Three Sundays in April (Part 3)

pastor-robert-jeffress

If you had thirty minutes to say something to the most powerful man in the world, what would you say?

This is how I started our short series titled “Three Sundays in April.”

On April 12, 2020, Donald Trump watched the Easter Sunday service at Robert Jeffress‘s First Baptist Church of Dallas, Texas. What did he hear?

Jeffress, at age 64, is younger than Greg Laurie (the subject of Part 2 in our series), but he is much more traditional. I don’t think I have ever seen him without a suit and tie. His hair is cut short. He carries a big Bible. And his church has a robed choir.

While Jeffress has long-been a celebrity in Southern Baptist circles, I had never heard of him until he made national headlines during the 2012 presidential campaign. In October 2011, Jeffress was in Washington D.C. to introduce Texas governor Rick Perry at the annual Values Voters Summit. After he completed his introduction, Jeffress told reporters that Mitt Romney, one of Perry’s opponents in the GOP primaries and a practicing Mormon, did not deserve the votes of evangelical Christians because he was a member of a cult.

After a little research, I learned that this was not the first political stunt Jeffress has pulled. He has always loved the limelight. In May 1998, while serving as the pastor of the Wichita Falls (TX) Baptist Church, Jeffress led a protest against the Wichita Falls Public Library for acquiring books titled Heather Has Two Mommies and Daddy’s Roommate. After a member of his congregation checked these books out of the library and showed them to Jeffress, the pastor wrote a check for $54.00, sent it to the library, and vowed never to return the books. According to the Associated Press, the plan backfired.

In December 2010, his third year at First Baptist-Dallas, Jeffress created a website–grinchalert.com–to shame local stores that advertised using “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas.” There was a place on the website where readers could add a store to the “naughty list.” Jeffress appeared on CNN to defend his antics.

Today, Jeffress can be seen regularly on Fox News and Fox Business News. If there is an opportunity for a Trump photo-op with evangelical leaders, Jeffress is on the first plane from Dallas Washington D.C.  We have covered him extensively here at the blog and I wrote about him in Believe Me: The Evangelical Road to Donald Trump. In addition to his role as a pastor of a large congregation, Jeffress is a culture warrior–a political operative who wants to restore the United States to its supposed Christian roots.

Jeffress grew-up in First Baptist Church-Dallas, a flagship congregation in the Southern Baptist Convention with a long history of racial segregation and Jim Crow. This history, it is worth noting, is absent in a series videos created for the church’s 150th anniversary in 2018. One of the videos extols former pastor W.A. Criswell, one of the most famous Southern Baptist preachers of the 20th century and a segregationist, as a “champion” of “race and family values.” Criswell led Jeffress to faith in Jesus when the current pastor was a five-year-old boy. Jeffress was baptized, married, and ordained in the church. First Baptist-Dallas was the site of his first sermon.

After graduating from Baylor University, Jeffress completed a Master of Theology degree at Dallas Theological Seminary, one of the bastions of dispensational theology in America. This was an unusual choice for a young Southern Baptist. Most aspiring ministerial candidates in Texas attended Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. Dallas Theological Seminary is non-denominational. In 2003, Jeffress said that his ordination council “grilled” him about his decision to attend this seminary. He claimed he went to Dallas Theological Seminary because he was attracted to the work of Christian Education professor and Bible teacher Howard Hendricks.

While at Dallas Theological Seminary, Jeffress imbibed the “end times” theology that has informed his numerous popular books, including Twilight’s Last Gleaming: How America’s Last Days Can Be Your Best Days, Countdown to Apocalypse: Why ISIS and Ebola are Only the Beginning, and A Place Called Heaven.  Like Greg Laurie, Jeffress thinks that believers will one day meet God in the air as part of an imminent rapture. Those remaining on earth after the rapture will live through seven years of tribulation before Jesus returns with his saints (the true believers raptured seven years earlier) to establish a millennial kingdom. According to this view of biblical prophecy, Jews will eventually return to Israel, rebuild the temple, and accept Jesus as their Messiah. This explains why Jeffress believes Donald Trump’s decision to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem was important. God is using Trump to advance His purposes and prepare the world for the last days through the president’s contribution to the restoration of His ancient “capital” city.

When Donald Trump pointed his web browser toward First Baptist-Dallas on Easter morning, he was met with a hearty welcome from Jeffress:

Today I’d like to say welcome to a very special guest visitor, a great friend of mine, our great president Donald Trump. Mr. President, we’re so honored that you would choose to worship with us today. And I know there are millions and millions of Christians all over this country who are not only grateful for you, but they are praying for you regularly for that continued wisdom that comes from God as you navigate us through this crisis we’re in. We are going to get through this, we are going to make it to the other side, but we want you to know we are praying for you.

After his message to Trump, Jeffress introduces the First Baptist choir and orchestra. He tells his listeners that these songs were recorded before social distancing guidelines went into place. The choir begins with the classic Easter hymn, “Christ the Lord is Risen Today.” I am not sure when this music was recorded because the sanctuary is full. Is this from last year’s Easter service? Did the church hold a mock Easter service sometime before the quarantine? I’m not going to try to figure this out. Whatever the case, the music sounded great and it is very appropriate and uplifting for Easter.

When Jeffress comes back on the feed, ready to preach, he offers yet another welcome to Trump. Before he starts his sermon, he says: “Mr. President, our church absolutely loves you.” He adds: “We appreciate your strong articulation of the Christian faith. I’ve never heard a stronger affirmation of faith than the one you gave Friday, Good Friday, in the Oval Office. We thank you for your commitment to religious liberty.”

I have no doubt that Robert Jeffress has preached a version of this sermon every Easter Sunday of his ministerial career. From the perspective of Christian orthodoxy, there was nothing controversial about it. Jeffress focused on the empty tomb, Jesus’s victory over death, and the future resurrection of believers. This is pretty basic Easter fare. He did not mention Trump and he did not talk about politics (although he did take a few shots at liberal theologians who deny Jesus’s bodily resurrection).

But like Laurie on Palm Sunday, Jeffress only got it half right. He failed to mention that Jesus’s resurrection initiated the Kingdom of God. He failed to note that those who embrace the Christian Gospel are citizens of this Kingdom and are thus called to practice a form of citizenship defined by New Testament ethics.

Recently, through my reading of the works of Oxford University New Testament scholar and theologian N.T. Wright, I have been reflecting on the political nature of the Kingdom of God. As I wrote in my last post in this series, the members of this Kingdom must speak truth to the principalities and powers of this world. Citizens of the Kingdom should respect government authority, but must also call the ruling powers to task when it is appropriate. As we read in the New Testament Book of Acts, the earliest Christians found the courage to challenge the authorities of their day through the power of Jesus’s resurrection and the conviction of the Holy Spirit.

