An Eschatological Community

It is important for the church to recognize itself as an eschatological community because the church has an eschatological hope. The church exists in the future as well as the present. It is the hope of what the church will be that drives the church in its present work and causes the church to realize that what she will be in the future is something that she can take hold of now in the present time. This is called “living up to what one has already attained,” or “taking hold of what one already owns.” This future hope causes the church to act according to that hope. The church becomes in the present what she believes she will be in the future. If the church believes that she will fade and die out in the end then she is in fact fading and dying now. If the church believes that she will shine and be made new in the end then she is in fact shining and being made new in the present. What we believe ourselves to be in the future is what we become today. This is why dwelling upon the sin of the past is unhealthy, because that assumes that what we were yesterday is what we will always be to a certain extent, and if we believe that then we truly will be all that we dwell upon in the past that we allow to captivate us. We must allow the hope of the future glory to shape us now and so cause the future to become the present. “But it is precisely in speaking of the future that we address the here and now; for the needs and hungers of the moment cannot be understood except by reference to that healing and filling which is the promised future.” (Neuhaus 132).

My Ministry Manifesto

Introduction

The way we perceive the Kingdom of Heaven informs how we practice ministry. Not only must we have sound theology when we participate in the ministry of the Kingdom, but we also must put this theology into practice. Any ministry must be lived out through the life lived by the Spirit, which means that we must maintain a right relationship with God and with those around us. If we wish to be satisfied in ministry, we must first begin with the upkeep of our own spiritual lives, both on a personal level as well as on a corporate level. Ministry should never be done alone. In one way or another, ministry is something that is shared by the community in which the same Spirit – the Spirit of Christ – dwells.

My Theological Understanding of the Life of the Kingdom

In the Via Salutis, or the Way of Salvation, we see Christ’s redemption of fallen humanity at work within us. Before we are saved, we have no desire to serve God. God speaks to us through His Holy Spirit before we are saved in an act that a number of people call prevenient grace, or grace that goes before. This means that before we were seeking God, God was seeking us. Before we were calling to Him, He was calling to us. Without this act of prevenient grace in our lives, we would not seek God. We would be left in our natural state imparted to us by our first parents, doomed to sin and death, without even understanding our need of salvation. But through His prevenient grace God calls out to us, though we may not recognize Him at first.

Salvation is a process. Many people have a difficult time knowing at what exact point they were saved. This is especially true of individuals who have grown up in Christian families and in the church. These people can often identify key points where they made significant progress in their salvation journey. It is good, especially in cases where the individual cannot remember a time in their lives when they did not believe in God or even when they weren’t a Christian, to think of salvation as something that is continuous. Salvation is not limited to one moment in time. It is a progression of one coming closer to God. In this way, salvation includes the time before the person prayed “the sinner’s prayer” when they were willingly moving towards God as well as the time afterwards when they continue to make choices that reflect their devotion to God and the guidance of the Holy Spirit in their lives.

Part of a person’s salvation process is the coming to a realization that they need to be saved. They recognize the great peril they are in and are distressed by it. Through prevenient grace, the Holy Spirit causes the individual to recognize that they need to make a choice about whether or not they are going to follow God.

We eventually come to an understanding of our need of a Savior, and we surrender our lives to Jesus in repentance so that we may be saved. God is faithful, and He saves us. This can be called the act of justification, meaning that we are no longer condemned for our sins because we have surrendered them to God through Christ and have been forgiven.

We experience justification through faith. It is not by works that we are pardoned and saved, but by faith. God makes us spotless in His sight through faith which comes by His grace working within us. We are made righteous through faith. We believe God and have faith in Him whom we cannot see directly, and God declares us to be righteous. The Bible says the same thing of Abraham. It says that “Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness” (Gen. 15:6; Rom. 4:3).

We are made new in Christ so that we no longer live for ourselves and for the sinful nature. We continue to die daily to the self and the sinful nature by the sanctifying power of the Holy Spirit through the salvation we have found in Christ. We experience regeneration.

We are made new day after day as we grow in our relationship with God. As we continue on in our now redeemed lives, we have many opportunities to turn back to the old way of living in sin. The Holy Spirit works within us letting us know what is pleasing to Him. As we go on living, the Holy Spirit reveals to us even more areas of our lives we were not aware of that we need to surrender over to Him. If we continue to surrender these areas of our lives over to God as He reveals them to us, we eventually come to the point where we decide by God’s grace that we will always surrender everything over to God – both the known as well as the unknown. We choose that we will always say “yes” to God no matter what. This point of experience is referred to by a number of people as “entire sanctification.” Sanctification is a process that continues for the rest of our lives, and even in the afterlife, where our salvation will be made complete. The apostle Paul wrote of the future day of salvation as well as the present day. In the future day of salvation, we will be made like Christ in His glory. Our selves having been restored to the people Christ created us to be. In the meantime, we must remember that Christ’s salvation is also at work in us today. Our life does not begin when we die and go to Heaven. The Kingdom of Heaven breaking into the kingdom of this world is an important element of our present faith in Christ as well as our eschatology. The way we perceive the Kingdom of Heaven informs the way we practice our ministry. Our ministries should not have the sole-goal of getting people to say the sinner’s prayer so that they can go to Heaven. There is more to Christianity than this. The mentality of getting people to "accept Jesus" so that they can go to heaven is actually off-center of what we are called to be as Christians. That view is one that is escapist. It is almost as though we were all just waiting to get into heaven because that is when life really begins. But this is not true. Life is also now, and we must live for more than an escapist feeling that all we need to do is pray so we can go to heaven. We cannot minister to people in this way. The Kingdom of Heaven is now, not just in the eschaton. We need to remember this when we evangelize people. We are not just getting them ready for Heaven. We are equipping them for life in this world as well, recognizing that Heaven starts now, not when we die.

Part of the sanctifying process is that we become the disciples of Jesus. Becoming a disciple of Jesus means more than simply being taught to do good things, though that certainly is a part of it. Discipleship involves taking on the same spirit as that of the teacher – becoming like the teacher, and exercising the same kind of authority as that of the teacher. Jesus told his disciples that they would do even greater miracles than what they had seen Him do. Christ gave the believers His own authority when He breathed on them and they received the Holy Spirit (John 20:21-2). He placed all authority that has been given to Him into the hands of his disciples (Matt. 28:18-20), and we are His disciples. We live by the same Spirit, the Holy Spirit of God Who proceeds from both the Father and the Son and who dwells within us. The filling of the Spirit and the sanctification process are parts of being a disciple.

God’s prevenient grace works in our lives before we are saved, and His sanctifying grace works in our lives once we are saved. It continues to work in us throughout our lives. When we do something that goes against God’s will, the Holy Spirit lets us know, and gives us the opportunity to surrender this part of our lives back to God. God’s saving grace is present in the act of salvation. However, God’s saving grace is also present both before and after salvation. It is what makes both prevenient and sanctifying grace possible.

My Understanding of Core Values for Ministry

Our central goal in ministry is to always place God first in our lives. This is the most important thing we can do. Before we can minister to others, we must love God with all of our heart, soul, mind, and strength (Deut. 6:5; Matt. 22:37; Mark 12:30; Luke 10:27). In order to be successful ministers we must maintain a daily devotional life and be consistent in prayer. As a couple engaged in ministry together we must also continue to set aside regular times to pray together, for each other and our ministry.

Another goal in our ministry is to love people and to minister to them. The second most important part of ministry is to love our neighbor (Lev. 19:18; Matt. 19:19; 22:39; Mark. 12:31; Luke 10:27; Rom. 13:9; Gal. 5:14). We must reach out to those in need around us regardless of their ethnic background, lifestyle, or religious beliefs. We must learn to see people as Jesus would and to treat everyone we meet with the love of Jesus. We must be imitators of God in our life and conduct, remembering that it was God’s kindness that led us to repentance (Rom. 2:4). We must serve both the physical as well as the spiritual needs of the people we encounter. Jesus came not only to redeem the spiritual aspect of mankind, but the physical aspect as well. The physical and the spiritual are deeply connected. When we minister to someone, we minister to the whole person.

