(15 votes, average: 4.73 out of 5)
Loading...I have started to explain what I’m hoping my next trade book will be, focusing on the book of Revelation and its effect on modern thinking about the End of the World soon to come. I’m tentatively calling the book Expecting Armageddon, and it would roughly cover three areas: the religious expectation that God’s judgment is right around the corner – for example in the fundamentalist belief of an imminent “rapture”; the secular versions of this idea, that the world as we know it is soon to be destroyed in one way or another – for example, through nuclear holocaust (as portrayed, e.g., in novels and film), and the political implications of these beliefs (e.g., in understandings of the Second Amendment; environmental legislation; and the U.S. support for Israel) (! Who would-a thought?); and the demonstration that all this perspective is based ultimately on a certain understanding/way of reading the book of Revelation, a mode of interpretation that scholars have long argued is untenable.
I’m pretty pumped about the possibility of the book. But I haven’t proposed it to a publisher yet, so … well, I don’t know what the future holds!
Here is the next bit of the description that I’ve written for myself, based on yesterday’s post about the end-of-the-world predictions of Edgar Whisenant, widely accepted in some circles of Christian fundamentalists, who discovered, to their dismay, that he had been completely wrong in every way.
************************************************
Most people find such futuristic scenarios bizarre, troubling, and fringe. But they are not all that fringe. No better evidence can come than from one of….
To see the rest of this post you will need to belong to the blog. If you’re not a member yet, you’d better join, or it will be too late. The End is Near!!
Dr. Ehrman,
There is a conflict with the story in Revelation that I have yet to hear anyone address to my satisfaction, yet goes far in allowing the reader to understand. To be born again, as I understand it, one must be judged worthy. The great battle occurs after the remaining humans are born again (some are born again earlier to reign with Jesus 1000 years and will not die the second death (being cast into thelake of fire)). That is, the participants in the great battle are all born again (have been judged worthy of the kingdom of heaven). Those who rebel against Jesus in the kingdom of heaven will be thrown in the lake of fire. But Jesus promise of the kingdom of heaven is that those there will live forever and there will be no suffering. Those in the lake of fire will live forever (their seed will not die) but they will not suffer for that is the promise of the kingdom of heaven.
The book of revelation, like all books of the Bible is a book written by and (for the most part) for the Jews (in my opinion). And therefore there are three “holocausts” in the end times: the holocaust of the Jews (World War II and the murdering of 6 million Jews that led to the creation of the country of Israel (as predicted in the Bible)), the holocaust of the end of the earth (the destruction of the planet earth) which is just after Jesus comes again to save the righteous (the rapture), and the holocaust in the kingdom of heaven (when those who are unable to accept Jesus’ vision for the kingdom of heaven will be cast into the lake of fire). The Bible doesn’t say much about the Antichrist, but if someone should be given that label, then the Antichrist was Adolph Hitler; for to be Antichrist means to be anti-jew. But like all prophecies concerning the Jews, it was meant to be recognized and understood after it occurred and not before or during.
But Jesus’ 1000 year reign is the puzzle piece that once understood allows the whole story to begin to be understood. It would be interesting to hear your opinions of Jesus’ 1000 year reign.
Dennis Keister
A book title I’m stealing from James Tabor, but could be good for your new book: “Dead Messiahs That Never Return”. (Come on, you got to laugh at that one… It’s a GREAT title….!)
And would also be a great name for a rock band!
Bart,
Is it your view that the book of Revelation is simply just not reliable as a predictor of the future (obviously), or do you believe that, in addition, fundamentalists have poorly interpreted what the author is actually trying to communicate?
I guess my question boils down to: if somehow it was indeed inspired by God, is there a more accurate reading that tells us something different than what fundamentalists traditionally infer?
My view is that Revelation was not trying to predict what would happen millennia later (in our day), and that fundamentalists completely misunderstand it (because they think it does).
Expectations of imminent End Times seem to be found only in Protestant traditions. The notions of Rapture, dispensationalism, amillennialism, premillennialism, postmillennialism seem to be the unique preoccupations of strands of Protestantism. Why do contemporary Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians refrain from interpreting Book of Revelation as prophecies about the near future? It seems Christian denominations with strong emphasis on the social gospel (as some Catholic traditions do) – actively bringing about God’s kingdom to earth by tackling global poverty and injustices and environmental degradation – tend to pay a lot less attention to the imminent End Times. In contrast, if one believes the apocalypse is around the corner, it is futile to spend effort on improving conditions on earth for humans and other sentient living beings we share the planet with.
