If you think you dodged the eschatological bullet last week, think again. To paraphrase William Gibson, judgment day is already here—it’s just not very evenly distributed. At least that’s the latest word from radio evangelist and advocate of the imminent eschaton Harold Camping. In a radio broadcast on Monday, Camping explained that the world is still ending, it’s just been delayed a few months. 
“Were not changing a date at all; we’re just learning that we have to be a little more spiritual about this,” said Camping in his radio address, “But on October 21, the world will be destroyed. It won’t be five months of destruction. It will come at once.”
Through chatting with a friend over what he acknowledged was a very difficult weekend, it dawned on him that instead of the biblical Rapture in which the faithful would be swept up to the heavens, May 21 had instead been a “spiritual” Judgment Day, which places the entire world under Christ’s judgment, he said.
The globe will be completely destroyed in five months, he said, when the apocalypse comes. But because God’s judgment and salvation were completed on Saturday, there’s no point in continuing to warn people about it, so his network will now just play Christian music and programs until the final end on October 21.
“We’ve always said May 21 was the day, but we didn’t understand altogether the spiritual meaning,” he said. “The fact is there is only one kind of people who will ascend into heaven ... if God has saved them they’re going to be caught up.”
Get ready for the next round of mockery and derision that will follow this latest revision of Camping’s prophecy. His foolishness will continue to make Christians around the world wince in embarrassment. As well it should. However, the problem is not that Camping is a fool, but that he’s the wrong kind of fool.
Camping and his followers are often described as a sect of evangelical Christians. But it’s not true. Whatever evangelical family resemblance might have existed in Camping’s cult has long since faded. For example, evangelicals believe in the “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church”; Camping does not. According to the radio preacher, the age of the church is over and all Christians—from Mass-attending Catholics to back-pew Baptists—are required to separate themselves from their church. Because we refuse to do that, he believes we are the heretics.
Unfortunately, Camping’s heterodox theology isn’t limited to ecclesiology. In his peculiar view of salvation, those who believe in Christ aren’t necessarily saved. He thinks God will choose from among those who beg him for mercy on Judgment Day. According to Camping, “God plans to rescue about 200 million people (that is about 3% of today’s population).” With an estimated 2.1 billion Christians in the world, it’s obvious that some of us won’t be joining Camping on the ride to heaven.
Like the tares that grow with the wheat, such dysfunctional theological ideas inevitably grow alongside orthodox doctrine. Combine such aberrant beliefs with the natural sinful nature of man and it’s not surprising to see fresh heresies sprout anew with each generation. It’s a frustrating situation for Christians, as we must continually identify these false doctrines and clarify how they subvert the true Word.
But while we should distance ourselves from perverted doctrine, we must be careful not to step away from pure orthodoxy. While much of the derision aimed at Camping focuses on his prognostications about specific calendar dates, other detractors mock the very idea of a literal Judgment Day—a belief held by almost all Christians since the Ascension of Christ. Many who are laughing at Camping are laughing at us, too.
This puts us in an uncomfortable situation. In explaining how we don’t share Camping’s nutty beliefs, we may be tempted to gloss over nutty beliefs similar to those of the wacky numerologist. While some of us may not believe in the “rapture” (I don’t think the concept is biblical), we do believe—whether we are pre-, post-, or amillenialist—that Christ will return and judge the world.
So how do we mow down the heretical weeds without running over the wheat of orthodoxy? It’s a trickier situation than we might imagine. By trying to our make beliefs palatable to reasonable people, we run the risk of downplaying important doctrines of our faith. One of the most noticeable ways this has occurred during the past few years is in the way some Christians have accepted the legitimacy of homosexual behavior. Many fear the disapproval of their peers more than they fear the rebuke of their Creator. In running the good race they can’t get over the hurdle of being called a “bigot” and so sit on the sidelines with the secular spectators.