In ministry, we must be ready to develop disciples. We must realize that any ministry we are a part of does not depend on us, it is God’s work; therefore, any ministry we start or obtain should not end when we move on to a different assignment. We must train up other people to minister as we have done and to minister in whatever way they feel God is calling them to serve. We are not to make carbon copies of ourselves. We must invest in the gifts and strengths of others and let them use them to the best of their abilities without forcing our own particular interests upon them. We must also be willing to work as a team and in community, both with each other as well as with other ministers of Christ. We must also allow other people to minister to our needs and not allow ourselves to think that we can do it all on our own. We must be willing to accept gifts and generosity from others. In a very real way, refusing to accept gifts from others as a way of showing your unworthiness is actually an arrogant response. It sends a message that you do not need or want anyone but yourself.

My Succinct Summary of the Gospel

As a result of the original sin of Adam and Eve, all of mankind is fallen. Not only do we carry the burden of Adam and Eve’s original sin, but we also carry the weight of our own personal sins. Adam and Eve also serve as types of who we are as people – people who have been separated from God through rebellion. By our fallen nature, we are prone to depravity, meaning that all who have been given the opportunity to choose between what is right and what is wrong have chosen the wrong over the right. Our sin means that we are no longer in a right relationship with God. We are separated from Him (before salvation) and stand condemned to die in our sins and then be separated from God for eternity in hell. In order to restore a right relationship with us, God sent His only Son into the world to die for us and pay the penalty that our sins deserved. Because of Christ’s sacrifice, we can now enter into a right relationship with God. Our burden of guilt is removed. We can be set free from the works of the devil in our lives. God assumed human form, taking on the role of servant. What He assumed, He redeemed. He became mortal so that we might become immortal. He died so that those of us who die will be saved. He lowered Himself to the lowest reaches of human experience so that the lowest reaches of human experience might be redeemed. We are called to be imitators of Christ, filled with His Spirit.

Ministry Vision

We must keep in mind our mission statement – to love God, to love people, to make disciples – essentially, to bring Heaven to earth. We must maintain a daily devotional life and be consistent in prayer. We must take part in the fellowship of believers, ministering and being ministered to. We must find the correct spiritual disciplines for us to practice on a personal level in order to draw closer to God and to hear His voice more clearly. The spiritual disciplines are not to be seen as something to be feared or as a way of earning favor with God. They are to be seen as one of the ways we are able to better connect with God and be in tune with His Spirit. [1]

We must not be distracted by abstract scenarios based on how we think our lives ought to be lived in a sort of Jesus-mindset. We must instead learn what Jesus actually did in his own life-situation. When we do so, we learn that Jesus was a rabbi. He knew the entire Hebrew Scriptures by heart, and he had learned this through intense studying and memorizing since he was a child. One of the first things we must do if we truly wish to be like Jesus is to study the Scriptures and to know them and the message of God within them in our hearts.

Jesus fasted, and through the act of fasting one can see how Jesus was strengthened by this. Instead of relying on food to feed ones appetite, when fasting one is forced into recognizing a hunger within them of a different sort – a spiritual hunger. When this spiritual hunger is recognized and fed, then one has the ability to endure temptation and be victorious. Worship is both personal and corporate. Jesus also practiced the discipline of solitude. This was not just during his forty day fast in the wilderness where he was tempted by the devil. Jesus is also seen practicing solitude with prayer during His actual ministry. Jesus is recorded as having gone off into the hills by Himself away from all of the crowds and commotion in order to pray and to be alone with God. This was beneficial to Him and may be beneficial to the Christian in their walk. This is especially true for those involved in ministry. While we need to spend alone time worshiping God, we also need to take part in worship services with others, with those to whom we will minister and with those who will minister to us.

We must learn to see people as Jesus would and to treat everyone we meet with the love of Jesus. We must reach out to those in need around us regardless of their ethnic background, lifestyle, or religious beliefs. We must serve both the physical as well as the spiritual needs of the people we encounter. We must be able to preach and teach the word of God in a way that people can understand. We must be able to relate to those to whom we minister on a personal level and not be disconnected from them. We must speak truth into their lives, and we can do this best by knowing them on a personal level. We must be friends with those we minister to, not only speaking the truth of God to them with our words, but demonstrating the attitude of Christ in our life and actions. We must minister to all people: the poor, the rich; the well, the sick; the mentally challenged, the intellectually brilliant; the beautiful, the ugly; the evil, the righteous.

As we lead people into right relationship with Christ, we must keep in mind that conversion is a process that last a person’s entire life. We tend to think of conversion as being at a specific point in time, and while it is helpful to look back and take notice of pivotal points in one’s own salvation journey, we must also keep in mind that our faith is something that grows and develops as we grow closer to God. It should never be stagnant. In ministry, we must remember that getting people to pray the sinner’s prayer is not adequate. While it is good and is an important part of the conversion experience, it is not all there is. Conversion should not be viewed through a linear perspective where at one point one becomes converted. The conversion process is one in which an individual makes many steps in coming closer to Christ.[2] A conversion is not complete after “the second blessing” either. It is moving toward completeness. We must train up people in the faith and the knowledge of God, teaching them what God expects and showing them by example the life lived by the power of the Spirit. We must train up other people to minister as we have done and to minister in whatever way they feel God is calling them to serve. We must also be willing to work as a team and in community, both with each other as well as with other ministers of Christ. We must teach them salvation through Christ as revealed in the Bible, and the life of the Spirit.

Conclusion

Within our ministry, we must always seek to maintain the mind of Christ within us. Just as Christ made time to study the Scriptures thoroughly, we must also take the Scriptures to heart and know them. Just as Christ did not discriminate in those to whom He ministered, reaching out to both the rich and the poor, we must also do the same, recognizing that it is not those who are well who have need of a doctor (Matt. 9:12; Mark 2:17; Luke 5:31). God reaches out to all people. Also, just as Christ took time to practice the spiritual disciplines, we must also do the same, being renewed in mind and spirit through prayer, self-examination, meditation, fasting, silence, and solitude, among others. We must recognize that while we are Christ’s ambassadors, we are not superheroes. We can do nothing without Christ, and we will not truly display the life of the Kingdom if we do not share the responsibilities of our ministries with those in the community of believers who are equipped to partake in the ministry we share. God has not called us to be isolated in life or in ministry. The life of the Kingdom and in ministry is one lived in community.

---

[1] Willard, Dallas. The Spirit of the Disciplines: Understanding How God Changes Lives. Harper Collins Publishers: New York. 1988. 265 pages.

[2] Smith, Gordon T. Beginning Well: Christian Conversion and Authentic Transformation. InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove, IL. 2001. 233 pages.

Why Death?

What place does death have in the world?

Why do we die?

Why do things break and fall apart and decay? Why is there destruction?

As Christians, we have been taught that because of sin, death entered into the world. And that because of the one sin of Adam and Eve, all humankind was cursed to sin and to suffer and to die. This is what we call the Fall of Man and Original Sin. Because of that original sin committed by our first parents in the Garden of Eden, all of humankind and all of creation is fallen. And this is why we experience pain and suffering and this is why we die.

We have also been taught that as humans, we have only existed on earth for a relatively short period of time. Scientific findings place the existence of Homo sapiens to go back for only about 200,000 years. During that time, humans increased in knowledge of themselves and of the world around them. At the same time, throughout those 200,000 years humans experienced death. Their bodies experienced sickness and decay and they died, just like every other plant and animal on the face of the earth.

So at what point do we say death entered into the human condition? Evidence would say that death existed long before humans were formed. Our pre-human ancestors lived and died much as we do now. And their ancestors did the same. The Neanderthal was a close cousin to Homo sapiens. Neanderthals were very much like humans. They wore clothing, they communicated verbally, they participated in art, and they had an awareness of the spiritual. These creatures were so human-like, and yet they were not fully human. Their genetic code was certainly different from Homo sapiens, and yet similar enough that both species seemed to experience life in much the same way. Neanderthals were certainly sentient beings, and yet they were not truly human.

What are we to do with this? Both humans and Neanderthals, as well as the several other more fully evolved species of primates I have not mentioned, experienced death. They mourned for their dead, they suffered from pain when they were injured, they experienced sickness and frustration. All of these things have been blamed on the fall of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, all of these things have been blamed on Homo sapiens, and yet, all of these things existed before Homo sapiens were created. Humans and Neanderthals and the other similar species all had a common ancestor – one also considered a primate. This primate also experienced death, yet this ancestor did not experience death in the same way. This creature was incapable of seeing the world in the same ways in which his human and Neanderthal descendants could. His brain was not designed to comprehend these greater intricacies of the created order. He could not ponder death and pain in the same way his descendants would. He was truly an animal without sentience. And while he may have been able to recognize to a certain extent the tragedy of death and the sorrow all creatures experience when a loved one dies, he did not experience these things in a fully cognizant way. His life depended upon instinct and upon his sensory capabilities. He experienced life through his senses, and while he did think, his thought could only go so far before his baser instincts kicked in. This was what he was created to be.

