The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Criticism of Revelation

As I may have mentioned somewhere, I have a very negative view of the book of Revelation, for one simple main reason: it is too difficult to understand. I feel that contradicts the spirit of the Gospels, often intended for simpler people, and is objectively useless for the average Christian. I’m not quite convinced Revelation belongs in the canon. Right next to it, which is called the Apocalypse of John, was the Apocalypse of Peter. From what I know, it’s sheer luck that one was included and not the other, or both weren’t included.

But besides this, another concern is purely of the content and tone of the book of Revelation. This guy here puts it pretty well: infidels.org/kiosk/article846.html (btw, the Apocalypse of Peter, from what I remember reading, is far worse)

If any of you care to read it, what do you make of this? How do you feel about such language being used to describe God’s judgment and Jesus? Does it work well with the rest of the Bible, even?

Well personally although I am not an Aramaic Peshitta primacist, I can appreciate their view concerning the book of Revelation.
If you don’t know, the Peshitta (not Peshitto) only has 22 books and not 27. 2Peter, 2&3 John, Jude and Revelation are not included in the Peshitta. Only the Peshitto. There are people who swear that despite the majority view of the NT being written in Greek, they say all 22 books of the Peshitta were originally in Aramaic and the other 5 books came later. MAYBE authentic… but possibly not. Those 5 books are not considered canonical. In fact, the Church of the East has always only had the 22 book canon. There were no “Councils” to decide on it and they have always been in Aramaic… even today. From what I have been hearing, it wasn’t until the 18th or 19th century the book of Revelation was even known to them.

Now all that being said, I agree with them that Revelation is not really NECESSARY. I do personally accept it, but if it wasn’t there… it would not change much. The book of Daniel, Matthew and (I think) others deal with end-times or what have you just fine. Revelation seems like a reprise with a few extra details to me.

I used to really like Revelation because it IS so difficult. It is an intriguing document. What I don’t like is what people have done with the book as a result of it’s difficulty.

As for the article, it is something I had actually read before and it really is the same old atheist rhetoric and so I freely admit, I did not read it again via your link. I just browsed it and recognized it. I think too many people view Revelation with fear and misunderstanding. Me personally, today I rarely ever read it. I just do not care enough anymore about Revelation. When I used to care (and it used to be my favorite book) I was on the fence regarding my eschatological position. Somewhere between partial-preterism and amillenialism. I think pre-millenialism is to ruin the book of Revelation. However that has been the majority view for a while recently and most non-Christians attack believers from that view.

Sorry to go on a tangent, and I likely did not answer your question. But I just wanted to put in my .02

Hey Bird,

Read the opening line of Revelation, its title line. Its the unveiling of Jesus Christ, given in signs, to show His disciples what must shortly come to pass.

All creation waits with eager longing for the unveiling of the sons of God.

Do a little word study on revealing(unveiling) veil.

A lot of book (in my estimation), is what happens in us. The only end time it speaks of for me is the end of my carnal(beast) nature. Now some of that stuff will happen in the “end of days” I think because the waiting for the sons of God to be manifested(unveiled/revealed).

It is very hard to understand if we try and turn it “literal” and read it without the spirit giving life. I actually think it might be the most important book in the bible. I see it as a cypher that opens up the inward spiritual implications of the rest of the bible. But thats just me :slight_smile:

So the whole turn the other cheek Jesus was just a joke, the real Jesus just wants to avenge everyone for killing him?

The article I posted has a good comment on that. This unveiling is very evil and brings suffering upon mankind. Who in the world, who in their right mind, with any speck of love, can POSSIBLY look forward to this?

It’s definitely not literal, but regardless of how literally you take a plague, it’s still not a good thing.

By ANY literally analysis I am aware of Revelation is written with the INTENT to instill fear and terror, and lots of it. Have you read the stuff at the very end? The “if you take away from this you’ll be deprived something at the tree of life” part?

I’m not sure if “atheist rhetoric” is an argument. I’ve seen good arguments from atheists and Jews and even Muslims alike. Only listening to Christians about Christianity is bound to introduce a lot of bias.

9 When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the witness they had borne. 10 They cried out with a loud voice, “O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before you will judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?” [Revelation 6]

He’s not making it up. You have Christians. Martyrs. The most saintly of saints… asking for retribution??? Avenge their blood? What? This directly echoes the kind of stuff Tertullian was writing. I recall reading about one martyred Christian myself who told others that they will be burning in Hell forever while he’s burning only temporarily. If the pillar of our morality is a person who seeks revenge then we are in very serious trouble, because I always considered seeking vengeance as once of the lowest states. Does this not concern you, or are you seriously going to just ignore this because “oh that article is written by an atheist”? Who the fuck cares?

I have not read Daniel, but there’s nothing in Matthew anywhere close to what Revelation contains. I am not talking about end times and I’m not concerned with whether Revelation depicts end times, destruction of Jerusalem, or anything else. I’m talking about the tone of language, graphic content, and negative allegory. Particularly attributing a lot of non-loving stuff to Jesus specifically, who did not exist in Daniel.

I take your points very well, and I agree I misspoke concerning it being an “atheist” article. I simply dismiss it because Revelation just doesn’t mean the same to me as it does to others. And as you mentioned… “by ANY literal analysis”.

That is just it. I think it is a bad idea to take a literal approach to most if not all of the book.

Revelation 1:1 “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to him, to point out unto his servants the things which must needs come to pass with speed,-and he shewed them by signs, sending through his messenger, unto his servant John;”

The entire book is a book of signs or basically it is allegory. To take it as anything else is to see all the bad imagery (and there is allot) and to misconstrue it.

So that article could have been written by another Christian for all I care. In my opinion it is simply taking an incorrect view of the book and taking it to be literal when it should not be. But then again, I have been accused of “spiritualising” scripture to fit my own biases. Ah well.

Now if I believed Revelation should be viewed literally, I would completely agree… the book is vile and should not be included in scripture. I just do not view it literally. It really is that simple.

To which the author points out that giving a blind man a stumbling block is evil. That exactly what Revelation is. Christianity hardly existed by “my opinion” very long. How you see it is not important. How most see it is important. How a simple person sees it is important. If you need scholars to explain it, you have failed.

I said “literally”, i.e., one used and familiar to literature. The kind of critical approach we use when we analyze anything ranging from poems to historical books. By such an analysis, it remains a work designed to instill terror. I honestly was never able to read it in any other way. I have no idea what degree of spiritualizing you apply that you can. I would prefer this did not turn into some sort of a spirituality comparison.

OK, it’s an allegory. Why use such nasty graphic imagery?

I will say it’s taking Revelation in a pretty fair manner that most people would. Take Revelation and show it to a homeless man if you can convince him to read it. I’m sure he won’t be happy with it.

As is evidenced by the fact that there is NO valid interpretation of Revelation, it’s “signs” are effectively worthless, but the terror and fear it instills remain. And I am unable to brush off the language in Revelation via any form of spiritualizing. Yes, it’s allegorical. Yes, we should not take it literally. It still remains a vile book.

I don’t really disagree except that the majority can be wrong. I am not saying they are… but they can be.
After all… the majority of Christians who read the bible without scholarly assistance believe in ECT… unless they have easy access to bibles that eliminate the hints of ECT in most bibles.

Fair enough. :slight_smile:

Good question. Although if partial-preterism is true… it makes allot of sense and as I mentioned… I am sympathetic to that view. That being said IF (and this is a BIG IF) partial-preterism is true the vast majority of Revelations imagery makes sense… while still very disturbing.

I am sure you are correct.

I don’t REALLY disagree with your view of Revelation regarding it being vile. It is. Even if my concept of it is correct, it really is a vile book. All that being said… I really just think too many people place way too much importance on it. I actually would have no issue with what you said in your first post. Just get rid of it and put it alongside the Apocalypse of Peter. Heck its possible it was never really supposed to be scripture. Too many people have taken that book and used it to instill fear and pain in believers and non-believers alike.

I just ask that please, do not be so on the offensive with me. I actually really enjoy your posts that you put here, I just seem to differ with you (maybe?) on how seriously we should take Revelation since it is commonly accepted as Canon. Quite frankly I think that book alone if nothing else should come with a disclaimer stating its allegorical nature.

Also please do not forget, we are fellow siblings in Christ… at least that is how I see you. And I also see I misspoke in my initial response. I said I accept the book of Revelation. I need to change that. I can accept it as an authentic book written by John (but I am not Dogmatic on that belief). But I am not convinced it is inspired. As for my relating it to Matthew and Daniel… I was not referring to how horrible it is in content… I was strictly referring to its eschatological focus. Many people say without Revelation, the end-times info would be lacking. I disagree. THAT is all I was implying. But YOU ARE CORRECT in that Matthew and Daniel do not contain the same “type” of content in the same way.

Really… I think it comes down to you think Revelation is vile and should not be included as I gather from your OP. I say I think it is authentic and although misunderstood as literal by the majority, I also think it is vile and should at LEAST have a disclaimer. At most, have it rejected as inspired scripture. I think I just tend to be bit more long-winded. :laughing:

I’d say that there is probably more disagreement on the meaning of Revelation than any other book of the bible. I think this is primarily because it is so cryptic, but also because it was probably written to a certain set of Christians. Not to say that if it does belong in the canon that it doesn’t have anything to say to us today, but the truths are primarily spiritual, and not for the most part pointing to literal current events as it is so popularly interpreted.
I’m personally not really sure whether is is fair to say it’s more trouble than it’s worth. I do know that there are at least a couple of major groups that do not consider it canonical.

A short summation of Revelation based upon my current understanding: an indictment against, and prediction of ruin for, the budding Christian movement’s unfair, unjust and inhumane persecutors, along with the religious leaders who condemned them. I’m saying this with a certain amount of trust in further partial preterist interpretations which I have not fully studied; but it seems to be pretty insightful.

One should notice, however, that when Christ comes back with his armies, he does so as a shepherd, and the earthly armies are immediately blown away by the word of his mouth, which is conviction.

As for the shepherd bit, I’ll have to go back and find the analysis that I was given by somebody recently on this.

I agree that there’s mostly negative stuff in Revelation, but there’s some positive stuff too…
for instance, Jesus touching John on the shoulder at the beginning and telling him to not be afraid, and saying that He holds the keys to death and the grave, which is a really encouraging passage… or the last chapter, where God says He is making all things new, and the passage about coming to drink freely of the river of life… I thought that was beautiful…

So it’s not all bad, I think, so don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater just yet, and it may still have meaning… and even if the meaning is elusive to us, it could still be there…
And there are plenty of difficult and dark passages throughout the Bible, which I’ve read all the way through, so I’m aware of them… so if we throw out Revelation, we mi’aswell throw out a bunch of other stuff too. :neutral_face: There might not be any books left in the Bible, if we did that. :neutral_face:

I’m still not sure what to think of all those disturbing writings throughout the Bible, including most of Revelation, or what to think of the Bible as a whole, but I think we should keep an open mind, and hold onto what we can understand and what resonates with us, instead of just focusing in on and going crazy over the things we don’t understand…

Coming to believe in UR gives me a lot more peace about those things though. It helps me to believe that some things may just be mistranslation, and others just misinterpretation… that the way we are perceiving what’s right in front of us may be off a bit, and we may not have the whole story, and that one day we will understand things better…

Or we may find out that some of the stuff in the canon isn’t even inspired, like some of you guys are saying… but that doesn’t mean none of it is, or that we should throw out the good with the bad, or be closed to the possibility that we might be missing something…

Bird, I can relate to your anger. I was pretty angry when I was an agnostic/atheist, and I’ve had my days of cussing God (or my caricature of Him) out like an angry drunk. :frowning: So I know where you’re coming from. And I believe that God Himself (the real one, not the caricature) does too.
But just try to keep an open mind, and hold onto Jesus, as portrayed in the gospels, the best image of who God really is (or at least should be), like He holds onto you, whether you can feel it or not, and also to the hope that in the end all will be well, even after all the pain and the struggle… that all manner of things shall be well. :slight_smile:

Blessings to you, my fellow wrestler :slight_smile:

Matt

When it says He will rule the nations with a rod of iron, that word rule is shepherd.

Bird,
The only man to be destroyed is the carnal nature, adam.

Bird there is nothing vile about the unveiling unless you are looking through the carnal mind. It is death to the carnal mind which is why it is being come up against. Isa 25, on this mountain I will remove the veil the covering that is cast over all people all nations, the covering is death. And I will wipe away all tears from all faces. That is the unveiling which is what sets creation free from its bondage to corruption, i.e. the veil of death, the carnal nature.

As for that article, well its all written from a literal perspective and you will see death if you look at it through that perspective. Lets compare Gods anger and wrath with another beautiful passage.
zeph 3: 8,9
I will assemble nations, peoples, I will pour out on them all my burning anger in the fire of my jealousy all the earth will be consumed.
– if we stop right there it seems mean and harsh and we see death, but read on
For at that time I will give the peoples a pure speech, that all of them may call on the name of the Lord with one accord.

The sword Jesus carries is the sword of the spirit that divides to the joints and marrow, the division of soul and spirit. The fire of His eyes is the purifying fire that lays bare all of your sins. Yes that hurts, but only the flesh, only the carnal. It is necessary to be spotless and blameless before Him.

Everything in the book is meant to be seen with Spiritual Eyes, eyes like flames of fire.

If you want to throw out Revelation, you might just go ahead and throw out the gospels too. Jesus spoke only in parables, so that seeing they would not see and hearing they would not hear. If ECT is true then Jesus is the greatest criminal to ever walk this planet because He hid truth from people.

He said unless you eat of my body and drink of my blood. He doesn’t mean to become a cannibal. So why when He comes back IN THE SPIRIT “I was in the spirit in the Lords day”, would all the sudden the words He speaks (pictures really) be literal?

He uses the foolish things of the world to shame the wise. Its the treasure of a king to search out the hidden things.

As for the majority of christians getting it wrong, yep they get ECT wrong too, so…

Why, God wants us to be perfect, why can’t I expect Revelation to be perfect? “some positive stuff” that’s just grasping at straws.

I tried to do that for a long time but it just feels dishonest. I can read 1 Corinthians 13 all I want buy any vile message instantly overrides it. It sounds like doublespeak. And I’ve been doing this for a long time, it really never gets better. What is it, do I have such a strong disjoint with the language/history that when I read it I only get negative emotions? Even if God will make everything good in the end, it still feels like he currently hates us, everything we’ve become, everything we ever did, everything we’ll do. All the good in us comes from him, i.e., there’s actually nothing good and no worth in us. I think that’s extremely depressing, and that doesn’t really mesh with my view in the world.

If God hates everything we do so much, he can leave it be. I like it, and I’m not alone. As we have seen, God’s idea of improving things is sending down a flood. Human’s idea of improving things is making something a bit better even when it’s not perfect. We demand no more from man than what he can give. I’ll take the rug with some ink on it, it’s still a rug. Who knows, that spot of ink may make that rug some character, make it unique. Because when everything is perfect and clean and sterile it becomes… boring. You can spend your money on a brand new clean rug, I’ll settle with mine, because there are memories with it. It’s dirty, and I’m dirty, and I don’t think I want to be clean.

I don’t think I can like Jesus anymore. He just tells me I’m worthless over and over again, and he behaves like he knows everything and I don’t like how he treats the Pharisees. I don’t like them either but they’re still my brothers, they’re still fellow humans, and he just curses them and gives them no hope. I can do that just fine, myself. Jesus is just some alien who came to judge us all randomly on some stupid set of rules that makes our existence miserable. We do the best we can but he just chastises them and us. Pharisees followed the very laws he gave them but now he doesn’t like that. Paul says “the law made nobody perfect”, whose fault was that? Was this all just a big “proof” for him, an experiment, he was trying to make a point? I believe we’d call such experiments unethical.

“You are not a Christian therefore you can’t read this” is not an argument. If you want to go there, that only causes problems, and I guess you can just say I’m carnal and you’re not and we stop the discussion there. (granted, if you want to leave this discussion and I feel too ranty, feel free)

The text is carnal. Not me. I can write better than that. I can write things you wouldn’t believe. I can describe a God that will lick yours hollow.

I have already countered this. It sounds vile even from a non-literal perspective. There’s no need for such ugly allegory from a divine being.

A husband who beats his wife and then says “never mind I love you” is an abusive husband. Your only response to this is “oh there’s a passage just as bad somewhere else”. Anger and jealousy are uncontrolled emotions that should not be expressed by a divine being while he’s doing something. I can be calm with the OT because I believe Jesus effectively discredited it, not because I don’t think OT is full of various garbage.

Why, in the world, would you do that? Why would you speak in parables instead of plain language. Why deceive people on purpose? Doesn’t that seem screwy? I brought that up before. If you can speak clearly why not do so?

Then what worth is religion if 99% get it wrong? What is the benefit of Christ if nobody understands? What is the benefit of his death if everyone understands it wrong? For every one man who benefited from this in full we get a crusade. Is it worth it? Did Jesus succeed? Or did he really only help 1% while on this earth and helps the rest only afterwards? What worth is that?

Our great and amazing savior. Came down to save the world. Spoke in parables to confuse the shit out of everybody. Spawned a book that brought excuses for misogyny, slavery, homophobia for generations. Says the Bible is for simple people but only super smart theologians understand it. So Jesus saves and changes the lives of some tiny percentage of people who most probably do it on their own merit and are a tiny amount, because Jesus is too weak? Humanity is not the tiny saved percentage, and I know you agree with me.

Why doesn’t the Holy Spirit influence all those fundamentalists? Why doesn’t he stop the Bible-thumpers, the suicide bombers? Why doesn’t he fix the Orthodox church and the Catholic church, they call on him every day. If you say “man doesn’t want it”, I don’t agree. I know many who want truth and never hear it. There are many solid Christians among fundamentalists, Catholics, Orthodox, Reformed. I know some personally. I know many ready to change their views. They get nothing. NOTHING. NO call from the Spirit that says “you are wrong”. Even let’s speak of those who don’t want it. If 99% do not want it, why did Jesus say he saved the world? He saved the special group of people that was different, little else. That’s favoritism. Anyone can save those who want it. “not want” is a psychological issue of high significance that we work with, yet it stops God in his tracks. We work with people who do not want to drop smoking, study, work, follow the law. God just drops them, gives up on them. Instead of sending John Piper a message, he just ignores John Piper.

Why do I pray and get no response? Why is it so obscure and unclear? Why does your average lukewarmish Christian pray and get no response and has to get help through other people? Why does John Piper pray and get no response? Mark Driscoll? Why did Mother Teresa get no effing response? Why don’t so many people? Why don’t Africans have water rain down on them but someone else is blessed by not getting hit by a car? And these people who are serious why do they not change? Why are they only slightly better than the average atheist? Where’s the Holy Spirit and wtf is he doing? Why is he so slow, and weak, and ineffective; so ineffective I can’t see any difference?

Yet he accuses us. He diminishes us. He tells us we’re worthless. We’re slaves. We should serve him. Praise him. Worship him. Give everything up for him. Everything’s our fault and none of it is his. Yet what did he do for us? We should be perfect, but why? We should obey his laws, why? We are to trust without questioning, why? Why is a genocide holy and homosex an abomination? Why is everything he does with perfect wisdom is blameless yet things we do without wisdom are judged as if they are also done with perfect wisdom? Isn’t this just really convenient? For us he keeps track of every idle word we speak, but we can say nothing of the stuff he did or does or promises to do?

Does this not worry you? Why does God not have such a strong influence over Christians that everyone would notice? That it would be like bible.cc/matthew/5-16.htm? Why, instead, do I see nothing, in fact, why do I see so much evil from this instead and the good I have to dig out.

No, really, what did Jesus accomplish? WHAT?

I think I’m done with this for the time being. Sorry guys.

Well I can’t come down TOO hard on the too hard book of Revelation, because studying led me to UR, which reinspired my somewhat apostate faith.

What in Revelation inspired me toward UR? The fact that we are priests to God. Priests to whom? To the “unbelieving, the dogs etc.” that are outside the gates. The ones that were thrown into the lake of fire. Into which hell and death are ALSO thrown. That the gates of the new Jerusalem are always open. That Jesus was asking (always) for people to come and cleanse themselves in the spring, to wash their robes.

It certainly describes an apocalyptic ending to this selfish materialistic world. But a careful reading also revealed to me a FAR more hopeful and open-ended eschaton than I had ever been taught, or contemplated.

The Spirit AND the Bride say “Come”! (to whom? The bride?? Nope, sorry. To those outside the gates! To whom we are priests.)

Yes, Revelation is a mind-blower. And always will be. But modernists, who think they can reduce GOD to an algorithm of doctrine, need their minds blown, need to let the Spirit speak to their spirit in words that are beyond rational comprehension.

Bird,

I’m not saying you’re carnal and I’m not. I’m saying we’re all carnal. That is who “we” are. But that is not who “we” should be listening to. Thats the point. All your outrage here is the point, you are close to the edge. The point of the letter killing is doing exactly what its doing now. Its killing your carnal mind. Its madness. The reason all those people, the John Pipers etc don’t get it is they won’t submit to the Spirit (I’m not judging anyones walk just taking your above example). That is the whole point. The spirit gives life. The wisdom of man is foolishness. The heart of man is deceitful.

Why did Jesus hide it? TO SHAME THE WISE. That is the entire point. FLESH AND BLOOD CANNOT INHERIT THE KINGDOM OF GOD. we cannot take it through our own understanding. You can yell and scream (believe me I do it all the time), but “you” are not God. I no longer live but Christ in me. That is the goal. Christ in you is the hope of glory, NOT figuring out things from a worldly point of view.

Go back and read Zeph 3 again. You missed the point completely its not about God beating His wife. What does His anger and jealousy produce (those are anthropomorphisms imo) LIFE, real LIFE. The fire, the plagues, the hail, the sword only kills the carnal nature. That is the point.

As for Him telling you you are unworthy that is your carnal mind saying that also. You who were formerly enemies in your mind. The carnal mind is at enmity with God. The carnal mind is death. All He sees is Christ in you, you are seated now with Him on the throne. Your conscience is convicting you and telling you all those things. It is the liar, it was a liar from the beginning.

Bird,

No reason to be sorry or apologize to us. You can only see what you’re ready and willing and able to see. Jesus sent word to John the baptist (in prison about to be executed), “Blessed is he who is not offended in Me.” That’s a hard saying. John was also reading the scriptures literally. He expected Jesus to run the Romans out of town and lead Israel into world domination. He probably also expected to be pretty high up there in the government. Maybe I’m wrong about that, but in any case, it was a hard place to be in, and Jesus didn’t even go to visit him in prison. Most of us would be offended. Jesus didn’t perform as expected. He almost never does, at least until we’re willing to get to know Him as He is, and learn what to expect and not to expect.

I can see how you might think this, but Jesus didn’t hate the Pharisees. Many of them even became His followers after His ascension. He hung around with them and ate with them just as He did with sinners of more obvious types. If you read the four versions of the gospel, you’ll notice several mentions of Jesus eating with, or otherwise just being with Jewish religious leaders. Typically the conversation goes in ways they don’t like (which is most likely why it was a notable enough incident to bother writing down), but the thing is, He is there, available to explain things to those who want to know, and that most definitely included Jewish religious leaders.

Jesus spoke to the crowds in parables, and most of them didn’t understand. Why? I suspect at least part of the reason for this is that a person who did not earnestly desire this sort of enlightenment would not get it even if Jesus laid it out in plain Koinonia Greek (or Aramaic, maybe). Part of the understanding process is in fact the pondering. It’s even worse for us, since we don’t have all the cultural references His listeners would have automatically pulled up as He spoke. But notice that those who followed Him closely (and this was far more than the twelve) got to hear the explanations. Why were they so privileged? Simply because they asked. They WANTED to know.

We can also ask and get answers. I ask all the time, and He eventually gives me answers. I had to put forth some effort to learn how to hear Him, and He doesn’t always answer me directly, but He does answer in His time and by His own means – whether by speaking directly to my heart, through my study, through another person, through another scripture, through a seemingly random thought . . . He uses many means, but He does answer.

Now as to the Revelation . . . the Revelation to John was addressed to a specific group of people. John expected it to be read by them and not by you or by me. It was written from a prison island and most likely carried by or past Roman officials. It was not written in plain language, and likely this situation had a lot to do with the need for its cryptic style. It is an apocalypse, and for the day, I suppose maybe you could compare it to a document written in a ghetto dialect, fully understandable only to an inmate of that particular subculture. It takes a LOT of effort to understand the Revelation, and when we’ve put forth a lot of effort, all we can really say is, “My interpretation of this is . . .” because the history is incomplete; the cultural metaphors (many of them) are lost, and we’re not in on the inside story.

Now that doesn’t mean it isn’t worth the effort. Even though complete and unquestionable understanding is not possible today (and perhaps even John didn’t understand all of it then), there is a LOT of good stuff in the Revelation. I would hate to do without it. I think it is a magnificent book, but I don’t take it literally. At all. And I do consider the violence of the culture into which it was given.

