 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Marshall Member Joined Feb 7, 2002 1191 posts Location: Langley, BC |
 Left Behind and Anabaptism |
Posted Jan 25, 2005; 3:21 pm |
|
I recently came across a web journal that tears apart the Left Behind series. That in itself is not remarkable -- anything as popular as that series has become is bound to have many detractors -- but what is remarkable is how often the criticism is based on areas where Left Behind (and the world-view behind it) totally misses the boat on Christian fundamentals that are perhaps most commonly associated with Anabaptists.
For instance, in an entry called "Cursed are the peacemakers", the author writes:
| Quote: | Our first real glimpse of Nicolae Carpathia comes through the eyes of Chaim Rosenzweig, who is rather impressed with him [...] But Rosenzweig also says the Magic Words regarding Carpathia -- the words that indicate to every premillennial dispensationalist "prophecy" buff that this man is clearly the Antichrist: "... a peacemaker and leading a movement toward disarmament. ... I believe his goal is global disarmament."
That word -- "peacemaker" -- practically screams Antichrist. For LaHaye and Jenkins' intended readers, it wouldn't be any clearer if Carpathia had the number "666" tattooed on his forehead and went by the nickname "Horny Beast."
For those not initiated into the cabalistic logic of PMD prophecy freaks, this seems counter-intuitive. Peace, after all, is generally regarded by Scripture as a Good Thing. [...] But none of this matters to the prophecy nuts who are convinced that the Antichrist will be a man of peace. And since they believe that the most important thing for Christians to do is to be on the lookout against the Antichrist, and vigilantly opposed to his evil ways, they believe that Christians must oppose anyone who speaks of, pursues, or tries to make, peace. |
In another entry titled "Inhumanly profamily" he writes:
| Quote: | Rayford Steele and Hattie Durham make the long walk back to the terminal, carefully threading their way past the smoldering wrecks of various crashed planes. "All around were ambulances and other emergency vehicles trying to get to ugly wreckage scenes," LaHaye & Jenkins tell us. [...] LaHaye and Jenkins, like their hero, are wholly focused on moving along. The "ugly wreckage scenes" are not explored in any further detail -- they exist only as obstacles between Rayford and his family.
Here we see the "profamily" ethic of Timothy LaHaye's brand of religious conservatism at work. Rayford is, first and foremost, a husband and a father. The dead and the dying who surround him at the airport are strangers, untermenschen. They are not his family and therefore, according to LaHaye's profamily view, Steele is right to ignore them on his way back to Irene and the kids. [...]
Rayford Steele's single-minded tunnel-vision -- his ability to avoid even seeing the suffering of those outside of his immediate family -- is typical of the worst extremes of this profamily ethic as applied by the outer wing of America's religious right.
I don't wholly reject the idea at the heart of this "pro-family" approach. [...] Yet when these obligations are allowed to trump every other claim, something has gone horribly wrong. [...] There's something deeply perverse and inhuman about a story in which we are asked to consider such a man "heroic." |
Other entries that I found especially interesting are "Dr. Dives is bored" and "Nice people finish last".
Any thoughts about this perspective toward the pre-mil dispensationalism that is now so popular? Is the criticism unfair, exaggerated, or prophetic? Or, is the problem real, but not really connected with one's outlook on the end times but rather something deeper? |
|
|
|
| McDLT Moderator Joined May 14, 2004 1451 posts Location: Toronto |
| |
Posted Jan 25, 2005; 5:30 pm |
|
I find this rather ironic as at this moment I am reading the books. (Having never read them before. I'm not one to jump on the bandwagon of something popular, I either am in it before popularity or after.)
Anyway, I think the author of this weblog seems to miss out on something - LaHaye and Jenkins are not really great writers - they are okay but seem to be lacking in character development. Most of what I see is a 2 deminsional arena to share their views on prophecy. Although I am enjoying the read because I don't have to think too much, having done a few studies on the end times and millenial views.
Now on to the two topics quoted
Peace-making: I don't see the authors saying anything wrong with peace-makers and to hate peace-makers. At the beginning their characters even liked the peace-maker to a point until he started a peace treaty with Israel then they believed him to be the Antichrist.
It is mentioned in the Left Behind books that the characters can not change what God has said will happen, so their oppostition to the Antichrist would be futile. I see the "heros" as just trying to survive. Plus it is a novel so it also needs a little something for the characters to do.
I must say that I am taken aback name calling, calling people "nuts" which, of course, makes the weblog author and his points lose credibility. When someone has to stoop to calling names then I usually turn off anything they have to say.
Profamily: The author of the weblog seems to miss the point of the passage he's quoted. One of the heros, Rayford Steele, is not yet a Christian when he focuses on his family and trying to get to them.
Just some thoughts on these too. I will have to read the others a little later and comment. |
|
|
|
| Todd Moderator Joined Sep 9, 2004 1088 posts Location: Winnipeg |
| |
Posted Jan 25, 2005; 5:32 pm |
|
It's been a while since I've looked into these issues in prophecy. Regarding the antichrist, I think it should be made clear that while these dispensationalists believe that this guy will bring peace, it is a peace that comes in the opposition of God, and is thus not really peace at all. The dispensationalist says we should be praying for peace in the Middle East, but at the same time believes that real peace is an impossibility without Christ as King.
Personally, I would consider myself a dispensationalist, but I don't really consider anyone an authority on the issue. Only Scripture is authoritative. So, you will find me distancing myself from LaHaye from time to time.
Consider what the Jews expected in a Messiah. A person who would bring political deliverance to Israel. I don't believe their expectations were unfounded. No one but the Messiah can bring political deliverance to Israel. What the Jews expected in the Messiah's first coming, I very much expect in his second coming. Nonetheless, we shouldn't forget the first coming, and it was the major stumbling stone for Jews. Our spiritual redemption is of utmost importance.
I hope to clarify that dispensationalists (given they are following the Scriptures), are very much for real peace. They are, however, careful to clarify that it is only the Messiah who can deliver Israel and give real peace.
----------
Regarding the second blog, it doesn't seem like something I am wanting to defend. Yes, we all agree that the family unit is vital. It doesn't mean that we should neglect our neighbours who are in need. It's a tricky question whether we should put the safety of our own family first before the safety of another family. In the blog, I don't get a clear sense of what actually occurred in the story. There are too many lurking variables to consider, which can only be answered if I actually read the book or series. |
|
|
|
| Marshall Member Joined Feb 7, 2002 1191 posts Location: Langley, BC |
| |
Posted Jan 25, 2005; 6:47 pm |
|
| McDLT wrote: | | I must say that I am taken aback name calling, calling people "nuts" which, of course, makes the weblog author and his points lose credibility. |
Yes, I certainly agree. Perhaps he uses terms like "prophecy nuts" to clarify that he's only talking about the extremists and not all who hold to a certain view of prophecy, but I'm not sure about that. |
|
|
|
| Sudsy Member Joined Sep 23, 2003 2833 posts |
| |
Posted Jan 25, 2005; 10:13 pm |
|
| I guess I have been out of touch with this series. It appears to me to be more of the 'fear' approach to evangelism which I do not lean towards. Maybe I have it wrong thinking it is. I just don't see the apostles using 'fear' tactics in their evangelism and I tend to believe they were very Spirit led. I have often wondered why they did not preach the rapture and hell fire sermons. To me, the Gospel is good news that sets the captive free and makes eternal life possible. |
|
|
|
| McDLT Moderator Joined May 14, 2004 1451 posts Location: Toronto |
| |
Posted Jan 26, 2005; 9:29 am |
|
I really don't see this as "fear evangelism". I see it as a couple of guys you are really into prophecy and decide it would make a cool novel. If you do have a chance to read a couple of the books, you might see what I mean. I don't think see it as evangelism but if someone does/has come to know the Lord from it, that's a bonus. The books feel like they were written for the Christian from the way they use the language and explain things.
Just some more of my thoughts.  |
|
|
|
| Sudsy Member Joined Sep 23, 2003 2833 posts |
| |
Posted Jan 26, 2005; 9:33 am |
|
| McDLT, is there a book in this series that you would recommend that I read first ? I may not want to read the series. |
|
|
|
| McDLT Moderator Joined May 14, 2004 1451 posts Location: Toronto |
| |
Posted Jan 26, 2005; 9:59 am |
|
Well right now I'm on the 4th book - they are rather easy reads - but I would recommend starting at the beginning; it's always a good place to start.  |
|
|
|
| vanislandwoman |
| |
Posted Jan 27, 2005; 6:58 pm |
|
I read five (I think?) of the Left Behind series. I decided not to read any more of them, I felt an inner un-easiness about the mindset I was starting to adopt. I know this about myself- I can be influenced if I have a lot of input from a source. This being a long series, there is plenty of time to have the mindset influence me. As usual, both La Haye and his critics claim to be based in sound biblical doctrine.