And yet this study of the evolution of the genetic code of primates fails to answer the question of where death came from. We believe that death entered the world through the sin of people, and yet death obviously existed at the time of this primate ancestor, before humans existed. We cannot say that this ancestor is the cause of the suffering we experience in the world, for he was not capable of the sin which we believe brought death into the world. As Wesleyans, we often say we believe that sin is only truly a sin if it is committed willingly and if the person who commits the sin is aware of what they are doing and that what they are doing is wrong. Surely, humans and Neanderthals and the like were capable of this kind of sin, and surely this primate ancestor was not. He was not capable of sin, because he was not aware of the ability to sin. So if we are to blame death on sin, we cannot blame it on him because he did not sin, and if we are to blame death on the specific sin of humans, we also run into trouble because death existed before humans, before creatures were capable of sinning.

And yet we cannot, as some have, just throw out centuries of church theology and millennia of progress in understanding how we relate to God and how our sin separates us from God and how death interacts with sin – not to mention the restorative work of Christ, which of all things oddly tends to be the most ridiculed by secularists. But at the same time, we cannot simply deny the evidence that science has given us, as others have, and say that evolution is a lie and the earth is only 6,000 years old while completely ignoring the overwhelming genetic and archaeological evidence against such claims.

As Wesleyans, we are not Fundamentalists. We believe that the Bible is the divinely inspired word of God, but we do not mistake the word of God for the Word of God, which is Christ. We believe in the truth of the Bible, but we believe more so in the truth that is revealed in Christ. We do not believe that God simply dictated the words of Scripture to the people who wrote them down. We believe that those who wrote the Bible used their own minds and skills and incorporated their own thoughts and ideas into its pages while at the same time being influenced and led in a certain direction by the Sprit of God. This gives us room to say that perhaps some of things we read in the Bible reflect not so much the way God saw the world, but rather the way humans interacted with God within their own limited historical and cultural settings. If one were to take the Creation accounts in Genesis, for example, on a completely literal level, then one would have to conclude that the sky is actually a great glass dome overlooking the earth, behind which can be seen a great mass of blue water. Science has disproved this theory long ago, but this does not mean that the story is just a bunch of falsehoods and should not be trusted. On the contrary, this story paints a picture of the all-powerful God who created the heavens and the earth by his own will and love, and it shows how his image is stamped over all of his creation, and how people out of all of the creation were chosen to interact with God in a special way. All of these timeless truths are portrayed in a poetic way in Genesis, a way that the people of the time could easily remember. In addition to this, these truths are forever engraved upon an ancient near eastern understanding of the world, which believed in such things as the sky dome. These elements of the story do not detract from its intended message, even though some get overly distracted by them, rather they show how God has revealed himself in all generations, even to ancient near eastern people who did not fully understand the way the world operated on a grand scale, just as God continues to reveal himself today to us who do not fully understand the way the world operates on a grand scale.

And yet after all this time, we still do not have an answer as to exactly why death exists and how exactly the sin of humans is related to death. We believe that sin causes death, but what do we exactly mean when we say that? Death can have many different forms after all. Do we mean to say that all forms of death are a result of human sin? Do we believe that death came into existence because of sin? Or do we believe that the end result of sin is death? Does death truly exist in and of itself? Or is death merely the absence of life and all that truly does exist? Perhaps what we mean when we say that sin leads to death is that when we sin we die spiritually. Our sin cuts us off from the life-giving Spirit of God. So in a very real sense, our souls are being led to death when we sin. So maybe when we say that sin leads to death, what we are really saying is that our soul is dying when we sin.

However, this leads some other problems. While it is very true that our souls are dying when we sin, there is more to death than just a spiritual death. Some may argue that the spirit and soul of a person is all that matters, so a spiritual salvation from death is all that is required, but that ignores that fact that as humans we have been created to exist in both a spiritual and a physical sense. We are both physical and spiritual beings, and this cannot be ignored. The Gnostics believed that people were created from sinful matter, and the only way we could be free from sin was to die and live on as an eternal soul, but such an understanding denies the inherent goodness of God’s creation. We believe that God created everything good, and that this is not limited to some concept about an eternal soul. God made the physical as well as the spiritual, and he made both good. If we truly believe that, then what do we say when we say that sin only leads to spiritual death and not physical death? When we say that, we say that physical death is not truly bad. If only spiritual death is the result of sin, then that would mean that physical death must have come to be a reality by some other means. But do we really want to say this? Everything within us screams that when we lose a loved one, or when we are forced to see a loved one suffer physical pain or when we experience physical pain and suffering ourselves, that this is not the way things should be. If the creation was truly created good and our sin only leads to spiritual pain and death, then what is the deal with all of the physical suffering and death that we see? Where did all of that come from? And why do we resist it with all of our being? Something deep inside us tells us that it is all terribly wrong. And yet physical death and decay are a part of nature. Without physical death, the creation would not exist as it does. The created order is full of cycles and one of these cycles is the death of all things. As the creation continues to recreate and to replenish itself, it continues to discard the old and that which is no longer needed in order to make space for new creation. Is that all that physical death is? Is it just a natural part of the way the universe exists? Everything dies and decays after all – from people, to animals, to plants, to planets, to stars, to galaxies. And yet everything continues on regardless of death. People create more people before they eventually die. Plants make more plants. Even stars have a reproductive cycle. It would appear that everything in the universe was made with the purpose of eventually recreating itself in one way or another. Is physical death then, the way that nature makes room for new creations? Does physical death eliminate that which is less complete in order to replace it with something more complete? And what does such a belief say about us when we die? Are we to believe that the reason we die is to make room for better people, a more complete creation than we are, to come after us? Again, this type of thinking can also lead us into many additional problems.

While the evidence may lead us to believe that the natural way of the universe tends towards “survival of the fittest,” and while we cannot rule out such a claim, we must also recognize that such an understanding is limited when it comes to understanding death. We may be led to believe that physical death on its own is a good thing because it has helped lead to the creation which we see today and has driven the creation towards perfection. But does a natural physical death truly lead to a better creation, or just a different creation than what previously existed? Does death really make anything better? Or does it simply eliminate what nature perceives as lesser? One could argue that death not only eliminates the lesser and the imperfect, but it also eliminates that which is good. If we truly believe that the physical world was created good then why would anything in it need to be destroyed? And what are we to believe about ourselves? If God truly loves us, then why would he create us to die? While it might be easier for some to believe that death naturally occurs in creation in general, it is more difficult to claim that sentient beings such as humans, beings which we believe God loves personally and on an individual level, have been created to die and be replaced by other humans. Maybe that is how creation was meant to exist up to the point some branches of the primate family tree became sentient beings, but what about after this? Why does God let people die?

Perhaps the answer lies at the point in which the creation became sentient – the point at which the ancestors of homo sapiens and like-minded creatures were first given sentience. One could argue that a creature that cannot experience death on a cognizant level cannot ever have a problem with death. While a non-sentient animal can still experience death and pain on a sensory level, it does not ever have to wrestle with the meaning of life and death. However, we, as sentient beings, do. And this continues to beg the question, why do people experience physical death? It also causes one to wonder how deep physical death stings us, and not us only, but the rest of creation as well. We believe pain and anguish to be a bad thing on a cognizant level, but we also experience pain and anguish on an emotional and sensory level and it causes great unpleasantness to the point at which we recognize through our cognitive abilities that pain is a bad thing – not just because have the ability process that fact with our minds, but because our sensory bodies naturally feel that way when they are injured. This is true not just for us, but for the rest of the animal world. It is not just humans who dread pain and destruction. Animals also dread it on a very deep, though less cognizant, level.

So what does that lead us to conclude? It would seem then that while physical death is a natural part of the physical creation, it is also for some reason natural for the creation to fight against death. Why then is there this contradiction? One could perhaps say that without this resistance to death, the creation would summarily succumb to death. Without the natural tendency of the creation to resist death, death would be all that would remain and there would be no creation. If then, it is so important that the creation resist death so as never to fully succumb to it, why is death necessary at all? If God is the creator of the creation, then why did he allow a creation that includes death?

