Date: 28-Feb-1995 05:09pm EST
Subject: RE: Questions from Bob Hunter
(I'm posting this to new-wine-news, assuming that Bob Hunter's post also appeared here. If not, then, Jon, this need not be posted here either.)
Bob, thanks for your inquiry, addressed to Randy Clark and me. I'll be glad to provide you with some of my own opinions on the questions you asked, but I would be speaking only for myself, and not necessarily on behalf of Randy (nor necessarily on behalf of anyone in the Vineyard).
In general it is the case that, during times of revival, there is usually a lot of speculation on eschatological matters. There is also a very heightened expectation of the immediate fulfillment of various eschatological portions of the Scriptures, especially the coming of Christ.
My guess is that if you posed these questions to various proponents of the current revival, you would get a variety of answers. It would seem to me that, at least for some of these questions, we are really only in the realm of speculation. It may be that a lot of these things really won't get cleared up until the events that have been prophesied have actually been fulfilled.
I don't even claim to have answers for your questions, so I'm not even sure that I can answer them correctly, but I'll do what I can to try to interact with them.
You asked about the relationship between what is happening now (including the expectation of a coming great harvest) with certain Scriptures, particularly II Thess. 2:12, Matt. 24:21-27, and I Thess. 4:13-18. There are, of course, other Scriptures that specifically quote Jesus to the effect that there will be a harvest at the end of the age, so the question is really a hermeneutical one, i.e., how do we interpret these Scriptures in light of the fact that there will be a harvest at the end of the age and/or in light of the fact that we are currently experiencing revival.
The question seems to assume: (1) that proponents of the current move of God believe (a) that there will be a final, huge revival at the time of the end, and (b) that the present revival is indeed the revival that will usher in the end of the age, (2) that II Thess. 2:12 would imply that anti-Christ will be made manifest before any final harvest, and (3) that Matt. 24:21-27 implies that there will be false Christs, lying signs and wonders, and unequalled distress before any such final harvest. (But I wasn't quite sure why you were asking about the relationship of I Thess 4:13-18 to what is happening at the present time.)
There are thus a lot of assumptions here, and I'm not equally comfortable with all of them. To be specific, I have not decided yet whether I agree with assumptions (a) and (b) above, despite the excellent writings of Rick Joyner. But one of the things that I like about the Body of Christ, and also about the current revival in particular, is that we can be in full fellowship with one another as Christian brothers and sisters, yet not necessarily be in total agreement on every single issue.
Now, if I understand your general question, it is, "shouldn't certain things happen prior to the harvest at the end of the age, like the coming of the anti-Christ, unequalled distress, false signs and miracles, and false christs?" My answer to this question is, yes, certain things of this nature will happen, and I expect them to happen very soon--momentarily. How all of this relates to the current revival is an interesting question. My own personal opinion is that the present move of God is His method of preparing us for very, very difficult times that lie directly ahead for all Christians. I believe that we live in very perilous times. I say this, not as a theologian, but as a historian. I see the signs of gravely serious peril because of our own particular historical situation, regardless of what the Bible may or may not say about these matters.
The only way many of us are going to MAKE IT through the imminent perilous times is with extra oil in our lamps, so to speak. God is providing that oil right now. We can either take advantage of it, or not. If not, then life will be much more difficult (but theoretically not impossible) for those of us who reject what God is giving to us at the present time. God loves us, and He wants us to be prepared for what is about to happen. But if we reject that help, that does not necessarily mean that He'll have no compassion upon us when faced with the coming peril. It just means that things will be that much more difficult.
You asked whether we believed that there is an antichrist coming as a single individual. Yes, I do believe that the antichrist will be (or perhaps already is) a single individual.
You also asked whether we believed that there will be a rapture. I'm not sure why are you asking this. Is there some reason why you think that we might not believe that there will be a rapture? (I'm not sure how this particular question relates to the other questions--and it's quite possible that I'm missing something here.) My own personal interpretation of I Thess. 4:13-18 differs markedly from the usual twentieth century interpretation, and is more along the lines of the understanding of such people as Jonathan Edwards (and the understanding that prevailed during his time), and that of Ireneaus, bishop of Lyons. But to elaborate upon this would not be directly relevant to the discussion (unless I'm missing something).
Finally, you asked about William DeArteaga's statements about heresies, and whether we think that those who oppose this move of God are heretics. There are two possibilities. Either what is happening now is a move of God or it is not. If, indeed, it is a move of God, then, in my opinion, anyone opposing it is opposing God. Whether or not those involved in opposition to it are called heretics is, in my opinion, basically a matter of semantics. According to the quote you provided, Bill DeArteaga says, "Phariseeism is the heresy of orthodoxy, which is basically correct ideas . . . The Pharisees didn't have wrong theological ideas." This, I suppose, is one way of definining heresy. But if you define heresy in terms of what is believed theologically, then those who oppose the current move of God are not necessarily heretics. But what I think Bill is saying here is that you don't even necessarily have to be a heretic in the traditionally understood sense to be opposed to God, and that, I think, is true.
Now it is important to remember that, during times of revival, many of those who begin as opponents of a revival later become its defenders. Sometimes this is a result of dramatic supernatural events that are experienced by these people. So it's never appropriate to "write off" opponents of a move of God as intransigently opposed of God, nor should they be treated in that way.
I hope this answers most of your questions. As I said, I can't speak for Randy, or for any other leaders, but I do value and welcome their perspectives and yours, and hope to seriously consider all of these perspectives prayerfully, even if they might differ from my own, for that is how we learn, and grow.
May the Lord continue to BLESS you abundandly!
Most sincerely,
Richard M. Riss
RRISS@DREW.EDU