Re: [asa] A theology question (imminent return of Christ)

Excllent George, thank you -- this is the sort of thing I've been meaning to
say, less eloquently.

On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 8:58 AM, George Murphy <GMURPHY10@neo.rr.com> wrote:

> Bernie et al -
>
> In discussing eschatology it's crucial to be aware that in the NT there are
> elements of both discontinuity and continuity between the present age & the
> world to come, between the present & the new creation. The new creation is
> not yet - but it is breaking into the world now. We will be raised the same
> - but changed.
> & there will be new heavens and a new earth - but they will be heavens &
> earth. In Rev.21:1 the world has apparently been destroyed - "the first
> heaven and the first earth had passed away." The rulers of the earth who
> have opposed Christ have been defeated, but then in 21:14-16 here they come,
> bringing "the glory and honor of the nations" into the holy city. "The
> glory and honor of the nations" can hardly be anything but what was good in
> the original creation, & which is therefore not destroyed - though (as with
> the resurrection) it may be transformed.
>
> Among other things, this means that we have to be very wary of focusing
> just on what one verse or one passage says about the last things. It's
> important to remain aware of the tensions - now & not yet, continuity &
> discontinuity, same & changed. Failure to do this is one source of a lot of
> the "end times" nuttiness that's so prevalent.
>
> Shalom
> George
> http://home.neo.rr.com/scitheologyglm
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dehler, Bernie" <
> bernie.dehler@intel.com>
> To: <asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 3:30 AM
>
> Subject: RE: [asa] A theology question (imminent return of Christ)
>
>
> Hi Christine-
>>
>> I saw Romans and 2 Peter in agreement. They both talk about a new heaven
>> and new earth. The old passes away, including that tree you plant.
>>
>> ...Bernie
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
>> Behalf Of Christine Smith
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 6:31 PM
>> To: asa@calvin.edu
>> Subject: RE: [asa] A theology question (imminent return of Christ)
>>
>> Hi Bernie,
>>
>> I'm drawing on Romans 8:19-23:
>>
>> "For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons
>> of God; for the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will but
>> by the will of him who subjected it in hope; because the CREATION ITSELF
>> will be set free from its bondage to decay AND OBTAIN THE GLORIOUS LIBERTY
>> OF THE CHILDREN OF GOD [my emphasis]. We know that the whole creation has
>> been groaning in travail together until now; and not only the creation, but
>> we ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we
>> wait for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies."
>>
>> Given that Romans was certainly written by Paul and was clearly considered
>> authoritative, whereas 2 Peter's canonical status was questioned prior to
>> its inclusion in the Bible, my inclination would be to place more weight on
>> Romans....even if you didn't though on that basis, I think its still fair to
>> say that the tone of Romans--much more deliberative and theologically
>> rigorous--gives it greater weight doctrinally than 2 Peter, which is more
>> designed as an exhortation (possibly leading to, as David O. noted
>> figurative and/or exaggerated language for emphasis)...would you agree?
>>
>> In Christ,
>> Christine
>>
>>
>> --- On Tue, 10/21/08, Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> From: Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com>
>>> Subject: RE: [asa] A theology question (imminent return of Christ)
>>> To: "asa@calvin.edu" <asa@calvin.edu>
>>> Date: Tuesday, October 21, 2008, 6:35 PM
>>> Christine said:
>>> "creation itself will be redeemed, so that tree which
>>> you plant today may yet remain when Christ's kingdom
>>> comes tomorrow."
>>>
>>> I don't think so; I think it is all going to burn (see
>>> v 11-13 below). In this way, anything you do for the future
>>> is like arranging the deck chairs on the sinking Titanic- it
>>> is all going down.
>>>
>>> 2 Peter 3:1-13 (New International Version)
>>>
>>> The Day of the Lord
>>> 1Dear friends, this is now my second letter to you. I have
>>> written both of them as reminders to stimulate you to
>>> wholesome thinking. 2I want you to recall the words spoken
>>> in the past by the holy prophets and the command given by
>>> our Lord and Savior through your apostles.
>>> 3First of all, you must understand that in the last days
>>> scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil
>>> desires. 4They will say, "Where is this
>>> 'coming' he promised? Ever since our fathers died,
>>> everything goes on as it has since the beginning of
>>> creation." 5But they deliberately forget that long ago
>>> by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was
>>> formed out of water and by water. 6By these waters also the
>>> world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 7By the same
>>> word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire,
>>> being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of
>>> ungodly men.
>>>
>>> 8But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the
>>> Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years
>>> are like a day. 9The Lord is not slow in keeping his
>>> promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with
>>> you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to
>>> repentance.
>>>
>>> 10But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The
>>> heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be
>>> destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will
>>> be laid bare.
>>>
>>> 11Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what
>>> kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and
>>> godly lives 12as you look forward to the day of God and
>>> speed its coming.That day will bring about the destruction
>>> of the heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the
>>> heat. 13But in keeping with his promise we are looking
>>> forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of
>>> righteousness.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
>>> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Christine
>>> Smith
>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 10:53 AM
>>> To: asa@calvin.edu
>>> Subject: RE: [asa] A theology question (imminent return of
>>> Christ)
>>>
>>> Hi Bernie,
>>>
>>> You wrote:
>>> "Luther was reported to say something like he believed
>>> Christ could return at any time, but he would also plant a
>>> tree (for the future). That's dualistic thinking-
>>> trying to hold two mutually exclusive thoughts at the same
>>> time- and agnostic thinking, practically, I think. (If
>>> someone is planting a tree, they don't really believe in
>>> the end of the world happening tomorrow..."
>>>
>>> If memory serves, I believe Luther was answering the
>>> question, "What would you do if you knew that Christ
>>> would return tomorrow?". And again, if memory serves,
>>> the answer "plant a tree" was his response because
>>> 1) this was in fulfillment of God's original command to
>>> keep and till the garden (steward of the earth), and 2)
>>> because planning for the future is a symbol of hope, just as
>>> (I think it was?) Jeremiah went and bought a field even as
>>> Israel was about to be sent into exile. To Luther's
>>> answer, I would also add 3) creation itself will be
>>> redeemed, so that tree which you plant today may yet remain
>>> when Christ's kingdom comes tomorrow.
>>>
>>> I would also note, more to your main point, that at least
>>> for me (and many other Christians?), I would not
>>> characterize my feelings as "don't know/don't
>>> care" but rather "can't know/won't worry
>>> about it" in the sense of, "let's not get so
>>> preoccupied with trying to know something that we cannot
>>> know that we lose sight of what we're actually supposed
>>> to be doing right now (be the body of Christ and do
>>> God's work in the world). Perhaps that's what you
>>> meant in your original phrase, but that's not how it
>>> came across.
>>>
>>> That's all for now...lunch break is over!
>>> In Christ,
>>> Christine (ASA member)
>>>
>>>
>>> --- On Tue, 10/21/08, Dehler, Bernie
>>> <bernie.dehler@intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > From: Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com>
>>> > Subject: RE: [asa] A theology question (imminent
>>> return of Christ)
>>> > To: "asa@lists.calvin.edu"
>>> <asa@lists.calvin.edu>
>>> > Date: Tuesday, October 21, 2008, 10:43 AM
>>> > Edward said:
>>> > " And the mere fact that interpretations are
>>> necessary
>>> > in order to either try to pull all the loose strings
>>> > together or acknowledge their looseness (the latter of
>>> which
>>> > is my view), should make one step back and acknowledge
>>> that
>>> > perhaps people are putting too much faith in their
>>> > interpretations, especially since all these
>>> difficulties
>>> > inherent in each interpretation arise from a plain
>>> reading
>>> > of the texts themselves and have never been solved,
>>> not by
>>> > prayer nor theological cunning. So maybe there's
>>> > something to be said for agnosticism after all."
>>> >
>>> > In a way, I think we agree with you, only instead of
>>> > agnosticism on the entire Bible and faith in God, it
>>> is
>>> > agnosticism on certain issues, such as the imminent
>>> return
>>> > of Christ. I see agnostics with an attitude of
>>> > "don't know/don't care." In regards
>>> to
>>> > the imminent return of Christ, many believers may
>>> profess
>>> > they are ready for it now, but in practical terms I
>>> think
>>> > they are "don't know/don't care."
>>> Luther
>>> > was reported to say something like he believed Christ
>>> could
>>> > return at any time, but he would also plant a tree
>>> (for the
>>> > future). That's dualistic thinking- trying to
>>> hold two
>>> > mutually exclusive thoughts at the same time- and
>>> agnostic
>>> > thinking, practically, I think. (If someone is
>>> planting a
>>> > tree, they don't really believe in the end of the
>>> world
>>> > happening tomorrow... that would be stupid, like
>>> arranging
>>> > the deck chairs on the sinking Titanic.)
>>> >
>>> > ...Bernie
>>> >
>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>> > From: Edward T. Babinski [mailto:leonardo3@msn.com]
>>> > Sent: Monday, October 20, 2008 8:02 PM
>>> > To: asa@lists.calvin.edu
>>> > Cc: Dehler, Bernie; bsollereder@gmail.com;
>>> > gmurphy10@neo.rr.com; joe.degroot@gmail.com;
>>> > muzhogg@netspace.net.au; leonardo3@msn.com;
>>> > christine_mb_smith@yahoo.com;
>>> Gordon.Brown@Colorado.EDU;
>>> > schwarzwald@gmail.com; pleuronaia@gmail.com;
>>> > alexanian@uncw.edu; dopderbeck@gmail.com;
>>> > jarmstro@qwest.net; drsyme@verizon.net;
>>> heddle@gmail.com
>>> > Subject: Re: [asa] A theology question (imminent
>>> return of
>>> > Christ)
>>> >
>>> > A word to all,
>>> >
>>> > I've studied Preterism and Dispensationalism. The
>>> > Preterists agree with me that the predicted time was a
>>> > generation. The Dispensationalists agree with me that
>>> the
>>> > coming of the son of man would equal the final
>>> judgment with
>>> > the angels gathering the righteous from the world,
>>> etc. Put
>>> > those two points together and you get the modern
>>> apocalyptic
>>> > view that the Bible contains errors.
>>> >
>>> > Neither do you have to be a "skeptic" like
>>> Ehrman
>>> > to note such difficulties. Modern theologians
>>> including
>>> > James D. G. Dunn along with the host of scholars he
>>> cites
>>> > also recognize such difficulties.
>>> >
>>> > Lastly, among Preterists, the Partialists and the Full
>>> > Preterists don't get along. There's also
>>> different
>>> > schools of Dispensationalism. It's all pretty
>>> wild. What
>>> > I learned after studying such matters is that no
>>> matter how
>>> > much you believe the Bible is inerrant, proving it is
>>> > another thing, and nobody so far has claimed that
>>> their
>>> > interpretation is inerrant. And the mere fact that
>>> > interpretations are necessary in order to either try
>>> to pull
>>> > all the loose strings together or acknowledge their
>>> > looseness (the latter of which is my view), should
>>> make one
>>> > step back and acknowledge that perhaps people are
>>> putting
>>> > too much faith in their interpretations, especially
>>> since
>>> > all these difficulties inherent in each interpretation
>>> arise
>>> > from a plain reading of the texts themselves and have
>>> never
>>> > been solved, not by prayer nor theological cunning. So
>>> maybe
>>> > there's something to be said for agnosticism after
>>> all.
>>> >
>>> > "The Lowdown on God's Showdown"
>>> > http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ed_babinski/
>>> >
>>> > N.T. scholar James D. Tabor lists "New Testament
>>> Texts
>>> > on the Imminence of the End" on his website,
>>> "The
>>> > Jewish Roman World of Jesus":
>>> >
>>> http://www.religiousstudies.uncc.edu/jdtabor/christian.html
>>> >
>>> > See also Tabor's article, "Dead Messiahs Who
>>> > Don't Return: Millennial Hope and Disappointment
>>> in the
>>> > Dead Sea Scroll Community"
>>> >
>>> http://www.religiousstudies.uncc.edu/jdtabor/deadmessiahs.html
>>> >
>>> > Jesus of Nazareth: Millenarian Prophet (Minneapolis:
>>> > Fortress Press, 1998)
>>> >
>>> > Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium (New
>>> York:
>>> > Oxford University Press, 1999).
>>> >
>>> > The Apocalyptic Jesus: A Debate (Santa Rosa, CA:
>>> Polebridge
>>> > Press, 2001)
>>> >
>>> > The Stars Will Fall from Heaven: Cosmic Catastrophe in
>>> the
>>> > New Testament and Its World -- (Library of New
>>> Testament
>>> > Studies 347, 2007) delves into conclusive evidence for
>>> a
>>> > belief in the end of the created world in works
>>> written
>>> > either just before or during the N.T. period.
>>> >
>>> > In God's Time - The most moderate Evangelical book
>>> on
>>> > the topic
>>> > http://www.ingodstime.com/
>>> >
>>> > The video for the above book is even sold along with
>>> N.T.
>>> > Wright's videos at this website:
>>> > http://www.wesleyministrynetwork.com/
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > __________________________________________________
>>> > Do You Yahoo!?
>>> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
>>> protection
>>> > around
>>> > http://mail.yahoo.com
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu
>>> with
>>> > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of
>>> the
>>> > message.
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>>> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the
>>> message.
>>>
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>>> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the
>>> message.
>>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>>
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

-- 
David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.