Marty Solomon makes some bold statements in the 2nd episode of Season 5 of the BEMA Podcast (Episode 192, Telling a Story) (starting about 20 minutes in). He says the early Christians were not wrong to believe the return of Christ was imminent. He believes Christ’s return actually was imminent (and still is) – if only the time was right
Solomon basically believes that Jesus might have returned within a generation or two of his death if the right things developed. He believes that the date was not and is not fixed. This is not how I have viewed it nor how I believe most people view the return of Jesus.
I have always assumed that God has fixed a date for the return of Jesus. It seems to me that this is what is generally taught or assumed. This is why we struggle with Jesus saying no one knows the hour or day of his return – not even Jesus. This is why we wrestle with the message of the imminent return of Jesus that bleeds through the New Testament.
Jesus didn’t return, so can it be possible that they were wrong about that? If they were wrong about that, what else are they wrong about?
Marty Solomon says they were not wrong about the potential, imminent return of Jesus. It could have happened, if only the time was right, if only the right things happened, if only the circumstances were such that his return was appropriate.
This is a radically different view than what I have assumed, but I was intrigued by the thought of it. As I mulled it over, I began to see some some things, and that inspires my writing today.
Life is a journey, and each day is a leg in that journey. Proverbs says that a man makes his plans, but God directs his steps. Basically, God is ultimately in control, but we have something to say in the process. Where we end up depends on whether and how we align ourselves with God and HIs purposes.
The weekly reading for the small group I am in (and the subject of the sermon this coming Sunday) is 1 Timothy 4:7-10. That passage inspires my writing today as part of the leg of my journey that I call today. My focus will be the following two verses:
Have nothing to do with godless myths and old wives’ tales; rather, train yourself to be godly. For physical training is of some value, but godliness has value for all things, holding promise for both the present life and the life to come.
1 timothy 4:7-8 (niv)
I was fortunate today that I didn’t just set out to check off this reading for Wednesday night. I came at this reading with a more intentional and devoted mindset, which I suppose is appropriate for the topic. I can’t say that I always have the mindfulness to do that, but today I did.
I might otherwise have assumed I knew what “godless myths” are and what “godly” training is. I might have glossed over those phrases without really understanding what Paul is saying, but I realized as read them that I didn’t really know what he meant by “godless myths” and training to be “godly.”
Acknowledging this, I took one step back to read these verses in context. I read verse 6, which says:
If you point these things out to the brothers and sisters, you will be a good minister of Christ Jesus, nourished on the truths of the faith and of the good teaching that you have followed.
1 Timothy 4:6 (emphasis added)
Of course, then I had to step further back to see what Paul meant when he said, “If you point these things….” What things? The previously verses contain those “things”:
The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth. For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer.
1 Timothy 4:1-5
I am still not sure what “deceiving spirits” these people followed or what “teachings” Paul references here, but the fact that Paul calls these teachers “hypocritical liars” who taught ascetic religious practices (forbidding marriage and ordering abstinence from certain foods) is a clue. Affirming that God created everything good and receiving those good things with thanksgiving and prayer is another clue.
it seems that another clue lies in the use of the word, hypocritical,” which I learned recently was not meant in exactly the same way modern people think of it. We think of hypocrisy as saying one thing and doing another. The Greek word, ὑπόκρισις (hupokrisis), that we translate as hypocrisy literally means “to act under a feigned part.”
In other words, a hypocrite is an actor. A hypocrite according to the Greek meaning is someone playing a part, a person pretending to be someone or to know something than who or what they are.
As I considered these things, I realized that the Greek words translated into English as “godless myths” and training to “godly” might also give me a better understanding of what Paul is saying. When I dove into the Greek, the meaning became clearer, and it isn’t necessarily what I might have thought.
I might have answered, if someone pressed me, that godliness is how a person behaves. I might have said that godliness means doing right, living according to God’s rules, and conforming to biblical morality, but that isn’t what Paul is saying here. To be sure, godliness does bear the fruits of the Holy Spirit, but we should not confuse the fruit for the root.
