|
BY THE AUTHOR
Dr. W. Robert Cook, Th.D
Be Thou my vision, 0 Lord of my heart—
Naught be all else to me save that Thou art;
Thou my best thought by day or by night—
Waking or sleeping Thy presence my light.
High King of heaven, when vict'ry is won,
May I reach heaven's joys, 0 bright heaven’s Sun!
Heart of my own heart, whatever befall,
Still be my vision, 0 Ruler of all.
Irish hymn (c. 8th century) Trans. by Mary E. Byrne
Traditionally, the last head to be considered in the theological encyclopedia is that of eschatology, the doctrine of last things. Herein is considered the consummation of God's purposes both in and beyond time. Because our English word "last" tends to leave us with an overly narrow idea, its use in this context needs more careful attention.
As a general principle "last" is understood as referring to that which concludes a series, such as the last car of the train or the last event on the agenda. Breshears has correctly noted, however, that when used in a theological setting the word eschatological "refers more to the nature of an event than to the time of an event." As Bloesch puts it, "the eschaton signifies both the finis (chronological end) and telos (goal) of history." [i]
In his discussion of the word eschatos Buswell suggests that it has the idea of "cosmic eventuality or finality." He states that "the writers of the Bible frequently refer to an eschatological complex of events as the climax of world history", the resolution and the consummation of God's cosmic program." [ii]
Toon, in his comments on the meaning of "last" states, "not only does it mean that which comes after everything else but also that which completes a process by bringing it to its purposed end."[iii]
With this broad agreement that the "eschatological" is more qualitative than quantitative the question remains as to just what the nature of the eschaton may be. In Carl Henry’s mind it is basically Christological. “Eschatology is the doctrine or logos of the end. Christ is that Logos. As the end or goal of the universe he presides even now over history moving toward the end of the age. He is more than simply Overlord of the finalities: he is Omega in person, the very Final Word." [iv]
This theme is developed more fully as he states that "the touchstone that distinguishes authentic eschatology from utopia and myth is its refusal to speak merely of the future in an indeterminate and ambiguous manner; instead it grounds all affirmation about the future only in terms of God in Christ as the incarnate, risen and returning Lord." [v]
Gerry Breshears' analysis of the nature of eschatological events is even more precise and to the point. He sees them as "acts of God which are related to his program of reconciliation, i.e., his program of reestablishing his kingdom." By this is meant the dynamic activity of God to reconcile his sin alienated creation by delivering it from the power of evil and bringing it into his gracious reign."
Since there can be no reconciliation without a reconciler and no kingdom without a king, this line of thinking is likewise Christological in the final analysis. Henry recognizes the “kingdom” character of eschatology as he writes:
Not by any means were all expectations attaching to the kingdom of God fulfilled in the historical manifestation of Jesus of Nazareth nor in his present relationship to his followers. What has "already" transpired—the kingdom of God mirrored transparently in Jesus of Nazareth and approximated in the regenerate church as a moral beachhead in history—does not diminish one bit the importance of the coming future. In relation to what lies ahead, even the "already" of the present age is largely intermediate; though standing at the threshold of the ultimate, it remains penultimate. All that has gone before, and all that now already is, stands correlated with and inseparable from remarkable events of world scope that are yet to come: the full manifestation of the kingdom of God awaits Jesus' coming return in glory. [vi].
Eschatology does indeed deal with last things since it has to do with the consummation of the old order, the bringing to an end of that which has never had God's approval. It also deals with ultimate things since it has to do with the establishment of that which God has always intended. The eschaton, then, is that which brings an end that is a beginning—a beginning that will never end.
Like every other major head of theology this one has involved controversy. On occasion this has led to unnecessary and unfortunate division in the church of Jesus Christ. Or, in other cases, it has led toward a detachment from or avoidance of the study of prophecy.
It would seem, however, that a better route to go would be to follow the same pattern we pursue in other matters of doctrine. Wherein revelation is clear a position of conviction should be assumed, all the while speaking the truth in love. Thus, if clear revelation involves details, at those points we may confidently affirm a detailed system of eschatology.
If, on the other hand, it only involves generalities, at t those points we should state the details of our system with modesty, humility, and open-mindedness.
Since it is last in the order of study is eschatology to be considered as least, as well? "There is ... a wide range of views of the status of eschatology; it is variously regarded as an appendage to other doctrines, one of the major doctrines, the supreme doctrine, and the whole of theology." [vii]
It is most important to keep in mind that eschatology is not an addendum to our body of doctrine with little or no interrelationship thereto. If it is true that eschatology deals with the consummation of God's declared purposes it is naive to think that prophetic truth can be systematized apart from consideration of other aspects of theology.
Since God is a God of order it follows that there will be direct relationship between what he declares he will do and what he finally does. Thus, already in ecclesiology some of the solutions to eschatological problems are foreshadowed (just as certain hermeneutical considerations forecast ecclesiological and eschatological results).
But, behind all of this stands the constraints of our bibliology. Do we allow the scriptures to determine our hermeneutics as we allow them to determine our other beliefs? Can one retain a traditionally dispensational or a traditionally covenantal hermeneutic and allow the scriptures to chasten one's views?
That God considers eschatological truth important as a part of our belief-system can hardly be questioned. In other realms of reality sheer volume does not necessarily determine value. When the God-breathed scriptures give prominent attention to something, however, we do well to take notice.
Seventeen of the sixty-six canonical books were prophetic when written (over 25%) and this does not include prophetic portions of other genre of biblical literature. Further, one-twentieth of the New Testament and one-fifth of the Pauline writings are prophetic.
One of the reasons eschatological truth is such a vital part of one's theology relates as much to pragmatics as it does to dogmatics. Such truths provide hope for the believer and hope is one of the ingredients necessary for life.
The significance of hope to Christian living is highlighted when the biblical concept is contrasted with the commonly held meaning associated with the English word in daily parlance. It is usually related to plans the outcome of which one must await with uncertainty. This idea is also reflected in such biblical passages as Ruth 1:12; Ecclesiastes 9:4; Isaiah 20:5; 1 Corinthians 9:10, 13:7.
The scriptures also set forth another usage of the word with a dramatically different connotation. In several significant passages it means glad certainty regarding things as yet unrealized. The difference may be accounted for in that, like faith, hope is no better than its object. That which revolutionizes its character is that upon which it is focused.
When directed toward God (e.g., Titus 2:13) and the things of God (e.g., 1 Pet. 1:13) the element of uncertainty is removed for "hope does not disappoint us" (Rom. 5:5). On the other hand, those separate from Christ, who do not believe that Jesus died and rose again, have "no hope" (Eph. 2:12; 1 Thess. 4:13-14). It is not that they have no anticipation of the future but that it is either without foundation or filled with dread.
Hope fixed on God embraces three elements: expectation of the future (1 Thess. 4:13-14); trust (Heb. 11:1; Gal. 5:5); and the patience (steadfastness, endurance) which comes from waiting (1 Thess. 1:3, 10; Rom. 8:24-25).
Peter, in a passage which combines all of these elements especially highlights the close relationship of faith and hope. He writes of a suffering Savior who has become a glorious Sovereign "so that your faith and hope are in God" (1 Pet. 1:21).
Salvation is a “package deal." It not only includes redemption and forgiveness for past sins, and provision for present needs, but also a glorious hope of consummation. In other words, hope is not an option or addition but an integral part of the believer's birthright.
By its very nature Christian hope is eschatological, having to do with things related to the consummation of God's plans. At the same time, it is certainly immediate, as well. Peter speaks of a hope which we possess and for which we may give account (1 Pet. 3:15), while Paul notes that the glad certainty of our future deliverance is protection for our minds today (1 Thess. 5:8).
In addition, like faith and love, hope is eternal. Hope abides (remains) (1 Cor. 13:13) because it is "not concerned with human dreams of the future but with the confidence which, directed away from the world to God, waits patiently for God's gift, and when it is received does not rest in possession but in the assurance that God will maintain what he has given."
The term "hope" may signify both an act and attitude and also, rhetorically, that which is hoped for itself (see e.g., Rom. 8:24; Col. 1:5; Heb. 6:18). As we see Paul applying this principle in Colossians 1:27 and 1 Timothy 1:1 we discover the distinctive of Christian hope. Our hope is not merely something but someone; not so much an event as a person.
Because this hope is personal as well as attitudinal the scriptures describe it with certain qualifying words and phrases. It is described as "good" (2 Thess. 2:16-17) because it is intrinsically worthy. That which it will produce will be good because of the inner nature of the hope itself. It is also "blessed" (Titus 2:13), that is felicitous or happy. This term describes the spiritual joy produced in the believer by hope.
A third descriptor uses the term "living" (1 Pet. 1:3). It should be noted that Peter did not speak of a hope that is alive, although that would be a true statement of fact, but of "a living hope," one that is pulsating with life. Fourthly, John speaks of "this" hope in Christ which is transforming and leads to self- purification (1 John 3:2-3).
Finally, the believer's hope should be dynamic rather than static. There are at least two resources for its development: personal experience and the promises of God. The first is more subjective in nature but no less legitimate despite this fact. It involves a process which begins with personal tribulation, which leads to perseverance, which develops proven character, which issues in hope (Rom. 5:3-4). The second involves the objective declarations of the written word of God, the scriptures, which were designed for our instruction, encouragement and consequent hope.
I. Reasons for the Study of Eschatology
The following items are drawn largely from Charles Ryrie, The Basis of the Premillennial Faith, pp. 15-16.
A. Reasons Related to God
1. His sovereign plan and purpose for and in the world are not fully understood apart from the prophetic future, (Isa. 46:9-11)
God is a God of his word. What he promises he performs. What he begins he completes (Phil. 1:6).
2. Christ's truthfulness is therein affirmed, (see John 2:22)
While the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ is most certainly a matter of past historical record it is at the same time eschatological. It partakes of the character, purpose and significance of the eschaton.
This is apparent from Paul's association of our Lord's resurrection with our yet future resurrection by the use of the "firstfruits" concept (1 Cor. 15:20). Thus, Jesus' prophetic statement about his resurrection was both eschatological and evidential (John 2:18-22).
B. Reasons Related to the Word of God
1. Fulfilled prophecy testifies to the truthfulness and accuracy of scripture
There are 333 fulfilled prophecies concerning Christ. The ratio of chance fulfillment for such is one to 87,000 plus 93 zeros. This sets the pattern for as yet unfulfilled prophecy, the things usually associated with eschatology.
2. The study of last things is necessary if we would be true to Scripture
It is our responsibility to know and expound the whole of God's purposes, including the eschatological portions (Acts 20:27, cf. Revelation 1:3). Difficulty of understanding and/or disagreement of interpretation are not legitimate reasons to avoid the Bible's teaching on last things.
C. Reasons Related to the Man of God
The study of eschatological truths will positively affect the believer
1. It comforts, (John 14:1-3; 2 Cor. 5:8; 1 Thess. 4:13-18).
In the face of unsettling change, sorrow and death it assuages anxiety
2. It encourages, (2 Cor. 4:14, 16-18; 1 Thess. 5:9-11)
In the midst of trial, especially that brought by the ravages of time, it gives a clearer vision of coming glory.
3. It motivates, (2 Cor. 5:9-10)
Our desire to please him, which produces God-honoring service, is stimulated by awareness of our accountability before the judgment seat of Christ.
4. It creates (Rev. 5:11-14)
The atmosphere of heaven is developed in our lives as the unseen world takes on reality.
5. It contents (Rev. 19:11; 21:3-5; Rom. 8:18)
Present injustice may be more easily endured knowing it will be dealt with justly one day.
6. It corrects, (2 Thess. 2:1-5; Gal. 6:6-10; 2 Pet. 3:17)
An accurate knowledge of the end times will help to keep us from false teaching and false practice.
7. It purifies, (1 John 3:2-3; 2 Pet. 3:11-12, 14)
Responsiveness to eschatological truth will encourage us to holy living and godliness.
In considering specific reasons for the study of eschatology certain cautions must be noted as well.
II. Cautions in the Study of Eschatology
A. We Must Beware of Inordinate Curiosity, (cf. Acts 1:6-8)
While we must go as far as scripture takes us we must not go beyond. There are matters about which God has been pleased to remain silent. It is most instructive to notice in this very strategic passage from Acts that the Lord not only cautions the disciples regarding the unavailability of some truth about the future. He also refocuses their attention on their present responsibility, namely bearing witness to himself throughout the earth.
B. We Must Beware of Undue Certainty, (2 Thess. 2:1-2; cf. Luke 9:53-55)
It is unwise to be overly dogmatic about those details (many of which are difficult to determine with exactness) which do not affect the system as a whole. As Henry notes, "Many questions about the world to come we cannot answer. Divine revelation is silent on many matters and invites a proper reticence lest we supplement apostolic enlightenment by rampant imagination." [viii]
This extrapolation of imagination beyond revealed truth seems to have been the problem Paul faced as he wrote the believers in Thessalonica in the first century. Some in the church, as has been true in modern times, as well, had moved beyond Paul's teaching about the coming again of Jesus Christ and were "leading an undisciplined life, doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies" (2 Thess. 3:11).
C. We Must Beware of Cowardice, (cf. 2 Tim. 1:7-8)
Wherein God has spoken with clarity we should do likewise with conviction. Note, e.g., 1 Thessalonians 4:l3a, "we do not want you' to be uninformed …."
D. We Must Beware of Complacency, (cf. 2 Pet. 3:3-8)
Both the sin of unbelief and the sin of unappropriated truth are spiritually debilitating. We dare not be hearers only. Since it is the Holy Spirit who discloses "things to come" (John 16:13), a failure to act on such disclosure is a spiritual sin.
[i] Donald Bloesch, Essentials of Evangelical Theology, II, 183
[ii] J. Oliver Buswell, A Systematic Theology of the Christian Religion, II, 295
[iii] Peter Toon, Heaven and Hell, p. 206
[iv] Carl F. H. Henry, God, Revelation and Authority, VI, 492
[v] Ibid., III, 23
[vi] Ibid., p. 24
[vii] Millard Erickson, Christian Theology, III, 1151
[viii] Henry, op. cit., VI, 494
|
Copyright © 2007 by
AncientPath Network
and the authors. All rights reserved. |
12.13.07