Prophecy Always Points Away
One of the most confusing books in the New Testament would have to be the book of Revelation. Ezekiel and Zechariah are right up there with it, I might add, with Daniel 7-12 coming in a close runner up.
The reason they are so confusing is that they are (in the case of Revelation and Daniel) apocalyptic works, which means that they purport to describe events of the end times. Add to this that all four of these books are written with heavy emphasis on visions and symbolic language that they are not immediately clear as to their meaning.
I would add that they might never be clear as to their meaning. Hence the centuries worth of people trying to decipher these works.
For the record, I believe that these works can be deciphered but only in their original contextual setting. If these books were written to describe things that were centuries away, they would have had very little meaning for their original readers - in much the same way we humans tend to talk about environmental issues: it doesn't affect me directly, so I'm not too worried and I will just go on about my business.
If, on the other hand, the book of Revelation (in particular) was written for a particular people during a particular time, then figuring out that time and context provides the cipher with which it can be "decoded." Once you can read the symbolism, the visions and the message opens up.
Yet for many evangelicals, Revelation apparently cannot be anything other than a prediction of the future. Perry Stone, when the invasion of Iraq began, for example, utilized a whole raft of passages from these books (and plenty other biblical quotes) to point out how the Bible had predicted this event and that then President Bush was acting under the prophetic direction of God and that we were witnessing events from Revelation unfolding before us.
Of course several years before, Hal Lindsey had done the same thing with the same passages but had put a different set of dates and circumstances on the events in his book The Late, Great Planet Earth. Lindsey predicted that these events of prophecy would signal the great tribulation and the end of the world as early as the 1980s. Of course he has written several books to revise that date since then.
These kinds of books crop up without fail around significant dates (1999-2000), major weather events (Katrina, Sandy, the Tsunami in 2011), or heightened political activity. And that heightened political activity usually revolves around condemning a "liberal" president as acting on behalf of Satan or of a conservative president as acting "according to prophecy." This should come as no surprise when one begins to delve into the politics of these kinds of "prophetic" writers.
I say that because usually whomever they are vilifying as the agent of Rome (a euphemism for evil in these kinds of writings and/or the Catholic Church) or the Antichrist are those who stand in some kind of tradition other than the writer either religiously or politically. In fact, just before the election in 2016, there was a big push in and around Chattanooga to come to "Biblical" meetings to discern the future of America and which way it would go. The posters and billboards were heavy on apocalyptic language and some even suggested the outline of Hillary Clinton which, in and of itself, was suggesting some particular political view.
However after the "rigged" election that ended up putting Trump in the White House, the posters vanished. I was amazed. Suddenly the prophetic warnings of the end times should a liberal woman be elected president no longer had any power because it didn't happen.
Now my question is this. Why is it that these "scholars of prophecy" never consider themselves to be the agent of evil in these equations? Have you ever read a book that proposed that the author and his (and it is usually a him) followers were actually the ones that the Bible "predicted" would be the agents of Satan? I mean, that would really be a prophetic coup. Can you imagine it? "We have studied the book of Revelation and cross referenced it with the rest of the books of the Bible and, based on our understanding of these inspired passages have come to the conclusion that our church is, in fact, the seven-headed dragon that blasphemes God. We aren't real thrilled with that, but prophecy is prophecy and we will fulfill that role. Thanks be to God."
Or imagine someone from the Trinity Broadcasting Network coming on the air and saying, "Turns out that we are the great harlot from the prophecy of Revelation 17. Sorry about that."
It won't happen, but it does suggest that the authors have a particular vantage point in interpreting prophecy and it seems to always suggest that they are in fact on the "right" side of whatever tribulation is headed our way. This also suggests that unbiased readings of such symbolic and visionary writings such as Revelation cannot be the default position of those who wish to "predict prophecy and preach end times." They have too much invested in prophecy matching their own understandings for it to be read against them.
So take prophetic readings with a grain (or maybe a shaker) of salt. And be careful. Jesus himself said "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits."