Here is part of Wright’s commentary on on 1 Corinthians 15:20-28, a passage that directly connects the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ to the Kingdom that this resurrection initiated:

We should not ignore the political overtones of this, another letter to a Roman colony. The whole paragraph is about the Messiah through whose “kingdom” (basileia) the one true God will overthrow all other authorities and rulers. “Resurrection,” as in Pharisaic thought, belongs firmly within kingdom-of-god theology; and every first-century Jew knew that kingdom-of-God theology carried inescapable political meaning. The present “ordering” (tagma) of society places Caesar at the top, his agents in the middle, and ordinary people at the bottom; the creator’s new ordering will have himself at the top, the Messiah–and his people, as in [1 Corinthians] 6:2 and elsewhere!–in the middle, and the world as a whole underneath, not however exploited and oppressed but rescued and restored, given the freedom which comes with the wise rule of the creator, his Messiah, and his image-bearing subjects. This passage thus belongs with Romans 8, Philippians 2:6-11 and 3:20-21, as, simultaneously, a classic exposition of the creator God’s plan to rescue the creation, and a coded but powerful reminder to the young church, living in Caesar’s world, that Jesus was lord and that at his name every knee would bow. (N.T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 337-338).

Jeffress misses this dimension of the Easter story. For him, Easter is all about Christians getting to heaven. But the Easter message has both “on earth” and “as it is heaven” dimensions. And one day, as the hymn-writer says, “earth and Heav’n [will be] be one.

Jeffress’s theology leaves no place for the church to speak truth to power. This approach to Easter is pretty common among American evangelicalism. As we will see in our next post in this series, too many evangelical churches offer a kind of cheap grace that measures results in the “decisions” people make–decisions, they believe, that will secure a place for them in heaven.  As a result, the church does not connect the resurrection power of Jesus to the task of social, cultural, and political engagement beyond abortion, religious liberty, and other Christian Right favorites.

Yes, Donald Trump, the most powerful man in the world, needs to hear about saving faith and eternal life in Jesus. (Unless, as many court evangelicals have suggested, he is already “saved”). But Easter is also about the announcement of Jesus as a ruler who will one day topple all the empires of the world. It is time that the evangelical church, especially during Eastertide, reminds the president of this theological reality.

Former Fundamentalists Await the Apocalypse

Rapture 2

Today a piece by Sarah Jones at New York Magazine caught my attention. Here is a taste of “Apocalypse Now?”:

If you think it feels like the end of the world, you’re not alone. There is a pandemic. Donald Trump is the president. Hospitals don’t have enough ventilators, and the lieutenant governor of Texas thinks your grandmother should give up the ghost so that you can go back to your job. We keep hearing that the virus will peak, but nobody seems to know exactly when that will happen, or how long we’ll all be inside, or how many people will die before this is all over. The coronavirus isn’t the End, but its escalating horrors feel somewhat familiar.

Since the pandemic commenced, I have wondered if my fundamentalist upbringing might be useful. For American Evangelicals, the ’90s were the era of apocalyptic fantasia. Almost everyone I knew believed that Christ would return soon, and rapture his saints into heaven to spare them the death throes of the world.

So I called up a few friends. Like me, they grew up Evangelical or fundamentalist, with the same basic convictions about the imminent demise of humanity. I wanted to know if their old beliefs had emotionally prepared them for our moment of woe, or if they had simply become more anxious than usual. In the most secret regions of my brain I wondered, too, if they missed any of it, because sometimes I do. Believing in Armageddon was an act of catharsis. It promised relief. In the near-future, my suffering would cease and so, too, would the pain of the world. (Alas! God has stranded me here, on Post Malone’s planet, and I’m suffering right along with the rest of you.)

Read the entire piece here.

What Does the Bible Say About the Antichrist?

Anti-Christ-Luca-Signorelli2

I spent most of my late teens and early twenties getting schooled in dispensational theology.  We spent a lot of time trying to figure out when the rapture would come, the nature of the Great Tribulation, and the signs Antichrist’s coming.  I haven’t thought about this stuff in a while, but I have been struck lately by how many people–smart religious people–have been talking about the Antichrist.

A friend recently sent me a blog post by theologian Benjamin Corey, a self-identified member of the Christian Left with an masters degree from Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary and a Ph.D from Fuller Theological Seminary.

Corey dug through the Bible and found every prophecy on the Antichrist.  Whatever you think about biblical prophecy, his list is very interesting, entertaining, and perhaps even revealing.

Here are a few characteristics of the Antichrist:

  • The Antichrist will be a leader of a nation that is a military superpower with the ability to trample and crush the entire earth. (Daniel 7:23)
  • The Antichrist will be a man who is exceptionally arrogant and will be known for giving boastful speeches. (Daniel 7:8, Revelation 13:5)
  • The Antichrist will be someone known for making a lot of public threats against the people (Revelation 13:2, Daniel 7:4)
  • The Antichrist will be a political outsider with despicable character and a contemptuous personality who wins an election that no one expects him to win. (Daniel 11:21)
  • The Antichrist will give speeches where he speaks “great things” and then about things that are even “greater.” (Daniel 7:20)
  • The Antichrist’s rise to power will seem like a miracle that God performed, tricking people into following Satan instead of God without even noticing. (2 Thess. 2:9)
  • Once in power the Antichrist will reveal that his heart wants to make alterations to the “appointed times” that are in current laws. (Daniel 7:25)
  • The Antichrist will make fake news popular and will be a chronic liar.  His followers will believe his delusions because they hate the truth. (Daniel 8:25, 2 Thess.2:10)
  • The Antichrist will draw strong support from many Christians as if they are willfully blind and outright delusional (Matt 24:24, 2 Thess 2:10)
  • The Antichrist will appear to receive a wound he can’t recover from, but will survive to put down the first attempts to remove him from office. (Revelation 13:3)
  • The Antichrist will worship the god of border walls. (Daniel 11:37-38)

Read the rest here.

Jack Van Impe, RIP

Van ImpeWhen I was in divinity school I used to watch Jack Van Impe’s television show.  Van Impe’s wife Rexella (we often referred to her as Jack’s “lovely wife Rexella”) would read a story in the news and then turn to Jack and let him riff on how that particularly story fit into the grand scheme of a dispensational view of biblical prophecy.  I was writing an M.A. thesis on Protestant fundamentalism at the time. Van Impe’s show was research.

I was always amazed at Van Impe’s ability to rattle-off scripture verses at such a rapid-fire rate.  While his interpretation of scripture is certainly up for debate, Van Impe deserves the name “Walking Bible.”  He must have done a lot of sword drills as a kid.

