From: Timster132@aol.com
Date: Wed Aug 30 1995 - 19:46:40 EDT
In a message dated 95-08-30 Carl Conrad writes:
>My own reading of the gospel of John is that the Parousia of Jesus is
>presented as occurring fundamentally on the day of Easter,and that this is
>the dominant eschatology of John's gospel,but there are some passages in
>John that seem to point to a more distant futuristic consummation also.
...............<stuff deleted>..............
>The most meaningful summation on that matter that I've ever heard is that
the NT as a >whole is permeated with a conviction that in some way the New
Age has indeed >already begun, but that in many important ways it awaits a
future consummation yet.
I think that the early NT writers believed that the Escaton (Last Days) had
arrived with the coming of Jesus and his Resurrection. All they were waiting
now for was "the Day of the Lord", ie the Day of Judgment (2 Thes 2:2,3; 1
Cor 3:13). Jesus was the One who who be doing the judging (2 Thes 2:8.)
The epistle to the Hebrews differed somewhat from Paul, explaining that
judgment comes after we die, but still Christ will come "a second time"
(DEUTEROU) not to deal with sin, but to save those who are waiting for him
(Heb 9:27,28).
Here's how I think it developed at this point.
When Jerusalem fell there was fear of persecution, and probably some
sporadic persecution (Rev 1:9; 3:10; 21:2). There was a sense for Christians
that God's justice was sorely needed. The desire for the Day of Judgment to
come grew stronger and this is reflected in the mini-apocalypses of
synoptics. And Terry Bruce is right that the disciples (read: Gospel
writers' audience) anticipated that the Temple being destroyed would signal
the end. But I don't think they were confused about it; it confirmed their
belief that Jesus and his resurrection began the ESCATON.
I have to disagree with Jan Haugland that the little apocalypse contains
the historically accurate logia of Jesus. This particular passage borrows
heavily on language and vocab from Dan 7:13; 9:27; 11:31; 12:1-2; 12:12; Ex
9:18; Is 8:21; 13:13; 19:2; 2 Chron 15:6; Ez 7:12-16; 4 Esdras
13:30-32; 6:25; etc.
In John, there isn't any future eschatology as in the synoptics. In a way,
one could say that John has spiritualized (or maybe demythologized?) the
escatology tradition.
For instance, I think John doesn't separate Jesus' initial coming from a
latter one, since the Day of judgment arrives as he arrives (Jn 3:19). This
is also evident in John 5:21-29, where Jesus has authority to execute
judgment and Jesus says he will soon raise the dead for judgment too. Even
when John speaks about the Last Day (the day of Judgment), it is Jesus' words
in the present that will do the judging later (Jn 12:48)!
Also, John doesn't have "signs of the endtimes" like the synoptics, simply
because John has "signs" pointing to who Jesus is, the ultimate spiritual
being. Jesus is the Eschaton, the Telios, the ultimate. Even the gift of
the Holy Spirit to the disciples comes directly from the breath of Jesus in
John (Jn 20:22).
Luke, is probably the last of the gospels to be written. I agree with Carl
Conrad that Luke's "Time of the Gentiles" (Luk 21:24; cf Acts 28:28) is an
indication of Luke's tendency toward a "Lucan dispensationalism". It has
been argued that Luke begins his dispensations with a descent of the Spirit
(see Act 2:17,17; cf Luk 3:22 "bodily"; Act 2:2-3).
By the end of the first century, there is still a sense of "living in the
last days" in the later NT books. 1 John 2:18 admonishes "Children
(PAIDIA), this is the last hour!". Jude warns of the "great Day" of judgment
(v 6) and of Enoch's vision of the Lord coming to execute judgment (v14-15).
The "scoffers" or "mockers" or "tricksters" (EMPAIKTAI) in Jude appear in
the endtimes scoffing at self-discipline.
Later on (150 CE?), 2 Peter has the scoffers ridiculing the doctrine of
the second coming (2 Pt 3:3), an echo of Jeremiah 17:15 "POY ESTIN O LOGOS
KYRIOY? ELQETW." I think it is only at this point that the idea of an
immediate second coming shows strain in the NT.
>I think probably we ought to stick to the elucidation of particular texts
rather than >attempt to characterize the eschatology of the NT as a whole
I thought the discussion could be benefitted with a developmental
hypothesis on how the understanding of the second coming grew. But you may
be wise in suggesting that we return to discussing particular passages. Like
you, I couldn't help myself :)
Throwing in my hat,
Peace
Tim Staker, Pastor at Poseyville, IN
Timster132@aol.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:26 EDT