Christian Motivation

Why am I a Christian? What compels me to live like Christ and for Christ and reject unchristian things? What helps me face life’s difficulties and the unrelenting attacks against the Christian faith and pressures to conform to this sinful world? Why should I be and remain a faithful and active member of Christ’s church?

In 2 Corinthians Paul observes that genuine conversion to Christ leads to spiritual transformation (3:16-18). Despite the challenges of serving the Lord in an antichristian world, the apostle says with confidence, “… as we have received mercy, we do not lose heart” (4:1). Our commitment and focus are redirected. “Therefore we do not lose heart. Even though our outward man is perishing, yet the inward man is being renewed day by day” (4:16).¹ Looking beyond the temporal and focusing on the eternal (4:17-18), five good reasons to press on are listed in the fifth chapter of 2 Corinthians.

1. The Hope of Heaven. “For we know that if our earthly house, this tent, is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed with our habitation which is from heaven …. We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord” (2 Cor. 5:1-8). Despite the inevitable pain, suffering, and trials of this problem-plagued earthly existence, as the redeemed in Christ we have something so much better to look forward to!

2. Aiming to Please the Lord. “Therefore we make it our aim, whether present or absent, to be well pleasing to Him” (v. 9). Instead of making heaven our main goal, if our leading priority is to live a life pleasing to the Lord, everything else falls into place. We will instinctively love and obey him, serve him and others, and heaven will take care of itself—not just for the individual Christian but for everyone impacted by our faithful lives of pleasing the Lord.

3. The Coming Judgment. “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad” (v. 10). Temporal life on earth is preparatory for eternity. The day of judgment is an appointment all will keep. Now is the time to be prepared.²  

4. The Terror of the Lord. “Knowing, therefore, the terror of the Lord, we persuade men …” (v. 11). Admittedly this may not be the best motivation, but for some, realizing the horrifying consequences of rejecting the Lord’s goodness and the just penalty for sin can be a strong motivator in overcoming apathetic resistance. If fear is what it takes to lead someone away from the path of destruction to the way of righteousness, so be it.

5. The Love of Christ. “For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died; and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again” (vv. 14-15). When Paul speaks of “the love of Christ,” is this Christ’s love for us or our love for Christ? Yes, it is! We love him because he first loved us, which is a compelling reason to continue following his lead.

Conclusion

People are motivated by different things. What motivates you might not motivate me, and vice versa. But surely we all can relate to some if not every one of the reasons listed in the fifth chapter of 2 Corinthians. We have plenty of incentive to not give up and to be faithful to the Lord until our future hope is realized.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Unless otherwise noted, scripture quotations are from the New King James Version (1996).

     ² See K. L. Moore, “Preterism: What’s the Big Deal? (Part 1),” Moore Perspective (3 June 2020), <Link>.

Related Posts: Our Heavenly Citizenship 

Related articles:

 

Image credit: https://joniewp.wordpress.com/2009/05/31/acts-21-24/ 

Until the Times of the Gentiles are Fulfilled?

In the Olivet Discourse Jesus informed his disciples about the approaching destruction of Jerusalem. He warned that the city would be surrounded by armies, that fleeing to the Judean mountains would be urgent and difficult, and “there will be great distress upon the land and wrath to this people; and they will fall by the edge of the sword, and will be led captive unto the nations ...” (Luke 21:20-24a). He then observed, “and all Jerusalem will be trampled under the nations until the times of the nations may be fulfilled” (v. 24b).¹ To what does this last statement refer?

A Helpful Commentary

Almost identical wording is used by Paul in Romans 11:25, providing a helpful commentary: “for I do not want you to be ignorant, brothers, of this mystery, that you might not be wise in yourselves, that a hardening in part to Israel has occurred until [ἄχρι] that [οὗ] the fulness [τὸ πλήρωμα] of the nations [τῶν ἐθνῶν] should come in.”

