Millions of Christians are waiting for Jesus to come. He's going to come any
moment, we are told.
We've been told this now for decades.
"Any moment now!"
He ain't coming.
These Christians misread the New Testament. There are three reasons why we all know they are wrong.
Harsh judgments? Outrageous ideas? Possibly. But I certainly have your attention.
This paper represents a significant change in my own perspective, and I have circulated it elsewhere under the title "The Myth of the 'Last Days'" as a revision of mistaken ideas contained in Essay One of the series The Meaning of Vine & Fig Tree. Thus I am certainly not immune from criticism and the need for continued change. So in obedience to the command of Scripture, let's talk about Biblical language and the idea of "the Last Days" (Acts 17:11).
I. Me-Centered Christianity
We all tend to want to be wanted. We want to think we're important. We want to think that the age in which we live is the most important age in history. We want to think that the things that -really- -matter- are happening to -us-, through us, and for us, in -our- day.
Thus, many Christians want to think that -this- is the year that Jesus is going to return. Before -we- have to die a mere "natural" death. Like everyone else.
But what is really important in this universe is God, not us, and His Will, not our own. We are important only to the extent that we are a part of -God's- Kingdom, obedient to -God's- Law, and if we are being blessed according to His -Covenant-, our prayer is that it all redounds to -His- Glory.
II. Whole-Bible Christianity and "Interpretive Maximalism"
God's purposes are expressed in the Scriptures. Not just the New Testament, but the Old as well. Jesus did not come to abrogate the Old Testament, and He says that those who teach that the least little part of the Old Testament is unimportant is himself least in the Kingdom (Matthew 5:17-20).
Christians in the first century generally knew their Old Testament well, particularly if they were converted Jews. They were taught the Bible at home (since public schools and Deweyist "socialization" hadn't been implemented on a wide scale) and if they obeyed the commands of the Apostles, they learned the Old Testament thoroughly if they hadn't already (II Timothy 3:14-17; Acts 17:11).
And by learning the Scriptures they imbibed a "way of seeing." Their picture of the world was probably quite different than ours; not because we know so much more than they, but more probably because we know less.
Even if they hadn't learned the Old Testament, the teachings of the Old Testament were widely known in the ancient world, and variations on its teachings were incorporated in nearly all pagan traditions. At least one such teaching must be understood if we are to fully understand the concept of "the last days" -- the relationship between demons and institutions of power. (We will examine this concept in greater detail in Essay Four.)
Demons and the State
One teaching of the Old Testament which was universally recognized in the ancient world was the relationship of angels and social structures (which the New Testament calls "pedagogues" ("teachers" -- Galatians 3:24 - 4:9)).
The Biblical View Pagan, rebellious nations were governed by fallen angels (Deuteronomy 32:8,43 (LXX or RSV)) called the "sons of God" (Job 2:1) or "sons of the mighty" (Psalm 89:6; cf. Jude 8-9; 2 Peter 2:10-11). Demons were certainly active at the Tower of Babel, and Babylon was the Mother of Evolutionary Humanism.[1] The nations were the happy hunting ground of Satan and his political henchmen (Luke 4:5-7, cf. Daniel 10:13,20).
It is important to realize that this is not some form of exaggerated rhetoric, some primitive and (now) "poetic" way of speaking of reality. The existence of angelic beings cannot be reduced to symbolism or fable without falling prey to the fallacies of Enlightenment rationalism.
This is not to deny, however, that "symbolism" -- in the form of propaganda -- was generated by the Empires of the ancient world using the truths taught in the Scriptures. And it is admittedly difficult in our day to separate the Biblical teaching from its sometimes better-known distortions as they have come down to us in ancient history and archeology. The task is especially formidable for those of us who, having not "learned it from infancy" (2 Tim. 3:15), are not steeped in the thought of the Bible.
It is nevertheless possible to begin to see how the Biblical concept of the demonic state could be transformed into the Humanistic doctrine of the Divine State.
