Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Progressive Christian
LBCF, No. 216: ‘Bruce’s sermon, part 4’

LBCF, No. 216: ‘Bruce’s sermon, part 4’

Last updated on: December 28, 2018 at 4:05 pm by Fred Clark

LBCF, No. 216: ‘Bruce’s sermon, part 4’ 2018-12-28T16:05:24-05:00 Fred Clark

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Originally posted August 8, 2009.

You can read this entire series, for free, via the convenient Left Behind Index. The ebook collection The Anti-Christ Handbook: Volume 1, is available on Amazon for just $2.99. Michael Cohen, in Prague, with the cell phone. Volume 2 of The Anti-Christ Handbook, completing all the posts on the first Left Behind book, is also now available. Volume 3 is coming soon(ish).

Tribulation Force, pp. 69-73

Buck sat in the pew behind Rayford and Chloe Steele and glanced at his watch. More than an hour had flown by since he had last checked. His stomach told him he was hungry, or at least that he could eat. His mind told him he could sit there all day, listening to Bruce Barnes explain from the Bible what was happening today and what would happen tomorrow.

For you kids out there, a “watch” was a kind of 20th-century timepiece. Picture a small analog or digital clock worn as a bracelet. Watches were kind of like telephones, except you couldn’t use them to text or shoot video. All they did was tell time.

Bruce is still going on about the Antichrist, the core of his message at this point being roughly, “I know who the Antichrist is and I’m not gonna tell you, neener neener.” Unlike most of the people attending New Hope Village Church that morning, though, Buck has been initiated into this Big Secret. He and the Steeles, as members of the elite Tribulation Force, have been allowed to speak the name. Everyone else at NHVC that morning has to sit there as Bruce explains that the Antichrist will be the charismatic leader of a One World Government who speaks of peace, but that he won’t suggest any names because that description could apply to so many different people.

Buck had spent enough time with Bruce and the Steeles, poring over the passages, to know beyond doubt that Nicolae Carpathia embodied the enemy of God. And yet he could not jump to his feet and corroborate Bruce’s message with his own account. Neither could Bruce reveal that he knew precisely who the Antichrist was, or that someone in this very church had met him.

Bruce and Buck know who the Antichrist is but they can’t just tell their fellow believers, obviously, because … um, because … because why again exactly? The authors and their characters never really do explain why not. This would seem like useful and necessary information for Loretta and the rest to have, but the Tribulation Force elite don’t seem to see it that way. Instead, Bruce and Buck spend pages musing on how special they are to know such secrets when the others don’t. As Buck basks in his own elite specialness, he can’t help but also think how such specialness must be a sign of his own humility.

For years Buck had been an inveterate name-dropper. He had run in high circles for so long that it was not uncommon for him to be able to say, “Met him,” “Interviewed her,” “Know him,” “Was with her in Paris,” “Stayed in her home.”

But that self-centeredness had been swept away by the disappearances and his experiences on the front lines of supernatural events. The old Buck Williams would have welcomed the prospect of letting on that he was a personal acquaintance of not only the leading personality in the world, but also the very Antichrist foretold in Scripture. Now he simply sat riveted as his friend preached on.

I’m trying to imagine a conversation between two pretentious name-droppers in which mentioning one’s personal acquaintance with the Antichrist could be used to inflate one’s importance:

“The Antichrist? Yeah, we had coffee last week at the Plaza. …”
“The Plaza? I was just saying to War the other day that the Plaza is going down hill. …”
“War? I think I owe him a phone call. It’s like I was saying to Famine …”
“Famine? I’ll let you in on a little secret that Death and Hades told me about Famine …”

Ridiculous, yes, but that sort of thing is exactly what first occurs to Buck when he realizes that he, personally, his own very important self, has encountered the global tyrant and embodiment of evil. He doesn’t smell the evil, he smells the celebrity. If the Antichrist isn’t an A-lister, then who is?

Despite the earlier strange tangent about Nicolae’s sudden mid-term elevation to become People magazine’s “Sexiest Man Alive and Still Here After the Disappearances,” I hadn’t really given much thought to his status as a celebrity. Maybe this accounts for the mass-brainwashing that caused everyone to forget about Buck’s presence at the United Nations during his clandestine press event and double homicide. Maybe Nicolae’d had it with reporters and paparazzi and he just worked some kind of blanket-mojo to wipe away every trace of the media who’d been harassing him, forgetting to carve out a brainwash-exception for the one reporter he’d invited to be there.

While Buck congratulates himself for being so very special that he doesn’t even need to congratulate himself for his own specialness, Bruce takes a stab at exegesis:

“In Scripture, the first in a succession is always important — the firstborn, the first day of the week, the first commandment. The first rider, the first of the four horses of the first seven judgments, is important! He sets the tone. He is the key to understanding the rest of the horsemen, the rest of the Seal Judgments, indeed, the rest of all of the judgments.

“Who is this first horseman? Clearly he represents the Antichrist and his kingdom. His purpose is ‘conquering and to conquer.’ He has a bow in his hand, a symbol of aggressive warfare, and yet there is no mention of an arrow. So how will he conquer? Other passages indicate that he is a ‘willful king’ and that he will triumph through diplomacy. He will usher in a false peace, promising world unity. Will he be victorious? Yes! He has a crown.”

This is one of the few places where we get to read two uninterrupted paragraphs of Bruce’s sermon verbatim. It’s followed, just a few paragraphs later, by yet another hymn of praise to Bruce’s mesmerizing passion and sincerity and another belabored paragraph insisting that all of his listeners were transfixed, yearning to hear more of this.

Sweaty, rumpled earnestness, in the authors’ minds, seems to be able to magically transform even this into a gripping, unforgettable sermon. What’s that bit of nonsense about “no mention of an arrow”? And how on earth do you get from “a conqueror bent on conquest” to a mere diplomat? And doesn’t Bruce notice that he has the crown before he rides out? And …

None of that matters — just look at how sincere and passionate Bruce is. See that exclamation point after the word “important”? That means it’s important! Bruce is saying important(!) things and he’s saying them passionately and sincerely.

… [Bruce] was brimming with the truth and eager to share it. And if the others were like Rayford, they could think of nothing they would rather do than sit here under that instruction.

Yes, he’s been preaching for more than an hour already, but who cares about lunch, I just want to hear about what it means that John’s vision makes no mention of a bow-string.

Albrecht Durer gave the white rider a bow AND arrows. Durer was clearly a liberal heretic.

Bruce is still preaching. “We’ll talk next week and following about the next three horsemen of the Apocalypse,” he says, forgetting that he’s already said this. “The rider of the white horse is the Antichrist, who comes as a deceiver promising peace and uniting the world,” he continues, forgetting that he’s already said this more than twice:

“The Old Testament book of Daniel — chapter 9, verses 24 through 27 — says he will sign a treaty with Israel.”

Really? Let’s look, shall we? Here is Daniel 9:24-27:

Seventy ‘sevens’ are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy. “Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and 62 ‘sevens.’ It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. After the 62 ‘sevens,’ the Anointed One will be cut off and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed. He will confirm a covenant with many for one ‘seven.’ In the middle of the ‘seven’ he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on a wing of the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.

Clear as mud, that, but that’s Daniel for you.

The first six chapters of Daniel are fairly straightforward stories of Israel in exile. The final six chapters are a hallucinogenic stew of visions, numerology and wrath. That description of the second half of Daniel might also work as a description of much of Revelation, so it’s not altogether unreasonable for Bruce to decide that there’s some connection between the two apocalyptic nightmares, but why here? Why jump to this passage in Daniel from that passage in Revelation? What’s the justification or logic or excuse?

This skipping back and forth between Revelation and Daniel is standard practice for “Bible prophecy scholars.” They are, after all, reading from Scofield Reference Bibles, in which all of this cross-referencing is right there in the footnotes. Yet while this may be par for the course with prophecy preachers, it still seems to me that there are at least four reasons why Bruce’s abrupt segues here from Revelation 6:2 to Daniel 9:24-27 and then back to Revelation 6, verse 3, strike me as deeply weird.

