Tag: Harold Camping

Posted on Posted in Q&A No Comments

CraigC. asks:

Does God want the Gospel spread by deceit? Is it is moral to collect donations on the basis of deceit? He has not promoted the Gospel but shamed it. God did not speak to Camping in any way but by Satan and his own imagination and deceit and greed. He does nothing to promote Christianity in any way, but in fact HARMs it. Maybe God should harm him (Deut 18).

Thanks for the question.  I assume you’re referencing some of what I’ve had to say about doomsdayer Harold Camping.

I’m not sure where you’re coming from, but to answer your questions

No, God does not want the Gospel spread by deceit.  However, there are many times when God has used the deceitful ways of men to his purposes.  This is the simple demonstration that God’s will will be done and nothing, not even deceit, will prevent it.

No, it is not moral to collect donations on the basis of deceit.  There are many so-called Christian organisations that are guilty of this.  I watched a documentary the other day which attended the seminar of someone who promised corporate success through hypnotism.  This man was at least upfront, but he looked and sounded, and used the same pyschological trickery as many prosperity breathing so-called evangelists who collect donations by this form of deceit.  Camping is not alone in this regard.

Yes, I agree that Camping is not a true prophet and in many ways has harmed the cause of the gospel.  Yet God is gracious, and even through this circumstance he will achieve his purpose.

God’s judgment on Camping is God’s.  It is not my place to tell Him what to do.

Posted on Posted in Q&A No Comments

Anonymous asks: How do you think we should respond, when confronted about him [Harold Camping] and others? One ‘whacky’ minister, gets more media attention than a million faithful followers or a thousand faithful preachers(from my experience) and the faithful witness of neighbours is undone by the preaching of someone who seems to be seriously misguided, but offers the nightly news a dramatic sound bite.

Thanks for the question.  It’s actually something I’ve been reflecting about the recent “big day” in hindsight.

One obvious form of response was mockery.  Sometimes this was taken to extraordinary lengths.  And it’s not necessarily an invalid response.  The prophecy and the underlying framework is worthy of derision and “Don’t listen to this fool” is an appropriate pastoral message.  Some people did seem to enjoy it a bit too much though and I don’t think that’s helpful.

I also suspect that there was a flurry of mockery in order to set up a clear demarcation to non-Christians – “Yes we’re Christian, but we’re not like those whacky Christians – haha, how foolish they are.”  Sometimes this came across as the wannabe-cool-guy in the playground laughing at his embarassing younger brother to earn kudos.  Not a good look.

And it was probably not very effective or needed.  Those non-Christians who understood the demarcation would have continued to understand.  Those non-Christians who didn’t care would continue not to care.  Indeed, some of the anti-Christians I follow simply didn’t get it (“I’m not raptured yet.”  Seriously, not even Harold Camping was suggesting you would be!) and continued to lump the serious Christians in with the whacky ones.

The best response I heard was on the radio – I can’t remember who it was now, if someone remembers, please remind me – and it was a simple response that clearly portrayed the mainstream Christian gospel and expressed genuine pastoral concern for those who would have their faith shaken when the prophesy failed.

So, to answer your question:  I think the way to respond is with clarity about the truth – and the error being put forward – without mockery or derision, and something positive about how you live your life for Jesus.

Posted on Posted in Q&A

Anonymous asks: So, shall we all do the Deuteronomical thing and stone Harold as a false prophet on the 22nd?

Nope. Two reasons:

1) Assuming a strict application of the “deuteronomical thing” the stoning of a false prophet is found in Deuteronomy 13 where from my (quick) reading (and correct me if I’m wrong) the stoning only applies to a prophet who makes a prophecy (that is fulfilled!) and then calls people to worship other gods.  For all his faults, Camping isn’t doing that.  Deuteronomy 18 talks about prophets whose prophecies don’t come to pass and the warning about them is to simply “not be alarmed” by them.  I am not alarmed by Harold Camping.

2) That’s not how we, as Christians, apply the Old Testament.  This is a huge topic in it’s own right – but suffice it to say that the casuistic strictures of the Law come to us via the grace of God and the obedience of Christ and are applied in that light.  I can’t see how stoning Harold Camping would glorify Jesus.  And, to preach to myself a bit too, ridiculing him probably doesn’t do that much either.

Posted on Posted in Q&A

Anonymous asks: Can you give us your thoughts and reflection upon Harold Camping’s prophecies regarding the nearing rapture on May 21? Is there anything I need to do in preparation? Do we assume that anyone who is still around after Sunday isn’t a Christian?

Anonymous asks: Further to my earlier anonymous question: http://www.familyradio.com/graphical/literature/judgment/judgment.html

To which I would add this from googling around: http://www.ebiblefellowship.com/outreach/tracts/may21/

The whole thing is about a supposed understanding of the Bible that indicates that Judgement Day occur on May 21, 2011 (two days away!) and that the world will end five months later on October 21, 2011.

As a twitter friend of mine wrote, “Was Matthew 24:36 removed from the bible or something?”  Matthew 24:36 reads “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”  Proponents get around it by saying that new understanding has rendered this text superfluous.  It’s a ridiculous argument really.  The simple fact that there is a prediction is evidence enough that the whole thing is wrong.

There is further irony in that, having ignored Matthew 24:36, it seems that the whole prediction rests upon a misapplication of the very next verse: Matthew 24:37 – “As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.”  Which leads to a less-than-tenuous hermeneutic which applies details of the accounts of Noah in Genesis, improbably located in history, via some questionable numerological manipulations, to the span of history itself.  The reason why May 21, 2011 is important, apparently, is because it’s 7000 years after the beginning of the flood.

I’ll end with a quote which I think is from Mark Driscoll: “On May 20th I’m planting a tree, on May 22nd I’m laughing at this false prophet.”

image_pdfimage_print