Second Coming=Real. New Heavens/Earth=Real. Rapture=Distorting Text, Missing Point, 1800s Funhouse.

Shel Boese / Shelby Boese – the Bible is the Word of God – not necessarily all interpretations of it.  NT Wright a great orthodox Anglican theologian does a great job with this.  ”Cliff notes” in case you miss the main point: Second Coming=Real.  New Heavens/Earth=Real.  Rapture=Distorting Text, Mission the Point,  1800s Funhouse Theology.

Now keep in mind all of this will require use of your holy imagination – because there is nothing like it to compare to.  Paul uses imagery to get our imagination fired up about the second coming of Christ.  But again there is nothing like it until it occurs!!!

FYI – I personally still wrestle with affirming some sort 1800s view of the rapture.  But this is the most basic and orthodox view of the end below.

Bolding/underlining mostly mine.  Enjoy!

——

Farewell to the Rapture
(N.T. Wright, Bible Review, August 2001.  Reproduced by permission of the author)

Little did Paul know how his colorful metaphors for Jesus’ second coming would be misunderstood two millennia later.

The American obsession with the second coming of Jesus — especially with distorted interpretations of it — continues unabated.  Seen from my side of the Atlantic, the phenomenal success of the Left Behind books appears puzzling, even bizarre[1].  Few in the U.K. hold the belief on which the popular series of novels is based: that there will be a literal “rapture” in which believers will be snatched up to heaven, leaving empty cars crashing on freeways and kids coming home from school only to find that their parents have been taken to be with Jesus while they have been “left behind.”  This pseudo-theological version of Home Alone has reportedly frightened many children into some kind of (distorted) faith. [Shel here - I have STORIES to tell you about this first hand!]

This dramatic end-time scenario is based (wrongly, as we shall see) on Paul’s First Letter to the Thessalonians, where he writes: “For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout of command, with the voice of an archangel and the trumpet of God.  The dead in Christ will rise first; then we, who are left alive, will be snatched up with them on clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord” (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17).

What on earth (or in heaven) did Paul mean?

It is Paul who should be credited with creating this scenario.  Jesus himself, as I have argued in various books, never predicted such an event[2]. The gospel passages about “the Son of Man coming on the clouds” (Mark 13:26, 14:62, for example) are about Jesus’ vindication, his “coming” to heaven from earth.  The parables about a returning king or master (for example, Luke 19:11-27) were originally about God returning to Jerusalem, not about Jesus returning to earth.  This, Jesus seemed to believe, was an event within space-time history, not one that would end it forever.

The Ascension of Jesus and the Second Coming are nevertheless vital Christian doctrines[3], and I don’t deny that I believe some future event will result in the personal presence of Jesus within God’s new creation.  This is taught throughout the New Testament outside the Gospels.  But this event won’t in any way resemble the Left Behind account.  Understanding what will happen requires a far more sophisticated cosmology than the one in which “heaven” is somewhere up there in our universe, rather than in a different dimension, a different space-time, altogether.

The New Testament, building on ancient biblical prophecy, envisages that the creator God will remake heaven and earth entirely, affirming the goodness of the old Creation but overcoming its mortality and corruptibility (e.g., Romans 8:18-27; Revelation 21:1; Isaiah 65:17, 66:22).  When that happens, Jesus will appear within the resulting new world (e.g., Colossians 3:4; 1 John 3:2).

Paul’s description of Jesus’ reappearance in 1 Thessalonians 4 is a brightly colored version of what he says in two other passages, 1 Corinthians 15:51-54 and Philippians 3:20-21: At Jesus’ “coming” or “appearing,” those who are still alive will be “changed” or “transformed” so that their mortal bodies will become incorruptible, deathless. This is all that Paul intends to say in Thessalonians, but here he borrows imagery—from biblical and political sources—to enhance his message.  Little did he know how his rich metaphors would be misunderstood two millennia later.

