The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Why is there so much confusion about Jesus' return?

Theology Eschatology
#41

Hi, Catherine

I wouldn’t even consider trying to dissuade you from believing in the plenary inspiration of scripture UNLESS that belief was undermining your trust and faith in God. Which is more important? It’s honestly dead easy to tell which portions of scripture are right (at least in the way we understand them) and which are wrong (in the way we understand them). You yourself do this, and that’s why you’re having trouble reconciling what you’re reading in the old testament as well as some of the things Jesus has said, with a loving God. YOU know what’s loving and what isn’t. Otherwise, why are you judging God? And I think you’re RIGHT to judge these reputed actions of God, because if they were literal actions, then you know they were wrong. But they’re NOT literal. The Exodus imo was not literal; the YHWH wars were not literal; the plenary inspiration of Moses’ law was not literal. Are these books inspired? Do they contain magnificent truths? Absolutely they are and do. We however cannot see those truths because of our concern with God literally commanding literal genocide against literal small children and doddering elders, the rape and enslavement of virgins after the killing of their families, the unabashed slaughter of men, women, children, and even the little lambs. This is an untenable position to be in. My God didn’t do that. He just did not. Archaeology doesn’t support it and even a great many Jewish scholars don’t believe it. Here’s what one leader has to say about the Exodus:

Here’s another link describing both sides of this controversy: hierographics.org/JewsGrappleWit … Story.html

Regarding Jesus’ support of Mosaic law; He actually didn’t affirm Moses unconditionally. He told the Priests (in the controversy over “for any cause” or “for sexual immorality” divorce), “Moses wrote you that law (about writing your wife a certificate of divorce) because of the hardness of your hearts, but in the beginning it was not so.”

He also told them on another occasion, “Moses gave you the law and yet none of you keep it.” Notice, MOSES gave you these laws. He DID come to fulfill the law of Moses which, as far as it went, was a good law; at least for the barbaric culture into which it was given. It improved the lot of slaves and women, and secured rights for girls who’d been raped, etc. To us today (after about 1500 years of Jewish cultural development and another 2000 years of Christian cultural development) these laws are horrifying. To the people of Moses day they were probably horrifying too, but for the complete opposite reasons. Back to the point though. Jesus DID fulfill the law. He dealt with it by nailing to the tree the writing of the decree that was against us.

The fact that He spoke of Sodom and Gomorrah as a literal event doesn’t mean it was (or was not) a literal event. We do this sort of thing all the time; using a literary story as the basis of a discussion, we’ll naturally speak of the characters as though they were real, and the story as though it literally happened. I don’t know what Jesus thought of the downfall of S&G; whether or not He saw it as literal. He didn’t have all knowledge as a human being, and had special knowledge only concerning those things the Father told Him via the Spirit. Ultimately, it’s the meaning of any biblical account that matters far more than whether it literally happened in history. In some cases, believing that things literally happened in history turns out to be toxic – such as, to sensitive and loving people like you, who know that (whatever the text says God did), the YHWH wars literally interpreted are genocide.

So, that’s my take on it. I simply cannot make excuses for God having literally done the things described in the Pentateuch. Since history and archeology don’t support it, I think it makes sense to take these accounts as sacred myth (a very high and very true form of literature – far more so than history, imo). To me it makes a lot more sense for God to say, destroy all the sin within you, even the innocent little things that seem harmless now. Destroy the old things that you’ve held onto all your life. Destroy it ALL. Take the land (your life) and make it the temple of God. Cast out all the filthy things, the strangers that don’t belong, the sinful practices. Be holy and separate unto Me.

People will balk at this. We’ve employed our methods of interpretation for, oh, a couple hundred years, or maybe since the Reformation and the “Age of Reason,” and we feel they’re holy writ. People have not always interpreted the bible this way. To us if feels like they have, but we are so short-lived and we often haven’t the time to scratch back through history and study past attitudes. I do believe that all scripture is profitable for discipleship and doctrine and reproof, etc. I just do NOT believe that it all literally, historically happened. I have, I believe, very good reasons to in fact believe that Jesus and His miracles and His resurrection did happen, but that’s another whole big (actually, a lot bigger) article.

Love, Cindy

#42

So the ‘quick’ slaughter of whole families is not that bad because it was quick? Taking a sword and killing whole families is surely evil, whatever way you look at it. I’m focusing on the fact that God’s ways are meant to be higher than our ways, so why would He order such a thing?

Yes if they must die then a quick slaughter is not that bad. I am willing to accept the premise that although i don’t understand why people may need to be destroyed , God knows why and i can accept that fact.
BTW the OT covers thousands of years and we have a handful of incidents so these examples are very much the exceptions. For the mostpart God is quite merciful.

#43

Steve, I tried to tell myself that a quick slaughter ‘is not that bad’. But what screams at me now is ‘Isis’ and ‘gas chambers’. We both know that if someone came and slaughtered our family, be it ever so quickly we would not be saying ‘‘IT IS NOT THAT BAD’’.

Having just read Cindy’s reply, Jesus’ words spring to mind regarding what you are saying Steve (and what I tried to believe too):

"Why don’t you judge for yourselves what is right?’’ Luke 12:57.

I’m also reminded of when the apostles wanted to shout down fire to destroy the people who wouldn’t listen to Jesus: “Lord, do you want us to call fire down from heaven to destroy them ?” 55But Jesus turned and rebuked them.’’ Luke 9:54,55. Some later manuscripts say that Jesus said ‘‘You do not know what spirit you are of’’.

Food for thought. :wink:

#44

Dear Cindy, thank you so much for your thoughtful and loving reply. :smiley: I will check out the links tonight. It sounds so easy to just discard the bits of the Bible that I judge as ‘not right’, but I find it is very hard, coming from a background of believing the whole Bible is error free. I pray God will help me to do this, if that is the right thing to do. For now, I’ll keep pondering on Jesus’ words ‘’ judge for yourself what is right’’. :wink:

Oh yes, and it’s thanks to your reply that I was reminded of Jesus’ words. :smiley:

#45

Steve, I tried to tell myself that a quick slaughter ‘is not that bad’. But what screams at me now is ‘Isis’ and ‘gas chambers’. We both know that if someone came and slaughtered our family, be it ever so quickly we would not be saying ‘‘IT IS NOT THAT BAD’’.

Having just read Cindy’s reply, Jesus’ words spring to mind regarding what you are saying Steve (and what I tried to believe too):

"Why don’t you judge for yourselves what is right?’’ Luke 12:57.

Hi Catherine,
Sorry if i’m beating a dead horse but comparing Isis and Nazi gas chambers to God destroying evil, just does not seem very convincing. For example before God told the Israelites to kill the Canaanites He gave them 400 years to repent. They were in effect Satan worshipers and it appears they all had to be destroyed. If God had let them live then perhaps Israel would never have produced the Messiah Jesus and the world might not have had the opportunity for eternal salvation. But God would have appeared to be more merciful to folks who give this present evil age so much weight, so much value , yet it really may have been unjust to the rest of humanity, so would it have been worth it?

What i think it boils down to is that Jesus said “no one is good except God” so if God is good then everything He does is good. The issue simply is, will you believe Jesus?

#46

“Why is there so much confusion about Jesus’ return?”

Because of human sinfulness and idiocy.

The doctrine of the Second Coming says that Jesus will physically return someday. That’s it. No timetable is given or implied. Christ could return today, or He might not return for a billion years, or whatever. It makes no sense to say that Jesus is taking too long. The phrase “too long” is meaningless in this connection.

#47

Hi Johnny, thank you for bringing this to our attention. There are many ‘types’ in the OT that ‘signify’ how God is going to redeem His people. I just hope everyone is going to be His people eventually. :wink:

#48

Thank you for your reply Steve. You are certainly not overstating your position it’s just that I find your explanations for why God would use a method of judgment which is as repulsive and evil as man’s methods no longer convincing. Let’s suppose you are right, and these Canaanites had to be removed from the earth, or rather snuffed out of existence. Why does God need to use such violent methods? If His ways are higher than ours, surely He could in the twinkling of an eye remove them, painlessly and violence free? I can follow these accounts if I see the actions of the Israelites as being those of ‘fallen’ men, and so God allows man- even His chosen people, to learn the hard way. The Israelites lived by the sword, died by the sword, eye for eye etc. Maybe God allowed this to show them how those ways achieved nothing good really. Like Ghandi said, an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind’ or something like that. ‘Man’s way’ doesn’t work and doesn’t bring about permanent peace. I’m not sure. All I know is, just as I cannot envisage Jesus telling anyone to grab a sword and kill a baby, I cannot comprehend how God would command such a thing. Jesus shows us why it will be ‘worth it’ to have gone through all the suffering that we do in this life. I can just about get my head around God allowing evil in order to bring His creation into real freedom, but as for God committing evil in the exact same way as fallen man- that I cannot get my head around. :confused:

