You are here: Home

Armageddon OT Background to the Battle for the Cosmic Mountain 3

08/25/2011 2 Comments

THE COSMIC MOUNTAIN

First, I would like to offer a quick word about the use of the term myth or mythology.  In popular usage the term has come to mean a story which is necessarily false but that is not the way scholars often use the term. For instance the Pocket Dictionary of Biblical Studies defines myth as, “A story, usually relating the actions of supernatural beings, that serves to explain why the world is as it is and to establish the rationale for the rules by which people live in a given society. In classical Greek, myths were simply stories or plots, whether true or false;” In other words, please do not read into my use of “myth” that I  think the events described have no historical basis. It is my thesis here that the mythologies referenced by the prophets do have a real space time point of reference to actual events whether earthly or cosmic. With that being said, the “mount of assembly in the far reaches of the north” (Is 14:13) was originally a mythological meeting place for the pagan gods and corresponds to Mount Zaphon in Ugaritic (Canaanite) texts. These texts describe Mount Zaphon as Baal’s “holy mountain”, “beautiful hill” and “mighty mountain.”[1] According to John Walton:

Saphon/Zaphon  is identified with a mountain, Jebel al-ʿAqra, or Casius in classical sources (deriving from the Hittite Chazzi), which lies north of Ugarit. It is considered holy because it is capped by Baal’s palace in the Baal Epic and is also the site of his burial. (Walton 2009b, 73)

Isaiah was drawing on imagery from Baal-Athtar mythology to make a point about the king of Babylon as well as a divine usurper we know as Satan. It may seem odd that Isaiah would reference a Canaanite holy mountain, yet the Hebrew prophets were famous for juxtaposing Yahweh against the Canaanite deities. For instance, the biblical account of Elijah pronouncing a drought on the land was an assault on Baal as fertility god (1 Kings 17:1). His subsequent showdown with the prophets of Baal was a further demonstration of their god’s impotence (1 Kings 18:38). In the same way, the prophets appropriate the property of a foreign god to assert Yahweh’s superiority.

Jerusalem was located at a higher elevation than much of the surrounding region. The temple was on a conspicuous summit in Jerusalem, his holy hill Mount Zion (Ps. 2:6; 99:2, 9). Psalm 48 is an explicit example of the connection to Zaphon “…His holy mountain, beautiful in elevation, is the joy of all the earth, Mount Zion, in the far north, the city of the great King.” (Ps 48:1b-2) This “far north” reference connects to the Isaiah taunt song. Heiser notes that,

Yahweh’s sanctuary is on a mountain, Mount Zion (Ps 48:1-2) which is located in the “heights of the north (saphon),” or on a “very high mountain” (Ezek 40:2). Zion is the “mount of assembly” again located in the “heights of the north (saphon),” (Isa 14:13).  (Heiser 2004, 42)

It is important to note that it is described as “in the far north” yet Jerusalem is hardly the extreme geographic north. There is something much bigger going on. The ancient Near Eastern cosmology was a tripartite conception in which the abode of the gods was “the heights of the north.” Thus, the cosmic north is being alluded to designating the divine mount Zion.[2]

Yahweh was associated with a holy mountain from the very beginning in Eden.[3] Ezekiel 28:13-16 equates the garden of God with the mountain of God. Then during in the interim he relocated to Mount Horeb or Sinai (Ex. 3:1). The assembly or mô∙ʿēḏ terminology alludes to the “tent of meeting” which served temporarily and then later the temple proper in Jerusalem on Mount Zion is associated with the mô∙ʿēḏ terminology (Ps.74:4; Lam. 2:6). [4] According to Ezekiel, Yahweh vacated the mountain prior to the temples destruction by the Babylonians (Eze. 10:18).  Lamentations 5:16 describes Mount Zion as utterly desolate. Jesus was the fulfillment of Yahweh’s return for the second temple period. However, the second temple was also destroyed. Still yet, the Shekinah is promised to return to a new temple in the end time after the nation has repented and been cleansed (Eze 43:1-9). It will be argued that this corresponds to what we know about Armageddon and the Day of the Lord.

It seems likely that Armageddon refers to the end time battle for Yahweh’s holy mountain. Mounce comments, “Still others interpret the term in reference to some ancient myth in which an army of demons assault the holy mountain of the gods.”[5] And indeed various texts support the idea that this will be a war with divine, demonic and earthly soldiers. Zechariah describes the Lord returning with his “holy ones” likely angel warriors (Zech. 14:5). Other Old Testament passages also support the idea (Is. 13:16; 24:1-21; Joel 3:9-12). The book of Revelation describes the involvement of demonic hordes (Rev. 16:14) and armies from heaven dressed in white linen which accompany the Lord (Rev. 19:14). Finally, the Dead Sea Scrolls also support this future event. Heiser argues, “The conflict described in the War Scroll involves both men and heavenly beings fighting side-by-side and against one another.”[6]  Accordingly, it seems appropriate to believe that just as Jesus leads an army, the Antichrist or Beast is Satan’s incarnate general.

 

For the day of the Lord is near upon all the nations.
As you have done, it shall be done to you;
your deeds shall return on your own head.
For as you have drunk on my holy mountain,
so all the nations shall drink continually;
they shall drink and swallow,
and shall be as though they had never been.
Obadiah 15-16
….to be continued with part 4: The Divine Usurper

Get a signed copy of Pandemonium’s Engine here for $10.00

[1]John H Walton, Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary (Old Testament) Volume 5: The Minor Prophets, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), 362.

