblical concept
24:07
of Revelation because it maintains the absolute
24:10
hiddenness of the thing being revealed, and therefore the
24:12
absolute sovereignty of the one doing the revealing.
24:15
So if we were to sum it all up, the main realization from this
24:18
deep dive into Apocalypto is that this word never refers to
24:22
human discovery. It's not about intellectual
24:24
ascent or philosophical striving.
24:26
No, it is always the sovereign, gracious act of the Father
24:30
offering himself for fellowship, an action that was prepared
24:33
throughout the Old Testament, was actualized in Christ's
24:36
historical life, death and resurrection, and now waits for
24:39
its final conclusion at the Perusa.
24:41
It's always the divine movement downward into human history.
24:45
And this leads to a final crucial thought that comes out
24:47
of the sources definition of what revelation includes.
24:50
We usually think of revelation is just the content, you know,
24:53
the message itself. But the sources remind us that
24:56
the definition of revelation also includes the effective
24:59
transmission of it to the hearer.
25:01
God's act isn't finished until the message is received by
25:04
faith. And we see that in First
25:06
Thessalonians 2, right, where Paul praises the church for
25:10
accepting the Word not as the word of men, but is what it
25:13
really is, the Word of God which is at working you believers.
25:17
The reception is part of the divine act.
25:19
So here's the thought to leave with you.
25:21
If the effect of reception and delivery of the message are part
25:24
of God's act of revelation itself, meaning God is sovereign
25:28
not just in giving the truth but in opening the heart to receive
25:31
it, how does that change your personal role in reading the
25:34
Scriptures and sharing them? It means when you open the word,
25:37
you're not just studying a historical document.
25:39
You are participating in the ongoing effectiveness of God's
25:42
self disclosure, A disclosure delivered by Him and received by
25:46
faith, where the Apocalypto Act is, in a very real sense, still
25:50
taking place. A compelling concept to consider
25:53
as you read and share the scriptures this week.
25:55
Thank you for joining us for this deep dive into the essence
25:58
of divine disclosure. Until next time.