#49

I disagree with you Geoffrey regarding no timetable being given. Many verses point to time references or season indicators and are given by Jesus to imply that He was going to return during the life time of some of the people he was talking to. Maybe we’ve misunderstood Jesus regarding what He meant by ‘coming back’. But I agree that saying He is taking ‘too long’ is probably silly. If Jesus is going to come back to earth again, then He will come bang on time no doubt. It’s just our misunderstandings make it seem like He’s delayed. :wink:

#50

You’ve hit the nail on the head Steve. :smiley: We know that everything God does is good and we know killing a baby is evil, not good. Do you agree? :question:

#51

All I know is, just as I cannot envisage Jesus telling anyone to grab a sword and kill a baby, I cannot comprehend how God would command such a thing. Jesus shows us why it will be ‘worth it’ to have gone through all the suffering that we do in this life. I can just about get my head around God allowing evil in order to bring His creation into real freedom, but as for God committing evil in the exact same way as fallen man- that I cannot get my head around.

Hi Catherine,
But all the things you like about Jesus are because Jesus said He did’nt do his own will but he did the will of his Father. I understand you won’t agree with me but i think evil from God is for a high purpose , one of those being that we learn by contrast and therefore we must experience evil to learn and appreciate good. If we only had good, would we appreciate it or would be get complacent about it, take it for granted, expect it, feel entitled to it? My vote is for all of the above. God said in Gen 3 “They have become like us knowing good and evil” , so to me this is a prophecy telling us we must experience good and evil together for a certain period of time to become sons and daughters of the Most High.

#52

Steve I absolutely agree with you. :wink: That is the only reason for evil existing that makes any kind of sense. What I am struggling with is not that God allows evil, although that is very hard to grasp too, but I just about do. Does God command evil acts, rather than just allow man’s evil acts? (God can surely use evil events to bring about good e.g Jesus’ death being the pinnacle. We don’t view Jesus’ death as being done by His Father, but by the evil men.)

#53

Notice the direction of the coming of the Son of Man: ““I was watching in the night visions, and behold, One like the Son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him.” (Daniel 7:13)

In other words, the Son of Man’s coming refers to His Ascension from earth to Heaven. He is coming to the Father, NOT coming to us.

I therefore understand Jesus’s words of His coming to be referring to His Ascension (circa A. D. 30). I think we humans are so self-centered that we tend to always place ourselves in the center of everything: “Look! Jesus says He’s coming! He must be coming to us!”

#54

Does God command evil acts, rather than just allow man’s evil acts? (God can surely use evil events to bring about good e.g Jesus’ death being the pinnacle. We don’t view Jesus’ death as being done by His Father, but by the evil men.)

Is there really a difference? James said that if we know to do good and don’t then that ommission is a sin. The act of God not intervening and stopping evil either is sin or it is not good to intervene.
In other words God could intervene but chooses not to, so this decision either must be sin or must be good. If you believe Jesus that God is good then NOT stopping evil must be good therefore there must be information we simply don’t know about. So the allowance of evil or causing evil simply has to be for a greater good. Greater good demands postmortem salvation, it can’t work without it.
If God is good there are only 2 possibilities which is the above or to not believe the parts of scripture that offend or appear to be contradictory.
One of the problems with omitting parts of scripture is it still doesn’t explain (to me) why God does not just destroy evil or at least Satan.

#55

Hi Geoffrey. :slight_smile: I have no problem with understanding Daniel 7 to be referring to Jesus in heaven after His death, i.e. at his ascension. I suppose Jesus’ ‘parousia’ could be referring to Him being present with His Father, rather than Him ‘coming’ to us. However, what do you make of the angels’ statement after Jesus ascended to heaven: ''This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will ***come back ***in the same way you have seen him go into heaven." Acts 1:11?

