New Pope, Old Prophecy?
by Andre Reis
Jorge Mario Bergoglio, an Argentinian Jesuit since 2001 and Archbishop of Buenos Aires since 1998 has been chosen as the new leader of the 1.2 billion Catholics worldwide. For Adventists, this has been a time of renewed interest in the Papacy and its place in traditional Adventist prophetic interpretation.
Although slightly less prominent in our neck of the woods, the interpretation of Revelation 13 that pits Catholicism against Adventism in the end times is still a sine qua non of subequatorial Adventism. Recently, the leading televangelist for the South American Division stated that although the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI was not a prophetic fulfillment per se, it does show the continued importance of the Vatican in eschatology. It is unclear, however, exactly how this particular event would even fit the traditional Adventist interpretation of the "importance of the Vatican"! [1]
But that was before the election of Francis I. Since then, the Adventist blogosphere has been ablaze with Adventist versions of Jesuit conspiracy theories [link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesuit_conspiracy_theories]. Finally, they aver, Ellen White's veiled hint that the Jesuits' may have a role in the new eschatological horizon as they did in the Middle Ages (GC 215-216), may become a reality.
But is the Papacy really the undeniable fulfillment of Revelation 13? Or could Francis I be the "eighth king" of Revelation 17?
As many have attempted to demonstrate, there are several problems with the traditional historicist approach to these chapters. First, projecting the importance of the message of Revelation millennia in the future all but annuls its relevance to its target audience, i.e., the seven, literal churches of Asia. This is just too expensive an exegetical move.
Revelation is introduced as a revelatory work (apokalypsis means "unveiling") that needed to be read, understood and applied to the daily life of its original readers (Rev 1:3). It is at once book, prophecy, and personal letter (1:4; 22:16). The church of Ephesus ran the risk of losing its status as a Christian body (2:5), the number of the beast could be figured out by engaged readers (13:6), and whoever tampered with the contents of the letter would incur severe temporal and eternal punishment (22:18-19).
Scholars have long emphasized the need to take an ever closer look at the book's Sitz im Leben, its original milieu in first century Asia. This important tenet of hermeneutics may indicate that the most sensible approach to Revelation is to read it primarily with an eye to its immediate social, religious and political background (most likely pre-70 A.D. Jewish Christianity).[2] And if we put the tendentious labels aside (e.g., preterism, futurism etc.), we may gain a new perspective on some features of Revelation. If this is correct, other entities may emerge as stronger candidates for the beasts of Rev 13 than a religious movement thousands of years removed from the churches of Asia.
For example, an intriguing interpretation posits that the beast from the sea (13:1-10) symbolized the Roman emperor vying for veneration as Dominus et Deus (possibly referring to Nero) and the beast from the earth (13:11-18) symbolized the local arm of the Roman government which enforced such adoration by building images and temples dedicated to the Emperor. Surprisingly, according to Suetonius, Nero's name was veiled in at least one contemporary riddle which went like this:
Count the numerical values of the letters of Nero's name,
And in "murdered his own mother", You will find their sum is the same.[3]
Both values add up to 1,005 in Greek gematria. This is indeed a striking parallel with the riddle of 666 as "number of the beast" (Rev 13:6). This important evidence may be one more nail in the coffin of the Vicarius Filii Dei interpretation which lingers stubbornly in the global Adventist South. But this is just one possibility. The fact is that the definitive culprit, guilty of such bestial actions and disguised in a sea of symbolism, remains at large.
And what about the seven kings of Revelation 17? Could any one Pope be one of them?
Scholars have pointed out the parallel of the harlot in Revelation 17 with coins minted during the reign of Vespasian (c. 70 A.D) which depict the Roman empire as Dea Roma, "goddess Roma", seated on the seven hills of Rome.[4] This would be hard to miss for the original readers. Several lists of possible candidates for these seven mountains which represents seven kings, five of which had already "fallen" by John's time, have been proposed by all schools of interpretation. The five may indicate a series of Roman emperors, but it's simply impossible to be precise. However, an emphasis on the list misses the point of the chapter, which is meant to culminate with the imminent fall of Babylon in Rev 18. The message is clear: worldly powers antagonistic to God will ultimately be destroyed, or, as one Adventist pastor put it, "Revelation has one clear message: God wins!"
