Take the 2-minute tour ×
Christianity Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for committed Christians, experts in Christianity and those interested in learning more. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In "The Late Great Planet Earth," Hal Lindsey presents a view of "Armageddon" referred to in Revelation. Is this view considered "valid, and if so, by which Christian groups?" Is Lindsey considered a "false prophet, and if so, by which Christian groups?" Or hasn't a consensus yet formed as to whether or not Lindsey's view "holds up."

share|improve this question
4  
Ususally we just try to forget that book ;0 –  Affable Geek Feb 23 '13 at 4:21
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 3 down vote accepted

It is considered invalid by many Christians. It's also considered valid by many Christians. The closest you'll get to an objective answer is to look at the Amazon book star-reviews, which is what I encourage you to do. It indicates that the book is very polarizing. And I suspect that the answers which will accumulate here will look very much like the written reviews there.

There is absolutely no way to "decide" whether Lindsey's view holds up, so the question is impossible to answer. As you may predict from the book's reviews, you are sure to get quite polarized answers. For example, a random Catholic from the internet says:

I recommend Catholics stay away from Lindsey's stuff and go read something by a saint instead.

And from an article on general subject matter:

The Church does not endorse pre-millennialism. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains: "The Church has rejected even modified forms of this falsification of the kingdom to come under the name of millenarianism." Indeed, the Nicene Creed, which is said at every Sunday Mass, appears to reject pre-millennialism, holding that Christ will return "to judge the living and the dead," not to reign on earth for a thousand years and then judge the living and the dead. Since the Church is not pre-millennial, the question of a pre-trib Rapture does not arise, as pre-tribulationism is a variant of pre-millennialism.

From all this we can only assume that mild answers will range from the mild "well, many consider him ok" that Narnian presents, to the mild "read something better" I quoted above.

Questions you may consider asking instead:

  • "Is Hal considered a prophet by any body of Christians?"
  • "What is the view presented by Hal in ... called?"
  • "Why does the Catholic Church reject pre-millennialism?"
  • "Do [insert denomination that you identify with the most]s like Hal?
share|improve this answer
    
I tried to improve the question by asking WHICH Christian groups considered Lindsey's thesis valid or invalid. Even if his (or another) doctrine is "controversial," I want to know that. –  Tom Au Feb 23 '13 at 21:01
add comment

It is considered valid by many Christians, specifically those who hold to a pre-tribulation rapture of the Church. Those that disagree with this opinion will generally consider him wrong about this issue, but not a false prophet. Hal Lindsey attempts to interpret Revelation. He certainly is convinced of this interpretation, but that does not make him a false prophet. He still holds to all of the essential doctrines of at least Protestant Christianity--the virgin birth, the Trinity, the death and resurrection of Jesus, etc.

So, he is probably wrong about at least some points and maybe even most or all of them, but he believes in salvation by faith alone in Christ alone--just as many other Protestants do.

By the same token, those who do not believe in a pre-tribulation rapture are not considered to be false prophets by those that do. It's just a disagreement in interpretation, over which we will have eternity to discuss and perhaps laugh about who was right and who was wrong.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.