Among other things, I am currently reading through Stephen Cook‘s The Apocalyptic Literature in Abingdon’s Interpreting Biblical Texts series. I will have a full review up later, but I’d like to share a couple quotes here. In his first second chapter, “The Danger of Domesticating The Apocalyptic Texts,” Stephen attempts to find a balance between the various interpretive extremes. As a little nugget in that chapter, he shares some thoughts on inspiration:

The apocalyptic texts of the Bible did not come directly from God in any sort of pure form, but bear distinct marks of transmission by finite human authors and editors. As human literature, the biblical apocalyptic texts have blind spots against which an approach of submissive credulity has no defense.

Cook is countering those who take apocalyptic texts too “literally” (or “credulously”) in this quote. On the other hand, he also takes jabs at “overly suspicious” readers of apocalyptic literature:

Beginning in the seventeenth century, there was an eclipse of the Bible’s narrative storyline, of its textual art, and of its theological vitality. Abandoning the biblical literature as a theological witness, interpreters of the modern period substituted an anthropological study of the Bible. Their interests shifted to the Bible’s original authors and the quest of these authors for religious understanding and meaning in life. The Bible’s apocalyptic literature, unfortunately does not fare well when evaluated in these “anthropological” terms.

So, in Cook’s estimation, we’ve got to find the balance between “human literature” and “theological witness.” Should be easy enough . . .