Left Behind a superstition? Armageddon a myth?

[Rhamiel]

Which is why some believe the original purpose of the Apocalypse was the prophecy of God visiting Jerusalem in judgement, but its primary purpose now is the poem of the Church-- the story of her the many dangers, enemies, trials, and temptations, and her sure, and eventual triumph and consummation.

you should check out that book I linked earlier in this thread

 

[SarahsKnight]

Saucy, with all due respect, a literal reading of apocalyptic literature is automatically mishandling it. Apocalyptic literature is highly symbolic, poetic, and metaphoric, and was meant to be read and interpreted as such.

The preterist would agree that the events (or most of them) in John's vision would occur soon; in the Olivet discourse, Jesus himself said his generation would not pass before his prophecy was fulfilled.

That is one question I have, Forest Lord. Jesus did say it would be soon, which would certainly fit the Revelation events referring to what happened in 70 more so than still in the future from now (and we all know how often evangelicals here and there in the near past have tried to predict when Armaggedon would happen). But if John's vision was brought to the written word in 95, 25 years after it occurred, I just don't see the point of it, unless there was a whole 'nother lesson altogether that God meant to reveal to us through Revelation other than anything prophetic.

 

[Saucy]

Yeah that's my point. John said it was something to happen later, written after the invasion. But, Jesus didn't even know when the end will be. That is knowledge only the Father has.

 

[Rhamiel]

I am not bothered by the fact that Jesus says that this will happen "soon"

God is beyond time
and we have the new Covenant
remember there were several covenants before the New Testament Covenant

so I think it being "soon" means that there will be no more developments in the Covenant before the end of Time
no new revelation either

 

[Gnarwhal]

I'm sorry for my tone. I guess I'm just frustrated with the attitude I get sometimes that being a conservative Christians means I don't know what I'm talking about. You must be liberal or become a Christian outside of America to really find the truth.

Rham's an example of why that's not true. Amillennialism covers a wide swath of Christianity (being the dominant eschatological view) from one end of the spectrum to the other. It has nothing to do with politics, it has everything to do with being faithful to the text and reading it as it was meant to be read.

 

[Cearbhall]

Yeah I know several people who think Revelation is about the Roman invasion of AD 70, but what kind of revelation was it when the book was written AFTER the invasion? Why all the cryptic visions about something that already happened?

I think it's a fascinating piece of literature for this reason. I studied it a bit in high school, but I really want to learn more when I have the time...

 

[Lord Of The Forest]

SarahsKnight
The date of its writing is probably the largest crux of the argument; if the book was written after 70 A.D., what's the point? It must be talking about something else.

It's been a while since I've read up on eschatology, but there are some scholars who push for an earlier date than 95. Unfortunately, I cannot tell you their reasoning right now.

Edit- Did I misread your post?

 

[Saucy]

I've been studying it for over ten years now because it deeply fascinates me. I just dislike how my arguments are seemingly shrugged off as evangelical heresy. But I'm not saying it's an addition to closed scripture, no more than there are a lot of Catholic theologies and traditions developed AFTER scripture was finished. Is it possible that new interpretations and revelations could happen? Every single possible interpretation HAD to of been discovered centuries ago or it's not worth anything? God can't still reveal truths of His word today that remained hidden for so long because it just wasn't time yet?

 

[Lord Of The Forest]

New interpretations on smaller matters are perhaps more palatable, but something as all pervasive as Dispensationalism arouses suspicions. Sort of like how Joseph Smith was the recipient of grand new revelation which, if true, would shake Christianity to its core. Interestingly enough, Mormonism, Dispensationalism, and the Archko Volume all appeared around the same time.

I'm not saying Dispensationalism is a damnable doctrine, but rather that there were dubious theologies circulating at the same time Dispensationalism was formed, and for that reason, Dispensationalism should be analyzed before being espoused.

 

[Saucy]

Well in my opinion, the bible makes it clear we will one day be caught up in the clouds. Some of you don't believe that will happen, but that's what the text says in 2nd Thessalonians and even describes it in Revelations. There is other symbolism, like Christ coming for His bride and we better be ready as it will happen 'like a thief in the night'. It even describes it as two people are laying in bed and one is gone and the other remains. Two people are working in a field, one is caught up and the other remains.

So the idea is there for someone to come along and try to make sense of it. It's not just some random made up thing.

 

[DaedraSun]

I often wonder about that caught up in the clouds thing.

I mean - the Gospels say Christ was bodily raised from the dead - and taken up to heaven this way.

So, about the now dead - are their bodies somehow put back together? What about those who have been cremated and their ashes scattered?

Or is it just the spirit that is raised? If so - what is that exactly?

 

[Rhamiel]

Rham's an example of why that's not true. Amillennialism covers a wide swath of Christianity (being the dominant eschatological view) from one end of the spectrum to the other. It has nothing to do with politics, it has everything to do with being faithful to the text and reading it as it was meant to be read.

all Amillennial means is that you do not think that there will be a 1,000 year kingdom where Jesus rules the world before the Last Judgment

that "millennium" is right now, Jesus rules through His Church

there is a diverse amount of opinions in this view

for example, I do believe that the anti-Christ will be a real person and is not just a metaphor or an office (something that both traditional and liberal Protestants tend to not agree with)

 

[SarahsKnight]

It's been a while since I've read up on eschatology, but there are some scholars who push for an earlier date than 95. Unfortunately, I cannot tell you their reasoning right now.

Edit- Did I misread your post?

No, I think you've answered my question as best as you could.


And in any event, I do kind of think that, if Revelation were a literal (or literal to the extent a human being can see these fantastical things depicted in the book) thing that will happen as the futurists behind the Left Behind books obviously seem it, then I find the imagery of really everything therein except the Rapture to be quite horrific and I dare say it disturbs my faith a little. This seeming all-out war for "eternal souls", to the point where the saints may even kill in retaliation as much as followers of a human called the Anti-Christ down and kill the saints, the huge dragon waiting before a woman to swallow her child, literal torment of the anti-christ followers by fire and brimstone as SAINTS SIT AND WATCH, the winepress imagery of God's wrath (I remember a section of one of the LB books giving an even more detailed picture in reference to that last thing, where the "evil people" literally explode at Christ's appearing). I have no qualms about saying this disturbs me, and seems like an actually unnecessary string of horrific events just to eventually bring God's victory over Evil. Something that He wants and made to happen himself. Yes, yes, there's my faulty human emotional reasoning taking prevalence there, as more zealous believers would probably say of people who say something like I did just now, but I feel no shame in using my personal sense of conscience to assist me in my search for Biblical truth.

Not saying that last thing to passively insult any of the more conservative/fundamentalist and/or zealous believers here, like claiming that you don't have a conscience or something. I just wanted to get that out, so that you all know where I stand in my views on how to relate to God and Christ and how I search for theological truth (on all but who Christ is and what He did for me; of THAT I am 100% reliant and sure on, because in this indeed the Bible is actually very clear to me, that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life).

There is that proverb that "there is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death". So that would seem to suggest that my getting my sense of logic and emotions involved in the mix will only lead me to believe false things. But if one lets the Holy Spirit guide them instead of just accepting the first doctrine taught to them in church as a child, then might the Holy Spirit begin to influence those very emotions and ways of thinking?

_________________________________________

I'm not saying Dispensationalism is a damnable doctrine, but rather that there were dubious theologies circulating at the same time Dispensationalism was formed, and for that reason, Dispensationalism should be analyzed before being espoused.

And that, Forest Lord, is the attitude I try to take at all times, trying to make it known to anyone who I disagree with on Biblical interpretation that I do not think in the least that because of doctrinal differences they are heretics or "damnable". I think believers who do that are only fooling themselves into thinking they have the monopoly on God's wisdom and truth. Things like conditional vs. inherent immortality, preterism vs. futurism, Calvinism vs. Arminianism, etc., ultimately do not have anything to do with Christ Himself, and only by denying Him does one have not eternal life, and even then, God knows the heart of someone, not other people, so I feel it is not up to us to make any such judgment. If peripheral issues were of that magnitude of importance, then no one here can possibly say with confidence that we aren't all screwed, then.

 

[Rhamiel]

I often wonder about that caught up in the clouds thing.

I mean - the Gospels say Christ was bodily raised from the dead - and taken up to heaven this way.

So, about the now dead - are their bodies somehow put back together? What about those who have been cremated and their ashes scattered?

Or is it just the spirit that is raised? If so - what is that exactly?

yes, the belief that the bodies of the dead would be raised is a Christian belief, it was a scandal to the "sophisticated" Greeks and Romans with their pagan philosophies
the Platonic Theory of Forms has ideas without bodies as the "highest" for of reality, so the idea that our bodies would be brought back, shocking

as for ashes being scattered?

God > fire

there, simple

or maybe a less snarky way to put it is
the exact mechanics of that miracle is unknown to me, but I trust in God who is greater then these petty physical restraints

I find the conservation of matter to be more disturbing
I mean, the molecules in my body have probably part of the bodies of countless dead people... how is that gonna work?

maybe we should think on the multiplication of the loaves to see that lack of physical materials do not restrict God

 

[Kaonashi]

No, There isn't going to be a Rapture. No, Obama isn't the AntiChrist. Yes, Evangelicals are going to be stuck with the rest of us riff-raff until the end of time.

 

[NannaNae]

oops singles..

 

[radhead]

Why would you put so much faith in specific verses? You have no way of knowing what was added or changed from the original text. Or maybe the original text was created in an effort to control the Jewish people. I don't understand why so many people hold the scriptures so highly. Especially the New Testament which was created while the original Christian movement was already underway. It's all suspect to me.

 

[Saucy]

I don't understand why some people don't hold them high enough. Of course they only want to believe they've been changed so much so they don't have to follow it.

 

[Rhamiel]

Why would you put so much faith in specific verses? You have no way of knowing what was added or changed from the original text. Or maybe the original text was created in an effort to control the Jewish people. I don't understand why so many people hold the scriptures so highly. Especially the New Testament which was created while the original Christian movement was already underway. It's all suspect to me.

we believe that God preserved the Scripture
that it was inspired by the Holy Spirit and protected from error

 

[Nanopants]

Isn't the RCC officially amillenial, because it officially rejects millenarianism/chiliasm?

Anyways, I'm inclined to believe the "thousand years" in Revelation is related to the following:

For a day in Your courts is better than a thousand... -Ps 84:10

And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God [the Father], and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. -John 17:3

So, I think it means something, but I wouldn't interpret it as exactly 1000 years give or take 30 minutes, but rather as a way of describing something like the depth, sheer gravity of or endlessness of eternal life that is available in this life. As for being "caught up" and "in the air" to meet Him, remember that Elijah was "caught up", Isaiah saw Him, and also some man Paul described in 2 Cor 12 was caught up to paradise. I'd suggest reading up 1 Cr 15, the beatific vision and the connection with the transfiguration.