The church I knew as a child, evolved out of events sometimes known as, “The Great Disappointment.” This so called “disappointment” describes the experience of a group of 19th century Millerites who came to believe October 22, 1844 was the day when the second coming of Christ would occur and thus they were waiting eagerly for this anticipated event. These folks were so convinced of their interpretation of Bible prophecy (which they believed predicted the timing of this event) that many of them had given away possessions and left crops unharvested in the fields. When Christ did not come as they had predicted, these folks were not only greatly disappointed but they also had to pick up all the loose threads of their lives and get on with life. Many returned to the various churches and denominations out of which they had come – but a smaller remnant stuck together, refusing to admit their error, convinced they had gotten the date right but that it was for a different event.
As this group evolved into a denomination over the next number of years, their theology also evolved. Many of the beliefs and doctrines central to most Christian denominations and certainly the essential core beliefs held by those initial members of this growing movement were retained; but they also developed a number of unique and peculiar distinctives as well. Central to the evolution of this denomination was (and always had been) it’s focus on eschatology and the second Advent. One could say in fact, that the views on the second coming were fixed and firmly in place while their theological beliefs and doctrinal distinctives were subsequent to and formed around the core advent beliefs.
It is my view that one can not understand the points I wish to address next unless they know this bit of history. To the extent we are all shaped to some extent by our history and circumstances, I believe that this process is not unique to the denomination I was raised in; thus we find many Christian denominations today with peculiar distinctives and views which continue to go largely accepted and rarely questioned. Sometimes this process can even result in such views being read into scripture rather than emerging from scripture.
I left my church in my early 20’s. What I did not realize at the time was the unique blend of faulty end-time views, peculiar distinctives and unique doctrines had come to form my overall view of both the church in particular as well as Christianity in general. Indeed, I could not even begin to realize this until many years later when, after having accepted the gospel message, I began to vet each distinctive, each unique doctrine and most of my earlier teachings and suppositions against relevant Biblical teaching and passages.
This vetting process is ongoing and continues to this day - especially with respect to areas I regard as “missing but unavoidable.” By this phrase I mean certain views or doctrinal statements that, while not regarded as “essential” core Christian beliefs, are nevertheless both important and unavoidable. Included within this category are many of those doctrines and distinctives I was raised with that differ from positions taken by most traditional evangelical churches. Where possible, I feel compelled to continue comparing and examining each subject closely and carefully seeking truth and scriptural clarity.
Recently I saw the meme on-line, “If you continue to carry the bricks from your past, you will end up building the same house.” This quote really resonated with me and captures the essence of what I’ve been trying to say thus far. Having left the church of my youth, I essentially moved out of the “old” house and was content to “wander the street” for quite a long time. I was neither ready nor willing to move into another house but chose to explore other options instead. But the time did arrive when I was finally ready for a new house and I did not want to simply build a copy of the old uninhabitable house I had left many years earlier. I’m slowly coming to realize however, that there are many features from that old house that are worth preserving and incorporating into the new house.
To take this metaphor even further, some of “the bricks” are important to keep and some definitely need replacing – but which is which and replaced with what. The critical place to start is at the foundation and the only solid foundation would have to consist of Biblical truth. The core, essential Christian beliefs would have to form the footings of that foundation. Those beliefs include: the Gospel of Jesus Christ, His birth, life, death, resurrection, ascension to the Father, His promised return and everything else he taught while He was here on earth. Secondarily to that (but still fully supported and based in Scripture) would be those church teachings and doctrines which emerged over time beginning with His earliest followers. This, then, is the puzzle I’ve found myself working on to a greater or lesser extent since returning to Christianity.
It is on certain of those “missing but unavoidable” areas that I want to focus the rest of this essay.