Van Impe passed away over the weekend.  Here is Bob Smietana’s piece on his life and legacy:

Jack Van Impe, a televangelist who spent decades warning Christians that the end of the world was nigh, has died, his ministry announced on Saturday (Jan. 18). 

He was 88. 

“The beloved Dr. Jack Van Impe was welcomed into Heaven by His blessed Savior and Lord who he had so faithfully served in ministry for over 70 years,” reads an announcement posted on the website for Jack Van Impe Ministries International. “Please pray for his beloved wife and lifelong ministry partner Rexella and their families as they grieve this immense loss and for wisdom as she and the Board lead the ministry in the days ahead.”

Van Impe and his wife, Rexella, were longtime hosts of “Jack Van Impe Presents,” which mixed Bible teaching with a review of news and current events, often linking those events to Bible prophesies about the Second Coming of Jesus. He often ended the program by asking viewers to become followers of Jesus. 

Read the rest here.

Here is Rexella and Jack railing on rock music in 1989:

The Links Between Mike Pompeo’s Foreign Policy and Christian Zionism

Pompeo

Mike Pompeo has not specifically connected the assassination of Qasem Soleimani with his pro-Israel Christian world view, but, as Nancy LeTourenau notes at The Washington Monthly, there is certainly enough evidence to consider such a connection.

Here is a taste of her piece “Pompeo Aligns U.S Foreign Policy With Christian Zionists“:

As Kathryn Joyce pointed out last March, “even amid an administration stacked with evangelical staffers and advisors, Pompeo stands out.” At about that time, the secretary of state was in Jerusalem and sat down for an interview with reporters from the Christian Broadcast Network.

Chris Mitchell asked Pompeo, “could it be that President Trump right now has been sort of raised for such a time as this, just like Queen Esther, to help save the Jewish people from the Iranian menace?”…

“As a Christian, I certainly believe that’s possible,” Pompeo said.

On that occasion, Pompeo was reacting to a question from a reporter. But a few months later, he gave a speech titled “The U.S. and Israel: a Friendship for Freedom.” He used the occasion to bring up the Biblical story of Esther himself.

A lot of people get spun up with the wrong ideas that American evangelicals want to impose a theocracy on America.  I wish they would be concerned about the real theocratic takeover that has been happening in Iran for the last four decades.  The ayatollahs have grievously deprived the Iranian people of that most basic, simple, fundamental right, their right to worship.

That same twisted, intolerant doctrine that fuels persecution inside Iran has also led the ayatollah and his cronies to cry out, quote, “death to Israel” for four decades now.  This is similar to a cry that came out of Iran—then called Persia—many, many years ago.

It was in the 5th century B.C.  There was a wicked advisor named King Xerxes.  A fellow named Haman hatched a plot to kill all the Jews in the Persian Empire.  He secretly wrote letters with the king’s seal to all the provincial governors, ordering the people to rise up and attack the Jews.  This edict, once issued, could not be revoked.  But thanks to the courageous intervention of Queen Esther, who begged the king to show mercy to her people, Haman’s plot was exposed and the Jews were ultimately spared.

I wanted to tell this story today for a couple of reasons, because similar threats to the Jewish people have marked other eras as well… Thank God we have a leader in President Trump—an immovable friend of Israel.

Pompeo went on to articulate the Trump administration’s pressure campaign on Iran as a demonstration of its support for Israel.

Read the entire piece here.

Martin Spence is Associate Professor of History at Cornerstone University in Grand Rapids, Michigan. He is writing for us this weekend at the Annual Meeting of the American Historical Association in New York City. Enjoy his latest post. –JF

The Evangelical Free Church Drops Premillennialism

TEDS

TEDS campus

When I was a student at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (TEDS) between 1989 and 1992, the official position of the sponsoring denomination, the Evangelical Free Church of America, was premillennialism. In other words, in order to teach at TEDS or receive ordination in the denomination, one needed to espouse the belief that the second coming of Jesus Christ would usher in his literal 1000-year reign as king of the earth.

Since my early evangelical experience was filtered through premillennialism, I never really thought twice about any of this.  I have always been interested in the relationship between premillennialism and American evangelicalism, but at the time I was a student at TEDS I was more obsessed with the intramural theological debate over whether or not one was a dispensational premillennialist or a Reformed or “covenant” premillennialist.  Theologians of both persuasions taught at TEDS.

Now, as Daniel Silliman reports at Christianity Today, the Evangelical Free Church has decided to drop the word “premillennial” from its statement of faith.  Here is a taste of his piece:

An internal document explaining the rationale for the change says premillennialism “is clearly a minority position among evangelical believers.” Premillennialism has been a “denominational distinctive” for the EFCA, according to the document, but shouldn’t be overemphasized.

“The thought was, we must either stop saying we are a denomination that majors on the majors … and minors on the minors, or we must stop requiring premillennialism as the one and only eschatological position,” said Greg Strand, EFCA executive director of theology, in an interview with Ed Stetzer.

The revised statement says, “We believe in the personal, bodily and glorious return of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Whether or not Jesus will set up a literal kingdom on earth for a millennium is left to individual discretion.

The EFCA has been considering the change for more than a decade. John Woodbridge, a professor of church history at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School (TEDS), the ECFA-affiliated seminary in Deerfield, Illinois, spoke in favor of the shift back in 2008.

Read the entire piece here.

As of Friday night, August 23, 2019, the doctrinal statement of TEDS still reads:

We believe in the personal, bodily and premillennial return of our Lord Jesus Christ. The coming of Christ, at a time known only to God, demands constant expectancy and, as our blessed hope, motivates the believer to godly living, sacrificial service and energetic mission.

I will be eager to see how this change will influence future faculty hiring at TEDS.

The Politics of the “Chosen One”

Trump inauguration

My daughter was quick to tell me that “Antichrist” was trending on Twitter today.  Then I got a call from Emily McFarland  Miller, a reporter for Religion News Service, to talk about the meaning of words like “Antichrist” and “Chosen One.”  Here is a taste of Miller’s piece (co-authored with Jack Jenkins and Yonat Shimron):

Somebody had to take on China on trade, Trump told reporters Wednesday.

“I am the chosen one,” he said, glancing heavenward with outstretched hands.

Supporters have excused that comment as a joke.

Others used words like “blasphemy” and “idolatry.”

Bass tweeted that the phrase refers to Isaiah 42:1: “Behold, My Servant, whom I uphold; My chosen one in whom My soul delights I have put My Spirit upon Him; He will bring forth justice to the nations.” Christians understand the Bible verse as a prophecy referring to Jesus.

“The chosen one” isn’t necessarily a biblical concept, said John Fea, professor of American history at Messiah College. It also has been used to refer to everyone from basketball star Lebron James to fictional wizard Harry Potter.

But in the context it’s difficult to ignore, Fea said.

“The phrase ‘chosen one’ is probably part Christianity, part science fiction, part myth, part fantasy, part Harry Potter,” Fea said. “But at the same time, there is embedded within that phrase this idea that God chooses certain people — and evangelicals will believe this — that God chooses certain people for particular moments in time to serve his purposes.”

Read the entire piece here.

Is Donald Trump the Antichrist?

Donald J. Trump, Taking Over The Big Apple

Check out Sarah Jones’s playful piece at New York Magazine in the wake of Trump’s recent “chosen one” comments.

So could Trump be the Antichrist? Look, anything is possible. I will tell you what my father once told me. Satan walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour. (For the record, I don’t recommend saying this to a child, especially not after she tells you that she had a dream about a witch who eats people.) The point is that Satan is devious, and his works can be found anywhere. Trump could indeed be his agent, and that would make him an antichrist, if not the Antichrist.

The distinction is relevant. As Hannah Gais pointed out in the Outline last year, the term initially identified “those who refused to confess Christ’s presence on Earth or his divinity.” But the eschatology popular with many conservative Evangelicals holds that there is one Antichrist, who will bring about Armageddon. Biblical literalists of a certain stripe have long speculated that a president would make an ideal Antichrist, though this interpretation is not universal. The Left Behind series, which terrorized Christian youth groups in the late 1990s and early 2000s, gives us an Antichrist from Romania, who exists thanks to genetic experimentation by a Satanic cult.

Read the rest here. I don’t know if Trump is the Antichrist, but one could certainly make the case that he is anti-Christ.

The Meaning of Trump’s Israel Comments

The president has been talking about Israel a lot lately.

First, there was Trump pressuring Benjamin Netanyahu to prevent two members of Congress from visiting Israel.

Then he suggested that Jews who vote for Democratic candidates lack knowledge and are “disloyal.”

Then a conservative pundit and promoter of the Obama birther conspiracy named Wayne Allyn Root said this about Trump:

I happen to be Jewish by birth, and 75% of all Jews vote Democrat and they don’t like Trump and he is the greatest president for Jews, and for Israel, in the history of the world–not just America, Trump is the best for Israel in the history of world.  And the Jewish people love him like he’s the King of Israel.  They love him like he is the second coming of God. And in America, American Jews don’t like him.

Trump liked what he heard.  Of course he did.  He is always glad when one of his sycophants worships him.  He tweeted:

And then there was yesterday press briefing.  I think Root got in his head.  Watch Trump’s refer to himself as “the chosen one”:

Whenever Donald Trump mentions Israel he is speaking directly to his evangelical base.

Here is what I wrote in Believe Me: The Evangelical Road to Donald Trump:

The third major issue championed by the court evangelicals is the United states recognition of Jerusalem as the “eternal capital ” of the Jewish people….One of the reasons conservative evangelicals are ecstatic about this move is that many of them believe…that biblical prophecy teaches that the return of the Jews to Israel is a prerequisite for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.  Christ will one day return to earth with his raptured saints and descend on a rebuilt temple located inside Jerusalem.  Robert Jeffress is one of the most outspoken defenders of Trump’s decision to move the capital to the holy city.  He has written several books on biblical prophecy and is a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary, the center of Dispensational theology in America.  Jeffress told Fox News that Trump is now “on the right side of history” and on the “right side of God.”

Trump’s decision to move the embassy, which no doubt came after much lobbying from the court evangelicals, is not only a triumph for the Dispensationalists; it also fits well with INC apostle Lance Wallnau’s prophecy that Donald Trump is a new King Cyrus.  This merger of Dispensational theology and INC prophecy appears in court evangelical Mike Evans’s response to the Trump move.  One of America’s leading Christian Zionists, Evans recently founded the Friends of Zion Heritage Center and the Friends of Zion Museum in Jerusalem to celebrate the “everlasting bond between the Jewish and Christian peoples.”  When Trump announced that he was moving the American embassy to Jerusalem, Evans enthusiastically told the Christian Broadcasting Network that when he next saw Trump in the Oval Office he would say to him: “Cyrus, you’re Cyrus.  Because you’ve done something historic and prophetic.”  Wallnau envisioned Trump as a Cyrus who would save American Christians; Evans believed that Trump was a modern-day Cyrus who would make possible the restoration of Jerusalem and the further confirmation of Israel’s future role in biblical prophecy.  Because of Trump’s actions, Evans declared, the blessing of God would come upon America.  Indeed, this decision would make America great in the eyes of God.  It also made Trump great in the eyes of the court evangelicals, raising questions about whether his decision to move the American embassy to Jerusalem was more of a political move than a diplomatic or religious one.

Yesterday Fox News broadcaster Todd Starnes had court evangelical Robert Jeffress on the show to talk about Trump’s comments about Israel.  Listen to it here:

Jeffress tries to downplay biblical prophecy in this interview (despite the fact that he has written books about this very topic), but it should not surprise anyone that he supports Trump’s remarks about Jews who vote for Democratic candidates.

Again, when you hear Trump talk about Israel, think about the evangelical base he needs to win in 2020.

Thoughts on Mike Pompeo and Queen Esther

Here is Mike Pompeo talking with the Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN):

Sarah Pulliam Bailey gets us up to speed at The Washington Post.  Read here piece here.

Here are some really random thoughts about Pompeo’s remarks:

The fact that CBN asked Pompeo to compare Trump to Queen Esther in interesting in and of itself.  Let’s be clear:  Pompeo was responding to a question, not offering-up his religious views on Middle East foreign policy in an unsolicited fashion.

CBN has a long history of trying to connect biblical prophecy to developments in the Middle East.  The people at CBN believe, along with millions of other evangelicals, that God still has a special place in His plan for the nation of Israel.  The establishment of the state of Israel will be a sign that Jesus Christ’s return is coming.  This theology is often described as dispensationalism.  Those at CBN understand their mission in terms of 1 Chronicles 12:32.  In this Old Testament passage, David builds an army at Hebron to overthrow King Saul.  It says that “the men from Issachar” were men “who understood the times and knew what Israel should do….”  Today CBN wants to “understand the times” so that it can help evangelicals win the culture war and shape foreign policy.

Pompeo’s answer reveals that he also believes God still has a plan for Israel.  His answer makes it clear that he favors a pro-Israel foreign policy partially for dispensational or “end times” reasons.  It does not surprise me that he would see Iran as Haman and Esther as Trump.  What is most telling is that Pompeo is not running for office (like Trump) and thus does not have to appeal to evangelicals to shore-up an electoral base for 2020.   Unlike Trump, he seems to really believe this stuff.

One illustration of the evangelical love of Israel comes from Peter Lillback, the President of Westminster Theological Seminary, an evangelical Reformed seminary in the Philadelphia area. In 2011, Lillback wrote an entire book arguing that George Washington was a supporter of Israel.  Here is one of his arguments: “If there had been no George Washington, there would have been no American Independence.  If there had been no American Independence there would have been no United States.  If there had been no United States, there would have no super-power to support the existence of Israel.  If there has been no super-power to support Israel, there would be no Israel.”  He then concludes that George Washington was part of God’s plan for “the destiny of Israel.”

Trump has also been compared to King Cyrus. Some evangelicals make this comparison metaphorically—Trump is a pagan ruler who set the evangelical church free from the captivity of the Obama administration much in the same way that Cyrus, a pagan ruler, set the Israelites free from Babylonian bondage.  Others apply the Cyrus example to Israel.  Mike Evans, a Christian Zionist, has said that God used Trump to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem much in the same way God used Cyrus to advance biblical prophecy as related to a future for Israel.  I wrote extensively about this in Believe Me: The Evangelical Road to Donald Trump.

It is worth noting that Harry Truman was also hailed as a King Cyrus after the state of Israel was established in 1948.

Back in 2012, Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu gave Barack Obama a copy of the Book of Esther.  It was a clear message that Obama, according to Netanyahu, was NOT acting as an Esther in his support of Iran over Israel.

Many evangelicals compared Sarah Palin to Queen Esther when she was John McCain’s vice-presidential candidate in 2008.  (She would save Christian America from the threat of an Obama administration and secularism.

Abraham Lincoln was compared to Queen Esther for freeing the slaves.  (He was also compared to Moses).

And that brings my random thought to an end.  🙂

Should a Premillennial Dispensational View of the Bible Disqualify a Person from a Teaching Job at a University?

Ribuffo

Leo Ribuffo, RIP

I was sad to hear of the death of Leo Ribuffo.  In 1991 or 1992 I wrote him a letter to ask him he was taking graduate students at George Washington University.  He never wrote me back, but I was accepted to the Ph.D program at George Washington University and, if I remember correctly, Ribuffo was assigned as my adviser.  Unfortunately, the offer did not come with any funding.  I turned it down, accepted an offer with funding from SUNY-Stony Brook, and began my training as an early American historian.

I first learned about Ribuffo’s work when I was writing my M.A. thesis on separatist fundamentalism.  I devoured his Merle Curti Prize-winning book The Old Christian Right: The Protestant Far Right from the Great Depression to the Cold War.  I loved his  Journal of American History review essay “God and Contemporary Politics” and his 1994 American Historical Review piece “Why Is There So Much Conservatism in the United States and Why Do So Few Historians Know Anything About it?”  Ribuffo seemed to understand things about the evangelical experience in recent America that other historians at that time did not.

Over at his Patheos blog, Darryl Hart writes:

I will miss, in particular, Leo’s uncanny ability to capture the oddity of aspects of American religion and politics that we generally take for granted. One example comes from a review he wrote of George Marsden’s The Soul of the American University and the difficult questions that surround discerning secular prejudice against religion along with what counts as normal in secular scholarship:

Suppose that a candidate for a professorship in European diplomatic history volunteers that he is a “fairly traditional Protestant of the Reformed theological heritage,” as Marsden describes himself (p. 7). That phrase is sufficiently vague to cover not only Marsden, but also the Niebuhrian Baptist Jimmy Carter, the fundamentalist Jerry Falwell, and the Pentecostal Pat Robertson. Could prospective employers probe further without violating federal law? If so, they might want to know whether “traditional Protestantism” in this instance includes the theory of premillennial dispensationalism, and specifically, whether the job applicant agrees with many other dispensationalists that the Common Market was predicted in the Bible and now signals the imminent return of Jesus Christ. Do affirmative answers automatically bar the candidate from further consideration?

This is not a rhetorical question. The premillennialist job seeker might also be the foremost expert on the economics of the Common Market and a great teacher willing to entertain secular perspectives in the classroom. My own view is that a dispensationalist reading of the Bible, which resembles deconstructionist literary criticism rather than private revelation, should not automatically disqualify a job candidate. After all, I coexist in the academy with men and women whose methodological premises I dispute, including economists who reduce human motives to rational expectations, political scientists who formulate grand theories of the presidency without examining the private papers of any president, and cultural critics who think Jean Baudrillard understands the United States better than C. Wright Mills. And recent American intellectual life would have been poorer without the Hegelian social critic Herbert Marcuse and the Freudian metahistorian Norman 0. Brown, both of whom teetered on the verge of supernaturalism.Nonetheless, a dispensationalist diplomatic historian would be a tough sell in most history departments. Indeed, Marsden probably would be more wary of our hypothetical job seeker than I am. An evangelical Protestant himself, he has a vested interest in the right kind of theological conservative, and he clearly regards populist fundamentalists who indulge in Bible prophecy as the wrong kind. Whatever the outcome, the resulting department meeting would illustrate some of the prosaic, nonintellectual reasons why the acad- emy came to exclude normative religious teachings.

That is vintage Ribuffo — a lapsed Roman Catholic in background and a political liberal who knows more Protestant theology that many evangelicals and also understands that the theories that animate contemporary politics and scholarship are no less arcane (and contested) than the teachings found in the Scofield Reference Bible.

Read the entire piece here.  And yes, we have done two Darryl Hart posts in one day!  🙂

The Author’s Corner with Donald Akenson

51i8JUNVXDL._SX327_BO1,204,203,200_Donald Akenson is Douglas Professor of Canadian and Colonial History at Queen’s University. This interview is based on his new book Exporting the Rapture: John Nelson Darby and the Victorian Conquest of North-American Evangelicalism (Oxford University Press, 2018).

JF: What led you to write Exporting the Rapture?

DA: This is the second volume in my three-volume set on where and how radical apocalyptic millennialism was built into its central position in American conservative evangelicalism. The first volume, Discovering the End of Time was published in 2016 by McGill-Queens University Press.

JF: In 2 sentences, what is the argument of Exporting the Rapture?

DA: The big argument is that the ideological core of American evangelicalism was formed overseas and in the period 1860ff began to be energetically imported into North America. Surprisingly, the germinal ground was southern Ireland in the 1820s and thereafter. The entry point was the Great Lakes Basin and the subsequent process was equally a matter of Canadian and US assimilation of imported concepts. That is simple to state, but the process was anything but linear.

JF: Why do we need to read Exporting the Rapture?

DA: Mostly to help us escape the mortmain of American Exceptionalism, which, despite the heroic efforts of some fine historians, too frequently comes forth as American Parochialism.

JF: When and why did you decide to become an American historian?

DA: I am an historian of Ireland, and of the Second British Empire and of the diasporas that had their origin in the British Isles. For a long time now, I have been arguing that in diaspora studies religion not only counts, it counts a great deal—despite its being marginalized by most historians of physical migration and by their counterparts in the field of cultural studies.

JF: What is your next project?

DA: To complete the third volume of the study and to bring the story up to the first decade of the twentieth century, when the new apocalyptic evangelicalism won.

JF: Thanks, Donald!

Is Robert Jeffress a “Bigot” for Claiming that Jesus is the Only Way to Heaven?

 

I wrote this early last week and never got the chance to place it somewhere.  Regular readers of The Way of Improvement Leads Home will recognize it as a compilation of a couple of blog posts I wrote in the wake of the dedication of the new Jerusalem embassy.  –JF

Jesus said “I am the way, the truth, and life.  No one comes to the Father except through me.”

In age in which the exclusive claims of the Christian gospel are scorned by a culture that celebrates tolerance as one of its highest virtues, Jesus’s claim in John 14:6 seems like bigotry.

Robert Jeffress, the pastor of the First Baptist Church in Dallas, learned this hard way.  When Jeffress’s critics learned that he would be praying at last week’s opening of the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem, they recalled some of the Southern Baptist’s previous remarks about the exclusive claims of Christianity.

Mitt Romney led the charge.  In a tweet he criticized Jeffress for saying that “you can’t be saved by being a Jew” and “Mormonism is a heresy from the pit of hell.”

If Romney had more than 280 characters to work with, he could have also noted Jeffress’s belief that Hindus “worship a false God” and Muslims are “evil.”

Indeed, Jeffress is a bombastic, loud-mouthed preacher who likes to peddle his brand of evangelicalism on Fox News and other politically conservative news outlets.  He was one of the few evangelical leaders to support Donald Trump’s presidential candidacy during the GOP primaries when there were Christian Right candidates in the field—Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, to name three—who did not come with Trump’s moral baggage.

On the evening of the embassy dedication, Jeffress appeared on Fox News to defend himself against charges of bigotry. While he did not say anything negative about non-Christian religions during this appearance, he firmly re-asserted his belief that Christianity is an exclusive religion.

The belief that salvation comes through Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ alone, Jeffress proclaimed, has been the teaching of the Christian church for more than two thousand years.

He is correct.

And Noah Feldman, law professor and public intellectual at Harvard, agrees.  In a recent column at Bloomsburg News, Feldman argued,

“All Jeffress is doing is echoing an almost 1,800-year-old doctrine: Extra ecclesiam nulla salus, there is no salvation outside the church. It can be traced to St. Cyprian of Carthage, who died in the year 258. The basic idea is that Jesus Christ came to save those who believe in him — and not those who don’t…Most religions in the monotheistic tradition think they are right and others are wrong. That’s normal. It isn’t a reason to consider those who hold other beliefs to be bigots.”

Why would we expect Jeffress, a Christian pastor, to believe that there is more than one way to God?  I am sure that Mitt Romney, if pushed to explain his own religious beliefs, would say something similar about the exclusive nature of the Christian faith as understood through his Mormonism.

Let’s face it, evangelical Christians are not going away anytime soon.  Thomas Jefferson learned this lesson the hard way.  The great man of the Enlightenment from Monticello predicted in 1822: “there is not a young man now living in the United States who will not die a Unitarian.” Woops. So much for Enlightenment progress.

So rather than wishing evangelicals away, it is time for Americans to think seriously about how to live together amid what Washington University law professor John Inazu has described as our “seemingly irresolvable differences.”  The practical application of Inazu’s vision will not be easy, and people like Robert Jeffress will make it even more difficult.

As an evangelical and a historian, I have been critical of the Dallas pastor’s attempt to fuse God and country in a desire to “restore” America to its supposedly Christian roots.  It is a form idolatry and it is based on bad history.  Jeffress’s undying support of Trump and his Christian nationalism weakens the witness of the Christian Gospel–the “good news”–and alienates the very people who may be most in need of it.

Moreover, Jeffress’s dispensationalism makes him insensitive to the sufferings of his fellow evangelicals in Palestine. He seems oblivious to the very real possibility that Donald Trump is playing him and his fellow court evangelicals, the born-again Christians who frequent the Oval Office and flatter the president much in the same way that the King’s courtiers did in the Renaissance-era.

As New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman recently put it, the ceremony celebrating the opening of the new Jerusalem embassy was a “Republican mid-term pep rally disguised as a diplomatic event….This was meant to fire-up the far-right religious base of the Republican Party.”

When Jeffress does announce that salvation lies only in Jesus Christ, he may have the history of Christian doctrine on his side, but he makes such pronouncements with a culture-warrior spirit that reflects a dark and angry brand of conservative evangelicalism that has little to do with the Prince of Peace.

If secularists need to learn how to live with the millions of evangelicals who believe that salvation lies only in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, then evangelicals need to learn how to engage those with whom they differ with “gentleness and reverence” that will cause them to ask about the “hope that lies within.”

“The Strategic Implications of American Millennialism”

4-rightly

After reading this post at The Way of Improvement Leads Home, a friend sent me Major Brian L. Stuckert‘s 2008 study of the impact of dispensationalism on American foreign policy.  The paper was written as part of Stuckert’s education at the School of Advanced Military Studies at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

The paper is over seventy pages long and does a nice job of explaining dispensationalism to a military audience.  Stuckert’s “conclusions and recommendations” for the U.S. Army are worth considering:

“The enemy is a spiritual enemy. It’s called the principality of darkness. We, ladies and gentlemen, are in a spiritual battle, not a physical battle. Oh, we’ve got soldiers fighting on the battlefields, we’ve got sailors, marines, airmen, coast guardsmen out there fighting against a physical enemy. But the battle this nation is in is a spiritual battle, it’s a battle for our soul. And the enemy is a guy called Satan – Satan wants to destroy this nation. He wants to destroy us as a nation and he wants to destroy us as a Christian army.” – U.S. Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, Lieutenant General Boykin, 2003

A 2003 survey found that more than two-thirds of evangelical leaders view Islam as a religion of violence bent on world domination.181 Following the events of September 11, 2001, many Christian opinion leaders began to speak of President Bush’s election and policies as “divinely inspired.” This attitude can present challenges to rational decision making processes. While some political commentators have theorized that the administration’s unwillingness to admit errors is the result of arrogance or political calculation, it is more likely that the administration believes they are doing the will of God and will be vindicated in the end. In other words, intelligence or analysis that seems to support invasions or other administration policies are interpreted as an affirmation of God’s will, while information is to the contrary is viewed with suspicion – perhaps an effort by Satan to deceive or mislead.

As President Carter explained to former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, what people believe as a matter of religion, they will do as a matter of public policy.185 There is a tendency on the part of Americans to view foreign policy and international affairs as a “clash of moral opposites.” This tendency may make it difficult for U.S. policy makers and strategists to perceive and act upon subtleties that may lie outside our conceptions of moral absolutes. Military leaders have the difficult task translating this religiously tinged policy into successful strategy and operations. War is primarily about politics. While geography and technology play a role, in order to be successful military leaders must be able to see the political goals as clearly as possible. Because of the influence of pre-millennialism, it can be difficult for military leaders to see themselves and their government accurately and state policy goals objectively.

Because religion in America directly impacts policy, military leaders and planners must learn to recognize the tenets and implications of American millennial thought. Millennialism has always been a feature of the American culture and has shaped not only the objectives of U.S. government policy, but also the way in which we interpret the words and actions of other actors on the international stage. Millennial ideas contribute to a common American understanding of international relations that guide our thinking regardless of individual religious or political affiliation. Millennialism has great explanatory value, significant policy implications, and creates potential vulnerabilities that adversaries may exploit. By gaining insight into and embracing intellectual honesty where our own prejudices and proclivities are concerned, we can greatly improve the quality and clarity of our decision-making.

Pessimism and paranoia are two possible results of pre-millennial influence. In the Capstone Concept for Joint Operations, the Joint Staff describes the near-term future as one characterized by “a pervasive sense of global insecurity.”188 There are actually many reasons to trend toward optimism. The U.S. military has no rival and our power is truly global in nature. U.S. military spending always exceeds that of the next several major nations combined. The U.S. military regularly enjoys a position of leadership on the international stage and effectively uses military power to intervene in the affairs of other states. Decision makers should guard against unwarranted pessimism. We should consider whether a contemplated decision or policy is either overly optimistic or pessimistic. Dispensational pre-millennialism typically causes a predisposition toward pessimism in world affairs and a general worsening of international relations. A pre millennial reading of Bible prophecy paints a dismal picture of a world disintegrating toward a cataclysmic end where we are forced to confront the wrath and judgment of God. Assumptions and plans based on this worldview will be less than ideal. 

In the same manner that we so assiduously study the culture and thinking of others,
potential adversaries may study us, to include the ramifications of millennial thought, and gain significant advantages. Millennial thought and its policy implications may create strategic transparency that affords adversaries an advantage in decision-making. In other words, by studying the tenets and predictions of dispensational pre millennialism, one could, to some extent, predict U.S. government actions and reactions. This would certainly prove more useful in areas that figure prominently in dispensational pre-millennialist eschatology, such as Israel. An extension of this strategic transparency might include an ability to provoke or manipulate American policy and subsequent action. With or without the efforts of adversaries, American millennialism may increase the fragility of or even disrupt coalitions. Finally, adversaries could easily transform an understanding American pre-millennialism into a highly effective set of information operations themes and messages or psychological operations efforts to achieve a variety of results with American leadership or the population at large. By recognizing these potential vulnerabilities, American strategists can take action now to mitigate the effects.

Based on what we know about the effect millennialism has on our thinking, we may incorporate additional considerations into policy formulation and evaluation to assist ourselves in the identification of defects, diminished objectivity or unwarranted biases. As a result of millenarian influences on our culture, most Americans think as absolutists. A proclivity for clear differentiations between good, evil, right, and wrong do not always serve us well in foreign relations or security policy. Policy makers must strive to honestly confront their own cognitive filters and the prejudices associated with various international organizations and actors vis-à-vis pre-millennialism. We must come to more fully understand the background of our thinking about the U.N., the E.U., the World Trade Organization, Russia, China and Israel. We must ask similar questions about natural events such as earthquakes or disease. An ability to consider these potential influences upon our thinking may greatly enhance objectivity.

The inevitability of millennial peace through redemptive violence and an exceptional role for America have been and continue to be powerful themes running throughout the security and foreign policies of the U.S.191 Official U.S. government policy expresses these themes in a number of ways from the National seal that reads Novus Ordo Seclorum – the New Order for the Ages – or the nuclear intercontinental ballistic missile known as the Peacekeeper. Whether Americans seek to subdue the continent to realize their Manifest Destiny, conquer the Soviet Evil Empire or rid the world of Saddam Hussein, millennialism imparts an unusual degree of certainty and fortitude in the face of difficult situations. Judis points out that, for the same reasons, millennialism is usually “at odds with the empirical method that goes into appraising reality, based on a determination of means and ends.”192 As demonstrated by American history, millennialism has predisposed us toward stark absolutes, overly simplified dichotomies and a preference for revolutionary or cataclysmic change as opposed to gradual processes. In other words, American strategists tend to rely too much on broad generalizations, often incorrectly cast in terms of ‘good’ and ‘evil,’ and seek the fastest resolution to any conflict rather than the most thoughtful or patient one.

Read Stuckert’s entire monograph here.

Why Some Evangelicals Love Israel

hagee jeffress

I turned my weekend tweetstorm into a piece for Religion News Service.

Here is a taste:

Because of Trump’s actions, dispensationalists believe the blessing of God will come upon America. The Jerusalem decision reinforces the idea that America is a Christian nation. This decision makes America great in the eyes of God. It also makes Trump great in the eyes of those American evangelicals who visit the White House regularly to consult with the president, the flatterers and sycophants whom I have called the “court evangelicals.”

Jeffress, Evans and other court evangelicals claim that they were influential in Trump’s decision to move the Israel embassy. If this is true, we can say with certainty that United States policy in the Middle East is now heavily influenced by dispensational theology.

Read the entire piece here.

Robert Jeffress, Dispensationalism, and the American Embassy in Jerusalem

This morning court evangelical Robert Jeffress appeared on Fox and Friends to talk about Monday’s opening of the American embassy in Jerusalem.  Jeffress will say a public prayer at the event.

I watched Jeffress’s appearance on Fox and Friends and it led me to embark on a small Twitter rant.  Here it is:

I touch on some of this stuff in my forthcoming Believe Me: The Evangelical Road to Donald Trump.  Don’t forget to pre-order at your favorite bookstore.  The book releases on June 28.

Believe Me Banner

The “Rapture Bet”

rapture

Check out Fred Clark’s piece titled “A death bet is morally repugnant.  So is a ‘Rapture’ bet.”

A taste:

Donald Trump is making a death bet on climate change. The president is 70 years old and he just doesn’t care about what the world will be like three decades from now. By 2050 he, personally, will be gone, so why should he care about anyone or anything in a future that he will not, personally, live to see?

