This story from FoxNews reports that a group of Christians holding a pre-tribulation, premillenial doctrinal understanding of eschatology (or “last things”) have launched a website which will alert friends and loved ones if the “Rapture” has occurred. According to this report, “Final e-mails from vanished subscribers will be triggered when three of the site’s five Christian staffers fail to log in for six days in a row.” Those persons administering the site seem quite certain they will be among those taken up in to heaven when the final trumpet sounds.
The site, http://www.youvebeenleftbehind.com/, will alert up to 62 loved ones of your departure via an email message if the above criteria are met. This form of premillenialism has led the site administrators to also facilitate storage of financial account information. This is so you might pass your assets on to family before the conclusion of the tribulation, which according to this strand of theology is a period lasting 7 years.
This story does include one bit of poor journalism, stating, “According to Christian theology, after the Rapture, Satan will rule a global government that will torment doubters with seven years of Tribulation”(emphasis mine). Such broad statements about Christian theology fall short of the truth, as eschatology is but one of many historic doctrines which exhibit broad diversity between different Christian communities. This reporter could have done a better job by indicating the strand of theology from which this perspective comes, rather than making a blanket statement that doesn’t do justice to the tradition. Some Christians will no doubt be offended by this generalization, as they would claim that the particular eschatology which gave birth to this website is not only errant, but dangerous.
Dispensationalism (what we’re talking about here) can trace its roots to John Nelson Darby, a Christian leader during the 1800s. His teaching became largely popularlized through the publication of the Scofield Reference Bible. I know all about it–I went to seminary at a place that holds dispensationalism as a key doctrine. I’ve had my fair share of conversations about premillenialism, postmillenialism, and amillenialism. I’ve read books on the topic. I’ve sat around discussions concerning the specifics of the “tribulation,” asking if the rapture will occur pre-trib, mid-trib, or post-trib. I’ve also been around persons who do their very best to match current events with what they understand as relevant biblical passages so that they might speculate on the timing of Jesus’s return. I’ve spent a good deal of time thinking about these matters myself, continuing to study the different eschatological frameworks and measuring them against the biblical evidence so that I might arrive at a well-reasoned faith.
We all know that dispensationalism has been popularized in recent years in the publication of the Left Behind series of Christian fiction. LaHaye and Jenkins (and friends) have not only published books, but guides for Bible studies, a video game, and other forms of media to increase their following. This particular product is quite interesting, to put it mildly.
For church leaders and preachers out there who don’t like premillenial dispensationalism, what is your response? Clearly there is one particular form of eschatology that dominates the American landscape. Aside from premillenial dispensationalism, are there any other options, and if so, are we teaching them? If we are teaching them, do our people have the ability to clearly articulate the grounds upon which they might hold an amillenial or postmillenial viewpoint? Can they make clear statements about the nature of God’s actions in history, and what Christians claim concerning Jesus’s awaited return? Or are they pan-millenialists, asserting they are not worried about particulars, simply confident it will “all pan out in the end.”
Stories such as these present a challenge to church leaders across America, particularly those persons who exist in church traditions that believe dispensationalism is not our best option. We do have other perspectives which have a rich historical and theological heritage, but are we teaching them? How well are the people in the pews instructed concerning our belief in last things?
For some persons the response might be, “well, I’ll preach and teach about how dispensationalism is wrong.” I say unto you, “OK, but are you going to construct a theology in its place that is historically and theologically well grounded?” If you go about blasting away what you believe are misconceptions, you have to go about the work of construction. You have to tell a narrative that makes sense. Eschatology is about hope. The doctrine which you teach on this aspect of theology is critical for your ministry.
I hope that pastors, church leaders, and Bible teachers who take this stuff seriously will consider how they might address eschatology. It is one of the essential pillars in building a systematic theology. It deserves our reflection, our esteem, and our best efforts at teaching people in our congregations in a way that they might understand. Jesus’s life, death, and resurrection are all events that in themselves are eschatological. The world hasn’t been the same since God took on the flesh, died on the cross, and rose three days later. Now, we await the culmination or full measure of the Kingdom of God to be brought about as we exist in the time between the times. Until Jesus returns, what is our hope?
That, my friends, is a question I hope we can stand to answer.
Ben – I read your blog in disbelief at first and took time to check out the website in question as well. I saw it, but still find it a bit hard to believe.
Until Jesus returns, our hope is that he will return. Our hope is that the kingdom that was initiated in Jesus is coming closer to full realization and that we live, move and be active participants in that kingdom today.
This is an off the cuff response with little time for reflection, but my general response to this element of Dispensationalism is to argue from Paul’s (and by extension the early church’s) fairly clear expectation that the return of Jesus was imminent, especially after the destruction of the Temple. This would preclude a great deal of the theological “Timeline” fantasizing which required the re-establishment of Isreal and the temple etc.
This is no doubt a weak point for us Wesleyans. John’s preaching came before the darbyites came to any level of prominance – so it wasnt a question he answered. In general I tend to lean towards this basic eschatology – It could end any time. So lets get busy living out John Wesley’s Call to his preachers – “You have nothing to do but save souls, so spend in be spent in this endeavor”
Ben, I have several things to say:
1. I subscribed and put you on my recipient list. I also put Yount, so don’t feel so bad.
2. My favorite line from their website is: “They will know it was true and that they have blown it. ”
3. Eschatology is the one part of Doctrine that exclusively deals with events which have not yet happened. The church is so fragmented already in interpreting the faith without even trying to tackle the future. As such, your point on the gross generalization is well made. I am one of those guys who cringe with offense when I read people attribute Christians as pre-trib premillennial dispensationalists, as I am far from one. LaHaye children’s books and studies are perfect examples though of the Bible Belt’s ignorance on Eschatological issues and simply what is or is not Biblical. Much of this, however, is exactly your point. Pastors and teachers rarely teach eschatology from Scripture, and very rare is the one who will share multiple interpretations within the faith. Popular fiction becomes truth because of popularity. Meanwhile, Christian thought is absent from the parishioner community. Little should be expected of the broader Christian community if their exposure to eschatology is lacking the theologian or a competent teaching pastor who is willing to tackle such issues.
4. I was at a lecture on Politics & Religion last week, and Dr. Billy Abraham, the speaker, made a point that pre-trib rapture “heresy” as he put it came originally from a defunct Anglican Irish priest…then to be picked up by Darby…and Scofield (which he made the great observation of how much money Oxford Press made by turning a blind eye to academic truth)…and though he didn’t say it, but we know, DTS…and so on. Anyway, he said he was embarrassed as an Irishman that an Irish heretic created such rubbish to become almost canonical truth in southern America. All this to be said, I wasn’t familiar with the Irish part of the story. Are you? If you have material on this, I would be interested.
also, since you like Stuff Christians Like, I just want to make sure you know http://stufffchristianslike.blogspot.com/.
Wow… that’s all I can say really.
and maybe sigh a little.
I appreciate that you take the time to wrestle with and ask the hard questions about what much of the church is taking as undeniable truth instead of a doctrine extrapolated from scripture. I can only hope you represent a broad set of church leaders who will not only do the same, but ask the same from their congregations. I would go to that church.
I have to start by wondering how you can read the bible and ask a question like, “where is our hope?” Are you trying to say that we only have hope if we have our eschatological framework is fully settled biblically? Because whilte I agree with you’re vomitting sentiment (when it comes to eschatological theology) maybe I vomit for a different reason.
I vomit becuase so many denominations, churches, and pastors go to war over eschatology when there are so many more important issues to grapple with. Does your church’s community really care if the rapture is going to happen or if the millenium is literaly etc?
In the end the soul’s and bodies of man matter. How are we reaching out to people and meeting their needs in order to preach the gospel to their hearts? Our great hope, is Jesus Christ, He is everything.
And while I can agree with the idea that arguing over the future (as if we know what will happen) is rather pointless especially for a church that has better things to do with its time (like fulfilling the great commission) one thing we can take to the bank is our future salvation.
I am just as saved now as I will be in the future, and God’s love is set upon me just as much now as it will be tommorrow and a thousand years from now. These great truths have only come about and been accomplished by the work of Jesus Christ, and despite any kind of future event or catastrophe that is my hope.
These are some great comments.
Matt, please pass along info about your time with Billy Abraham–I’d like to hear more about your observations from his talk.
Chuck, can’t wait to sit down and talk theology.
Brandon, thanks for your words.
And Tyler, thanks for your questions. I’m interested in pursuing some of your points. What I’m not saying is that one must have a fully developed pre/post/amillenial theology to possess hope. What I am saying is that statements such as “our great hope is Jesus Christ” are clearly eschatological. The question that then follows is, “Why?” The resurrection itself is an eschatological event, giving us reason for hope. My point concerns the type of hope which we possess–the hope of a premillenial dispensationalist can look different from that of an amillenialist. The return of Jesus is the same, but the events surrounding that return differ.
Lord Jesus has been raised, and we await his return.
[...] Simpson writes that Sometimes Eschatology Makes Me Want to Vomit – I [...]
Since Darby was referred to, let me add that one scholar has spent more than 35 years in foreign and domestic libraries etc. unearthing long-covered-up or long-forgotten historical evidence relative to pretribulation dispensationalism’s initial appearance and early development. (No one else, to my knowledge, has spent 35 months or even 35 weeks focusing on the pretrib origin.) I refer to journalist/historian Dave MacPherson whose riveting Google items include “Famous Rapture Watchers,” “Pretrib Rapture Diehards,” “Pretrib Rapture Desperados,” “X-Raying Margaret,” “Thomas Ice (Bloopers),” “Revisers of Pretrib Rapture History,” “The Unoriginal John Darby,” “The Real Manuel Lacunza,” “Walvoord’s Posttrib Varieties – Plus,” and “Deceiving and Being Deceived” (debunking the Pseudo-Ephraem and Morgan Edwards claims). The best and most comprehensive (and most heavily documented) of his eight book titles is his 300-page work “The Rapture Plot” (see Armageddon Books) which is the never-before-told subtle history revisionism between 1890 and 1906 which succeeded in covering up the real pretrib originator and falsely transferring that “honor” to Darby! Google “Scholars Weigh My Research” to see reactions to his lengthy research from eminent evangelical scholars. Jon (MacPherson offers much evidence, BTW, that Darby wasn’t original on any crucial aspect of dispensationalism!)
I thought it was important to include this comment, so thanks, Jon. Good to know that Edwards’ Religious Affections continue to hold sway with some of the faithful out there.
I’ve found it interesting that some persons who hold a pretrib rapture eschatological perspective have gone on to “find” support for their views within the writings of the Fathers, the Reformers, and other thinkers throughout history. In most all instances I think these “findings” are great examples of eisegesis rather than solid exegesis. I was trained by Christian men and women who have done plenty of thinking on this matter and have read a great deal about Christian eschatology–some of them who had sat under Walvoord or Lewis Sperry Chafer. Most of those men and women regarded Darby as a critical figure in the development and increased adherence to premillenial dispensationalism. Also, as cited above, theologian William Abraham believes this theological stream solidified most fully under Darby in his native country. The people I’m talking about are theologians, not journalist/historians, like MacPherson who is cited above.
Another thing to consider: This past week I read a portion of David Wells’ No Place for Truth?, where he observes that premillenialism has been a minority perspective among scholars, theologians, and church leaders until the last century.