The Mid-Point of the Tribulation

 

I think there should be some special end time judgment reserved for people who write boring theology.

I am halfway through Holdcroft’s Eschatologly: A Futurist View, my own tribulation, and I am waiting for someone to make a deal that will make the rest of the book go by a lot quicker. In a nutshell, this book is boring. It is dry, uninteresting, and in places mind-numbing with its bullet points and lists of random Scripture references. I wish, for futurism’s sake, that Holdcroft had made this a little more engaging. I’m trying not to let the medium destroy the message.

It also lacks any connection to systematic theology as a whole, and that is a significant weakness in my opinion.

As soon as I got into the book, I realized I was coming at things from quite a different viewpoint. In fact, the first few chapters made me quite upset! The margins are filled with a pencil debate against Holdcroft. He lays a foundation for futurism, and dispensationalism in particular, that I simply cannot agree with on a number of theological grounds.

I think I will lay out my particular problems in another post, after I’ve considered the book as a whole. And in the meantime, I’m going to try and slog through the rest of it as quickly as I can, so I can move on to other, more interesting reads!

Does anyone know of a good book that outlines and defends a dispensationalist view of eschatology? I would like to read the best of this position and really give it a chance, but as of right now I am ready to cast it into the lake of fire (well, at least Holdcroft’s version). I have Dwight J. Pentecost’s Things to Come, which apparently was the Bible College textbook before Holdcroft. It is a thicker book. I’m wary of committing myself to it if it’s just more of the same. 

~lg

The End is Just the Beginning

As I begin my study, I am reminded that no one strain of theology can be considered on its own, independent of other “ologies.” As soon as you get into one subject, you realize there are other subjects that must be brought into the conversation.

A good eschatology is necessarily, and inevitably, shaped by other fields of biblical/theological study. There are a few that are already jumping to mind as I start to think and read:

Hermeneutics

·         How one understands and interprets the Bible as a whole, and certain prophetic passages in particular, is a HUGE part of one’s eschatological framework. What is strictly literal and what is symbolic and how does one decide one over the other? Is there such a thing as double fulfillment? Prophetic telescoping?

Christology

·         What Christ accomplished the first time, and what he has left to accomplish in His second coming also plays a part. Also, Christology informs how the Old Testament is read.

Israel

·         How many of God’s promises to the nation of Israel were fulfilled in Jesus? Do we reinterpret certain passages in the OT with Jesus/the church in mind? What is the distinction between Israel and the church? Does God still have a specific/unique plan for the nation of Israel?

So, though I may be beginning on the path of eschatology, I know I will be going down many a side trail in pursuit of these other factors. It’s a big theological world out there. . .let's hope I don't get lost!

~lg

Road Map to the End of the World

A reading list of eschatological proportions! 

Here’s a draft study plan for how I’m going to go about some of my research. I want it to be multidisciplinary. So I’m going to do some biblical studies, some historical studies, and some theological studies, likely sprinkled with a bit of pop culture/theology.

I’ve got some books on my shelf right now, and I’m going to start with those. I’m also looking for recommendations, so any suggestions would be most welcome! I'm sure this list will be added to as time goes on, but it's a start.

Historic creeds & catechisms

Biblical studies:

Mysterious Apocalypse: Interpreting the Book of Revelation (Arthur W. Wainwright)

Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible: Revelation (Joseph L. Mangina)

Traditional Pentecostal/dispensationalist eschatology:

Eschatology: A Futurist View (Thomas L. Holdcroft) – Pentecostal

Knowing the Doctrines of the Bible (Myer Pearlman) – Pentecostal

Other eschatology:

Hope Against Hope: Christian Eschatology at the Turn of the Millennium (Richard Bauckham & Trevor Hart)

Surprised by Hope (NT Wright) – Anglican

Excerpts from systematic (sorts of) theologies:

Credo (Karl Barth) – Reformed

Dogmatics in Outline (Karl Barth) – not sure I have time to delve into Church Dogmatics!

Systematic Theology Vol 2: The Works of God (Robert Jenson) – Lutheran

Introduction to Christianity (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger) – Roman Catholic

Apostolic Faith (David Yeago) – Lutheran

But where to start?

I think I’ll begin where I first began – with what I was taught as a Classical Pentecostal. So it’s back to my Bible College textbook, Eschatology: A Futurist View. I’m interested to see how this book sits with me now. 

~lg

Journey to the End of the World

Well, 2012 seems a good a year as any to figure out my eschatology, what with the end of the world supposedly on its way! You see, I’m somewhat of an eschatological orphan at the moment. I grew up with Classical Pentecostal dispensationalism, but over the years have become disenchanted with aspects of it. I have come across snatches of other systems that appeal to me, but I haven’t invested any time in really delving into the subject.

Since it’s a favourite topic with my husband, Micah, he’s been after me for ages to nail down my eschatology. Some of our most heated arguments have been theological in nature, and eschatological in particular. But it’s hard to debate when I’m not even sure what my own ground rules are anymore.

