- Jun 12, 2023
- 96
- 4
- 76
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Married
Historicists Do Not Agree with Each Other
One of the reasons historicists cannot agree on the location and meaning of the trumpets is this: The Bible does not explicitly say anything about the timing of each trumpet or its purpose. In other words, there is nothing in the second trumpet text that specifically mandates that it has to be associated with the fall of Rome.
Thiele and Maxwell simply apply the second trumpet-event to the fall of Rome because they have the predisposition that the trumpets are in the past! However, to limit the second trumpet to the fall of Rome is to impose an interpretation upon the text that is unwarranted. Other historicists clearly understand this fact which is why there is no universal agreement.
Let us assume for a moment that Maxwell shares his view with another historicist. The historicist reads the second trumpet and notes Maxwell’s interpretation. Let us suppose the second historicist agrees with Maxwell saying, “Yes, the mountain represents an invading nation, and yes, the sea represents a host of multinational people.
Nevertheless, I believe this trumpet-event is concerned with another war at another time – not the fall of the Roman empire.” I offer this illustration to make a point. Even if historicists agree on the use of certain “impressionistic language” from Scripture, the timing of the second trumpet is still subject to a host of other questions. So much so, that the subject goes beyond widely held agreement.
A parallel can be drawn between correctly understanding prophecy and building a house. If the foundation of the new house is out of square from the beginning, the entire house will be out of square at the end. In other words, if we approach Revelation with flawed assumptions, there will be no end to adjustments and puzzles that cannot be solved.
On the other hand, if we treat the text as God intended, intelligent and forthright answers will appear without any manipulation.
Consider the third trumpet and observe how Maxwell interprets this passage. Notice what the Bible says, “The third angel sounded his trumpet, and a great star, blazing like a torch, fell from the sky on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water— the name of the star is Wormwood. A third of the waters turned bitter, and many people died from the waters that had become bitter.” (Revelation 8:10,11)
Keep in mind these two verses are adjacent to the two preceding verses of the second trumpet. In other words, Scriptural context is unchanged. Notice in these two verses that people are literally identified as people! Why would God literally identify people in the third trumpet and not in the second?
In other words, why should we assume that the sea and the sea creatures in the second trumpet are symbolic of people when in the same context God literally identifies people in the third trumpet? Even more, should we consider the bitter waters, the rivers and springs as literal or symbolic?
If you cannot trust your own ability to read and understand this text, then whom will you trust to tell you what they are?
Maxwell treats the trumpets as though they were written with “impressionistic language.” The use of impressionistic language is necessary when defending the historical position on the trumpets because everyone can see there is no record of literal fulfillment in the past.
Historicists often look around in the Bible to find parallel passages that complement the larger picture they are trying to support – namely, significant events or trends that can be found in ages past. On the surface, this appears to be a good principle: Let the Bible interpret the Bible.
However, this good principle will go awry if the primary principles of interpretation are violated. I’ve seen a number of historicists approach the same text with “good principles” of interpretation and arrive at very different conclusions. Are Bible prophecies made of a nose of wax that can be easily manipulated?
No. When the right rules are followed, the prophecies will produce the same “big picture” for everyone regardless of religious bias. (This too, will be confirmed during the Great Tribulation.)
Note: The use of parallel language can be both a big help and a big obstacle toward understanding Bible prophecies. The use of parallel language is the process of finding other passages that say similar things and substituting the easier idea within the more difficult prophetic passages. For example, “Babylon makes all nations drink the maddening wine of her adulteries.” (Revelation 14:8) This phrase in Revelation can be better understood after studying a parallel passage in Jeremiah 25:15-18 and elsewhere.
The problem with parallel passages is knowing how, when, and when not to use them! For example, in the first trumpet one-third of the trees are burned up. (Revelation 8:7) Does this text refer to literal trees or does this text refer to righteous people? Psalm 1:2-3 and Jeremiah 17:7-8 compares righteous people to trees.
Notice also, in Revelation 7:1-4 the trees are not hurt until the 144,000 are sealed. Are the trees in Revelation 7 to be interpreted as literal trees or should the trees be interpreted as righteous people? Can trees sometimes be literal and sometimes symbolic? I do not think so.
A good exegesis does not take a comparative or analogous statement and make it a symbolic definition. In other words, just because David and Jeremiah compare a righteous man to a tree, this does not mean that trees in Revelation represent righteous men. What about the stars mentioned in this text?
