Re: [asa] Radioactive decay of U-238 is imminent (just wait a few billion years)

Bernie,

I obviously CAN'T answer the question "is Christ coming SOON" because "no man knows the day or hour."

I disagree that the bible teaches Jesus taught his return would be "soon" - I believe he taught it would be "imminent" in the sense that term is used in the context of Christian eschatology.

As for whether eschatology should motivate ethical concerns - I've already made clear to you my position. I don't care whether Jesus return occurs in one second or one million years - it won't effect my priorities or behaviour one iota.

Regards,
Murray

Dehler, Bernie wrote:
> Hi Pastor Murray-
>
>
>
> I think the general population knows what "imminent" means. I think
> there's some push in theological circles to explain it away, because if
> not, it looks like the Bible has an error, since it clearly teaches the
> return of Christ is imminent and that the early believers thought so,
> and were wrong. The Bible can't be wrong, therefore imminent can't mean
> what most people think it means. I think this judgment is validated by
> the quote you gave below- reprinted here- emphasis mine:
>
>
>
> " From Wayne A. Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical
> Doctrine. (Leicester, England: InterVarsity Press, 1994.) 1096n7.
>
> "In this chapter, it must be made clear that I am not using imminent as
> a technical term for a pre-tribulational rapture position (explained
> below), but simply to mean that Christ could return at any day, or even
> any hour. Furthermore, I am not using the word imminent to mean that
> Christ certainly will come soon (*/_for then the verses teaching
> imminence would have been untrue when they were written_/*). I am using
> the word imminent to mean that Christ could come and might come at any
> time, and that we are to be prepared for him to come at any day."
>
>
>
> Bottom line- can you answer this?
>
>
>
> */Is Christ coming _SOON_? Yes or no./* I think the bible clearly
> teaches “yes.” The only reason for doubting it is history.
>
>
>
> Pastor Murray said in a later email:
> “As I see it, either environmental concern is a valid Christian concern
> or it is not. Assuming that it is (and note the assumption!), then we
> ought to be about it BECAUSE we expect the master of the house to come
> at any moment rather than abandoning it on that exact basis! But by a
> rather bizarre logic there are those who seem to think that a purported
> immediate return of the master actually absolves them from
> responsibility to obey his commands.”
>
>
>
> Let me challenge that. Suppose I told you that I was going to come to
> your house */_soon_/*, move you and your family out and into a brand new
> mansion beyond your dreams, and then torch your existing house to make
> the real estate available for something else. Would you bother to spend
> money and time fixing your leaky roof, doing landscaping, building
> editions, etc.? Obviously not. Why would you want to see your work go
> up in flames, unless of course, you don’t believe my promise? In the
> same way- the promise from the Bible is that Christ is coming soon, and
> everything will melt in His coming (2 Peter 3).
>
>
>
> 2 Peter 3
>
>
>
> 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.[_/*a]
>
>
>
> */_ 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.[b]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.
>
>
>
> George Murphy said:
> “There's a big difference between saying (a) "Scripture teaches that
> Christ's return will be soon" & (b) "Scripture shows us that there was a
> widespread expectation that Christ would return soon among the first
> generation of Christians." A very good case can be made for the 2d
> statement but not for the 1st.”
>
>
>
> For your case two- if the idea of a soon return didn’t come from
> Scripture- then where else would it come from? Teachers. Teachers who
> are closer to the Apostles and would have known their teaching more
> clearly than we do today by reading Scripture. Also- I don’t know why 2
> Peter 3 (quoted above) doesn’t just make it obvious that they thought
> Christ was returning very soon... the case from Scripture, which you
> indicate may be hard to make. It seems to me to elaborate on this
> “soon” idea in great detail.
>
>
>
> ...Bernie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Murray Hogg [mailto:muzhogg@netspace.net.au]
> Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2009 12:21 PM
> To: Dehler, Bernie
> Subject: Re: [asa] Radioactive decay of U-238 is imminent (just wait a
> few billion years)
>
>
>
> Hi Bernie,
>
>
>
> Burgy's remark that a dictionary definition is a poor guide when it
> comes to theological terms struck me as apposite. So I did a quick check
> of my theological library, and came up with the following. They serve to
> illustrate the point I've been attempting to make that when used in the
> context of Christian theology, "imminent" does NOT mean "soon" but
> rather "at any time" or (as I actually prefer to put it) "suddenly and