Weirder, even, than the bizarre content of the passages themselves.

First of all, there’s nothing in that passage in Revelation about the horsemen that suggests any need or justification for inserting gaps into the chronology of John’s strange vision. Here again is the relevant bit of Revelation 6:

I watched as the Lamb opened the first of the seven seals. Then I heard one of the four living creatures say in a voice like thunder, “Come!” I looked, and there before me was a white horse! Its rider held a bow, and he was given a crown, and he rode out as a conqueror bent on conquest. When the Lamb opened the second seal, I heard the second living creature say, “Come!” Then another horse came out, a fiery red one.

There’s a rhythm to this passage. Four creepy “living creatures” calling forth four even creepier horsemen. One of the grievous angels says “Come” and a horseman rides out and then the next angel does the same thing in turn. It’s not obvious to me that the passage wants or permits us to insert an interim of 18 months or of 3 1/2 years between the first and second angel’s summons.

I should probably take a moment to note that while premillennial dispensationalist “prophecy scholars” all seem to agree to insert such an interim here, there remains fierce disagreement and debate as to the length of this interim. They agree, in Bruce’s term, that the Antichrist “will sign a treaty with Israel,” (what else could “a covenant with many” mean?), but they vehemently disagree as to whether this treaty will last for 42 months or, as LaHaye argues, only for 18.

You really, really don’t ever want to learn enough about the esoterica of PMDism to appreciate the details of this disagreement, but it’s fun to realize that Tim LaHaye isn’t just using his fictional depiction of End Times events to “prove” that all non-PMDists are doomed to wrath, he also thinks this fictional depiction stands as proof that the wrong kind of PMDists are also fools and doomed to wrath. LaHaye has an ax to grind with prophecy scholars who disagree with him on the length of this allegedly prophesied peace treaty, or about when the Two Witnesses will first appear in Jerusalem, and so occasionally he turns away, briefly, from celebrating his fictional triumph over people like you and me to celebrating his fictional triumph over these dissenting PMDists.

But all we really need to know about this obscure dispute is that both LaHaye and his 18-monther allies and their foes in the 42-month camp agree that a “literal” reading of Revelation 6:1-3 requires us to stop after verse 2, skip back to Daniel 9 to insert some number of “weeks” or “sevens,” and then proceed on to read verse 3.

Which brings us to the second deeply weird aspect of Bruce’s sudden instruction to his congregation to turn to the book of Daniel: Why Daniel? Nothing in this passage of this book specifically refers or alludes to anything in that passage in that book, so if we’re going to turn elsewhere for an explanation of Revelation’s seven seals, why should we turn to Daniel’s 70 sevens instead of Jesus’ seven woes or Zechariah’s* seven lights or Seven Brides for Seven Brothers?

Even if we try to cooperate here, if we tilt our heads and squint and swallow the red pill, we can only get as far as maybe kinda sorta thinking that John’s and Daniel’s “sevens” are related maybe, somehow, because they’re both sevens, but that’s not what Bruce and LaHaye are suggesting. They’re saying that Daniel’s sevens provide a timeline for a seven-year period during which John’s sevens unfold and the “weeks” of Daniel …

You know what? Never mind exactly what it is that LaHaye is saying. The point here is that he doesn’t bother to justify his connection between these texts. He just asserts that he’s reading them both “literally” — which for him involves an astonishingly complex, often arbitrary, system involving a kind of inconsistent numerology in which numeric symbols sometimes mean one thing and sometimes mean another, and in which the unsupported and unsupportable decision to leap from one text to another doesn’t require any justification other than repeating that word “literally.”

Anyway, the third deeply weird thing about Bruce’s instruction to turn back to the book of Daniel is that everyone — Buck and Rayford included — seems able to do so without difficulty. Somehow, in less than three weeks, these brand-new believers have all mastered the navigation of the 66-book anthology we Protestants refer to as the Bible.