[2] H. Niehr, “Zaphon” in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible DDD, 2nd extensively rev. ed. K. van der Toorn, Bob Becking and Pieter Willem van der Horst (Leiden; Boston; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Brill; Eerdmans, 1999), 927.

[3] Michael S. Heiser, “The Divine Council in Late Cannonical and Non-Cannonical Second Temple Jewish Literature,” (Ph.D. diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2004), 43.

[4] Torrey, “Armageddon,” 246.

[5] Mounce, The Book of Revelation, 301.

[6] Michael S. Heiser, Islam and Armageddon, (Self-published book, 2002):111.

 

 

Filed Under Bible Exposition, Eschatology Tagged With Armageddon, Arnold Fruchtenbaum, Day of the Lord, End Times, Eschatology, Jerusalem, Kline, last days, Megiddo, Micheal Heiser, Mount Zion, Revelation, Torrey, War Scroll

Armageddon OT Background to the Battle for the Cosmic Mountain 2

08/21/2011 1 Comment

ARMAGEDDON IN REVELATION 16:16

“And they assembled them at the place that in Hebrew is called Harmagedon.” (NRSV)

This may come as a shock to many of you but a principle tenet of this treatment is that Armageddon has nothing to do with the valley of Megiddo. Bear with me, I realize this might challenge some long held prophetic scenarios but it is actually more coherent with scripture. It involves some technical discussion of original languages but the end result is worth the trouble. The cryptic passage in question reads “And they assembled them at the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.” (Re 16:16)  Remember that the book of Revelation was composed in Greek. The term in Greek, Ἃρ Μαγεδών, is problematic in that it is a transliteration of a Hebrew term yet we find no immediate Old Testament analog. The rough breathing mark before the vowel is an ‘h’ sound. Thus, it is better represented in English as Har Magedon. In fact, the NRSV translation reads “…that in Hebrew is called Harmagedon.” Torrey argued that the division into two words is required by the Semitic trilateral root structure. The former word Ἃρ or “Har” means “mountain”, הַר  in Hebrew.[1] Accordingly, the remainder is Μαγεδών but the last two letters ‘ών’ are merely a suffix for a place name.[2] Hence, all that remains is a Greek transliteration of a Hebrew word for a mountain which was written as Μαγεδ.

Many respected dispensational scholars (Missler; Pentecost; Walvoord; Fruchtenbaum) identify Armageddon with the area of the Galilean city of Megiddo and believe that a literal military battle will be fought in that area. For instance the respected Messianic scholar, Arnold Fruchtenbaum, argues:

Megiddo was a strategic city located at the western end of the Valley of Jezreel, guarding the famous Megiddo Pass into Israel’s largest valley. One can see the entire Valley of Jezreel from the mount upon which the city of Megiddo stood. So what is known as the Valley of Armageddon in Christian circles is actually the biblical Valley of Jezreel. The term Armageddon is never applied to the valley itself, but only to the mount at the western end.[3]

This sounds convincing at first. Yet, the western end of the Jezreel valley consists of Mount Tabor and Mount Gilboa. It is flanked on the south by Mount Carmel. “Mount Megiddo” appears to have been posthumously entitled to fit the interpretation. The thing that sticks out in his comment is “in Christian circles.” Apparently this idea became widely accepted in dispensational scholarship since it appeared in the New Scofield Reference Bible notes for Judges 5:19 and Revelation 16:16.[4]  Don’t get me wrong, I hold a dispensational view. But the difficulty is that there are no scholarly sources that corroborate this naming convention prior to modern dispensationalism. Of course, this view has now become a meme through the bestselling LaHaye and Jenkins Left Behind book series. The idea behind the traditional “Megiddo” rendering is that the Greek appears as if it could be a possible transliteration for מְגִדֹּו (meḡid∙dô), and that it was the site of some important battles in Israelite history (Josh 12:21; Judg 5:19, 2 Kings 9:27, 23:29-30).[5]  However, the problems demonstrably outweigh the advantages.

The ten thousand pound elephant in the room is that there simply is no such place as Mount Megiddo. In the Bible, Megiddo is twice represented as “the plain of Megiddo” (Zech 12:11; 2 Chron. 35:22). The only mountains near it have their own well established names. In truth, during the Apostle John’s day the only actual hill at Megiddo was a measly seventy foot high artificial mound known as a ‘tell’ in archeology.[6] Furthermore, by using Google earth for geographic investigation, one can see that the town of Megiddo is a full 54 miles in a straight line from the Mount of Olives where the Lord defeats the armies in Zechariah 14. Thus a rendering of Megiddo makes the Day of the Lord passages centering on Jerusalem unrealistically distant. In contrast, the Mount of Olives where the Lord lands with his army is a mere one third mile from Mount Zion. Because of the geography and the fact that the text specifies a mountain, the Megiddo plain or Jezreel valley is not a viable option. We now explore the more plausible alternatives which have been suggested for a reverse Hebrew rendering of the Greek Μαγεδ.

The reference is cryptic and has long evaded unambiguous definition. In effect, scholars must now attempt to reverse transliterate from Greek back to Hebrew. The early commentators Origen, Eusebius and Jerome did not even think Armageddon was the name of an actual place.[7]  R.H. Charles ventured,” it is possible that Ἅρ Μαγεδών may be a corruption either for הַר מִגְדּוֹ = ‘his fruitful mountain.’”[8] This connects it to Jerusalem and coheres nicely to Old Testament “Day of the Lord” texts. Another suggestion is that the Hebrew gādad, (a marauding band, troop)[9] appended to har (“mountain”) would mean “marauding mountain” and would perhaps allude to Jeremiah’s “destroying mountain” (Jer 51:25).[10] Another similar idea suggested by Johnson stems from the secondary sense of the Hebrew gādad that means “to gather in troops or bands” because one can make a noun form a verb in Hebrew by adding the prefix ‘ma’ rendering magēd, “a place of gathering in troops,”[11] which coheres nicely with the context of Revelation 16. While these all seem plausible, in seeming frustration, Robert Mounce surmises:

Wherever it takes place, Armageddon is symbolic of the final overthrow of all the forces of evil by the might and power of God. The great conflict between God and Satan, Christ and Antichrist, good and evil, that lies behind the perplexing course of history will in the end issue in a final struggle in which God will emerge victorious and take with him all who have placed their faith in him. This is Har-Magedon. [12]

While this is surely correct, God has given us this strange name for some purpose albeit enigmatic. Still yet, there is a solution which offers more explanatory scope than the above.

Biblical scholar Charles C. Torrey proposed a solution based on Hebrew mythology back in 1938 which is gaining wider acceptance. Torrey refers to an article in the Hastings Dictionary of the Bible that posited an alternate rendering by Hommel. As far back as the nineteenth century German scholars had made a connection to Isaiah 14:13 but ancient Near Eastern scholarship was still in its infancy. He pointed out that interpreters lacking an intimate knowledge of both Hebrew and Greek miss that the Greek letter gamma, ‘γ’ in Μαγεδών or the ‘g’ in Megiddo can represent the Hebrew consonant ayin, ע.  In other words, New Testament interpreters  think only “Megiddo” being unaware of the possibility that John was Hellenizing as well as transliterating. Accordingly, Torrey postulated מֹועֵד (mô∙ʿēḏ) which infers the “Mount of Assembly” mentioned in Isaiah 14:13. The increasing consensus amongst modern scholars suggests that this view has much to commend it. Hebrew Bible and Semitic languages scholar Michael Heiser argues:

The Hebrew letter ע. מֹועֵד (mô∙ʿēḏ) is transliterated with the sign (ʿ ) because the English alphabet does not have this sound or letter in its alphabet. Neither does Greek, and the Greeks used “g” to denote its sound. Hence “Gomorrah” in English letters is spelled עֲמֹרָה in Hebrew. Therefore there is every reason to suspect that “Armageddon” does in fact mean har mô∙ʿēḏ / “Mount of Assembly.”[14]

Thus, we have an actual mountain referenced in the Hebrew Bible which matches John’s transliteration. American theologian and Old Testament scholar Meredith  Kline concurs stating “Representation of the consonant cayin by Greek gamma is well attested. Also, in Hebrew -on is an affirmative to nouns, including place names.”[15] This rendering was also suggested by Mathias Rissi in his Revelation study Time and History published in 1966.[16]  Because of its scholarly support and convincing explanatory scope the “mount of assembly” rendering is the focus of this presentation.

You said in your heart,
I will ascend to heaven;
above the stars of God
I will set my throne on high;
I will sit on the mount of assembly
in the far reaches of the north;
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High.’
But you are brought down to Sheol,
to the far reaches of the pit.
Isaiah 14:13-15.

 

….to be continued with part 3: The Cosmic Mountain

[1] James Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages With Semantic Domains: Hebrew (Old Testament), electronic ed. (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997).

[2] Meredith Kline, “Har Magedon: The End of the Millennium.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 39, 2.I (1996): 208.

[3]Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, The Footsteps of the Messiah: A Study of the Sequence of Prophetic Events, Rev. ed. (Tustin, CA: Ariel Ministries, 2003), 311.

[4] Alan F. Johnson, “Revelation” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Volume 12: Hebrews Through Revelation, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 551.

[5]Johnson, “Revelation,” 551.

[6]Robert H. Mounce, The Book of Revelation, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1997), 301.

[7] Torrey, “Armageddon,” 238.

[8]R.H. Charles, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Revelation of St John (Edinburgh: T&T Clark International, 1920), 2:50.

[9]R. Laird Harris, Robert Laird Harris, Gleason Leonard Archer and Bruce K. Waltke, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, electronic ed. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1999, c1980), 150.

[10]Johnson, “Revelation,” 552.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Mounce  Revelation, 302.

[13] Torrey, “Armageddon,” 245.

[14] Michael Heiser, Islam and Armageddon. Self-published book, 2002, 101.

[15] Kline, “Har Magedon,” 208.

[16] Mathias Rissi, Time and History (Louisville: John Knox Press, 1966), 84–85.