As I think about it, I see the series as an elaborate morality play using puppet characters to communicate a message. The characters are very cardboard, the writing is not particularly good, but the 'action' is ongoing. None of which prevents a novel from being popular. I haven't seen the movies, but I'm sure the crashes are spectacular.
*****************************
What does Tim La Haye say about himself and his beliefs?
Tim LaHaye Ministries Mission Statement
www.timlahaye.com/...Statement
Within the following page, click on "when will prophecy be fulfilled" (La Haye's responses to preterists
www.timlahaye.com/...FAQs#c
"… I want to orient you to the four views that people hold in relation to the timing of prophetic fulfillment. The four views are simple in the sense that they reflect the only four possible ways that one can relate to time: past, present, future, and timeless. When speaking of the fulfillment of Bible prophecy these four timing possibilities are called preterism, historicism, futurism, and idealism."
Tim LaHaye then writes a bit more about the points of view, identifying his 'futurism' stance (pre-trib rapture).
*********************************************
What does a critic say about La Haye? www.rapidnet.com/...general.htm
(Biblical Discernment Ministries has a pretty long list of "expose" articles, (some of your favourite authors/teachers may be on the list, )
www.rapidnet.com/...general.htm
particularly critical of ecumenicals, charismatics, moderns, post-moderns, psychology, non-"inerrancy" Biblical interpretation, etc) Even so, there is a lot of biographical information and attempts to 'fit' the person into a wider network. This could be regarded as 'guilt by association' thinking, or could be seen as unmasking hidden agendas that BDM opposes.
******************************************** |
|
|
|
| Martin Blumrich Joined Mar 23, 2004 161 posts Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba |
| Blumrich rides the fence |
Posted Jan 28, 2005; 9:08 am |
|
Hey folks; There's a book I've recently purchased that (as objectively as possible) tries to explain many of the differences in many of the views that "divide" us as Christians. (Is it better to say, "Explains issues in which we differ", rather than suggest we're divided?)
That said, Gregory A. Boyd and Paul R. Eddy's book is entitled: Across the Spectrum: Understanding Issues in Evangelical Theology. It describes in succinct chapters not only this premill debate and what the options and ramifications are, but seventeen others including Providence (Calvin vs. Arminius), The Hell Debate (which mark my words, is coming as a topic of laity interest pretty quick - theologians have be chewing the fat for years on this one), Women in ministry, and Eternal security...
I have to ride the fence again Marshall. I'm interested in contributing, but not on something referenced in google.
Peace to all of you today, Martin |
|
|
|
| McDLT Moderator Joined May 14, 2004 1451 posts Location: Toronto |
| |
Posted Jan 28, 2005; 9:55 am |
|
| vanislandwoman wrote: | | I haven't seen the movies, but I'm sure the crashes are spectacular. |
The movies are quite different from the books. I saw both movies before starting to read the books. Buck works for GNN (CNN) and him & Rayford do meet on the plane. Buck is the one who gets Hattie the job before the disappearances and before meeting Nicolae. Rayford knows Ritz. The list of changes is extensive. I must say I like the LaLonde (Cloud Ten Pictures) changes better. Although the whole Chloe-Buck relationship could have had a little more air time.
From the beginning I have treated these books as fiction based on some interpretations of Biblical passages. This has helped in not letting them influence my mindset. Mind you everything you see and read does influence you in some way. After I've finished reading the books, I've decided to study prophecy again; my interest has been piqued again.  |
|
|
|
| Guest |
| Left Behind - the series |
Posted Jan 31, 2005; 6:05 am |
|
Surely the message here portayed through Tim La Haye's writings is not one of unqualified and authorative based research and understanding of the end times. I have read all the series and the writers do state it is only their opinion based upon research into the bible and hypothesis.
The true reason behind the books, I think is one of getting people to discuss, read, study and understand that the end, when it comes, will not be pleasant to those who have not accepted Jesus Christ as Saviour. It has focussed debate and reintensified some of the Church into action with communities.
The series sent me back to the Word and helped me to recommit myself to the job at hand, bringing my family, friends, work mates and those I do not know within my community to the Lord.
Archives |
|
|
|
| Sudsy Member Joined Sep 23, 2003 2833 posts |
| |
Posted Jan 31, 2005; 1:20 pm |
|
Archives, that is what these books should be doing. So often, we are side-tracked and filling our minds with stuff that in the long run doesn't matter. Good to hear you found what really counts when you said -
| Quote: | | The series sent me back to the Word and helped me to recommit myself to the job at hand, bringing my family, friends, work mates and those I do not know within my community to the Lord. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