I am writing today about something I have written before, but I think it bears repeating. I have not stopped thinking about it since these words from Paul virtually leapt off the page when I read them a few years ago:
“What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside.”
1 Corinthians 5:12-13 (emphasis added)
How many times had I glossed over those words without really seeing them? Did he really mean that? We are not to judge people outside the church? Isn’t that exactly what we do?
I have kept going back to Paul’s admonition often since that day. I didn’t see it right away, but I eventually noticed that Paul echoed the very words of Jesus in that statement: Jesus said,
“If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world. There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day.”
JOhn 12:47-48 (emphasis added)
Elsewhere, Jesus said, “God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.” (John 3:17)
If Jesus bids us to follow him, should we not adopt the same posture toward the world? It is the same posture Paul admonished the Corinthians to model toward those outside the Church: Do not judge them because they have a judge! (And it isn’t us!)
Paul
1 Corinthians 5:12-13
What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church?
God will judge those outside
Jesus
John 12:47-48
I have not come to judge the world.
There is a judge for the one who rejects me.
When adopt the posture Jesus had toward the world and the posture Paul tells the church to adopt, we are freed up from the responsibility to judge so that we can love. Even if the world goes its own way, which it will, we can love the world. Even if the world hates us, we can still love the world.
We are free to preach good news to the poor, to give sight to the blind, to set the oppressed free, and to proclaim the favor of God to all who will receive Him. This was how Jesus characterized what he came to do when he read from the Isaiah scroll in his hometown synagogue, sat down, and said, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.” (Luke 4: 21) This is our ministry also, if we will follow him.
We don’t have to be in the business of judging the world because the world has a Judge. We can leave that to God. In fact, it isn’t an option. It is God’s rightful place to judge, and it isn’t our place.
That means it isn’t up to us to make the world conform to the law of God. We are not responsible to require godly behavior and biblical morality from the world, and it isn’t our business to do that.
Rather, we are to love the world, though people in the world are yet sinners. We can do that because Jesus loved us and died for us while we were yet sinners.
“Are you not to judge those inside?” says Paul. The world has not subscribed to Jesus, but we have. Judgment begins in the house of God because Jesus counts on us to be the light and salt of the world. If we lose our flavor, we cannot be who God calls us to be.
Who among us were able to conform to the Law before Jesus? None of us! Which is why we needed him. We are saved by grace through faith, and not by anything we could do. The world, likewise, cannot conform to God’s law apart from Jesus. This is why the world needs a Savior: because it has a Judge.
Why, then, would we try to impose godly behavior and biblical morality on the world through human, legal means when the world is incapable of conforming to God’s law apart from Jesus?
Jesus sends us into the world as his ambassadors just as he came into the world: not to judge the world, because the world already has a judge. He sends us out as ambassadors not to condemn the world, but but to save it.
If we can adopt this posture toward the world that Jesus adopted and that Paul admonished, we can be unified in that purpose and calling of Jesus even in our own differences about how the world ought to operate. We can love each other as fellow ambassadors of Christ and give each other grace in the areas in which we disagree.
Our primary focus should be the purpose and focus of Jesus – not to condemn the world, but to save it by proclaiming good news to the poor, sight for the blind, freedom for the oppressed, and the favor of God’s love toward all who will receive Him. Everything else fades in light of that purpose and calling.
Jesus said, the world will know us by our love for each other. (John 13:35) Let us so live, then, that the world knows us for our love for one another and our love for the world that Jesus loved!
I am listening to The Basic Folk podcast episode 316 with Joy Oladokun (an artist I like by the way) Perhaps, that is a strange way to open a blog post on the age old heresy of Marcionism – the belief that the god revealed in the Old Testament is different from God revealed in the New Testament. Hang with me though!
Joy Oladokun (who is a musical artist you should check out) grew up in the church and cut her musical chops on worship music and listening to Phil Collins with her father. She uses biblical themes in her music, which also has a distinctly spiritual character to it.
Though she may have some heretical ideas about God and the Bible, I believe we can appreciate and like music even when the artist doesn’t believe exactly as we do and, in this case, even when she has heretical ideas about God and the Bible. We are all on a journey in our relationship to God, and I appreciate that about people and the music people make on their own journeys.
Anyway, around the 15 minute mark in the podcast Joy Oladokun expresses her understanding that God, in the Old Testament flip flops. Then, she provides this short theological synopsis, “It’s like, ‘Sacrifice your son…. Never mind, here’s a goat.” I am chuckling even now, but her thoughts and the example she gives deserves a response.
Many people her age (and all ages, really) have an issue with the story of Abraham sacrificing Isaac. It also opens up a biblical theme that I glimpsed as a young nonbeliever reading the Bible for the first time many years ago that continues to develop as I age.
Perhaps, I am fortunate that I didn’t pay much attention to theology in my formative years, because I didn’t formulate many theological ideas that colored and warped my view of God. When I read the Bible for the first time in college, I came to it with no preconceived ideas and no assumptions (that I recall).
I was raised Catholic, but I didn’t even realize that the readings in the mass were from the Bible (until after I became a Christian). I could not recall anything from the catechism classes I took. I was pretty much too zoned out (and, later, stoned out) to latch onto many theological constructs.
I didn’t know anything about evangelical ideas, like biblical inerrancy, predestination, and eschatological schemes. I came at the Bible like I approached all literature, poetry, and philosophy. I let it speak to me and convey its message to me.
Early on (as I read Genesis), I learned that Abraham heard the voice of God, and he responded in faith (with trust). I learned that the Ancient Near Eastern people from whom Abraham descended and believed in many gods who were more or less arbitrary and capricious. One of those beliefs that was ubiquitous in Abraham’s day was the belief that gods require child sacrifice to be appeased.
I could see that the God who Abraham “heard” was not like those other gods that he and the people around him believed in. I could see that Abraham lived his life on a journey (quite literally) of discovery about this God whose “voice” he heard.
Abraham’s understanding was evolving as he sensed this God and responded in faith to Him. He was learning that God was not like the gods with which he was familiar. This God made promises, and He kept them. This God desired a relationship with Abraham, and He was trustworthy.
I have to admit that the story about Isaac was a bit of a mystery to me then, but I didn’t rush to any conclusions. I understood that child sacrifice was practiced throughout the ancient Levant, but something was different about this story that carried some significance, though I wasn’t quite sure of all that it meant at the time.
There was a lot I didn’t understand. I was on a journey myself, and I realized there was mystery in the stories that belied quick or simple explanations. I, like Abraham perhaps, was willing to explore where a connection to this God might take me (after a brief flirtation with Eastern religion).
I have been on this journey now for over 45 years. I responded to the God of Abraham when I was 19 (the summer after I first read the Bible). I was far from knowing all the answers (though I did go through a period in which I thought I knew much more than I did).
I guess the thought that we know more than we really do is a human trait, and it is one we are well advised to resist. We are finite beings, regardless of the knowledge we collect, and we will never be more than finite beings in these earthly bodies that we will take to our graves.
I can’t tell you how many years I have taken to get to a place of some comfortable understanding on the Abraham and Isaac story. It is more than I might like to admit, but I have always been willing to give God the benefit of the doubt, which is what Abraham did. It is what he was commended for: faith, which is simply trusting in the goodness of God.
The Bible we have says that God told Abraham to go sacrifice his son, Isaac. We cannot escape that is what the Bible says. But, is that what God actually said?
Or is that just what Abraham “heard”? Or is it just what Abraham understood? Or is it just what he felt compelled to do?
I don’t know, and I think it is ok to say, “We don’t really know.” I also think it is ok to ask the question and to assume we may not necessarily have the right answer.
