Genre and Left Behind/ J. Colannino, a derivative review of Going into Godmode in Left Behind/Clive Thompson – Wired News

A Game That’s really fun
Wired News presents Clive Johnson’s review about Left Behind the video game – the latest incarnation of Tim LaHaye’s Left Behind series. Really? Yes, really. The official title of the game is Left Behind, Eternal Forces, The PC Game. Johnson had basically good things to say about game’s presentation. In other words it is not boring; it is actually fun and entertaining.

My Problem with Left Behind
So what is my problem with Left Behind? Let’s begin with an excerpt from the wired article:

“Indeed, I kept wondering when the game was going to throw it down and truly embrace the apocalyptic Christian vision. This story line isn't merely of armageddon, but Armageddon. Thus, the last Left Behind book -- Glorious Appearing -- concludes with the ultimate triumph of Jesus in a phantasmagorically gruesome holocaust. As predicted in Revelation, the savior [sic] returns to Earth, chides Satan for defiling the planet (and for inventing Darwinism), then proceeds to slaughter all unbelievers, dissolving their tongues and bursting their bodies like overstuffed sausages. As millions die in transports of agony, the ground becomes a swamp of blood and mud, and some extremely unpleasant things happen to the Jews who refuse to convert. As for the born-again? They stand around watching and cheering.”

Apparently the video game ends less offensively. However, the above prose prompted this reaction from one commenter (edited for length, expletives bleeped).

“you christians [sic] have a really bleeped up god [sic]... he really seems like a bleep... what with the wrathful vengeful bleep from the old testament (oh that's right, christians [sic] tend to forget about the old testament) and then jesus [sic] coming along and creating hell for people who don't grovel and worship him... i'm [sic] glad i [sic] don't have to deal with any of that bleep that comes from your overly humanized (and somewhat insulting) version of what god [sic] is...”

Well, do you blame him?

Certainly both excerpts are exaggerations and not strictly correct of either Left Behind or the Bible. Notwithstanding, both make a valid point: there is something grossly sinister in a collective schadenfreude. If God takes “no pleasure in the death of the wicked,” and prohibits believers from doing so, then where is the Biblical warrant for that sentiment in LaHaye’s Left Behind? LaHaye gets it wrong because he gets his genre wrong.

About Genre
Suppose my wife prepares an inventory of what is in the refrigerator and cupboard in order to create a shopping list. If I get the lists confused and take the inventory list to the supermarket will my wife not think I am mad? The shopping list genre tacitly says “buy this stuff”; the inventory list tacitly says “don’t buy this stuff.” By misunderstanding the genre I misinterpret the author’s intentions as incorrectly as one can and buy exactly what I should not.

Revelation’s genre is that of apocalyptic literature and must be interpreted accordingly. Contrary to popular belief (e.g., LaHaye’s) the primary audience for Revelation was never the Christian community 2000 years after its writing. Is the concept not absurd on its face? Apocalyptic literature was authored during times of calamity for the benefit of its then present-day audience. As such, Revelation comprises deliberately (but not hopelessly) coded messages; codes are meant to be decoded and without mysticism.

Revelation was designed to be circulated throughout the region of Asia Minor during a period of intense first-century persecution. Thus the document was publicly broadcast for a private audience. The most literal analogy is that of the transmission of coded messages during wartime. The text makes use of symbols and devices known to Jewish Christian converts in Asia Minor but veiled to the pagan persecutors throughout whose territory the message had to be disseminated. Understanding the genre and historical context is necessary for unveiling the meaning.

Who is the Beast?
The beast is Nero Caesar (Nrwn Qsr, Hebrew). How do I know? Gematria is the ancient practice of substituting numbers for letters of proper names and obtaining the sum. This practice was given an exaggerated mystical significance in the 13^th century by the cabbalists, but we should not import that into a first-century text. In ancient cultures, letters were often used as numbers in numerical calculations, e.g., Hebrew, Greek, and Roman numerals.

Here is John’s coded reference to Nero in Revelation: “let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is six hundred sixty six.” Accordingly, here is the math using the practice of the day: n = 50 + r = 200 + w = 6 + n = 50 + q = 100 + s = 60 + r = 200 = 666. This also accounts for a common textual variant footnoted in most Bibles “… and his number is six hundred sixteen.” Six hundred sixteen is the gematria for the Latin variant.

That Nero qualifies as the beast would have been readily apparent to the first century Jewish Christian community and probably the first name that would have leapt to their mind. One of Nero’s practices was soaking Christians in tar, hanging them in poles during the noonday sun and lighting them on fire during the evening for use as human torches. This lends a macabre undertone to John’s writing in Revelation 7.16 regarding the martyrs: “They shall hunger no more, neither thirst anymore; the sun shall not strike them, nor any scorching heat.”

Besides this, scholar Gary DeMar reports:

“Nero had his mother bludgeoned and slashed to death by marines… after his attempts to poison her had failed. [He killed his wife Octavia] so he could marry his mistress, Poppea. He kicked Poppea to death when she complained about him coming home late. The Roman historian Suetonius reported that Nero ‘castrated the boy Sporus and actually tried to make a woman out of him; and he married him with all the usual ceremonies… and treated him as his wife.’ His other sexual exploits are too degrading to put into print.”

The reason for this macabre digression is not gratuitous. When we recognize the genre of the text and the intended audience then (and only then) can the author’s intended meaning become clear: Nero and his kingdom will be overthrown; your suffering will end; even in death you are victorious, remain steadfast and you will receive the crown of eternal life. Has this not been the Christian message throughout the ages?

A Future Antichrist?
This is not to say that the world could not be faced with another Nero sometime in the future. We have seen them in the past – antitypes such as Lenin, Stalin, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, and Hitler. If Hitler had come to dominate the world, Antichrist would have been an apt moniker. Is it possible that an antichrist could arise in the future with even more devastating consequences? Could he be the head of a world empire as was Nero? Yes, and it is a likely lesson intended in the wider context of the book – a lesson which we have failed to heed in the case of the aforementioned despots. But clearly, John’s primary purpose was not to ignore the murder and persecution of first century martyrs to benefit an audience that would not materialize for two millennia (and counting) after his death.

So What?
Why does it matter? Isn’t this a “non-essential” issue of Christianity over which we may respectfully disagree? Yes, it is. But error is error, and not without consequence. If we believe that the world is going to hell in a hand basket anyway, where is the impetus to transform the culture, shape politics, contribute to public debate and law, or to contend for the widow and orphan? Why should Christians pursue graduate degrees or engage in life? Yet, the Bible routinely commands Christians to transform and redeem culture.

So what have I learned this semester and how does it apply? This semester, I learned about genre. I also learned that failure to recognize genre can lead to serious errors. Quod Erat Demonstrandum ■