Explorations in Theology

The series explores a theology that is human friendly! Jesus as the true human shows us who God is, and because of his consideration for us ('who are we, that God should make note of us?') defines who humanity was created to be. The nature of sin is to fall short of the glory of God. The glory of God as revealed in the truly human one - 'we beheld his glory full of grace and truth'. This volume is a foundation for the other volumes. And there are ZOOM groups available...
Volume 2 Significant Other and Volume 3 A Subversive Movement now also available!
El libro electrónico (en Español) también ya está disponible
.

So go on... you know you want to!!! Order a copy Boz Publications

And who do we expect?

Coming king, coming to rule. Words carry meaning and we can change the meaning of words by our preconceptions. I referred in a previous post to the teaching of Reconstructionism (Theonomy) that we might be turning another cheek now, but then – and they are post-millennialists with the kingdom of God coming, being expressed in the world before the ‘coming’ of Jesus through the exercise of law – we will not be turning the other cheek for the Old Testament law lays out in no uncertain manner how those who do not go God’s way are to be treated!

Every knee will bow… and we have understood that to be (excuse the clumsy language) an imposition of God’s good will whether people really want it or not. Language!

The language used for the parousia is full of imperial imagery as is the entire ‘good news’ proclamation in the NT (even the word parousia was imperial after all). The mistake I think though we can make is to make the way that Caesar ruled as the lens through which we see the future reign of Jesus (the language being parallel is a contributing factor, though I suspect it is really fuelled by how we understand the rule of God, who comes to crush all his enemies). The NT point, though, is that Caesar and Jesus are not parallels, but they are contrasting opposites. Caesar ruled by the sword (hence Paul’s rather tongue in cheek ‘submit to the governing authorities’ instruction), Caesar took life to maintain peace; Jesus refused to take up the sword or even to defend his own life, his ‘rulership’ is released through the laying down his life, peace being established through his death.

I have referred to Phil 2: 6,7 in previous posts and want to go there again, quoting the NRSV (I wonder what the translators will do when the Updated Version comes out this year). I quote it below with unjustifiable word in bold:

Christ Jesus,
who, though he was in the form of God,
did not regard equality with God
as something to be exploited,
but emptied himself…

There is no ‘though’ in the Greek. It could write:

Lionel Messi, being one of the best footballers ever was inducted into the hall of fame… but if I changed that to:

Lionel Messi, who, though being one of the best footballers ever was inducted into the hall of fame…’

My change is anything but subtle and furthermore makes no sense at all! The added ‘though’ in the translators for Phil. 2 only makes sense if we are inferring Jesus is acting in a way that is counter to how God acts. And I think that is often how we see it. His incarnation is not a revelation of God, it is not really ‘God’ with us, but a god in disguise who is with us with the parousia then truly revealing this God, for then Jesus will not be the one laying down his life but the one who (like Caesar) will crush all before him.

I hope you are not disappointed in this. Why follow Jesus? Not in order to avoid hell-fire, but to become God-like, to be freed to lay down our lives. That is why the going to heaven / going to hell divide is not even close to the centre (for me of the Gospel). Salvation is not a saved from (other than ‘from our sins’ our many failures to be human, to be God-like in insisting we will create our own destiny) but a salvation for, the for being as per the one we follow, for the world.

In Acts 1:11 those seeing Jesus ascend were told that he will come in like manner as to how they saw him go. Maybe that was a simple reference to ‘you were looking up into the sky and he ascended, so one day you will look up into the sky and he will descend’, but any future parousia is so different to how he left. Seen by a few, then to be seen by all; they are left, he is gone; but in the parousia all those who have died returning, total transformation and all to happen in a moment – no time for gazing into the sky when that happens!

In the same way – tropos – often carries with it the sense of ‘way of life’. The Jesus who came as human, came truly representing God; the Jesus who lived is the one who is to come, the same revelation of God will be present, he will come in the same way, the same Jesus, the same life-motivated Person will be seen and welcomed. Truly peace on earth and good-will to all, regardless of location.

The return of Jesus is not in order that we can self-justify ourselves with ‘see we picked the right side and now you will see who is powerful’, it is not ‘so he came as Saviour, now he comes as judge’. First time round he came as judge, and brought all things to a place of judgement; second time he will come as Saviour… or better whenever he comes he comes as Saviour and judge. The same Jesus.

More of my conventional approach in the next post.

2 thoughts on “And who do we expect?

  1. Love this. I’m not sure I would call myself a Christian at this point in life but I am intrigued by Jesus. I say that as a former pastor. Jesus intrigues because he is so freakin’ radical. An amazing man. Even if the gospels are flat out untrue in that no one like that lived, they amaze because someone thought to write down such a story. Whether Jesus actually lived or not, the gospels remain an amazing narrative that encapsulates the longings of all on the wrong side of imperialism, patriarchy and racism. Imperialism as you rightly point out is challenged in his life and death. Patriarchy in so many of his interactions with women. And Racism as he elevated Samaritans and Gentiles as righteous and believers.

    But then so many of the aspirations of so called followers appear to be the opposite. They want revenge. They yearn for power. They want a leader who is an autocratic, imperialistic, vengeful ruler. Everything Jesus abhors. And died to repudiate.

    Its a funny world today. Not just the pandemic and all the back and forth to manage the lethal virus. . . but so many cultural attitudes. Here in North America, at least, there is a constant emphasis on me and my. My wellness. My time. My passions. My desires. Whole industries to support that which is just me as an imperial, autocratic ruler of my own life. A result of consumer society. And that gets expanded to my entitlement to do as I please (in fact, I must to be fulfilled!), get what I want (and destroy creation in the process), and treat others in a way that never negates me. Imperialism at a personal level gets extrapolated to imperialism at a global level in so much of the end time theology.

    Where is Jesus in all of this? Is he present? How? He is so radical. So fundamentally challenging to all of us. Demanding both the most simple and most difficult thing any of us can do – lay down our lives for our neighbours. The neighbour who is the OTHER, the different and despised one. I fail at this daily. So I hesitate to call myself a follower of Jesus. But he still intrigues me!

    1. For sure, Ann, the desire for ‘revenge’, ‘I am proved right and now you get your come uppance (known as judgement, righteous judgement!!)’ is so different to how Jesus lived. And it seems to me to require a different Jesus to come, hence as Saviour (past) and judge (future), and never will the twain meet.

Comments are closed.

Post section built on the WordPress platform. | Theme: Perspectives 18, a fully-responsive, mobile-first design developed by © Martin Scott. | Site contents © Perspectives, 2007 - 2022, all rights reserved. | If interested in a customised site email: Martin Scott.
Perspectives