The Pagan View Stated bluntly, those nations which rebelled against the God of Israel worshipped the demons which were over them. Their great heroes were made into powerful patrons of the State by the "liberal media" of the day, and after their death were said to have joined (or become) these demons, climbing the great ladder of Being, becoming "gods." This propaganda was used to inculcate patriotism and nationalistic self-gratification ("the Roman Dream" -- a split-level parthenon with a 9% mortgage).
Modern scholars tend to view this mythology as primitive and incredible. They appear blind to the striking parallels between these ancient empires and the modern world. The tombs of our greatest leaders (e.g., JFK) serve similar functions as did tombs of the ancient world, and modern writers can often be heard using "metaphysical" language to describe the continuing "influence" of these revered individuals. Of course politicians are not the only group of idols. Future archeologists, if they employ the same methods as modern rationalist scholars, will look back at the U.S. and will describe it in terms of primitive mythology and religious superstition -- should they uncover, for example, the remains of 25,000 "worshippers" quick-frozen in a sudden cataclysm in Nashville, Tennessee, at the grave of Elvis Presley.[2]
It is difficult to ascertain exactly what secularists think when they use pseudo-religious language in our day. Feminists are presently going wild with "goddess" rhetoric. New-Agers are explicitly and self-consciously reviving the language of ancient paganism. Romans 1:18ff. would seem to indicate that they don't really believe it. In the ancient world, however, they did believe that there was a supra-mundane aspect to their empires, and they cannot be criticized for that, at least as I read -my- Bible
It's the -application- (or "distortion") of those Biblical truths for purposes of political propaganda that we can criticize.
All ancient religions and empires opposed the Biblical religion of service-based morality and embraced the worship of power -- best exemplified by the State: its legal interests and customs (Acts 16:21; 17:7), its wealth (Acts 19:23-28), and the demons behind it (Acts 17:18 (Gk., Ue2.nln waimoniln, "out-of-State gods"), 22 (Gk., weisiwaimoneste2.poyz, "reverent toward 'demons' (gods)"); cf. 8:9-11; 14:11-16).
The Jewish View Unfortunately, even God's chosen people did not rely wholly on the Biblical teaching on the reality and influence of demons on the empires of the day. They bought into the propaganda which they read and heard from the prophets of these empires. The "holy nation" of Israel preferred living as slaves in a pyramid-building welfare state, subsisting on a diet of leeks and onions, rather than exercise personal responsibility under God's Law in a beautiful Garden land flowing with milk and honey (Numbers 11:4,7; 14:7-10), and just as fallen angelic forces were placed over the secular nations around them, a social pedagogue was necessary for slave-like Israel, and God appointed it "at the hand of angels" (Deuteronomy 33:2; Acts 7:53; Galatians 3:19; Hebrews 2:2).
Stars and Idolatry
When the Old Testament spoke of the "powers," it often used astronomical allusions, calling the angels "stars" (as in Revelation 12:7) and associating celestial phenomena (sun, moon, stars) with the angelic hosts of their respective States (Isaiah 45:12-13; Jeremiah 10:1-16; 8:1-2; Amos 5:26; Zephaniah 1:5; Isaiah 24:21; Judges 5:20; etc.).
Again, this is hard to grapple with. Rhetoric? Symbolism?
Fundamentalists and others holding to the traditional view of "the last days" and the "imminent Second Coming of Christ" pride themselves on a "literal" interpretation of the Bible, accusing those who disagree with them of "allegorizing" or "spiritualizing" the Bible away. It is beyond the scope of this article to analyze this argument. Let us just say that "Christian Reconstructionist"[3] scholars, rigorously following Calvin and the Protestant Reformers, have viewed these connections between stars and angels with a "holistic literalness" which makes distinguishing the "literalists" from the "spiritualizers" all the more difficult. For example, James B. Jordan says that we have succumbed to "neo-Baalism" when we attribute cosmic occurrences to rationalistic "laws of nature" rather than personal angelic beings (Judges: God's War Against Humanism, Tyler, TX: Geneva Ministries, 1985, p. 102). David Chilton, in his book on AIDS, makes similar mention of direct angelic agency in God's government of the universe (Power in the Blood, 1988). Both men admit to their direct dependence on the commentaries of John Calvin, whose rationalistic 19th-century English editor, in a barrage of footnotes and introductory essays, profusely apologized for Calvin's "pre-scientific" views, urging us to ignore these angelic foibles and to be content to profit from his "theology" alone (see especially the commentary on Ezekiel, chaps. 1-10).