First, Paul echoes the story of Moses coming down the mountain with the Torah.  The trumpet sounds, a loud voice is heard, and after a long wait Moses comes to see what’s been going on in his absence.

Second, he echoes Daniel 7, in which “the people of the saints of the Most High” (that is, the “one like a son of man”) are vindicated over their pagan enemy by being raised up to sit with God in glory.  This metaphor, applied to Jesus in the Gospels, is now applied to Christians who are suffering persecution.

Third, Paul conjures up images of an emperor visiting a colony or province.  The citizens go out to meet him in open country and then escort him into the city.  Paul’s image of the people “meeting the Lord in the air” should be read with the assumption that the people will immediately turn around and lead the Lord back to the newly remade world.

Paul’s mixed metaphors of trumpets blowing and the living being snatched into heaven to meet the Lord are not to be understood as literal truth, as the Left Behind series suggests, but as a vivid and biblically allusive description of the great transformation of the present world of which he speaks elsewhere.

Paul’s misunderstood metaphors present a challenge for us: How can we reuse biblical imagery, including Paul’s, so as to clarify the truth, not distort it?  And how can we do so, as he did, in such a way as to subvert the political imagery of the dominant and dehumanizing empires of our world?  We might begin by asking, What view of the world is sustained, even legitimized, by the Left Behind ideology?  How might it be confronted and subverted by genuinely biblical thinking?  For a start, is not the Left Behind mentality in thrall to a dualistic view of reality that allows people to pollute God’s world on the grounds that it’s all going to be destroyed soon?  Wouldn’t this be overturned if we recaptured Paul’s wholistic vision of God’s whole creation?


[1] Tim F. Lahaye and Jerry B. Jenkins, Left Behind (Cambridge, UK: Tyndale House Publishing, 1996).  Eight other titles have followed, all runaway bestsellers.

[2] See my Jesus and the Victory of God (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1996); the discussions in Jesus and the Restoration of Israel: A Critical Assessment of N.T. Wright’s Jesus and the Victory of God, ed. Carey C. Newman (Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999); and Marcus J. Borg and N.T. Wright, The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1999), chapters 13 and 14.

[3] Douglas Farrow, Ascension and Ecclesia: On the Significance of the Doctrine of the Ascension for Ecclesiology and Christian Cosmology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999).

 

 

Infant Baptism and a Puzzling Text -John Piper

http://www.desiringgod.org/blog/posts/infant-baptism-and-a-puzzling-text

May 4, 2011 | by: John Piper

From age 18 to 28, my schooling became increasingly less congenial to believers’ baptism.

My History

I grew up in a Southern Baptist home and church. Then Wheaton College broadened my world, and I learned the word “Evangelical.” I discovered that there were Presbyterians who were better Christians than I was. Then Fuller Seminary challenged me again as the debate grew more intense.

Then at the University of Munich, I was totally alone. All the German students were Lutheran, and the few foreigners besides me were Presbyterian. Once I attended a class on “Spirit, Word, and Baptism in 1 Peter,” and was the lone voice for believers’ baptism, which to most of them seemed sectarian.

In the challenges I faced, I never found the case for infant baptism compelling. One reason was that I had read Paul Jewett’s Infant Baptism and the Covenant of Grace when I was in seminary. To this day, I find it totally compelling for believers’ baptism.

A Presbyterian With a Big Exception

Jewett was ordained in the American Baptist denomination, but became a Presbyterian minister while I was at Fuller—with one exception. He got a special dispensation from the Presbytery—I don’t know how—that he not have to believe or teach infant baptism. That is how convinced he was.

Here is an example of how he helped me. Often 1 Corinthians 7:13–14 is used to defend infant baptism.
If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband is made holy(hagiastai)because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy (hagiastai) because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy (hagi).

This text poses significant problems if one claims that the “holiness” of the children warrants their baptism. For example, that same “holiness” of the unbelieving partner does not warrant his or her baptism. Perhaps that incongruity is owing to the fact that in this context, the “holiness” of the children and the spouse has nothing to do with baptism.

