March/April 2002
End-Times Fiction?
Tim LaHaye claims that his best-selling Left Behind series of books and videos is "true to the literal interpretation of Bible prophecy." If he is wrong, millions of readers are believing a myth.
In a conversation with Gary DeMar, we take a critical look at the flawed theology behind this popular series.
Many American evangelicals do not realize that: 1. For 1,800 years Christianity thrived without what passes for "prophecy teaching" today, and 2. The majority of Christians who are alive today do not accept the rapture or other end-time events as taught by some. William Miller's interpretations of the Bible convinced his followers that Jesus Christ would return in 1844. When Jesus failed to follow these same interpretations, the event became known as the Great Disappointment. But the failure of this method of interpreting the Bible (dispensationalism) did not stop many in the generations that followed from making similar mistakes. In our generation, Hal Lindsey's Late Great Planet Earth continued the addictive and popular teachings of dispensationalism. Due to many failed predictions, forecasting the exact date of Jesus' return is not as popular today. But the business of predicting precise events that will lead up to the return of Jesus Christ is booming. There is big money in the prediction business. The latest entry in a long line of fatally flawed prognostications is the Left Behind series. As we go to press, estimates for total sales are in excess of 40 million copies. Because The Plain Truth contributed many of its own failed predictions in past decades, we believe we have a unique perspective and a duty to point out the pitfalls in prediction addiction. In 1994, Gary DeMar published Last Days Madness, helping to popularize an alternative viewpoint of biblical prophecy. In his newest book, End Times Fiction, DeMar carefully and systematically reveals the failure of the method of biblical interpretation followed by the authors of Left Behind. Respected Christian author, R.C. Sproul notes in the forward to End Times Fiction, "The Left Behind series is clearly fiction. But it involves the literary genre of fiction to teach a theological viewpoint that the authors do not believe is fiction. I do not think one can account for phenomenal sales (over 40 million copies) of this series by the strength of the fictional story line. I believe these books are devoured by people who regard the theological premises upon which they are based as true and valid. I find that a sad and tragic matter, for if I am correct, millions of earnest Christians are being taught manifestly flawed doctrine." The need for truth and understanding is profound. We present the following conversation with Gary DeMar to provide deeper insight into the Word of God. |
Aren't signs of the end times increasing? Famines, earthquakes, wars and rumors of wars -- didn't Jesus say these would be signs of the approaching end of the age?
Jesus had that first century generation in mind in Matthew 24. He said that this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. Matthew 24:7 talks about earthquakes. In Acts 11, Agabus says there will be a famine throughout the entire Roman Empire, which happened during the reign of Claudius. Of course, there were wars and rumors of wars throughout the empire. The gospel had, in fact, been preached throughout the Roman Empire as Matthew 24:14 says. Paul even goes on to say in Romans 16:26 that the gospel had been preached to all the nations in his day.
So I really believe that the Olivet discourse in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 has that particular generation in mind, leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. By not understanding it that way, every generation that has earthquakes and famines and wars and rumors of wars and tribulation has also had prophecy writers who end up saying "this is the end time."
Since the second century, people have looked at those passages and have predicted that their generation is the final generation. I don't think it's any different today. The bubonic plague wiped out a third to half of the population of Europe. The Lisbon earthquake happened in 1755. There have been horrendous wars for the last two thousand years. That's why I think it's important to look at the time parameters that Jesus gives in Matthew 24.
If not "end-time" Christians, who was Jesus speaking to, then, when he talked about tribulation, falling away, betrayal, false prophets and lawlessness -- and enduring to the end?
I think the topic under discussion in Matthew 24 is the destruction of the temple and the end of the age. In 1 Corinthians 10, Paul says that "the ends of the ages have come" upon us (NKJV). I believe Jesus was describing the events at the end of the old covenant age. Jesus had inaugurated the new covenant age in his salvation work, in his redemptive work. That old age of the stone temple, the human priesthood and the animal sacrifices was passing away. Jesus comes in and inaugurates a new age in his person -- he's the temple, he's the lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world. He is the high priest after the order of Melchizedek. We see the passing away of one age and the inauguration of another age. The definitive time when that happened was when the temple was destroyed in A.D. 70. The temple was the visible representation of the old covenant. That was the very end that Jesus was talking about.
You're saying that term "the end of the age" as it is used in the New Testament refers to the end of the old covenant age and not the end of the world?
Right. "The end" is used all the way through Scripture. In fact, Peter says "the end of all things is near" (1 Peter 4:7). The "all things" can't mean absolutely everything. I believe what Peter had in mind was the end of the old covenant age. What the book of Hebrews deals with and talks about is the end of the old covenant, the fading away and finally the culmination that took place with the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
Jesus said to watch. Aren't we supposed to be watching for the Man of Sin -- the Beast -- the Antichrist to appear? Doesn't the Bible warn repeatedly about the coming Antichrist?
Jesus never mentions an Antichrist figure at all. John is the only one who mentions the Antichrist and that's only in two of his epistles (1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 7). The book of Revelation never mentions an Antichrist. I always ask people the definition of Antichrist and many don't know the biblical definition. It's simply someone who denies that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh as 2 John 7 says, "Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world." This was something that was taking place in John's day. And then we should also consider 1 John 2:18: "Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. This is how we know that it is the last hour."
I believe that the Antichrist was a Jewish concept. It was applied to those who had denied that Jesus Christ was indeed the Messiah, who were calling on Christians to come back under Mosaic law. John says that was a first century -- "this generation" -- phenomenon taking place in his day. In 2 Thessalonians 2 "the man of lawlessness" is discussed. Paul says "you know what is holding him back," which means that the restrainer was alive in Paul's day and the man of lawlessness was alive in Paul's day. The people of Thessalonia knew who that restrainer was.
If Jesus' Olivet prophecy was fulfilled in the first century, what about the book of Revelation? Surely it points to a future fulfillment.
Again, there's quite a bit of debate about that --especially in the last 20 years where people have taken a closer look at the book of Revelation. When I was in seminary, I was taught that the book of Revelation was written about A.D. 95. But since then, I've found that many scholars date the writing of the book of Revelation prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. The temple is still standing in Revelation 11. John is told to measure the inner sanctuary of the temple and we know the temple was destroyed in A.D. 70. The opening verses of the book of Revelation say "the time is near" (Revelation 1:3) and "what must soon take place" (verse 1). So there is a good bit of evidence that the book of Revelation was written in the early 60s during the time of Nero and that it's describing the persecutions that Nero perpetrated on the Christians. Nero finally killed himself, but his death led to the destruction of the temple. Titus leveled the city, killed a million Jews and took about 50,000 of them into captivity, even marching them into Rome. Secular evidence tells us that these Jews were involved in the completion of the Colosseum. This is a view that is gaining credence. Quite a few commentaries are being written showing a first century fulfillment of the book of Revelation.
The whole Left Behind series is predicated on a pre-tribulation rapture. Many evangelical Christians believe this is the only way -- and the traditional way -- to interpret certain passages. Has the idea of a pre-tribulation rapture always been around, or is it a relatively recent notion?
The rapture is a 19th century invention, dating from around 1830. It was popularized in 1909 with the Scofield Reference Bible. Prior to 1830 there is absolutely no indication of the pre-trib rapture doctrine. Generally, Christians were taught that the Bible said Jesus will come again at some undisclosed time, and he will judge the living and the dead. This is affirmed by the Apostles' creed and the Nicene creed. There was not a two-stage coming of Christ, as the preachers of the rapture say, "for his saints," and later "with his saints." There was one end-time eschatological event we call the second coming.
Left Behind series co-author Tim LaHaye advocates a literal interpretation of the Bible. Does he follow through on that?
He says that when the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense, but take every word at its primary literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context clearly indicate otherwise. Is Tim LeHaye consistent with that? He isn't. In fact the very first prophetic scene in the Left Behind series is a battle with Russia's sophisticated jet planes and atomic weapons, and he takes this as the prophetic fulfillment of Ezekiel 38 and 39. Yet, when you read Ezekiel 38 and 39 you find that the battle is with men on horseback, with bows and arrows and clubs and shields. It's obvious that the battle is an ancient one. I don't know how one can interpret the Bible literally and then make this particular battle so futuristic. In all of his books, he continually breaks his own golden rule of biblical interpretation.
Many evangelical Christians are expecting a third temple to be built in the near future. Doesn't the Bible say -- or at least imply -- that a temple will be rebuilt before Christ's second coming?
The Old Testament certainly talks about a rebuilt temple after the temple was destroyed by the Babylonians. And the temple was rebuilt. During the time of Ezra and Nehemiah we see the beginning of rebuilding the temple. We know that it was defaced somewhat in second century B.C. during the reign of Antiochus Ephiphanes and then finally renovated by Herod. That is the temple that was destroyed in A.D. 70. What we would need from the New Testament is some indication that there's going to be another temple. One would have to infer that the temple mentioned in Revelation 11 is a rebuilt temple, although it doesn't say that. The angel doesn't say to John, "go and measure the rebuilt temple." He says "go and measure the temple." In 2 Thessalonians 2 when the man of lawlessness takes his seat in the temple of God, one would have to assume that Paul was referring to the temple in Jerusalem. Certainly, that's what the people in Thessalonica would have thought. There isn't a verse in the New Testament that says anything about a rebuilt temple.
When is it suggested that the Left Behind series is based on a flawed Biblical interpretation, fans of the series are quick to point out that it is only fiction. What harm can a little Bible-based fiction do?
If Tim LeHaye was just saying "I'm not even going to speculate, I'm just going to write kind of a fun novel, but take some liberties with the Bible," that would be one thing. But that's not what he says. He says that Left Behind is "the first fictional portrayal of prophetic events that is true to the literal interpretation of Bible prophecy."
How can a fictional portrayal be true to literal events?
That's part of the problem. Since all these events take place supposedly after the church is gone, we would never be able to determine whether or not anything Tim LeHaye and Jerry Jenkins wrote will actually come to pass. Tim LeHaye means for the Left Behind series to be a fictional portrayal of prophetic events, true to his "literal" interpretation of Bible prophecy. That's his statement. He certainly sees it as more than just a fictional story.
Other defenders of the series point out that it is leading people to the Lord. How can something that leads people to the Lord be a problem?
A better question would be, "Is this the way the Bible says we should be leading people to Christ?" I don't see anywhere in Scripture where this methodology is used. There's nothing in Scripture that says to be ready for the tribulation period, the rise of the Antichrist and a rapture. The Bible tells us to be ready for death -- to meet our Maker. And I think that ought to be the emphasis. On the flip side of this, we're never told how many people have abandoned the Christian faith because of these prophetic novels. We tend only to put the best face on those things that support our position and to ignore things that don't support our position.
Why do you believe the Left Behind series has been so successful, when mainstream Christianity has generally never espoused such a view?
People want to know what the future holds for them. In this case, there's a future out there that's terrible and they're supposedly going to escape it. In most fiction, we try to identify with the characters. When you read this series -- this is the ultimate in escapism. That's a very attractive way to look at the future -- that you're going to escape all the bad things in the world and these books supposedly set your mind at ease. But of course, we're not experiencing that. We're seeing that the world is a devilish place. During WWII, many people believed that Hitler or Mussolini was the Antichrist and that what was happening to the Jews was the fulfillment of Bible prophecy. More than 50 years have passed since that took place. Now the same kind of prophetic speculation has risen its head again.