A Review: Post-Modern EschatologyPost-modern eschatology is failing miserably in the battle against secularism and its attack on eschatology. Carl Braaten and Robert W. Jenson, editors of the The Last Things, recognize the influence of secularism (a non-biblical view of the world) and its challenge to eschatology. One of the deepest aspirations of our humanity is our desire to transcend our humanity beyond this life. Ernst Troeltsch coined the slogan that “the next world is the power of life in this world.” God’s creation of Adam outside the garden of Eden, separate from the tree of life carries with it the implication that man was not intended to inhabit earth forever. The command not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, with its consequence, “dying you shall die,” (Genesis 2:16, 17), affirms that Adam, before he sinned, was mortal, i.e., a dying (biologically speaking) creature. Hence, he was not designed to live on earth forever. To hope beyond this life does not negate the power and blessings of our earthly existence. Paul, having a desire to depart from this life to be with Christ, which “is far better” nevertheless saw tremendous value in remaining in the flesh to serve his brethren (Philippians 1:23,24).
Post-modern eschatology suffers from an achilles heel, --the non-occurrence of an imminent end of the world.
All other reasons can be dismissed. If the early Christian expectation of a near catastrophic end of this world is disproved by the world’s continuing existence, then eschatological hope can and should be dismissed. What rational person can believe a Bible or a God that lies? That is the essence of the matter. First, we must ask whether the Bible in fact teaches (from a first century standpoint) the catastrophic end of “this” world. We suggest this is an incorrect view of the eschatological hope. It is the brain-child of post-modern eschatology which is post-apostolic. The material world/universe in which we live was never the subject or object of eschatology. It stems from a misreading of endtime texts and misapplications of the apocalyptic genre of eschatological passages.
Post-Modern Eschatology and the Biblical End of the WorldThe Old Testament provides abundant examples of “end-of-the-world” scenarios, none of which ever applied to the destruction of the universe. See Deuteronomy 32:22, Isaiah 13:10-12, Chapter 24, 34:4-8. Note the fulfillment of Haggai 2:6, 7 in Hebrews 12:26, 27 and Joel 2:30, 31 with Matthew 24:29, to speak of the demise of the Jewish economy. Failure to recognize the use of this language among the ancient Seers, Christ (Matthew 24:29, 35) and his apostles, (1 Corinthians 7:31, 10:11; Hebrews 1:10-12; 12:26, 27; 2 Peter 3:7, 10), is tragic to a would-be expositor of the endtime.Peter, checking the scoffers who arrive in the last days, gives us very easy clues which help to establish the imminence of the end of the Jewish age, not of the material universe. The scoffers come asking, “Where is the promise of his Parousia?” In other words, they appear in Peter’s generation asking “why is there a delay.” They are citing both the words of Christ and the apostles who taught and of the church who eagerly expected and awaited an imminent Parousia, (Matthew 24:3, 34; Luke 21:27-32; Romans13:11,12; Philippians 4:5; James 5:7, 8; 1 Peter 4:5, 7, 17; 1 John 2:18; Revelation 1:1-3; 22:6, 10, 12). Had Peter and his fellow apostles taught an extended, long-drawn out Parousia as claimed by post-modern eschatology, the scoffers would not have mocked against it. They would have applauded. Further, Peter would have no objections to what they were saying for both would be in agreement. Rather, it is because the apostles taught imminence, that the scoffers were opposed to their message. Being Jewish, they sought the continuance of their world order. See also Acts 6:14. Pannenburg, while recognizing the critical issue and attempting to address the problem of the secularization of eschatology, due to his lack of perception and appreciation for the imminent message of Christ and the apostles, unwittingly becomes a contributor to the dilemma. Post-Modern Eschatology and the Imminent KingdomOnce again, correct in his recognition that the kingdom of God is the perfect destiny of human persons, Pannenburg errs in seeing that kingdom as a future assembly of all nations on earth, atop Mt. Zion. (p. 5-6). The writer in Hebrews says Mt. Zion is the church of the first born, the heavenly Jerusalem. This is the holy city, the bride and the Lamb’s wife, i.e. the tabernacle of God which John saw coming down from God out of heaven, (Revelation 21:1-3). Remember, this was an imminent, “at hand” coming. His declaration was “Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men. Hence, the Hebrews’ writer encouraged his hearers to come to it.The kingdom, certainly not of this world, has certainly broken into it as a present reality. First century disciples were receiving it as a kingdom which could not be moved or shaken, (Hebrews 12:28) . Jesus assured us that when the apostles saw the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, that those were the days in which all things written were fulfilled. At that time, the apostles would see the kingdom of God come with power, Luke 21:31. All would happen before their generation passed, (v. 32). From this there is no escape if one would be faithful to the words of Scripture. Jesus’ message of the kingdom was simply stated in Matthew 16:28. Assuredly I say to you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom. The parallel texts of Mark 8:38 – 9:1, show this