Nevertheless, when it comes to understanding "the Last Days," Jordan, Chilton, and Calvin would all be accused by Fundamentalists of failing to take the Bible "literally." We are seeing that this criticism is really a vacuous slogan. This article espouses the Reformational view of Calvin and his progeny; I think if you read the passages cited you will find yourself, with the Reconstructionists, getting a sense that this angelic language is not mere allegory or "primitive poetry," but holistic, Biblical, science.
Another line of argument supports this view. When the Prophets spoke of God's judgment of States, when governors and their citizen-drones were destroyed for their rebellion against Biblical Law, this same kind of language was used: whether destroyed by storm, famine, or war, angelic beings were actively destroying and being destroyed, particularly in the case of two demonic empires warring against each other. Are you familiar with these prophesies: Isaiah 24:23; 13:10; 34:4; 60:19-20; Jeremiah 4:28; Joel 2:10,31; 3:15; Ezekiel 30:18; 32:7,8? Failure to understand this correlation results in absurd interpretations of Scripture. Example:
Isaiah, in prophesying the destruction of Babylon at the hands of the army of the Medes, used such language:
Behold, the Day of the Lord is coming,
Cruel, with fury and burning anger,
To make the earth a desolation;
And he will exterminate its sinners from it.
For the stars of heaven and their constellations
Will not flash forth their light;
The sun will be dark when it rises,
And the moon will not shed its light.
(Isaiah 13:9-10)
Even those Christians who believe that Jesus is coming tomorrow will -- if they have a shred of scholarly ability -- admit that this prophecy was fulfilled in 539 B.C. Understood "literally," that is, from a 20th-century perspective (a perspective gained in public schools, where we were taught to worship science and the technocrats of the State), this prophecy did not come true. Nor did any of the other prophecies cited above. "Whaddya mean?! The stars never fell from the sky! The sun never ceased its process of heat-emitting fusion!"
Understood Biblically, however, they all came true. All of these empires -- and the angelic forces behind them -- were destroyed.
It is surely critical to begin to assimilate a Biblical outlook on the cosmos. It is important for us to speak to the next generation in these terms, at least in terms of our chronicle of history.
But while demonic governance of the State was the norm in the Old Testament, it may be argued that something dramatic took place at the inauguration of the New Testament in a series of events which occurred in the last days of the Old.
Jesus Binds the Demons
As we continue in our "whole-Bible" theology, we come to the New Testament. Jesus predicts the destruction of Israel, and of the entire Old Testament order.
The termination of the Old Testament world and the foundation for a New Age is rooted in Jesus' victory over the demons. The overthrow of the pagan empires and inception of the non-archist Kingdom of Christ (Mark 10:42-45; Daniel 2:31-45) was accomplished through the "binding" of Satan and his flunkies (Matthew 12:29; Luke 10:18; 11:20-22; Mark 1:24; Revelation 12:10-12; 20:1-4). Christ's assassination by the demonic conspiracy among "the powers that be" (Acts 3:13; 4:27-28; Luke 23:23-24; John 19:15) resulted in the ultimate sacrifice, ending the old liturgical order (Hebrews 9:26). His resurrection/enthronement was Satan's death-bell (John 12:31-33; 14:30; 16:11) and the power which he and his demonic army formerly held over the nations has been quelled; a new, Spiritual Power (social order created by the Spirit through charity without "archism") has been granted to Christ (Matthew 28:18-20; Revelation 20:1-4; Luke 10:18; 11:17-22; Colossians 2:15; Ephesians 4:8; Hebrews 2:14; I John 3:8; 4:4; Genesis 3:15; Romans 16:20). The miraculous victories which Christ won over the demons were witnessed by the religious establishment of Jesus' day, alerting them to the emergence of the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 12:28).
