The #Bible’s New Testament: The Book of Revelations – The End is Near (The Bible’s Disaster Flick)

Posted on January 2, 2014 by virgowriter

With the exception of perhaps the recent Sharknado, there isn’t a disaster movie Jared doesn’t love.  Maybe love is strong word, but when 2012, The Day After Tomorrow, Dante’s Peak or Deep Impact airs, forget about it.  Instead of debating the merits of these “films,” I leave the room.  He can’t quite put his finger on what makes the utter destruction of New York City or the White House so appealing, but he will cop to the fact that there is something fun in the sheer campiness of these movies.

But of course he’s not alone, for these films make millions of dollars—perhaps there’s something cathartic in the world’s ability to simply hit reset?

I pass though—if I want to watch a disaster flick, I go for the unintentional ones, like Showgirls or Glitter—for to me there’s something exceedingly morbid about the annihilation of billions of people serving as entertainment, even if it’s in the service of some “message,” like: see how human beings rise to the challenge! See how an approaching tsunami the size of Texas brings out the hero in a chosen few!

Although I had a sense of what to expect—The Book of Revelations predicts the end of the world for all except a select few— I didn’t quite appreciate the Bible’s own disaster-flick book until I read it.  As such, this Bible book is a decidedly strange choice to end the New Testament, especially given its grim—and laughably implausible—content. In a book filled with hope (which tempers all the fire and brimstone), why end the Bible on such a dark note?

So what’s really included in this final book? John (no relation to the author of previous books), a prisoner in a hard-labor camp, has a series of visions.  Although the book has been analyzed for it supposedly having been written in code, it seems strange that there is no mention of someone questioning what brought on these crazy visions in the first place: perhaps a person emotionally and physically spent from enduring hard labor has a distorted perception of things? Where does one draw the line between crazy and “a vision”?

In any event, first, Jesus’ return is predicted, and when he arrives, he instructs the author to take some notes.  After sending out warnings to the churches in six areas, he breaks out the prophecies—and these are grim.

First there are the seven seals, which, when broken, welcome various destruction upon the earth, increasing in intensity. Then arrives the wonderfully-rounded number of 144,000, which speaks to the number of people who are to be guarded against this entire calamity. These people will apparently witness the breaking of the seventh seal, which will feature seven angels blowing seven trumpets, and at the sounding of each trumpet, more destruction involving (but not limited to) the sun, the moon, the stars, and a series of fractions: ½ the ships on the sea, 1/3 of the rivers turning bitter, 1/3 of the tress, etc. Then follows a woman and a dragon, a few beasts (one from the sea, one from the earth).  Next, seven angels with seven plagues are released from the Temple. Saving the best for last, God unleashes the seven bowls of his wrath.

With all of this destruction, you’d think the mood would be decidedly grim; however, the author wants everyone to rejoice! at God’s victory. Yet there’s some fuzzy math here.  Surely the number of God’s followers exceeds 144,000, so most of the believers will be killed. So why would they cheer?

But I guess if you have one of the 144,000 golden tickets, you’ll get to see the New Jerusalem descend from the sky, bringing with it a new way of life: no more death, no more pain (21:2). This utopia will even have no use for the sun, as there will be no more night, since God will illuminate the earth 24/7.  So basically this place sounds like a well-furnished and landscaped version of Alaska in June.

All of this joy seems a little odd. After all of their suffering for their faith, they should enjoy some pain-free existence; however, should people not feel some deep sadness over the utter destruction of everything they know, including family, friends, and neighbors who didn’t make the cut? I also found it hard to swallow that Jesus would be leading this charge—sure, one could argue that he’s merely keeping watch over the 144,000 saved people; however, given his love and compassion for people, I could not see him standing by to watch all of this go down.

My student version of the Bible mentions that a lot of readers reject this Bible book. But if it’s included, it’s part of it; and if you accept the Bible, you have to accept all of it, right? Although I see why people would turn away from this content, I don’t understand why it was canonized with the rest (because, as the Apocrypha demonstrates, a lot was cut). Perhaps the powers that be wanted something dark to lord over people’s heads. After all, if you can sell fear—look, only so many people will be saved—who wouldn’t want to do all they could to secure a spot.

Although a lot of people enjoy disaster flicks that show destruction on a grand scale, the enjoyable part is not just that you get to see how people rise to the occasion, but rather that you get to leave the theater, hoping something like what you saw will never happen. By ending the Bible with this book, there basically telling people that this is what they have and should look forward to. Where’s the hope in that?

Posted in Revelations, The New Testament | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The #Bible’s New Testament: The Book of Jude – Sounding the Alarm against Men Who Follow Natural Instincts

Posted on December 30, 2013 by virgowriter

Can you call yourself a movie fan and NOT have seen a Mel Gibson film? If you never saw Braveheart, you probably saw at least one of the lethal weapon films. You might have skipped The Man Without a Face but probably sat through at least part of The Patriot, Signs, or one of the Mad Max films.  There’s a reason his films have made a ton of money for various studios—and himself—they’re usually quite entertaining.

And then he directed The Passion of the Christ and people didn’t know what to think—who knew he had such a religious streak? The movie went on to make a LOT of money and proved there was an audience for religious films (perhaps forgetting the 10 Commandments had done well too).

But then he started getting all kinds of bad press, and not for his acting. In addition to demonstrating a generally sexist attitude to the female cop(s) who detained him for drinking and driving, he also declared that Jews were responsible for all the wars in the world.

It’s one thing to hold a passionate belief; it’s quite another thing to put forward something that is both hurtful and inaccurate.

In this book of the Bible, Jude is all fired up and writing to warn his audience about the sin and doom of godless men.  Such people are dangerous, for they “change the grace of our God into a license for immorality” (1:4).  These people should have learned from the lesson of Sodom and Gomorrah, whom—in case you forgot—God punished for their sexual immorality by destroying them (1:7). In case this won’t convince his audience, he brings more examples, such as Cain, Balaam, and Korah’s rebellion (1:11).

So he’s at least done his homework.  Who wouldn’t take pause at these worthwhile examples, given the source (if that’s what you believe)? But then he keeps talking.  These people are “blemishes” at his audience’s table, when they share the same food, etc.  Although he is worried that their behavior might become infectious and taint well-meaning people, he’s forgetting an even greater example in the Bible: Jesus ROUTINELY feasted with “bad” people. In fact, he SPECIFICALLY sought these people out.

But he seems to not mention Jesus, choosing instead to argue that the biggest these evil people have is that they follow their evil desires, boast about themselves, and flatter people in order to take advantage of them. These people, he contends, follow “natural” desires and lack spirit.

This one word, natural, is perhaps the most startling admission in the entire Bible—people are embracing what occurs in them NATURALLY, which means it is not a perversion or even something unique. No, it’s natural, as in something people are BORN WITH. And if this is true, that means that God provided these desires. So if people are embracing their natural desires, they are just following through on what God gave them. Therefore, condemning their natural desires seems unnatural—why should someone judge another person who is only living the life God programmed in him or her?

Although his point seems to speak to things man-made—of the natural world—as opposed to things heaven-sent, there’s no mistaking the language. Since people who have often used the Bible to support their beliefs, it seems strange to not embrace the wording here.

These days, with social media providing the opportunity for so much scrutiny of what someone says, thankfully people tend to be held accountable for what they say. It also gives us an opportunity to replay what is said to make sure we’re hearing what we’re hearing. I wish more scrutiny would be afforded older ideas. If the Bible says that people are born the way they are, why isn’t this respected more often, especially if—as 1 John makes clear—a person’s actions are not a threat to another person, let them be (John 5:16). This should be our natural instinct.

Posted in Jude, The New Testament | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments

The #Bible’s New Testament: The Books of 2 and 3 John – Guidelines for Hospitality

Posted on December 27, 2013 by virgowriter

In 1994, I was living in San Diego, attending community college, and working at Blockbuster.  I was broke. Which explains my living situation: I shared a two-bedroom apartment with three other guys.  I can’t remember the name of the guy with whom I shared the double room. The front area (where most people would have kept a couch and TV), Theo had cordoned off with the help of a laundry line and bed sheet—I’m not sure if he owned a mattress. The small, single bedroom went to a senior at UCSD. He majored in Religious studies.  So when two handsome gentlemen who knocked on the door and asked me if I’d given any thought to my relationship with the lord—or whatever their specific opening line happened to be—I paused.  Normally I would have said nope and shut the door.  Rude, I know, but I had no use for religion (even little respect for it) and didn’t have anything intelligent to say, for I hadn’t read the Bible.  But with the doorknob still in my hand, I sensed an opportunity.

“Wait one sec,” I told them.  “Mike,” I called out, “the door’s for you.”

Perhaps I was being rude—do you mess with people who come to your door (at least from their perspective) with good intentions?—but I was looking forward to confrontation between these two guys and my roommate, who was a really bright guy and would likely take these two to task on their beliefs. I really wanted to see how much these two kids really knew.

In both 2 and 3 John, the author is equally concerned with issues of hospitality and its impact on Christianity’s ideas.  Here, he presents some guidelines for his audience, who apparently has been a bit too welcoming to people who don’t have their best interest—i.e. share different religious beliefs—at heart.

Apparently, because people could find food and shelter traveling around, a new trend of religious “circuit riders” developed, and these people tended to spread religious doctrine in order to be welcomed into people’s homes and receive room and board—who wouldn’t want a man of faith to be fed and sheltered? The problem, of course, was (perhaps unbeknownst to some of the audience) that not all of what they preached represented God’s words; some, in fact, were distorted.  Apparently, a good chunk of these men of faith had no interest in religion—to hear the author tell it.  No, be careful, he suggests, for they are merely traveling to sponge off the gracious hospitality—who needs a real job if people are going to give you free room and board for hearing you speak?

Therefore, John warns against opening your home (and your hearts) to these people—only show hospitality to the ones who are worthy of God (3:8). Test them, basically, don’t merely take their word for it, because they will poison you with their wrong ideas.

My roommate Mike engaged the two guys at our door that day warmly and enjoyed dissecting their points, pointing them to parts of the Bible that they should re-read.  For a good half hour they went back and forth, and although I was unable to follow their points—they might as well have been speaking Greek—I enjoyed having someone’s religious stance shown to be lacking in places.  Still, I respected that the two guys left without being offended and appeared to have picked up some new information.

Posted in 2 and 3 John, The New Testament | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment