Ad litteram

Does it matter whether we say the events recorded in the Bible happened? Couldn’t we draw the same “lessons” regardless?

Not if one of the “lessons” has to do with the pattern of God’s action in history. Whether tropological or allegorical, “timeless” and ahistorical interpretations neutralize the text.

Take the example of Revelation. Most scholars today insists that we should not try to tie the images of the book to actual historical events. Revelation instead depicts the realities underlying all human history. Thus for instance, the beast of Revelation 13 should not be understood as “Rome” but as “Empire” as such. Revelation’s images uncover the timeless essence of political power. John the seer is Foucaultian avant la lettre .

That essentializing mode of reading makes it impossible to make discriminating hermeneutical and political judgments. Empire is empire is empire. If, by contrast, the beast of Revelation 13 refers to an actual empire and the events of Revelation 12-17 depict a real series of events (written in images), then we remain open to the possibility that there might be a non-bestial form of power. Bestial powers might appear again; new Rome might arise. But by reading ad litteram , we aren’t paralyzed by the conclusion that all power is bestial.