Historically, of course, there were plenty of Christians imagining the end was coming in their own day before the Reformation! (From Montanists to Joachim of Fiore and onward). But yes, the rapture/millenialist debates are decidedly Protestant.
Having noted your citation of growth among “conservative communities”, it might nonetheless be interesting to see what percentages the Pew survey would yield today as Millennials come of age.
There are at least two filmatizations of “Left Behind” – one with Kirk Cameron and one with Nicolas Cage. Not even the Cagey one could save that movie, and he can usually make even bad movies watchable. I believe the Cinema Snob has reviewed at least one of them.
Yes, one wonders why he takes on the parts he does….
Cage? He was under a court injunction to take any role he was offered at that time. Something about a divorce or alimony or something like that. He played the role like he was on Xanax.
Really? Wow.
Nick Cage is just prolific and weird. I don’t think he was required to do any roles.
I still have a paperback copy of Hal Lindsey’s “The Late Great Planet Earth.” Had to salvage the binding with duct tape! Think I’ll gift it to my born again neighbor. … See his reaction.
Second thought: In Rev 13:16, the beast gives everyone his mark “on their right hands or on their foreheads”. I’ve always thought that meant ‘in their deeds’ (hands) or ‘in their thoughts’ (forehead), but a lot of apocalypticists interpret it as a physical mark, a tattoo or RFID chip of some sort. What is your interpretation?
My sense is that it’s a physical mark of some kind. But somehow I don’t think it’s an embedded computer chip….
I’m in Canada and the previous govt. which was conservative had many evangelicals in it including the Prime Minister Stephen Harper. After many positions favoring Israel and even a statement by Harper that Canada will always stand by Israel, I watched a national news panel wonder why he was so adamant about it when Canada had previously been more neutral. Either they didn’t know Israel’s place in Evangelical thought or didn’t want to bring it up. But to my mind it had to be the main explanation.
I was recently told by an apologist that Mark 9:1 and 13:30-31 should not, in fact, give anyone an expectation of an imminent second coming, and that the Greek indicates something completely different. I wasn’t willing to start arguing about Greek, a subject that i know nothing about, so I conceded the point. I imagine these passages will come up in the book you’re previewing now. Can you give a short summary of your take on these passages and what they entail?
My view is that they definitely predict that the disciples will be alive when the end of history arrives. And you can see why Christian apologists would place a high priority in claiming they must mean something else. But the Greek is as clear as the English (the apologists usually play with the term “generation” in 13:30-31, saying it can mean something like “race”; but that’s not the normal meaning of the term, and their reading makes absolutely no sense in the context)
I was provided with a screenshot from Strong’s concordance in this conversation showing the definition of “generation” to mean “race”. Is there a way to summarize why this wouldn’t apply to those verses, or does it merit a longer and more technical discussion?
It’s a long discussion. But if Jesus wanted to explain when the end would come, what would be the point of saying that it will come while the Jewish race still existed? That doesn’t answer the question he was asked (since neither he nor anyone else thought the world would ever be without the Jewish race).
What are other reasons that you think race isn’t the applicable term in this passage?
Apart from the fact that it doesn’t make much sense? That’s certainly the main reason: the way we understand what words mean in a sentence is based on what makes sense…
Apart from the verses of Mark mentioned above and those within the Book of Revelation (as cited in your textbook), can you think of any other NT verses that indubitably predict the Imminence of the Apocalypse? More is better! Thank you.
It’s presupposed in 1 Corinthians 15:50-5 (“WE” will be changed) and 1 Thess. 4:13-18 (“WE who remain”); and yes, the idea that it is “soon” is around a lot (also 1 Thess 5, e.g.)
Belief in an imminent end of the world is one of the strangest things to have arisen in the history of human thought, and one of the scariest, as the statistics you quote point out. It becomes particularly dangerous when these ideas are held by those with political power and influence. *Our* world may indeed end through our ignorance and lack of proper stewardship of our planet, but it will have nothing to do with the rapture or second coming of JC.
I think this is a great idea for a trade book, and I hope you do it. Anything that mitigates the rampant ignorance of the American public these days is laudable, and you have a gift for simplifying and clarifying often complex ideas and making the history behind them interesting.
I attended one of the fundamentalist-type churches that had a conservative view of Revelation and did not buy into the rapture concept. Still, people often wanted to study Revelation, and quite a few got into the Left Behind series. These apocalyptic ideas are just more fun than the real thing for most people. Too bad people aren’t as enthusiastic to study Jesus’ teachings on things like forgiveness, caring for the needy, turning the other cheek, etc.
Fascinating topic! Would this be your first foray into writing something not entirely focused on ancient Christianity? I’d be curious to know whether end of times scenarios have lost their power after so many false predictions (2012, 2000 and remember when everyone thought Reagan was the anti-christ because each of his names has six letters?) As friend once told me, the thing about predicting the apocalypse is you only have to be right once!
Yes, except for God’s Problem. But see today’s post. As to your friend’s comment — I suppose so! Unless we go out with a peaceful whimper, gradually and non-reluctantly, the way we came in.
As we approach the 2000th anniversary of Jesus’ death I suspect there will be an increase in predictions of his second coming. This would be entertaining except for the many who will believe these predictions and quit their job, sell their home, etc.
If we only knew what year he died!! (Of course not knowing the year of his birth didn’t put the brakes on Y2K)
Would non-apocalyptic people in the first century find the apocalyptic folks to be odd?
Very odd.
Well, to be fair, Y2K had nothing to do with Jesus or the rapture. It’s the turning of a new century; if computers had become popular in 1865 instead of 1965, we’d have had this same problem on Dec. 31, 1899. (I was one of the people heavily involved in fixing it.)
Actually, it was partially about Jesus, because of the belief that the world started in 4000 BCE, Jesus was born in 0 (he wasn’t, actually, since there was no year 0), and the end would come in 2000 — 6000 years because creation in Genesis took 6 days and each day with the Lord “is a thousand years”
Difference in perspective: to me, “Y2K” was the critical problem of using 2-digit year dates in computer programming, which would cause MAJOR disasters when we rolled around to a new century. (And typically for humans, the first programmer to seriously point this out, in 1984, was fired because he wouldn’t shut up about it.) Companies started to get concerned around 1998, and it cost literally billions of dollars to fix. My group alone spent 18 months getting it right.
So when I hear “Y2K,” for me its only association with “Jesus” is when someone swore at a computer screen!
Maybe so. But you probably don’t live in the American south….
All of these end-times “prophets” exhibit the classic “cognitive dissonance resolution” phenomenon. Their pet belief is thoroughly disconfirmed by incontrovertible evidence (usually, the prophesied date of Armageddon has come and gone and the World keeps on a turning). So the true believers double down, tie themselves in knots, and rationalize the failure as actually an expected outcome because God, working as usual in His mysterious ways, has postponed that dreadful day, which would have happened as originally prophesied accept for this Divine Intervention.
Just another example of good old American religious fantasy and magical thinking.
The Doobie Brothers nailed it in 1979:
What a fool believes he sees.
No wise man has the power to reason away.
What seems to be is always better than nothing at all.
Looking at the people who are most adamant and vocal about the Great Change coming anytime soon–most of them sure don’t act like they believe it.
By which I mean they seem more interested in what’s going to happen to everybody else, and far less worried about the logs in their own eyes.
How many scholars besides you believe that the gospels are not accurate
Apart from fundamentalists and conservative evangelicals, virtually all scholars agree that there are inaccuracies — some think a few, and some think a lot.
Bart, what’s the root of the obsession with Russia invading Israel? I remember this from my own fundie upbringing!
Cold War fears connected with Soviet dominance and the need to control oil in the Middle East. Why Israel then, since there’s no oil there? Because the rhetorical is based on the Bible for which Israel is central, not peripheral.
And because Russia is to the north of Israel; from where danger always comes. I believe it has to do with the geography of David’s Jerusalem; the northern side was the most vulnerable.
Perhaps because most invading nations were out to invade Egypt and had to come through the Levant from the North?
The most troubling thing to me about these “fundies” is their eligibility to vote!
One person one vote. It’s why, for me, it’s important for people to be informed rather than ignorant (not just about politics but also about assumptions and views lying behind their politics)
I’m going with Isaac Newton (2060 CE). That sounds about right to me. After all, he was a scientist and so far he’s been completely right. The end hasn’t happened yet so he must be right. And I’ll probably be dead by then anyway so I’ll never know if he was wrong. That settles it. 2060 CE!
You got it! And he could say it with all the assurance that I myself could claim it will be 2460!
“so … well, I don’t know what the future holds!” – Whoa! (*feels a Great Disappointment . . *) 😉
If Jesus was an apocalyptic preacher who believed that the messianic age was going to come soon, how did Christians manage to maintain their identity as his followers when it didn’t.
Why didn’t Christianity die around 100 CE? I know about Leon Festinger and have seen his theory of Cognitive Dissonance used to explain this.
And I’m sure that this has been discussed here before but I must have missed it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leon_Festinger#When_Prophecy_Fails
Yes, his book is amazing and worth reading (When Prophecy Fails). If you want to see one explanation explicitly invoking this theory, see John Gager’s Kingdom and Community. But apart from the theory, it’s always amazing to see how communities change their beliefs in light of their circumstances, sometimes radically (not just in religious issues but also social, political, and cultural)
Visions of the End of the World
Where exactly does Jesus say that the WORLD WILL COME TO AN END ?
As far as I know Jesus thought the world would change RADICALLY . . .
does that imply
a) the world will be destroyed? (there are sufficient earlier biblical verses to think not), or
b) some kind of supernatural phenomena will occur ? ( universally visible beings appearing on clouds, humans becoming weightless, corpses rising from their graves, etc), and
c) end to marriage and even human mortality ?
Ascribing such views to Jesus seems to me to be really really stretching his words, and also even inserting preconceived and not necessarily warranted concepts into the mind of John the Revelator.
Of course the radical change Jesus foresaw to the earth was God presence becoming a tangible reality in all humans’ hearts (see for example Jer 31:31) .
How reasonable is it to read more into the prophet Jesus words than that ?
Yes, “World will come to an end” is really just short hand for saying that everything is radically going to be transformed in the future, the old will pass away and the new will come. It doesn’t mean the planet itself will explode.
It is difficult to understand how far flung religious thought has come since Jesus’ time. It seems every generation from the early church fathers to the present have continued to add their own ideas to what Jesus’ message was about. Personally, I am of the opinion that Valentinus may have had some valid insights. I would like to know more about his thoughts. Writing a book about the end of time would make for interesting reading, especially including how earliest Christian thoughts may have differed. (My step-mother actually believed all the Left Behind books were inspired by God.) I believe there is a creator/sustainer who is spirit. Are we a part of a giant experiment? Part human/Part divine? Will we annihilate ourselves (that seems likely)? What would it be like to live in a Spiritual reality? Would the spiritual reality be the result of the end of the physical world? As you can see, I have more questions than answers. Perhaps we are like all the earlier ones who thought these same thoughts and made up their own answers. I appreciate those who make me think. Best Wishes, bAnn
Yup, good question! On the first point, I summarize Valentinian thought on the blog: search for Valentinians.
Of course, apocalyptic expectations about the End of the World are not limited to Christianity only. Certain Islamic sects seem to share in the lunacy. Most recently we had ISIS reviving a prophecy centered on Dabiq in Syria, where the armies of 80 nations were to gather for history’s final battle that would ultimately lead to the reign of the Mahdi. The similarities with the Armageddon story are pretty remarkable. Perhaps a side chapter on Islamic apocalypticism would make your book even more relevant.
Yup, I’d assume Muslims picked it up from their Christian predecessors, but I’d be interested in learning more about it.
For introduction to Islamic eschatology:
L’Apocalypse dans l’Islam by Jean-Pierre Filiu (I believe an English translation exists.)
For ISIS apocalyptic lunacy:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-30083303
In discussions with evangelical fundi’s I sometimes use the ISIS story as an example of how apocalyptic fanaticism can descend into ultimate evil. Doesn’t make much of an impression I’m afraid.
How far down the rabbit hole are you going to go? Gog and Magog? Daniel’s “seventy weeks”? Pre-trib, Post-trib, Mid-trib?
thx
That’s always one of the hardest decisions in writing a trade book. Lots of rabbit holes and how far down does one go, when trying to stick to the point and to keep it highly interesting, not just to textual nerds like me….
On my recent Ted Talk binge, one of the speakers helped me understand why people (including myself many years ago) become fundamentalists and believe in things like Bible inerrancy and the Rapture. First, we’re superior to other species because of two things: cooperating in large numbers and creating fictional realities. In other words, our imaginations are so highly sophisticated, it sometimes overtakes objective reality. A chimpanzee might trade a coconut for a banana with another chimpanzee, but they won’t exchange a piece of paper (money) for a banana because they operate in objective reality. We can’t threaten a chimpanzee with hell or offer them a reward of heaven in exchange for a certain type of behavior. We, on the other hand, can take a piece of paper or plastic to a complete stranger in a restaurant, anywhere in the world, and get food in return. As a species, we cooperated and agreed to this created system. We invent stories for things all the time—gods, religions, laws, corporations—and believe in them so strongly that they become our reality even though every bit of it is fiction.
The danger for us, as a human race, is that if a massive number of people around the globe believe the world will fall apart because the Bible says it will, then our objective reality actually succumbs to the fiction. Even if we don’t cause an apocalypse to happen, we’ll create other types of fictional entities for ourselves. For example, some scientists think that video games will be the fiction that will rule our lives.
I think this is a great idea for a book. I have long been disturbed by the idea that millions of Americans are living in “End Times” fantasy land and the danger socially and politically that stem from this. Anything you could do that might help some people wake up to the absurdity such beliefs would be welcome.
Dr. Ehrman,
What passage in the New Testament do people look at when interpreting a “RAPTURE “.
Thanks, Jay
One in particular: 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18. (The entire idea is not in the book of Revelation, to the surprise of many!)
Does this verse make it sound like Christians will be with Jesus in the clouds (heaven?) forever rather than a new kingdom on earth?
The normal interpretation is that they are going up to heaven to usher Jesus down into his kingdom, just as a town would send out its leaders to greet the emperor who was coming to spend the night with them.
Bart
Did you see the 70s film ‘Thief in the Night’ ?
It terrorised teenagers across the world.
Oh boy did I. Many a time. It’ll be part of my book probably.
off topic.
I am interested in 2 Timothy. 3:16 “All scripture is breathed out of god…”. Since this letter was written probably in the 60s of the first century before the canon was stablished and before the gospels and revelation: What Scripture is the author talking about? Is he talking about only the jewish bible or do you think that he includes the early letters of Paul ?
Yes, he’s definitely referring to the Jewish Scriptures.
Are you familiar with medieval Jewish eschatology? The most famous, of course, are Shabati Zvi (or Zevi), who probably was sincere (at least until the sultan caught up with him) and Jacob Frank, who was an out-and-out crook.
Yes, a bit, but not a lot, I had a colleague for years who was an expert on Shabati Zvi.
On The John Ankerberg Show, Gary Habermas said that even skeptics accept these “minimal facts”:
1) Jesus died by crucifixion.
2) Shortly afterward the disciples had experiences which they believed were appearances of the risen Jesus.
3) The disciples’ lives were transformed. They were willing to die for their belief in the risen Jesus.
4) The skeptic James, the brother of Jesus, came to believe.
5) Paul, a scholar and a Pharisee who persecuted Christians, came to believe in Jesus. James and Paul both came to faith in Jesus because they thought they saw the risen Jesus.
Do you accept these facts? If not, which one(s) do you not agree with and why?
All except the second part of #3. We don’t know how they died or what they willed. But yes, the others are right. And I don’t think they add up to “proof” in the least!
Interesting points but – the resurrection goes completely against every scientific law we know. We need some pretty strong evidence in order to suspend our scientific mindset. The apostles came from first century Palestine – mostly uneducated an illliterate , and certainly pre-scientific. People believed all sorts of strange things in those days. And coincidentally we dont see any of the miracles today that are claimed in the gospels.
So yes, you do have some core basic ‘facts’ we all agree on and some were believers transformed into evangelists and some died for their beleifs. But sadly we’ve seen people die for unfounded beleifs many times since then.