Broad, unanimous agreement within the Christian church is missing on some of these matters therefore such topics are often overlooked, avoided or viewed as having only secondary importance (because they are regarded as not essential for our salvation). Nevertheless, these views are held as doctrinal and distinctive within some denominations which means they can not be easily set aside with the explanation that they are “non-essential.” Other topics are more the subject of difference among individuals within a denomination – nevertheless they still can be divisive at times. But “secondary” or not, they are not so esoteric as to be unimportant. Frankly, one might even be led to wonder if such matters are indeed so “non-essential” if they could rightly be ignored or avoided altogether or perhaps even handled carelessly without consequence. Personally, I do not believe so. After all, these are all areas on which there is scriptural comment and they are highly relevant to the human experience: they help shape one’s views of both this life as well as anything which is to follow.
So... how is one to proceed with such “non-essential” topics.... It seemed reasonable to me that any new (to me) but firmly held belief, to which I get exposed, should be able to stand up to tough and probing scrutiny. So with regard to these related subjects, I did not want to simply replace one previously held “erroneous” belief with another equally faulty view (based largely on preconceived or long held assumptions heavily influenced by earlier teaching) imposed on or read into the Biblical text. Testing the veracity of the topic under study by comparing it to the actual text and context seems the ideal manner to proceed with any serious study. It seems to me that the truth of any belief system should be consistent with the data and facts as uncovered through Bible study and where beliefs differ from the text and data, the belief system would have to be seriously reconsidered in favour of the facts.
Despite such an approach seeming to be rational enough, I was surprised to find out how frustrating this process would become. Most people I’ve talked with over the years seem in agreement with this approach ... at least, it turns out, until it is their own beliefs that come under scrutiny. Even those who claim an open mind or say they only hold to a view “loosely” can respond with surprising irritation and act as if a nerve has been struck when certain views are held up to in-depth scrutiny ... especially if/when they seem to be contrary to the facts. In fact, it is fairly common to see individuals reject the actual truth when it contradicts their beliefs. Thus this journey is often a very lonely one at times.
Heaven, Hell and The Second Coming
One topic that has come under heavy scrutiny in my vetting process that has been both unavoidable and about which there is little or no agreement is: What happens at the end of one’s life here on this earth? Life, death and what (if anything) lies beyond the grave are topics about which most everyone either holds some belief or at least wonders about and are thus unavoidable. One can not abandon any earlier held belief on subjects such as these without replacing it with something because beliefs play such an important role in how one lives their life. The position taken by both individuals and churches on each of these topics will play a large part in how they go on to define their role, mission, use of resources and activities.
It’s been said that nobody gets out of here alive. Is this true? Is there a time coming in which this might not be the case? What about Heaven or Hell – there are a multitude of beliefs on what these places might be all about - as well as when and how one might end up there. Even in many non Christian traditions and cultures there are beliefs which hold that one’s ancestors are still around in existence somewhere.
On the subject of Hell, specifically with respect to the place where the wicked are kept conscious and suffer torment eternally, I have already written much. It is not my intention to repeat here what I’ve already written elsewhere (but I would be happy to provide those thoughts to anyone who wishes to access and read them). Simply put, I reject the traditional concept of Hell completely and believe the Bible more properly teaches what is often referred to as conditional immortality aka annihilation-ism as the final punishment and end for evil and the unrepentant wicked. Such a final end/state is arrived at following the final judgment (as spoken of in Revelation) and after having then been consigned to the lake of fire and thereby consumed – gone for eternity.
Some of the confusing (dare I say dystopian) views of both Heaven and Hell appear to have survived the early churches repeated flirtations with Neoplatonism and Gnosticism and endorsed largely through the teaching of Augustine (though not exclusively). This seems to be particularly the case with regard to the Platonic/Gnostic dualistic understanding of body and soul (believing the soul to be immortal as opposed to the body made up of matter and thus mortal).
In the article, Gnosticism and Plato taken from “The Encyclopedia of Plato,” we find the following:
“The leading figures of Gnosticism fused Eastern mythical imagery and religious symbols with personified philosophical concepts, and composed narratives, exquisitely intricate at times, that satisfied the intellect, and brought satisfaction to the hearts of their devotees. Their Greek-inspired model of the universe, with Earth at its center, the spheres of the seven planets in between and the realm of the fixed stars in its outer fringes, functioned as the stage of an existential drama of cosmic proportions, repeated at the birth of every individual human being. A great number of supernatural beings (Aeons, Angels, Archons, etc.) filled in the space between Heaven and Earth, and exerted their influence, sometimes beneficial, other times harmful, on the descent and ascent of the souls.”
In his article titled, “Gnosticism and the Human Body” David Koyzis writes:
“The Gnostics held that salvation is attained through a higher knowledge (gnosis in Greek) unavailable to most people. Borrowing from the philosopher Plato, they taught that redemption comes from nurturing the intellect and deprecating our corporeal existence. Because the mind was deemed superior to the body, captive as it is to the forces of decay and the messiness of ordinary existence, the Gnostics sought to free the mind from the prison of the body and managed to read this into Christian doctrine. The survival of an immortal soul after death replaced the biblical hope of bodily resurrection and a new heaven and new earth.... (emphasis added)
...Remarkably, the notion that I can do with my body as I please is predicated on the very Gnostic dualism that plagued the early church. The real “me” is a transcendent ego that “uses” its body for its own desired purposes. The opposition between the ego and the body, coupled with the belief in the supremacy of the ego, produces a society in which everyone is thought to have absolute ownership over this biological dwelling he or she just happens to inhabit.”
The following is from the article, “Immortality of the Soul and Gnosis”
“(By Freemason, Gnostic and author, Hank Kraychir) – The term “Immortality of the Soul” should not be a foreign concept to the Enlightened Mason. In fact, Albert Pike, author of Morals and Dogma (1871) wrote about the topic extensively, like on page 622;
“Among all the nations of primitive antiquity, the doctrine of the immortality of the soul was not a mere probable hypothesis, needing laborious researches and diffuse argumentation to produce conviction of its truth. Nor can we hardly give it the name of Faith; for it was a lively certainty, like the feeling of one’s own existence and identity, and of what is actually present; exerting its influence on all sublunary affairs, and the motive of mightier deeds and enterprises than any mere earthly interest could inspire.”
From their work titled, “Care for the soul: exploring the intersection of psychology & theology,” McMinn & Phillips (2001), pp. 107–8:
“A broad consensus emerged among biblical and theological scholars that soul-body dualism is a Platonic, Hellenistic idea that is not found anywhere in the Bible. The Bible, from cover to cover, promotes what they call the "Hebrew concept of the whole person." GC Berkouwer writes that the biblical view is always holistic, that in the Bible the soul is never ascribed any special religious significance. Werner Jaeger writes that soul-body dualism is a bizarre idea that has been read into the Bible by misguided church fathers such as Augustine. Rudolf Bultmann writes that Paul uses the word soma (body) to refer to the whole person, the self, so that there is not a soul and body, but rather the body is the whole thing. This interpretation of Pauline anthropology has been a theme in much subsequent Pauline scholarship.”
Not only has this Gnostic heresy infected what has come to be the “traditional” basis for teachings on Hell and Hell-fire, it has also infected many of the ideas concerning Heaven and what follows our earthly existence in general. But... so much for Hell... that (for me) was the easier piece to come to a conclusion on... what about Heaven? In sorting through a multitude of viewpoints related to Heaven, an intermediate state and/or the second coming of Jesus – all subjects which differ in one way or another from what I learned as a young person – I found myself caught in a tangled-up, confusing, spider-web of ideas.
First, I certainly do believe in Heaven – it is real – so far no confusion. So then, is Heaven a place to which we go (or does it come here) and in either case – when? Is it the place where our disembodied souls go to be with the Lord until the resurrection at the end of time? Is there a “Rapture” in the picture some where and if so, when? Is there something called a “Millennium” and if so when does that happen? Does it happen before the end of time or after? Before Jesus returns or after? I believe Jesus is coming back just as He promised... so when, in the mix of questions I just asked, will that be?
In looking at alternate eschatological belief systems (different from the one I grew up with) and in an effort to address some of those confusing views and questions related to the whole topic, I first became attracted to and accepted the pre-millennial, pre-tribulation rapture theory. For several years this was the subject of a lot of my reading, videos I watched and general study I engaged in. The more I studied and the deeper I dug, the more I became dissatisfied and uncomfortable with this particular belief system. For me it simply fails to stand-up to the text of scripture and it raises questions about assumptions one has to make in order to adopt such a view. The other competing views, all related to the millennium, have their own points of attraction as well but also a set of problems to overcome textually as well. So the question must be asked, “Are we trying to make the text say or read into the text, something it was never meant to say?”
It was not until I came to realize that we do not have to subscribe to any of the afore mentioned systems in order to hold a belief in the second coming of Jesus and a New Heaven and New Earth. In reference to the various popular eschatological systems, Dr Michael Heiser says that after holding to certain assumptions, the only reason people say or write certain things is to prop up their particular system. He states:
“In other words, their system gets in the way of the text. We're not about systems here. We're about the text. If we're going to do biblical theology, by definition it needs to be about the text, not a system that we've constructed and bring to the text and then have to adjust the text to fit the system. That's not what we do here. But you'll see that. Even though this seems like an obvious thing, we have to point it out because this is what certain writers will do.”
In the beginning when God created the Heavens and the Earth, He had a plan in mind. He created us with a purpose in mind as a part of that creation and I believe in the end He will have achieved exactly what He planned for. There is no Plan B. I do not believe there is any plan for a great evacuation i.e. rapture - with the church somehow functioning in a kind of rearguard action for purposes of restraining the Antichrist and the forces of evil. It does seem highly likely however, that as we approach the final days before Jesus returns, that things are (and will continue) getting worse with more and increasing persecution of the followers of Christ. Jesus told us what to expect and what the signs would be concerning those times. He also assured us not to worry and that He will be with us through it all. He has reminded us that He has “overcome the world” and also assured us that His church will prevail against the very “gates of Hell.”
From the beginning when humans were created, the earth has been the home of man. “Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” Genesis 1:26 We are told that this was the process, “then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.” Genesis 2:7
Once we were created, we were given a commission, responsibility and all the necessary authority. “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” Genesis 1:27-28
Thus it seems pretty clear to me that God (who had created his family within the unseen/spiritual realm) desired, planned for and created his human family within the physical/material realm. Indeed, we were formed from the very substance of this earth which he first created and then he blew into us His breath of life (Genesis 2:7, Ecclesiastes 3:19-21). It seems therefore, that God created the earth for man’s habitation and man, in turn, to populate, care for, civilize and administrate that realm. Further I believe the Bible shows that it has always been God’s plan to bring both Heaven (His dwelling place) and Earth together. As it was in Eden, so it will be again with His whole family once more together (Isaiah 65:17-19, 2 Peter 3:13, Revelation 21).
Here, I would like to quote Dr. J. Richard Middleton a Biblical scholar:
“In the context of the ancient Near East (which is the Bible’s original context), rule of the earth refers most basically to the development of agriculture and animal husbandry, which are the basis of human societal organization, and ultimately includes the development of all aspects of culture, technology and civilization. To put it another way, while various psalms (like 148 and 96) indeed call upon all creatures (humans included) to worship or serve God in the cosmic temple of creation (heaven and earth), the distinctive way humans worship or render service to the Creator is by the development of culture through interaction with our earthly environment (in a manner that glorifies God).”
As a footnote to this quote, the author adds:
“This is not meant to exclude what we call “worship” from the appropriate human response to God. My point is twofold. First, the cultural development of the earth, rather than “worship” narrowly conceived, is explicitly stated to be the human purpose in biblical texts recounting the creation of humanity. “Worship” in the narrow sense may be understood as part of human cultural activity. Second, we should not reduce human worship/service of God to verbal, emotionally charged expressions of praise (which is what we usually mean by the term). Note that Paul in Romans 12:1‐2 borrows language of sacrifice and liturgy from Israel’s cult in order to describe full‐orbed bodily obedience (which, he says, is our true worship). This is the Bible’s typical emphasis.”
