CultureWatch

Bill Muehlenberg's commentary on issues of the day...

Why the Book of Revelation Would Be Banned Today

Mar 27, 2011

It is a good thing the New Testament canon was long ago recognised. I fear that in today’s PC and TC climate, the bulk of churches and leaders would argue that it must not be recognised as divinely inspired Scripture. After all, it breaks every rule in the book.

Just think about it for a moment. Here we have a book which is guilty of every thought crime imaginable today: it is sexist, chauvinistic, militaristic, judgemental, intolerant, bigoted, and exclusivist. It is totally politically incorrect, and in today’s wimpy spiritual climate, it is theologically incorrect as well.

Consider the many ways in which it offends our modern sensibilities. It is clearly a male-dominated book, with patriarchal and chauvinistic themes and images running throughout. Women don’t get much of a mention, and when they do, they are usually presented in a bad light.

Consider Jezebel the prophetess and seductress in ch. 2, or the woman riding on the beast full of abominations and adulteries in ch. 17. With a few exceptions, all we find are these negative and discriminatory stereotypes of women and female figures. Whoever wrote this book was obviously one big woman-hating creep.

And consider all the times repentance is mentioned in this book. If we just look at the seven churches we find Jesus calling them to repent time and time again. And what about verses like Rev. 9:20-21? “The rest of mankind who were not killed by these plagues still did not repent of the work of their hands; they did not stop worshiping demons, and idols of gold, silver, bronze, stone and wood – idols that cannot see or hear or walk. Nor did they repent of their murders, their magic arts, their sexual immorality or their thefts.”

But I thought Jesus wasn’t into repentance. All my Christianity-lite and emergent church buddies insist that Jesus hardly ever spoke about repentance. Jesus does not make any heavy demands – he welcomes us all with wide-open arms.

And they also told me that we can forget everything else and just concentrate on the love of God. This is the supreme attribute, as I have been told so often. All other attributes are really just secondary to his love. Hey, sounds good to me. So then what is the problem with the Book of Revelation? Why is it so out of step here?

The love of God is hardly mentioned in the book. Indeed, we have close up shots of what heaven is like and what the mega-worship services there are like, and what do we find? All we get is this harsh judgmental stuff. For example, in the heavenly throne room we read about the four living creatures in Rev. 4.

It says this about them: “Day and night they never stop saying: ‘Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty, who was, and is, and is to come’.” OK, I will grant that the Bible does mention his holiness once and a while, but what about his love?

Surely they should be celebrating his love day and night, not going on and on about such secondary features and attributes, right? After all, the Christian life is all about balance isn’t it? We can’t get too carried away with this holiness stuff. It will make us look like extremists and weirdoes.

But wait, there’s more. Get this – this is the most incredible bit of all. It sure doesn’t sound like the Jesus I have been taught about, the tree-hugging, peace-loving Jesus who would never harm a fly or never be exclusive or intolerant. In ch. 19 we read about one of the biggest praise and worship sessions you will ever encounter. It makes the happenings at Hillsongs look like a convention of deaf and dumb people. This is a mega-worship session, with “a great multitude in heaven shouting” hallelujahs and all the rest.

But this is the really amazing bit. Just what are they celebrating and getting so excited about? The fact that everyone is going to be saved? The fact that God accepts into heaven followers of every non-Christian religion? The fact that God loves everyone and has a wonderful plan for their life?

No, they are celebrating what is recorded in Rev. 18: the judgment of Babylon. All the gory, bloody descriptions of the wrath of God being poured out on unrepentant Babylon are the subject of this praise meeting. All the woes and fearful judgments on those who reject God are in fact being celebrated.

And in case we missed this connection, this is what Rev 19:1-4 states about this massive praise gathering: “‘Hallelujah! Salvation and glory and power belong to our God, for true and just are his judgments. He has condemned the great prostitute who corrupted the earth by her adulteries. He has avenged on her the blood of his servants.’ And again they shouted: ‘Hallelujah! The smoke from her goes up for ever and ever.’ The twenty-four elders and the four living creatures fell down and worshiped God, who was seated on the throne. And they cried: ‘Amen, Hallelujah!’”

Oh come on now: rejoicing at the destruction of God’s enemies? That is not very loving. That is not something Jesus would do, is it? Oh yeah, it is Jesus doing the judging here. Oh well, it still isn’t very nice. In fact, this entire book reeks of wrath and judgment, pestilence and plagues, mischief and mayhem.

Look at all these angels of destruction and seals and bowls and vials and plagues and woes and earthquakes and trumpet judgments and horsemen! Give me a break already. This is not the sweet Jesus I have been taught about. This is not the inclusive, tolerant and non-judgmental Jesus everyone is talking about these days.

What’s even worse, Jesus is said to be actively behind all this. Look at Rev 6:15-17 for example. Here people are not running to the welcoming Jesus, but fleeing and hiding from the wrathful Jesus: “Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and everyone else, both slave and free, hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains. They called to the mountains and the rocks, ‘Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! For the great day of their wrath has come, and who can withstand it?’”

Hey, that’s not what we hear in most churches today. We are basically taught that God is little more than a deistic figure, who is not at all actively involved in the affairs of men. He is more like a gentle grandfather, looking down on us and smiling a lot.

He certainly does not get angry with us. He certainly does not use the forces of nature to unleash his wrath upon unrepentant sinners. Oh no. And Rob Bell and the other experts keep telling me that God is too loving to allow anyone into a lost eternity, and he would never let his judgment get so carried away as this.

This is simply one big misogynist, hate-filled and belligerent book. I really don’t think it can be allowed in our Bibles. It is far too harsh and judgmental. It is far too unloving and ungracious. It is far too unlike the meek and mild Jesus I have been taught about all my life.

OK then, agreed: from now on the Book of Revelation will no longer be allowed in our Bibles. Right then, while we are at it, time to start looking at those especially nasty epistles of Paul…

[1270 words]

38 Responses to Why the Book of Revelation Would Be Banned Today

  • Hmm, “the wrath of the Lamb”??

    I hadn’t noticed that until now.

    We all recognise the power and wrath of a Lion (even an Aslan if we have enjoyed the Narnia books).

    But the Scriptures talk about the wrath of The Lamb – the pictorial representation which gentle, maudlin, sentimental pseudo-Christianity loves to put forward as the quintessential image of Jesus.

    Now that’s a bit of a shock, isn’t it?

    John Angelico

  • I love the Book of Revelation. It is so powerful and it tells us so much, and just because it doesn’t talk of love, it demonstrates it in the many opportunities even throughout the Judgement for man to repent.

    As for the idea that it’s misogynistic, patriarchal, yada, yada, whatevah! I honestly never read it that way.

    It’s a Revelation. Hello, new-agers, it’s telling you what’s to come. The future is not interested in your opinions.

    God’s Will is what counts, not your warm and fuzzy yearnings for fluffy slippers and kumbaya.

    Oh, and as for the elders and the kings and the creatures singing praises to God? I am so there!

    Debra Franklin

  • Bill this is timely and helpful.
    Stan Fishley

  • While He certainly is a God of love and mercy we ignore, at our peril, the fact that He is also a God of justice as well. His nature is such that He cannot be otherwise; as attested to on many occasions in Scripture.
    Dunstan Hartley

  • Thanks Bill

    I think your onto something here. I like your tone. It’s in A flat isn’t it? Or is it G sharp?

    I was going to write in when you wrote your article on 11/3/11 but was a little slow in putting ideas together. Dear Bill, you are going to have to watch it mate, you are starting to sound like such a wowser or even worse, a red neck. Diana Mcinnes delivered you the following comment on 11/3/11 with great sophistry.

    “..I, and many people too numerous to count .. would be appalled at having to share “heaven” with most of the people who are allowed to comment on this website..” she said.

    Paul Washer wonderfully said:
    “Everyone wants to go to heaven; but very few want God to be there when they get there.”

    In the context of your article it is also true to say that “Every Christian wants to go to heaven; but very few Christians want a God different to what they imagine Him to be there when they get there.”

    The Holy Scriptures teach the incomprehensibility of God; and yet wonderful truths are revealed about His nature. (Divine incomprehensibility is a biblical theme, see: Job 11 v 7 – 8; Ps 97 v 2; 145 v 3; Isaiah 40 v 28; 45 v 15; 55 v 8 – 9; but this is by no means to deny that God can be known, as our Saviour taught: “And this is eternal life that they should know you, the only true God and Jesus Christ whom you have sent” John 17 v 3.) I am tempted to say that I can sympathise with Diana Mcinnes. But it is our confidence in the goodness of God is what alleviates all our other concerns about heaven. But our confidence is such that even though we know that most of us who have sought to love Him with our whole lives will only just manage to be saved (as 1 Peter 4 v 18 tells us). There is a process of salvation, where we are purifying ourselves even as He is pure. (See 1 John 3 v 3 & 2 Peter 1 v 3 – 11) On that day of our Saviour’s appearing, it is those who are eagerly awaiting that day who are saved.
    This all make little sense to people in the world. But they can have some understanding of sin. Purely upon assumption being demonstrated, Ray Comfort has shown in his ‘Hell’s Best Kept Secret” that we all want God to be a holy God who is also a righteous judge. See: video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1034567761681383803# Similarly, upon this assumption, it makes sense that if God were running the universe, that He should judge evil. Science seems so largely grounded in a mechanistic view of the universe. We must say sorry to Diana Mcinnes and the people like her, but this view is pure myth.

    A proper defence of God’s judgements would, by necessity, be grounded in understanding two things: (i) the doctrine of the incomprehensibility of God. While the ordered world is profoundly God’s creation and he is present to every atom and molecule, as Job says, God is closer to us than our own spit. Even Patrick White knew better than many. White converted from an atheism to theism after an incident where he fell over, hurt himself badly and cursed God so strongly that he came to a profound realisation that there really must be a God. How then can people live their lives in total ignorance to God? The answer is that they believe lies. Religion, philosophy and political movements have provided a great source of lies throughout history. However, hatred of God invariably manifests itself as disinterest. The incomprehensibility of God is a key, but there is another to understanding God’s judgements.

    The other is that of collective evil is frequently normative within a community group and because it is collective, people make the mistake of thinking that it is normative. The difference or similarity between sin and insanity needs to be stressed to understand the nature of sin. Sinful acts have no ontological reality and are dynamically opposed to humanity’s essential God given nature.

    To finish on the theme you have wonderfully raised. The most terrify words in the Bible are not in the book of Revelation but in the Gospel of St Matthew chapter 21 v 23. These verses quote the Saviour as clearly teaching that there will be “many” on the day of judgement, who thought themselves to be Christians – and clearly many others thought them Christians also – who will not make it to heaven.

    Sorry, I changed the key a bit by returning to a similar theme you raised earlier, but I have come back to your original, even if I have changed to the minor mode in the process. No longer mocking, but calling for an inward glance.

    Cheers, Chris McNicol

  • I think you are right Bill, though they would argue about the implications of Revelation for today. I think Calvin once said that the reason he never wrote a commentary on Revelation is that he never understood it! I’m firmly in that camp!!

    Another book that Pentecostals overlook is Job – there is no suffering in Gods Kingdom after all!!

    Blessings
    Adam Elovalis

  • I never noticed that before either John. I’d always thought of the Lamb as the sacrificial Lamb, silent before His shearers.

    Annette Nestor, Perth

  • Thanks Adam

    But it is not just Pentecostals who avoid books like Job. Plenty of believers refuse to believe that suffering may in fact be part and parcel of the Christian life. We need to develop a theology of suffering, as I write here (and elsewhere on this site): www.billmuehlenberg.com/2010/01/16/comfort-for-the-broken-and-afflicted/

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Where on earth do these people get the idea that there is no suffering in christian life? Our world is built upon the foundation of Jesus suffering and dying for our redemption.

    Did I just miss something? Look at Paul, and even at the OT prophets. There were suffering and privation there, too.

    And to touch on mercy, what is mercy for if not to temper justice? You don’t get one without the other.

    I’d say it’s not rocket science, but perhaps these days it is.

    Debra Franklin

  • Thanks Debra

    Some of these believers will begrudgingly acknowledge that God’s people may experience suffering, but they claim it only has to do with persecution and nothing else. I seek to rebut this mistaken notion here:

    www.billmuehlenberg.com/2010/09/30/suffering-in-the-new-testament-part-one/
    www.billmuehlenberg.com/2010/09/30/suffering-in-the-new-testament-part-two/

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Bill, I don’t think you need to write the next post about Paul – you’ve been beaten to the post by the guys at the Gospel Coalition – see Justin Taylor’s blog from a couple of days ago.

    Samuel Ellemor

  • Thanks Samuel

    Yes that is a good one. It is very similar to this one, also on Galatians: sacredsandwich.com/archives/2781

    And then there is this one as well: socialhazard.wordpress.com/2008/12/18/gods-wonderful-plan-for-your-life/

    Also, I did one on Elijah coming to our churches today: www.billmuehlenberg.com/2011/03/16/when-elijah-comes-to-town/

    Oh well, I can still do a demolition job of the Gospels. They too are not very PC or TC today.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • John, one thing to note about the use of the word Lamb in our Bibles is that it is a poor translation. We think of a newborn sheep. Whereas the original text indicates a one year old male, a fully grown animal in its prime. Indeed one year old males without blemish were sacrificed in Old Testament days.

    If you had to name a few books of the Bible that get attacked, you’d have to put Genesis and Revelation pretty much at the top of the list.

    For if you deny Genesis, then you don’t believe in many (if not all) of the foundational truths of the Bible. If you don’t believe Revelation then you also have an incomplete view of God, of Jesus. Revelation is one of the main prophecies of what is still yet to come and provides assurance of the complete fulfilment of the blessings as a result of the victory Jesus has already won.

    Indeed when considering why these books tend to be attacked so much one can also consider that Genesis shows Satan’s rise to power in this world through deception, and Revelation shows his helplessness when he is chained up and left in a pit for 1000 years and his ultimate doom when he is thrown alive into the lake of fire.

    Bill, people who think Jesus is someone who wouldn’t hurt a fly tend to ignore much of what they read in the gospels too. There is of course his anger at the temple being turned into a den of thieves and his verbal attacks e.g. on the Pharisees to consider as prominent examples.

    One should also note things like in Luke 4 where Jesus quotes Isaiah 61 but leaves out the mention of “the day of vengeance”. In the gospels the focus is largely on the “year of the Lord’s favour”, with predictions about judgement, whereas in Revelation there is the focus on the end of the year of the Lord’s favour and judgment.

    Matt Vinay

  • Thanks Matt for pointing that bit out about the context of the word ‘lamb’ – I didn’t know that.
    Christie Ewens

  • Most of the opinions mentioned by Bill about Revelation have been made seriously, believe it or not, e.g. several feminist writers called for Revelation to be deleted from the canon because of its violence and misogyny and D.H. Lawrence had a field day with the militant lamb.
    On the other hand, there is a clear romance love theme in the book, which ends with a wedding!
    Most of the church is embarrassed by Revelation, not just because it is not very PC but because it has been so misused over the centuries. Can I plug my book “Revelation Reclaimed: the use and Misuse of the Apocalypse” here? In the book, I try to seriously consider how we can best read Revelation today.
    Jon Newton

  • Great piece, Bill! Interestingly, this reads like a continuation of our church service today from Rom. 5:9 on Jesus saving us from the wrath of God through justification by faith. It was discussed that God is wrathful not just at sin but at sinners themselves. Since we rarely hear sermons on God’s wrath towards sinners, it seemed quite radical, until you think about all of the horrific crimes being committed against Christians in North Korea and the Middle East or against children all over the world, late term abortions and other atrocities. If God were any less than wrathful towards the sin and the sinner, what an unjust world it would be. Perhaps we, who are created in the image of God, should be getting angry more often at the flagrant rebellion against the law of God ourselves.
    Dee Graf

  • Excuse my ignorance. What is TC please?
    Kylie Anderson

  • Thanks Kylie

    I mention it in my article: theological correctness. It is a term I invented to reflect what happens theologically, just like what politically happens with PC. There are certain theological doctrines which many Christians today are ashamed of or don’t want to promote. They see them as theologically incorrect. Get my drift?

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Thanks Christie. I’ve just looked into it a bit further and there’s a clear reference in English in Exodus 12:5 to the age of the “lamb” sacrificed for the Passover needing to be one year. You may find references to the age of one year old being required for other sacrifices in the Old Testament as well if you look (I haven’t checked, at least not recently, so I can’t be sure).

    The Jew of Jesus’ day would be very familiar with the age of the Passover lamb with it being an annual sacrifice, but unfortunately Christians tend not to be and this can lead to wrong impressions of who Jesus is. To properly understand the New Testament, particularly books like Revelation a good knowledge of the Old Testament is required.

    Matt Vinay

  • Thanks Matt

    Yes you are absolutely correct about how essential a thorough knowledge of the OT is if we want to appreciate and properly understand the NT.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Yes, As I’ve written letter about (and had it published), one never seems to hear about sin from “the pulpit” anymore: that’s too “harsh”!! All one hears is “don’t be judgemental”, as if that’s the only sin. By the way, to say that someone is “judgemental” means to be judgemental oneself!!
    Jerome Gonzalez

  • Sorry, but has someone just removed Romans 5v9, Dee? It says ‘God demonstrates his own LOVE for us in this: While we were STILL SINNERS, Christ died for us.’ – in fact it seems that it is only Christ’s life in CHRISTIANS that saves us from God’s wrath from v 9 – so he loves sinners enough to send Jesus to die for them and Jesus’ full, perfect and sufficient sacrifice is THE ONLY source of our salvation. We should never trust in anything we can do to get us to heaven.
    Katharine Hornsby

  • There is a pattern in Revelation: High praise is followed by God’s governance. A fuller explanation can be found here.
    Another interesting observation is the number of names for Jesus. A long time ago, I counted them–over thirty.
    Jill Woodliff

  • There is a precedent for trying to “remove” books from the Bible when those books are at variance with preconceived ideas. Luther, for example, wanted the Epistle of St James removed, and the Protestant Reformers succeeded in getting rid of a whole of other books (so-called deutero-canonical books). The books of the Maccabees, for example, described prayers for the dead and so had to go.

    Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose! Thomas Jefferson produced his own Bible with the bits he didn’t like nicely excised, and now the attack is on the Book of Revelation with its superb witness to the worship of God in Heaven. Well done Bill in pointing this out.

    Fr John Fleming

  • Thanks John

    But for at least two reasons you should be more careful here concerning the first half of your comment. One, you used to be a Protestant who converted to Catholicism (so you should know better) and two, I have said repeatedly on this site that I won’t allow Protestants to engage in Catholic baiting or bashing here, and I won’t allow Catholics to do it either.

    Luther of course never declared James to be non-canonical book, and even quoted from it, but he did say that compared to the evangelical nature of Paul’s letters it seemed like “an epistle of straw”. As to the Apocrypha, there are good reasons why it is not included in Protestant Bibles. And this has absolutely nothing to do with “getting rid” of the books as you rather crassly and falsely put it, but simply agreeing with the earlier church in it not being recognised as part of the canon as was formulated a millennia earlier.

    But I will have to pen an entire article on this to lay out the case more carefully.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • I think the saddest part is how divided we are! In a world so against Christianity we should be standing together not trying to paint God in our own way. I’m no bible scholar buts its hard to miss the fact God is not ONLY about love…He is sovereign, just, righteous etc.
    Thanks Bill for helping us keep ours eyes where they should be!
    Anthony Lichoudaris

  • BTW Kylie, I have now written an entire article on TC:

    www.billmuehlenberg.com/2011/03/28/on-theological-correctness/

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • Bill, you’re just going too far!
    David Skinner, UK

  • C.S. Lewis in chapter 5 of his “Mere Christianity” says,

    The Moral Law does not give us any grounds for thinking that God is “good” in the sense of being indulgent, or soft, or sympathetic. There is nothing indulgent about the Moral Law. It is as hard as nails. It tells you to do the straight thing and it does not seem to care how painful, or dangerous, or difficult it is to do. If God is like the Moral Law, then He is not soft. It is no use, at this stage, saying that what you mean by a “good” God is a God who can forgive. You are going too quickly. Only a Person can forgive. And we have not yet got as far as a personal God-only as far as a power, behind the Moral Law, and more like a mind than it is like anything else. But it may still be very unlike a Person. If it is pure impersonal mind, there may be no tense in asking it to make allowances for you or let you off, just as there is no sense in asking the multiplication table to let you off when you do your sums wrong. You are bound to get the wrong answer. And it is no use either saying that if there is a God of that sort-an impersonal absolute goodness-then you do not like Him and are not going to bother about Him. For the trouble is that one part of you is on His side and really agrees with His disapproval of human greed and trickery and exploitation. You may want Him to make an exception in your own case, to let you off this one time; but you know at bottom that unless the power behind the world really and unalterably detests that sort of behaviour, then He cannot be good. On the other hand, we know that if there does exist an absolute goodness it must hate most of what we do. That is the terrible fix we are in. If the universe is not governed by an absolute goodness, then all our efforts are in the long run hopeless. But if it is, then we are making ourselves enemies to that goodness every day, and are not in the least likely to do any better tomorrow, and so our case is hopeless again. We cannot do without it. and we cannot do with it. God is the only comfort, He is also the supreme terror: the thing we most need and the thing we most want to hide from. He is our only possible-ally, and we have made ourselves His enemies. Some people talk as if meeting the gaze of absolute goodness would be fun. They need to think again. They are still only playing with religion. Goodness is either the great safety or the great danger-according to the way you react to it. And we have reacted the wrong way.

    David Skinner, UK

  • How often do we hear expositions on Psalm 51 these days? Surely King David is celebrating the truth that God is a God of justice, when he says in Psalm 51, “so you are right in your verdict and justified when you judge.” He would not want God to be anything other than a God of righteousness, even if this was going to be painful for David himself.

    1 Have mercy on me, O God,
    according to your unfailing love;
    according to your great compassion
    blot out my transgressions.
    2 Wash away all my iniquity
    and cleanse me from my sin.
    3 For I know my transgressions,
    and my sin is always before me.
    4 Against you, you only, have I sinned
    and done what is evil in your sight;
    so you are right in your verdict
    and justified when you judge.
    5 Surely I was sinful at birth,
    sinful from the time my mother conceived me.
    6 Yet you desired faithfulness even in the womb;
    you taught me wisdom in that secret place.
    7 Cleanse me with hyssop, and I will be clean;
    wash me, and I will be whiter than snow.
    8 Let me hear joy and gladness;
    let the bones you have crushed rejoice.
    9 Hide your face from my sins
    and blot out all my iniquity.
    10 Create in me a pure heart, O God,
    and renew a steadfast spirit within me.
    11 Do not cast me from your presence
    or take your Holy Spirit from me.
    12 Restore to me the joy of your salvation
    and grant me a willing spirit, to sustain me.
    13 Then I will teach transgressors your ways,
    so that sinners will turn back to you.
    14 Deliver me from the guilt of bloodshed, O God,
    you who are God my Saviour,
    and my tongue will sing of your righteousness.
    15 Open my lips, Lord,
    and my mouth will declare your praise.
    16 You do not delight in sacrifice, or I would bring it;
    you do not take pleasure in burnt offerings.
    17 My sacrifice, O God, is a broken spirit;
    a broken and contrite heart
    you, God, will not despise.
    18 May it please you to prosper Zion,
    to build up the walls of Jerusalem.
    19 Then you will delight in the sacrifices of the righteous,
    in burnt offerings offered whole;
    then bulls will be offered on your altar.

    David Skinner, UK

  • I guess that is why the science geeks on ABC knock Revelation. They would rather have Christianity lite. I suspect they don’t like Genesis either but the day that they had a go at the rainbow I missed the start of the show so didn’t get to protest.
    Katherine Fishley

  • “Jesus does not make any heavy demands – he welcomes us all with wide-open arms.” (Emergent Church – Evangelical, as it would seem from your text, Bill) – and I thought these ideas only came from “Liberal” falling Anglicans.
    I’m with Debra on this. The Book of Revelation is wonderful for many reasons. Christianity without the idea of judgement/God’s holiness would be worse than amoral.
    John Thomas, UK

  • Hi Bill – And let’s not forget the prayer of the martyrs in Revelation 5 – “How long, oh God, holy and true, until you avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth.” Saints of the Lord calling out for God to avenge them! Does the Lord rebuke them? No – He merely calls for them to be patient. The time for vengeance will come – and it does in chapter 15.
    Ed Sherman, Holland

  • Yes quite right Ed.
    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  • James 5:20: “Be sure of this, any man who brings a sinner back from his crooked ways will be rescuing his soul from death and cancelling innumerable sins.”

    Many of the readings at church, during this penitential season of lent, are quite terrifying and there is a clear call to repent and accept God’s merciful forgiveness and so avoid the just punishment our sins deserve. Our priests and pastors have an awesome responsibility to call us to account over our sinfulness and faithlessness and if they’re not doing that, then maybe we’re not supporting them with our prayer as we should be. We’re all in this together so let’s watch and pray this Lent, examine our consciences and repent as needed. Our joy will be the greater when Easter comes and we experience afresh the wonder of our redemption.

    I thank God for you Bill, may he bless you always.
    Anna Cook

  • Revelation truly does rip to shreds the arguments of those who attempt to claim that the God of the Old Testament and New Testament are separate and distinct.
    Mario Del Giudice

  • To the apparent author (maybe Bill Muehlenberg) who wrote this article:

    Keep in mind that the Bible is what it is. It is not there for your useless opinions or your stupid equality rules. The author of the Book of Revelation wrote this book based on his prophecies/visions from the father. If you do not like the Bible or its books, do not read it, especially do not openly criticize it to others, let them decide for themselves. Go read your Mein Kampf and attend the Church of Satan if you hate God, Christianity, or any of God’s prophets or teachings. Or be an atheist and simply ignore religion if you cannot handle it; stop spamming the already-spammed internet with your worthless articles.

    P.S. Before you call another of God’s prophets a “creep” you should be more respectful so keep that in mind. I would not have attacked you if I did not see your direct attacks against the Bible/its authors. And don’t bother replying, I will not be attending your disgusting website anymore. Oh and by the way, hell does exist, you will find out the easy way or the hard way.

    Watch your tongue

  • Thanks Watch your tongue, but two problems here:

    One, you are required to have a full name, and not hide behind anonymity.

    Two, sadly, you are not very aware of the nature of satire and being facetious. This entire article was of course a send up of the PC mob – exactly what I said in the first paragraph. It is called humour, and it is used to make a point. Sorry it went completely over your head. Anyone reading my site (with all 2,500 articles) knows exactly of course where I am coming from; I am a biblical Christian who fully supports the inspired word of God. So next time you are about to go off half-cocked, actually read things a bit more carefully first. That should save you a lot of unnecessary embarrassment.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

Leave a Reply