Just hours after the attacks on Iran began, disturbing interpretations
of the conflict emerged. The violence itself is disturbing enough, of course,
but one hopes that there was a series of rational explanations that got us
here. Yet, military personal began reporting that they were being told from
higher ups to interpret the conflict through a (narrow) biblical lens. More
than 100 service members across dozens of bases made reports to the Military
Religious Freedom Foundation that commanders were framing operations as part of
God’s plan for Armageddon and the return of Christ.
To this dangerous strain of Christianity, one wants to
accelerate violence and tribulations in order to hurry Christ’s return. They
interpret prophets as literal geopolitical predictions and the Book of Revelation
as a blueprint in which they can be major players in controlling the narrative.
Iran is viewed as modern Persia. Israel (and ally U.S) as
the modern Israelites. A war between them as the battle of Gog and Magog
(Ezekiel 38). Interpretations always vary to accommodate current geopolitics; currently
the prevailing idea is that Gog (Iran) and Magog (Russia/China) will invade Israel,
with God supernaturally intervening to protect Israel. The Third Temple will be
rebuilt, with the Dome of the Rock destroyed and a red heifer sacrificed. Jesus
will come back and establish peace.
First, this is bad theology. Point blank. For most of
Christianity, no one was concerned with concrete details of Christ’s return. He
would keep His promises, He would return, and we must be ready for Him. It was
a personal, spiritual call to prepared, like the brides with oil in their
lamps.