In any event, Abraham clearly believed that God told him to sacrifice his son. That requirement, of course, is antithetical to the promise God had given Abraham – that Abraham’s descendants would fill the earth and become as numerous as the stars in the sky. Yet, Abraham dutifully (if not reluctantly) complied with what he believed he must do.
This is a kind of faith that we don’t understand today, especially in the post Enlightenment age of reason and science driven more recently by post-modern skepticism. We are told in Sunday school (as I have learned) that this story is about Abraham’s faith and willingness to do what he was told, though it didn’t make sense
I think that is partially true, but I have come to see that the story is not only (or maybe even primarily) about faith. The story isn’t primarily about Abraham, either. He is just the vessel through which the story unfolds. The story is about God, and who God is, and the character of God.
Whether God told Abraham to sacrifice his son, or Abraham jumped to that conclusion, doesn’t matter so much. Child sacrifice was demanded by the gods, according to Ancient Near Eastern religious thought that was formative in Abraham’s outlook on the world. He responded according to the custom, practice, and wisdom of his age.
I have written about this a number of times before. (See the Abraham and the Paradigm Shift, Abraham and the Love of God, Abraham and Isaac Revisited: Introduction, Abraham and Isaac Revisited: Here I Am, Abraham, Abraham and Faith and the Hope Deferred, and Abraham and the Blood Path) I am not going to cover all that ground again, but I return to the same theme again because it has roots in my initial revelation of God and my own journey of faith. As I hope to flesh out, it also provides some insight into the God who seems to flip flop.
Have you ever noticed the odd qualification in the key statement of the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats: [W]hatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.” (Matthew 25:40)(NIV) Why did Jesus qualify “the least of these” with the phrase, “brothers and sisters of mine?”
I came at the same topic from a different angle in Who are Christians to love? I raised the question, then, whether “brothers and sisters of mine” limits the people we are to care for – limiting them to brothers and sisters of Jesus. What does that phrase mean in the context of the parable of the Sheep and the Goats?
Elsewhere, Jesus tells his disciples that the world will know they are his followers by the love they have for one another. (John 13:35) When Jesus learns from someone in a crowd that his mother and brothers are looking for him, Jesus says, “[W]hoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.” (Matthew 12:50)
These verses in other contexts have prompted some scholars to conclude that we are only called to love fellow believers. They conclude that only the care we show for fellow believers who are hungry, thirsty, naked, a stranger, or a prisoner is showing care for Jesus in the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats. Some even narrow the focus further, taking the position that Jesus was only referring to his disciples (with whom he shared the parable).
This, however, is a minority view. Most of the early church fathers and theologians do not hold that view because of the many Bible passages that instruct us to love our neighbors and even our enemies. The Parable of the Good Samaritan makes this point rather clearly, as I show in the blog article linked in the opening paragraph.
In another article, I tackled the question, Why does Jesus repeatedly prioritize Christians loving one another? It seems that Jesus does prioritize our love for fellow believers. Paul also prioritizes Christian love for fellow believers when he says, “[A]s we have opportunity, let us do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith.” (Galatians 6:10)
I note in the previous article that Jesus emphasized loving each other as he was preparing his disciples for the imminent reality of his death. In that context, he was encouraging them to stick together and to love each other. The context matters.
In other contexts, Jesus told his followers to love their neighbors and their enemies. Thus, Christian love is not exclusive to loving Christians.
Yet, Jesus does seem to prioritize love for fellow followers of Christ at some points.
Perhaps, Jesus was letting his followers (and us) know that we need to love each other, first, before we can love our neighbors (and then our enemies). If we cannot even love those who love us and think like us, how can we love our neighbors – and how in the world can we love our enemies?
I encourage you to read the previous two blog articles if you want a more compete analysis on the subject. In this blog article, I want to explore the majority way of reading “whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.” (Matthew 25:40)
Navigating by Faith 