Perhaps the reason why death exists in the physical world is because God had in mind to create humans – people made in his image who would have the ability to think for themselves, fully sentient beings. Perhaps God recognized from the beginning that once sentient beings were created, they would immediately have the ability to distinguish between two different ways of thinking and living, two different paths if you will. A sentient being would be capable of recognizing the difference between good and evil, and would also be capable of choosing which path to follow. A sentient being would have the ability to perceive with the mind what the rest of creation could only perceive through sensory input abilities. It would be able to perceive with the mind that which other animals only recognized by instinct. A sentient being would have the ability to go against instinct to the point of making decisions that would affect the rest of creation on a grand scale. A sentient being would be able to recognize death and destruction with its mind, and more than that, would be able to choose whether or not to reject death and destruction, or to embrace it. A sentient being would also have the ability to recognize others of its own kind and love them and be able to ponder his or her responsibility towards protecting them as well as his or her responsibility to the rest of the creation, the choice to treasure or to abuse. It would seem then that these first sentient beings right on down the present state of sentient beings in us as humans chose to try both paths. From that point on down to the present time, they have always wanted both the good and the bad. They have wanted everything. They wanted power over good and evil, and the power to decide what was good and what was evil. In other words, these first sentient beings, whose sentience has continued on in Homo sapiens for the past 200,000 years, have wanted to play the part of God. We have wanted to be masters over good and evil. People over the millennia have chosen to both treasure and to abuse each other as well as the rest of creation. As a result, the entire creation has become what we might refer to as “fallen,” to the point that even other animals fear humans and have the ability to be influenced by humans for better or for worse. It would seem that animals in today’s world have developed in such a way as to become permanently subject to humankind in many different ways. The mental abilities of many animals can even mimic those of the humans who interact with them. Animals in turn can experience shame or happiness or fear or hatred at the sight of a human, depending upon their interaction with humans.

What does this have to do with the presence of physical death in the creation? It would seem that God allows physical death in the creation in order to destroy that which is not good. It would seem that God recognized that when he created sentient beings that they would have the ability to choose between good and evil, and that they would choose both good and evil. This attempt to replace God by being masters over both good and evil is what led to what we would call spiritual death among people, in which the human soul is cut off from the life-giving Spirit of God, from which it came. Because people would experience spiritual death would seem to be the reason why physical death was also allowed to continue. God will not allow spiritual death to reign over people forever. This is why people experience physical death – so that their spiritual death will not remain in the creation. What about those who desired good more than the bad? We believe that God is gracious and that he does not want any person to be destroyed. What he wants to destroy is sin, and the reason for that is because sin destroys us, we who are his good creation. Sin must be destroyed in us before it is allowed to destroy us itself. Because of our desire to be master over both good and evil, we have become a self-destructive creation. Paul in the book of Romans writes that all of creation has been subjected to frustration because of us. Our sin has changed the course of natural history. Paul also writes that it is through Christ, who was God in the flesh, fully God and fully human, who committed no sin, that the creation may be restored. It is through Christ that we have the ability to become “children of God.” It is through Christ that our bondage and tendency towards sin is broken, and it is through his death and resurrection that we are set free from sin and death. We are not only set free from spiritual death and separation from God, which is what we call “hell,” but we are also set free from physical death. Christ physically rose from dead, and because of this we will also be physically raised from the dead. When Christ ascended into heaven forty days after his bodily resurrection, he was entering into God’s space. God’s space is separated from this space that we occupy on earth, but it is not far away. Through Christ, we have access to God’s space. Eventually, God’s space will be united with our space, and when this happened we will see that everything that was truly good about this world will never be destroyed. God’s good creation is eternal, both the physical and the spiritual creation. The reason physical death exists now is to provide for the ability to rid the created world of sin and everything that causes despair and separation from God. The final goal is essentially to remove hell from the creation and into its own space separate from God forever. All that was truly evil in creation, all that continually chose to reject God in the creation, and chose to reform itself into the image of hell (or the image of the absence of God) will be separated from everything that is good in creation. All that has become hell will be removed, and since it is the Spirit of God that sustains life, one could argue that in the absence of God’s Spirit, there would be no life, and in hell, all of creation that refused to submit to God’s redemption would cease to exist.

In the absence of sin and the desire to sin, we would then see a new creation, one where nothing good from the old creation was destroyed, where we would be reunited with loved ones who had previously died, and a place where death itself would be destroyed and there would no longer be any spiritual death for God would always be there, and there would no longer be any need for people to experience physical death, because sin would always be absent.


____________________________________________________________

Sources:

C.S. Lewis. The Problem of Pain. HarperCollins Pub., 1940.

NOVA. Becoming Human: Unearthing Our Earliest Ancestors. WGBH Boston, 2009.

St. Augustine. City of God, Book XIV.

The Millennium

I am unsure of which millennial view best suits my tastes, but perhaps that is the wrong perspective to have. I do not have to find something palatable in order believe in its reality. I believe that the farthest view from my own and to which I disassociate myself the most is that of Dispensational Premillennialism. I tend to isolate myself from such ideas and timetables as are portrayed in such books as the Left Behind series. I do not think that these books and the interpretation of scripture behind them are faithful to the text and to the Christian tradition. I also believe that they venture outside the limits of reason. I understand that God can work outside of our understanding, but he has already revealed certain things about the end and I feel as though much of Dispensational Premillennialism goes outside of what God has already revealed to us, to provide us with an eschatology that is outside the bounds of orthodoxy as well as plausibility from a logical standpoint.

I do not particularly care for the position of Amillennialism either. I can see the appeal to this idea, given that Christ has not returned in the last two thousand years. It would seem as though the early church misunderstood him when he spoke of his return as well as misunderstanding the idea of his future reign over all the earth. Perhaps it would be best to view his words as having spiritual significance. Christ’s reign over the world would be through the growth of the church, which would make the world into a better place over time. I can see how one might find this view appealing, but I believe that it has serious flaws. Christ indeed reigns over the world through the church in a spiritual sense, but I believe that the future reign of Christ is not limited to this idea. The whole created order will one day be restored, and this cannot be done by only a spiritual sense of Christ’s reign. One with this view may believe that death is a part of the natural order, and while death may be natural to life presently that does not mean that death belongs in the creation. Spiritual death is obviously bad, but I would argue that physical death is also bad, at least in its present form. Someone who has an Amillennial understanding may believe that medicine and technology will eventually find a way to eliminate death for humans, but I do not believe this to be true. I believe that there needs to be divine intervention, one that is seen in both a spiritual and physical “millennium.”

Postmillennialism is more optimistic than Amillennialism. Amillennialism does not believe in Christ’s return, but only, it would seem, in the spiritual reign of Christ in such a sense as it exists now. Postmillennialism shares some of the ideas of Amillennialism in that it places much emphasis upon the work of the church in the world. However, Postmillennialism believes that the work of the church will usher in the new millennial age in which Christ will return. We are to prepare the world for the return of Christ, making his house ready for him before he gets back. I find myself indentifying with this sort of view in the sense that I believe that we should do our part in getting the world in order in preparation for Christ’s return. However, I do not believe that the church on its own, even with the spirit of Christ living inside of us can do away with every last evil before Christ comes back. This is where I see Postmillennialism to be somewhat naïve. I do seem to identify with this model more than most other models, though. The early Nazarenes also held this model up as their standard. I think that it would do the church good to believe in much that this model has to offer. I think it would do the world much good as well. I believe that we need to recapture that spirit of the early holiness movement and understand that we as the church are bringing the kingdom of God into the world through Christ. Christ told his disciples that they would do even greater things than what he had done during his earthly ministry. I believe that what Jesus said was true for his first disciples and I believe that it remains true for the church today – we who are the product of those first disciples.

The problem that I have with Postmillennialism is that I do not think that we will ever be able to perfect the world to what it ought to be as much as we try. I believe that the church will grow to become like nothing the world has ever seen, and I believe that we will prepare the way for the second advent of the Lord, but I also believe that as good increases, wickedness and evil will also increase. The evil presence that is in this world will use the good for its own purposes. It will use the strength of the good to make itself stronger. I also believe that the good is greater than the evil, and that through the return of Christ and the establishment of the “millennium” evil will begin to be thoroughly eradicated from the creation. I believe that just as the church and all that is good will continue to grow beyond what we can possibly imagine, evil will also grow in this world to something beyond what we can possibly imagine. However, the good will never be extinguished by the evil. Christ lives in the church. He died once and it is impossible for him to die again. We are in a war with the darkness, and the second advent of Christ is one of the decisive and ultimate stages of that war, just as his first advent was.

I do not know what the millennium, or the millennial age will look like, but I know that it will be good. We are given glimpses of this in both the Old and the New Testaments. This age is spoken of by the prophets. Isaiah says that the Lord will reign in Zion, and that he will establish his rule on the earth. He says that God’s people will live on his holy mountain, and that the creation will no longer be harmful and destructive. The animals will not kill each other and the people will not live in misery. They will have children who have a hopeful future. Apparently, death will still exist in Isaiah’s vision, but people will also live very long lives. He says that if someone failed to reach a hundred years of age, then they must have been cursed. I would seem that in this picture of the new age that Isaiah sees, people will still marry and reproduce and die of old age. I am unsure of what to make of all of these things. The New Testament writers do not speak in detail about these things, but they do seem to indicate that Christ’s “millennial” reign over the earth will only be a temporary thing – as long as it may be – before the final reign and the marriage of the Lamb. The Revelation seems to indicate that only after the millennial reign of Christ, in which Eden is in a sense restored, will evil be finally and completely done away with. At this point, death itself will die; just as Paul writes that the last enemy to be destroyed is death, so John writes that after the millennium Satan, Hades, and death itself will be thrown into the Lake of Fire, being destroyed forever. I do not fully understand what this all means and what it will look like and how exactly it will take place, but it sounds pretty good to me.

Surprised By Hope

Surprised by Hope by N. T. Wright was an intriguing read. I appreciated his articulation of many things I have wondered about in regard to the faith and to eschatology. I tend to agree for the most part with his understanding of the Kingdom of God and how God’s kingdom is present now in this present reality as well as present in the future reality. I agree with his understanding of Christianity, especially in contrast with the popular notions of Christian theology portrayed in much of the United States and the western world. I believe, like Wright, that most people do not understand much of anything about the Christian hope, mistaking it for a detached sort of hope in going to heaven when we die without much thought into the here and now ramifications of salvation and the hope it brings for the present and well as the future and how both of those realities overlap and interact with each other.

In the first chapter of his book he speaks of the distorted views of death that people tend to have. He speaks of the tragedies of the Oklahoma City bombing, the death of Princess Diana, 9-11, Hurricane Katrina, and the earthquakes in Pakistan, among other things. He says that these events are indications that all is not right in the world. They point to the evilness of death and its presence in the world in these various forms, through mass murder, destruction, disaster, and tragedy. In the context of these horrific events, Wright asks the question, “What is the ultimate Christian hope?” How does one respond to death if they live out the Christian hope, and how does one respond if they do not have or understand the Christian hope, and above all, what is the Christian hope? He seems to believe that the Christian hope firmly stands in its belief that God is going to make a new heavens and a new earth and that the old order of things will be done away with, so that there will no longer be tragedy, sin, and death. Everything will be redeemed, and God has already set out in bringing the whole of creation, including people, into full redemption.

He says that people are generally confused about death. This is evident in the way people, even Christians, respond to death. Christians tend to believe that Christianity is mostly about belief in life after death, but there is much more to Christianity than this notion. This idea is distinguishing enough from many other religious traditions. People, including many Christians, do not have a proper understanding nor a proper hope in the resurrection of the dead and what the life everlasting truly indicates. Many believe that people live on in heaven and that this is the goal of all believers. Others believe that the memory of someone who has died lives on through other people, or even through the breakdown of the body to become life-giving properties for other plants and animals. Other people believe that the soul exists in a way in which it is absorbed by the rest of creation and that ultimately we will all be reunited in the sense that we will all be absorbed into one giant cosmic thing, whatever that means. Others believe that there is not life after death, and that death marks the end of human existence. Most people seem to have no hope in what orthodox Christianity teaches about the resurrection of the body, either denying the full extent of the reality that their loved one has truly been separated from them in death, or else believing that death is some sort of good thing that will take us to heaven where we will finally be done with the shackles of physical being.

In the second chapter of his book, Wright more fully investigates the distorted images that people have about the Christian hope. He says that Platonism has distorted it by saying that the soul, and not the body, is eternal and is therefore all that really matters, leading Christians to partake in an escapist belief. People also believe that heaven is only some sort of other-worldly kind of spiritual place where people sit on clouds and play harps. People also believe that heaven does not really exist as a physical place. Heaven is within us, and as long as we remember those we love they will live on in heaven and in our memories. Heaven is more of a fairy tale than anything else, like a blissful dream of some kind. People have also come to believe less in the reality of hell. Also, a rise in the belief of some kind of purgatorial existence after death has taken shape. Some people believe that heaven has nothing to do with this life and do not live in the hope of the resurrection, believing that while on this earth they are stuck in sin and cannot do anything about it, so they believe that in purgatory they will finally be made free from sin so they can go be with God or whatever happens after death. People have lost the hope of the resurrection and the redemption of creation in the present sense as well as the future sense. Both are real, but not recognized. God’s redemption will make everything new, and is already at work this present life. People mostly seem to think that the goal is to get to heaven some day after death. All eschatological thought then functions under the notion that God is going to destroy the world and take us to heaven so that we can get out of this mess. Christ’s return is not seen as the complete restoration of the created order in which we now play a part, but is rather the point at which Christ takes us “home to heaven” so he can damn the rest of his creation. In summary, Wright says people are generally confused, not understanding at all the implications of Christ’s incarnation, much less his resurrection and what that means for us.

Chapter three describes the “early Christian hope in its historical setting.” Wright discusses the views of the resurrection and of life after death in the ancient world among the Jews and the pagans. The pagans believed that death was all-powerful and that everyone would have to die. People either wanted to have a new body in the future but believed they could not really have one or they believed that existence away from the body was far better and hoped that they would live on in a soul-existence after death. The Jews, however, at the time Christianity began believed in a resurrection of the body. This is something quite different from any of the pagan beliefs. This is the context in which the Gospels claim that Jesus had risen form the dead, in the context of bodily resurrection. The early Christians recognized Jesus’ resurrection as being something new and unseen before. They had not expected it, though they had looked for a general resurrection of the dead at a future date, the “last day.”

Resurrection was also linked at this point to the vision of the Messiah as reflected in much of the apocalyptic apocryphal literature between the time of the exile and the time of Jesus. When Jesus was killed, all hope in him ushering in the final age where the dead would be raised was lost. The Messiah could not be killed if he was truly the one to bring in the age of life, even though Jesus had said that he would be killed. However, Jesus’ resurrection brought to light a whole new way of viewing the resurrection of the dead and created the entire framework and basis of Christianity which emerged at this time. Christianity is focused on the resurrection. Early Christianity was based on Judaism and did not focus too much on life after death, but the resurrection reshaped Christianity to be focused almost entirely on the resurrection. Resurrection before this was “important, but not that important.” Christianity ended up separating from Second Temple Judaism because of its focus on the resurrection. Judaism had always been somewhat vague as to what the resurrected form would be like, but Christianity claimed that the resurrected body would be a remade body, a transformed body. Christians also split the resurrection into two in contrast to Judaism. The first resurrection being seen in Christ through whom we may also be resurrected to life, but also a second resurrection in which all of the dead would be raised in physical bodies once again. The Christians also believed that God had called them to work with him towards this later resurrection in restoring the world in preparation for God’s ultimate redemption of all creation. This power was given to Christians through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. God now lived in us. Also, within Judaism resurrection passages were often rightly interpreted as being metaphorical in nature and were not actually speaking of a bodily resurrection, but more so of God’s restoration of Israel from captivity. Many passages could easily be interpreted that way, though not all. Christianity, though, spoke mostly of resurrection in the literal sense, both of a literal raising of Christ and of a literal raising of humanity from the grave. The view of the Messiah also changed with the birth of Christianity. Judaism had seen the Messiah as the powerful victor over Israel’s enemies who would establish his kingdom. They did not think he would be killed by Israel’s enemies. This was a stumbling block for the Jews, but was the foundation of the hope of Christianity and why the resurrection of Christ was so important to them.

Wright then goes on to point out the many flaws in the arguments people have come up with to refute the historicity of the resurrection of Christ. Some say that the early disciples were not willing to give up their view of Jesus as Messiah even after he was killed, but that is not what the text indicates. The texts portray them as feeling a sense of disillusionment with their former beliefs of Jesus as Messiah. They had given up on him when he died. They were hurt and confused by this, but they did not cling to a belief that he was still the Messiah until after he had risen. Some have also argued that Christ’s resurrection is a misunderstanding of what the disciples were describing. They were actually saying that Jesus had been exalted and taken up to heaven when he died. However, this is not consistent with their Judaism, which said that the dead, including martyrs, would be raised and glorified at a later time, not presently. Some also say that the disciples could have felt a sense of Jesus’ presence still with them after he died and so claimed that he was still alive or living again. However, the disciples did not claim this. They claimed that Jesus had been resurrected from the grave in bodily form and that he had appeared to them. If they had been filled with joy and their hearts had been strangely warmed by a feeling of Christ’s presence among them, then they would not have reacted by saying that Jesus had emerged from his grave. They would have sung a psalm or something along those lines and would not have made such wild and disrespectful claims about the body of the deceased. Also, some say that the disciples had visions or dreams that Jesus appeared to them, which happens to people who have experienced the loss of someone close. However, this assumes that the disciples were unaware that people had dreams and visions and interpreted these dreams as actual events. Dreaming, as most people do, about their recently deceased friend, would not lead them to claim that he had been risen form the dead, much less that he was the Messiah.

The fourth chapter continues Wright’s points on the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus. He uses the actual stories from the Gospels now to show that they do not appear to be late inventions, but perhaps the earliest written forms of the Christian tradition. He says that while other parts of the Gospels rely heavily upon the Hebrew Scriptures to support what they say about Jesus, the resurrection stories do not. Also, the four Gospels all describe the resurrection in quite different ways and are at the same time theologically consistent. Also, it is women who are portrayed as the principle witnesses of the resurrection. It seems unlikely that the disciples would have said that the women were the primary witnesses to the event if they had fabricated the story themselves. Also, if the disciples were trying to prove that Jesus had been resurrected in bodily form, it would not make sense for them to describe Jesus in ways that make him seem like a ghost at times, such as when he walks through walls, while at other times, he is acting like a physical person, as when he is eating fish. Also, in the Gospels Jesus’ resurrection is never linked to the future resurrection as it is in the rest of the New Testament, indicating that these stories are likely from the earliest of Christian traditions.

Other arguments that Wright gives to support the historicity of the resurrection are that Jesus’ tomb was never made into a martyr’s shrine, as was often the case with martyrs; also, the early church suddenly began to meet on the first day of the week instead of on the Sabbath; and the disciples were willing to die, and did die, for their claims about Christ’s resurrection, which seems unlikely if they had made it up. Wright claims that people today have been influenced by enlightenment thinking which claims that miracles do not happen, so they tend to view the resurrection as implausible. However, the people of today have also rejected much of this thought in order to investigate a lot of eastern forms of spirituality and mysticism. Ironically, they will put up with that sort of thing, but revert back to an Enlightenment view whenever it comes to something related to Christ’s resurrection or miracles related to Christianity. He goes on to say that the belief in Christ is not one that rejects history and science, nor is it one that is in its own sphere and apart from them, but it is faith claiming events “within history, demanding evidence that demands an explanation from the scientist.”

In Chapter five, Wright discusses the cosmic future and the different views people have on this. He says that many are focused on the individual and what God has in store for the individual in the cosmic future, but he says that he prefers to think of creation as a whole first before narrowing down redemption and resurrection to the individual. His point is that there is much more to resurrection than just in a personal sense. The whole of creation will be restored, and the individual is a part of that creation who will take part along with others in the redemptive process, both in restoring and being restored. Wright says that there are generally two misunderstandings about the Cosmic Future, “evolutionary optimism” and “souls in transit.” They are both often mistaken for Christianity. The first lends itself to the myth of optimism and believes that all of creation is working towards bettering itself and is slowly moving towards a perfect state. The second idea believes that we are only here temporarily, and that eventually we will be removed from the limitations of our bodily existence and live on in freedom as eternal souls. The first view is too optimistic in the natural order of the world, and the second is too pessimistic. The first one fails to understand the need of Christ’s redemption for the created order or recognize that “moral progress” has failed to bring us to “utopia.” Christ does not continue the betterment of the world, he recreates it. The second idea sees this world as beyond redemption, which is also foreign to Christianity. This world is not to be done away with, but rescued from its bondage to decay.

In chapter six Wright says that the early Christians did not believe that the world was getting better over time, nor did they believe that the world was getting worse over time. “They believed that God was going to do for the whole cosmos what he had done for Jesus at Easter.” The early Christians recognized the goodness of creation, the nature of evil, and the plan of redemption. Wright says that there are six themes in the New Testament writings that are laid out in relationship to this. The first is “seedtime and harvest,” which is based on the resurrection of Jesus being the “first fruits” of the resurrection of all people. Because of Christ’s resurrection, we also may be resurrected. The second is “the victorious battle,” in which the entire cosmos must submit to Christ, even death itself, so that Christ may make everything new. The third is “citizens of heaven, colonizing the earth,” which meant that we would not depart into heaven, but that Christ will come from heaven to earth to transform everything and we will serve under him. The fourth is “God will be all in all,” which means that “God intends to fill all creation with his own presence and love.” The fifth is “new birth,” which speaks to how the whole creation is waiting to be freed from bondage and that when the children of God are revealed or resurrected the whole earth and the created order itself will be resurrected or renewed as well. The sixth is “the marriage of heaven and earth,” which describes the New Jerusalem coming down out of heaven as a bride adorned for her husband. This is the opposite of what a lot of Christians think, where they are brought up to heaven to meet God there. Heaven and earth are not opposed to one another, and they are not two different ideas conveying the same message. They are like male and female, who are made to be joined together.

Wright begins the seventh chapter by talking about the ascension. He makes the point that the resurrection and the ascension should not be viewed as the same thing. When we speak of the ascension, we do not speak of Christ dying and then being raised from the dead by being taken up into heaven, nor we do we speak of Christ dying and going to heaven as though that were his resurrection. Both say the same thing and both are wrong. Wright says that the ascension is also not just a strange idea that was added later, and he says that ascension is a vital feature of Christian belief and that without it things begin to go wrong. Some have insisted upon pure literalism to say that Jesus vertically took-off into the clouds. However, this creates some issues because it suggests that heaven is literally somewhere in the clouds within the earth’s atmosphere. Also, it indicates that heaven lies directly above the exact spot where Jesus took-off, but since the earth is round he would be perceived by people on the other side of the world as descending upside down, and the positioning of heaven in this way limits its relation to the earth by the spherical qualities of a globe, where one cannot tell the difference between up and down. Some have also interpreted the ascension where he disappears into the clouds to mean that when he died he disappeared, but that his spiritual presence lives on in us. Wright says that literalism and skepticism both lead us astray here, and that theologians who take the ascension seriously have viewed heaven and earth not as being two different locations within the time-space continuum, but “two different dimensions of God’s good creation.” He also says that the one who is in heaven may at the same time be anywhere and everywhere on earth, so that Jesus is accessible to everyone in every location on earth. He further says that Jesus did not stop being human after his death. He remained human and exists as a human right now in heaven, where he reigns in both heaven and earth in the present as well as in the future. The church is evidence of his reign on the earth, but the church should not be confused with Christ himself. This has happened in history with “triumphalism” and has always led to disasters of one kind or another. Also, it is by the Holy Spirit and the sacraments that Jesus is present with us now. Wright goes on to say:

“when the Bible speaks of heaven and earth it is not talking about two localities related to each other within the same time-space continuum or about a nonphysical world contrasted with a physical one but about two different kinds of what we call space, two different kinds of what we call matter, and also quite possibly (though this does not necessarily follow from the other two) two different kinds of what we call time. We post-Enlightenment Westerners are such wretched flatlanders. Although New Age thinkers, and indeed quite a lot of contemporary novelists, are quite capable of taking us into other parallel worlds, spaces, and times, we retreat into our rationalistic closed-system universe as soon as we think about Jesus” (115).

Wright also says that the Eastern Orthodox church views heaven as the inner sanctuary and the earth as the outer portions of the temple. The ascension leads us to believe that “God’s space and ours…are, though very different, not far away from one another” (116). He says that God’s space and ours interlock in many different ways, but that they are also separate right now for a time. One day, though, when Christ returns, the two will be joined together as in marriage.

After this, Wright speaks in more detail of the second coming of Christ. He says that most mainstream Christians confess to believe this but they do not have a clue as to what it means. In his discussion on the second coming Wright says that this has to do with the outcome and such of the individual person in the context of the renewal of the entire cosmos. When God renews the cosmos, he says, Jesus will be at the very center of this. He notes that the second coming has become a hot topic among a number of different evangelical groups, mainly fundamentalist ones. These groups tend to believe that we are now living in what they call the “end times.” They believe that Jesus will come back in the midst of certain geo-political events and will take all the Christians away, leaving the world to fend for itself for a little while. Wright believes that this obsession with an inappropriate interpretation of the second coming of Jesus is a problem. He says that this type of interpretation leads one to believe that Christ’s return must only be able to happen under certain conditions and that it also leads one to think that there is no point in making any effort to better the environment in which we now live because it is only going to get destroyed anyway. On the other side of the spectrum are the post-Enlightenment liberals who find it embarrassing that anyone would believe in a literal second coming of Christ and especially a day of judgment. The second coming sounds too much like an outdated supernaturalism and the judgment makes God sound too wrathful for their taste. He also points out that ironically many people these days have become increasingly interested in mysticism and the supernatural, but that people tend to avoid those things if they have anything to do with Christianity.

With chapter eight, Wright says that Christ will indeed return. However, he points out that his return seems to indicate that he is absent at the present. Wright says that Christ is not absent even though he has not yet returned, and points back to his previous explanations of the ascension. He says that people often misinterpret what the Bible means when it says that Christ will come on the clouds. The Son of Man passages, which hearken back to Daniel, are not speaking of Christ descending from heaven to earth, but of his ascent into heaven or entering into God’s space. Christ’s words were justified by his ascension. This was the sign showing that what he had predicted would happen in the future to Jerusalem would indeed happen. By his ascension, his words were vindicated. Many Christians think that in the future Christ will come down from heaven and we will rise up from the earth and meet him at the halfway point. Wright also says that Jesus did not really teach about his second coming, but that this does not mean that it is not true or that it will not happen. The rest of the New Testament does teach about the second coming of Christ. I am not sure I agree with Wright on this point. I feel as though Christ does address his return at places, such as with the verse, “But when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on the earth?” among some others. I do agree, though, that Paul’s letters are much clearer than the Gospels in the issue of Christ’s second coming. Wright talks about the concept of parousia in the New Testament and how this reflected the idea of Christ still being present in spirit but not in body at the current time. It refers to a sort of interim period between when Christ was present in the body in the past and when Christ will be present in the body in the future. Further, Paul wished to show that Christ was the true king both now and in the future, as opposed to Caesar who was a sham. Wright says that the passage which talks about Christ’s descent and our ascent to meet him in the air are three different word-pictures from the Old Testament all wrapped up into one in order to convey his eschatological theme. Wright also takes a jab at rapture theology here, saying that it is Gnostic in its origins. Wright ends this chapter by stating that Christ’s ascending as well as his appearing were both fundamental elements of Christian belief right from the get-go.

In chapter nine, Wright says that at his appearing Christ will play the special role of judge. If God is a good God then he must be a God of judgment when faced with a “world full of exploitation and wickedness.” The nineteenth century embraced a sort of optimism about the human condition believing mankind to be progressing into a glorious state, but the twentieth century was a great hindrance to that optimism with all of its war and destruction. Some people say that who we are on the inside is all that that matters and that we do not need to be held accountable for what is on the outside, but this is contrary to New Testament belief which indicates that we will be judged for everything about us, both the outside and the inside, and that Jesus will be the judge of both our thoughts and our actions. With Christ’s coming everything will be judged. This means that when he comes everything must be transformed. Death and decay will be overcome and God will be “all in all” as the entire cosmos undergoes a transformation. With this realization, the church should not think that it can bring about this change all on its own and it should not think that it cannot do anything at all until Christ comes back and makes everything right again. The church has an active role in the parousia, one that is not absent from Christ.

In chapter ten, Wright focuses on the redemption of our bodies. He says that Paul writes that we are promised a new bodily existence. This is the “fulfillment and redemption of our present bodily life.” Wright says that the resurrection of the body was an integral part of Christian belief from the start but that overtime it became unpopular among many segments of the church because of different ideas to which they had held that did not seem to agree with the idea of a bodily resurrection. Much of the church came to believe that upon death, one either went immediately to heaven or to hell in a “one-stage postmortem journey” that sometimes included an intermediate purgatory and sometimes did not. Wright believes that this idea of heaven and hell has helped to lead to an escapist theology among Christians who see the goal of this life to be to go to heaven when they die. Wright refers to something he calls “life after life after death,” saying that we do not simply go to heaven or hell when we die and that is all that happens. There is a restoration of the created order that takes place. Yes, we live on after we die, but our bodily existence upon the recreated or renewed earth will come at a later time after we have died. This is what the resurrection is. It is about heaven coming to earth and creation, including us, being restored even after we have died and gone to be with the Lord. The resurrection is not just a spiritual resurrection when we go to heaven. The Gospels and the rest of the New Testament make this clear. Another thing to point out is that when the Bible uses the word heaven it is often referring to God in reverent language. So the idea of going to heaven is really the idea of going to be in God’s presence, which does not start when we die, but here and now. Wright refers back to C.S. Lewis’s The Great Divorce when trying to describe what the future body will be like, saying that it will be fuller, more real, more complete, than what we have now. We will not be ghosts at the resurrection, but we will be less ghostlike than we are now. However, Wright is hesitant to go as far as Lewis went in his interpretation. Lewis tended to think that the present reality was only a shadow or copy of what was to come, which is a bit too Platonic for Wright, who believes that the present reality will be redeemed.

Chapter eleven is on purgatory, paradise, and hell. He says that “purgatory is basically a Roman catholic doctrine.” The Eastern Orthodox church and most Protestant churches have rejected it. Purgatory seems to allow for more people to be able to enter into heaven than would have entered without it. However, this is not exactly how purgatory was supposed to function. It is not a universalistic kind of idea. Only Christians – no non-believers – went to purgatory. It was for those who had not become holy enough to enter the presence of God and needed further refinement after death even after experiencing salvation in this life. Some people believe that purgatory allows for us to do whatever we please in this life because we will have another go at it later, but this is not how this doctrine was supposed to function. The idea some have is that whatever journey we were on in this life when we died will continue on after we die. Wright does not agree with this universalistic sort of interpretation. Wright says that the reason ideas such as purgatory worked was that they were allegorical of the present life. In this life we are refined and purified, and this often through suffering. It is “a projection from the present onto the future.”

Wright concludes that all of the “Christian departed” are at rest in the presence of God. This is what we may refer to as paradise. It is not, however, to be confused with the later resurrection of the body. In speaking of paradise, people often refer to the thief on the cross to whom Jesus said, “Today you shall be with me in paradise.” People often interpret this to mean that when the thief died he was with Jesus in paradise, or in heaven. However, this also seems to contradict the traditional church belief that Christ descended into hades when he died and then ascended from the grave on the third day. The question then is why would Jesus say that he would be in paradise? Wright says that the answer lies in the context of the statement of the thief. The thief asks Jesus to remember him when he comes into his kingdom, thinking that the kingdom is only a future reality, but Jesus corrects him and reassures him by telling him that the kingdom is not just in the future, but it is present. This is why he says “today you will be with me in paradise.” He is indicating the present reality of the “not yet” which is made present through himself. In speaking of hell, Wright points out that several times when Jesus refers to hell, he uses the word “Gehenna,” which was the trash dump, where waste was burned outside of the city. He is using a picture that the people are familiar with in order to speak of a greater truth. There are a number of people who have become bothered by the images of hell they have been given so they prefer to become Universalists, wondering how a loving God could send someone to a place of eternal fire and torment. The picture that Jesus uses is one to say that “unless you repent in this life you are going to burn in the next.” However, the focus is on repentance in this life, and not on a future hell. This idea of reaching a place that is beyond all pity and all hope in the next life is firmly connected to this life and whether one repents or not. Wright again falls upon Lewis’s The Great Divorce, saying that in the end those who are beyond all hope are the ones to whom God says “Thy will be done.” Wright concludes that damnation and hell are things that reflect who we have chosen to be. He wonders if in being damned we have reached the point of becoming sub-human or ex-human. He says that those things that we allow to define us in this life are things that will define us in the next. If we allow ourselves to be controlled by bitterness, sensuality, or power then we will become these very attributes and eventually cease to be in the image of God entirely and we will no longer be truly human at least in the sense that we were intended to be. This is damnation.

In chapter twelve, Wright begins his discussion of the role of the church in the kingdom of God. He shows that the point of Jesus’ resurrection was that we may also be resurrected and that the entire cosmos may be resurrected or restored. The church plays an active role in the redemption that God will bring and even now is already bringing into the created order. Paul says that if Christ’s resurrection does not bring about our own resurrection then “we are to be pitied above all men,” for “if there is no resurrection of the dead then not even Christ was raised,” and if Christ was not raised then the Christian faith is pointless. Also, in speaking of the kingdom of God, Wright says that whatever you do now carries on into the future – into God’s future. This is how the church participates in God’s redemption.

Wright then discusses the meaning of salvation. Salvation means to be rescued from something, and in Christian belief this something is death. Yet, people still die. If being rescued from death means that we will live on as souls after our bodies have decayed this does not mean that we have been rescued from death. It simply means that we have died. If we are to be truly rescued from death then our bodies which have died must be rescued. This is what salvation is – the rescue of both body and soul. In the Gospels Jesus’ healing miracles are associated with salvation, indicating that salvation also has to do with the healing of the body at some point. At this point, Wright summarizes everything he has covered thus far by saying: “the work of salvation, in its full sense, is (1) about whole human beings, not merely souls; (2) about the present, not simply the future; and (3) about what God does through us, not merely what God does in and for us” (200). Wright reiterates at the end of this chapter the idea that kingdom of God is breaking into the present, on earth as it is in heaven.

Chapter thirteen continues the idea of “building for the kingdom.” Wright points out first of all that it is God who builds the kingdom, but that God works with his creation in such a way that he uses us as instruments in his work. Secondly, “we need to distinguish between the final kingdom and the present anticipations of it” (208). The kingdom has been inaugurated and we are participating in the coming kingdom, but ultimately only God can bring about the final restoration, the creation of the new heavens and the new earth. “The work we do in the present, then, gains its full significance from the eventual design in which it is meant to belong” (211). Wright also speaks of the topic of justice, saying that he does not mean to over-emphasize social justice, but that our sense of justice or our understanding of justice ought to be the result of our recognition of our living in between the time of Christ’s death and resurrection and the time of his appearing. Wright also seeks to point out that we must also avoid dualism which leaves us with no concern for social justice at all. Wright also mentions that in Jesus’ time, resurrection was a bit of a radical idea. It seemed to be rather a late-comer on the scene in the history of the Old Testament. The resurrection doctrine was revolutionary and “spoke of God’s determination to bring about the new Exodus” (214). After speaking for a while on the dangers of a poor eschatology and how that can lead to a flawed sense of justice, such as was seen in Nazism, he talks about beauty. His view is that beauty is almost just as important as spirituality and justice. God’s intent is to restore the beauty of his creation. He also talks about evangelism and says that if we are helping to bring about the work of new creation then we seek to “bring advance signs of God’s eventual new world into being in the present” (225). This can be seen in evangelism. Evangelism can be a difficult word for some people because it produces images of televangelists and political evangelicalism, but that is not really what evangelism looks like. Evangelism proclaims that “God is God, that Jesus is Lord, that the powers of evil, corruption, and death itself have been defeated, and that God’s new world has begun…” (227). A private relationship with Jesus is not the only thing that matters, which is how some have interpreted evangelism. This is not a private and merely personal thing.

In chapter fourteen, Wright provides justification from the biblical texts to support what he claims the mission of the church should be. He provides thorough examples from the Gospels, from Acts, and from Paul’s letters. In the Gospels the picture made is that Jesus is risen from the dead just as he said he would be. The idea of Jesus being raised and showing that there really is life after death is not indicated at all, but rather, according to Mark, Jesus has been raised, so his disciples should hurry up and go see him – he is waiting for them in Galilee. What Jesus was referring to when he said some would not taste death until they saw the kingdom coming in power was his resurrection. His resurrection “completes the inauguration of God’s kingdom” (234). The resurrection is not just a miracle intended to show just how powerful God is when he wants to be, nor is it telling us by visible means that there is a life waiting for us in heaven after we die. The resurrection is about God’s kingdom being established on earth as it is in heaven, and in this kingdom death is eventually abolished forever. According to Matthew, “resurrection doesn’t mean escaping from the world; it means mission to the world based on Jesus’s lordship over the world” (235). According to Luke, the resurrection provides a whole new way of telling the story of God and Israel and God and the world. On the road to Emmaus, the two men recognize how Jesus’ death was a horrible tragedy in the grand scheme of things. They had believed that he was the Messiah, and then it all blew up in their faces. Jesus then shows them a new way of looking at the Law and the Prophets, indicating that the truth about himself was already there, but had just not been recognized or understood yet. Yet through his death and resurrection the whole of Scripture and of history may be looked at in a new light, a brighter and clearer light. In John the disciples go fishing and catch nothing until Jesus helps them. After this, Jesus tells Peter to shepherd his sheep. The fishing may be understood as representing what they had been doing all along as Jews. The shepherding, however, shows a new way of work that relates to the newly inaugurated kingdom.

In Acts 1-12 Jesus is proclaimed by the disciples to be the risen Messiah, as they are mainly preaching to the Jews at this point. When Paul preaches to the Greeks, he also proclaims Jesus to be Messiah, saying that Jesus’ resurrection brings resurrection to all believers. He preaches this in the Areopagus and the people cannot believe that someone could be raised from the dead. In the very place where it was announced by Apollo through drama six hundred years prior that there was no hope at all for a resurrection of the dead, Paul proclaims the resurrection boldly. Paul goes on preaching this in his letters, saying that through Christ’s resurrection we will all be raised, and not only us, but the entire creation will be restored.

In chapter fifteen, Wright continues to talk about what the mission of the church should be, this time from a more future-oriented perspective. He begins by emphasizing the celebration of Easter, and that being not just once a year, but every first day of the week as the early church did. They met every Sunday of every week in addition to meeting with each other additionally throughout the week in order to celebrate the anniversary of our Lord’s resurrection, what we would call Easter. Easter is then not only an annual celebration, but a weekly, and even a daily one. The hope of Easter should live on in us throughout all the year. Wright says that we should be attempting to celebrate Easter in new creative ways as Easter is a sign of new creation: “in art, literature, children’s games, poetry, music, dance, festivals, bells, special concerts, anything that comes to mind” (256). I agree with him very much on this matter. I am a bit miffed at times by our people’s lack of genuine enthusiasm for Easter. Easter should not be viewed as the end of a forty day gloomy fast.

Wright also discusses what will happen to space, time, and matter as a result of the restoration of all things. In discussing space, he refers back to Celtic tradition which believed in “thin places” or places where the distance between heaven and earth was minimal. With the renewal of space, the distance between heaven and earth is done away with because heaven and earth have become one. He also says that time itself is focused upon Christ. Every time we date something, we still date it in regard to its placement in time in reference to the time of Christ. Every Sunday we go to church is also an indication of the renewal of time. Sunday is the eighth day of creation, where God begins to restore all things to himself. The renewal of matter can also be seen beginning to take place in the sacraments. Here we have the presence of God himself in created matter, just as Christ was made a sacrifice for us by becoming earthly matter in the hope that matter would be renewed, so that Eucharist works in similar way as the presence of God incarnate, God made into flesh to restore flesh. When we take the Eucharist we are identifying ourselves with Christ just as Christ identified himself with us. We remember his death and suffering and resurrection and we anticipate his appearing where he will restore all things so that God will at last be all in all. This is all practiced in our mission to the world, in love, prayer, scripture, and holiness. All of these things are signs of the renewal that Christ brings to us now and in the future. This is the hope of the world that we must bring unto the farthest reaches. Christ works through us to bring hope and healing to the world, and just as he has inaugurated this mission, so will he also bring this mission to completeness.