#56

Obviously God allowing sin is not the same as humans who know to do good but don’t. God knows the end from the beginning, and so if He allows something it must be for a good reason. I suppose this could be applied to causing evil too. As we can’t see the whole picture, we are stuck in the moment and can’t see what is being achieved. I remember when in labour with my first child, it was so bad I would have happily pressed a button to end the whole world, in order to stop the pain. I couldn’t get past the pain whilst it lasted. Once it passed, and the baby was in my arms, the pain was instantly forgotten, and of course looking back I knew it was worth it. I suppose that is how we will view the sufferings we have gone through in our lives, once we are made whole and see things the way God does.

I don’t understand your last point Steve? Whether you omit scriptures or not, the Bible’s main theme is about destroying evil surely? At the end of time, no evil acts or persons will exist. All will have been reconciled, and so evil and Satan will be no more. We are still in ‘time’ and so are still experiencing evil. Thank you for your replies Steve. They have helped me. :slight_smile:

#57

I don’t understand your last point Steve? Whether you omit scriptures or not, the Bible’s main theme is about destroying evil surely? At the end of time, no evil acts or persons will exist. All will have been reconciled, and so evil and Satan will be no more. We are still in ‘time’ and so are still experiencing evil. Thank you for your replies Steve. They have helped me.

Thanks Catherine, i hoped it helped. I realize that having faith also includes believing God is good even though there are many unanswered questions.

Yes evil will be destroyed at the end of the age, that’s why Paul calls it “this present evil age” to distinguish it from other ages or the eternal state.

Having faith is tough, it’s not a natural thing.

#58

Hi Catherine
I have been following this thread with great interest because I share many of your thoughts and concerns. You put them more clearly than I could and I am grateful for that.
There seems to be two matters to deal with. One is the apparent violence/cruelty (or whatever) of the OT depiction of God and how that may affect our confidence in the Bible as a whole. The other is about the second coming. With regard to the former, I am just as puzzled and weighed-down as it seems you are.
With regard to the Second coming, whist I agree first glance at texts may lead one to believe in a promised 1st century return, I don’t think those texts necessarily imply such a thing and I certainly disbelieve that Christ’s second coming has yet happened. I believe we are probably not far from a physical, literal second coming.

But, as for the quote above, I only see ONE time when Jesus said people living would SEE Him in His Glory (ie as Coming King), this promise was (possibly) fulfilled in the verses immediately following when some SAW Him transfigured on the Mount. (Note he only promised a ‘seeing’ not an actuality.)
The other texts talk about ‘this generation shall not pass’ but what did Jesus mean by ‘this generation’? Did the ‘this’ refer to his listeners, did it refer to the generation he was already talking about in his account? Or did it mean ‘this gene-pool’ (as Paidion has suggested). Ive read and re-read those passages and I believe that the second possibility is AT LEAST as likely as the first. In which case there is no problem.
And one final rider, I also happen to believe that the ‘imminence’ of Jesus return is true for 1st century Christians as it is for 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and us too because we will all encounter the reality of Jesus’ second coming at the moment of our death.
That is not to deny a second coming which will be visible world-wide to those living and which (according to some absolutely amazing prophecies in scripture) is probably within the next twenty years.

Just my thoughts on the second coming

#59

The “greater good” is the maintenance of man’s free will. God values the ability to choose above preventing evil, because He wants man to FREELY choose Him; He has no use for a race of robots, or puppets controlled by strings.

Although God sometimes (but rarely) intervenes to stop evil, to do so ALL the time would be the destruction of free will.

I know, Steve, that your objection to this is: "Why would God allow evil people to exercise the power of choice, and dominate or kill other people, therefore depriving the victims of their choices?

Thank you, Steve, for bringing that up. It appears to be a valid point! I have thought some more about this, and now realize that I didn’t give you a satisfactory answer when you brought it up. I still cannot give you a good answer, but I’m thinking.http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g374/Paidion9/Emoticons/hmmm.gif

#60

I believe that to be the very first proclamation of the Second Coming in Scripture. Here is how I break it down:

  1. The Old Testament talks about Christ’s First Coming.
  2. The four Gospels talk about Christ’s First Coming.
  3. Acts and the Epistles talk about Christ’s Second Coming.
  4. The book of Revelation talks about Christ’s First Coming.

In sum, I think the only texts referring to Christ’s Second Coming are in Acts and in the New Testament epistles. :slight_smile: