2015-78-Main Body-Tim LaHaye
Tim LaHaye: New End Times Thriller Teaches ‘Ridiculous’ Views
By Jenni Parker and Jim Brown
(AgapePress) – A best-selling Christian author is criticizing his publisher for putting out a new fictional series by another writer whose stories postulate that the rapture occurred long ago and Revelation’s prophecies have already been fulfilled.
Tyndale House recently published The Last Disciple, the first book of a series that embraces the notion that many of the promises for the return of Christ were fulfilled in A.D. 70 when the Roman armies brought destruction to Israel. The novel was co-written by Hank Hanegraaff, a Christian scholar/researcher and host of a syndicated call-in radio show, The Bible Answer Man, and the eschatological theory on which his fictional story is based stands in stark contrast to the pre-tribulation view espoused in Tyndale’s popular Left Behind series, co-authored by Dr. Tim LaHaye.
The Last Disciple tells a story in which the Roman emperor, Nero, is depicted as Revelation’s “beast.” In the novel, Christians in Rome and Jerusalem are suffering through the Tribulation, a period of severe persecution against Christians. Nero, meanwhile, is seeking the Apostle John’s letter (the Book of Revelation) in order to destroy it. To survive, the early Christians in the story must decipher the mysteries hidden in the apostle’s carefully coded communication.
Tyndale’s decision to publish The Last Disciple came as a total surprise to LaHaye, who has a long history with Tyndale. “I was shocked beyond words, just stunned,” he says, “when I saw this from this publisher. See, I was their first writer — Spirit-Controlled Temper was my first book. And they’ve held the pre-trib position for 40 years. That’s why I went to them.”
LaHaye believes the “millennial” or “preterist” view of biblical prophecy put forth in The Last Disciple fails to interpret properly what scripture makes plain. The Left Behind author says, “It comes right down to the issue of whether the millennium is a thousand years, the way the Book of Revelation clearly says it is, or whether it’s an ambiguous period of time, and we can’t pin it down.”
The pre-trib author says the new book by Hanegraaff erroneously teaches that all of Revelation’s prophecies have come to pass and the rapture has already occurred. “Their idea that the Book of Revelation was written in 64 or 66 A.D. means it’s passed — it was all fulfilled,” he notes. “Personally, I think it’s an absolutely ridiculous view — and indefensible.”
The well-known Christian theologian says hearing preterists promote this “nonsense” causes him to respond, “You mean we’re living in the millennium? What a shock! Or that Satan is bound? — Good grief! Can you imagine the surprise of the apostles and others, to think that Satan is bound? Then, who’s doing all the mischief in this world?”
LaHaye says the allegorical view of Bible prophecy held by Hanegraaff and others was first espoused by the Catholic monk Augustine, but he considers it completely false and is stunned and disappointed by Tyndale’s choice to publish a millennial series of novels. He feels the Left Behind series he wrote with Jerry Jenkins gives readers a more biblically accurate view of end times prophecy, but now he says (as quoted in the Dallas Morning News), “They are going to take the money we made for them and promote this nonsense.”
But Ron Beers, senior vice president of Tyndale, feels there is nothing strange about Tyndale publishing both series of books. The Dallas Morning News quotes him as saying that Tyndale, as a Christian publisher, is committed to representing a diversity of viewpoints. He notes that there are “a variety of perspectives on the end times” and says some readers “had a problem with the theology in the Left Behind books.”
Hanegraaff, who heads a Christian research institute based in Southern California, says he is “elated” with Tyndale’s support. His hope for the new book series, he adds, is that it will attract readers “in an age where most people aren’t even reading the Bible” and, once they have read it, that they will be prompted “to go back to Revelation and see if they will read it the same way.”
What do YOU think ?
Submit Your Comments For Posting Here
Date: 13 Sep 2006
Thanks for posting this piece even though I judge its exegetical value to be minor, and I decidedly part company with the author in his attempt to make Papal Rome part of Daniel’s fourth kingdom. The author was correct, however, in holding that “the old Roman power can never be considered as a little horn of the Greek he goat.” More important, in my estimation, is his reminder that Josephus claimed that the Book of Daniel was shown by the priests of Jerusalem to Alexander the Great. It seems remarkable to me that critical historical scholars have tended to simply dismiss this testimony from Josephus (Jewish Antiquities, 11.8.5) as evidence of an early date for Daniel, but dismiss it they do. I am glad to be reminded of that fact.
As far as I am concerned, this article demonstrates the futility of trying to find someone other than Antiochus IV to qualify as the small horn of Daniel 8. In my view, its most useful function is to remind us of the account of Alexander the Great’s encounter with the priests of Judaism, in which Josephus refers to the Book of Daniel’s existence long before Antiochus reigned.
John S. Evans
Date: 30 Jul 2010
Rev. Tim LaHaye says “They are going to take the money we made for them and promote this nonsense.”
I believe the Left Behind series is nonsense as well. Scripture does not support either theory.