Customer Reviews

The Truth Behind Left Behind: A Biblical View of the End Times

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

I have just finished reading "The Truth Behind Left Behind" by Hitchcock and Ice. As a layman who considers himself to be a well read and versed student on the subject of Bible prophecy, I would consider this book to be an highly accurate and well documented explaination of the end times as they are written in the Bible. Many people who study prophecy have many different interpretations of what, when and how the Bible says that the world will end and Gods Kingdom will be ushered in. To many of those people I would say, "stop trying to read between the lines!" The Bible is the inerrant Word of God and what it says as you read it is exactly what it means. People try to put too much conjecture into Gods Word that simply isn't there. The books of the Old Testament and their prophecies of the end times identically match those in the New Testament so I truly do not understand where most of these detractors of the "Left Behind" series come up with their arguments that say the books are untrue and not well founded. These people are supposed to be Biblical scholars, well they either aren't reading the same Bible I do or they need to work on their comprehension skills. "The Truth Behind Left Behind" is right on the money in explaining the Biblical accuracy and validity of the "Left Behind" series of books concerning end times events. So as I stated in my title, "Why Not Believe the Truth?" this book is a must read for all of those who have been distracted by the detractors. I would recommend that everyone who is seriously interested in the truth about end times events should read "The Truth Behind Left Behind"!

This book has very good explanations for the questions raised by many of the readers of the Left Behind series. It is a good companion to "Are We Living In The End Times?" by LaHaye and Jenkins. I encourage readers to read this book side by side with a Bible, in order to reach a satisfactory conclusion.
There are several views of interpretation of the End Times, and I happen to agree with the view presented in Left Behind.
For all serious seekers and skeptics out there, there are many good books on Bible Prophecy and Eschathology, but the best answers will always come from the Bible.
To anyone interested in this subject, I suggest taking a good course on it at your local Bible college, or attend a class or teaching of prophecy at your local church.
The LB series is fictional, but the events are very real nevertheless. They will happen. Weather they will happen as portrayed or not, they will happen regardless.
This is a very good book indeed, although I did expect a little more of it than what was delivered (thus the 4 stars), but it's still good enough for answering basic questions.

Darbyism (more commonly known as Dispensationalism-the eschatology expounded in this book) is only a Johnny-Come-Lately interpretation of the Bible in the minds of some people. How anyone can read "The Truth Behind Left Behind" and totally miss the ancient evidence given by the authors makes it difficult not to attribute it to willful blindness. Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Knox, Edwards, Spurgeon in their time were all considered Johnny-Come-Latelies by somebody or other. Whatever truth they expounded was in the Scriptures from the beginning, but wasn't emphasized until their day. Martin Luther was hardly considered a "respected Christian theologian" when he began to preach justification by faith alone. Just so, the abuses heaped upon John Nelson Darby are often founded on rumors, innuendo, and hearsay rather than a careful analysis of what he actually taught. Once you have read "The Truth Behind Left Behind," I recommend reading "John Nelson Darby/a Biography" by the German author Max S. Weremchuk; and for a fuller exposition of Dispensationalism "Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology" by J. Dwight Pentecost. Both are available through amazon.com.

I was quite amazed at the "epistle" negative reviews of this book. One in particular talked about the 'literal' weapons and such. It only took reading three sentences of this review to know that the writer has an extreamly limited knowledge of the Bible itself, and biblical prophecy, yet went on to write what amounted to a 300 word essay. Those who are not of the spirit, can NOT understand the things of the spirit.

This book is a throwback to the old Walvoord-Ladd eschatology wars of the 1950s through the 1970s, except now, the war is being waged with Thomas Ice and Mark Hitchcock in the pretribulational corner, and Gary Demar in the other.

Of course, the real purpose of this book is to show that the theology undergirding the 12 Left Behind novels is indeed the true teaching of the Bible. The strongest exegetical evidence for the pretribulational rapture teaching is John 14:1-4 and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, and Hitchcock and Ice make mention of these texts.

But they do not exegete the texts in context, and make no attempt to dialogue with the myriad of evangelical scholars who have a different viewpoint. In fact, almost every single evangelical commentary on 1 Thessalonians released in the past 30 years rejects the pretribulational reading of 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, but our brave authors have no intention of giving a ready defense to their viewpoint. I would have liked to see how they would have responded to the use of apantesis in verse 17, which was often used of a party meeting the victorious king outside the walls of their city, and then accompanying him back into their own city. Most evangelical scholars teach that we will be caught up to meet the Lord in the air, and then accompany him in triumph back to earth. But Hitchcock and Ice are either oblivious of these insights, or they do not have an answer. Also, what about the imagery of the Jewish wedding as a backdrop for 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 or Matthew 25:7-11? That would greatly aid the pretribulational reading of the text, but again, our authors are apparently unaware.

The discussion of a Russian invasion of Israel along with Islamic nations is certainly a possible reading of Ezekiel 38-39. But here, as elsewhere, the authors seem more indebted to a particular interpretation of 20th-21st century contemporary history than they are with trying to interpret the scripture in context.

The authors also have a chapter about Israel as a supersign of the end times. They base much of their teachings on the prophetic significance of Israel becoming a recognized nation again as of 1948. But when you read Ezekiel 39:25-29, Jeremiah 31:23, Isaiah 43:5-7, and Isaiah 51:11, the regathering of Israel seems to be something that God accomplishes at the end of the age, right before the millennium. Ice and Hitchcock counter with the assertion that there will be two gatherings of Israel, one in unbelief and one in belief. But the biblical evidence for this bifurcation is debatable.

Also, I would have liked to have seen Ice and Hitchcock explain how the day of the Lord comes suddenly like a thief in the night in 1 Thessalonians 5:2, and yet is heralded by signs and precursors in 2 Thessalonians 2. Renald Showers wrestles with this by contending that there is a broad day of the Lord and a short day of the Lord, but he seems to be importing outside ideas onto the text.

Ice and Hitchcock also spend much energy showing that Revelation 17-18 must be about a judgment on literal Babylon, since it mirrors exactly what OT texts say about the demise of historic Babylon. They stress that the OT prophecies about Babylon's destruction have never been literally fulfilled. Their argumentation seems quite impressive at first, and the charts are quite helpful.

However, after studying the book of Revelation in its historical context, it would seem that John is saying that Rome is the Mother of harlots. Look at 1 Peter 5:12, another classic example where Babylon is being used as a code word for Rome. I believe the same thing is true of Revelation 17-18. Rome is the resurrected Babylon of yore. All the terrible judgments awaiting Babylon will fall on the Roman incarnation of Babylon.

There is also a chapter about how dispensationalists are better interpreters of the Bible because they are the only ones who are consistently literal in their interpretations. There are countless chapters like this in dispensational monographs, and they are all annoying and smarmy. The issue is not which interpreter is more literal, (although I would classify myself as an historical-grammatical interpreter), the issue is which interpreter has the better interpretation of the given text.

Hitchcock and Ice also quote Paul Lee Tan approvingly when he says that since Christ fulfilled all the OT prophecies about the first coming literally, therefore, he will surely fulfill all the second coming prophecies literally.

The problem with this is that Christ did NOT fulfill all the OT prophecies literally. Isaiah 7:12-Isaiah 8:3 in context is talking about the birth of a child during the Ahaz administration. Jesus fulfilled this text analogically - Just as a child is born as a sign to the house of David in the Ahaz administration, Jesus was born as a sign to the house of David in the Herod administration.

Hosea 11:1ff is another example. No way is Hosea talking about Jesus being called out of Egypt. He's rehearsing Israel's history of disobedience since they were called out of Egypt. Again, Jesus fulfills this text analogically: Just as OT Israel was called by God out of Egypt, so also the true Israel of God is called by God out of Egypt. Did Jesus fulfill the prophecies of the OT? Absolutely! Did he fulfill all of them literally, following a grammatical-historical interpretation of the OT? NO. Some were fulfilled literally, many of them were fulfilled analogically. Same thing with Revelation 17: Rome fulfills the prophecies of Babylon's destruction analogically.

I have been quite critical of New Testament scholars for failing to engage with dispensational writers like John Walvoord, Alva J McClain, Charles Ryrie, J.D Pentecost, Renald Showers, and Robert Thomas. Showers in particular has two of the best books in defense of dispensational theology and rapture theology, and these guys get ignored by the scholarly world, and that's why mainstream scholars in the Society of Biblical Literature continue to misunderstand dispensationalism and fail to give good answers to their readings of John 14:1-4 (which to me clinches the rapture argument for the pretribbers) and Luke 12:40 and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18.

But I am equally critical of revised dispensationalists like Ice and Hitchcock because they live in their own world where Gary Demar and guys like him are the only worthy sparring partners. They need to rejoin the larger evangelical world and dialogue with guys like Ben Witherington, Gordon Fee, IH Marshall, D.A Carson, John Piper, and Craig Blomberg, and find out why the dispensational viewpoint is considered untenable by most evangelical scholars. I blame both sides for passing each other by like spirits in the night.

All right, I've been quite tough on Ice and Hitchcock, so I better say something nice now. I agree with them about the rapture, and I love their charts, and their discussion of the antichrist is excellent, though they ignore the historical evidence pointing to Nero Caesar as the inspiration behind the description of the beast in Revelation 13. Whoever the antichrist is, he will minister with evil in the spirit and power of Nero.

I also like how they see that God is not done with Israel, and that the 70th week of Daniel is still future. Their answers to Gary Demar are strong, and they have a passion for Christ. This book will help readers of the series see that the Rapture is real, and it can happen at any time.

Darbyism (the eschatology expounded in this book) is a Johnny-Come-Lately interpretation of the Bible. It's running rampant among evangelicals today, but that is a phenomenon that is recent in church history. Not Augustine, nor Luther, nor Calvin, nor Knox, nor Edwards, nor Spurgeon held to this view. It appeals to those who are titillated by the "deep secrets" of the end times and/or science fiction and fantasy. Do a wikipedia search for John Nelson Darby and learn more.

Let me cite just one example from The Truth Behind Left Behind that makes it a very weak defense of the Left Behind theology. There are many more, but there are space limitations. In Tim LaHaye's Introduction to TBLB, we read: "Jerry [Jenkins] and I have unashamedly taken the position that all prophecy should be interpreted literally whenever possible. We have been guided throughout by the golden rule of interpretation: When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense. Take every word at its primary, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context clearly indicate otherwise" (7). So shouldn't the reader interpret the weapons of Ezekiel 38-39--bows, arrows, shields, war clubs, spears, horses, and chariots--literally? Not according to our authors. Here's their interpretation from their chapter "The Coming Russian/Islamic Invasion": "Inspired by the Holy Spirit, Ezekiel spoke in language that the people of his day could understand. If he had spoken of MIG-29s, laser-fired missiles, tanks, and assault rifles, this text would have been nonsensical to everyone until the twentieth century" (47). Of course, this is question begging in the extreme. Why would the people in Ezekiel's day need to understand a prophecy if it wasn't meant for them? Why confuse them and us? How do Hitchcock, Ice, and LaHaye KNOW that this is what the Holy Spirit meant? Once the trio makes these ancient weapons of no consequence, they are free to create their own prophetic scenario that can't be tested because it all takes place after Christians are no longer here! Convenient. Consider their words: "The focus clearly is NOT the specific weapons that will be used by these invaders" (47). What happened to "literal interpretation"? The weapons may not be the passage's "focus," but they can't be dismissed as inconsequential to the narrative. The weapons are part of the story from beginning to end, and if taken literally would negate the future scenario outlined by the authors. They claim that Ezek. 38-39 has to be a DISTANT future battle because it takes place in the "latter years" (38:8) and the "last days" (38:16). Most biblical scholars, even some dispensationalists, would say that these two time expressions most often mean nothing more than "in the future" or "in the days to come." The same Hebrew phrase is translated as "the days to come" in Num. 24:14, which probably refers to David's victory over Moab. The prophecy of Deut. 31:29, where the same expression is used, came to pass in the period of the Judges (cf. 2:20-21). Here's how one Bible expositor explains it: "this expression does not refer to 'the latter days' (KJV, RSV) in the eschatological sense. . . , but rather to that portion of the future that falls within the scope of the speaker's perspective (cf. Gen. 49:1)." Then one has to wonder why the authors avoid interacting with Edwin M. Yamauchi's Foes of the Northern Frontier which refutes their historical, geographical, and lexographic arguments line by line, and it was written in 1982! Yamauchi is a noted expert on this subject. The Russian invasion premise is only one of the book's many problems. If readers are interested in this topic, I suggest that they pick up a copy of End Times Fiction: A Biblical Consideration of the Left Behind Theology written by me. Since Hitchcock and Ice refer to it several times, it would be helpful to read what they do not deal with.

Trying to justify a work of fiction by writing another book to try to prove it's true - doesn't make it true. There is a reason there are respected Christian theologians writing books that explain how the Left Behind series doesn't parallel what is in the Bible. The Bible is true, Left Behind is fiction.

From the depths of scholarship spring such delightful works.

One hungers for more time to plunge into the depths of studies such as this, as much as one is drawn to halls of mirrors, to contemplate the visions of reality scattered across the historical landscape.

Needed for embarkation is merely the mined tittle from Holy Writ which demands the discoverer now attempt to identify at least the parameters of said nugget of truth.

Hilarity is drenched upon the students of such quests as they navigate the morass of information swamping these gleaming points of God's revealed truth.

Spurgeon's works include an entire book of sermons on the pre-millenial, pre-trib Rapture, contrary to uneducated proclamations here. The founders of Harvard, Brown and most, if not all Ivy League institutions were pre-millenial, etc., etc., etc. Darby merely joined the ranks of the Blessed in the fullness of his time !

Hitchcock and Ice courageously cap the study with an introduction to Bible Prophecy Interpretation.

Hallelujah ! Our Blessed Hope is so certain, so imminent, and so illusively ungraspable to the carnal mind. And we, the Blessed, are left to dream of the halls of eternity whence we shall satiate our temporal failings of knowledge with God's full disclosure !

TL Farley,
bibleraptureprophecy.com
author,

When Now Becomes Too Late, {If we believe Jesus rose again -- The imminence of the Rapture.} Available in print, ebook, and on Kindle.

I waited for this book for months. It's a fair read but the information's chunky. Mark's written much better. Read Mark's, 'WOEIGO' instead.