End Times Teaching By Randall Mark The reason one’s interpretation of the Bible is so important is that every interpretation has consequences and a literal reading of the book of Revelation has very scary consequences. I will outline a few reason why this type of teaching is deeply problematic to most Christians throughout history. What are we talking about when we say “end-times?” Well, we are talking about a very recent invention by a man named John Nelson Darby who in the 1830′s received a vision from God about how to interpret the book of Revelation literally. His own church rejected these ideas as false and out of line with all of church history but it finally gained popularity in the Southern US in the 1870s. The basis of Darby’s idea was that there was going to be a secret “rapture” event where Jesus would come back in the clouds and take with him all Christians to escape the chaos and evil of the world. An American society ravaged by civil war was ready for a story of escape. Aided by a popular preacher named Cyrus I. Scofield these ideas began to take root in America in the early 20th Century. The main ideas were as follows: 1) God had a special plan for the Jewish people and that before Jesus could return the nation of Israel needed to be established. Although Darby believed that the Jews were deceived and needed to become Christians to be saved, his idea began to create very interesting bedfellows of Jewish and evangelical Zionists. This tie is stronger today more than ever with mega preachers like Texas based John Hagee who heads a powerful pro-Israel lobby among evangelicals. 2) Once Israel was established as a nation in 1948 the challenge shifted to getting control of the Dome of Rock, currently a Muslim holy site, in order to re-establish the literal throne of David in preparation for the return of Jesus when he will reign over all of the world with justice and peace. 3) The teaching of a secret rapture whereby Christians will be mystically removed literally from the earth and the planet will be left to the rule of the anti-Christ – a political figure who will arise to enslave and unite all of humanity in wickedness and evil. 4) After the tribulation, seven years of this hellish existence, Jesus will come back again on a literal white horse with a sword in his hands to make war and destro83112943wc004 mccain Do Stephen Harper and Sarah Palin share beliefs about end times?y the anti-Christ and all of his followers in a massive physical battle in the middle east – referred to as Armageddon. 5) After his victory he will set up his kingdom in Jerusalem and rule for 1000 years on earth with peace and harmony. After which will be a judgment where people will be sent to heaven or hell. This whole scenario, referred to as “dispensationalism” is filled with so many problems both biblically and historically. First of all it is anti-historical. It is important to note that all of th e major traditions of historic Christianity have rejected Darby’s ideas as false. This includes Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Lutherans, Reformed churches, and Anglicans. This belief is primarily found within Pentecostal and evangelical churches. It gained a lot of support in the 1970′s by authors like Tim Lahaye in the United States author of the “Left Behind” series and in Canada by authors like William Goetz, the pastor of the largest church in Canada at the time, a Christian and Missionary Alliance church, called Sevenoaks Alliance church in Abbotsford BC. Goetz’s book, Apocalypse Next and the new world order, was hugely popular in Canada. Secondly, it turns a blind eye to injustice. The pro-Israel stance disregards the clear teaching of Jesus that commands Christians to stand up for the “least of these” which would include the oppressed Palestinians. Thirdly, it is anti-intellectual. By ignoring the genre of literature that the poem of Revelations is written in, this system of thought is able to make metaphors and typology point to present day news stories and headlines and thereby manipulate the text to its own end. Fourthly, it is fear based and makes Jesus into a violent warrior bent on killing half of humanity with a literal sword. Jesus teaching is in direct opposition to violence and no where justifies killing in the name of God. For further detail of this topic see the excellent article by Ron Dart, a professor at Fraser Valley University, which is here: clarionjournal.typepad/clarion_journal_of_spirit/2006/06/the_christian_p.html – Randall Mark
Posted on: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 04:40:33 +0000