Perhaps it refers to the “sanctity” of lawful marriage and legitimate children. The marriage is still lawful (though one is an unbeliever), and the children are legitimate (though born of this mixed union). The “sanctity” (holiness) of marriage and birth are not compromised.

Here is Jewett’s summary interpretation:

The sanctity of the original marriage, which the Corinthians were doubting, the apostle is affirming. Therefore, “let not the believer leave the unbeliever,” he says, “because the unbeliever has been and still is [Greek perfect tense of hagiazo] sanctified by the believer”; that is, he/she has been and still is set apart by the believer through the marriage covenant for his/her exclusive enjoyment in the marriage relationship. . . . Otherwise, our children would be “unclean,” that is, illegitimate. But you know that is not so; rather they are “holy,” that is, legitimate (135–136).
Then Jewett, shows from Jewish sources like the Mishna, that the Hebrew stem for holiness (kadash) is used in just this way at least ten times, signifying the setting apart of a woman to be a man’s wife. “A man ‘sanctifies,’ tthat is, espouses, a wife by himself or by his messenger” (136).

The point here is not that this settles the issue of infant baptism. The point is to simply bring some clarity to a puzzling text, lest it seem too obviously to support infant baptism.

And just like in the old college days, I still keep running into Presbyterians and Anglicans who are better Christians than I am.

Growth Group Resouces

So you want to lead a group to make the church healthier, grow as a leader and a spiritual person?

What about resources?  Do I have to re-invent the wheel?

Yes, you can do that and for a season it’s often fun and life-giving …then you run up against the wall where your experiences of the past cannot lead the group into a new future.

Time to lean on the collected wisdom of the church!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Here are some modern Evangelicalish sources:

Navpress - LOTS of options: https://www.navpress.com

Discipleship Inside Out™ NavPress has returned to its roots of publishing discipleship materials that can help believers in every stage of their walk with Christ.  Mission

NavPress’ mission is to advance The Navigators’ calling by publishing life-transforming materials.

We are committed to serving people by facilitating and motivating spiritual growth through products that are biblically rooted, culturally relevant, and highly practical.
You can trust NavPress to provide resources that God can use to transform lives. Join us in our calling to Establish, Engage, Equip, and Empower believers in their journey of faith.

Find the Right Bible Study Method for You

Friends Reading Bible

There are many choices that are yours as you and your group decide what you would like to study. Consider one of the Bible study methods below.

1. Scripture memory. There are some wonderful topical memory systems, such as those produced by The Navigators, that allow a group to learn, meditate, and benefit from the Bible. They are broken down topically so that a small group can discuss each week’s subject while sharing the weekly memorization verses.

2. Character study.
Your group can locate each part of the Bible that tells a person’s story and follow that character from beginning to end. One benefit of this type of study is that, although there are books that can guide the study of a particular individual, all that’s really needed is a Bible concordance, some diligence, and a notebook.

3. Themes. Another type of study that utilizes the Bible concordance, diligence, and a notebook is the study of Bible themes. It is a great challenge to root out the whole Bible teaching on a particular matter so that the group can better understand its meaning.

4. Bible study helps.
There are a number of Bible study materials that have been written to help Christians study a particular book of the Bible. These often take the inductive approach, allowing the Bible student to answer directed questions.

5. Inductive Bible study.
Inductive study teaches you how to approach the Bible so that you can arrive at biblical truth with confidence. Through the use of questions, and the careful analysis of each text in its context, inductive Bible study can be the most exciting kind of study.

6. Book Bible study.
Some people want to study books of the Bible; this could very simply involve each person reading a portion of Scripture and sharing what they have learned from their reading. The benefit of this type of study is that all conclusions are original and people are forced to think for themselves.

Another great resource for studying the Bible is Handbook for Personal Bible Study by Bill Klein, which includes an overview of the Bible’s history and development and the basics of studying Scripture and interpreting the Bible.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

http://www.smallgroups.com/