 

Filed Under Bible Exposition, Eschatology Tagged With Armageddon, Arnold Fruchtenbaum, Day of the Lord, End Times, Eschatology, Kline, last days, Megiddo, Micheal Heiser, Revelation, Torrey

Armageddon the OT Background to the Battle for the Cosmic Mountain

08/16/2011 12 Comments

This series of posts will address the term “Armageddon” from a Hebrew Bible perspective as it applies to Christian eschatology. This presentation was originally a research paper for an Old Testament seminary course under Dr Micheal Heiser who was very helpful and influential in my research. I am going to publish it here in a series of  four posts. First, will be a summary and overview of the Old Testament use of the “Day of the Lord” terminology. This naturally leads to the term “Armageddon” because of the book of Revelation’s detailed exposition of the Day of the Lord. Solutions to the meaning of the cryptic term will be offered on the basis of plausible Hebrew transliterations as well as contextual and geographical coherence. Then the relationship to the cosmic mountain and Antichrist figure will be explored. Finally, the battle itself will be examined and a novel solution offered in light of the Ezekiel 38 and 39 descriptions of an end time war. This presentation will demonstrate that while the topic is enigmatic, the Hebrew background to the term Armageddon reveals a confrontation over the divine mountain and a more defined picture of the prophetic scenario.

DAY OF THE LORD

The Day of the Lord is a key theme found in the Old Testament prophetic books. It carries a context of future judgment and foreboding darkness. However, one should not read all of the passages into our future, as some have come and gone. The first appears in Amos and is speaking of the coming Assyrian invasion of the Northern Kingdom (Amos 5:18-20). Zephaniah uses the term to refer to the imminent Babylonian invasion of Judah (Zeph. 1:7, 14). Nevertheless, other passages do refer to a time of ultimate judgment upon the nations and indicate a much wider scope (Eze. 30:3; Joel 3:14; Oba. 15). Most germane to the task here are instances when the prophet seems to speak of an eschatological Day of the Lord (Mal 4:5; Joel 3:2). Even more, the New Testament authors Peter and Paul appropriated the term for the future return of Christ (2 Pet 3:10; 1 Cor. 1:8). Accordingly, we can connect the Day of the Lord to the tribulation and the battle of Armageddon.

The day is to be understood in a broad and a narrow sense.[1] The broad sense encompasses a span of time known in the Hebrew Bible as “the time of Jacob’s distress” (Jer. 30:7) and also in Daniel as “a time of trouble, such as never has been since there was a nation till that time” (Da 12:1). Jesus referred to it as the “great tribulation” (Matt. 24:21; Rev.7:14) just prior to his return. A time described by him in Matthew’s gospel (24:15-28) and in detail through John with the trumpet and bowl judgments found in the book of Revelation. Prior to Armageddon, a substantial part of the broad Day of the Lord’s judgments have occurred concurrent with the trumpets and bowls. Then armies of the nations will only begin to be gathered by the demonic hordes to Armageddon after the sixth bowl is poured out (Rev. 16:12–16). The Hebrew Bible supplies more detail.

Joel 3:9–16 and Zechariah 14:1–5 both indicate that after the armies of the nations have gathered in Israel, then a specific day will come, e.g. the “Day of the Lord is near” (Joel 3:14) and “a day is coming for the Lord” (Zech. 14:1).  It is apparent that this narrow Day of the Lord will not take place until the armies have gathered in Israel by the miraculous sign working demonic pack (Rev 16:14).  Thus, this special day will be within the broad Day of the Lord but utterly distinct. Both Joel 3 and Zechariah 14 indicate that their Day of the Lord will be the specific day when the Lord comes to fight against and destroy the armies gathered in Israel. Also, Jesus revealed to John that this will be when he returns to the earth (Rev. 19:11–21). Thus, the narrow Day of Joel 3 and Zechariah 14 will be the day on which Christ comes to the earth for the battle of Armageddon.

The prophecy of Zechariah 14 gives us specific details about this future day. At the end of the Tribulation, during the battle of Armageddon and after it, the following will occur. First, the nations of the earth will surround Jerusalem (v.2). Second, Jerusalem will be captured, plundered, and women raped (v.2b). Third, a remnant will flee via a valley created by an earthquake (v.5a).  Fourth, Jesus will return to the Mount of Olives as was promised by the angel after the ascension (Acts 1:11; Zech. 14: 4). Fifth, he comes with an Angelic army to fight the nations (Zech. 14:5b).  Revelation 19 parallels this section and indicates that “From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, “(Re 19:15a). Furthermore, the text describes a horrible plague cursed upon the combatants (Zech. 14:12). Finally, the Lord will be King and the whole world will worship him (v.16).

What is central to this presentation is that these events are unanimously purported to occur in Jerusalem near Mount Zion. According to Biblical scholar Charles Torrey, “In Hebrew eschatology Jerusalem was the center of all the predicted gatherings, whether of the people of God or of the heathen nations.”[2] The Hebrew Bible is unequivocal in its testimony.  Joel 2:32 proclaims that “in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those who escape…” Obadiah 21 describes the culmination with “Saviors shall go up to Mount Zion to rule Mount Esau, and the kingdom shall be the Lord’s.” Isaiah 24:23 declares “Then the moon will be confounded and the sun ashamed, for the Lord of hosts reigns on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, and his glory will be before his elders.” With this prophetic unanimity, one wonders why Armageddon is typically located on the plain of Megiddo.


to be continued by part 2: Armageddon in Revelation 16:16

[1]Renald E Showers, Maranatha Our Lord, Come! (Bellmawr, New Jersey: The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry, Inc., 1995),

[2] Charles C. Torrey, “Armageddon,” Harvard Theological Review 31, 3 (1938):  246.

