Your Honesty is Refreshing!
Admitting that there is even a possibility that Christ and the disciples knew what they were talking about is a huge step for most contemporary Christians. For over two centuries, we have been bombarded with futuristic teaching. The advent of radio and television pushed futurism to a frenzy as the year 2000 approached. The message is always the same, "The End is Near!"
We are hearing it today as the war on terrorism continues. In every case, the modern prophets of doom have been wrong, and each time they are wrong they bring reproach upon the name of our Lord. They have revised dates again and again throughout history and they have always been wrong.
Those of us who understand how Christ's promise was fulfilled in the first century, know that they will always be wrong.
Diligence demands that we continue to study so that with the Spirit's help we arrive at truth. If eschatology can be seen as past or future, how can we know which is true? The question we must answer can really be narrowed to one, at least initially: "What factor should guide our study, the nature of Christ's coming, or its timing?"
Properly understood, we could begin with either one. The catch is that the nature and the timing of Christ's coming must be consistent with each other.
Most Christians today are convinced by tradition that the nature of Christ's coming is visible. If that is true, the timing has to be future because (as far as we know) Christ has not visably returned to earth. If, as we believe, it is an invisible coming (i.e. presence), it could be past or future. Just because it is viewed as invisible does not necessarily mean it is past. More on that later. For now realize that if the nature dictates the timing, then all kinds of biblical gymnastics have to be employed to make sense out of the time statements (the so-called Gap Theory in Daniel's 70 weeks for example).
On the other hand, if we allow the timing of Christ's coming to provide the framework for our interpretation, the nature of that coming must of necessity be invisible because the time statements clearly indicate a first century "coming". That there is no ambiguity when approaching prophecy this way provides strong support for seeing the time statements as literal.
Next question...
"What does scripture tell us about the nature of Christ's Coming?"
© Copyright 2003 ~ Jim Wade
Updated 07/23/03