> without warning".
>
>
>
> Note that Gudrem has a pretty good response to the claim that the
> biblical materials teach that Jesus return would be "soon" - like myself
> he notes that NONE of the texts regarding Jesus return necessarily
> require such an interpretation.
>
>
>
> What's interesting about the below - particularly the passage from
> Bilezikian - is that it is apparent that there is great possibility for
> confusion regarding the use of the term. Whereas traditional theological
> usage (to which I appeal) has used "imminent" to mean "at any time" (now
> or in a million years) this stand in some tension with the common usage
> in which "imminent" is taken to mean "soon".
>
>
>
> Note that IF one REJECTS (as I do) the claim that scripture teaches
> Christ's return will be "soon" in favour of the idea that it will be
> "suddenly and without warning"; and IF one defines "imminent" in
> accordance with traditional theological usage to mean "at any time" (now
> OR in a million years), THEN there is no shell-game being played.
>
>
>
> Hope the below is helpful in furthering the discussion.
>
>
>
> Blessings,
>
> Murray
>
>
>
> From Stanley Gundry, "Imminence," in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology
> (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1984), 551;
>
>
>
> <cite>
>
> "The doctrine that Christ can return at any moment and that no predicted
> event must intervene before that return."
>
> </cite>
>
>
>
> From Wayne A. Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical
> Doctrine. (Leicester, England: InterVarsity Press, 1994.) 1096n7.
>
>
>
> <cite>
>
> "In this chapter, it must be made clear that I am not using imminent as
> a technical term for a pre-tribulational rapture position (explained
> below), but simply to mean that Christ could return at any day, or even
> any hour. Furthermore, I am not using the word imminent to mean that
> Christ certainly will come soon (for then the verses teaching imminence
> would have been untrue when they were written). I am using the word
> imminent to mean that Christ could come and might come at any time, and
> that we are to be prepared for him to come at any day. (Others define
> imminent more broadly, taking it to mean that Christ could come in any
> generation. I am not using the term in that way in this chapter.
>
> </cite>
>
>
>
> From Bilezikian, Gilbert G. Christianity 101: Your Guide to Eight Basic
> Christian Beliefs. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1993. 231-32.
>
>
>
> <cite>
>
> Practically every church creed or statement of faith that mentions the
> Second Coming confesses that no one knows for certain the time of the
> Parousia, but acknowledges that it will surely happen. It could happen
> at the present moment or in a million years, but its eventual occurrence
> is certain. From a human perspective, the time of the event is unknown,
> but the fact is unquestionably confirmed in Scripture.
>
>
>
> Generally, this is the meaning that the word "imminent" is intended to
> convey when it is used in relation to the Parousia. Strictly speaking,
> however, the word "imminent" means something else. According to the
> dictionary an event is imminent when it is just about to happen. For
> instance, should someone pull the pin off a hand grenade and let go of
> it, the explosion of the grenade would be imminent, in the sense that it
> would happen almost [232] immediately. But should the pin have corroded
> and seem weak enough to let go on its own, we could not say that the
> explosion is imminent. All we could say is that it is "possibly
> imminent," with the exact time being unpredictable.
>
>
>
> Likewise for our own individual demise, we all know that death is
> inevitable. Any of us could die at any moment. But people in reasonably
> good health do not say that their death is "imminent." This can be said
> only of people whose vital signs are down and who are visibly on their
> way out of this life. Thus, to speak accurately, the word "imminent"
> must be qualified when it is applied to the Second Coming. That is why
> we have placed it in quotation marks in the title above. We are using
> the term as a concession to tradition and as an attempt to communicate
> the concept in familiar terms. But we qualify its meaning here to convey
> the idea of the possible imminence of the Parousia, an event that will
> happen for sure but at a time that cannot be accurately anticipated by
> humans. Indeed, the occurrence of the Parousia could be imminent, but it
> could also be a long time in the making.
>
>
>
> Any discussion of the time frame for the Parousia must be grounded in
> Scripture. Fortunately, the New Testament yields abundant data in this
> area. The New Testament gives ample evidence that the early Christians
> believed in the possible imminence of the Parousia and that they lived
> in a mode of active expectancy for the Lord's return, yet without
> attempting to seek signs or to set dates.
>
> </cite>
>
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Jan 26 17:13:44 2009