Israel Worships the Demons The quest for power through empire reached a peak among the Jews who worshipped the Roman Caesars (John 19:15). Instead of seeing the pedagogue-state as a temporary provision, lasting until the coming of the Messiah and the Holy Spirit-Anointing of all believers as antitype priests and kings, the Jewish leaders had come to view the pedagogue as normative. They prescribed sacrifice rather than obedience (I Sam. 15:22; Hosea 6:4-6). They preferred "entitlements" to productivity (Numb. 11:5; Ps. 106:7; Ps. 78). They erroneously worshipped the pedagogues (stoixeia, Col. 2:8 + 18; Gal. 4:3 + 3:19). And they assassinated those who prophesied that personal responsibility and obedient self-government under God's Law was better than political power and ritual sacrifice (Micah 6:6-8). Thus, Jesus, in the tradition of Isaiah, predicted their judgment according to the terms of the Covenant (Deuteronomy 28:15-68):
Woe unto you, scribes and pharisees, hypocrites! ...upon you will come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. Truly, I say to you, all this will come upon this generation.
So when you see the desolating sacrilege spoken of by the prophet Daniel (Jerusalem surrounded by (unclean pagan) armies) then know that its desolation has come near.
Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the power of the heavens will be shaken.
Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place
(Matthew 23:29-36; 24:15; Luke 21:20; Matthew 24:29-35)
It happened.
Just as Jesus said it would.
Not as modern Carl Saganized Christians understand the passage, but just as first-century Christians understood it.
Israel, in all her empire-worshipping power and liturgy, was destroyed in the holocaust of A.D. 70.
The Last Days of the Old World
This is why those living before A.D. 70 could be said to be living in "the last days." The old pedagogical order of temple rituals and angelic guardians was about to be terminated by fire, just as an earlier "world" had been terminated by flood (2 Peter 3:5-7; Luke 17:22-32). "In speaking of a new covenant, he treats the first as obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete is growing old and is ready to vanish away" (Hebrews 8:13; cf. I Peter 4:7).
Are we living in "the last days" of the Old Covenant?
To ask the question is to ridicule it.
Yet many say we are.
The test is simple: just look up "last days" in a concordance and see if you can find even one verse which indicates that the writer who used the phrase "the last days" believed it would be about one thousand nine hundred and eighty years away. Chances are you'll find verses which reveal the universally-held belief that the Apostles and their contemporaries were living in "the last days" of the pre-Christian world. Example:
God, Who at sundry times and in diverse manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son.
Hebrews 1:1-2
Most students of Scripture are quite surprised, after doing a little concordance work, to find themselves unable to locate even one verse which says that those living in the latter part of the second millennium after Christ will be living in "the last days" of the Old Covenant World.
(Of course, the big mistake, it seems to me, is a failure to listen to Jesus and His stated goals. Fundamentalists believe that the phrase "the last days" refers to the "last (few) days before Jesus physically returns and (a) sets up an empire rivaling the Roman Empire, and/or (b) literally melts the physical earth and the heavens in a fiery (nuclear) cataclysm." But if the Bible writers in the years A.D. 30-68 taught that Jesus was going to return in that manner (and in a matter of days), then those Bible writers were plainly in error, weren't they? After all, the "coming" of Christ, which the New Testament writers unanimously and expectantly agreed would "shortly come to pass" (Rev. 1:1), clearly did not come with all the military regalia and nuclear destruction eagerly anticipated by visionaries of the Fundamentalist Right. This is a very critical question: If the Apostolic writers of Scripture taught that Jesus was going to "come" in a matter of days, then either Jesus "came" (and we in the 20th century need to re-evaluate our unScriptural conception of His "coming") or else the Apostles were in error in believing He would "come quickly" (Rev. 22:7,10) and the Bible is untrustworthy.
