The historicist method understands the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation to meet their fulfillments in historical time through a sequence of events running from the prophet’s time down to the establishment of God’s kingdom at the end of the world. This appears to be the way that the ancients interpreted these prophecies. The historicist method was fairly standard throughout the Protestant world from the time of the Reformation through the first half of the 19th Century. This method was taken over by the Adventist pioneers and has continued to be the standard approach ever since, even though it has become increasingly rejected by biblical scholarship outside the denomination.
On the negative side, historicist interpretation has often been plagued by a number of faults. There is a tendency to pay much more attention to history and to the newspapers than to the exegesis of the biblical text. For example, see Uriah Smith on the trumpets (475-517). In the course of 42 pages of interpretation there is but one single exegetical statement. Verses are printed according to the King James Version followed by pages of historical detail without a single reference back to the text or its background in the Old Testament. Sixty-two percent of the text is in quotation marks, being culled from earlier non-Adventist historicist writers. This leads to the suspicion the Brother Smith himself never did any serious work in the text. In addition, the desire to locate just where we are in the course of history has often led historicists to unhealthy attempts at date-setting and manipulation of the text in service of theological agendas. And the use of history, there has been a huge difference of opinion as to just what events in history are a fulfillment of just what symbolism. It is problems such as these, along with critical bias against the concept of predictive prophecy, that caused the general demise of historicism, to the point where in scholarly discussions today, the possibility never even comes up.
Given the difficulties with historicism why bother with it any more? What difference does it make? Why would it be worth the trouble to defend in a world that is mainly concerned with the “now?” Well, for one thing, historicism remains the primary approach that is used in Adventist evangelism. The way our fundamental beliefs are presented to the public is intertwined with a historicist approach to Daniel and Revelation. To abandon the method out of convenience is to call into question the entire basis upon which millions have chosen to align themselves with the Adventist movement. For this reason alone, it would be unwise to relinquish the approach casually. If it must be put to rest, let it only be on the basis of overwhelming and compelling biblical evidence.
A second reason to hang on to historicism, if it is intellectually credible to do so, is that it provides a solid basis for confidence in the future work of God. Just as the historical reality that Jesus was raised from the dead gives us confidence that we too will one day be raised from the dead, so the recognition of prophetic fulfillments in the past offers confidence that the last events of this earth’s history will also occur according to the plan of God. To move to a totally futurist approach in search of greater clarity regarding unfulfilled events is to abandon the basis for confidence that unfulfilled prophecy will in fact occur, as it has in the past.
A third reason to seek support for a continued use of historicist method is that it is also central to the whole concept of Adventist self-understanding and identity. Adventists are not particularly kinder than other Christians, they are not more Christ-centered or gospel-oriented than other Christians, they are not less prone to sexual or physical abuse, nor are they less subject to addictions in the broadest sense of the term. The Adventist claim to a unique, end-time role in God’s plan for the close of earth’s history is grounded in careful attention to the apocalyptic prophecies of Daniel and Revelation. To abandon these, and/or to abandon the method that brought us where we are, is, to a large degree, to abandon our self-understanding and identity. Few movements have ever survived the loss of core identity.
Interpreting Biblical Apocalyptic (11): From Exegesis to Application—Futurism
The futurist approach to apocalyptic prophecy, particularly to Revelation, sees the fulfillment of most of Revelation being restricted to a short period of time still future to our own day. In its dispensational form, this approach limits most of Revelation to the last seven years of earth’s history, following a secret rapture of Christians. Even within the Adventist context, increasing numbers of Bible students are seeking end-time understandings in every corner of Daniel and Revelation.
On the positive side, there are clearly many aspects of Daniel and Revelation that were intended to portray the far future from the perspective of the prophets’ time and place (Dan 2:44-45; 8:26; 11:40; 12:4,13; Rev 1:19; 6:15-17; 7:15-17; 19:11-21; 21:1-22:5). Most of what these passages portray has not occurred to this day. So an examination of Daniel and Revelation without an openness to understanding of future events would be an inappropriate limitation on the divine supervision of these books.
Approaches to Daniel and Revelation that limit the meaning of most of the text to end-time events, however, have consistently proven to claim more than they can deliver. Dispensationalism trumpets a literal approach to the Bible, yet imposes a system upon biblical interpretation that forces texts into molds which resist sound exegesis of those same texts. Adventist forms of futurism tend toward an allegorism of dual or multiple applications that quickly lose touch with the original setting and context of the prophecies. A futurism that ignores the cues in the text in the name of relevance, ends up abandoning the text for a contemporary system. An appropriate search for unfulfilled prophecy will always ground itself in the original meaning of the prophecy.
Interpreting Biblical Apocalyptic (10): From Exegesis to Application—Preterism/Idealism
The above study demonstrates the vital importance of understanding the original context in which apocalyptic visions were given their setting. The divine and human intentions of the text’s language must be respected. Nevertheless, if apocalyptic texts do reflect a predictive element, later readers of those texts are challenged to understand just how those predictions apply to the course of subsequent human history. There are three main approaches to this problem. We will look at each of these briefly.
Preterism/Idealism
Preterist scholars tend to limit the value of apocalyptic texts to the original time and place. In their view exegesis of apocalyptic texts helps us gain a better understanding of the world in which the texts came into existence. Books like Daniel and Revelation were written to their time and place and need to be understood within that context. The primary focus is not on prediction of future events, but on analysis of the situation in which and to which the apocalypse was written. Principles drawn from exegesis of the text in its original situation can be applied by believers to later situations (this application of principles in apocalyptic literature is often known as “idealism”).
On the positive side, preterism/idealism is the approach that most believing Christians (including Adventists) take to the bulk of the biblical materials. The letters of Paul, for example, must be understood as the products of a human writer’s intention reflecting a specific purpose and aimed at a particular audience. To read such letters as if they were philosophical treatises with a universal purpose is clearly inappropriate. Nevertheless, in recognizing God’s purpose in including these letters in the Bible, we feel free to draw principles from Paul’s letters and apply them to our own time and place as the Word of God. When done with sensitivity to the original context, this is entirely appropriate for Paul’s letters and also for parts of Daniel and Revelation. Certainly the seven letters of Revelation suggest that they should be addressed from a preterist/idealist perspective (Rev 1:11; 2:1,7,8.11, etc.).
The problem with preterism/idealism comes in when it is imposed on apocalyptic texts that cry out for other approaches. Biblical scholars are human beings. Whether or not the scholar is conscious of the fact, psychological and spiritual motivations may drive a person to reject the plain implications of the biblical text. Some scholars may limit interpretation to preterism because it does not require a belief in inspiration and predictive prophecy. Others may do so because their scientific training inclines them to reject the possibility of the supernatural in any form. Roman Catholic scholars at one point in history turned to radical preterism in order to deflect the pointed historicist interpretations of Dan 7 and Rev 13 made by Luther and other protestants. While preterist interpretation has value in its proper place, Adventists rightly reject placing psychological or scientific limits on how the Word of God should be understood. Preterism/idealism alone is not an adequate approach to apocalyptic prophecy.
Interpreting Biblical Apocalyptic (9): Safeguards for Apocalyptic Scholars III
4) Focus on General Reading
A fourth major safeguard to apocalyptic interpretation is to spend the majority of one’s study time reading the Bible rather than searching through a concordance. An obsession with the various details of the Bible can lead one away from its central thrust. Without safeguards the use of a concordance may cause us to focus on texts apart from their contexts.
When you read biblical books from beginning to end the biblical author is in control of the order and flow of the material. The author leads you naturally from one idea to the next, so your exposure to the Bible is not controlled by any need arising from within yourself or from your background. Broad reading of the Bible, therefore, anchors the interpreter in the intentions of the original writers and helps the interpreter to get the “big picture” view that provides the best safeguard against bizarre interpretations of its isolated parts. General reading naturally encourages a teachable spirit and helps you see the text as it was intended to be read. The Bible is not supposed to learn from us; we are supposed to learn from the Bible.
This aspect of a “life hermeneutic” is particularly important in the computer age. Computers have been a great blessing to Bible study. But there is a dark side to their use. Thanks to the computer it is possible to spend hundreds of hours in “Bible study” without ever actually reading the Bible itself. The meanings you can draw from such study may be extremely impressive, yet have nothing to do with the original writer’s intention. It can be like taking a pair of scissors and cutting fifty texts out of your Bible, tossing them like a salad in a bowl, and finally pulling them out one by one and saying, “This sequence is from the Lord.” Whether the concordance is a print version or is computerized, the process puts the interpreter in control of how the Biblical text impacts on his or her understanding of truth.
The use of a concordance is an important piece in an overall hermeneutic for biblical study. But we need to keep in mind that when we use a concordance we are in control of what where we go and what we learn, whereas in broad reading the biblical writers are in control. In concordance study there is the danger of losing the forest in the midst of all the trees. Unless we spend the majority of our time in broad reading of the Bible, we will tend manipulate the text in service of our own agenda, even though we do not intend to do so.
5) The Criticism of Peers
Finally it is vital, in the study of apocalyptic as well as other biblical texts, to give careful attention to the criticism of peers (people who give similar attention to the Bible as you do), especially those who disagree with you or who are competent in the original languages and the tools of exegesis. One of the biggest problems in Biblical understanding is that each of us has a natural bent to self-deception (Jer 17:9). That self-deception runs so deep that sometimes, even if you are using the original text, praying, and doing a lot of general reading in the clear texts of the Bible, it is still possible to end up in a completely bizarre place. The best antidote to self-deception is to constantly subject one’s own understandings to the criticism of others who are making equally rigorous efforts to understand those texts.
It may be painful to listen to that kind of criticism. Nevertheless, such criticisms are particularly valuable when they come from people we naturally disagree with. People who disagree with us see things in the text that we would never see because of our particular blind spots and defense mechanisms. A sister in the church may be just as unteachable as I am, but if she has a different set of blind spots than I do, she will see things in the text that I would miss and I will see things that she would miss.
No one who studies the Bible with earnest prayer and self-distrust will want to ignore the apocalyptic parts of the Bible, just because they are difficult. On the contrary, those who saturate themselves in the big picture of the Bible that comes from broad reading of the clear texts, corrected by vigorous listening to others, will gain two great benefits as a result. They will stay out of the pit of sensationalism and date-setting. And they will enjoy the wonderful sense of assurance and identity that comes when one better understands the steady and reliable workings of God in human history.
Interpreting Biblical Apocalyptic (8): Safeguards for Apocalyptic Scholars II
2) Use a Variety of Translations
A second safeguard against the misuse of apocalyptic texts is the use of a variety of translations in the course of our study. While some translations are better than others, it is still safer for those who have no access to the original languages to consult a variety of translations of the Bible when doing serious study. Every translation has its limitations and weaknesses and to some degree reflects the biases of the translator(s). These limitations can be minimized by comparing several translations against each other. Where most translators agree, the meaning of the underlying Greek or Hebrew text is probably fairly clear and the translation can be safely followed. The authority that you as an interpreter give to a particular reading of a text, will depend on how certain it is that the reading is founded on the clear meaning of the original. When most or all translators agree you can be reasonably confident that the meaning of the original is being fairly represented.
But what do you do when the translators disagree, and disagree widely? When there is wide disagreement among most or all of the translations available to you, the original and its meaning is probably difficult or ambiguous. This is not the kind of text that can be safely used as a basis of one’s belief system. Apocalyptic texts often fall in this category. It is as dangerous to base one’s theology on unclear biblical texts as it is to ignore the clear texts of the Bible. The work of David Koresh on the seals is an excellent example of that danger.
How can one become aware of the biases in a translation without a knowledge of the biblical languages? Compare four or give good translations on a particular text. What if three or four of them all agree, but one of them is way off in some other direction? That is usually a reflection of the translator’s bias. When you compare translations long enough by this method, you can gain a sense of each translations biases. This is a very important safeguard against misreading the Bible on the basis of mistranslation or translational bias. Where translation patterns indicate that the original text is clear, on the other hand, we can safely find authoritative meaning in the translated text.
3) Focus on the Clear Texts
A third major safeguard against the misinterpretation of apocalyptic texts is to spend the majority of one’s study time in the clear texts of Scripture. If you want to really let the Scriptures speak for themselves, spend the majority of your time in the sections of Scripture that are reasonably clear. There are many parts of the Bible regarding which there is little disagreement among Christians, while other texts vex even the Greek and Hebrew scholars. So an extremely important safeguard in the study of Scripture is to spend the majority of your time in the sections that are reasonably clear. The clear texts of Scripture ground the reader in the great central themes of the biblical message, safeguarding the interpreter against the misuse of texts that are more ambiguous.
On the other hand, if you spend the majority of your time in texts like the seals and trumpets of Revelation or Daniel 11, you will go crazy. One of the major tactics of people who misuse the Bible is to take ambiguous texts, develop creative solutions to the problems they find there, and then use those solutions as the basis for their theology. Such interpreters often end up having to distort clear texts of Scripture because the message there doesn’t fit the theology that they have developed from the difficult texts.
An important safeguard for the study of books like Daniel and Revelation, then, is not to make them the sole or primary focus of one’s study of the Bible. These books are very important to us as Seventh-day Adventists. They are at the heart of our self-identity, of what we believe about ourselves and about God. But apocalyptic texts can also be the breeding ground of dangerous speculations. They are best understood by interpreters who are thoroughly grounded in the clear, central teachings of the Bible. The clear texts of Scripture ground the reader in the big picture of the Bible and the great verities of its message. Such an interpreter will be much less prone to the speculative excesses that sometimes plague the interpretation of books like Daniel and Revelation.
Interpreting Biblical Apocalyptic (7): Safeguards for Apocalyptic Scholars
The interpretation of biblical apocalyptic, however, has proven to be problematic throughout history. The complexities of apocalyptic interpretation have caused apocalyptic to become a “safe-haven” for time-setters and speculators. The goal of any biblical hermeneutic is a whole-hearted openness to the Word of God wherever it may lead. But when it comes to apocalyptic literature, the meaning of the text often seems to resist our openness to it. It becomes very easy for us to read our own ideas, concepts, and needs into the symbolism. The resulting interpretation may look more like us than like God.
How can we safeguard our study of apocalyptic from speculation? The best way, as we have seen above, is careful attention to the original setting in which the passage was given, including the original languages in which the text was written. But most readers of the Bible will never have the opportunity to learn Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic, or to become specialists in the ancient time, place, and circumstances. Understanding of the Bible must never be limited to scholars and specialists. But can non-specialists approach the apocalyptic texts of the Bible without succumbing to speculation? I believe so. I’d like to suggest five approaches to Bible study that can keep us in the solid center of the Biblical message. These form what I sometimes call a “life hermeneutic,” a lifelong process of becoming conformed to the message of Scripture, rather than bending it to conform to our own needs and purposes.
1) Prayer and Self-Distrust
As we approach any biblical text, but especially apocalyptic texts, it is important to study them in the in the context of much prayer and an attitude of self-distrust. Our hearts are naturally deceitful (Jer 17:9). By nature we lack a teachable spirit. It doesn’t matter how much Greek you know or how many Ph.D.s you accumulate, if you don’t have a teachable spirit, your learning is worth nothing. True knowledge of God does not come from merely intellectual pursuit or academic study (John 7:17; 1 Cor 2:14; James 1:5). “The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.” 1 Corinthians 2:14 (NIV).
According to 2 Thess 2:10, the knowledge of God comes from a willingness to receive the truth from God no matter what it costs. The gifts of God are free but they can be costly in their own way. Knowledge of God can cost your life, your family, your friends, and your reputation. But if you are willing to follow the truth no matter what the cost to you, you will receive it.
The study of apocalyptic texts, therefore, needs to begin with authentic prayer. An example of authentic prayer might go something like this: “Lord, I want to know the truth about this text (or topic) no matter what that knowledge costs me.” That’s a hard prayer to pray. But if you pray that prayer, you will receive God’s truth. And you will also pay the price. When we come to God’s Word with this kind of personal dedication, there is reason to hope that the natural self-deception of our hearts can be turned aside by the Spirit of God and the Bible can truly become our teacher rather than our servant.
Reflections on a Knee to the Neck and Burning Streets
This blog is not for everyone. It is about a German-American talking to my brothers and sisters who identify, or are identified, as “white”. If you are a brother or sister who is identified as “non-white” or a “person of color,” I have no expertise to address how you are feeling in light of the senseless death of George Floyd. It was and is a great tragedy. My heartfelt sympathy goes out to his family and all who loved him. But if I can, in a small way, help some who look like me to understand just a bit of what they and you are going through, I am obligated to make the effort.
It happened one day in Orlando, Florida. I was attending a conference in a hotel near downtown. Next to the hotel was a lovely lake with a park-like strip between the lake and the four-lane boulevard that intersects the downtown from north to south. During a break I decided to take a walk along the park-like strip between the lake and the street. The path was separated from the boulevard by a strip of grass and trees about twenty-feet wide, so I was at a small distance from the traffic. I was dressed in my best suit and tie, so I probably looked pretty professional.
Suddenly I heard a voice calling from the street. “Jon Paulien!! I know you from television!!” I looked over at the street and a car had stopped with the window down. A young man I didn’t know was beckoning me from the passenger seat. Not wanting to be rude, I went over reluctantly, realizing his car should not be stopping on a busy street. I acknowledged his greeting and asked how he recognized me. He told me of the TV program and I told him I appreciated his gratitude for the program. Glancing nervously to my left I saw a police car approaching and quickly told him, “You’ve got to go, there’s a police car approaching.” The driver of the car took the hint and drove off immediately.
I was turning away from the street to walk back to the path when the police car came to a screeching halt near me. I turned around and the policemen began yelling at the top of his voice through his open window: “YOU ARE THE MOST SELFISH, INCONSIDERATE, STUPID PERSON I HAVE EVER SEEN!!!!! HOW COULD YOU STOP TRAFFIC JUST TO HAVE A CHAT. . . .” I honestly don’t remember what else he said, I had totally numbed out by this time. When he finally paused for a breath, I broke in and said as calmly as I could muster, “Thank you, sir, I’ll remember that in the future,” then turned around and walked away. But as I walked away I was literally shaking, totally traumatized by the feeling of injustice, and also the combination of loud anger with the emblems of authority (uniform and police car). The thought occurred to me, “If that could happen to me, right here, right now, and wearing my best suit, what would have happened to me just now if I had been black and wearing a hoodie?”
I recalled a minor incident years before in upstate New York. I was driving in a small town with my good friend Al from the City. We were trying to find our way through that unfamiliar rural town when I realized that I had just gone through a stop sign without knowing it. Right in front of me was a police car, but officer didn’t seem to have noticed what I did. I told Al, “It’s a good thing that policeman didn’t see me, I just went through a stop sign.” Al responded, “Yeah, that’s a good thing for both of us. He would have given you a ticket, but he would have given me a beatin’.” Al is African-American. He was joking. Or was he?
Police are human. They have good days and bad days. But nearly every police officer I have ever met would rank among the finest human beings I know. Self-controlled. Professional. Courteous. Nearly all are impressive and honorable human beings. But I know from experience not all are self-controlled, at least not all the time. Not all are professional and unbiased. And it does not take many to taint the whole. The officer in Orlando completely misread what was happening in front of him. He did not know that I was where I was under some duress. I don’t know what he was going through that day, but what he said and did to me was wrong, it was unjust. It was over the top. And I ended up shaking at the abuse and the injustice in a way I have never experienced before or since. And for a moment, I tasted just a bit of what my African-American friend and other people of color go through way more frequently.
In light of the burning streets, it is no doubt tempting for you to believe that an isolated instance of police brutality cannot measure up to the national chaos that has followed. But that is because you and I have never been mistreated because we were driving while black, or jogging while black, or even walking along the street while black. I spoke yesterday with Leslie Pollard, President of Oakwood University, a predominantly black Seventh-day Adventist institution. He told me that the students and faculty were deeply traumatized by what happened to George Floyd. They are wondering if the Adventist Church has anything relevant to say to all this. But frankly, if we are neutral at a time like this, we are irrelevant. The students and faculty at Oakwood are saddened, they are angry, they are frustrated. Some are outraged and tempted to fight. It is not because they have over-active imaginations. It is because most have had multiple encounters with police like the one I did. After an event like this, each wonders, “Could I be next? Could my father be next? My sister, my children?” It is not an illusion. It does not take many incidents like the one I experienced to live in constant fear of those who have been called to serve and protect.
There is such a thing as systemic or institutional racism. These are often not the result of conscious intent, but combined with conscious or unconscious bias, result to the disadvantage of many. When you are at the disadvantaged end of the societal spectrum, it can affect your physical, mental and emotional health. People who are systematically discriminated against because of the color of their skin or the place of their origin, live shorter, less-healthy lives (see the research of David Williams at Harvard). And it is not just people of color. Williams discovered that working-class whites and white evangelical Christians today are experiencing similar marginalization (“trailer trash,” “Bible-thumping bigots”) as their darker-hued family members experience. And with similar health consequences. So ultimately the problem is not a matter of right or left, black or white, we must all examine our hearts regarding how we treat those who are different from us.
I don’t have an answer for unconscious bias or systemic discrimination. I don’t have an answer for how criminal elements so quickly take advantage of righteous indignation. The people who are actually rioting are rarely the same ones who are demonstrating against injustice. You don’t correct an injustice by creating new injustices. Many of the homes and businesses being destroyed are owned by the very people hurting over the loss of George Floyd. The vandalism and destruction must be stopped. But in our outrage over the way law-abiding police are being treated, and over the wanton destruction of property and livelihoods, let us not forget how all this started. Let us consider how these events are impacting our brothers and sisters. And let’s do something about it.
What can you do? First of all, speak up. And not just in mixed audiences. Speak up to your own white brothers and sisters. It is often hard to speak up for yourself. It comes across as self-serving. Our black brothers and sisters need us to speak up for them and with them at this time. I am speaking up here. And I will be looking for other ways to get my voice heard on this issue. Second, pray that God will bring people of color into your life and impress you with how to offer a word of encouragement and support, and also deeds of kindness and love. Third, work to improve the social structures in your community. Many people of color live in food deserts, no easy access to fresh fruits and vegetables. It is no wonder so many are over-weight and diabetic. Band together with others to create opportunities for those less fortunate than yourselves. Lobby, vote, do all in your power to speak up for those less fortunate than you. And finally, pray that the God of justice will move mightily in this situation to show how He feels about the hurting and the oppressed. And pray that He will use you to show his justice and mercy to them. It is time to “do justice and to love mercy” (Micah 6:8).
Interpreting Biblical Apocalyptic (6): Hermeneutical Keys
There are a number of hermeneutical keys that are suggested by a comparison of Daniel 2 and Daniel 7.
1) God speaks to each of His human emissaries in the context of their own time, place, and circumstances. He speaks in language they can understand and appreciate, even when He speaks in apocalyptic terms. He uses the language of the prophet’s past to paint a picture of the prophet’s future. God meets people where they are. This has hermeneutical implications. It means that in our study of apocalyptic literature, it is imperative that we seek to understand it in terms of the original time, place, language, and circumstances, as well as the content of the whole of Scripture. We should not expect to find God’s meaning for the text in some context outside that of the original revelation. God’s meaning for today will not contradict the message that He placed in the vision in the first place.
2) The purpose of apocalyptic visions is not simply to satisfy human curiosity about the future (although that may have played a role in the first instance, according to Dan 2:29). It is a message about the character and the workings of God. God is not only communicating something about the future course of history, He is revealing Himself as the One who is in control of that history. To study apocalyptic only as a key to unlock the future is to miss its message about a God who seeks to be known by His people. From a Christian perspective, apocalyptic is never rightly understood unless its central focus is on the “son of man,” Jesus Christ.
3) Apocalyptic is people-oriented. In conforming to the principle of “God meets people where they are,” it is evident that the purpose of apocalyptic is to comfort and instruct the people of God on earth. God offers a powerful message of both hope and warning to the original recipients of each message, and that message of hope and warning has a repeated application to every reader of these visions throughout history. Whether or not the forecast of history has always been rightly understood, God’s appeal to the human recipients of His revelation is ever fresh.
4) While in Daniel 2 and 7 the issue of God’s control over history is front row and center, it is important to see how that control is exercised in the larger sweep of the Bible. As a God of love, God initiates, encourages and respects the freedom of His creatures. The cross demonstrates that God does not exercise control through overwhelming power and dominance, but through demonstration of His character and persuasion. In Daniel 7 human exercise of power is portrayed in terms of vicious, carnivorous beasts that trample and destroy. In contrast, God rules by kindness (Rom 2:4) and self-sacrifice (Rev 5:6). God prefers to exercise His authority with gentleness and patience rather than intimidation and force.
Interpreting Biblical Apocalyptic (5): Visions Meet People Where They Are
The crucial question for prophetic interpretation is whether the general biblical principle of “God meets people where they are” is applicable to apocalyptic prophecies such as Daniel and Revelation. If so, how does it affect our interpretation of these prophecies? I believe it will be helpful to our purpose to notice that God at times even adjusted the form of apocalyptic visions in order to more effectively communicate to the inspired prophet. The most striking example is in the book of Daniel. There visions of similar content were given to two people from completely different backgrounds.
Many Adventists have tended to distinguish between the visionary experiences of Nebuchadnezzar and Daniel. They say that the pagan king had a dream in Daniel 2 but that Daniel himself had a vision in Daniel 7. This distinction is not, however, warranted by the biblical text. Unusual wording in two passages, Dan 2:28 and 7:1, while often overlooked by commentators as of little interest, reveals that the experience of the two “prophets” was the same. In Dan 2:28 Nebuchadnezzar is told, “Your dream and the visions that passed through your mind as you lay on your bed are these” (NIV). In Dan 7:1 we are told, “Daniel had a dream, and visions passed through his mind as he was lying on his bed (NIV).” The underlying Aramaic is essentially identical with that of Dan 2:28. In both cases, God chose to reveal Himself in visionary form, He was in full control of the revelation.
Not only is the mode of revelation essentially the same, but the content of the two visions, when interpreted, is essentially the same. In Dan 2 the vision begins with the kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar (Babylon), traces three kingdoms that will follow, and eventuates in the kingdom that the God of heaven will set up and which will never be destroyed (Dan 2:36-45). In Dan 7 we again have a series of four kingdoms, with the first representing Babylon (Dan 7:4,17), and again the interpretation eventuates in the everlasting kingdom of the Most High (Dan 7:26-27). To Nebuchadnezzar, the heathen king, God portrays the future world empires by means of an idol. The term translated “statue” or “image” is frequently used in connection with idolatry in the Old Testament (2 Kings 11:18; 2 Chron 23:17; Amos 5:26, etc.). That this meaning is to be understood here is clear from Daniel 3. There Nebuchadnezzar recognized exactly what to do with such an object! Nebuchadnezzar could appreciate God’s use of this cultural concept, since he saw the nations of the world as bright and shining counterparts of the gods that they worshiped.
God here chooses to use cultural expressions with which Nebuchadnezzar was familiar, and those concepts lent themselves to the point God was trying to make to him. God’s point in the vision was that He was the source of Nebuchadnezzar’s power and position (Dan 2:37-38), that He is in full control of all kingdoms of the earth (and their gods) and places them under the control of whomever He wishes (Dan 4:17). But Nebuchadnezzar was not to understand this point until his second vision (4:5, 34-37). In chapter 2 Nebuchadnezzar accepts that God is a revealer of mysteries (Dan 2:47), but his reworking of the idol into one totally of gold shows his unwillingness to submit to God’s control of history at this point in time.
For Daniel, on the other hand, the nations of the world were like vicious, ravenous beasts who were hurting his people (chapter 7). God again draws on the prophet’s knowledge and setting as He shapes the vision He gives to Daniel. This time, instead of symbolism drawn from the Babylonian world, He shapes the vision as a midrash on the creation story of Genesis chapters 1 and 2. God describes Daniel’s future in terms of a new creation.
“Daniel said, ‘In my vision at night I looked, and there before me were the four winds of heaven churning up the great sea’”(Dan 7:2). The concept of winds stirring up the sea is reminiscent of Gen 1:2, where the wind/spirit moves upon the waters of the great deep. As in the original creation, beasts then appear (Dan 7:3ff., cf. Gen 1:24-25; 2:19). In each story the appearance of the beasts is followed by the appearance of a “son of man,” who is given dominion over the beasts (Gen 1:26-28; 2:19-20, cf. Dan 7:13-14). What we have in this vision is an early example of “second Adam” typology, in which an end-time Adam figure takes possession of God’s kingdom in behalf of His people (Dan 7:13-14, cf. 7:27).
What message was God seeking to communicate to Daniel and his fellow exiles in Babylon? I believe it was the same basic message that God sought to communicate to Nebuchadnezzar. God is the One who is in control of history and of all the affairs of nations. To Daniel and his fellow exiles, things seemed out of control. The Godless nations flaunted their dominion (see Dan 7:6,12, which use the same word for “dominion” as Dan 7:14, 26-27) like carnivorous beasts ravaging a flock. To Daniel in Babylon, the message of Dan 7 was a great comfort: just as Adam had dominion over the beasts in the Garden of Eden, so the Son of Man, when he comes, will have dominion over these nations that are hurting your people. God is in control even when things seem out of control. He is the one who sets up kings and removes them.
An “Adventist Muslim” Response to COVID-19
It has been one of the great privileges of my life to work for 13 years at Loma Linda University, a grand experiment in the possibility that many religions can work together in a common mission to “continue the teaching and healing ministry of Jesus Christ.” I have been often been amazed at the spiritual commitment of the non-Christian faculty and staff at LLU. Among them is Eba Hathout, Professor of Medicine and Medical Director of the Pediatric Diabetes Center at our Children’s Hospital. A self-professed “Adventist Muslim,” she speaks below with prophetic power to our situation. This is a transcript of her Ramadan speech at an interfaith event on May 14, 2020:
“It was a mere two months ago, that we were all wrapped up around ourselves. We as individuals, political parties, different-color races, religions and countries. On the global scene, our world was in a state of toxic inflammation, with fires of anger and hatred and war everywhere. Then in just one moment, on March 11, everything stopped, and the world stood still. I had been busy preparing for the annual Hassan Hathout Legacy interfaith event: For the Love of Tomorrow, which was scheduled to take place at the Huntington Gardens on March 15th. My last meeting at the venue was on March 10th when all details were final. The next morning, news about the virus invading America was starting to erupt, and I made the difficult decision to postpone our event. Later that evening, and with unprecedented speed, the whole of America shut down. My son and his classmates at Harvard Law School were told not come back to campus after Spring Break. Harvard was closing. Other colleges shut down. Schools followed. Our nation, and much of the world, was on lock down.
“As a physician, the priority at our university hospital was how to take care of patients while keeping everyone safe. We had heard the horror stories of Italy, and then of New York. The work environment changed to a war zone, with command center meetings twice a day including weekends, and numerous other virtual meetings throughout the day. At Loma Linda, every meeting starts with a prayer. A two-year transition to Telemedicine had to be done in two weeks. Quick decisions were made about which doctors needed to stay and work from home for their own safety. Visionary leaders planned and were ready for the worst in terms of casualties. However, the worst did not happen in the form of massive numbers of sick and dead people, rather it was in the many co-workers and patients’ families who had to lose income or livelihood. At work and throughout the nation, financial losses were cruel and grave.
“We take comfort in God’s insurmountable power and bountiful grace as we read in the bible: But They that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength, they shall mount up with wings as eagles, they shall run and not be weary, and they shall walk and not faint.
We read echoes in the Quran: It is God who started creation that can start it again. He shall grant you endless bounties from heaven, and from earth.
Today more than ever, we are being tested for our capability to adapt, and our ability to recover. Self-renewal, in all of God’s living creatures, is what favors the survival of one species over another. It is that inner force to bounce back and move on. This too is a skill in which God can provide and guide.
“One month after ‘D-Day’ of the pandemic, I started going out for solitary walks around our Pasadena neighborhood. I couldn’t help but notice that our world had changed again. The sky was bluer, the trees were greener. I could smell more roses as the earth began to breathe. There were far more birds singing and children walking with their parents in the streets. Strangers were smiling to each other in the markets, and the pavements were full of friendly words and gestures. I didn’t know quite how to describe it other than to say that, somehow, despite the threat of a deadly virus in the air, the world felt less toxic, and more human.
“Towards the end of April, the lunar month of Ramadan started, and it was then that I realized what an unprecedented fasting month that would be. This time, it was not just Muslims who were staying home reflecting and reading scripture, Americans of all faiths were doing the same. It was as if all of America was living with us, our first common Ramadan. Our mouths are not just closed but masked with veils of different colors, as we each try to protect our neighbors and our friends. The only time we unveil is when we talk to God in prayer. Our eyes yearn for each other. We got accustomed to smiling with our eyes rather than our lips. This inconvenience is far more tolerable for those who wear the mask, not out of fear, but out of love.
“In the past, when we called for cleaner air, we sometimes forgot that toxicity was also spiritual and emotional and social. It took one tiny virus, killing thousands around the world, for us to wake up to a gentler and kinder America. And it is important as we mask and glove each day to remember why we do this. Personally, it is easier to accept that one will die whenever God destined them to, and just move on. One other factor is added to this equation, it is that negligence can carry harm to someone we love. I know many who have such orientation. Taking precautions is neither forgetful of faith nor of destiny, it is not born out of restlessness, rather it is taking a bold step out of the house of fear, and into the house of love.
In his poem, The Great Realization, Tom Roberts was asked by a little boy: why did it take a virus to bring people back together, he answered: sometimes you got to get sick before you start feeling better. That is why Hindsight is 2020.
“So here we are together, living through and making History as the generation of 2020. Therein lies the perfect milieu for fasting, where the inflammation of hatred is quietened, and many toxins that invade our ears and gut and spirit are put to rest, body and soul align to make happy brains and happy hearts. That is healing at its best. There is a depth and a height which we attain when we fast that is enormously uplifting. Whenever we reach one mountaintop, we begin to climb another. Everything shrinks to its proper dimension, and a magical power prevails. That I would argue, is the power of distilled, detoxified, and purified Love.
“As a child, I remember sitting next to my father watching the first Apollo moon landing, I recall my father’s words which echo in my conscience to this day: Isn’t it a pity, that Man who was able to reach the moon, is still not able to reach the heart of his fellow man. Now that we face this common and largely unpredictable virus threat, perhaps we can start conducting our lives with a more vivid image of an ancient and eternal reality, that of our own impermanence, and our ultimate divine destination.
“While we cannot cure the world, we can certainly do our part, where we are, with what we have..like the old story of the man who walked on the beach rescuing one starfish at a time by tossing it from the sand back to the ocean where it can live..When someone told him: “There are hundreds of beaches and thousands of starfish, you won’t make a difference..” he replied as he tossed another starfish back into the ocean: “I make a difference to this one.”
This pandemic has left us with many to resuscitate, and much to rebuild. So wherever we are, and however we can, let us take a path of love, and rescue whatever starfish come our way, remembering that if we cannot help everyone, sometimes it’s enough to make a difference to one.
“On these special last nights of Ramadan, I hope that our fast will add to the collective prayers of Americans of all faiths, and that divine healing can touch both body and soul of our nation. May God make us instruments of His mercy as we rebuild a common new path, guided by divine wisdom, and shining with God’s light.
“I pray that God will ease our deep longing for each other, and for people and places where we cannot be at present. Today in particular, I remember my own friends and say to them: In love we met, in love we part, and in love, I hope, we meet again.”