The Last Disciple by Hank Hanegraaff and Sigmund Brouwer
01/18/2005 20:57 Filed in: Books & Literature
POTENTIAL ABSTRACT SUBTITLES:
Take -THAT-, Tim LaHaye...
Opening an apocalyptic can of worms...
I was a teenage Dispensationalist...
Hank Hanegraaff of Bible Answer Man fame has thrown down the gauntlet to Tim LaHaye by releasing his own fictional counterpoint to the endtimes: The Last Disciple . Co-written by Sigmund Brouwer, this is the first in a proposed three-volume series that places the events of the Book of Revelation squarely in the first century against the backdrop of the Roman persecution of Christians under the Emperor Nero.
The book itself is a pretty good page-turner (I read it in no particular rush as bedtime reading in about two weeks). The protagonist of the story is a member of Nero's close inner circle named Vitas. Although a number of characters in the book are actual historical figures, Vitas is not. In the story, Vitas is increasingly troubled by the paranoid Nero's persecution of Christian believers. Although not a believer himself (at least in what's been published so far) Vitas finds himself in the middle of a spiritual struggle made even more complicated by his love for a freed Jewish slave, Sophia who is herself a believer in Jesus of Nazareth. The story takes place on a number of fronts in the Roman Empire, but primarily goes back and forth between first century Rome and Jerusalem.
I liked this book, and I don't want to reveal too much of the story. The authors have carefully constructed a tale that will appeal to both men and women. To speak in great generalities, there's enough action, fighting, and intrigue to keep male readers interested while the romantic threads that run throughout the story will keep any female reader turning pages as well. And regardless of your gender, if you are a student of John's Apocalypse, ancient history--especially Roman history--there's more than enough here to keep you interested.
As hinted at above, there's a little bit of controversy to this book, in more ways than one. First, from a theological perspective, Hanegraaff & Brouwer's Last Disciple takes a viewpoint completely contrary to the Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkin's Left Behind series. More than that, both The Last Disciple and Left Behind are printed by the same publisher, Tyndale House ! Word is that Lahaye is furious at Tyndale for publishing an opposing viewpoint. "They are going to take the money we made for them and promote this nonsense," said Tim Lahaye in an article first appearing in the Dallas Morning News.
In a nutshell, LaHaye's Dispensational Premillennial view says that at some date in the future, Jesus will return to take all believers away (known as the "Rapture") in an event that inaugurates a seven-year reign of terror by the Antichrist. This will end in an apocalyptic showdown between the forces of good and evil where Jesus will return and institute a thousand year rule, after which Judgement Day will occur when believers will enter into eternal glory and unbelievers will be cast into the Lake of Fire. Whoops, I just ruined the ending for those of you reading the Left Behind series. My apologies.
Hanegraaff and Brouwer are coming from a perspective known as Partial Preterism. If you've never heard of this, let me explain. Preterism says that the events described in the Book of Revelation have already taken place in the first century. The tribulation is the persecution of the church in the fifties and sixities of the first century, and Nero is the Antichrist. The Book of Revelation itself is written in a code based upon Old Testament symbols so as to keep it's message a secret from the Romans. A full preterist believes that everything that is described in the Book of Revelation has already taken place. A partial preterist such as Hanegraaff will distinguish himself by saying that not all of the things described in the last book of the Bible have yet occurred. Believers are still looking forward to the bodily return of Christ, the resurrection from the dead, and the judgment before entering into eternity, according to the partial view.
I grew up in a tradition that primarily espoused LaHaye's viewpoint of dispensationalism. Many Christians go through a time in their lives when they are overly fascinated with these issues. For me, it was when I was in high school, around my senior year. In seeking to understand the end times better, I read the leading authority of the day, Hal Lindsey. I read The Late Great Planet Earth (which, incidentally was the top-selling book, Christian or secular, of the 1970's), Lindsey's commentary on Revelation, There's a New World Coming, and of course, The 1980's: Countdown to Armageddon.
But the more dispensationalism I read, the less I seemed to buy it. Primarily as a sticking point for me was this idea that Jesus was going to come back in this secret second coming and take all the believers away seven years before his real second coming. I could not and still cannot find any biblical warrant for anything like this. Later I would learn that the idea of a "rapture"--rescuing all believers from the tribulation--is essentially new theology, originating from the mid-nineteenth century with John Darby who was a huge influence on Charles Scofield of the Scofield Bible. These were to influence 20th century individuals such as Charles Ryrie, Hal Lindsey, Tim LaHaye and others who have championed and promoted dispensationalism to the point that it is a predominant view among evangelical Christians. Although I don't consider it heretical, I have to remind people that it is not historic Christian belief.
There is one part of The Last Disciple in which Hanegraaff and Brouwer poke a bit of fun at the Left Behind series. The "last disciple" refers, of course, to the Apostle John who doesn't even appear in the book until well into the last third of the story. On p. 318, Hanegraaff and Brouwer write:
John continued to smile. "I'm sure that all believers would wish to be whisked away, taken up into thin air, to avoid the Tribulation. Yet that would be a false hope, especially if it replaces the true hope of the Resurrection, for the resurrection of Jesus and the resurrection promised to us because of it are what give us the hope to endure troubles. In this age. In any age, even should it take thousands of years for the Second Coming."
Personally, I am respectful of the partial preterist viewpoint more than dispensationalism because preterism treats the historical context behind the biblical text seriously. However, I think there is a midway point that I prefer. As I began to reject dispensationalism in my late teens, I began to form my own understanding and later I found a particular perspective that matched what I had understood from my study of the Bible quite well. It is known as Historical Premillienialism. If anything it is a midway point between the two options already discussed here. First of all, it does treat the historical realities behind the Book of Revelation seriously as does preterism, but it also looks to a future time of heightened persecution and an extremely godless individual who sets himself up as a messiah, and seeks self-worship, and self-exaltation. Historical premillennnialism rejects the idea of a secret rapture of the church, but rather says that believers will go through the tribulation before the second coming of Christ.
Biblical prophecy can have layers or multiple fulfillments. So in Hosea 11:1, the prophet can say "Out of Egypt I called my son" referring to the Exodus, but it also has further implication in regard to the Messiah as noted in Matthew 2:15 when Joseph hides Mary and the infant Jesus in Egypt to escape Herod. In Isaiah 7:14, we read "and a virgin [Hebrew, almah] will conceive and give birth to a son." This prophecy had immediate implication for King Ahaz, but it also had significance regarding the Messiah to come as noted by Matthew in his Gospel (Matt 1:22-23). This is--in its truest sense--prophecy being fulfilled which comes from the idea of being filled full. There can be layers to prophetic writing. This can certainly make it difficult to interpret, but it keeps us watchful and humble as we approach the Scriptures and the events that take place in the world around us. Unlike dispensationalists, we are careful not to jump to conclusions in interpreting current events and we would certainly avoid setting any dates for the return of Christ which has become fairly popular with dispensationalists over the last two centuries.
So, although I am respectful of Hanegraaff's position--much more so than LaHaye's--I would have to find a median position that treats seriously the history behind the Book of Revelation, but still looks for events to take place. Hardly anyone disagrees that through the ancient number game of gematria where letters of the alphabet stand for numbers (explained in detail in the book), the number 666 clearly says Neron Caesar. Even dispensationalists like LaHaye will admit this. And here I would agree with them that Nero formed the prototype for the antichrist--one who is absolutely opposed to God and his people. And yet, there is one like Nero, perhaps you could say, in the spirit of Nero who is still to come.
Besides interpretational differences, the only real problem I have with The Last Disciple is that in order for it to really work, the Book of Revelation has to have been written in the early sixties of the first century. Although I believe that most of the epistles were written in the fifties and the Gospels in the late fifties or in the sixties (before the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple), I have a hard time believing that John's Apocalypse was written this early. Almost all evangelical scholars and church tradition beginning with Irenaus has placed Revelation as being written during the reign of the Emperor Domitian around AD 90. There are a number of issues surrounding this that I am not going to go into here right now, but I think this is a monumental issue with Hanegraaff's argument.
I do recommend the book though. The Last Disciple reminded me how central the resurrection of believers is to the hope that we have for the future. The first century Christians were willing to face death in the Roman coliseum so bravely because they knew that their physical death was not the end. They knew that they were coming back, and coming back in bodily form. This is our hope for the future, not some secret rescue before things get really, really bad.
I admit up front that I have not read ANY of the Left Behind series, but if you have or even if you haven't, The Last Disciple will introduce you to a lot of history and background that sets the context for the New Testament. One word of warning: there are some highly graphic descriptions in the book relating to the cruelty of Roman persecution. But the Roman persecution, like many of the events in the book are grounded in reality as opposed to some books grounded in pop-theology and speculation.
Take -THAT-, Tim LaHaye...
Opening an apocalyptic can of worms...
I was a teenage Dispensationalist...
The book itself is a pretty good page-turner (I read it in no particular rush as bedtime reading in about two weeks). The protagonist of the story is a member of Nero's close inner circle named Vitas. Although a number of characters in the book are actual historical figures, Vitas is not. In the story, Vitas is increasingly troubled by the paranoid Nero's persecution of Christian believers. Although not a believer himself (at least in what's been published so far) Vitas finds himself in the middle of a spiritual struggle made even more complicated by his love for a freed Jewish slave, Sophia who is herself a believer in Jesus of Nazareth. The story takes place on a number of fronts in the Roman Empire, but primarily goes back and forth between first century Rome and Jerusalem.
I liked this book, and I don't want to reveal too much of the story. The authors have carefully constructed a tale that will appeal to both men and women. To speak in great generalities, there's enough action, fighting, and intrigue to keep male readers interested while the romantic threads that run throughout the story will keep any female reader turning pages as well. And regardless of your gender, if you are a student of John's Apocalypse, ancient history--especially Roman history--there's more than enough here to keep you interested.
As hinted at above, there's a little bit of controversy to this book, in more ways than one. First, from a theological perspective, Hanegraaff & Brouwer's Last Disciple takes a viewpoint completely contrary to the Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkin's Left Behind series. More than that, both The Last Disciple and Left Behind are printed by the same publisher, Tyndale House ! Word is that Lahaye is furious at Tyndale for publishing an opposing viewpoint. "They are going to take the money we made for them and promote this nonsense," said Tim Lahaye in an article first appearing in the Dallas Morning News.
In a nutshell, LaHaye's Dispensational Premillennial view says that at some date in the future, Jesus will return to take all believers away (known as the "Rapture") in an event that inaugurates a seven-year reign of terror by the Antichrist. This will end in an apocalyptic showdown between the forces of good and evil where Jesus will return and institute a thousand year rule, after which Judgement Day will occur when believers will enter into eternal glory and unbelievers will be cast into the Lake of Fire. Whoops, I just ruined the ending for those of you reading the Left Behind series. My apologies.
Hanegraaff and Brouwer are coming from a perspective known as Partial Preterism. If you've never heard of this, let me explain. Preterism says that the events described in the Book of Revelation have already taken place in the first century. The tribulation is the persecution of the church in the fifties and sixities of the first century, and Nero is the Antichrist. The Book of Revelation itself is written in a code based upon Old Testament symbols so as to keep it's message a secret from the Romans. A full preterist believes that everything that is described in the Book of Revelation has already taken place. A partial preterist such as Hanegraaff will distinguish himself by saying that not all of the things described in the last book of the Bible have yet occurred. Believers are still looking forward to the bodily return of Christ, the resurrection from the dead, and the judgment before entering into eternity, according to the partial view.
I grew up in a tradition that primarily espoused LaHaye's viewpoint of dispensationalism. Many Christians go through a time in their lives when they are overly fascinated with these issues. For me, it was when I was in high school, around my senior year. In seeking to understand the end times better, I read the leading authority of the day, Hal Lindsey. I read The Late Great Planet Earth (which, incidentally was the top-selling book, Christian or secular, of the 1970's), Lindsey's commentary on Revelation, There's a New World Coming, and of course, The 1980's: Countdown to Armageddon.
But the more dispensationalism I read, the less I seemed to buy it. Primarily as a sticking point for me was this idea that Jesus was going to come back in this secret second coming and take all the believers away seven years before his real second coming. I could not and still cannot find any biblical warrant for anything like this. Later I would learn that the idea of a "rapture"--rescuing all believers from the tribulation--is essentially new theology, originating from the mid-nineteenth century with John Darby who was a huge influence on Charles Scofield of the Scofield Bible. These were to influence 20th century individuals such as Charles Ryrie, Hal Lindsey, Tim LaHaye and others who have championed and promoted dispensationalism to the point that it is a predominant view among evangelical Christians. Although I don't consider it heretical, I have to remind people that it is not historic Christian belief.
There is one part of The Last Disciple in which Hanegraaff and Brouwer poke a bit of fun at the Left Behind series. The "last disciple" refers, of course, to the Apostle John who doesn't even appear in the book until well into the last third of the story. On p. 318, Hanegraaff and Brouwer write:
John continued to smile. "I'm sure that all believers would wish to be whisked away, taken up into thin air, to avoid the Tribulation. Yet that would be a false hope, especially if it replaces the true hope of the Resurrection, for the resurrection of Jesus and the resurrection promised to us because of it are what give us the hope to endure troubles. In this age. In any age, even should it take thousands of years for the Second Coming."
Personally, I am respectful of the partial preterist viewpoint more than dispensationalism because preterism treats the historical context behind the biblical text seriously. However, I think there is a midway point that I prefer. As I began to reject dispensationalism in my late teens, I began to form my own understanding and later I found a particular perspective that matched what I had understood from my study of the Bible quite well. It is known as Historical Premillienialism. If anything it is a midway point between the two options already discussed here. First of all, it does treat the historical realities behind the Book of Revelation seriously as does preterism, but it also looks to a future time of heightened persecution and an extremely godless individual who sets himself up as a messiah, and seeks self-worship, and self-exaltation. Historical premillennnialism rejects the idea of a secret rapture of the church, but rather says that believers will go through the tribulation before the second coming of Christ.
Biblical prophecy can have layers or multiple fulfillments. So in Hosea 11:1, the prophet can say "Out of Egypt I called my son" referring to the Exodus, but it also has further implication in regard to the Messiah as noted in Matthew 2:15 when Joseph hides Mary and the infant Jesus in Egypt to escape Herod. In Isaiah 7:14, we read "and a virgin [Hebrew, almah] will conceive and give birth to a son." This prophecy had immediate implication for King Ahaz, but it also had significance regarding the Messiah to come as noted by Matthew in his Gospel (Matt 1:22-23). This is--in its truest sense--prophecy being fulfilled which comes from the idea of being filled full. There can be layers to prophetic writing. This can certainly make it difficult to interpret, but it keeps us watchful and humble as we approach the Scriptures and the events that take place in the world around us. Unlike dispensationalists, we are careful not to jump to conclusions in interpreting current events and we would certainly avoid setting any dates for the return of Christ which has become fairly popular with dispensationalists over the last two centuries.
So, although I am respectful of Hanegraaff's position--much more so than LaHaye's--I would have to find a median position that treats seriously the history behind the Book of Revelation, but still looks for events to take place. Hardly anyone disagrees that through the ancient number game of gematria where letters of the alphabet stand for numbers (explained in detail in the book), the number 666 clearly says Neron Caesar. Even dispensationalists like LaHaye will admit this. And here I would agree with them that Nero formed the prototype for the antichrist--one who is absolutely opposed to God and his people. And yet, there is one like Nero, perhaps you could say, in the spirit of Nero who is still to come.
Besides interpretational differences, the only real problem I have with The Last Disciple is that in order for it to really work, the Book of Revelation has to have been written in the early sixties of the first century. Although I believe that most of the epistles were written in the fifties and the Gospels in the late fifties or in the sixties (before the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple), I have a hard time believing that John's Apocalypse was written this early. Almost all evangelical scholars and church tradition beginning with Irenaus has placed Revelation as being written during the reign of the Emperor Domitian around AD 90. There are a number of issues surrounding this that I am not going to go into here right now, but I think this is a monumental issue with Hanegraaff's argument.
I do recommend the book though. The Last Disciple reminded me how central the resurrection of believers is to the hope that we have for the future. The first century Christians were willing to face death in the Roman coliseum so bravely because they knew that their physical death was not the end. They knew that they were coming back, and coming back in bodily form. This is our hope for the future, not some secret rescue before things get really, really bad.
I admit up front that I have not read ANY of the Left Behind series, but if you have or even if you haven't, The Last Disciple will introduce you to a lot of history and background that sets the context for the New Testament. One word of warning: there are some highly graphic descriptions in the book relating to the cruelty of Roman persecution. But the Roman persecution, like many of the events in the book are grounded in reality as opposed to some books grounded in pop-theology and speculation.