But such obstacles are to be expected in the Christian life. Our belief is founded on such ideas considered absurd by the spirit of our age. A crucified God, as St. Paul told the church at Corinth, is a “stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles.” Paul didn't sugarcoat the problems we face. We should expect unbelievers to find Christianity dangerous, strange, and subversive, because true Christianity is dangerous, strange, and subversive. Attempting to water down our beliefs in order to make them palatable to the broader culture is a recipe for creating lukewarm Jesus-spit (Revelation 3:15-17). While we must constantly strive to gain a hearing in the public square, we should not suffer delusions about how the gospel will be received. We are called to proclaim the evangelion to the world, not to be a PR firm for the Kingdom. God doesn’t need us to apologize for his embarrassing claims about homosexuality or judgment day.
We must not make ourselves fools when we should be wise. Loving God with our whole mind requires developing the intellectual gifts he’s given us and using them in his service. Yet we must be careful not to tailor the Gospel any more to our age than is warranted to make it more intelligible to the sophisticated and worldly wise. “Everything should be made as simple as possible,” said Einstein, “but not simpler.” The same could be said about the message of the Christian faith. The gospel should be presented as reasonably as possible, but not so reasonably that it excludes faith. After all, God has not recruited us to be spin-doctors for the church; he calls us to be fools for Christ. As Camping continually proves, we are likely to be fools anyway. We might as well strive to become the right kind of fools.
Joe Carter is Web Editor of First Things and the co-author of How to Argue Like Jesus: Learning Persuasion from History's Greatest Communicator. His previous articles for “On the Square” can be found here.
RESOURCES
San Francisco Chronicle, Harold Camping now says end is coming Oct. 21
Comments:
At the same time, while pondering eschatalogical mysteries, one must be careful not to mock the notion that not all who believe in Christ will be saved, as "peculiar." This truth is part of the 2000-year-old deposit of orthodox Christian faith. To believe otherwise is presumption, a sin against the virtue of Hope. Again, the Master: "Not everyone who says Lord, Lord will enter the Kingdome of Heaven."
Sadly, a Harold Camping, abusive priest or cruel "right winger" reinforces the poisonous cartoon. Joe, no doubt you will be labeled "cruel" for your pointing out the Gospel rejection of homosexuality.
I don't want to defend Harold Camping, but it does seem to me it's not a very compelling criticism to quote Jesus saying, "But of that day or hour, no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." He did, after all, say, "Learn a lesson from the fig tree. When its branch becomes tender and sprouts leaves, you know that summer is near. In the same way, when you see these things happening, know that he is near, at the gates." It seems to me Jesus was saying people would know in advance that the Second Coming was approaching by various signs.
Also, while there are differing interpretations, it seem quite possible to me that Jesus was predicting the Second Coming while some he was speaking to were still alive. If so, he was wrong.
Jehovah Witnesses are a spin-off of the second Adventist which all came from the Millerite movement. American war of 1812 army captain William Miller is ground zero for Jehovah's Witnesses.
I do not believe he will have any followers anymore. I am amazed that he is an engineer.
I am sorry that his pride does not let him acknowledge reality. Pride causes so many problems in so many things in life.
And on a side note, a perfectly reasonable (and Biblical) understanding of Christ's prediction of his second coming during the lifetimes of those to whom he spoke is that HE DID, in the form of the real presence in the Eucharist. Taking Christ at his word in John chapter 6 means that Christ is and continues to be literally and physically present, body, blood, soul and divinity, in every Catholic mass on the planet. One of those dangerous, strange, and subversive elements of Christianity you mentioned -- only moreso because it is true. God bless!
I would dearly love to see Christians of today endeavoring to embody Jesus' compassion for outcast, downtrodden, misunderstood and disenfranchised people. But I don't. What we outsiders too often see are self-righteous people parading around trying to persuade everyone else to see how wrong _they_ are; all the while wrapping themselves in the flag, yelling about guns, saving fetuses and executing adults, ignoring neglected children, thoughtlessly supporting war, and fuming about other peoples' sexual behaviors. Meanwhile, children go hungry, homelessness is tolerated, mental health is ignored, prisoners are hidden away to rot and adultery/divorce is rampant in the church (I'm sorry, this _is_ how today's Christians appear to outsiders!) You will recall that Jesus said _no one_ meets the test of the law --- that includes you. There are 613 (!) commandments in the Old Testament (not just ten). More humility would be ennobling and appealing --- perhaps even soul-winning?
Why not make your primary ministries into actual help for hurting people? Why not involve yourselves in changing people's lives where it counts --- there where you live. Then, when you have demonstrated compassion, your service will be explainable as the result of Christ and His sacrifice. Jesus sat down with sinners. What kind of world would we have if the example of Christ was emulated, rather than just talked about in an effort to persuade followers?
Peace to all.
David,
Could you clarify what matters cannot be known for sure? I agree with your point about humility, but I am not sure that I follow the rest. Thanks,
PeterG
Curious, you sound well educated in doctrine. Do you believe in the power of God, and the personal leading of the Holy Spirit?
First,
"I would have thought the lesson to be learned from the Harold Camping embarrassment was to cultivate humility and eschew claims of certitude about matters that can't be known for sure."
and then you wrote,
"Also, while there are differing interpretations, it seem quite possible to me that Jesus was predicting the Second Coming while some he was speaking to were still alive. If so, he was wrong. "
Methinks you might want to follow your own advice from your first post. Isn't this claiming certitude about things which cannot?
You write, as a former Christian, to point out how Christians can be better Christians.
“More humility would be ennobling and appealing --- perhaps even soul-winning?” Is it from deep humility that you write this advice?
Do you want Christians to be better Christians because it is the best way to live? Or would this help your life in some way? Do you profess to understand Jesus better than self proclaimed Christians? Are the ‘outsiders’ better at following Jesus than the ‘insiders’ are? I ask in sincerity, as I wonder why you felt motivated to comment as you did.
“What we outsiders too often see are self-righteous people parading around trying to persuade everyone else to see how wrong _they_ are…”
Ok. My cynical side can’t help to notice that you are doing the exact same thing you accuse us of. You have a different set of things that should be defended, but you are not afraid of persuading others of how wrong they are. Ironic, isn’t it?
PeterG
If Christians "emulated" Christ by being sinless, they wouldn't need to follow him because they wouldn't need a savior. Christ came for sinners and sinners are the ones that hear the call. That so many fail to be perfect like he was perfect isn't news to "insiders" or "outsiders." The insiders ask his forgiveness for all of their shortcomings and believe that by His blood we can be cleansed. And like anything else in this world, regular cleaning is required.
You wrote: "Also, while there are differing interpretations, it seem quite possible to me that Jesus was predicting the Second Coming while some he was speaking to were still alive. If so, he was wrong."
It is not only quite possible, it is quite likely, that Jesus did predict His coming in judgment during the lives of His hearers. All the talk about the future Rapture misses His point colossally.
But He was not in error. You might want to check out the interpretive position known as "partial preterism." Jesus did come in the clouds of judgment, before the generation that heard Him passed away, just as He predicted (Mt. 24). "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem," as He lamented.
This is not to deny a future Second Coming. But the specific prophecies of Jesus were not in error, if interpreted from the preterist perspective. To avoid all the sorts of silliness such as Camping's, the church as a whole needs to ditch completely the "Left Behind" scenarios and start teaching accurately and with insight.
When people refer to N.T. Wright's views on prophecy, or R.C. Sproul's, or Hank Hanegraaf's, as readily as they now refer to Tim LaHaye's and Hal Lindsey's, we will have come a long, long way.
There was a book about 20 years ago about a similar prophet in Wisconsin--a woman who claimed to be in touch with space aliens, and who predicted that the Great Lakes would suddenly empty out on a certain date. The media could not get enough of it and made her a start. Of course, when "disconformation" occurred (as with the Jehovah's Witnesses and countless others) it was back to the drawing board (as with Canning this time). The real cause of these eruptions is the media, which hype this garbage for all it's worth--and more.
The good that Christians do does not get a lot of coverage, but let me ask you these questions.
When you think of missions to the homeless and the alcoholics, is the first organization you think of the Salvation Army?
When you think of hospitals, how many hospital names can you think of that start with the word "Saint"?
When you think of the poor and destitute of India, does Mother Teresa come immediately to your mind?
When you think of people giving of themselves to build homes for the poor, do the words "Habitat" and "Humanity" mean anything to you?
I could continue for quite a bit longer, but my grandson just woke up.
It is not at all obvious that Jesus, in the passage you quote, was referring to final judgment. Judgment is clearly in view--but not necessarily final judgment at the end of history and at the resurrection of the dead. Rather, it could be a judgment with respect to the passing of one age and the inauguration of another. In which case Jesus is just speaking about some to whom he spoke being alive when that judgment--not the end of history--comes to pass. This view is at least plausible.
Colin,
Where in this statement of mine do you see anything resembling certainty:
"Also, while there are differing interpretations, it seem quite possible to me that Jesus was predicting the Second Coming while some he was speaking to were still alive. If so, he was wrong."
Certainty would be: "Jesus predicted the Second Coming would occur during the lifetime of some to whom he was speaking, but he was wrong."
Acknowledging that there are different interpretations of a particular saying of Jesus, saying something is "quite possible," and saying "if so" all imply that I have no definitive answer to whether Jesus predicted the Second Coming within the lifetime of some of his listeners. I did not even offer my own personal opinion regarding the answer to the question!
My considered opinion, based on decades of serious study and sincere involvement in Christian and Biblical scholarship, is that well-meaning Christianity is being ECLIPSED in the public eye by ignorant spectacles like Camping's rapture/apocalypse predictions. I would also include absurd actors such as the Institute for Creation Research, Answers in Genesis, etc. in the same category. Other so-called Christians (filthy rich televangelists) see it as the purpose of the religion to make themselves comfortable, with money and things ("name it, claim it"). So many of these highly visible "Christian" entities doggedly stick to absolutely insupportable positions (assuming of course that we are NOT disregarding chemical and physical laws set in motion at the beginning of the cosmos; and if we are NOT ignoring the words of the Gospels). But I'm sure each of you could expand this list of ugly distortions of Christianity.
What American Christianity needs is a loud repudiation of such fringe figures and groups; a disclaimer that would also unmask the perverse use of the religion as a fig leaf for blatantly political movements, on television "news" and in rabid rallies. These repulsive types are the ones that are coming to represent Christianity to America and the wider world. These misuses are very corrosive to your honest Christian mission --- your fellow man (physical necessities first, evangelization second).
Finally, to those who question my legitimacy to comment after having revealed myself as a _former_ Christian: I would respond that I _am_ sincere, and that I know what I am talking about. I am confident that my knowledge and experience are comparable to anyone's here. Please understand, despite the fact that I am a former Christian (I no longer believe in Jesus Christ as savior), I am not Anti-Christian. It would be very good for America and the world if decent and reasonable Christian people recaptured the media focus away from Harold Camping and his ilk that pervert the mission of Christianity. I do not know how this could be accomplished; most Christians are good people who toil in anonymity.
*Don't bother responding to me here in this forum. I do not typically visit this site and only found it through a news search. My email address is posted above. Best wishes and peace to all.*
Re: Pastor Michael Stifel, a friend of Luther:
"Stifel’s mathematical interests also led him to manipulate words in such a way that apocalyptic dates could be ascertained by applying various cablistic processes to the letter of the alphabet contained in certain Bible passages….In 1533 Luther had already condemned Stifel’s calculations as fanaticism. In the meantime Stifel had set eight o’clock in the morning of 19 October 1533 as the time of Christ’s return and had already given away his household goods.”
Having lost his job as pastor, he lived with the Luthers for a time, learning until he was given a new church.
From Martin Luther: The Peservation of the Church, by Martin Brecht, pp. 8-9
Don't see your e-mail address, but you have obviously not been to the church I attend. We can always do more, but our church, a fairly large protestant church in the Chicago area, sends missionaries out all over the world, and not just to preach the Gospel. There are service opportunities to help the less fortunate all throughout the year. And our church is not unique. I think your view of Christianity and Christians is more of a caricature built by our mainstream media and popular culture than it is a reality. Do the issues you bring up exist? Of course, but they are only a very small part of the story.
