I’ve got another one for you to ponder…
September 5th, 2007
Since we’re having so much fun over the last amillennial offering, I’m throwing out another proverbial sacrificial lamb for you all. It may be slightly unfair to say this, but I have noticed that when I dialogue with amillennial thinkers they tend to stay conceptual rather than exegetical. In other words, there are powerful and compelling arguments that make an amillennial viewpoint seem appealing.
This is related to the seeming scarcity of New Testament evidence of a literal thousand-year time period (beyond the passage that mentions it six times). However, in my opinion, the “appeal” of the concepts behind amillennial thinking leave me behind when it comes time for an actual scriptural examination of some of the prophetic passages, such as the following, by another gentleman from the bibleforums(.org):
Rev. 9:1-11,”And the 5th angel sounded, and I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth: and to him was given the key to the bottomless pit. And he opened the bottomless pit; and there arose a smoke out of the pit, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air were darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit. And there came out of the smoke locusts upon the earth: and unto them was given power, as the scorpions of the earth have power. And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads.
And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented 5 months: and their torment was the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man. And in those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it; and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them.
And the shapes of the locusts were like unto horses prepared unto battle; and on their heads were as it were crowns of gold, and there faces were as faces of men. And they had hair as the hair of women, and their teeth were as the teeth of lions.
And they had brestplates, as it were brestplates of iron; and the sound of their wings was as the sound of chariots of many horses running to battle. And they had tails like unto scorpions, and there were stings in their tails: and their power was to hurt men 5 months.
And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue his name is Apollyon.”
The 5th Trumpet plague represents addictions. The emphasis here is mine. I just wanted to highlight the key phrase - let the reader understand.
Now, of course those who subscribe to the literal interpretation school will not make any sense out of what I’m saying but this thread is not for them.
This judgement (5th Trumpet) is the result of those who instead of worshipping God worship ‘The Beast’ or Modern Man, who arises and attempts to take the place of God.
In Dan. 3:5 King Nebuchnezzer sets up a statue which all men must worship or be thrown into a firey furnace. Those in this day who worship the image of ‘modern man’ and forsake God fall prey to these ‘locusts’.
The language is symbolic: Locusts - because there is a bewildering onslaught of them, they don’t obey any geographic boundary, and they ’swarm’ as you will in a time when one is most susceptible to them.
These addictions make man prey to his base instincts, rather than ‘reason’ or self-control, they make him slave to his passions. They harm men, not God’s creation; this tells you that the meaning is symbolic as no locust feeds on the souls of men. They torment man, not kill him. The desire of a man(or woman) who is in bondage to drugs, alcohol, etc., is to want death, but death escapes him- unless the person overdoses or engages in some behavior which endangers himself-it’s not the substance that did it but the individual.
Horses prepared for battle describes their tenacity, one who engages in addictive behavior has a severe struggle on their hands. The crowns of gold represent the authority they have; so much so that people engaged in addictive behavior are treated as if they are ‘diseased’ and will carry this ’sickness’ for life. The faces of men represent the desires of men; the excuse that every addicted person makes is that ‘I’m normal, it’s only natural’, the face they see is the face of themselves-except distorted and out of control.
The hair of gold is that the behavior or substance is desirable: tell your kids the effect of smoking is the same as inhaling the contents of a dirty ashtray(or worse, because the ashes are still lit) and they will cringe-and yet Joe Camel puts on a white suit and a red bowtie(warning label and all), and your teens are on the path to a life-long habit. This explains the teeth of the lions-they don’t give up their prey.
The brestplates represent the immunity that these addictions have from any reason, common sense, whatever. And they are noisy, demanding constant attention from the person that they inflict.
Lastly, they have tails like scopions, and their sting is in their tails. Any one who has ever suffered the effect of addictive behavior knows that it is not when the ’stinger’ is in, but when the stinger is pulled out is when the most suffering is had. Withdrawls, ‘DT’s’ - whatever you want to call it, it is the absense of the addictive behavior or substance which drives men mad.
Everywhere in the world now the effects of addictions are felt-in epic proportions. As trends they ebb and flow, giving men opportunity to repent; then returning in greater tenacity. Why do we have the ‘War on Drugs?’ Or ‘Mother’s Against Drunk Driving’? Or the ‘Pace’ program that our school kids are exposed to? The 12 Step programs?
The Blood of the Lamb is the only suitable remedy for this plague. And those that have gone through it(as I have) know that this is all the remedy that’s needed.
So, I ask again - does this sound like a reasonable exegesis of Revelation 9 and the fifth trumpet?
David
Entry Filed under: end times
16 Comments Add your own
1. Lauren | September 5th, 2007 at 9:49 pm
It sounds like a reasonable view of addictions.
One of the things I most appreciate about Revelation is this - When something is a symbol, someone tells us. They then explain what the symbol means. Mike says it all the time, and each time I find it in the book, I am grateful.
Actually, now that I read it again, it sounds like a reasonable view of most sin…
2. David | September 5th, 2007 at 10:04 pm
I agree - I have massive compassion for addictions and those who have wrestled through them.
3. Josh Hawkins | September 6th, 2007 at 3:01 am
I tell you, it’s all in the hermeneutic. A sound biblical exegesis is really the only way to go to interpret passages like that. While I agree with many of the things he said about addictions, you can pretty much make the passage say anything you want it to say, which is what our friend from the forums has done…
4. anita h | September 6th, 2007 at 7:19 am
while that was an interesting read, it made my head hurt. that was the way i used to think about Revelation. which is why i love hearing you all at IHOP talk about it. It makes sense then, it seems simple then and I am encouraged in my heart to push into the Lord and His Word so that I can stand strong.
5. David | September 6th, 2007 at 10:45 am
Josh Hawkins is publicly writing!! (some would call it “blogging”, but I digress…)
6. David | September 6th, 2007 at 10:46 am
Anita - what I appreciate about a straightforward interpretation is that anyone can access the prophetic scriptures rather than interpreting them through their own experiences or interpretive systems.
7. Josh Hawkins | September 6th, 2007 at 11:05 am
David, you should add me to your wordcastroll sidebar! Or, I could do it for you
Hmm. “Wordcastroll” somehow does not flow as easily as “blogroll”…
8. Silly me… « J&hellip | September 7th, 2007 at 5:12 am
[…] Dave Sliker recently wrote a post looking at the ammil perspective on the 5th trumpet. I sort of skimmed the introduction, skipped […]
9. Amanda Beattie | September 7th, 2007 at 2:46 pm
To answer the question really directly, “Does this sound like a reasonable exegesis of Revelation 9 and the fifth trumpet?” I would say be “no.” This is not techincally an exegesis.
Some red flags for me:
1) There is no Biblical precedence for the vast majority of the interpretations he assigned to the symbols. No contextual references are cited to confirm his conclusion
2) Reference made to Daniel 3, with no clear connection to Revelation 9.
3) “…this tells you that the meaning is symbolic as no locust feeds on the souls of men”. But the passage doesn’t actually say that these locusts *do* feed on the souls of men… Granted, there are a lot of other indicators that they aren’t standard run-of-the-mill locusts, but it’s not a great indicator of the overall argument if one of its points is based on something that’s not actually in the Word at all.
4) The phrase about seeking death and not finding it is essentially dismissed (people won’t be able to find death unless they overdose or do something to endanger themselves…? Sounds like finding death to me).
I agree that this take on addictions in general, as well as the solution to the problem, is a fair one.
But I’m thinking this is some definite eisegesis, not exegesis.
10. Amanda Beattie | September 7th, 2007 at 2:49 pm
Sorry, the word nerd in me has to apologize for using “indicator” twice in one sentence in my last comment.
11. refe | September 8th, 2007 at 7:16 am
I think Rev 9 is about male pattern baldness. The golden hair of the locusts is to mock those who suffer from it. The only men whose manes are protected are those who have the seal of God on their foreheads.
12. Washington | September 8th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
Hahahaha…. that was brilliant!
Leviticus 13:40 - “And when a man’s head grows bald; he is bald. He is clean.”
13. George | September 8th, 2007 at 6:31 pm
Reading this makes me, a line-upon-line guy, want to throw up in a bucket repeatedly, because that feels better than this does.
I mean no disrespect to people in addiction. Addictions are awful and terrible, the products of strongholds that can be dismantled only through the grace and love of Jesus Christ. I have great compassion for everyone who is bound up in them.
However, one of the fundamental questions when interpreting a text is, “What did it mean to the first hearers?” Now, consider the following two scenarios at a local coffee shop in AD 100.
Scenario 1: “Hey, what do you make of those locusts in Revelation 9?” “Well, they can’t be locusts, because I don’t understand what they look like. Maybe they’re representative of things that haven’t been invented yet, like ‘drugs’. Then someday, they’ll be exemplary of all sorts of addictive behaviors. It appears that John is taking time out of his narrative and using precious papyrus to make a social commentary.”
Scenario 2: “Hey, what do you make of those locusts in Revelation 9?” “Well, they’re probably locusts. I don’t understand fully what they’ll be, but they’re locusts.”
Which one is plainer?
Personally, I like to leave eisegesis to those folks at Our Daily Bread. Give me exigesis every time.
14. David | September 8th, 2007 at 6:35 pm
I’m wondering if you could be a bit less secretive about what’s on your mind, George, and really open up with us and share your feelings. I just feel like you’re too reserved and closed up when it comes to emoting. Not healthy at all, IMO.
15. Amanda B | September 10th, 2007 at 4:51 am
(hands George a bucket)
Anything I can do to help, man.
16. George | September 10th, 2007 at 4:15 pm
(receives bucket)
Too late… I’m gonna need a mop or something… maybe one of those Mr. Clean Magic Erasers…
And I am raw unbridled emotion, David. Raw. Unbridled.
Not the least bit analytical.
Leave a Comment
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed