Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to Him, we ask you, brothers, not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. (2 Thess 2:1-2)Peter warned that it was expected.
This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. In both of them I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. They will say, "Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation." (2 Peter 3:1-4)This approach is, perhaps, popular, but it is also biblically anticipated and answered. "But," they will object, "didn't the first century believers expect Christ's imminent return?" Yes, they did. All believers from Christ's ascension on have expected His imminent return. But all believers have understood that the timing is His. Paul certainly said things, like, "Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord ..." (1 Thess 4:17), sounding very much like "we" means "you, the people to whom I write, and I," but nothing in there requires "within the next 10 years or so" or the like.
Remember, the Old Testament prophecies of a Messiah included both a Suffering Servant and a Conquering King. The Jews were expecting that Conquering King and missed entirely the Suffering Servant. What they got was Christ, the Suffering Servant, and what is yet to come is Christ, the Conquering King. Since prophecy often carries this time anomaly, it is no surprise that prophecies on the return of Christ may, also.
What is often forgotten is this little fact. Built into these prophecies is an intentional delay. In Paul's letters to the church at Thessalonica, he tells them "Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God." (2 Thess 2:3-4) In truth, a misunderstanding of a favorite passage almost blinds us to the other delay. Peter, easing his readers' fears about this delay, writes, "Do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slow to fulfill His promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance." (2 Peter 3:8-9) Note, first, that Peter is not vague. The Lord is not slow to fulfill His promise. He accomplishes it at the very time He intends. We understand that Peter tells us that God's time is not our time, and he says that should comfort us. But the reason for the delay is much bigger than we seem to realize. God is "not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance." Now, we tend to think that this is a generalization, that God really wishes everyone would be saved. This, of course, is a strange reading. Is God not Sovereign? Is He not Omniscient? How does this vague wish delay Him? It doesn't. That's not the intent. We arrive at that by inserting a term that isn't there. We understand "that all should reach repentance" refers to "all people." Note that "people" is not in that sentence. We've inserted it in our minds, but it's not there. But the subject of that "all" is not missing. Peter wrote to the elect -- God "is patient toward you." The "all" in view here is the "all" who will be saved. God is waiting for the last person He intends to save to be saved, when His "wish" becomes a fact, not a failed hope. That is the reason for the delay. God is waiting to finish the job He set out to do -- to save every last one of His elect.
This won't convince the skeptics; I only hope to encourage believers. Some of prophecy yet unfulfilled appears to be troublesome. For 2000 years and more we've anticipated prophetic events that haven't occurred, yet they seemed so imminent when the prophecies were made. This isn't an error on God's part, a mistake of Scripture. The problem is on our end. We're impatient. God has specific plans with specific events and specific ends and He is not late ... ever. When Joseph dreamed of his family bowing to him, I'm quite certain he had no thought of the process and time that would take, but it did. God's Word encourages us to trust God through the delays because God is reliable, He has a plan, and He never fails. Expect the skepticism. Just don't add to it.
13 comments:
The irony is that the scoffers that complain about the delay of the second coming of Christ, are fulfilling prophesy by their very actions.
I am retired now, but in my working days I learned that one of my coworkers was a member of the Latter Day Saints (Mormon) church. Eventually I asked him a couple of theological questions in a neutral tone of voice (leaving open in his mind the possibility that I might be asking because I wanted to join in on his faith, though in fact I had long since settled in my mind that LDS beliefs are riddled with problems). That gave him an opening to start witnessing in spurts over the course of months. Eventually he realized he was not making any progress with me, and backed off on the theological discussions. His last shot at me was that he was wasting his efforts "casting pearls before swine," making use of that phrase straight from scripture. I was in the role of the pig, see. :-)
Days before that, though, he informed me that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young prophesied that evil men would come against their ministry, and so what I was doing in my resistance to his sacred witness was actually confirming in his mind that those prophets were righteous men of God. I am seeing that same mindset here at Stan's blog.
Let me see if I understand your complaint. Isaiah spoke of the Messiah (Isa 53) in terms so specific that if you read the text to a Jew today they will recognize Jesus in it. However, if we say, "Jesus is the fulfillment of that prophecy," we're making stuff up? While I am sure that people can falsely apply Scripture to situations (because it happens all the time), does that require that all applications of Scripture are false? Because someone incorrectly identified you as a "swine" to whom he cast "pearls," does that mean no pearls and no swine are actual? Does it require that any suggestion that people will doubt God's reality because they question His return is false? I'm not understanding the point.
I'm curious what your intended outcome is. What is your goal in seeding doubt? When we proselytize, we do it out of love, out of a desire to see good things for those that don't believe. To make the world a better place, just a little. If I had not Christ, I would be a complete hedonist without a care for my fellow Man. You believe that would make my life or our world better?
I definitely think that there are plenty of people who are going to jump on any possible item of scripture that they think they can exploit. We have to be able to differentiate between those who are asking genuine questions and those who are just being contrarians.
The Wintery Knight blog has a post on this very topic. He notes that too many people want to jump ahead in the process while what we should be working on is laying a solid foundation that leads people to the conclusion that Christianity is the best explanation of the world we live in, before getting into (semi) obscure theological questions.
In this case, I'd suggest that no amount of evidence regarding this particular prophecy is going to make a dent, because the questioner is simply using the question as a distraction from more foundational issues.
Excellent point regarding the pearls/swine.
I struggle with this from time to time. I know that many questions are not asked for purposes of information, but with an agenda of opposition. It makes me want to ignore them. On the other hand, I know that others might see the questions and be tripped up. It makes me want to answer the questions. So, quite often, I do, knowing that the answers are not sufficient for the skeptic. (However, I should point out that the anonymous commenter here didn't seem to ask a question, so ...)
I agree with the desire to engage any skeptic on any level, but I think there is something to be said for steering the conversation to the foundational issues, before attacking the peripheral issues.
I think it points or how important relationships are in these discussions. The better you know the questioner, the better you can understand why they are asking the question.
I read the comments and thought of eight things I could say in response. Yes, I counted. :-) But let me trim it down to something simpler.
I'll tell you that one reason I follow this blog is simple nostalgia. The regulars remind me so much of the authority figures around me as I was growing up. I'll recommend Tim Sledge's book 'Goodbye Jesus: An Evangelical Preacher's Journey Beyond Faith.' He was raised much the same way I was, though in Texas in his case. He would recognize your worldview as being that of his family and friends.
Way off topic: What are you praying about the coronavirus epidemic? Protect you from it? Your family? Your fellow congregants? All Americans? All Christians worldwide?
Ah, a deconvert. I get it. But, you understand, to us you're saying, "Since I gave up hope I feel a lot better." :) I, on the other hand, jettisoned the faith a long time ago only to find myself dragged back in by evidence and argument and, now, years later, experience. I don't have enough faith to not believe it.
I am not a "good prayer" in the typical church sense. I pray for less common things like, "Do what You will" and "Use these things for your glory" and such instead of, "Please, please, make us more comfortable, God." Some people don't like me to pray for them that way.
As far as those sorts of meta issues, I also tend to pray that God’s will be done, and that things point to Him. Of course that’s how I tend to pray for myself and others I know personally.
I do give anonymous some credit. Unlike some, who deny virtually every tenet of Christianity, yet cling to the label of “Christian”, he seems content to have completely broken away. Yet for some strange read he’s drawn to a blog like this and can’t seem to let go and disengage.
I think it's a good thing for him to continue to be exposed to good doctrine, even if he doesn't believe in it. As Stan said, he'd turned his back on God, but was brought back by sound reasoning.
To Craig: I've been reading comments here for many years. I haven't seen Glenn Chatfield opine here in quite some time. I should try to track down his blog page. His comments at Stan's blog took me straight back to the times I was around my father's parents and they chatted about politics and religion. A tidbit... I knew my grandmother went through a rebellious phase, but only in recent years did an uncle of mine claim she transported moonshine in the South. My father says he never heard that story though, so who knows. When I knew her she was very conservative in a lots of ways, but grew up in Dixiecrat territory which throughout her life made her reluctant to vote for a Republican--the party of the wealthier Whites as she saw it. The exception was when the Democrat candidate was a Roman Catholic. Is that awful to say? She certainly did have her prejudices, and never remained silent about them. Her daughter-in-law (my mother) always said, "Dottie could make friends quickly... and lose them just as quickly." In my mind I can still hear Grandma say, "I don't hold to that nasty old evolution. It's Marxist professors pushing that on the kids, to turn them away from the Lord."
To David: No need to worry, I will continue to seek out viewpoints contrary to my own for the rest of my life.
To coronaviruses everywhere: James 5:16. Take that!
David,
I agree that it’s good to be exposed to good theology. I think it’s telling that he’s drawn here where he’s getting exposed to that and to be able to engage with believers.
Post a Comment