In “Journal for Christian Theological Research, and from a paper titled: “A New Heaven and a New Earth: The Case for a Holistic Reading of the Biblical Story of Redemption”
To the above, I would like to add something from Professor N. T. Wright and taken from the article, “The New Testament Doesn’t Say What Most People Think It Does About Heaven:”
“One of the central stories of the Bible, many people believe, is that there is a heaven and an earth and that human souls have been exiled from heaven and are serving out time here on earth until they can return. Indeed, for most modern Christians, the idea of “going to heaven when you die” is not simply one belief among others, but the one that seems to give a point to it all.
But the people who believed in that kind of “heaven” when the New Testament was written were not the early Christians. They were the “Middle Platonists”....
...The followers of the Jesus-movement that grew up in that complex environment saw “heaven” and “earth” — God’s space and ours, if you like — as the twin halves of God’s good creation. Rather than rescuing people from the latter in order to reach the former, the creator God would finally bring heaven and earth together in a great act of new creation, completing the original creative purpose by healing the entire cosmos of its ancient ills. They believed that God would then raise his people from the dead, to share in — and, indeed, to share his stewardship over — this rescued and renewed creation. And they believed all this because of Jesus....
...The point was not for us to “go to heaven,” but for the life of heaven to arrive on earth. Jesus taught his followers to pray: “Thy kingdom come on earth as in heaven.” From as early as the third century, some Christian teachers tried to blend this with types of the Platonic belief, generating the idea of “leaving earth and going to heaven,” which became mainstream by the Middle Ages. But Jesus’ first followers never went that route.”
So... at this point what seems quite clear to me are the following points:
- From Creation to the Eschaton, the entire Bible tells a consistent and coherent story of redemption and restoration.
- God created the Heavens and Earth. He created humanity from the substance of the earth (dirt) and did so as the crowning event of earth’s creation. Mankind were given their assigned role and responsibility along with all necessary authority. They were given almost unlimited freedom; there was one clearly stated limit – one boundary they were told they must not violate and they were clearly told what the consequence would be should they ever violate that boundary.
- Man fell through disobedience (sin) and as a result of this rebellion death entered creation. Not only man, but all creation suffered as a part of that fall - from the curse of sin (Genesis 3:17-19, Romans 5:12, Romans 8:18–22).
- This fall had been anticipated by God before He had even begun and He had, already in place, the plan to redeem not only humanity, but ALL of His creation. Humanity would be redeemed and restored with, and not apart from, all of His creation.
I mention these first few points simply because I believe they serve to show where Creation is headed at the end. God never abandoned or gave up on His Creation. In the end He will have the Eden He set out to create at the beginning of the story... along with the Human & Spiritual family He desired.
- When the time was right, Jesus was born into the world with a mission to repair the damage all creation had suffered through the scourge of sin. Through His life, death and resurrection Jesus was fully successful and completed His mission on earth. Before He returned to the Father, He commissioned His followers to spread the Gospel (good news) and make disciples of all nations. This is the mission of His church on earth. All who receive the gospel, repent of their sins as a result of their belief in Jesus will be saved from the consequences of their sins will not perish but will be granted eternal life.
- Jesus promised He was coming back to earth again and this time it will be as King of Kings and Lord of Lords. When he comes, John 5:25 – 29 tells us:
“Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man. Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.”
Those who were dead in Christ will be raised and have their new immortal bodies and those believers who are living at the time will be changed instantly and given their immortal bodies. At this time those who have been judged and condemned - along with death and sin - will all be finally, fully and completely delt with. They will perish and be no more. Heaven and earth will be made new and will come together and Jesus will reign forever. Amen