Yet another problem for approaching Revelation as "history written in advance" is the undeniable imminence of the parousia to Jesus himself, Peter, Paul and the apostle John (cf. Mat 24:56; Mar 13:31; 1 Cor 1:17, 8; 4:5; Phil, 3:20; 1 Tess 4:13-18; 5:1-10, 23; 2 Pet 3:3-4; 1 John 2:18). To John the Revelator, all things would "soon take place" because the end was "near" (1:1, 3). How do we reconcile this fact with the view that probationary time would extend to very distant, preordained time markers (e.g., 538, 1798, 1844, 1929, 2013 etc.)?
Needless to say, a neatly organized chronology is simply not self-evident in Revelation. And the many and sundry diverging historicist interpretations in our midst (a la Hal Lindsey) bordering on wild conspiracy theories indicate that this model simply does not work.
But perhaps that is precisely the point of the symbols: the blessing reserved for students of the book does not lie in deciphering every symbol, but is rather in the continuous search to understand the deep things of God. All the symbolism militates against zeroing in on a single interpretation.
Adventists have long held that by placing Revelation as a transparency over the book of Daniel, a clear and unequivocal eschatological picture will emerge. But is Revelation solely dependent on Daniel? In fact, in order of sheer number of allusions, Revelation uses the book Isaiah more than it does Daniel, followed by Ezekiel. And although alluded to less than Daniel, Ezekiel exerts more influence on Revelation.[5] Obviously, this does not remove the importance of Daniel as a warehouse for some of the most important imagery in the book, it simply expands the interpretative horizon by adding those other apocalypses of the OT. And if Isaiah and Ezekiel do not seem to contain timetables for the end times, how does this impact the interpretation of Revelation, which draws heavily on them as well for its eschatological visions? In other words, the historicist interpretation of Daniel may not provide the key for the interpretation Revelation after all.
Another metaphor may help. What if Revelation is a first century version of an autostereogram, you know, those "abstract" paintings that require you to relax your eyes, focus on the whole, and be patient? When done right, all of a sudden, voilà!, a 3D picture pops up out of nowhere. The same with Revelation—all those intriguing, sometimes confusing and at other terrifying images, sounds, smells, and colors are meant to show one thing: the reign of Christ, the Pantokrator.
Sadly, however, whenever new attempts are made to grapple with the biblical text and what it has meant to Christians from all ages (and not only to self-proclaimed end-time Laodicea), the outcry is loud and clear. "We should not move away from the landmarks!" Most of this rejection clearly stems from the pages of the Great Controversy, where Ellen White, the infallible interpreter of Scripture to large swaths of Adventism, has laid a clear and scathing condemnation of all that Catholicism stands for.
But Ellen White was far from the rigid interpreter of Scripture some have made her out to be. She insisted she was not infallible[6], that we should lay her writings to one side and never quote her again unless prioritize the Bible,[7] that her writings were not as inspired as the ten commandments,[8] that we should continue studying Scriptures to see "if these things are so" and accept every ray of new light, even if it contradicts what we have held in the past.[9] She acknowledges that her interpretations of prophecy in the Great Controversy were largely dependent on Adventist theologians of her time (such as John Andrews and Uriah Smith)[10] and cautioned her readers to avoid demonizing the Catholic church.[11]
I find strength in the fact that Adventism emerged because a group of students of Scriptures took the promise of the Second Advent seriously. I'm glad this gene has been passed on to all future generations of Adventists. Nevertheless, their at times overzealous stance on prophetic interpretation stretched historicism to its very limits, something Ellen White was apparently reluctant to revise. And while I agree with Knight that apocalypticism has often been a successful way of galvanizing a movement's raison d'être (and often tragically so, remember Jonestown and Waco?), Adventists need to take a closer look at our motives when approaching these ancient sacred writings.[12]
The characteristic sectarian overtones we often hear in our midst, similar to that of other apocalyptic movements of the past (e.g., c. 100 B.C. Qumran) may well be the product of a psycho-social phenomenon rather interpretative prowess. And when we put these theories to a strict exegetical method (even by the grammatical-historical standards) there is simply not an unequivocal scriptural thread running from the pages of Daniel and Revelation to buttress our sense of prophetic security, let alone the most extreme Adventist doomsday tracts and TV campaigns.
By attempting to pinpoint the correspondence of Revelation's symbols to specific historical figures, in part in order to meet our need of corporate reassurance rather than unveiling Christ, we end up weakening its raw eschatological relevance. And no doubt having the Pope as a collective target to shoot at has strengthened our sense of "community".
But despite being the advocate of questionable doctrines and having a shady political past in Argentina, I wonder what role Francis I will play in the spiritual lives of our fellow Catholic Christians all over the world. One thing we can be certain about: if he fulfills the promise of modeling the altruistic example of St. Francis of Assisi, his impact could be quite profound on the whole of modern Christianity, akin to that of Mother Theresa.
We'll just have to wait and see.
____________________
André Reis has degrees in theology and music and is currently finishing a PhD in New Testament at Avondale College. He contributed two chapters to "En Espíritu y en Verdad" [link https://www.adventistbookcenter.com/in-spirit-and-in-truth-spanish.html] a book on music and worship recently published by Pacific Press.
____________
[1] Even George Knight, an outspoken critic of many of Adventism's "secret handshakes" also suggested that by jettisoning the traditional interpretation of Revelation 13, Adventism could end up neutering itself. (The Apocalyptic Vision and the Neutering of Adventism (Review and Herald, 2008).
[2] There is strong textual evidence that the Apocalypse was written in the early decades of the first century rather than in 95 AD, possibly even before the fall of Jerusalem, when Christianity was still strongly connected to Judaism. Such intimate relationship with Judaism had been noted by R. H. Charles in his seminal early 20th century commentary on Revelation; another author calls Revelation the "Jewish Apocalypse" (Cf. John W. Marshall, Parables of War (Wilfrid Lauer University Press, 2001).
[3] Cf. J. Nelson Kraybill, Apocalypse and Allegiance: Worship, Politics, and Devotion in the Book of Revelation (Brazos Press, 2010), 54-62, 67.
[4] Cf. David Aune, Revelation 17-22. Word Biblical Commentary (Thomas Nelson, 1998), 920-922. Aune's massive, three volume commentary has nearly exhausted the literary, social, historical and cultural background of the book of Revelation.
[5] Cf. Greg Beale, The Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 77.
[6 RH July 26, 1892.
[7] Manuscript 43, 1901.
[8] Selected Messages 1:24.
[9] "If ideas are presented that differ in some points from our former doctrines, we must not condemn them without diligent search of the Bible to see if they are true. We must fast and pray and search the Scriptures as did the noble Bereans, to see if these things are so. We must accept every ray of light that comes to us." (ST May 26, 1890).
[10] See the Introduction to The Great Controversy.
[11] Testimonies to Ministers, 112.
[12] See Kai Arasola's "The End of Historicism: Millerite hermeneutic of time prophecies in the Old Testament" available here https://www.scribd.com/doc/106151308/Kai-Arasola-End-of-Historicism; Jon Paulien, "The End of Historicism"? series at Adventist Theological Society Part 1 https://www.atsjats.org/publication_file.php?pub_id=25=1=pdf and part 2 https://www.atsjats.org/publication_file.php?pub_id=243=1=pdf.
Andre,
"We'll just have to wait and see." What a perfect conclusion! That is something I wish more Adventist end-time theorists would heed and quit wasting their time debating topics that can never be settled. If they put even half the energy they are expending in endless debate into actual soul-winning we might witness the evangelism explosion that we dream of seeing in fulfillment of prophecy.
Didn't you mean, "Adventist end-time terrorists?" 🙂
'But perhaps that is precisely the point of the symbols: the blessing reserved for students of the book does not lie in deciphering every symbol, but is rather in the continuous search to understand the deep things of God. All the symbolism militates against zeroing in on a single interpretation.'
For me, that is what Revelation is all about. It is also the only thing that makes sense, insofar as why Jesus wouldn't have spelt out more clearly when the End actually is. As you rightly say elsewhere, the Apostles certainly thought Jesus would return in their own lifetimes.
Imagine if Jesus had told His disciples – I will return in 2,300 years from today. What sort of attitude would that foster? Instead, the Church and people in it need to believe the Second Advent is just around the corner, because only that fosters the sort of attitude we need to have. Revelation's ambiguity and double-meanings (which again seem to suggest both a 1st century and eschatological meaning) achieve just that.
My main concern for Adventism is not its focus on eschatology, but that can be a good thing. Both the Early Church of the Apostles and Adventism have much in common, and thinking Christ was around the corner was a key strength in both. When one thinks the end is nigh, many of the more materialistic problems of the world, like wealth and power, should matter much less. When Church's lose than sense of impending end, they institutionalise and fossilize into bureaucratic orthodoxies – as the Papal Church did first, then other Protestant groups did, and now we are slowly becoming. So I certainly hope we retake our hope and emphasis on the Advent.
My main concern is we think we have Revelation's meaning all sorted out that we become 'People of the Chart' rather than 'People of the Book.' I am reminded of the 1st Advent, and how the so-called experts of the day with their 'charts' missed that John the Baptist was actually the fulfillment of Elijah. Prophecy tends to get fulfilled in ways we least expect. Thus, even when we are 'right', often we are right in such a different way that our predictions were wrong.
So Revelation's mystery should help us to keep watching for the thief, rather than living in terror thinking the thief is at the window (where he probably isn't), or not ever likely to break in (which isn't true either). In short, I support Adventism's emphasis on eschatology, and not merely some pretist view, but we need to be a lot less dogmatic about things the Bible is deliberately unclear about.
My concern is not that we again become "people of the book" but people after God's own heart.
I see a serious problem with the emphasis on the numerical method for identifying the
Beast of Revelation, since the 666 number has been applied to many individuals and organizations. It is probably much easier and less risky to use the character of the beast instead.
So what do beasts of prey do? They attack, maime and kill the weak and defenseless. If we use this method, we discover that the beast label applies to many individuals and entities such as the Roman Emperors and pontiffs, many world conquerors–including Islamic conquests–and modern despots like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Idi Amin, and Bin Laden.
And, for the sake of consistency, we must not exclude nations that have recently engaged in the abortion genocide. Consider the following: Hitler exterminated his six million, but the U.S. its 55 million, and China its 300 million.
Lastly, how about our own Adventist Church. Thousands of unborn children have perished inside our Adventist hospitals as a result of our practice of allowing abortions on demand with impunity starting back in 1970, a practice in violation of our own guidelines and the Lord's dictum against the killing of innocent human beings?
If we emulate what beasts of prey do, don't we share in the Image of the Beast? This is why Ellen
White did warn us that we were in danger of becoming a "sister to Babylon." And do not forget that she issued said warning when our church was still pro-life! Imagine what she would say today!
Since you are already changing the subject, let's change it again. A question for you:
Did YOU support the US' war against Iraq?
No!
There are many of us who know Nic personally who marvel at his ability to interject his favorate topic into any topic no matter how distant and unconnected that topic might be.This ability is truly unique. When he is talking in a group, no matter what the subject, we all are wondering how he is going to connect, for example, a discussion on the Trinity, to abortion. No one else but Nic would try to do it, but, he always seems to be able to bring it off. Amazing.
But to the topic at hand, the author makes a number of excellent points not the least of which is the one in his first footnote when he wonders what happened to Dr. Knight between the time he wrote his history books and when he wrote his strange book on the Apocalyptic Vision and the Neutering of Adventism (Review and Herald, 2008). When I wrote a book review of Apocalyptic Vision published some years ago in Adventist Today, I suggested that this book was his personal atonement for being such a candid author when it came to discussing the real history of Adventism.not the mythic history of apologists. In Apocalypic Vision Dr. Knight repented of being a historian and decided to be an apologist in his retirement years. It is really sad since it is the opposite of what usually happens when some churchman retires. He then is free to tell us what he really thinks about some part of the strange theological system of Adventism or how politics manifested itself in how decisions had been made at the GC..
"It is really sad since it is the opposite of what usually happens when some churchman retires. He then is free to tell us what he really thinks about some part of the strange theological system of Adventism or how politics manifested itself in how decisions had been made at the GC." (Dr Taylor)
————
Dr Taylor is indeed a smart individual who not only is able to catch out Dr Samojluk's elusive ways of using any and every opportunity to get Adventist Hospitals to stop committing the abortion of innocent unborn human offspring especially since there is a 'thou shalt not kill' clause somewhere within Adventism, he [Dr T] then makes a very pertinent observation of finding that many Adventist administrators, Pastors and other employees have a lot to say about what's wrong with the Church after they retire or resign. This is a very important observation indeed (even more significant I would say than Dr T catching out Dr S's favourite topic).
It seems quite clear to me from this that many within Adventism are accustomed to ‘biting the hand that feeds them’ or as a colloquial saying goes "they eat in your plate and then break it when they're done" in which the 'break' is substituted by a distasteful unmentionable word. That within our church there exists many who aren't converted to what we believe historically as a church is alarming indeed. They occupy seats of authority and influence yet these disgruntled theologians, administrators and employees together with educators at our training institutions run amok and go unchecked for years. I think we need to be more discriminate in who we employ as a Church. Many come into Adventism bringing in a lot of baggage which is still with them when they leave.
Regardless of partisan claims, I think you make a good point about the difficulties of paid Church employment, whether one's views are too liberal or too conservative for the 'mainstream Church.' I would personally think it quite difficult to tie one's most personal beliefs to one's wage packet. I have much sympathy for Church employees – of both liberal and conservative views.
Erv wrote: "There are many of us who know Nic personally who marvel at his ability to interject his favorate topic into any topic no matter how distant and unconnected that topic might be.This ability is truly unique."
You marvel at Nic's ability to connect the issue of abortion with the Beast of Revelation, while I am amazed at our blindnes who cannot see the elephant which is in the room. The Bible uses beasts of prey as symbols for organizations who use they raw power to attack and destroy the weak and the powerless.
We have become fixated on the theory that this applies only to Rome because the Catholic Church in the distant past did perseecute and kill dissenters, and this fixation on the past does not allow us to look in the mirror.
Read Rev. 13: 11-17. It describes a lamb like beast which comes out of the earth but ends by talking like a dragon. It performs miracles causing fire to come out of heaven, and forbids free trade to those opposed to its power.
Is not this a fit description of what the U.S. has been doing? It started as a democratic nation, but it ended talking like a dragon. It has raineed fire from the sky on its enemies and it has imposed trade embargoes on many nations. And four decadees ago, it legalized the killing of innocent unborn children.
The result has been the extermination of 55 million human beings in our country alone, and more than 300 million in China. It says that it decceives the whole world. The worst part is that it has deceiveed even the elect, the Adventist leadership, who were led to participate in this atrocious genocide of the unborn.
Erv, how can't you see what I see? Am I the one who is blind, or is it you perhaps and our Adventist leaders? You be the judge. The biblical predictions are taking place in front of our eyes, but wee are blind to this undeniable fact.