In Revelation 1:20 the seven stars in the right hand of Jesus represent the seven angels of the seven churches. The Bible clearly defines and interprets the symbol. In Revelation 6:13, the sun turns black, the moon turns red and the stars fall to the Earth. Should we regard the stars (as in meteorites) as literal or symbolic as angels?
The Greek word for stars is identical in both places. Obviously, we have to use a bit of common sense. Let me remind you again that truth radiates with clarity when the time comes to understand it.
Personally, I have found the best way to approach the prophecies is to treat the matter primarily as literal. If I cannot make sense of it, then I try to grasp the literal overall transaction being described. Then, if it is still unclear, I treat the passage as if it were analogous or a statement requiring comparative language from other places in Scripture. If that approach does not clarify the passage, then I treat it as symbolic and look for a relevant passage that bluntly defines the symbol.
I say “bluntly defines” because declaring something symbolic when it should be treated otherwise will only produce a wrong conclusion. For example, I do not believe the trees in Revelation 7 and 8 are symbolic even though Psalms and Jeremiah compare righteous people to trees.
For me, the passages in Psalms and Jeremiah are analogous. These writers compare righteous people to trees so the reader will appreciate the idea that righteous people are steadfast, generous and a delight – like a beautiful tree planted beside a river. However, in Revelation 7 and 8 there is no reason to treat the trees as though they were symbolic. Maxwell’s insistence that in the first trumpet the “one-third of the trees” which are burned up represent the people of God makes no sense. (Page 237)
To carry this logic further only illustrates how far one must go to support erroneous conclusions. For example, why would God harm symbolic land, a symbolic sea and symbolic trees after the 144,000 are sealed? If one insists on an improper use of symbolism, the subject will hopelessly spin out of control and other Bible students will never be able to reproduce your conclusions. In fact, the end result is nothing more than a private interpretation. (A private interpretation is a conclusion that others cannot reproduce.
The only way a private interpretation can be avoided is to follow clearly defined valid rules. Even if 100 million people accept a particular interpretation, it is still a private interpretation unless it conforms to a clearly defined valid set of rules.)
Back to the Third Trumpet
Notice the prophetic elements of the third trumpet:
I believe the third trumpet literally describes a great star, an asteroid blazing like a torch, falling from the sky. The impact from this asteroid affects one-third of the rivers (diverting their paths and causing destructive flooding) and one-third of the springs or fountains of water from which people drink (underground aquifers) become contaminated.
The ground waves resulting from a great impact of a large asteroid would sheer septic lines and water wells and badly fracture the geological plates that make up any continent so that toxic waste and bacteria would leach into the underground reservoirs of drinking water.
Large underground aquifers would soon become contaminated as diverted rivers force debris through the fractured plates of the continent. Millions of people would die of cholera and other infectious waterborne diseases. The name applied to this star is Wormwood which literally means “poisonous water.” (Jeremiah 9:15; 23:15 – KJV)
Even more, one must understand from parallel passages in the Old Testament that the name “Wormwood” is always used within the context of punishment for apostasy.
A Better Understanding
As stated earlier, I believe the second and third trumpets describe two literal asteroid impacts. The first asteroid impacts one of the Earth’s oceans, and the second asteroid impacts one of Earth’s continents. (In Revelation 10, Jesus is seen standing with one foot on the ocean and one foot on the land.
His stance indicates His authority over both of these areas.) If a literal reading of these two trumpets is the right reading, then a Bible student should expect “the cause” and “the outcome” to be harmoniously described in Revelation. Indeed, it is. Science not only confirms the possibility that Earth will be impacted by asteroids again, but a number of geological studies and simulation test models have produced results that are fully harmonious with everything that Revelation says.
The cause and effect are accurately described in this prophecy. There is no need to obscure the two trumpets with claims of historical fulfillment when in fact, the historicists cannot even agree on what fulfilled these events.
Jesus adds in Luke 21:25 saying, “There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea.” If the signs in the sun, moon, stars and sea that Jesus mentioned are a literal description of end-time events, then why shouldn’t the sea in the second trumpet be literal?
You can be sure that if a great asteroid did impact once of the oceans, nations (notice the plural) would be left in anguish resulting from the devastation caused by the “roaring and tossing of the sea.” On the other hand, if the intended meaning of the second trumpet is hidden in symbolism, then the meaning becomes elusive (e.g., endlessly debatable) because relevant Scripture to clearly define these symbols seems to be lacking.
The historicist interpretation robs these passages of Scripture of their simplicity, power and end-time purpose.
One of the reasons historicists cannot agree on the location and meaning of the trumpets is this: The Bible does not explicitly say anything about the timing of each trumpet or its purpose. In other words, there is nothing in the second trumpet text that specifically mandates that it has to be associated with the fall of Rome.
Thiele and Maxwell simply apply the second trumpet-event to the fall of Rome because they have the predisposition that the trumpets are in the past! However, to limit the second trumpet to the fall of Rome is to impose an interpretation upon the text that is unwarranted. Other historicists clearly understand this fact which is why there is no universal agreement.
Let us assume for a moment that Maxwell shares his view with another historicist. The historicist reads the second trumpet and notes Maxwell’s interpretation. Let us suppose the second historicist agrees with Maxwell saying, “Yes, the mountain represents an invading nation, and yes, the sea represents a host of multinational people.
Nevertheless, I believe this trumpet-event is concerned with another war at another time – not the fall of the Roman empire.” I offer this illustration to make a point. Even if historicists agree on the use of certain “impressionistic language” from Scripture, the timing of the second trumpet is still subject to a host of other questions. So much so, that the subject goes beyond widely held agreement.
A parallel can be drawn between correctly understanding prophecy and building a house. If the foundation of the new house is out of square from the beginning, the entire house will be out of square at the end. In other words, if we approach Revelation with flawed assumptions, there will be no end to adjustments and puzzles that cannot be solved.
On the other hand, if we treat the text as God intended, intelligent and forthright answers will appear without any manipulation.
Consider the third trumpet and observe how Maxwell interprets this passage. Notice what the Bible says, “The third angel sounded his trumpet, and a great star, blazing like a torch, fell from the sky on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water— the name of the star is Wormwood. A third of the waters turned bitter, and many people died from the waters that had become bitter.” (Revelation 8:10,11)
Keep in mind these two verses are adjacent to the two preceding verses of the second trumpet. In other words, Scriptural context is unchanged. Notice in these two verses that people are literally identified as people! Why would God literally identify people in the third trumpet and not in the second?
In other words, why should we assume that the sea and the sea creatures in the second trumpet are symbolic of people when in the same context God literally identifies people in the third trumpet? Even more, should we consider the bitter waters, the rivers and springs as literal or symbolic?
If you cannot trust your own ability to read and understand this text, then whom will you trust to tell you what they are?
Maxwell treats the trumpets as though they were written with “impressionistic language.” The use of impressionistic language is necessary when defending the historical position on the trumpets because everyone can see there is no record of literal fulfillment in the past.
Historicists often look around in the Bible to find parallel passages that complement the larger picture they are trying to support – namely, significant events or trends that can be found in ages past. On the surface, this appears to be a good principle: Let the Bible interpret the Bible.
However, this good principle will go awry if the primary principles of interpretation are violated. I’ve seen a number of historicists approach the same text with “good principles” of interpretation and arrive at very different conclusions. Are Bible prophecies made of a nose of wax that can be easily manipulated?
No. When the right rules are followed, the prophecies will produce the same “big picture” for everyone regardless of religious bias. (This too, will be confirmed during the Great Tribulation.)
Note: The use of parallel language can be both a big help and a big obstacle toward understanding Bible prophecies. The use of parallel language is the process of finding other passages that say similar things and substituting the easier idea within the more difficult prophetic passages. For example, “Babylon makes all nations drink the maddening wine of her adulteries.” (Revelation 14:8) This phrase in Revelation can be better understood after studying a parallel passage in Jeremiah 25:15-18 and elsewhere.
The problem with parallel passages is knowing how, when, and when not to use them! For example, in the first trumpet one-third of the trees are burned up. (Revelation 8:7) Does this text refer to literal trees or does this text refer to righteous people? Psalm 1:2-3 and Jeremiah 17:7-8 compares righteous people to trees.
Notice also, in Revelation 7:1-4 the trees are not hurt until the 144,000 are sealed. Are the trees in Revelation 7 to be interpreted as literal trees or should the trees be interpreted as righteous people? Can trees sometimes be literal and sometimes symbolic? I do not think so.
A good exegesis does not take a comparative or analogous statement and make it a symbolic definition. In other words, just because David and Jeremiah compare a righteous man to a tree, this does not mean that trees in Revelation represent righteous men. What about the stars mentioned in this text?
In Revelation 1:20 the seven stars in the right hand of Jesus represent the seven angels of the seven churches. The Bible clearly defines and interprets the symbol. In Revelation 6:13, the sun turns black, the moon turns red and the stars fall to the Earth. Should we regard the stars (as in meteorites) as literal or symbolic as angels?
The Greek word for stars is identical in both places. Obviously, we have to use a bit of common sense. Let me remind you again that truth radiates with clarity when the time comes to understand it.
Personally, I have found the best way to approach the prophecies is to treat the matter primarily as literal. If I cannot make sense of it, then I try to grasp the literal overall transaction being described. Then, if it is still unclear, I treat the passage as if it were analogous or a statement requiring comparative language from other places in Scripture. If that approach does not clarify the passage, then I treat it as symbolic and look for a relevant passage that bluntly defines the symbol.
I say “bluntly defines” because declaring something symbolic when it should be treated otherwise will only produce a wrong conclusion. For example, I do not believe the trees in Revelation 7 and 8 are symbolic even though Psalms and Jeremiah compare righteous people to trees.
For me, the passages in Psalms and Jeremiah are analogous. These writers compare righteous people to trees so the reader will appreciate the idea that righteous people are steadfast, generous and a delight – like a beautiful tree planted beside a river. However, in Revelation 7 and 8 there is no reason to treat the trees as though they were symbolic. Maxwell’s insistence that in the first trumpet the “one-third of the trees” which are burned up represent the people of God makes no sense. (Page 237)
To carry this logic further only illustrates how far one must go to support erroneous conclusions. For example, why would God harm symbolic land, a symbolic sea and symbolic trees after the 144,000 are sealed? If one insists on an improper use of symbolism, the subject will hopelessly spin out of control and other Bible students will never be able to reproduce your conclusions. In fact, the end result is nothing more than a private interpretation. (A private interpretation is a conclusion that others cannot reproduce.
The only way a private interpretation can be avoided is to follow clearly defined valid rules. Even if 100 million people accept a particular interpretation, it is still a private interpretation unless it conforms to a clearly defined valid set of rules.)
Back to the Third Trumpet
Notice the prophetic elements of the third trumpet:
- A great star, blazing like a torch fell from the sky
- The star fell on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water
- The name of the star is Wormwood
- A third of the waters turn bitter and many people die from [drinking] the water
I believe the third trumpet literally describes a great star, an asteroid blazing like a torch, falling from the sky. The impact from this asteroid affects one-third of the rivers (diverting their paths and causing destructive flooding) and one-third of the springs or fountains of water from which people drink (underground aquifers) become contaminated.
The ground waves resulting from a great impact of a large asteroid would sheer septic lines and water wells and badly fracture the geological plates that make up any continent so that toxic waste and bacteria would leach into the underground reservoirs of drinking water.
Large underground aquifers would soon become contaminated as diverted rivers force debris through the fractured plates of the continent. Millions of people would die of cholera and other infectious waterborne diseases. The name applied to this star is Wormwood which literally means “poisonous water.” (Jeremiah 9:15; 23:15 – KJV)
Even more, one must understand from parallel passages in the Old Testament that the name “Wormwood” is always used within the context of punishment for apostasy.
A Better Understanding
As stated earlier, I believe the second and third trumpets describe two literal asteroid impacts. The first asteroid impacts one of the Earth’s oceans, and the second asteroid impacts one of Earth’s continents. (In Revelation 10, Jesus is seen standing with one foot on the ocean and one foot on the land.
His stance indicates His authority over both of these areas.) If a literal reading of these two trumpets is the right reading, then a Bible student should expect “the cause” and “the outcome” to be harmoniously described in Revelation. Indeed, it is. Science not only confirms the possibility that Earth will be impacted by asteroids again, but a number of geological studies and simulation test models have produced results that are fully harmonious with everything that Revelation says.
The cause and effect are accurately described in this prophecy. There is no need to obscure the two trumpets with claims of historical fulfillment when in fact, the historicists cannot even agree on what fulfilled these events.
Jesus adds in Luke 21:25 saying, “There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea.” If the signs in the sun, moon, stars and sea that Jesus mentioned are a literal description of end-time events, then why shouldn’t the sea in the second trumpet be literal?
You can be sure that if a great asteroid did impact once of the oceans, nations (notice the plural) would be left in anguish resulting from the devastation caused by the “roaring and tossing of the sea.” On the other hand, if the intended meaning of the second trumpet is hidden in symbolism, then the meaning becomes elusive (e.g., endlessly debatable) because relevant Scripture to clearly define these symbols seems to be lacking.
The historicist interpretation robs these passages of Scripture of their simplicity, power and end-time purpose.