to be the time of judgment in Jesus’ very own generation. None of that generation are yet living today. Did Jesus’ words fail? To accept either secularization or post-modern eschatology’s response, the answer would be an unequivocal yes. The net result is a destruction of faith in the integrity of God and the Bible. On the other hand if it did, and we maintain it did in fact happen as Christ predicted, then secularization, i.e. dismissing eschatology based on failure, an inherent problem of post-modern eschatology is unwarrantable. For a free study 7 page report on Post-Modern Eschatology and the Kingdom of God enter your email address for our e-zine. The seven page report is free with your subscription. Post-Modern Eschatology and the Resurrection of the DeadAnother problem for those attempting to do battle with secularism’s attack on eschatology is the matter of the resurrection from the dead. It too is misplaced hope according to post-modern eschatology. Pannenburg sees the location of the general resurrection at the end of world history.Eschatology is not about the end of world history. It is the end of the ages before Christ’s Parousia which has nothing to do with the end of world history. In this, post-modern eschatology and secularism are twins. However, the kingdom of God is forever. In Luke, we are told that it has no end, Luke 1:33). Thus, it has neither last days, nor last day. More specifically, Daniel places the resurrection at the time of the end, not at the end of time. Those phrases are radically different. Jesus’ quoting from Daniel’s resurrection chapter (12:2-4) and applying this message in his explanation of the parable of the tares, says that the resurrection occurs at the end of the age, meaning that then present Jewish age, (Matthew 13:39, 40). Paul, affirmed that the end of the ages had come upon him and his readers, 1 Corinthians 10:11. Commenting on Daniel 12 above he wrote, “And that knowing the time, [hour] that it is high time to awake out of sleep, for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.” The night is far spent, the day is at hand, --literally “the day has drawn near.” (Romans 13:11, 12). Peter uses “hetoimos” (prepared or ready) to say that God was ready to judge the living and the dead, for the end of all things had drawn near, (1 Peter 5:5, 7). Paul argued using “mello” that there was about to be a resurrection of the dead. Christ, Paul and Peter followed the words of their predecessors, the prophets. They saw the resurrection as the regathering of Israel and Judah in the end of the age. Isaiah 25:8; 26:19; Hosea 13:14; 1 Corinthians 15:54-57. It marked the end of the law. It was the harvest at the end of the age. This brings us to Pannenburg’s recognition of the problem of post-modern eschatology and the firstfruits. He writes, “The fact that according to the Christian Easter message, Jesus’ resurrection occurred earlier, in the midst of a still incomplete history of humankind, does not contradict the localization of the general resurrection at the end of history, but presupposes it.” (The Last Things, Biblical & Theologial Perspectives on Eschatology, p. 11). We protest! Pannenburg recognizes that Jesus’ suffering and death at the Passover was typical of his being the firstfruits, (1 Corinthians 15:20, 23). Jesus died in the end of the Jewish age, (sun teleia ton aionion) to put away sin, (Hebrews 9:26). The general harvest would take place at the end of the age, again, (sun teleia ton aionion, Matthew 13:39, 40, 24:3, 28:19). As such, the harvest began in the first century. The harvest would occur within the end of the same age in which Jesus died! This is a huge problem with an eschatology that divides the eschaton by almost two centuries as does post-modern eschatology. To separate the firstfruits from the remaining harvest is to destroy the concept of the firstfruits. Further, more firstfruits, i.e. first century disciples were already being harvested, (James 1:18). No other generation of Christians could be termed firstfruits than those first century Christians. See Revelation 14:4. Finally, Pannenburg sees the endtime destiny of all natural conditions of human life inclusive of plants and animals in need of redemption at the end of an alleged Christian world. For proof, he cites Romans 8:19-22. Post-Modern Eschatology and the Creation of Romans 8There are serious exegetical problems inherent in taking the creation of Romans 8:19-22 as a reference to non-human existence whether plant or animal. For further exposition on that subject, see our free audio-visual study on the creation of Romans 8:19-22. The Creation Audio-Visual StudyIn summary, we have shown that the problem of secularization of eschatology stems from and is fueled by the post-modern eschatology hermeneutic. Assuming a future end of the world, is tantamount to assuming that the at hand, shortly to come to pass endtime did not occur in the days of the apostles in the first century. Such leaves the church open to ridicule, mockery, and a rejection of inspiration. While we applaud the efforts of Pannenburg, Carl Braaten and other writers of The Last Things to reemphasize the importance of eschatology, we do not approve of the failed doctrine of futurism. Only when the message of Christ and his apostles is understood and presented as an imminent, fulfilled message of events in the first century, will men begin to respect the words of scripture. The task will certainly demand the difficult work of proper exegesis, but we are confident it will yield the peaceful fruit of righteousness by those who are exercised thereby.
|
