Rapture Rumble: Catholic Author Debates "Left Behind" Author

Envoy Magazine ^ | 07-22-03 | Carl Olson

[Patrick Madrid]

Envoy Magazine's volume 7.1 features the article, "Rapture Rumble," a lengthy, written exchange between Envoy editor Carl Olson and Left Behind creator and co-author Dr. Tim LaHaye. Because of the length of that exchange in Envoy Magazine, some of it had to be cut. Here are the sections of the debate that were "left behind" on the editing floor, prefaced by Olson’s initial letter to LaHaye and concluding with a final exchange in which LaHaye tells Olson, "I do grieve for your soul" because of the latter’s entrance into the Catholic Church. (Olson is a convert to the Catholic Church from Fundamentalist Protestantism.)

[NYer]

Here are the sections of the debate that were "left behind" on the editing floor, prefaced by Olson’s initial letter to LaHaye and concluding with a final exchange in which LaHaye tells Olson, "I do grieve for your soul" because of the latter’s entrance into the Catholic Church.

Lol!! Will ping the troops - in both camps.

[wideawake]

Wow. LaHaye is even less intelligent and more dishonest than his Left Behind cottage industry would suggest.

[Zavien Doombringer]

Wow. LaHaye is even less intelligent and more dishonest than his Left Behind cottage industry would suggest.

What in this article suggests a basis for your your claims?

[american colleen]

Same impression I got - my way or no way. Talk about living in a box!

One of the things I love about being an appendage of the Catholic Church is that there is an openness and willingness and encouragement to read widely.

[Blessed]

One of the things I love about being an appendage of the Catholic Church is that there is an openness and willingness and encouragement to read widely.

You obviously are not old enough to remember when everything was done in Latin. With the exception of the RC's on FRC I am found most have spent very little time in the scriptures.

[Conservative til I die]

With the exception of the RC's on FRC I am found most have spent very little time in the scriptures

Zzzzzz...This is going to happen when you have over ONE BILLION Catholics in the world. Not all of them are going to be biblical scholars.

Also, the Latin argument is a non-sequitir. The Catholic Church has been producing vernacular bibles for centuries, certainly within the lifetime of anyone you know on either FR or elsewhere.

[xzins]

LaHaye: God bless you and my prayer is that you will open your heart and mind!

Olson: Thank you for your prayers; I appreciate them. Please know that you will also be in my prayers.

I don't believe either one of them.

Olsen is no esoteric. LaHaye is no scholar. Both were blind men swinging at the pinata and occasionally drawing blood. But no light broke in.

Not for me, anyway.

[wideawake]

What in this article suggests a basis for your your claims?

His citation of Dave Hunt as a source for history is laughable. That's shows he's a moron who knows nothing about historical research.

His claim that not buying into the most crackpot dispensationalist mania is the equivalent of not believing in Hell shows that he is a dishonest huckster.

[wideawake]

What's an "esoteric"?

[xzins]

An "initiated one"...a mystic.

I honestly don't think either is "praying" for the other. That was gobbledygook "christianese" at the end of their so-called debate.

[wideawake]

You obviously are not old enough to remember when everything was done in Latin.

(1) There was never a time that everything was done in Latin. This is silly misconception shared by many.

(2) My father is certainly old enough to remember when Mass was celebrated in Latin (and I attend Latin Mass on Sundays myself). Because my father was not lazy, he paid attention in Latin class and he is able (as I am) to read the Scriptures in Latin as well as in the English of the Catholic Revised Standard Version, the Douay-Rheims, the Confraternity Bible and the Knox Version - all translations widely available to Catholics long before the vernacular invaded the Mass.

[wideawake]

Did Olson make this claim for himself?

[Zavien Doombringer]

hmm, I guess I will need to check into that...I am not versed in this area.

[Zavien Doombringer]

hmm, I guess I will need to check into that...I am not versed in this area.

[xzins]

That he's a scholar? Yes, it's pretty clear from context.

[wideawake]

You told me that "esoteric" meant "initiated" or "mystic" - you made no mention of "esoteric" as scholarly or academic.

Do I take you to mean that being a scholar or an academic makes one a "mystic"?

[xzins]

Read #8 again. I think you've misapplied what I wrote.

I said Olsen is NO esoteric.

[wideawake]

Gotcha.

[xzins]

Now back to the point.

There is a proper way to apply a "spiritual" hermeneutic and a "literal" hermeneutic.

These two regularly arrive at different endpoints. Yet, as an advocate of the literal method, I nonetheless recognize the valid efforts of those whose use of a different method will take them to a different conclusion than my own.

Neither method is invalidated. We'll have to wait for the great consummation to make that evaluation.