 

Filed Under Bible Exposition, Eschatology Tagged With Armageddon, Day of the Lord, End Times, Eschatology, last days, Micheal Heiser, Revelation

Book Review: The Adversary the Christian Verses Demon Activity

08/10/2011 3 Comments

This presentation will first give a broad overview and summary of The Adversary by Mark I. Bubeck and then it will offer several critical points of analysis. The first point of analysis will be that although the book is over thirty years old it is still relevant today and perhaps its topic is more exigent.  Next, a discussion on the topic of sorcery will be offered, focusing on the wide cultural acceptance of pharmacological solutions to spiritual problems. Criticism is offered in that his exegesis of Job 1and Revelation 12 does not reflect a sound hermeneutic in light of John 12 and Luke 10. Furthermore, the idea of ancestral demonization has little biblical support. Still yet, it will be argued that many of Bubeck’s critics misrepresent his teaching. Overall, the book is biblically sound and has a great deal to offer the reader in search of strategies to battle Satan and demons.

Brief Summary

The book begins by establishing the biblical basis for the topic of spiritual warfare. Accordingly, Ephesians 6:12 is presented as foundational by indicating that the battle is primarily against the spiritual forces of darkness rather than flesh and blood. Bubeck writes that the battle is on three fronts: the world, the flesh, and the devil. Accordingly, the book is organized as such and chapter two addresses the flesh. While Paul uses the term in different ways, it often refers to man’s fallen sinful nature. Romans 7:23 speaks of the raging carnality which plagues man until he is born again (Jn 3:6-7). Bubeck lists the most common offenses and exposits their primary biblical texts: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, quarreling, jealousy, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envy, murder, drunkenness, and reveling. Giving way to any of these is an invitation to demonic attention. Bubeck proposes three steps toward overcoming the flesh: 1) a commitment to honesty; 2) dying to self; 3) walking in the Spirit. He includes an appropriate prayer one can employ to this end.

Chapter two is concerned with the world, as rendered from the Greek word kosmos. It describes the dominant order or spiritual system of things that is opposed to God and the Lord Jesus Christ.[1] He discusses the relevant passages and establishes that this is indeed the case (Jn 12:31; 1 Jn 2:16; 5:19).  The fact that Satan tempted Jesus with all the kingdoms of the world is particularly convincing as it would have not been a temptation had they not been Satan’s to give. Bubeck teaches that, “The world system exalts its own intellectual system and rejects God’s truth as foolishness (1 Cor 1:18–31).”[2] This truth is easily seen in worldly skepticism and parody of Christians. Furthermore, the world system tempts believers to conform to its ungodly worldview. Believers are exhorted to resist and conquer the world and its lies by belief and regeneration (1 Jn 5:4–5). Jesus has overcome the world on our behalf and we overcome by the renewal of our minds through God’s word (Rom 12:2).

Chapter four is a thorough examination of the pertinent texts which form a composite picture of Satan and his kingdom. He outlines Satan’s original position as guardian cherub in the garden of God (Eze 28:12–17) followed by his rebellion and fall due to his excessive pride (Is 14:12–15). He lists the many titles a descriptive names: adversary, accuser, Lucifer (light bearer), dragon, devil (slanderer), murderer, liar, deceiver, “prince of the power of the air”, destroyer (Abaddon, Apollyon), tempter, “evil one” and “god of this age.” He is powerful and has a kingdom (Mt 12:26). His sphere of activity is the earth (Job 1:7; 1 Pe 5:8). He entices man to sin by planting false ideas, causes sickness and suffering, holds the power of death (Heb 2:14) and specializes in accusing (Rev 12:10). He is ultimately destined for utter defeat (Is 14:15; Rev 20:10). He is a defeated foe and the Christian can resist him through employing his spiritual armor (Eph 6:10–18).

Chapter five examines our spiritual armor as described by Paul in Ephesians 6. It is especially noteworthy that we do not find special rituals or prayers for casting out demons; rather we see the helmet of salvation which a believer always has on, the sword of the Spirit which is God’s word available for us to study and the belt of truth which represents accurate knowledge through study. There are two extremes which must be avoided. One the one hand, many do not take the subject seriously and on the other some become overly interested and enticed by occultism. There are multiple layers of personal spiritual beings in which a believer does battle. Chapter six exhorts the reader to claim his authority and not be paralyzed by fear. The authority of Christ enables believers to overcome. Satan deceives and lies and tempts one to pride. There are degrees of conflict which characterize the enemy’s activity. It is often very subtle.

Chapter six is an important one as it is where he explains his views on the various levels of demonization believers and unbelievers experience. In order of intensity, the levels are oppression, obsession and possession. The first, oppression, is experienced by all believers and it is an outward attack. The second, obsession is a twofold term in that it can refer to a believer with an obsession to study the occult or the obsession of a demon with a particular believer. Of the latter category Bubeck argues that “Paul’s thorn in the flesh a messenger of Satan” is an example (2 Cor 12:7-10). The third level is possession and Bubeck argues that the biblical materials are somewhat vague here. He states, “The way the Greek language handles this problem is to call such people demoniacs or that they ‘had a demon.’”[3] Unbelievers are possessed either by invitation or folly. He argues that Mark 9:21 supports the idea that children can be possessed by ancestral wickedness. Although he argues Christians can be severely afflicted and challenged, he clarifies that he does not think born again believers can be possessed in the same sense that an unbeliever can.

