What's wrong with the way we interpret prophecy?

by EdenOne 16 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • EdenOne
    EdenOne

    I've posted this somewhere else, but i think it's worth some discussion here as well. The original thread revolves around the interpretation of the time for the Great Tribulation to occurr. I've pointed out if the problems we ran into in the past and present about interpreting prophecies are troubled by the false premise that we are living in the "last days".

    "A little history:

    Every religious group that got influenced by the teachings of William Miller, who became convinced that the date of the Second Coming of Christ was revealed in the Bible prophecies of Daniel and Revelation, and started out the whole "year-per-day" interpretative method, can be defined as "millerite". As early as 1822 he got convinced that the Scriptures singled out the year of 1843 as the date for the Second Advent. Eventually another well known pastor of Boston, Joshua Vaughan Himes became persuaded by his conclusions and began to publish a monthly magazine in 1840. The magazine was called Signs of the Times and to this day it continues to be edited by the Seventh-Day Adventistic Church. The millerite movement gained national attention in the US and by 1841 it reached the UK. The "date" for the Second Advent was adjusted to March 21, 1844, then April 18, 1844, then again October 22, 1844. These dates came to pass without any incident and this has resulted in "The Great Disappointment".

    The Millerite movement then split into three different factions:

    • The first, the "spiritualized group" lead by Joseph Turner, who believed that Christ had come to the bride's chamber invisibly in October 22, 1844 and therefore, the door to access the kingdom had been shut and the work of salvation had ended.
    • A second group disagreed that the door of salvation had been shut and drew most of the Millerite leaders, including Miller himself. On the Albany Conference of April, 1945, they manage to agree on a common statement of belief that eventually resulted in the foundation of the Advent Christian Church.
    • A third group, lead by Hiram Edson, claimed that October 22, 1844 was the date of a heavenly event, the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary. This formed the basis for the doctrine of Investigative Judgement, and this third group evolved into the Seventh-Day Adventist Church.

    Nelson H. Barbour was introduced to Millerism in 1842. After The Great Disappointment of 1844, Barbour suffered a faith crisis. But later he became convinced that 1873 would mark the return of Christ. His writings raised interest, mostly within the evangelical adventist groups, and some of his works concerning 1973 were published in the adventist magazine World's Crisis. When 1873 came and went, Barbour adopted the view of a two-stage presence, the first one being invisible. Barbour began to publish his studies in a monthly magazine, The Herald of The Morning, whose first issue came out in January 1874. It was through this magazine that Charles Taze Russell came to contact Barbour. They associated in co-editing the Herald until 1879, when they began to diverge over the teachings of Ransom and Atonement. Russel quit the Herald and began publishing another magazine, Zion's Watchtower. In the meantime, Barbour abandoned the idea of an invisible return of Christ, and set two more dates for the Second Advent, 1896 and 1907. Barbour eventually abandoned Adventism, although he continued to publish the Herald until 1903. He died in 1905.

    George Storrs also was introduced to Millerism just before 1843 and started the publication of his magazine The Bible Examiner in 1843, and edited it until 1879. He was also very influential on C.T.Russell.

    Now, C.T. Russel took on the notion of an invisible Second Coming of Christ, thus making him a "millerite" by definition. He took from Barbour the belief that the Rapture would take place in 1878. When that didn't happen, Russell began to drift from Barbour. Russell taught that the "last days" had begun in 1799 and would end in 1914 and Armageddon would then take place. Armageddon then was postponed to 1925 by Rutherford. Then again to 1975 by F. Franz. Then again it would surely happen "before the end of the 20th century" (Watchtower, January 1, 1989 - single issue. Interestingly, the binded volume replaced this by "our times").
    Now, what is there in common with all these beliefs that originated with William Miller?

    The men who produced these predictions all thought that the "end of times" would come during their lifetime. This is the key. This is the stumbling block. We are short-sighted by the limitation of our own existence. We think we're special, and therefore, the time where we live in is special. We so eagerly want to believe that we will see the fulfillment of the Bible prophecies that we will take any effort, no matter how controverted and absurd, to forcefully interpret the prophecies, squeezing them so that they will fit to events that happened before us or in our time, so that the climax of those prophecies will take place during our lifetime. This is what's wrong with us, children of William Miller.

    Didn't Paul say: "We live by faith, and not by sight" ? (2 Corinthians 5:7) Yet, we live as if our faith depends on we experience, see with our own eyes, live through, the fulfillment of the Bible prophecies. We should look at Abel, Enoch, Sarah and Abraham's example. Paul said : "All these people died having faith.They did not receive the things that were promised, yet they saw them in the distant future and welcomed them". (Hebrews 11:13 ISV)

    What a fine example. They knew it wasn't for them to see during their lifetime, and yet their faith didn't depend on experiencing it. They weren't "holding their breath" for the fulfillment of the promise. Yet, they welcomed such promises and lived in faith.

    Jesus observed that a characteristic of an "evil, adulterous generation" is to "demand a miraculous sign". (Matthew 12:39) Aren't we like such generation? We are so obsessed with the "signs of times" that we equate our salvation with the correct interpretation of the sign of times. Mind you, I do believe that is correct to take interest in the prophecies regarding the Second Coming of Christ, the Kingdom, the Great Tribulation, The Armageddon, the Millennium and beyond. BUT - is our salvation dependent on correctly understanding the timing for such events? Do we need to know that we live in the last days in order to be vigilant and live each day as if it were the last ? Isn't it a fact that "living in the last days" became a crucial requirement for our preaching message to be appealing? Didn't Jesus say: "it is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority" ? (Acts 1:7) Accordingly with this, Paul wrote: "Nowconcerning how and when all this will happen, dear brothers and sisters, we don't really need to write you. For you know quite well that the day of the Lord's return will come unexpectedly, like a thief in the night (1 Thessalonians 5:1, 2) Yes, there was no need to write about dates and times to the brethren, because it would be futile speculation. The Lord's return would come unexpectedly. Peter also wrote that the "day of the Lord" would come "like a thief", unexpectedly (2 Peter 3:10).

    Jesus himself told his disciples: "
    No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." (Mark 12:32) Also these words are very telling: "Be ready, because the Son of Man will return when you least expect him." (Luke 12:40) The greek expression used here for " least expect" is 'ou dokeite', that means "contrary to opinion; contrary to supposition". Despite the Christians efforts to try to determine the likely date for the return of Christ, these efforts would be doomed to fail as mere speculative work. This would lead to disappointment and loss of faith. That's why Jesus asked rhetorically: "when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?" (Luke 18:8) Yes, many Christians would stumble and lose faith over repeated disillusions regarding failed expectations regarding Jesus' Second Coming. We should ask ourselves: Why are we so determined to NOT listen to our Lord? Why do we keep stumbling ourselves?

    We should be very very careful, because our obsessive search for "proof" that we live in the "last days", the very same thing that is supposed to keep us spiritually awaken, may be what ultimately causes us to fall asleep spiritually. If the Great Tribulation happens in the near future or in our lifetime, that's just great. If the Armageddon will happen soon or even during our lifetime, that's great. If "millions now living may never die" will actually become a reality and we live to experience it all, then it will be a wonderful thing to experience. But what if this is all still in the future, even in the distant future? Will that make you stumble? To have insight about "the times and the ages" isn't the foundation of our faith nor is a condition to our salvation. Actually, it opens the door for our mental manipulation. It leads us to suspend our lives and live in a trance. We should live before our God, Jehovah as if each day would be the last day of our existence or the last day of this wicked system of things. That's the bottom line, isn't it?

    Eden

  • prologos
    prologos

    Eden: great summary, another warning in

    Acts 1:7 : "--it is not given to you to UNDERSTAND the TIMEs and the SEASONS , that

    THE FATHER has put in his OWN JURISDICTION.--"

    another item that was put in the fathers jurisdiction was THE TREE of KNOWLEDGE,

    transgress at your own risk and peril of those that follow you. .

  • Tiktaalik
    Tiktaalik

    Eden this is so weird. You believe that Armageddon is real??

    >> The men who produced these predictions all thought that the "end of times" would come during their lifetime . This is the key. This is the stumbling block.

    No actually the stumbling block is believing that god is gonna destroy the world. You write of the history of Millerism and deride those who have set dates for the end of the world. But you still think the end is coming but weasel out by not saying when. In essence you are exactly the same as those date-setters you have just exposed, but just not as bold.

    >> If the Armageddon will happen soon or even during our lifetime, that's great. If "millions now living may never die" will actually become a reality and we live to experience it all, then it will be a wonderful thing to experience.

    So you look forward to deaths of billions and the end of life on earth? Yeah "that's great" alright. One of the reasons I left the JWs was because of their gloating attitude to Armageddon. How could it healthy to rejoice in the violent deaths of so many innocent people? And here you are doing exactly that.

    This Armageddon fixation is a dangerous thing. You titled your thread "What's wrong with the way we interpret prophecy?". You outline all the past failures. Then you tell us where they all went wrong. Then you proceed to outline the 'correct' way to interpret prophecy. You are just another one in a long line of crazy people who feel the need to preach and sermonise about the end of the world.

  • Sapphy
    Sapphy

    "But what if this is all still in the future, even in the distant future ? "

    What if it never happens?

    "We should live before our God, Jehovah as if each day would be the last day of our existence or the last day of this wicked system of things. That's the bottom line, isn't it?"

    No. If someone truly believed that Armageddon was happening tomorrow, it would be incumbent upon them to preach to those at risk of death until they collapsed from exhaustion.

    What if the book of Revelation is simply the written depiction of a bad trip some 1st centuary Jewish Christian convert had after having a nervous breakdown at seeing the temple in Jerusalem destroyed?

    What if?

  • Pterist
    Pterist

    *** The Millerite movement then split into three different factions:*****

    Thanks for the article Eden. Love this stuff ! However, all these movements give their take on ONE millennium view, namely PRE-Millenniumists...

    Have you looked at Post-millennium, Amillenniumism and the various dispensionalism. .???

    Im with you all the way that any understanding should not be a condition for salvation, but the WBTS make it a disfellowshiping offense even to doubt their now failed end time failed eschatology of 607-1914.

    Shalom brother.

  • Christ Alone
    Christ Alone

    Eden, great stuff. You're coming right along!

    I've found it interesting to think about when the last days began. If they didn't begin in 1914, then when? Actually the Bible talks about it. Peter mentioned that what was being fulfilled with the Holy Spirit coming to believers was only supposed to happen in the last days. Notice Acts 2:14-17. It says, " But Peter stood up with the eleven, raised his voice, and addressed them: “You men of Judea and all you who live in Jerusalem, know this and listen carefully to what I say. In spite of what you think, these men are not drunk, for it is only nine o’clock in the morning. But this is what was spoken about through the prophet Joel: And in the last days it will be, God says, that I will pour out my Spirit on all people, and your sons and your daughters will prophecy, and your yong men will see visions, and your old men will dream dreams."

    Peter believed that they were in the last days. The last days was what was to occur after Jesus' resurrection and last until the end. It was not to be a short time in our view.

    Reading through Paul's writings as well, he too believed the end was soon. And it was for them. I believe 70ce figures into prophecy more than we ever gave it credit for. There is something to be said about Revelation and how it actually directly was written to those prior to 70ce and how they would have understood it. I believe it has a second application in our future. But its immediate fulfillment was in 70.

  • Pterist
    Pterist

    Christ Alone *** about Revelation and how it actually directly was written to those prior to 70ce***

    I did not know you were a CLOSET partial Preterist !!! ? Like me LOL :)

    Shalom brother

  • Christ Alone
    Christ Alone

    I didn't used to be, Pterist. I was ultra 100% Pre-Millenial. But the evidence is close to be undeniable. The 1st century church would have been utterly confused about what John wrote if it was not meant for them at that time. But the evidence shows that they knew EXACTLY what John was talking about in Revelation. One of the first rules of hermeneutics is that you must consider the audience that the writer was speaking to.

    I still think that there could be another fulfillment of much of Revelation in the future. But I also think that there may not be. I'm definitely not a full preterist. But partial...yeah...it makes so much sense. I started changing my views after Vanderhoven7 sent me a link to the book "Days of Vengence" by David Chilton. Absolutely phenominal book! And it's free online. I went into it thinking I was going to disprove it, but the arguments are solid. And it is the best way to interpret Revelation. It all makes historical sense, and is not as mystical and confusing as Pre-Millenialist make it out to be. I mean, look at some of the comments by some on this site. They are utterly confused by Revelation, so they throw it away and say it can mean anything. Yet, to a student of the OT, it would have made perfect sense in its application to 70ad.

    Anyway, here's a link to the book if anyone else wants to examine the evidence.

    http://www.preteristarchive.com/Books/pdf/1987_chilton_days-of-vengeance.pdf

  • Pterist
    Pterist

    So that makes 4 that I know off here ;) ...partial Preterist or border line hyper ! I felt all alone ;) thanks

  • EdenOne
    EdenOne

    Tiktaalik

    I can't change what the Bible says. I look forward to the Armageddon, whatever it may be. What it will be it's not in my hands.

    God is more merciful than anything you and I can imagine. If you don't believe in that, it's your problem. if I die at the Armageddon, at least I know I won't go any horrible place to be made suffer for eternity.

    In any case, I suspect that Armageddon isn't all that catastrophists think it is.

    Eden

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit