|
Banned
|
The man has all the answers............
Quote:
<a href="http://www.adn.com/life/story/6265868p-6142756c.html">http://www.adn.com/life/story/6265868p-6142756c.html</a>
Q & A with Tim LaHaye
Published: March 13th, 2005
Last Modified: March 13th, 2005 at 05:39 AM
LaHaye on the Bible, evolution and his critics
Before speaking at the recent "Left Behind Prophecy Conference" in Anchorage, evangelical preacher and best-selling author Tim LaHaye — co-author of the hugely popular "Left Behind" novels — met with the Daily News to discuss his life and work. An edited version of the interview follows:Q: Some people read passages in the Bible as metaphors. … But you believe what's written in the Bible is to be taken literally. Is that correct?
A: (Yes.) The allegorical (nonliteral interpretation of Bible stories) comes from Greek paganism, when the Greeks developed the idea of finding double and triple meanings within the written page — a custom that existed before the time of Christ. It was rejected by the Jews and rejected by the Christians during the first 400 years of Christianity.
Augustine was trained in Greek philosophy before he became a Christian, and he brought (allegorical interpretations) into the church. And he came to the conclusion that because Revelations was a little difficult to understand that it had to be allegorical.
Well, we say that's wrong, because the church never did that. And it doesn't make sense today. In fact, if you read the book of Revelation allegorically, you can come to about 25 different suggestions. If you take it literally, as if you were going to write a love letter to your wife — you'd want her to read it literally. … "When the plain sense makes common sense, don't seek any other …"
Q: How about Genesis — and disputes over what the language in Genesis means in terms of the creation of life on Earth?
A: Well, let's start with the first five words of Genesis: "In the beginning God created …" Now, you can just take that spiritually or you can take that literally. And there is a big controversy over whether they are 24-hour "days." … (But) when you have the trees and vegetation made on the third day and you have the sun — which is indispensable to the growth of the trees — on the fourth day, it can't be anything but 24 hours. If you have it as (a "day" representing) a thousand years, then the trees are all dead when the sun turns on.
Q: Obviously there is tension between a literal interpretation of the Bible and what scientists say about evolution and the beginning of life on Earth. Did it occur within the past 10,000 years, as some passages in the Bible suggest? Scientists would say, of course, it didn't .
A: When you look into what scientists say, there is almost a passionate religious obsession that you must take the Bible allegorically (rather than literally). … But if you don't believe in God, then where did man come from? Evolution is an excellent idea. The only trouble is, it's scientifically unprovable.
One of them (a well-known biologist) just died, and I have a hunch he's changed his mind.
Q: I think you've been asked in interviews before whether you think some of the prophecies might come true at some time certain — say, within your lifetime. … Has your answer to that question changed at all since Sept. 11, 2001?
A: Not really. … It's impossible to give any date (for the second coming). As you know, some of my friends in prophecy have been wrong in trying to set a date. They thought it was far enough into the future — but now we're living in that future.
I say our generation has more reason to believe Christ could come in our lifetimes than any generation in the history of the church … because there are certain technological discoveries that are available today that hadn't been available. In fact when I was a young minister, we used to read about the passage in which the Antichrist was going to put a mark on people so they couldn't buy or sell, and I used to wonder, "Well, how in the world could he do that? …"
Well, everybody knows that today, with microchips and so on, they can do that. … So suddenly we're within that technology. It's interesting that … some scientists say that, with all the problems in the world today, they see no future for the world beyond 25 or 50 years. And that's the same time that we're talking about — a general period of time. The Bible called it "the season." You can't know the day or the hour, but when you see the trees begin to bud, you know, "Well we're getting into the season." … And how long is the season? It's only known by God.
Q: Do you often have protesters outside when you have a conference — people objecting to your appearance in their town?
A: The gay community … they organize different things, and they protest. I don't blame them. If I were a gay and I rejected God, I wouldn't want the Bible to say what it says either. But that isn't going to change anything. What I'm concerned more about is helping them — and I have. I've introduced a gay to Jesus Christ and helped them out of that lifestyle. Then they become a productive, happy, well-developed person.
Q: What about gays who say, "But I am a Christian. I do believe in Jesus Christ"?
A: Then they've got a problem. They're not obedient. Because in the Book of Revelations it says: No sexually immoral person — and that doesn't mean just gays, it means immoral people — can live that lifestyle, and that's a hallmark of their lifestyle. Without repentance, they won't get to heaven. … Well, if I'm a minister faithful to the teaching, how can I change that?
Q: Other people critical of the "Left Behind" books say there is a vindictiveness in your characterization of God.
A: The only people who are going to experience the wrath of God are those who have deliberately opposed God and their delegates. … That's a consistent pattern in the Old and New Testaments, where God gives people an opportunity to come to him and receive his mercy and his grace.
|
|