Rome was an incredibly, shockingly violent empire. Christians in some places were perceived as burial societies because they would go out to the outskirts of town regularly to bury the bodies of those who had been crucified, murdered, and otherwise exterminated since the last time they’d been there, and to collect abandoned unwanted babies (to take them home and care for them). This was an ongoing task for the Christians; not an occasional need. You mustn’t imagine that the imagery in the Revelation seemed anything like as shocking to the original recipients of John’s apocalypse as they seem to us today. And again, you MUST remember that they are figurative and never literal.

You may feel that the bible should by rights be accessible to all; the simple and the learned. Part of this attitude is fostered by events during the aftermath of the Reformation. Roman Catholic doctrine was ponderous with clergy commentary and very thin on scripture. It was believed that laypeople were incapable of understanding scripture without heavy doses of interpretation, and that giving scripture to the unwashed, uneducated masses was nothing short of dangerous. Therefore the push-back insisted that the bible was self-evident to all and that no commentary was needed. Believers had an integral ability to understand scripture by the Spirit alone and no one else could understand it at all. Understanding scripture was a supernatural, not a natural function. And many people still believe this way.

I myself also believe this way to an extent. I believe that in order for us to truly understand scripture, God must illumine it for us. But scholarship and commentary is also NECESSARY. We do not understand the various cultures into which the books of the bible were presented, and we cannot understand them without research and study. And we cannot understand much of the bible without understanding the people who were being addressed and what was going on with them, inside references, symbolism, and ongoing study of the original languages. So yes, while we need to have the text available to all, we shouldn’t think we have some sort of inherent ability to understand it completely without help from our brothers and sisters who work so hard to make it comprehensible to all.

We must understand via the Holy Spirit, it is true, and God also gave us our intellect and emotions and moral sense, etc., as tools to use in this quest to understand. We are not to look at these tools as our source, but rather as servants to our spirits (indwelt by His Spirit) to be used in the exploration of the spiritual world, including what is written in scripture. If we expect to understand difficult bits of scripture such as the apocalyptic literature, without studying the culture and symbology of the culture into which it was originally presented, we will be frustrated and probably angry, and we most certainly will NOT understand.

I do believe that the core of the bible, which is the gospel, can be understood by anyone who DESIRES to understand it. The one who expects it to be a jar of pablum isn’t going to be able to understand it, because we do have to chew. It’s part of the process. If it WERE baby food all pre-mashed for us, we would miss the texture, much of the taste, the color, the fragrance, and the life; all of the nuances that make God’s word what it is. But in order to experience the word in its depth, yes – we have to work for it.

But good news! Jesus came into the world to save sinners (those who miss the mark, miss the point, are simply spinning around in angry and hopeless confusion) and He DID NOT FAIL.

We are good AS HE CREATED US, and He created us not as independent individuals, but rather He created us in His image, and He is community. He is love. When we attempt to stand on our own as independent individuals, we are eating from the wrong tree. We are dependent on Him because (like it or not) He is the source of everyone and everything. Without Him we do have some finite life, but it doesn’t last.

Every spring I collect shoots. Willow, chokecherry, alder . . . whatever I can find that’s green or red. I clip them off and put them in a big jar of water and they grow leaves. Spring comes late here in the higher elevations, and to see the fresh green branches cheers me up. It also reminds me that our source cannot be in ourselves, because those branches, beautiful as they are, soon run out of life. The leaves they put forth wither and dry up no matter how often I change the water. They die and are good for nothing but to toss them in the wood stove. They have no root in themselves; no source of life. They have only the life the plant pumped into them before I (or the road crew) cut them off.

That is us without union with God. We might like to look at our beautiful shiny bark and tender spring green leaves, but if we are cut off from the source, we have nothing. Yes, the bark and the leaves are good. They’re good. They’re pleasing, but even they are ultimately from the Tree and not of ourselves. We need Him. If it makes you feel any better, He also needs us. We came from Him, and He is not and cannot be complete and satisfied and no, not even whole without us any more than you or I can be whole without unity with those we love.

So blessings to you, dear Bird. Jesus truly does love you and the world. This I know, and you will also know when you are able to see it.

Cindy

well said Cindy, next to your eloquent words my thoughts sound like “fire bad” (in the vein of SNL frankenstein, tonto, tarzan)

RHM, :blush: You are too kind to me and too hard on yourself. I don’t think you sounded anything like Tarzan. You always have good and thoughtful things to say. :slight_smile: But thank you. I asked God to help me, and I hope at least some of that is from Him.

Love in Jesus, Cindy

Hey Bird, I want to apologize if I came off as kind of pat in my last post… perhaps I didn’t give it as much thought as I could have… I was tired and just trying to think of something intelligent and encouraging to say, but I think I fell short. :frowning:
So I apologize if I just made you feel even more on edge. :neutral_face:

Believe me though, Bird, I can relate deeply to what you’re feeling about all of this. Christianity does often come off as rather nuts at times, as nuts as the world we live in. :neutral_face: And there have been times I’ve out and out just hated the Bible, and I’ve even thrown it across the room a couple times I think, if I recall correctly. :neutral_face:
There are passages in there that have driven me up the wall, that’s for sure. :frowning:
And there are times I’ve just out and out hated God, and Jesus, and the whole she-bang, in those dark times that it has seemed like nothing more than a warped joke to me… :frowning:
So I know how you feel on this. :neutral_face:

And Jesus? It’s true that Jesus comes off sometimes as a disturbing figure, in the gospels… to be sure, the things that he’s recorded as DOING, (with a couple exceptions, like cursing the fig tree or the whole whip in the temple thing) are in large part really encouraging and loving, I think, but nevertheless a lot of the things he’s recorded as SAYING are difficult to comprehend or swallow. :neutral_face:
So I hear you there. The Sermon On The Mount, for instance, and some of the harder edged parables, and the like, used to make me quite mad. :neutral_face:

But then I get to thinking… and I should have explained this in my earlier post… that Jesus was a complex figure… not some hateful dictator who wanted to rule the world with an iron fist, who just hated people, who just hated his enemies, or who was malicious or vengeful in his intent, but then neither was he a fluffy bunnies kind of guy who didn’t care much about how you lived your life, even if your choices ruined your life or the lives of others, but who just wanted you to feel comfortable and hunky-dory, even if that feeling was just a pretty illusion, and even if you needed some serious spiritual surgery done… neither of these, but someone different, and someone complex, in a magnetic kind of way…

And perhaps Jesus was a complex figure because God is a complex figure. Not complex in the sense of being a monstrous sick mess of a being, but complex in the sense of being deep and impossible to chart… of not being readily understandable at all times and in all ways to His creation…

I really like this quote from G.K. Chesterton’s book The Man Who Was Thursday (still gotta read that, by the way, as I’ve run into several good quotes from it here and there):

“You want to know what I am, do you? Bull, you are a man of science. Grub in the roots of those trees and find out the truth about them. Syme, you are a poet. Stare at those morning clouds. But I tell you this, that you will have found out the truth of the last tree and the top-most cloud before the truth about me. You will understand the sea, and I shall be still a riddle; you shall know what the stars are, and not know what I am. Since the beginning of the world all men have hunted me like a wolf — kings and sages, and poets and lawgivers, all the churches, and all the philosophies. But I have never been caught yet, and the skies will fall in the time I turn to bay. I have given them a good run for their money, and I will now.”

And I like this one from my fiancee, Kaylyn, too (just to balance this out):

“If we can’t trust God, then who can we trust?”

A book that helped me quite a lot in my view of Jesus early on, a few years ago, was Philip Yancey’s thought-provoking book The Jesus I Never Knew… he points out that Jesus is both comforting and tough, scary and compassionate, and that he is not easy to pin down or understand…

But for some reason all of this makes him a more authentic, realistic figure, at least to me. I just got the feeling sometimes, like Philip Yancey did, when I read the gospels, that he’s just not the kind of person you could make up…

The Jesus of the gospels is as challenging as he is encouraging, but for some reason that makes him more real to me. And that makes the God he is said to reflect and embody more real to me too, I guess…

The whole ECT thing though never really fell into this category of thought for me… I tried to fit it in there, but just couldn’t… it crossed a line that I couldn’t bring myself to cross, at least not completely, in my heart of hearts…
Being honest with people, even brutally honest with people, saying some pretty crazy and difficult to decipher things, and running against some of the normally accepted social behaviors of this world… that I can take… but eternally tormenting or just giving up on and abandoning the people you’ve made,just because they rejected you, and most if not all doing so out of some measure of ignorance or another?
That’s just plain messed up, and cruel, sick, and crazy, and I believe I’ve always felt that way about it, deep down…

But what about the ‘hard side’ of God? The way I think of it, or at least try to think of it, is that God is totally dedicated (whether we can see that or not) to making us whole, to healing our wounds, to setting us free from the things we’re in bondage to, and all in due time… that he’s the doctor who means to cure us, whether we like the medicine or not, and the teacher who means to teach us, whether we think we’re capable of learning or not, the parent who means to give us the best possible life, at least when we’re ready for it, whether we’re settling for second best or not (even though this is hard to believe, when it seems like God isn’t doing anything, like you said)… and such a God can be scary, even terrifying…

Like C.S. Lewis said in his book A Grief Observed:

“The terrible thing is that a perfectly good God is in this matter hardly less formidable than a Cosmic Sadist.
The more we believe that God hurts only to heal, the less we can believe that there is any use in begging for tenderness.
A cruel man might be bribed—might grow tired of his vile sport—might have a temporary fit of mercy, as alcoholics have fits of sobriety. But suppose that what you are up against is a surgeon whose intentions are wholly good.
The kinder and more conscientious he is, the more inexorably he will go on cutting. If he yielded to your entreaties, if he stopped before the operation was complete, all the pain up to that point would have been useless.
But is it credible that such extremities of torture should be necessary for us? Well, take your choice. The tortures occur.
If they are unnecessary, then there is no God or a bad one. If there is a good God, then these tortures are necessary.
For no even moderately good Being could possibly inflict or permit them if they weren’t.
Either way, we’re for it. What do people mean when they say, ‘I am not afraid of God because I know He is good’?
Have they never even been to a dentist?”

I remember this picture of God as a surgeon, when thinking of suffering, really encouraged and helped me, in a strange kind of way, and it still does, but it is still pretty scary… because then we have to think to ourselves, “how much do I have to go through just to get well?” :neutral_face:

I guess what I’m saying is if God knows what we need, and knows we would be truly at peace once we have that, and would be, at least in the long run, miserable without it, and he is committed in love to us, then he will not stop until we have that… period. And that’s beautiful, to be sure, that kind of commitment… but it can be pretty overwhelming. :neutral_face:

And as to the issue of perfection? I like this quote from the film Tron:Legacy:

“The thing about perfection is that it’s unknowable. It’s impossible, but it’s also right in front of us all the time.”

I don’t think perfection, whatever it is, is something static and ultimately boring, and about following all the rules and operating correctly within the system all the time, crossing every T and dotting every I, but rather something dynamic and fluid and alive… and whatever perfection is, I think it has a lot to do with relationships, and a lot to do with love…
for instance, in the Sermon on the Mount, when Jesus talked about being ‘perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect’, it was all in the context of loving our enemies. :slight_smile:

Or think of the statement in 1st John, ‘perfect love casts our fear’.

Perhaps true perfection has more to do with the contents of something like 1 Corinthians 13 then it does with following rules or keeping the law unswervingly… perhaps the law of love is the only law that really matters… :slight_smile:

Of course all of this doesn’t take away your anxiety or your frustration, which I can relate to, and is stilled buried in me and comes out still in my more lonely and confused moments…

Bird, though a million Evangelicals would disagree with me in saying this, I honestly think it would be better for you to believe in no God at all, then to believe in a God whom you thought at the end of the day was just a monster… if that would make your life a little more bearable and a little more sane, then I’d say go for it.
This is coming from a former atheist turned an often doubt-ridden believer who has railed at his sometimes tyrannical conceptions of God, and is still recovering from ample and bitter skepticism… but by all means just go for it, if that is where you are at right now, and if that is what your heart is telling you to do.

That’s what I did for four or five years after high school, and as bad as it was, I think it was something that I needed to do at the time, and perhaps it was a necessary part of my journey…

But then at least try to keep this question in mind… what if God isn’t like that? That is ultimately the question we should all ask ourselves, I think. What if his being real was far better then his not being real?

I mean, if atheism is true then we’ll all be worm food eventually, and that’s it, and that’s not much to look forward to, if you ask me, and pretty much every religion out there (including much of Christianity, sadly, for that matter), it seems like, is all about what we have to do, pulling ourselves up by our bootstraps and all of that, but what if there’s really Someone out there (and also nearer then your heartbeat) who loves you unfailingly and understands you completely, and can answer every deep need and every deep longing in your soul, and is dedicated to all of creation, to giving each and every soul who has known life here on earth, in the long run, an abundant and full to overflowing and 'further up, and further in 'kind of life… what if God is like that? Then isn’t it at least worth a shot, looking for such a Being, being open to their existence and their ways?

And as to why things don’t seem to work out that way for you or me or others? Why does God seem so silent, so, well, dormant sometimes? Well, honestly, I don’t know. For all I know it could be to get some to seek him more desperately, so when they finally make contact they find he was in fact there all along, and they are all the happier for finding that out, and more so then they would have been if there was no struggle; or for others they learn something important that otherwise they wouldn’t have learned… I don’t know. :neutral_face:

But it’s still a shot I’m willing to take. I’ve seen enough evidence in my life that God is real and that God is good to take that shot… ultimately, Bird, I’d say you should just believe in something that you believe is worth believing in, what rings beautifully and truly in your own heart, despite what I may say or what anyone else may say or even what the Bible may say or may seem to say… and if you end up being a bit off, or even way off, then I believe God will lovingly correct you when the time is right…
I know that sounds like a pragmatic way of thinking… well, so sue me, but it is, and I’m not ashamed to say it… :slight_smile:
It’s how I’ve come to feel about all of this, about God and faith and everything, really… I still sometimes find myself giving dumb, pat answers to others, like I did in my last post here, and like I may even be giving in this post, but this is who I really am… an often dumb and pat seeker of truth, and peace, and real life, and real love, who is just bloody tired of beating his head against a wall; a bum crying out for a feast of grace, for a welcome home…
And I believe that this, UR, is what God has revealed to me, and it’s making some sense to me, and it gives me more hope then I’ve ever had before, so I’m sticking to it, at least until further notice. :wink:
But I believe it more than anything because I want to, because it gives me hope… and 'cuz I’m just too damn tired of hanging my hat on things that tear me up and just kill me on the inside…

And that’s how I honestly feel about it. Sorry for being a dolt and not shooting straight with you. :neutral_face:

May you be blessed, Bird, and may you find peace, and the hope and the home your heart is aching for… and may we all.

Matt

Oh, and Cindy, as always, you rock :slight_smile:

Matthew/Edward,

Thanks. :slight_smile: And I was pretty wowed by your post, only I didn’t want to post anything too quickly in case Bird might be put off responding to you. You really spoke to me there, and I appreciate it.

Love and Blessings, Cindy