So what’s my problem anyway? Why ditch dispensationalism? The big chart of the end times figured heavily in my doctrinal upbringing. I remember a larger than life version of it in my little church basement as a kid. We had to memorize and be able to draw the events in sequence in Bible College.

I’m not sure that I really questioned it until I hit Wycliffe College, an Anglican seminary. I know, the big bad seminary that poisons young evangelicals with liberal thinking and makes them doubt their faith. Only, it wasn’t like that. Wycliffe was evangelical by its own definition. And my faith was strengthened in my time there, precisely through various challenges by thinkers of other theological stripes.

As a Pentecostal, I was somewhat of a curiosity to others. I remember another student asking me if Pentecostals were fundamentalists. I said I supposed so, not really seeing what they were on about. And then there were the little pokes at the rapture in Systematic Theology class – the rapture seemed more of a joke than anything to these Anglicans. And finally I realized they just didn’t have a clue when, in a class on the history of biblical interpretation, a dispensationalist chart of the end times was presented as a novelty item. Really? I could have walked right up to the chalkboard and drawn the whole thing from memory.

Cleary, most of these people had a totally different understanding of eschatology than I did. I must admit to some feelings of insecurity. Why was dispensationalism so pooh-poohed by academia? Was it a case of intellectual snobbery, or was there something behind it? I didn’t say much at the time, but observed with mixed caution and curiosity. I was intrigued. And some of it just seemed to make sense.

If not dispensationalism, then what? I think the first glimpse of a viable alternative appeared to me in reading N. T. Wright’s Surprised by Hope. Here was an intelligent scholar, committed to the Scriptures and to orthodox Christianity, and he presented a different sort of vision, one that was surprisingly resonant with me. He pointed out the things about evangelical eschatology that had been rubbing me the wrong way, burrs in my skin I didn’t even know how to identify. I began to think that perhaps there was a different way to view the end of the world and this age as we know it.

So, where does that leave me know? In some ways, I’ve put dispensationalism aside, but haven’t replaced it yet. There’s a vacuum in my theology. To be honest, I’m not sure what I believe about it. So that’s what this is all about.

I’m going to do some research. I’m going to revisit my own theological heritage while exploring others. I’m going to investigate views I currently find a bit ridiculous, hoping to see the value in them. I’m going to listen to some wise people from past and present, and hopefully form a cohesive way to think about the “last things.”

And just for the record, there are things I do believe, things I believe are essential to any orthodox theology.

I believe Jesus, the God-Man, will return again, literally, physically, bodily, to this earth at a time of the Father’s choosing.
I believe when he comes he will set things right, once and for all.
I believe he will judge the living and the dead.
I believe he will usher in the new creation, a new heavens and new earth where God will reign over all creation.
I believe in the bodily resurrection of all Christians, and that we will enjoy a fully physical and fully spiritual life with God in this new creation.

With those boundaries defining my journey, I am ready to set off toward the end of the world . . . and maybe, just maybe by December 21, 2012, I’ll have a better idea of where I’m going!

You’re welcome to join me, if you like. I’ll be posting thoughts on the journey here on redletterstheology. (I probably won’t be doing facebook updates of each post though, as this is rather a specialized interest.) Theology is best done in community, so I’d love it if anyone else wants to join in the conversation!

Next post: My plan of study


~lg

Single-Handed Theology - Where Are the Children?

Single-Handed Theology: one hand in motherhood, one hand in theology, each inspiring the other.

Tonight, while nursing Arden before bed, all the while humming old hymns and drinking hot lemon tea, I was considering the relationship between Christ and the church. In a sacred mystery I am not sure I understand, the apostle Paul identifies Christ as the husband and the church as the wife. That got me thinking – where are the children?

We’ve got all sorts of relationships pictured in the Bible, relationships that exist among God and between God and humanity. There’s God the Father, and His Son, with the Spirit as the bond of love between them. There’s Christ the bridegroom, winning a bride for Himself, the Church. The Spirit may also be seen as the chemistry, or divine electricity that draws and binds each to the other. (Of course the Spirit is also a person, not simply a force, with whom we have a relationship with as well, though He is always handing us off to Christ.)

Surely the greatest romance of all time would find fulfillment in the natural outcome of marriage, that is, offspring. We are God’s children, but the Church as she is now has borne no children.

But of course. The marriage has yet to happen. The Great Wedding is an eschatological event, and we are still the betrothed, not yet a wife, not yet a mother.

When I thought of this, a little tingle of excitement ran through me. Sometimes when we think about the end of this world, or life after death, or eternity in heaven, we struggle to imagine what on earth we’ll be doing. (And yes, there will be a new earth too, as well as a new heaven.) Getting to the Marriage Supper of the Lamb seems like a pretty ultimate arrival in and of itself. But just think, we will be marrying Jesus, the One in whom and through whom all things were created! With such a creative husband, I wouldn’t be surprised if our union brings about some kind of new life. I’m not thinking of more human children, or a race of demi-gods, but something alive nonetheless, something that will recreate the church anew as baby recreates a woman from the inside out.