Revelation is easy enough to find because it’s at the very end, likewise with Genesis at the very beginning, and with the Psalms as the longest book right there in the middle, but you can’t ask a room full of even lifelong Bible-readers to turn to Daniel without a lengthy and audible session of page-flipping back and forth. In a sanctuary filled with new believers you’d have more than a few people who would be thinking “Daniel? What’s that?” without having yet come to realize that it’s the name of a distinct book within a distinct book within the book they’re already holding.

In the universe of Left Behind, saying the Magic Words not only creates an instantaneous fluency in the jargon and lingo of evangelicalese, it also seems to make one instantly an expert at Sword Drills.**

To the extent that the name “Daniel” would be meaningful at all to new believers, it would likely be from some dim association with the story of Daniel and the Lion’s Den. Yet for all the time PMD prophecy preachers love to spend in the book of Daniel, that beloved story isn’t one they ever read. All they ever care about from Daniel are the parts that are trippy and hard to understand.

And that brings us to the fourth deeply weird thing about Bruce’s repeated flipping back and forth between Revelation and Daniel.

Here you have a sanctuary filled with believers who will, Bruce tells them, soon be facing trials and tribulations the likes of which the world has never seen. They will all soon face persecution for their faith, he tells them. And then he has them turn to the book of Daniel, the first half of which is dedicated to people just like them living in just such a context.

But Bruce doesn’t read that part of Daniel.

The people gathered at New Hope Village Church have become a people in exile and Daniel is about exactly that, but this isn’t what Bruce gleans from the book. He warns his congregation of impending death from “the wild beasts of the earth,” but he never reads them the story of Daniel in the Lion’s Den. He warns them of looming fiery martyrdom, but he never reads to them about Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego and the angel in the fiery furnace. He tells them of a tyrant who will soon make them all his subjects, yet he can see nothing relevant in the stories of the exiles struggling under the boot of Nebuchadnezzar.

Bruce ignores the writing on the wall — literally.

This is incomprehensible, but it’s what happens when you read stories as though they were check lists. Sometimes illiteracy is a choice.

So everything we’ve heard so far is leading up to Bruce’s big conclusion in which he explains that war is peace and peace is war. The text for his sermon warns of Conquest, War, Famine and Death***, but Bruce wants to warn his congregation that what they really have to fear is peace. After all, Bruce explains, we’re not told that the conqueror has any arrows, which means we should flip back to Daniel where it’s clearly stated that the rider on the white horse actually goes forth as a diplomat bent on diplomacy, intending to create a 42-month an 18-month peace treaty with the only remaining sovereign nation apart from his OWG. The Bible clearly says so.

Here’s Bruce:

“He will appear to be their friend and protector, but in the end he will be their conqueror and destroyer. I must close for this week, but we’ll talk more about why this happens and what will come of it. Let me close by telling you how you can be sure I am not the Antichrist.”

That got people’s attention, including Rayford’s. There was embarrassed laughter.

“I’m not implying that you suspect me,” Bruce said, to more laughs.

Now I’m picturing Bruce doing his best Jeff Foxworthy impression and milking this for another 10 minutes with a bunch of “You might be the Antichrist …” jokes.

“But we may get to the point where every leader is suspect.”

You’d think that at this point, with the new One World Government, the category of “every leader” would be fairly narrow. (Nicolae Carpathia heads off to the men’s room at the U.N.: “Hey Steve, hold the fort for a minute, I have to go to the G-1 Summit.”)

“Remember, however, that you will never hear peace promised from this pulpit. The Bible is clear that we will have perhaps a year and a half of peace following the pact with Israel.”

That’s verbatim and unedited. Sentence No. 1 is a vow that “you will never hear peace promised” from Bruce. Sentence No. 2 is his promise of peace for the next 18 months. It’s hard not to contradict yourself when you’re delivering a sermon in doublespeak.

“But in the long run, I predict the opposite of peace. The other three horsemen are coming, and they bring war, famine, plagues and death. That is not a popular message, not a warm fuzzy you can cling to this week.”

Bruce has lost the map. In the long run, according to the very End Times check list Bruce himself is supposed to be working from, here is the 100-percent certain and guaranteed “long run” forecast:

Next 18 months: Peace.
5 1/2 years after that: War. Really, Really Bad Things.
1,000 years after that: Peace That Passeth Understanding, warmth, fuzziness.

But poor Bruce has, like the authors, painted himself into a rhetorical corner. After hundreds of pages insisting that peace is a Bad Thing and that anyone who speaks of peace is a Bad Person, it becomes hopelessly confusing to speak also of a millennial peaceable kingdom in which Jesus Christ himself will reign in peace.

So Bruce sticks with his message: Peace is bad. Peace means war. If anyone promises peace, you’ll get war. If they promise you war, well, you’ll still get war. Welcome to the Tribulation, folks, you’re screwed. And that, essentially, is how Bruce’s sermon ends:

“Our only hope is in Christ, and even in him we will likely suffer. See you next week.”

That’s a terrible, uninspiring and anticlimactic way to end a sermon.

But remove those two sentences from the rest of Bruce’s sermon and they’re not so bad. As lousy as they may be as the conclusion to an inspirational homily, they’d work pretty well as the last two sentences of an AA meeting. So in a sense, after 12 pages of infuriating heretical nonsense, Bruce finally said something I can kind of agree with.

Stay hopeful, even though you will likely suffer. See you next week.

– – – – – – – – – – – –

* If you like your scripture deliriously inscrutable, forget Revelation and Daniel, try Zechariah. This is the book that caused Martin Luther to write, in his commentary, “Here, I give up.” The symbolism and numerology of Zechariah would seem to provide the perfect sort of playground for “Bible prophecy” nuts — just the sort of confusing imagery they love to twist into whatever they want it to say.

Yet the PMDs never seem to spend any time expounding on Zechariah’s neglected bronze mountains and golden lampstands or his ginormous flying scroll of curses. At the very least you’d think some enterprising PMDist would try to draw some parallel between John’s four horsemen and Zechariah’s four charioteers (with their white, red and black horses), but poor Zechariah just doesn’t seem to make the cut with these people.

** For the uninitiated, Sword Drills (see Hebrews 4:12) are a useful game played in Sunday schools as a way of teaching children the books of the Bible and to help them learn to navigate this one-volume library. “Swords ready,” the teacher says and every child holds a Bible above their head. The teacher then names the passage they will have to locate as the kids nervously lick their lips and try to visualize where that passage would be. “Go,” the teacher says, and they frantically flip through the sacred pages. The first child to locate the passage jumps to her feet and reads it aloud, winning that round of the game.

Not to brag, but I was a world class Sword Drill champion. I could beat the kids who were using Bibles with tabs. And not just on the easy stuff, either, I’m talking non-Pauline epistles, minor prophets — I could turn to Obadiah before most of the other kids even realized why the teacher hadn’t given us a chapter number.

The minor prophets are, of course, what really distinguishes the serious Sword Drillers from the pretenders. So here’s a tip if you need to brush up on those 12 books. Learn the song. This is sung to the tune of “Have You Ever Seen a Lassie?”

Let us learn the minor prophets,
minor prophets, minor prophets
Let us learn the minor prophets,
there are twelve of them in all
Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah,
Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk
Zephaniah, Haggai,
Zechariah, Malachi.

Scoff all you want now, but you’ll thank me later when somebody asks you to look something up in Habakkuk.

*** And also, of course, poor Hades, coming up behind on foot. Thanks to the comments from last week’s LBFriday, I can no longer think of Hades in this context without getting a whole series of mental images that make me giggle. I’m fairly sure that’s not the effect that John of Patmos was shooting for.

Uncategorized

Left Behind

Previous Post

December 27, 2018

'Time and chance happen to them all'

Next Post

December 30, 2018 Sunday favorites

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category class warfare evangelicals Iraq Left Behind Mammon music Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who said, "If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation"?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Paul James John Peter