Of course, my quoting that doesn't let me off the hook either. Just a thought.
The reason they are so confusing is that they are (in the case of Revelation and Daniel) apocalyptic works, which means that they purport to describe events of the end times. Add to this that all four of these books are written with heavy emphasis on visions and symbolic language that they are not immediately clear as to their meaning.
I would add that they might never be clear as to their meaning. Hence the centuries worth of people trying to decipher these works.
For the record, I believe that these works can be deciphered but only in their original contextual setting. If these books were written to describe things that were centuries away, they would have had very little meaning for their original readers - in much the same way we humans tend to talk about environmental issues: it doesn't affect me directly, so I'm not too worried and I will just go on about my business.
If, on the other hand, the book of Revelation (in particular) was written for a particular people during a particular time, then figuring out that time and context provides the cipher with which it can be "decoded." Once you can read the symbolism, the visions and the message opens up.
Yet for many evangelicals, Revelation apparently cannot be anything other than a prediction of the future. Perry Stone, when the invasion of Iraq began, for example, utilized a whole raft of passages from these books (and plenty other biblical quotes) to point out how the Bible had predicted this event and that then President Bush was acting under the prophetic direction of God and that we were witnessing events from Revelation unfolding before us.
Of course several years before, Hal Lindsey had done the same thing with the same passages but had put a different set of dates and circumstances on the events in his book The Late, Great Planet Earth. Lindsey predicted that these events of prophecy would signal the great tribulation and the end of the world as early as the 1980s. Of course he has written several books to revise that date since then.
These kinds of books crop up without fail around significant dates (1999-2000), major weather events (Katrina, Sandy, the Tsunami in 2011), or heightened political activity. And that heightened political activity usually revolves around condemning a "liberal" president as acting on behalf of Satan or of a conservative president as acting "according to prophecy." This should come as no surprise when one begins to delve into the politics of these kinds of "prophetic" writers.
I say that because usually whomever they are vilifying as the agent of Rome (a euphemism for evil in these kinds of writings and/or the Catholic Church) or the Antichrist are those who stand in some kind of tradition other than the writer either religiously or politically. In fact, just before the election in 2016, there was a big push in and around Chattanooga to come to "Biblical" meetings to discern the future of America and which way it would go. The posters and billboards were heavy on apocalyptic language and some even suggested the outline of Hillary Clinton which, in and of itself, was suggesting some particular political view.
However after the "rigged" election that ended up putting Trump in the White House, the posters vanished. I was amazed. Suddenly the prophetic warnings of the end times should a liberal woman be elected president no longer had any power because it didn't happen.
Now my question is this. Why is it that these "scholars of prophecy" never consider themselves to be the agent of evil in these equations? Have you ever read a book that proposed that the author and his (and it is usually a him) followers were actually the ones that the Bible "predicted" would be the agents of Satan? I mean, that would really be a prophetic coup. Can you imagine it? "We have studied the book of Revelation and cross referenced it with the rest of the books of the Bible and, based on our understanding of these inspired passages have come to the conclusion that our church is, in fact, the seven-headed dragon that blasphemes God. We aren't real thrilled with that, but prophecy is prophecy and we will fulfill that role. Thanks be to God."
Or imagine someone from the Trinity Broadcasting Network coming on the air and saying, "Turns out that we are the great harlot from the prophecy of Revelation 17. Sorry about that."
It won't happen, but it does suggest that the authors have a particular vantage point in interpreting prophecy and it seems to always suggest that they are in fact on the "right" side of whatever tribulation is headed our way. This also suggests that unbiased readings of such symbolic and visionary writings such as Revelation cannot be the default position of those who wish to "predict prophecy and preach end times." They have too much invested in prophecy matching their own understandings for it to be read against them.
So take prophetic readings with a grain (or maybe a shaker) of salt. And be careful. Jesus himself said "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits."
Of course, my quoting that doesn't let me off the hook either. Just a thought.
Comments
Post a Comment