Perhaps we will experience a glorious motherhood, perhaps there will be things that need our nourishment and our love, love which has been made perfect through the fires of tribulation and resurrection. Perhaps we will be the co-creators we were meant to be. Perhaps the Spirit will birth new life in us as a surprise wedding gift. Who knows?

There is a reason a veil hangs over our faces as we look past the future into eternity. But you know what they say. First comes love, then comes marriage, then comes . . .


~lg

Resources on the Incarnation

At this time of year, thoughts turn again to the wonder of God-with-us. If you're looking to dig a little deeper into the theology of the Incarnation, here is a great resource page from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library.

http://www.ccel.org/node/7393

New Pentecostals post

Here's a new blog post over at New Pentecostals:

http://newpentecostals.blogspot.com/2010/11/lets-talk-pneumatology.html

New blog project on Pentecostalism

Come on over to New Pentecostals, a new blog project Josh Singh and I have begun. We're sharing our thoughts on Pentecostalism and opening it up for discussion. It's going to be fun!

Samuel Lee - New Kind of Pentecostalism?

Here's a guy that's advocating for change in Pentecostalism as we know it . . . take a look:

(This is from his blog, samlee.org )

The New Kind of Pentecostals are:

1.Those who do not claim exclusivity of the Holy Spirit to a particular denomination or church.

2. Those who respect other Christian denominations and traditions and are willing to fellowship, share and cooperate with them.


3.Those who believe that the unconditional love that is inspired & directed by the Holy Spirit in believers is the greatest sign of being filled with the Holy Spirit.

4. Those who share the Good News with all mankind, but in a manner full of grace and love and not through arrogance and “the-we-know-better-than-you-mentality...”

5. Those who believe that miracles, signs and wonders are still possible today, but one should not elevate these above the humility and the message of Jesus Christ. They are those who are against commercializing and merchandizing the gifts and signs of the Holy Spirit.

6. Those who do not tolerate any form of fear-theology and manipulation techniques in the name of the Holy Spirit in order to gain wealth, even for the ministry.

7. Those who believe in the grace that is in giving tithes and offerings but are against abusive and manipulative forms of preaching/using Malachi 3:8... Tithes and offerings should not be controlled and must come from the heart of the giver and not from the fear preached from the pulpit.

8. Those who may disapprove of the non-heterosexual lifestyle, but are not witch-hunting homosexuals. Instead of using hateful vocabulary toward homosexuals, they listen to and pray for them.

9. Those who are balanced in their theology on Israel/Zionism. New Kind of Pentecostals are those who aim to play the role of bridge builders between the Jews and Palestinians. For God loves both…

10. Those who are not only concerned with miracles, signs and wonders, but are also concerned with social justice, and with the poor, the oppressed, the orphans, the widows and the immigrants.

11. Those who respect other cultures’ and people’s convictions and even religions, and are willing to enter into a mutual dialogue with them, without any hidden agendas.

12. Those who respect and have a dialogue with other cultures, yet when it comes to any form of inhumane practices within these cultures, the New Pentecostals are willing to address them.

13. Those who are concerned with the environment and are willing to bring in Pentecostal input in caring for the creation.

14. Those who believe in the Bible as the inspired collection of Holy Scriptures, yet they use the scriptures to bring forth grace and mercy and offer blessings instead of doom and gloom theology.

15. Those who believe that leadership should be servant hood; that leaders should serve instead of being served. Leaders should sacrifice instead of demanding sacrifice. Leadership should be based on love and fellowship and not on spiritual rank.

16. Those who respect traditional churches, or organized churches, but believe that the real church is built of people and their relationship with God and with each other. They are those who believe that the church is not a “building”, but it is a part of God continually fulfilling kingdom.

sacred space

I was having a conversation with friends last night, and a certain comment revealed an ecclesiological conflict within. Perhaps it's the Pentecostal and the Anglican in me duking it out.

I had said at some point in the discussion that if I wasn't a Pentecostal, I would probably be an Anglican. Now there are many things about Anglicanism that I admire and appreciate, but one of them would be beautiful stained glass windows and a sense of sacred space. The physical, material dimension reflects spiritual realities in some way.

Not two minutes later I made another comment about how silly it was that we get uptight over what happens in a church building, as if God somehow lived in the building and not in his body, the people of the church.

It was my husband who caught me and reminded me of my previous statement, revealing this inner conflict of interest. Part of me craves that beauty of the sanctuary, part of me wants to push down the walls.

The issues:
- how do we view the material/physical element of our lives and our faith?
- how does the material/physical correlate to the spiritual? does it or should it at all?
- where is the support for sacred space in the New Testament?
- does our view of sacred space affect our concept of mission?
- where do we locate God's presence/Spirit in the church?


~lg