We shall see shortly (if it isn't clear already) that Jesus did not intend to set up a worldly empire at His First Advent, nor does He intend to return a second time to try again. In fact, the message of the New Testament seems quite consistently to be that Jesus opposed those who supported Empire, rejected opportunities to become a king Himself, and promised that the dreams and plans of the power-grabbers and State-worshippers would be blue-penciled.)
Of course, the Jewish leaders were not too happy about the prospect of their power and influence being destroyed, as the Christians were predicting (though they knew in their hearts it was inevitable). This is why the last days of the Old Covenant were characterized by such widespread seduction, persecution, and apostasy. The Jews were violently opposed to Christ and His non-institutional Law-order. But the rejection of the New Messianic Age had all been prophesied earlier, and it is just one more indication that those living before the year A.D. 70 were living in the "last times."
Little children, it is the last time; and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
I John 2:18 (cf. I Pet. 1:20)
Those who deny that a qualitatively new Kingdom was established by Christ also look for the fulfillment of the dreams of the same politico-religious establishment which assassinated Christ. David Chilton helps us see when Christ's Kingdom was founded, and prompts us to re-evaluate our priorities (Political Empire or Spirit-empowered Service?):
When will Christ's Kingdom begin? The prophet Daniel was given the answer. Interpreting Nebuchadnezzar's dream, Daniel foretold the future of four great world empires, symbolically represented by a statue. First there was the Babylonian empire; it would be followed by the Medo-Persian, the Greek, and the Roman empires. But during the last empire, a stone would strike it, bringing it to destruction, and becoming a mountain which would fill the earth. The stone represented the Kingdom of Christ, which would endure forever (Daniel 2:31-45). Because of the obvious connection of the beginning of God's Kingdom with the Roman Empire, those who wish to deny it have invented the myth that we would see a "revived Roman Empire" in the last days. The Bible says nothing of this; but as my friend Kevin Craig has remarked: Dispensationalists believe in the revival of the Roman Empire; we believe in the revival of Christianity.
(Productive Christians in an Age of Guilt Manipulators, Tyler, TX: I.C.E., 1st ed., 1981, p. 194.)
Those who believe that we in the twentieth century after Christ's Advent are living in the last days of the old age are also (most of them) looking for "the Antichrist" to appear. When it is pointed out to them that "he" ("them," actually) has already appeared, they are disappointed! Talk about priorities!!
III. Archists and Anarchists
Yes, let's talk about priorities.
The Law of God puts a priority on self-sacrificing service toward others and diligent work. Politicians put a premium on exercising power over others and living off the productive.
The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and those in authority over them are called benefactors. But not so with you; rather let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves. For which is the greater, one who sits at table, or one who serves? Is it not the one who sits at table? But I am among you as one who serves.
Luke 22:25-27
To transliterate the Greek word used by Mark, these pagans love to be "archists." But followers of Christ are not to be "archists."
Those who think we are in "the last days" -- many of them anyway -- believe that when Jesus comes again he is going to reverse everything He did and said at His first Advent. He is going to become a king (see John 6:15) and all His followers (who in this age were sitting around incompetent and uninvolved in the great struggles of our day, "waiting for His soon coming") are going to be "promoted" to the office of Little Caesar and, armed with their little rods of iron (together with Jesus and His big rod), will rule over all those nasty Secular Humanists. Gary North calls this view of the present age the laughable concept of "off-the-job training."
Jesus repudiated the view of Empire which many are today saying He is going to set up. His Kingdom is bottom-up, not "top-down."
Why do we all believe that to be really important is to be in a position of political power, or somehow connected with State-chartered institutions? Doesn't Jesus say that the truly important are those who are not respected and lauded by the State? Doesn't Jesus want us to be involved in little things everywhere, acts of service and self-sacrifice which restore the distorted Image of God in persons and mend the torn fabric of life? Did Jesus fail to accomplish what He wanted when He came as a child born in a stable?
No, Jesus established His Kingdom at His First Advent. It is a Spiritual Kingdom, not "of this world," that is, not deriving its power from worldly ways and institutions, but from the Power of the Holy Spirit in the exercise of service.
All ancient religions and empires opposed the Biblical concept of service-based morality, and embraced the worship of power -- best exemplified in the State: its legal interests and customs (Acts 16:21; 17:7), its wealth (Acts 19:23-28), and the demons behind it (Acts 17:18 (Gk., Ue2.nln waimoniln, "out-of-State gods"), 22 (Gk., weisiwaimonestepoyz, -- "reverent toward 'demons' [gods]"); cf. 8:9-11; 14:11-16).
Harsh judgments? Outrageous ideas? Possibly. But I certainly have your attention. This paper represents a significant change in my own perspective, and I am circulating it as a revision of ideas contained in Essay One of the series The Meaning of Vine & Fig Tree which I now believe are erroneous. Thus I am certainly not immune from criticism and the need for continued change. So in obedience to the command of Scripture, let's talk about Biblical language and the idea of "the Last Days" (Acts 17:11).
[1] Henry M. Morris, The Troubled Waters of Evolution, San Diego: Creation-Life Publishers, 1974, pp. 72ff.
[2] Rousas John Rushdoony, "Images, Ikons, and Pin-ups," The Journal of Christian Reconstruction, I:1 (Summer, 1974), p. 141.
[3] According to Newsweek, the "Christian Reconstructionist" Chalcedon Foundation is the "think tank" of the New Religious Right. While it is certainly true that the "Reconstructionist" scholars brought the Fundamentalists out of their political slumbers, it is not at all clear that the Fundies have learned all that the Reconstructionists tried to teach them.
Millions of Christians are waiting for Jesus to come. He's going to come any moment, we are told.
We've been told this now for decades.
"Any moment now!"
He ain't coming.
These Christians misread the New Testament. There are three reasons why we all know they are wrong.
(1) They are self-centered, not God-centered.
(2) They read the New Testament in a way we might expect from incompetent 20th-century trendoids, products of the public school dumbing-down system, not at all like first-century Christians who knew their Scriptures (the Old Testament) largely by heart.
(3) They want Jesus to come back and establish a "new" and "powerful" Empire, using the same power as all the old empires, forgetting that Jesus was executed as an Anarchist; He loathes Empires.
Harsh judgments? Outrageous ideas? Possibly. But I certainly have your attention.
This paper represents a significant change in my own perspective, and I am circulating it as a revision of ideas contained in Essay One of the series The Meaning of Vine & Fig Tree which I now believe are erroneous. Thus I am certainly not immune from criticism and the need for continued change. So in obedience to the command of Scripture, let's talk about Biblical language and the idea of "the Last Days" (Acts 17:11).
I. Me-Centered Christianity
We all tend to want to be wanted. We want to think we're important. We want to think that the age in which we live is the most important age in history. We want to think that the things that really matter are happening to us, through us, and for us, in our day.
Thus, many Christians want to think that this is the year that Jesus is going to return. Before we have to die a mere "natural" death. Like everyone else.
But what is really important in this universe is God, not us, and His Will, not our own. We are important only to the extent that we are a part of God's Kingdom, obedient to God's Law, and if we are being blessed according to His Covenant, our prayer is that it all redounds to His Glory.
II. Whole-Bible Christianity and "Interpretive Maximalism"
God's purposes are expressed in the Scriptures. Not just the New Testament, but the Old as well. Jesus did not come to abrogate the Old Testament, and He says that those who teach that the least little part of the Old Testament is unimportant is himself least in the Kingdom (Matthew 5:17-20).
Christians in the first century generally knew their Old Testament well, particularly if they were converted Jews. They were taught the Bible at home (since public schools and Deweyist "socialization" hadn't been implemented on a wide scale) and if they obeyed the commands of the Apostles, they learned