For those just starting on these, my point is not to take any positions (I don’t); it is to show you that much of what you think is secure about end times beliefs is far from self-evident and depends on assumptions brought to the text.

Why an Obsession with Eschatology is a Waste of Time, Part 1

Focus: Are Israel and the Church distinct from each other, or does the Church replace Israel in God’s program for the ages? How would we know? Why is it that Galatians 3 has the Church inheriting the promises given to Abraham? Why are believers called the temple of God in 1 Cor 3 and 6 if the temple is supposed to be rebuilt? If Israel and the Church are distinct, it would seem that Israel might still have a national future, apart from the church. Keeping Israel and the Church distinct is key to any view of a rapture (because the Church is taken, not Israel).

Why an Obsession with Eschatology is a Waste of Time, Part 2

Focus: The need for Israel and the Church to be distinct is in part created by the assumption that the land promised to the patriarchs was never inherited and so must still be fulfilled. But there are certain indications in Scripture that might suggest the land promises actually were fulfilled — what if that turns out to be the case?

Why An Obsession with Eschatology is a Waste of Time, Part 3

Focus: Did the covenants that God made with Abraham and David, and the New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:31-34), come with conditions for fulfillment? Are these covenants conditional or unconditional? The question is critical for knowing if the covenants (tied to the land promise) are still in effect or not (and so fulfilled by the Church).

Why An Obsession with Eschatology is a Waste of Time, Part 4

Focus: Was the Davidic covenant “sinned away” by the apostasy of Israel that resulted in the exile? The writer of Psalm 89 certainly wondered. If it was, there may be no point in a literal millennial reign of Jesus in the future. His reign would be spiritual, fulfilled beginning at the resurrection and Pentecost through the Church.

Why An Obsession with Eschatology is a Waste of Time, Part 5

Focus: Was the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31 fulfilled at Pentecost? If so, that’s another covenant given to Israel fulfilled in the Church, and so we have no reason to look for a national end times revival in Israel.

Why An Obsession with Eschatology is a Waste of Time, Part 6

Focus: This post revisits and elaborates upon post #2.

Why An Obsession with Eschatology is a Waste of Time, Part 7

Focus: Is there any *biblical* proof that the 70th week of Daniel = the tribulation period? Everyone assumes it, but there’s no Bible verse that says it.

Why An Obsession with Eschatology is a Waste of Time, Part 8

Focus: The 70th week of Daniel 9 (identifying it is more uncertain than you realize).

Why An Obsession with Eschatology is a Waste of Time, Part 9

Focus: Continuation of the 70th week of Daniel 9.

Why An Obsession with Eschatology is a Waste of Time, Part 10

Focus: Continuation of the 70th week of Daniel 9.

Why An Obsession with Eschatology is a Waste of Time, Part 11

Focus: Continuation of the 70th week of Daniel 9.

Why An Obsession with Eschatology is a Waste of Time, Part 12

Focus: Continuation of the 70th week of Daniel 9. (Last one – features a scholarly article defending a non-Left Behind view so you know the issues involved.

Why An Obsession with Eschatology is a Waste of Time, Part 13

Focus: Are you a splitter or a joiner? ANY view of a rapture is heavily dependent on splitting up passages that speak of the return of Jesus into two categories (one of which = a rapture). The splitting is done along the lines of slight “discrepancies” between all the “return of Jesus” passages, assuming that they describe two events, not one. But why split these when we JOIN such passages everywhere else in the gospels (we harmonize so as to remove disagreement rather than highlighting disagreements)? Who made up the rule that the return passages should be split to produce a rapture? Why not harmonize? Maybe the answer is because then the rapture disappears. Ultimately, splitting or joining is our guess.

Why An Obsession with Eschatology is a Waste of Time, Part 14

Focus: Was the book of Revelation written before or after 70 A.D.?  Any view of a rapture depends on a date after 70; any non-rapture view must assume a pre-70 date. How can we know which is right? Good question.

