That’s Not Taking Revelation Literally

That’s Not Taking Revelation Literally February 9, 2013

One media outlet described the man who quit his job over a form with the number 666 on it as taking Revelation literally. Fred Clark had this to say, with his characteristic combination of sarcastic wit and religious insight:

 

No. No, no, no, 666 times no. Believers like Slonopas do not “take the book of Revelation literally” — they take the book of Revelation and cut it up into a thousand tiny pieces, placing those pieces into a hat along with a thousand more tiny pieces taken from Daniel, Ezekiel, parts of Matthew, the screenplay for The Omen, folklore, blood-libels, and urban legends. And then they take those pieces out of the hat one by one, stringing them into sentences to which they accord all the authority of holy scripture.

They take those fabricated sentences “literally,” but not the book of Revelation.

 

 

"I realize I'm coming to this conversation late, but the part that most interested me ..."

Prayer in Schools
"Faculty in traditional professorial roles need to learn from librarians, who are well-practiced at educating ..."

Coaching and Curation in the Post-Pandemic ..."
"James said"it suggests that the story was widely known and liable to be known not ..."

Revisiting the Empty Tomb
"It isn't just whether we see signs in our very earliest source that something was ..."

Revisiting the Empty Tomb

Browse Our Archives