Our Prophetic Message
Stephen Terry
Commentary for the December 14, 2013
Sabbath School Lesson
“But the day of the Lord will come
like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be
destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything done in it will be laid bare.
Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you
to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives as you look forward to the day of
God and speed its coming. That day will bring about the destruction of the
heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the heat.” 2 Peter 3:10-12, NIV
Perhaps,
like me, you have from time to time received a chain letter. In the days before
the internet, they would arrive by mail carrier. The letter would have a list
of names, and you were asked to send the same letter to each person on the list
with some money, usually a dollar. When forwarding the list on to each person,
you would add your name to the bottom of the list. The idea was that if the
list continued to be forwarded along with a dollar, eventually a lot of money
would come back to you in the mail for the one dollar you sent to each person
on the list. This was the blessing aspect of the chain letter.
However,
chain letters often used the “carrot-and-stick” approach. They would threaten
dire consequences if you broke the chain by not forwarding the letters and
money as instructed. Sometimes the letters would spell out the consequences. Other
times, they would vaguely say “something bad” would happen, often within 24
hours in order to speed the letter, and the money, on its way. In the days
before computers when this required typing multiple letters with carbon paper,
or later using an available photocopier, it was no small endeavor to copy the
chain letter, address the envelopes, affix postage, and send the missives on
their way. Perhaps this is why the negative results were important. It would be
easy to simply decide not to go to all that work, especially if dollar bills
were scarce at the moment, and toss the letter into the trash.
Perhaps
after doing so, something bad actually did appear to happen. Even though they
knew that just because one event happens after another, this does not prove
causation, still, what if…? Maybe they even went to the garbage pail to see if
they could resurrect the letter to somehow repair Karma. Those letters that
were vague about the consequences would probably be more successful at achieving
compliance. The odds of something happening that could be interpreted as a
negative result might be much higher if left to the active imagination of the
letter recipient.
Now with the
internet and e-mail programs with address books, forwarding chain messages is
much easier. However, forwarding dollar bills is no longer so easy, so instead
a generous blessing to be given by an extremely wealthy celebrity, such as Bill
Gates, is sometimes invoked as a reason to forward the message. This of course
implies that the celebrity has the time or means to monitor every message
forwarded to keep track of who should receive his beneficence.
Since it is
so easy to forward the messages now, perhaps the “curse” for not complying is
not so vital to get the messages sent on. The hope of reward may be enough. However,
as an evidence of chain letter heritage from the days of “snail mail” the
negative result is still invoked on occasion. As before, the more nebulous the
blessing or curse, the more easily one can manufacture verification of one or
the other from subsequent experiences.
Perhaps some
look at the Bible in much the same way. They may see the various books of the
Bible like so many “chain letters” that must be forwarded to avoid dire
results. God becomes the celebrity monitoring their compliance. The apocalyptic
passages of Scripture are filled with the negative results of ignoring the
message. There are also lists of the rewards to be expected by those who
faithfully participate. Is it possible that some fervently forward these biblical
messages with similar expectations to the chain letter recipients, and it is
simply about expected rewards or punishments?
These
individuals may cite particular proof texts to support that perspective. An
example might be, “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole
world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.”[i]
Here we have a list of addressees: “all nations.” We have the letter to be
copied: “this gospel.” We also have the result to be expected: “the end will
come.”
We may have
heard individuals speak of this passage in exactly those terms. Get this done
and this will happen. However, are we making the error of inferring causation from
sequence? While one may happen after the other, perhaps we should not assume
that one causes the other. When we do we may be in danger of having the wrong
focus. Just as the person who, in the past, may have spent a great deal of time
and expense copying letters, addressing envelopes and forwarding them on, only
to find that they had been tricked into doing something not relevant to what
they maybe should have been doing instead with their time.
Some might
ask, “What about Matthew 28:19-20? Isn’t that telling us that we need to be
forwarding the message from Matthew 24?” It may be possible to read the passage
in that light. However it does not give any more emphasis in Matthew 28 to the
message of Matthew 24 than it does to the message of Matthew, chapters five
through seven, or even the parables of Matthew, chapter 25. It is simply a
message to the disciples to teach what they have been taught. Of course we may
want to see those instructions as applicable to us as well, but then we must
ask what we have been taught? Are we presenting an equivalent message? Is it
even possible to do so?
When we look
at how that message was interpreted in the first century, A.D., it may seem
quite foreign to our “modern” eyes. We find for instance that among the
followers of Jesus, property was shared and parceled out according to need.[ii]
How would that look, today? Would it play out as a pure influence unaffected by
the politics and culture of today, or would it be changed depending on whether
a culture was based on capitalism or socialism? Would one “Ism” be more
Christian than the other? Or would they simply be affectations distorting what
Christianity really is? When we consider the ramifications of the different perspectives,
often held very dear by individuals within their societies, it may become
obvious that a simplistic “chain letter” understanding of the Bible can fall
short in many ways.
Apocalyptic
passages may devolve into simply the negative result to be inflicted on another
“Ism” which stands in the way of one presenting the perspective of their own “Ism.”
It becomes less about actually discovering the original message and more about
self-promotion as a way of vindicating a particular perspective that may or may
not be right. We have seen examples of different perspective playing out in
this way within the Seventh-day Adventist Church throughout its history, and
that of the Millerites from which they sprung. The “Shut Door” doctrine[iii]
is an early example. Due to the belief that the judgment had ensued in 1844,
some of the early believers in the denomination felt that the opportunity for
salvation had passed and the door was shut. This being the case, the need for foreign
missionary endeavors was not clearly seen until the 1870’s when J. N. Andrews
became the denomination’s first overseas missionary.[iv]
There has
also been ongoing challenges to the denominational position regarding the
Investigative Judgment, a uniquely Seventh-day Adventist understanding that
attempts to reconcile the idea of the previously mentioned judgment beginning
in the 1844 time frame of the Millerites, yet not preventing the continuing
conversion of souls from “lost” to “saved,” thus allowing for the continued
growth of the denomination. Notwithstanding, there have been several efforts to
question the efficacy of that accommodation. Perhaps notable or maybe more
appropriately in some cases, infamously, among those attempting to call for
re-examination of the Investigative Judgment were Robert Brinsmead, Desmond
Ford, and Raymond Cottrell. There of course have been many others who have
urged that the denomination revisit this and other perspectives, but for
various reasons these individuals tended to serve more as “lightning rods” for
these issues perhaps than others, sometimes at great cost to themselves.
Unfortunately,
perhaps, we have tended for too long to continue with the “chain letter”
approach to the Bible and have considered it more important to copy the words
of the letter than to be concerned with whether or not what we are doing truly
makes sense theologically. When Martin Luther, an educated man, began to see
that there was disconnect between the church’s theology and the Bible, the
church, rather than listen, found it easier to cast him from their fellowship. He
was “breaking the chain” of what had been written and copied for centuries. Maybe
after over five hundred more centuries, we can finally start to listen to those
honest, educated individuals within Christendom who have the gift of
discovering these disconnects and guiding our way through them.