Some journal articles on assorted eschatological presumptions

An Eschatological Spasm: McFall’s Chronology of the Prophetic Weeks of Daniel

Other Items on Why Eschatology is Driven by Presuppositions and Guesses:

Thoughts on Prophecy: Embracing the Messiness

Video Link to My First “Why Do You Believe What You Believe About End Times?” Session

61 Responses to “Eschatology”

  1. Jim says:

    Hi Michael I’m new to your site. You have some great stuuf here. I love the critical thought put into your research. I’m wondering though you mention that Christ is coming back for the church, but isn’t he actually coming for the bride? My logical thought process leads me to believe the bride is inside the church. This would be much like a metephor of the wedding at this place and time.

    What do you think about this? Just wondering?



  2. A. R. Bordon says:

    Good afternoon, Mike.
    Also new to your blog. Took the time to read everything you have here, on your other site, The Facade, and borrowed a copy of your dissertation which I also carefully and thoughtfully read. After some careful consideration of what Sitchin said and did (and the “scholarship” with which he treated us through his Earth Chronicles), I came to realize two things: (1) the Nibiru phenomenon is that, a phenomenon that has become a meme in our culture, indeed, throughout the world, and (2) the scholarship that supports or denies the reality of the phenomenon is Biblical and sumero-egyptologic – a fact that makes both sides (yours and Sitchin’s) open to claims that both are based upon (a) an interpretation of the historical record, (b) a matter of expertise in ancient near eastern languages, and (c) conclusions, being what they are (hypothetical written “pictures” or models of a phenomenon), can be again highly interpretive of the records treated as data supporting a view through the prism used by the interpreter: Sitchin says “it is,” and you say “it isn’t.”

    But the story does not end there. There is, as they say, a “door number 3.” This door is the one through which, wittingly or unwittingly, willingly or forced by circumstances, I am walking into this phenomenon. This is the door opened by experiencers who have come in contact with so-called Annunakis. In my case, it occurred when I was eleven in South America, on the Parana River between Brazil and Paraguay, while fishing with my father northeast of Encarnacion, Paraguay. He and I were “picked up” by a triangular six-man craft and, while my father was kept sedated via interesting nonbiomedical means, I was not. This was the first of three encounters with the same individual who lead the first group on the Parana, and have since assisted the small scientific cooperative that LPG-C has been since the early ’90s with very advanced scientific information and the technology with which to get our own by the same, or similar means, they have for apparent eaons. They called it the “brilliance,” according to Sitchin; we were more mundane in the naming, referring to it as simply “the tank.” We’ve been at it since 1998, when the first of two prototypes were completed, tested, and much to our amazement, found it to work exceeding all of our expectations. The results have been cumuli of information about how nature is and how nature works, from the infinite to the infinitesimal, and presented in some detail and with an historical sense of order on our new and improved website at

    And we are not the only experiencers of these who call themselves Sa.a.mi. and fit the bill in appearance of the ancient Annunaki and/or Nephilim (the latter seeming human-Annunaki hybrids). There are others, and there are also others who are quietly pursuing face-to-face benevolent contact with “giants” in several places (South America, southern Africa, and the Mideast).

    In a larger context, there is also an exopolitical framework which is impinged upon by the past (and which is the reason we now all need not scholarship proving one view or another, but rather a model of what we as humans face today and must literally face within 50 to 70 years from now). Whether or not Nibiru is a star or a planet or a comet, all of that is splitting hair. The IRAS pictures did not lie, and the current South Pole Telescope data is showing the incoming as being quite real, and incidentally, proving Jim McCanney’s contentions out to be more certain that any fiction I could write (and have written) about. No, Mike, this is not fable, and it is not prehistory.

    Let me close this unexpectedly longer note than I intended by simply asking (1) whether or not you’ve ever experienced a face to face presence with one of these creatures, and (2) what would you do if you could?

  3. Joan says:

    I can tell that you haven’t used the KJV which gives understanding by comparing passages. Not saying everything is understandable to everyone as you have to have the Holy Spirit (truth) in your and in my spirit to correctly deceipher and discern what the Father is telling us. I particulary refer to passages like II Chron. 19:6 which tells me that I and all believers “belong” to God, not that we are “gods”. And all the other verses likewise refer to the possession by God the Father of those who are committed to Him. We can’t know all but we can always believe Him. Jesus Christ is the son of God the Father therefore that accounts for the plural God. Sort of like a family name.
    Sorry I bought the book.

    • MSH says:

      no idea what this is about or has to do with the eschatology post. I prefer the original languages, not English, in any event.

  4. Harry says:

    Hello Professor,

    Matthew said that after the resurrection of Jesus, other Saints have also been raised from the dead. Do you believe that this is the first resurrection and those who avoid the “second death?”


    • MSH says:

      no – the second death is something that all believers avoid.

      • Harry says:

        I am sorry, professor. The question I meant to ask (and should’ve asked to begin with) is did the first resurrection already happen? Or do you believe the first ressurrection already happened?

        I am not an amillenialist. However, as I study (now more in depth) the scriptures in Revelations and particularly Chapter 20, it seems that it already happened and now we are awaiting the second resurrection and the second coming of Christ as well as the appearance of New Jerusalem as written in Chapter 21.

        I say that I am not an amillenialist because I believe the 1000 year reign was literal (not figerative), but for two purposes: (a) to bound Satan and (b) for the first resurrected saints to reign with Jesus in Heaven until His return on earth. (I am just now coming to this conclusion as I used to be die-hard pretrib/premillenialist). And, I also believe that not everything was fulfilled, yet (like preterists believe).

        • MSH says:

          short answer: I don’t think the material allows for a clear determination. I also have to say I don’t see the importance of the question. I believe in an earthly kingdom, but I’m not a millennialist (I see it as too restrictive to be intended as literal; I view the new earth as the earthly kingdom). I know to some readers this won’t make sense, but I care so little about prophecy that I’m not going to get drawn back into it to explain what I think here.

          lPerhaps you can spell out why you think it matters.

          • Martin Gustafsson says:

            How can you not care about prophecy when Paul
            says prophecy is what vitalize the congregation
            and so the hope and the truth etc.
            Why are you even wasting time on Bible study
            since the Bible is the original forecast of the future
            from the loss the in paradise to the sacrifice on the cross
            unto the second coming and the new world.
            Take away the prophecy and the promises they make and you could
            pick whatever have you on the spiritual market,
            the law of Hammurabi and empty love of buddah.

            If you believe the Bible is written by God through
            human hands, then there’s no question about the
            Rapture. There is going to be one big for the world
            unbelievable Rapture whene we are going home.
            Come Jesus, Come. Thy Kingdom come.

            I have learned through sickness and poverty
            how faith grows. And how it fades when one is
            safe in the world by his money and buisiness.
            Let us all prey that we keep the faith and the promises
            Jesus died for, for especially teachers will stand
            accountable for their works.

            Prophecy aint some part of Scripture, its obviously
            the core of the Bible as it pushes and reminds the believers
            of the Prophesied One Jesus Christ who is He who knows everything
            from the beginning to end, alpha and omega,who Himself
            foretells or prophecy about His going forth and what
            will shortly come to pass.

            What if we dont have the time anymore arguing about
            stated matters like these. Its been debated by
            the philosophers of the church for 2000 years.
            Paul even remind them of not quitting their jobs
            even though he is obviously understanding them
            wholeheartedly. Their hope and waiting on the rapture
            were plain and simply facts directly from the King
            Jesus Himself. Thats how central the rapture and prophecy
            are in a vital faith, no more no less.

            And yes I have spent years studying ancient texts,
            religion and history so much so that I lost my first love
            with the obvious truths which gives hope and encouragement
            through the promises in the foretellings ( prophesies)
            of the future.

            • MSH says:

              What about the word “obsession” is confusing? I never said I didn’t care about eschatology. I said being obsessed with the subject (like so many are) is a waste of time.

  5. Josh says:


    The term rapture is so culturally linked to the idea of the pre-tribulation rapture in which christians vanish from the earth leaving behind neatly folded piles of clothing that when most people say “rapture” or hear “rapture” they think only of that association, that view of the rapture.

    I would suggest that the rapture is a real event, but it is something completely different than what the typical pre-trib view of christian’s suddenly vanishing holds.

    The rapture, in my opinion, is describing an event that would have been a well known phenomenon in the ancient world. Whenever an important person, a ruler or a dignitary, came to visit a city if the inhabitants of the city wanted to welcome the VIP and make a good impression, they would put on their best clothes and form a huge welcoming party that lined the road leading into the city. As the VIP approached they would all cheer and praise etc, and the leaders of the city would then meet the VIP and welcome them to the city.

    This is precisely what happened when Jesus came to Jerusalem on Palm Sunday. There is also a description of this in Josephus when Alexander the Great came to Jerusalem.

    The rapture described in scripture is simply God’s people being gathered together to form the welcome procession to greet and welcome the returning King.

  6. […] confessions and theological systems HomeABOUTBible VersionsBiblical AnthropologyElectionEschatologyHebrew HeaderInspirationRomans […]

  7. Keith J. says:

    It’s ironic how you have FOURTEEN sections on why an obsession is with eschatology is a waste of time. Of course you have a healthy “obsession”. Love it!

  8. gibby62 says:

    Just wondered if you have seen the alignment of Rev 12 is also going to line up around Feast of Trumpets @ the end of September and Comet Elenin?

    • MSH says:

      Yes, but I do not put ant stock in it for two reasons:

      (1) There is nothing in Scripture that explicitly says we ought to expect a revisitation (pun intended) of the precise set of celestial events that accompanied the first advent as a precursor to the second advent. One *must* presume (a nice word for guess) that “the sign of the son of man” is that *collection* of signs (and not just one celestial event or body) and that it isn’t something altogether different.

      (2) The end of September date isn’t actually a mirror image of the sky at the birth of Jesus. While the collection of signs will re-appear in that alignment, there were other celestial events in the sky at that time that Rev 12 does not mention — but which astronomers can track. if you want an exact mirror image, this isn’t the date.

      (Yes, I know the dates since I have a friend who is a very good astronomer with a keen interest in all this, but I do not present material as relevant unless I know with a high degree of certainty it *is* relevant – see #1 above).

      This is good fodder for the next time some nitwit (usually an ancient astronaut fundamentalist) on the radio accuses me of wanting to make money off people by doing what I do. I could make a pile of cash pretty quickly if I sensationalized ideas without regard to merit. There are those within and without the church who do that; I’m not one of them. If I ever produced anything on this it would be with repeated emphasis: “who knows if it means anything?; it’s just a curiosity until #1 can be resolved, which I don’t expect to ever be resolved.

  9. Gareth says:

    You mentioned you dont really like prophecy….
    Surely you must like the spirit of it?

    “and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.”

    Ps keep up the good work.

    • MSH says:

      Well, I meant that I don’t like eschatology :-)

      “Prophecy” in that quotation no doubt refers to the bulk of what prophets did — speak for God — with which I have no problem!


  10. Thomas Marquardt says:

    Please take another look. With your indepth knowledge do you see our history in the Psalms? Isn’t the 1991 Gulf war in Psalm 91? Isn’t the 1974 CIA Op to raise the Russian K-129 sub the Leviathan of Psalm 74? The 2004 tsunami is the water in the first part of Psalm 104. The height of the Holocaust, 1944, is in Psalm 44. The planetary alignment of Rev.12 and Psalm 112 occured on Sep. 29, 2011 when Venus and Saturn (cronus) were over the womb of Virgo. He (God) raiseth the poor out of the dust, and lifteth the needy out of the dunghill. Psalm 113 shows the rapture.
    The Psalms tie everything together. PLEASE take another look.
    Thanks, Thomas

    • MSH says:

      It’s just nonsense. The newspaper isn’t a hermeneutical guide to the Bible. (And the numbering of chapters and verses came in middle ages).

  11. Paul says:

    I do I get a copy of your e-book “Islam and Armageddon”?


  12. […] confessions and theological systems HomeABOUTAnthropologyBooksDivine CouncilElectionEschatologyHebrew HeaderInspirationPODCASTRomans […]

  13. Ed says:

    Hi Mike,

    I really appreciate your approach to end times. I am part of a group that has very strong views on the end times. One of my concerns with that is it there has been a culture created completely colored by a particular end time view (premillennialism/post-trib/Pro-Israel/very soon 2ndcmg). I was a big time advocate (taught on it tons), now, frankly, I’m just not sure anymore on its particulars. Wow, I have even begun questioning a literal, future millennial kingdom (you know, holy grail stuff). So, I really appreciate that you just say what see or feel, but never say, that it’s not all so clean and tidy. Thank you for that!
    Would it be possible to connect privately on some of this? Lastly, I don’t think I read what your actual views really, sorry if I missed it.

    • MSH says:

      depends on what “connect privately” means. If you mean “chat now and then by email” that’s fine, but if you’ve read my email disclaimer on my home page, it’s for real. I get about 20-30 a day for private email, so running correspondences aren’t likely (it’s more like hit and run). If you mean “get together and talk about prophecy” I’m not interested. Again, what I’ve said on my site is the truth. I don’t care about the subject; I can think of 20-30 things more interesting.

  14. Ed says:

    Excuse last comments grammar….
    “so, I really appreciate that you that you just say what see and feel”…
    Meant to say…you touch on things that many people see but rarely say about their particular views, which n fact are not so clear.

  15. […] you read Mike Hieser’s posts on Eschatology (the study of end times/prophecy) entitled, “Why an Obsession with Eschatology is a Waste of […]

  16. […] confessions and theological systems HomeABOUTAnthropologyBooksDivine CouncilElectionEschatologyHebrew HeaderInspirationPODCASTRomans […]

  17. Susan says:

    This may have been answered before, but I was wondering what the Hebrew script at the top of the web page says? Also, if you do any work with Aramaic and what the differences are with Hebrew?
    This is a very interesting site. Thanks.

  18. Ann says:

    I just heard you on Coast to Coast – great show. I agree that the text on end times and/or the Second Coming present a lot of difficulty. But here’s my question – what is the point of the second coming – why?
    The first time Jesus came he offered us salvation through his death and resurrection. Yes, now we can have access to God and his grace, forgiveness etc, but we are still sinners. The major difficulty I see confronting Christianity and all of humanity is this issue of “fallen nature.” If the first coming did not present any way to rid ourselves of fallen nature, then what good is a second coming – how do you change the fallen nature of humanity – even one at at time. Magical, supernatural events in the sky, pre-millenial or millenial or whatever – don’t change people internally. How can you have a Kingdom of God populated by sinners, ieven if they are forgiven?
    If the literal understanding of the rapture etc is correct – humanity is still left with sinnners. I can’t just discard the second coming because Jesus himself talked about a second coming – but why? Magical supernatural events do not stop people from sinning, or thinking sinful thoughts.
    So I’d appreciate hearing your viewpoint on the purpose of the second coming, and how the whole issue of the sinful nature of human beings is dealt with.

    • MSH says:

      The purpose of the second coming in biblical theology is to consummate the kingdom of God on earth that was re-kickstarted at the first coming. The goal is the restoration of Eden, not just to a slice on the planet, but the entire globe. Part of that involves the final judgment of evil and sin and the glorification of believers past and present into one family of God, joining the heavenly family / divine council (non-human imagers of God) in one family and administration of a new Edenic earth.

      Your note about sinning is well taken, which is the why the second coming resolves that. Note that what I described above is the note typical dispensational view that has evil still present after the second coming. That problem (no doubt related to the notes you made) is a serious weakness of the system. There are reasons it gets articulated that way, but I reject those reasons since they are designed to prop up a particular eschatological approach. I don’t care about propping anything up.

      Note that the view I described is also not traditional premillennialism (or amillennialism), though it affirms a new Edenic kingdom on earth. I don’t care about the labels. I’m more interested in what I think is defensible and clear from the text.

  19. […] Click here for Dr. Michael Heiser’s series “Why an Obsession With Eschatology is a Waste of Time,” and click here for Mike’s presentation “Revelation 12, Astral Prophecy and the Birth of Christ on 9/11″ (link opens YouTube video). […]

  20. […] Click here for Dr. Michael Heiser’s series “Why an Obsession With Eschatology is a Waste of Time,” and click here for Mike’s presentation “Revelation 12, Astral Prophecy and the Birth of Christ on 9/11″ (link opens YouTube video). […]

  21. Andy Limbu says:

    Dear Dr Heiser,

    I would like to thank God and you for your teachings on Divine Council. So, far I am doing my study on DC and I love it.

    I wanted to ask you about the temple sacrifice in millennium, mentioned in Ezekiel 43, 44, 46.

    If it is speaking about the millennium temple sacrifice, then why it is needed when Christ is ruling as the King during millennium?

    I look forward to hear from you,

    Kind Regards,


    • MSH says:

      I don’t see the material in Ezekiel 40-48 as having literal eschatological fulfillment, precisely because of the reason you point out. The NT has believers as the temple of God (individual and corporate; 1 Cor 3:16; 6:19-20 for example) covered by the sacrificial blood of Christ, as it were.

  22. Laura Stamper says:

    I’m coming a bit late to this dance, as this blog post is a few years old. Wow – I hate unintelligent Christianity. If the holy scriptures of the Sovereign God of the universe can’t stand up against intelligent discourse, we are all hapless fools for placing our faith in Him. Thank you for some very thought provoking and insightful challenges to popularly held notions of the “end times”.

  23. Terry says:

    I just finished watching your 16-part video series From Chaos to Restoration. Two years ago I decided that my end times view would be rapture-free. As far as I could tell, the familiar passages were about the resurrection. Since Daniel, Ezekiel, Jesus, and John never mentioned the Rapture, it wasn’t a necessary component to my thinking.

    Having been exposed to your teaching, I’m close to taking the same stance regarding the Millennium. Revelation 20 is among the more cryptic passages in all scripture. That the church ever began defining end time views based solely upon that chapter and the rapture verses is kind of ridiculous when balanced against all the other teaching on the Day of the Lord.

    • MSH says:

      I do believe in a literal eschatological earthly kingdom, but don’t like the word “millennium” (it’s too brief). Consequently, I don’t like to use the word, instead referring to earthly reign – which many amillers affirm in terms of the new earth / eternal state. I’m saying the earthly reign is the point of biblical theology, as is the church as kingdom. Both are in view; one transitions to the other. So to pick one and emphasize it and call that eschatology to me seems wrong-headed. But that’s what basically everyone does – pick and pole and stand next to it, prooftexting as you need to. They all cheat instead of affirming the obvious – it’s not an either-or, it’s a both-and. there’s no “system” for that with a memorable name.

      There is certainly recapitulation in Revelation, perhaps not through the whole book, but through a lot of it. For some (like Meredith Kline) that eliminates the millennium. His argument is coherent (and it’s based on a point of divine council theology – the har mo’ed and its motifs), but I think the whole equation of literal reign and millennium is a mistake, per the above. You don’t need a literal Rev 20 for an earthly reign.

      • Terry says:

        Thanks for the quick reply. Notice that I said “close to taking the same stance” inferring millennial-free. My belief based on scripture is that we never leave this place we call earth. It simply changes by degrees as God restores it even beyond the edenic stat. The most basic/literal reading of The Revelation describes: this age > earthly reign > new heaven and new earth.

        The confusing part of Rev 20 is the Ezekiel 38 parallel. Every attempt to explain it as literal and 1000 years after The Day of The Lord creates bizarre scenarios. I’m left with having to hold this passage at arms length without embracing a clearly defined prophetic sequence.

        My main problem with dispensationalism is it is unable to hold ANY theological idea at arms length and let any mystery remain.

        • MSH says:

          liked the last line here.

          • Terry says:

            Thanks. That one just rolled off, but here is one I have been actually working on:

            “The more specific and detailed your eschatology, the more ways you are guaranteed to be proven wrong”

            I can’t tell you just how it will play out, but I can with unusual confidence claim it won’t look like “Left Behind”.

  24. Stu Klemm says:

    Dr. Heiser…
    I have wondered about the extreme amount of detail in those chapters of Ezekiel, especially those that hearken back to chapters one and ten: i.e, 41:18,20, 25 – the cherubim with two faces in this chapter. I have wondered why so much detail if it is not to be literally fulfilled? And… what are your thoughts on Anderson’s “The Coming Prince?”

    Thanks for all the good work… Profound.. the top of my skull is somewhere off the highway between AZ and Carson City, NV….

    • MSH says:

      Detail isn’t a sound argument for literalism. I could write a novel with excruciating historical detail and it would still be a novel. The idea is also shown to be incoherent if you consider its inverse: “less detail means less literal reality.” Really? I’d submit that most prophecies in the OT cited by the NT only have 1-2 “details” but were considered quite valid by NT interpreters.

      The other problem is the assumption that non-literal means “not real”. That’s simply untrue for anyone who affirms the reality of an unseen world or divine activity – that world and those activities are just as real (I’d argue, more real, pardon the incongruent expression). Many believers live with a caricature of symbolic / non-literal interpretation, thinking it’s an attempt to escape “real fulfillment” of prophecy. A symbolic interpretation that plays out in heaven or earth or both is playing out in REALITY. It’s just not what a person would expect in his or her experience. What is less real about interpreting (for example) the stuff in Revelation about beasts rising from the sea as a symbol of rampaging chaos and evil on earth vs. every beast being a European country in a “ten nation confederacy”? Answer: it’s just as real if that’s a description of terror on earth. Earth is real. Those of us who inhabit the earth are real. But plenty of Christian “Bible teachers” will accuse someone who takes such a view as “allegorizing to avoid literal fulfillment.” It’s a bogus criticism.

      I’ve not read Anderson’s book, so I can’t comment.

  25. Arklen says:

    Okay Dr. H, since my question has to do with Eschatology Ill leave it on this page.

    In your recent Art Bell show you answered a caller’s question concerning the rebellion of Satan and his Angels and you stated that you found no evidence for such a thing through the text; Im paraphrasing here of course.
    I would be inclined to agree with the exception of one passage
    Rev. 12 7
    And there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels

    Im sure you have an explanation for what is going on here. It seems clear that the Dragon is the Devil in following passages? So what the heck is going on here in Rev 12 7? I find it all rather baffling,the whole Dragon thing in general; more or less your answer to the caller’s question put my exegesis in confusion.
    I appreciate any response and I thank you greatly for your time
    By the way The Facade is most excellent.

    • MSH says:

      Rev 12:7 is associated (in Rev 12!) with the first coming of the messiah, not a primeval rebellion. That idea comes from Milton and Paradise Lost, not the Bible.

      Glad you liked The Facade.

  26. April Martin says:

    Dear Mike,

    I recently purchased your book, the Façade, actually today. I have a voluminous library regarding much of the research around giants, nephilim from both sides of the the coin. I was wondering what you thought of the authors:
    Steve Quayle, Tom Horn, Chuck Missler, LA Marzulli, Michael Tellinger etc. I have all of Tom Horns books and some of the others.

    Also, you mentioned the theory about the fallen angels 1/3 falling with Satan. I was wondering have you ever heard about the first Ba’al temple called Qasar Antar (spelling) that was discovered back in the early 1930’s. There is an inscription on this temple that was taken to the UK and resides in one of their museums now regarding the fallen angels making a pact with Semyaza. I can provide that article if you like, if you are interested.

    Sincerely, April Martin

    • MSH says:

      I don’t really comment on others. There’s a bit on Dave Flynn at my FAQ –

      Generally, I don’t buy the conspiratorial thinking and the work in biblical interpretation often leaves a lot to be desired. My context is serious scholarship, and so that’s how I evaluate things. I could make a grocery list of interpretations they have that don’t have a prayer of being right, but that’s not why I’m online. All these guys have their heart in the right place and I like them all (I’ve never met Missler, but I presume he’d be likeable).

      Yes, I’d like to see the inscription.

  27. […] currently going through a detailed series on eschatology on another blog of mine, The Naked Bible. Here is the page where all my posts on eschatology are listed in order.  I will presume for future posts that you […]

  28. […] realities in the Bible but only hold true if certain outright guesses are correct. Here’s a sampling of what I […]

Leave a Reply

Please note: Comment moderation is currently enabled so there will be a delay between when you post your comment and when it shows up. Patience is a virtue; there is no need to re-submit your comment.