He then transitions to the importance of sound doctrine and the practice of doctrinal praying. Jesus’ use of Deuteronomy during his desert trial is a model of using doctrinal truth in spiritual warfare (Mt 4:1–11). Doctrinal praying is the practice of praying the objective, absolute truths of the Bible to address specific needs. Chapter eight offers further exhortation to pray aggressively for intercession. He provides example prayers and anecdotal accounts of encounters. He teaches that one needs to be specific and forceful standing firm in warfare prayer. This prayer discussion reaches an apex with chapter nine concerning bold confrontation.

In the ninth chapter he relates a chilling story about his own daughter’s demonic oppression. He argues that all believers have the authority that Jesus invoked in confronting demons. He laments that many believers live in denial that their loved ones might be demonically oppressed. His daughter’s story seems genuine and honest as it is not particularly flattering for a pastor to confess. He confronts the spirits commands them to desists and binds them in the name of Jesus. He warns the reader not to make too many assumptions as these situations are unpredictable. He then lists a series of practical dos and don’ts which seem prudent if not essential. The focus expands to the issue of church wide deliverance.

Bubeck’s discussion of revival and his reservations concerning the charismatic movement will be discussed below in the critical interaction section. Chapter 11 turns to practical application in discussing the tools of our warfare. Accordingly, he uses Dr. Victor Matthews’ “The Daily Affirmation of Faith.”[4] This affirmation is commended to be read aloud on a daily basis by those engaged in intense warfare. He then offers a warfare prayer also by Matthews. He also provides a list of symptoms which are indicative of demonic affliction. Furthermore, he includes some statements of renunciation and affirmation for those with potential ancestral demonization. The last chapter discusses the need for Christian unity. He points out those passages on spiritual warfare like Ephesians 6 are addressed to churches not individuals.  He appeals to the imminence of the Lord’s return and encourages unity for the purpose of battle. In the end, we stand together in victory against the devil and his designs.

Critical interaction

Although written in 1975, Bubeck’s book still seems current. If anything, the cultural trends discussed have only been exacerbated by an increasing skepticism on one hand and naïve openness on the other. Increasing skepticism is seen in that many theologians, especially in the mainline liberal denominations, have written Satan and demons off to superstition. Naïve openness manifests in an open embrace of demonic spirits by New Agers and even worse by undiscerning charismatic Christians. Amongst the emergent church movement, there is a growing yet troublesome emphasis on experience which could lead many otherwise doctrinally sound evangelicals astray. Bubeck writes, “Today man’s debate centers upon whether you are a ‘biblical supernaturalist,’ or an ‘investigating supernaturalist’ who wants to experiment with occult phenomena or dabble in the various branches of sorcery and witchcraft.”[5] Apart from the small naturalist segment of the population, this has held true. While there has been a revival of naturalism in the new atheist movement it is relatively fringe as most people find it a woefully inadequate worldview. Gary Habermas’ research indicates that there is a paradigm shift occurring in which the paranormal is becoming normal.[6] In fact as the evidence mounts, naturalism is becoming increasingly marginalized. The cultural embrace of the occult is ubiquitous.

The use of psychoactive drugs in the occult world is self-evident and undisputed. Thus, it seems prudent to look at less obvious manifestations. Secular society has effectively denied the very existence of the spiritual life. The forced secular indoctrination of school children and wide spread acceptance of Darwinism has alienated a vast segment of society from peace and soundness of mind. Instead of turning to God who loves them and wants to give their lives the significance and joy that they rightly perceive as missing, the vast majority are turning to sorceries. Bubeck writes:

It is interesting that the Greek word translated witchcraft or sorcery in our English texts is the word pharmakia, from which we get our English word pharmacy, referring to drugs. The use of drugs for sensational, mind-expanding experience is a form of sorcery. Drug experimentation is a fleshly sin which leads on into deeper bondage with Satan’s kingdom.[7]

 

While recreational drug use is a huge problem, it seems that the charge of sorcery applies to the perfectly legal and government sponsored variety as well as the illicit. In a 2004 Washington post article I read that “One in 10 American women takes an antidepressant drug such as Prozac, Paxil or Zoloft, and the use of such drugs by all adults has nearly tripled in the last decade, according to the latest figures on American health released yesterday by the federal government.”[8] Of course there are beneficial healing uses of psychiatric drugs but in the days gone by someone with an emotional pain or need might seek the counsel of her pastor or petition God in prayer as the first course of action.  Today it is the action of last resort if it is even considered. Christians should be following the teaching of our Lord Jesus who taught, “Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about its own things. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble” (Mt 6:34). Most drugs are not really solutions; they merely offer temporary relief while the root problem worsens. It seems correct to extend the charge of sorcery to some forms of psychiatry. While the majority of Bubeck’s exegesis is sound, exception is taken with a few of his conclusions.

Bubeck believes that Satan still has access to heaven based on the divine council scene in the first chapter of Job and that he will not be cast out until the tribulation.[9] First, “Satan” in the divine council scene of Job 1 is not a proper name but a title “the Satan.” It means “the accuser” and Hebrew Bible scholars are divided on whether this is one in the same as the devil in the New Testament. Still yet, I tend to agree that “the Satan” is the same entity due to Revelation 12:10 which identifies the devil as the “accuser of our brothers.” But the vision in Revelation 12 is clearly a flashback which includes the birth of Jesus and Satan’s expulsion from heaven is also presented in the past tense. John chapter 12 is decidedly conclusive to this matter:

“This voice has come for your sake, not mine. Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out. And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” He said this to show by what kind of death he was going to die (Jn 12:30-33).

 

Referring to his impending passion, Jesus said very clearly that now the ruler of this world is cast out. Not in the distant future end times. Jesus said it was “now”, way back then. Luke 10:18 also seems to hint at Satan’s expulsion in response to the proclamation of the Gospel. Satan and his minions only have the power that we give them by sin and fear. This is why Paul describes them as “weak and worthless” (Gal  4:9). Satan’s days in the divine council are over; he is no longer in God’s immediate presence accusing. Still yet, many have criticized Bubeck of giving too much power to the enemy but often they misrepresent him.

Bubeck has been widely criticized for overemphasizing demonic influence. In reading some of the criticisms on the internet, the majority seem unfair. For instance, Miles J. Stanford seems to charge Bubeck with saying believers can be possessed. He argues, “These demon deliverance leaders formulate imaginary demons in Christians, names and all; and then imagine victory over them. This seems to be a case of straw man burning because Bubeck explicitly writes:

It is my conviction that no believer can be possessed by an evil spirit in the same sense that an unbeliever can. In fact, I reject this term altogether when talking about a believer’s problem with the powers of darkness. A believer may be afflicted or even controlled in certain areas of his being, but he can never be owned or totally controlled as an unbeliever can.[10]

 

His critics, while often well intended, seem to be mischaracterizing his work. One wonders if the critics simply ignore his admonitions to doctrinal prayer. There is a difference between demon oppression and possession that is overlooked. However, the idea of ancestral demonization is promoted in the book. Most dubious is that his evidence for it comes from the demons, “One wicked spirit claimed to have been working in the ancestral line for over five hundred years.” [11] He argues that they attach to families and ancestral blood lines and that children and grandchildren are under the curse of their distant relative’s actions.[12] There does not seem to be much biblical basis for it.

In trying to examine Bubeck’s claim of ancestral demonization, the biblical evidence is scant. One can establish that children can be demonized by the incident in Mark 9:21 but this says nothing about why. While the Old Testament infers generational curses (Ex. 34:7ff), Ezekiel 18 seems to mitigate this as an ongoing phenomenon, “The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself” (Eze 18:20). In light of this passage, I am skeptical of ancestral demonization but open to explore the evidence. Still yet, if Christ’s salvific work in a believer’s life does not break ancestral curses, then, Christ’s work on the cross in one’s life is incomplete. However, we know that Christ’s redemptive work is complete (Heb. 9:11-12; 25-28). While he may have experiential and anecdotal support, it does not seem prudent to accept the word of demons at face value.

Bubeck laments that revival had not come to our nation. That was in the 1970s and it seems that the situation has only worsened since then. He seems especially concerned with the charismatic movement and rightfully so. He mentions, “…its emphasis upon experience and its lack of stand on objective, doctrinal truth.”[13] This situation has also escalated since his writing. The modern antics of Rick Joyner, Todd Bentley and the new apostolic reformation are promoting a dangerous heretical mysticism.[14]  Any time that experience is elevated above revealed truth, Satan is given an opportunity to deceive. Theological liberals and charismatics share an inappropriate emphasis on God’s immanence and on human experience. The counterfeit replaces esteem for Christ with self-esteem and sound doctrine for esoteric speculations. Both seem to have lost their way and run off the road into a ditch. Perhaps “pit” is a better choice of words.

 

CONCLUSION

            This paper offered a summary and analysis of The Adversary: The Christian Versus Demon Activity. After offering a brief summary, the paper sought to illustrate the value of the book by establishing its relevance. Critical analysis was offered concerning the idea that Satan still has access to God’s throne room and the idea of ancestral demonization. It was argued that many of Bubeck’s critics misrepresent him and that the book is largely sound. It has excellent examples of warfare prayers and prudent advice. The relationship between these points was shown. This book has great relevance to my personal testimony. In the end, it seems that this is a book I will keep on my shelf for further reference.

 


[1]Mark I. Bubeck, The Adversary: The Christian Versus Demon Activity (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1975), 46.

[2]Ibid, 50.

[3]Ibid, 85.

[4]Ibid, 136.

[5]Ibid 15.

[6] Gary Habermas, “Paradigm Shift: a Challenge to Naturalism,” Bibliotheca Sacra (146:584 Oct-Dec 1989), 437.

[7]Bubeck, The Adversary, 30.

[8] Shankar Vedantam, “Antidepressant Use By U.S. Adults Soars,” Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29751-2004Dec2.html (accessed 7/29/2011).

[9] Bubeck, The Adversary, 61.

[10]Bubeck, The Adversary, 87.

[11]Ibid, 147.

[12]Ibid, 87.

[13]Ibid, 130.

[14]Chrystal Whitt, “Rick Joyner, Todd Bentley, and the New Apostolic Reformation,” Apprising Ministries, http://apprising.org/2010/06/12/rick-joyner-todd-bentley-and-the-new-apostolic-reformation/ (accessed 7/28/2011).

 

 

Filed Under Spiritual Warfare Tagged With Demons, Mark Bubeck, Possession, Satan, spiritual warfare, The Adversary

The Singularity is Near!

08/05/2011 5 Comments

The much mythologized Singularity which is said to be near by transhumanists is the point in time when artificial intelligence surpasses human intelligence prompting the exponential curve of technological growth to go vertical. The growth will be so rapid as to supersede our current abilities of imagination. You see, Ray Kurzweil and other transhumanists believe that through modeling the human brain artificial intelligence will become conscious.  In fact, he goes so far as to argue that machines will have spiritual experiences and will even worship:

Twenty‐first‐century machines—based on the design of human thinking—will do as their human progenitors have done—going to real and virtual houses of worship, meditating, praying, and transcending—to connect with their spiritual dimension. [1]

While one marvels at what precisely he thinks they would worship, he seems to intuitively acknowledge that consciousness entails a sense of the divine. While many may suppress the truth, people know in their hearts that God exists. God wired us to seek him. Solomon said it this way:

 He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also, he has put eternity into man’s heart, yet so that he cannot find out what God has done from the beginning to the end (Ec 3:11).

Kurzweil has been challenged by John Searle the distinguished philosopher at the University of California at Berkeley. Searle has criticized the view that AI can become conscious with his “Chinese Room” argument which holds that software cannot give a machine a mind or true understanding, regardless of how cleverly it behaves.  Kurzweil responded to this argument in the last chapter of The Singularity is Near with some sound counter-arguments. While the debate is interesting, ultimately they are both wrong because they are arguing from a naturalistic worldview.

The scientific paradigm of materialism reduces humanity to a byproduct of chemistry and physics. But if my thoughts are merely chemical reactions, then I would have no good reason to believe they are true. Atoms and chemical reactions just do not discern truth. In this way, scientism (the belief that science is the only way to know truth) is self-defeating. The atheistic material reductionist view of consciousness is that it is an emergent property of the brain. This is the dominant scientific view point. For instance, even Kurzweil’s critic Searle has written:

The brain is a machine, a biological machine to be sure, but a machine all the same. So the first step is to figure out how the brain does it and then build an artificial machine that has an equally effective mechanism for causing consciousness. We know that brains cause consciousness with specific biological mechanisms.[2]

The understanding about consciousness in the case of artificial intelligence is that consciousness will arise from the material structure of electronic hardware as an emergent property.  Emergent properties are seen from a bottom up approach.

An emergent property is a property that emerges from a certain organization of matter. For instance, the taste of salt or saltiness is an emergent property of sodium and chloride when combined as NaCl or common salt. In this case, on the bottom we have subatomic particles forming sodium and chlorine atoms and then on the next level the matrix of atoms causes the property of saltiness to manifest. It is important to note that saltiness is an effect of the matter. Salty taste doesn’t change the salt. It is simply the property that emerges as an effect when the salt molecules come together. The matter is a cause and the emergent property is an effect.

Given the naturalistic worldview, spirituality and consciousness are merely functions of the brain. If that is the case, then consciousness is also on the top not on the bottom. Therefore it’s an effect not a cause. Accordingly, consciousness doesn’t cause things.  It’s simply the effect of fatty tissues, neurons and information. In the case of AI it is just a physical thing, computer hardware, programmed with software that allegedly produces consciousness. If the computer is producing consciousness, then consciousness is similarly an effect.

The problem is that consciousness is seen as the result of a purely material process. Being the effect it cannot also be the cause. If it is not a cause, then it does not make decisions or choices. Yet, the problem with that is, it seems that mental states do cause things. Think of it this way, you need legs to walk, but you’d never say that your legs are walking.  Another major problem with this is willful actions. It seems to me that I will something in my mind and then my body acts. In fact, I can imagine events in my mind that never physically occur at all. It seems to me that conscious beings do make choices. We do think about things and decide between alternate ideas and exercise rationality. This is what consciousness really means. Computers may mimic consciousness but they will never really achieve it.

Kurzweil’s dream of the Age of Spiritual Machines is logically incoherent.  His point of view doesn’t leave room for a soul that is a thing in itself with mental properties, but that mental properties are merely the effects of the physical thing itself.  The Christian view is that man is made up of two distinct substances: an immaterial substance (mind) and a material substance (body).  It is a top down approach in which you are not your body rather an eternal immaterial being that is having a temporal material experience. Evidence is mounting for this reality in the area of Near Death Experiences.  Look for a post on those coming soon.

If the singularity represents the event horizon of a major paradigm shift then I agree it is near. However, ultimately, the singularity is not at all what transhumanists expect. It will not mark the crowning achievement of mankind to godhood and the transcendence of machines. When it comes to human behavior, past performance is usually a good predictor of future results. A realistic view of history reveals that man is rapidly plunging himself into trouble. Some might even call it great tribulation. The real singularity will be when God decisively intervenes into the world in what is known as the Parousia or second coming of Jesus Christ.  Indeed, defined this way, I believe the Singularity is near:

Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.(Mt 24:29-30)

The singularity is near…  Maranatha!

מרנא תא

 

[1] Ray Kurzweil, The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence(New York: Penguin (Non-Classics), 2000), 106.

[2] Ray Kurzweil, The Singularity Is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology (New York: The Viking Press, 2005), 329.

I modeled some of my argument after a similar one here: Greg Koukl, “When the Enterprise Got a Soul,” STR.org, http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5706 (accessed 8/05/2011).

Filed Under Apologetics Tagged With conciousness, Eschatology, metaphysics, Mind Body Problem, Ray Kurzweil, Singularity, Transhumanism
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »