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. 252: ‘The ever-present absence of absence’

LBCF, No. 252: ‘The ever-present absence of absence’

Last updated on: October 25, 2019 at 3:38 pm by Fred Clark

LBCF, No. 252: ‘The ever-present absence of absence’ 2019-10-25T15:38:11-04:00 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 May 31, 2010.

You can read this entire series, for free, via the convenient Left Behind Index. The ebook collection The Anti-Christ Handbook: Volume 1, is sporadically available on Amazon for just $0.99. Friends don’t let friends use Facebook. 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 someday.

Tribulation Force, pp. 226-229

Buck Willliams is deeply offended after he gets off the phone with his boss.

Stanton Bailey, the publisher, seemed to think he was more qualified than Buck to make publisher’s decisions. And Jimmy Borland, the religion editor, seemed to think he was more qualified than Buck to edit religious stories. Buck decides he’ll show them:

His goal was to tie the religious stories together so neatly that Borland would get an idea how his job should be done and Bailey would get a picture of what he needed in an executive editor.

Buck didn’t want that job any more than he had when Steve Plank left and Buck had been talked into it. But he sure hoped Bailey found someone who would make it fun to work there again.

By “someone who would make it fun to work there” Buck seems to mean “someone who would acknowledge that Buck was not just the most gifted reporter and writer on staff, but also better at everyone else’s job too.”

There’s a useful boundary or metric here — a measure for discerning between Bad Author Fantasy and Very Bad Author Fantasy. In Mary-Sue author fantasies that are merely conventionally bad, the author-surrogate character will be portrayed as the best-of-all-time at a given pursuit. In such fantasies that are Very Bad, the author-surrogate must also be shown to be the best-of-all-time at every pursuit. No other character can be shown to be better than the author-surrogate at anything.

Only one thing should matter to any of the characters in this story, and it doesn’t matter — at all — to any of the characters in this story.

Thus we have Buck Williams who is not only a better reporter than all the other reporters, but also a better religion editor than the religion editor, a better sports editor than the sports editor, a better photographer than any of the photographers, a better programmer than anybody in the IT department, and probably even a better administrative secretary than Marge Potter. This doesn’t mean Buck wants to take over all of their jobs all the time. He just wants them to acknowledge as they come to work every day that whatever it is they’re doing is second best, and would have been much better if it had been done properly as only Buck could have done it.

In Jenkins’ mind, this shows how awesomely awesome Buck is. He’d probably be surprised and confused to learn that it just makes his hero seem like kind of a dick. Buck comes across like the director who gives line readings and then, to make it worse, gets frustrated that his actors aren’t imitating his line readings properly, so he gets up on the stage, pushes them out of the way, and demonstrates for them the way they ought to be performing the scene. That guy. Actors hate that guy. (So do audiences. And playwrights.)

Now he was hoping all these things would break at essentially the same time. It was possible he was sitting on the direct fulfillment of centuries-old prophecies.

“Centuries” there may be a reasonable splitting of the difference. Daniel and Revelation are much older than that, but Darby’s decision that they constituted this set of “prophecies” is much younger. (Last year marked the first centennial of the Scofield Reference Bible. This would probably have been a bigger deal except that the fact that the earth is still here 100 years after it’s publication is a bit of a sore point for its readers. Celebrating 100 years of saying the Rapture might occur “this very day” would seem awkward. This is also why there was no 20th anniversary commemorative edition of Edgar Whisenant’s 88 Reasons Why the Rapture Will Be in 1988.)

Cover stories or not, these developments would have as much impact on the short remaining history of mankind as the treaty with Israel.

It’s almost compulsive, this preoccupation Buck/Jenkins has with cover stories. I’m picturing the GIRAT trying to get a piece published in The New Yorker: “Tradition, schmadition, Remnick — I only write cover stories. …”

Buck is certain that his collection of “religion beat” stories is worthy of being a cover story because they will have a big affect on “the short remaining history” of the world. It hasn’t yet occurred to him that he’s also “sitting on” — in more than one sense — an even bigger story: The remaining history of the world is short.

It seems to me that having proof the world is going to end in seven years is somewhat newsworthy. Maybe even a bigger story than who gets to fly in Air Force One.

In any case, Buck hasn’t been on the telephone for four whole paragraphs, so:

Buck called Steve Plank.

That’s our Buck. When he got off the phone with Bailey he had been angrily muttering to himself that he might as well “just accept Carpathia’s offer to manage the Chicago Tribune and be done with it” rather than continue working where his comprehensive genius was so unappreciated. But he didn’t really mean it. So now he’s calling Steve to tell him, yet again, that he doesn’t want the job but isn’t turning it down either.

“Any word yet?” Steve said. “Anything I can tell the secretary-general?”

“Is that what you call him?” Buck said, astonished. “Not even you can call him by name?”

“I choose not to. It’s a matter of respect, Buck.”

That’s a reasonable answer from Steve, but Buck — and the authors — find such a thing “astonishing.” It makes sense for Steve to call Nicolae “Mr. Secretary-General” for the same reason that everybody who works in every White House calls the president “Mr. President.” It’s a sign of respect for the office, which is to say a sign of respect for the rule of law, which is to say a reminder that power is limited and constrained. We refer to the president as “Mr. President,” in part, to remind him that he is not a king.

LaHaye and Jenkins don’t see any need for any constraint on power other than that of virtue. To them, an evil all-powerful leader like Nicolae is a Bad Thing, but a virtuous all-powerful leader would be a Good Thing. That’s not a Madisonian view. Nor is it a Pauline view (or an Augustinian or Niebuhrian view, for that matter).

A frightening indicator of how widespread this misunderstanding is right now in America is the creepy preference for the title “commander in chief” rather than “president.” This has become increasingly widespread, inexplicably, among people not in uniform who thus don’t have a commander in chief. What those people do have, it seems, is a need or a desire to be commanded. And that doesn’t bode well for a democracy.

Steve continues:

“Even Hattie calls him ‘Mr. Secretary-General,’ and if I’m not mistaken, they spend almost as much time together off the job as on the job.”

“Don’t rub it in. I know well enough that I introduced them.”

“You regret it? You provided a world leader with someone he adores, and you changed Hattie’s life forever.”

“That’s what I’m afraid of,” Buck said, realizing he was dangerously close to showing his true colors to a Carpathia confidant.

I think he’s about three steps past “dangerously close.” In the event that you ever should find yourself in Buck’s situation, living under the reign of an all-powerful global despot, may I suggest that you don’t telephone his chief lieutenant and rudely inform him that you’re not enthusiastically loyal.

“So what’s the story, Buck?”

“I’m no closer to a decision today,” Buck said. “You know where I stand.”

If you’re still undecided, then how is he supposed to know where you …? Oh, nevermind.

Buck segues from hinting about his dislike for Steve’s boss to hinting about his dislike for Steve: “I’m a journalist, Steve, not a public relations guy.” (I can’t help reading that in my best DeForest Kelley impersonation, although really that would be “Dammit, Steve, I’m a journalist, not a …”)

Steve takes this as fightin’ words and the two friends trade digs for another page or so, leading to this:

“This will be the most widely covered event in history.”

… “The U.N. signs a peace treaty with Israel and you think it’s bigger than the disappearances of billions all over the globe?”

“Well, yeah, that. Of course.”

“Well, yeah, that. Of course,” Buck mimicked.

And that’s all they have to say about that subject, quickly moving on to discuss the big news about Air Force One. Seriously. One sentence on “the disappearances of billions all over the globe” and then directly back to Air Force One.

I suppose I should be grateful for even this one-sentence mention of the Event, as callously casual and off-handed as it is. And we should give Jenkins some credit for finally correcting the “millions” underestimate he’s been using up until now (even the back cover of the book says “millions”). And it’s nice to see the GIRAT seeming to recognize for once that every other news story would seem trivial compared with the Event.

But then they’re right back to discussing the trivia in the very next paragraph, changing the subject without ever mentioning the biggest fact of all: The children.

Yes, millions of adults were also among the disappeared. Perhaps even hundreds of millions if LaHaye is in a generous mood when offering one of his wildly varying estimates of the wheat/tares ratio. But the overwhelming reality in the aftermath would be that the children are gone. All of them. Every single one.

The world has no children. This story takes place in a world without children and yet it is not the story of a world without children.

That simply doesn’t work. In a world without children, no other story can be told. Jenkins tries — he tries to tell us stories of airline promotions, of secretive diplomacy and of mistaken-identity romantic blunders, but none of those stories seems possible in a world without children. None of those stories can be reconciled with the supposed setting of a world without children.

The occasional comment from Buck or Rayford can’t make up for the fact that 99 percent of the plot, dialogue and description of this book simply forgets or ignores that the world of Tribulation Force is a world without children.

I mention this often, but I can’t say it often enough. It is a fundamental mistake that infects and destroys everything else in this book and in the whole series of books. It’s a screechingly dissonant note that drowns out every other chord. It becomes as pervasive, constant and insurmountable an obstacle for the reader as it would be a pervasive, constant and insurmountable fact for every parent, every non-parent, every survivor in the story.

It doesn’t matter who the character is or what the words might be that Jenkins has given them to say. The words are wrong. The words are out of character. The conversation shouldn’t be happening. It doesn’t matter if it’s Chaim, Hattie, Bruce, Steve, Alice, Verna, Marge, Earl, Stanton Bailey or Jimmy Borland talking. Anything they say, anything at all, other than “My God, the children — the children” is the wrong thing to say. Any other topic is the wrong topic. Any other conversation is the wrong conversation.

LaHaye & Jenkins want all of these characters to simply move on, continuing with their lives as though nothing has changed. They need characters to behave this way because the End Times check list requires it. But it is impossible and unimaginable. And that means the End Times check list is, itself, impossible and unimaginable.

So much of the rest of these books is laughably wrong in a whole host of ways, but those mistakes are all overshadowed by the absence of the absence of the children.

The main subject of Buck and Steve’s conversation here, for example, is the United Nations’ impending peace treaty with Israel — a plot development premised on a vast misunderstanding of the U.N., of peace treaties, and of Israel. Dozens of objections and questions arise. How would such a treaty be ratified? Why isn’t Russia — portrayed in these books as uncontrollably hostile toward Israel for no apparent reason — vetoing this? Whatever happened to the security council? Was the U.N. previously at war with Israel?

The Air Force One subplot offers its own array of howling errors and inaccuracies. Every chapter — nearly every page — of this book is a minefield of such mistakes, misapprehensions and misrepresentations.

But none of them can compare to the gigantic ever-present wrongness underlying and dominating everything else that happens here: This story is set in a world without children, but this is not the story of a world without children.

Uncategorized

Left Behind

Previous Post

October 25, 2019

The rising stars of post-establishment evangelicalism

Next Post

October 29, 2019 White evangelicals love Kanye's Carman album

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 was the first high priest of Israel?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Joshua Aaron Caleb Moses