The idea of a death bet is as vile as it is simple. Live large and indulge yourself, free of all responsibility, paying for it all with debt that won’t come due until after you, personally, are dead. This screws over your heirs, and your creditors, and everyone else who is not you. But, hey, what do you care? You’ll be dead…

But it’s not just Donald Trump making the death bet of climate-change denial. He has the support on this of millions of white evangelical Christians. They don’t care about climate change because they believe the world is about to end anyway. They’re not making a death bet so much as, in their minds, a “Rapture” bet: Can you imagine, Rayford? Jesus coming back to get us before we die!

This isn’t quite as brazenly immoral and selfish as Trump’s death bet. He doesn’t care about what the world will be like in 50 years because he doesn’t care about anything he does not personally experience. These Rapture-Christians don’t care about what the world will be like in 50 years because they don’t believe the world will still be here then. They’re sure it won’t. They’re sure the Rapture is imminent — that it will occur any day, any moment, maybe even before you finish reading this…

Ask them about climate change and they’ll assure you there’s no need to worry about famine and flood in 2050, because they’re “certain” that Jesus is coming back before then. Ask them about their teenage child’s plans to major in art history or theater arts and they’ll give you a very different outlook.

Or just consider the way, say, Rapture-preacher John Hagee is grooming his son to take over his family ministry to ensure that it continues for another generation. Or, more cynically, look at the way these Rapture-preachers and Rapture-believers invest for their own retirements. They’re hedging their Rapture bet when it comes to their own future, but not when it comes to a future they imagine will only affect the lives of other people they don’t personally know.

Read the entire post at Clark’s blog Slacktivist.

Historically, things are a bit complicated.  Of course there is a longstanding history of rapture thinking in modern American evangelicalism.  This is part of the reason why some early 20th-century fundamentalists did not like the Social Gospel.  Why work for social reform when Jesus would be coming back soon? But to be fair to the historical record, many fundamentalists also combined rapture-longing with social action.

A belief in the end times was also the reason why some premillennialists did not initially support U.S. involvement in World War I.  Why fight a war to “make the world safe for democracy” when Jesus would be coming back soon?

And we could go on.  Not all rapture Christians broke with the social demands of Christian faith that their 19th-century Second Great Awakening ancestors championed, but some did.

There is also some question about whether the general failure of evangelicals to support environmental causes today is directly related to their views of the “end times.”  In 2012, political scientists David Barker and David Bearce argued in an article titled “End-Times Theology, the Shadow of the Future, and Public Resistance to Addressing Global Climate Change” that “believers in Christian end-times theology are less likely to support policies designed to curb global warming than are other Americans.”  Religion scholar Robin Globus Veldman challenged their findings in a piece at Religion Dispatches.

This all reminds me of when PBS host Bill Moyers accused James Watt, the Secretary of the Interior in the early years of the Reagan administration, of arguing that there was no need for Congress to pass legislation protecting the environment because Jesus Christ would soon be returning. Moyer quoted Watt as saying “After the last tree is felled, Christ will come back.” In 2005, Watt wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post claiming that he never said these things.  He wrote: “I know no Christian who believes or preaches such error.” Moyer apologized, but Watt wanted to make sure, over twenty years after he left office, that Americans understood that evangelical belief was not incompatible with environmental reform.

Today, in a piece on this issue by Washington Postreligion writer Sarah Pulliam Bailey, does not mention the “rapture” argument.

In the end, I am sure there are evangelicals out there who believe that the environment is unimportant because the rapture is coming soon.  Clark is right when he says that these rapture Christians are inconsistent. They plan for the future when it comes to their own retirements and inheritances, but they do not plan for the future when it comes to the fate of the planet.

I will end with a tweet from conservative pundit Erick Erickson.  Not sure if it fits into the “rapture Christian” category, but it is certainly revealing.

Dispensationalists Forced to Adjust Their End-Times Charts

Larkin

When I heard about Great Britain leaving the European Union I could not help but think about the years I spent as part of the dispensationalist wing of American evangelicalism.

Some of you may be unfamiliar with this wing of evangelicalism.  What is dispensationalism? Think Tim LaHaye’s Left Behind novels or Hal Lindsey’s The Late Great Planet Earth.  Dispensationalists take the prophetic passages of the Old Testament and New Testament and interpret them using charts and timelines in order to predict the exact order of end-of-the-world events.

For those with a deeper knowledge of 20th-century evangelical history, think C.I. Scofield, Charles Ryrie, John Walvoord, John Hagee, Dallas Theological Seminary, and Moody Bible Institute.

Want to learn more? Check out historian Brenden Pietsch’s book Dispensational Modernism.  (And while you’re at it check out his acknowledgments section.  Trust me, it’s good).

Most dispensationalists believe that the so-called “Antichrist” will lead a one-world government that he will use to persecute those Christians who have not already left the earth via the “rapture.” After seven years of the Antichrist’s reign, Jesus Christ will return to Jerusalem, gather all believers together, and engage the Antichrist in the so-called “Battle of Armageddon.”  The believers, of course, will win this battle and then Jesus will establish a 1000-year reign on the earth know as the millennium.

Dispensationalists thus love to monitor current events looking for prophetic signs.  In the last twenty or thirty years many of them have pointed to the European Union as the possible seed of the one-world government.  Now, with Great Britain out, the European Union is in jeopardy.  It may be time for dispensationalists to revise to the charts.

With all this mind, I got a kick out of the recent post at The Babylon Bee, the satiric evangelical website modeled after The Onion.  Here is a taste of the Bee’s post: “Dispensationalists Frantically End-Times Charts to Include Brexit Vote.”

“We’re thinking of calling this one ‘The Brexit Dispensation,’” Tim LaHaye told reporters as he hastily altered his precise wall charts to account for the new information. “We had previously thought that Saddam Hussein would be the one to usher in the one-world government, but that’s looking less likely now, so we’re going to make some official adjustments.” LaHaye added that the European Union might not be ushering in an age of one-world government after all, unfortunately.

Meanwhile in California, prophecy expert Dr. David Jeremiah of Shadow Mountain Community Church reportedly made an emergency early-morning phone call to Texas pastor John Hagee. “John, have you seen the news? This isn’t in any of the tables!” he is said to have screamed into the phone. After calming Jeremiah down, Hagee reportedly consulted a series of lunar charts taped across his bedroom walls and surmised that the Brexit decision had actually been accurately predicted by Halley’s Comet in 1986, before proceeding to scribble some corrections on his favorite eschatological timeline in red marker.

“We totally missed it!” Hagee told reporters as he explained his new chart at a Friday afternoon press conference. “It just goes to show when you’re not extremely careful about building your theology around current events and astrological signs, even the experts can make a mistake.”

Read the entire post here.