Parallel wording includes ἄχρι (“until”), a “marker of continuous extent of time up to a point” (BDAG 160), the genitive relative pronoun οὗ (“that”), and τὸ πλήρωμα, “that which fills (up) .... makes someth. full/complete .... brought to fulness or completion .... fulfillment” (BDAG 829-30).² The term ἔθνη has various shades of meaning with reference to “peoples,” “nations,” “foreigners,” “Gentiles,” “unbelievers,” “non-Israelites,” or even “non-Christians” (see BDAG 276-77). In Romans 11:25 almost all English versions render it “Gentiles,” and in Luke 21:24 it is variously rendered “nations” (NRSV), “heathen” (GNT), “unbelievers” (ISV), but mostly “Gentiles” (ESV, NASB, NET, NIV, NKJV, RSV, WEB).

Paul’s Message to the Roman Saints

Contextually, the partial “hardening,” applicable to “some” among “Israel” (Rom. 11:17) who “were unfaithful” (Rom. 3:3), alludes back to Rom. 9:17-18 and pertains to God’s word that softens compliant hearts but hardens the stubborn and resistant. This state of affairs lasts “until that the fullness of the nations should come in.” Opportunity is afforded to unbelievers of all “nations” [ἔθνη] (inclusive of Gentiles) until the “fullness” or “fulfillment” [πλήρωμα] of God’s salvation plan, i.e., the consummation of all things in the final judgment (see Rom. 16:25-26). The verbal εἰσέρχομαι (“come in”) is repeatedly used in the NT for entering the divine kingdom, life, or glory.³

The Broader Context of Scripture

Disciples are to be made of “all the nations” [πάντα τὰ ἔθνη] until the end of the age (Matt. 28:18-20); “making known to us the mystery [μυστήριον] of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness [πλήρωμα] of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth” (Eph. 1:9-10). “God our Savior … desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim. 2:3-4). “The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance” (2 Pet. 3:9).

The Context of Luke’s Gospel

In Luke 21:24, with respect to Jerusalem’s prophetic destruction by the Romans, Jewish survivors would be led captive “unto all the nations” [εἰς τὰ ἔθνη πάντα] (scattered far away from their sacred land), the city would be destroyed “by [the] Gentiles/ nations” [ὑπὸ ἐθνῶν] (the multi-national Roman legions), “until the times of the nations may be fulfilled,” i.e., disciples will be made of all nations until the end of the age, so Jerusalem will never again regain its former glory as the center of nationalistic Judaism, nor its temple stand as a symbol of divine favor. Jesus goes on to issue the great commission, for “repentance and forgiveness of sins to be proclaimed in his name unto all the nations [εἰς πάντα τὰ ἔθνη], having begun from Jerusalem” (Luke 24:47).

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Unless noted otherwise, scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.

     ² The verbal form πληρόω is employed in Luke’s account: “to make full .... to complete a period of time, fill (up), complete .... finish .... fulfill” (BDAG 827-29).

     ³ Matt. 5:20; 7:13, 21; 18:3, 8-9; 19:16-17, 23-24; 23:13; 25:10, 21, 23; Mark 9:43, 45, 47; 10:15, 23-25; Luke 13:24; 14:23; 18:17, 25; 24:26; John 3:5; 10:9; Acts 14:22; Heb. 3:11–4:11; 6:19-20; 9:12; Rev. 22:14.

Related Posts: Luke's Unique Perspective on God's Kingdom (Part 4)

Related articles:

 

Image credit:  Painting by David Roberts (1850)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_%2870_CE%29#/media/File:David_Roberts_-_The_Siege_and_Destruction_of_Jerusalem_by_the_Romans_Under_the_Command_of_Titus,_A.D._70.jpg  

Jesus Christ is Superior to Aaron as God’s High Priest (Hebrews 4:14–10:18): Part 2 of 7

Need for Spiritual Maturation

Jesus is High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek, “... of whom we have much to say, and hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing. For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food. For everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe. But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil” (Hebrews 5:11-14, NKJV).

The Christian community to whom Hebrews was written should have been much further along in their spiritual development than they currently were. “We” (plural authors?)¹ have much to say about the Melchizedek order of priest.² But it is hard to explain (cf. Mark 4:33; John 16:12; 2 Pet. 3:16), especially to the spiritually immature and “dull of hearing” (cf. Matt. 13:15). “Dullness of hearing is a metaphor for mental sluggishness and spiritual apathy” (N. Lightfoot, Jesus Christ Today 112).

For by this time “you ought to be teachers.” Every Christian is expected to be a teacher in some sense: (a) by example (Matt. 5:13-16; Rom. 16:19; 1 Tim. 3:7; 4:12, 15; 5:25; 1 Pet. 2:11-12); (b) open confession of faith (Matt. 10:32; Heb. 4:14; 10:23); (c) defense of one’s faith (1 Pet. 3:15; Jude 3); (d) evangelistically fulfilling the “ministry of reconciliation” (2 Cor. 5:17-21; cf. Matt. 28:18-20); and (e) some will go on to develop and utilize God-given teaching talent (Rom. 12:7; Eph. 4:11).

Instead, these readers needed to be re-taught the first/elementary principles of God’s word. Spiritual “milk” is for spiritual infants (5:12c-13; 1 Cor. 3:1-2; 14:20; cf. 1 Pet. 2:2), while spiritual “meat” or “solid food” is for the mature in faith (5:12c-14; 1 Cor. 2:6; 3:1-2; 14:20; Eph. 4:13-14). Unfamiliarity with God’s word leaves one spiritually weak and vulnerable. Conversely, regular use and practice of God’s word exercises and trains the senses so the mature Christian can make wise, responsible choices (cf. Phil. 1:9-10; 1 Thess. 5:21).

Admonition and Warning: the Danger of Not Progressing

“Therefore, leaving the discussion of the elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, of the doctrine of baptisms, of laying on of hands, of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. And this we will do if God permits” (Hebrews 6:1-3).

Moving on to “perfection” or “maturity” (cf. 2 Pet. 1:1-12; 3:17-18) requires progressing beyond the elementary teachings of Christ. The phrase tón tēs archēs tou Christou logon is literally “the word of the beginning of the Christ.” Rather than the objective genitive alluding to teachings “about Christ” (NASB, NIV, NRSV), the expression is better understood in the subjective genitive sense of teachings from Christ (and his inspired agents), i.e., Christ’s doctrine or the body of Christian teaching (cf. John 8:31-32, 51; 14:21, 23; 15:10, 14; 1 John 2:3-5; 2 John 9). The most basic of these teachings are listed in three sets of pairs: (1) repentance and faith; (2) baptisms and laying on of hands; (3) resurrection and eternal judgment.

The first of these is “repentance from dead works” (9:14; Acts 2:38; 3:19, 26; 26:17-20). Biblically understood, this involves at least four fundamental components: (a) godly sorrow due to sin (2 Cor. 7:9-10), (b) turning from sinful ways (Acts 3:19, 26), (c) turning to God and his ways (Acts 26:18-20), and (d) observable reformation of life (Acts 26:20).

Next is “faith toward God” (11:6; 12:2). Rather than the proverbial “blind leap in the dark,” genuine faith is built on assurance and conviction (11:1), without which God cannot be pleased (11:6). Biblical faith is neither inactive nor unresponsive nor divorced from obedience (11:8; cf. Jas. 2:14-26).

Teaching of baptísmōn concerns “baptisms” (N/KJV, NIV, NRSV), “washings” (NASB), “ablutions” (RSV) (cf. 9:10). At least seven “baptisms” are mentioned in the NT: of Moses (1 Cor. 10:1-2), of suffering (Mark 10:38-39), of fire (Matt. 3:11), Holy Spirit (Acts 1:5), for the dead (1 Cor. 15:29), John’s (Acts 18:25), and into Christ’s death, burial and resurrection (Rom. 6:3-5). The word “baptism” simply means immersion, and each of these baptisms was intended for a particular purpose and for specific individuals. The “doctrine of baptisms” could be the teaching about any or all of these. 

There were also ritual “washings” (baptismōn) among the pagans and Jews, and the idea here may be that of teaching the distinction between these and the baptism practiced by Christians, although in the context of Hebrews the Jewish ritual washings would seem to be more relevant (cf. 9:10; Mark 7:4). When Paul wrote his letter to the Ephesus church, there was only one valid baptism for penitent believers (Eph. 4:5): the baptism of the Great Commission (Matt. 28:19), a burial and resurrection in water (Col. 2:12; Acts 8:35 ff.), for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38), which places one into the community of the saved (Acts 2:41, 47; Gal. 3:27; etc.).

The “laying on of hands” had multiple purposes during the NT period: (a) customary sign recognizing and appointing persons for ministry (Acts 13:3; 1 Tim. 4:14; 5:22; cf. Acts 6:6; Num. 27:18-19, 23); (b) healing (Mark 5:23; 6:5; 16:18; Acts 28:8); (c) imparting miraculous power of the Holy Spirit by the apostles (Acts 6:5-8; 8:14-20; 19:6; 2 Tim. 1:6); (d) blessing (Matt. 19:13-15; cf. Mark 10:13; Luke 18:15).

Teaching about the “resurrection of the dead” (Acts 2:23-32; 3:14-15; 10:40; 1 Cor. 15:1-4, 12-20) was not accepted by everyone (Matt. 22:23; Acts 23:8; 1 Cor. 15:12). Jesus was the “firstborn” [protoktokos – ‘preeminent’] from the dead (Col. 1:18; Acts 13:34; 1 Cor. 15:1-4). Coinciding with Christ’s return (1 Thess. 4:16), the future resurrection pertains to everyone who has died, whether good or evil (John 5:28-29; Acts 24:15).

The “eternal judgment” (Acts 10:42; 17:30-31; 24:25) points to an appointed day in the future (Acts 17:31; Heb. 9:27) when God judges the world through Christ (Acts 10:42; 17:31) with everlasting rewards and punishments (Matt. 25:46). The word of Christ is the standard of judgment (John 12:48), and all are destined to stand before his judgment seat (2 Cor. 5:10).

“And this”—moving on to maturity—“we will do”—assuredly—“if God permits”—providentially according to his purpose (cf. Acts 18:21; 21:14; Rom. 1:10; 1 Cor. 4:19; 16:7; Jas. 4:13-15).

The Possibility of Apostasy and the Point of No Return

“For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame. For the earth which drinks in the rain that often comes upon it, and bears herbs useful for those by whom it is cultivated, receives blessing from God; but if it bears thorns and briers, it is rejected and near to being cursed, whose end is to be burned” (Hebrews 6:4-8).

It is possible for a child of God to fall from grace (cf. 3:12-13; 4:1; 10:35-38; 12:15, 25; 2 Pet. 2:20-22). It is possible for an unfaithful child of God to repent and be restored to faithfulness (cf. Acts 8:21-22; Gal. 6:1; Jas. 5:19-20). It is also possible for someone to become so hardened in sin that it is impossible to renew the defiantly rebellious one again to repentance (cf. 3:12; Matt. 7:6; John 8:42-47; 2 Thess. 2:9-12; 1 Cor. 1:18). The ASV reads, “… it is impossible to renew them again unto repentance, seeing [n. ‘the while’] they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame” (v. 6). For this type of person, who callously disregards what the Lord has done, Jesus’s death is worthless.

Using agricultural imagery (vv. 7-8), those who accept God’s gracious provisions and are fruitful in his service are blessed, whereas those who defiantly reject his goodness and gracious offerings through Christ are unfruitful and destined for condemnation (cf. Matt. 7:16-20; John 15:1-8). Let us learn from these admonitions and continue growing in our knowledge and faith.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ See K. L. Moore, “Plural Authorship of Hebrews (Part 2),” Moore Perspective (20 July 2016), <Link>.

     ² NASB text and footnote: “him,” “Him,” or “this”? The phrase peri hou (neuter or masculine?) may be interpreted (a) generally, “about which matter,” (b) specifically, about the subject of Christ as high priest, (c) about Christ generally, (d) about Christ as high priest like Melchizedek, or (e) about Melchizedek (see P. Ellingworth, Hebrews 299). 

Related Posts: Hebrews 4:14–5:10, Heb 6:9-18

 

Image credit: https://www.todaysparent.com/baby/how-i-finally-got-my-baby-to-take-a-bottle/

Preterism: What’s the Big Deal? (Part 4 of 4) Concluding Observations

Overly-Simplified, Overly-Complex

The fundamental weakness of hyper-preterism is its overly-simplistic method of interpretation, which creates an overly-complex belief system. When a biblical text does not seem to fit the preterist model, it has to be reinterpreted or spiritualized.¹ When a biblical text does seem to fit, context is sometimes ignored or explained away.² If one has not fully embraced the preterist system, it is extremely difficult to see in the Bible what preterism claims is there. In fact, it has been less than 150 years since this novel eschatological perspective was first introduced.³

Preterists insist theirs is the only “consistent” interpretive model, so much so that consistency of meaning is demanded even when appropriated scriptures are scattered across a variety of literary and historical-cultural settings. Strict preterism fails to appreciate that biblical terminology can be used in a variety of ways with different contextual connotations.⁴ The result of preterist methodology is an overly-simplified, overly-complex, acute imbalance.

A More Balanced Approach

Does the Bible speak of the Lord’s representative “coming”? Yes, but not always. Yahweh came representatively against Babylon via the Medo-Persians (Isa. 13:1-22; 26:21; 27:1). The Father’s presence was represented in his Son (John 14:7-11). Jesus sent the Spirit as a divine representative (John 14:16-18, 23-26; 15:26; 16:7-15). The Lord came in judgment against Jerusalem representatively by the Romans (Joel 1:9-16; Matt. 24:1-34). This does not mean, however, there can be no personal appearance of the Lord in the future, which a number of NT passages seem to affirm (John 14:2-3; Acts 1:9-11; 1 Cor. 15:23-24; Phil. 3:20; 1 Thess. 4:16; 2 Thess. 1:6-10; Heb. 9:28; 1 John 3:2-3; etc.). Why feel the need to force symbolization onto these verses unless there is an underlying agenda one is trying to defend? 

Now and Not Yet

Throughout the NT there is an obvious tension between “now” and “not yet.” Salvation is viewed not only as a past occurrence (Rom. 8:24; Eph. 2:5, 8), but also a present reality (1 Cor. 1:18; 15:2; 2 Cor. 2:15) and a future hope (Rom. 5:9-10; 9:27; 10:9; 1 Cor. 3:15; 5:5). Spiritual life is available right now (John 11:26; 1 Cor. 15:22; 2 Cor. 4:16–5:17), while those experiencing this newness of life still anticipate what is to come (Matt. 5:12; Rom. 8:24-25; Phil. 3:20; 1 Pet. 1:3-7). 

Does the Bible teach initiated eschatology (past), realized eschatology (present), or future eschatology (yet to come)? Yes it does! The long-anticipated arrival of the Messiah to usher in God’s final dispensation was in fact realized with Jesus’ physical presence on earth (Matt. 12:28; Luke 17:20-21) and the formation of his church (Matt. 16:18-19, 28). But it is also “unrealized eschatology” because there is more to come. The messianic kingdom has been inaugurated and is moving toward heavenly consummation (1 Cor. 15:23-26). Biblical eschatology is realized but not fully realized.

Other Timeframe Issues

Based on passages like 1 Cor. 7:29-31; 15:51; and 1 Thess. 4:15, liberal critics have long argued that certain NT writers and early disciples were anticipating in their lifetime the second advent of Christ at the end of the age, but they were wrong. Preterists agree that some biblical texts allude to the imminence of eschatological events, but rather than mistaken the prophecies were fulfilled in a non-literal sense in the summer of AD 70. 

Both of these conclusions, however, do not reflect the broader scope of what the scriptures teach. Even Jesus did not know whether or not his return would be imminent (Mark 13:32). Paul understood that he and his contemporaries may or may not still be living at the Lord’s parousía (cf. 1 Thess. 5:2-3, 10; 1 Cor. 6:14; 2 Cor. 4:14; Phil. 3:11). Although nearness in time was surely possible, it was never definitively affirmed as the only possibility.⁵

Another timeframe issue, upon which preterism stands or falls, is the dating of the book of Revelation. For futurists, it doesn’t matter. But for preterists, the close of the NT canon must have been prior to mid-AD 70 in order for their theory to seem plausible. Internal evidence places the most probable context of Revelation toward the end of the reign of Domitian (AD 95-96), supported by the weight of early testimony.⁶

Does it Really Matter?

The biblical doctrine of the parousía is foundational to the Christian faith (1 Thess. 1:10; 4:14-18). To allege it has already occurred is deceptive (2 Thess. 2:1-3), as well as cancerous, a deviation from the truth, undermining the faith of some (2 Tim. 2:17-18). The future judgment has always been part of the gospel message that provides an incentive to obey (Acts 3:19-21; 10:42; 17:30-31; 24:25; Rom. 2:4-6; 2 Cor. 5:10-11; 2 Thess. 2:5; Heb. 9:27-28; 1 Pet. 4:5; 2 Pet. 3:11, 14). 

The promise of the Lord’s parousía and accompanying experiences gives hope and reassurance to believers (Acts 23:6; 24:15; 26:6-8; 2 Cor. 4:14; Phil. 3:10-11; 1 John 3:2-3), “awaiting the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus” (Tit. 2:13).⁷ Teaching otherwise causes unnecessary apprehension and discord (2 Thess. 2:1-2) and counters the persistent admonition to be prepared, watchful, and alert (Matt. 24:36, 44; 1 Thess. 1:10; 5:1-11; 2 Pet. 3:10-18). Yes, it matters.

-- Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ For example, Matt. 24:36–25:46; 28:18-20; Luke 20:33-36; John 5:25-29; 6:39-44; 12:48; 14:2-3; Acts 1:11; 24:15; 1 Cor. 15:20-28, 35, 42, 52; 2 Cor. 4:14; 5:10-11; Phil. 3:10-11, 20-21; 1 Thess. 2:19; 4:13–5:11; Tit. 2:11-13; Heb. 9:28; 1 John 3:2-3; Rev. 20:11-15.

     ² For example, Matt. 10:23; Acts 17:30-31; 24:25; 1 Thess. 1:9-10; 2 Thess. 1:6-12; 2:1-3; 2 Tim. 2:17-18; 4:18.

     ³ James Stuart Russell, The Parousia: A Critical Inquiry into the New Testament Doctrine of Our Lord’s Second Coming (London: Daldy, Isbister, & Co., 1878). Notwithstanding 1st-century heresies (1 Cor. 15:12; 2 Thess. 2:1-3; 2 Tim. 2:17-18).

    ⁴ For example, while the return of Christ is sometimes referred to as “the day of the Lord” (2 Pet. 3:10), the same expression is used elsewhere in scripture with reference to six other days of the Lord’s judgment. It is a mistake to overlook the historical and literary contexts in which this phrase and comparable expressions are so often used. If the number seven is consistently employed throughout scripture to symbolize completeness, and the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem was the sixth so-called “day of the Lord,” should we not expect a seventh and final day of the Lord’s judgment? See K. L. Moore, “The Day of the Lord,” Moore Perspective (1 Feb. 2014), <Link>. No doubt adding to the confusion is the fact that the language used is clearly apocalyptic. “A real event is being described, but it is one which cannot be described literally since the direct activity of God cannot be fully comprehended in human language. The biblical writers have therefore to resort to analogy and metaphor, the language of symbol, in order to convey their message” (I. Howard Marshall, 1 and 2 Thessalonians [Vancouver: Regent College, 2002]: 128).

     ⁵ See K. L. Moore, “Anticipating Christ’s Return (Part 1),” Moore Perspective (31 Jan. 2018), <Link>; and “Anticipating Christ’s Return (Part 2),” Moore Perspective (7 Feb. 2018), <Link>.

     ⁶ See K. L. Moore, “Introducing the Book of Revelation (Part 2),” Moore Perspective (14 Nov. 2018), <Link>; “When Was the Book of Revelation Written? (Part 1),” Moore Perspective (12 Feb. 2025), <Link>.

     ⁷ Scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.

Addendum: Borrowed from Brian Giselbach -- The Bible's Christ-centered Message: I. Jesus Christ is Coming (Gen. 1:1 - Mal. 4:6); II. Jesus Christ has Come (Matt. 1:1 - Acts 28:31); III. Jesus Christ is Coming Again (Acts 1:9 - Rev. 22:21).

Related Posts: Preterism: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, The Man of Lawlessness (Part 1)

Image credit: https://www.triumphmodular.com/blog/contemplating-modular-construction/

Preterism: What’s the Big Deal? (Part 1 of 4) Introductory Matters

Defining Terms

1. Eschatology (from Greek éschatos, “last”) is the study of last things or the final events of history. Eschaton, the neuter form of the Greek term, is often used with reference to the end of the world.

2. Futurist Eschatology contends that the Bible’s end-time prophecies –Christ’s second coming, the resurrection of the dead, the end of the world, the final judgment – are yet in the future. Supporters of this view are called futurists.

3. Preterism (from Latin praeter, “past”) or Preterist Eschatology is the belief that all biblical prophecies were completed long ago. “Partial preterism” or “moderate preterism” considers most (not all) biblical prophecies to have already been accomplished, while “full-preterism” or “hyper-preterism” affirms the past fulfillment of all biblical prophecies, including Christ’s return and the final judgment.¹ Since the primary historical focus of this theory is the Roman ransacking of Jerusalem in the summer of AD 70, it is also known as the AD 70 Doctrine. Those espousing this view are called preterists.

4. Realized Eschatology or Fulfilled Eschatology is the designation generally applied to the idea of all end-time prophecies having been fulfilled, particularly at the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem.² However, many who affirm a future eschatology acknowledge a sense in which some eschatological elements (e.g. God’s spiritual kingdom, Christ’s messianic rule, the last days, newness of life) are current realities linked to future expectations. Many futurists also maintain a partial-preterist interpretation of prophecies in the book of Revelation. A better parallel to hyper-preterism is “Overrealized Eschatology.”

5. Revised Eschatology is the assertion made by liberal critics that Jesus and his earliest followers believed in the imminent consummation of end-time prophecies, but as years passed with hopes unfulfilled, concessions had to be made for a less-certain, future expectation.³ Preterists claim the best response to this erroneous charge is their “consistent” interpretation of biblical prophecies.

6. Parousia is the term frequently used in reference to events accompanying Christ’s return. It is transliterated from the Greek parousía, meaning “presence,” opposite of appousía, “absence” (see Phil. 2:12). It could refer to one’s immediate presence or appearance (2 Cor. 10:10) but more often applies to someone whose presence or arrival is anticipated, so the word “coming” is typically used in translation (see 1 Cor. 16:17; 2 Cor. 7:6, 7; Phil. 1:26). In this study the term parousía will be left untranslated to avoid potential confusion between the “presence,” “arrival,” and “coming” nuances.⁴

The Importance of the Doctrine in the Early Church

Having spent less than a month proclaiming God’s word in Thessalonica, Paul and his coworkers placed much emphasis on the Lord’s parousía (Acts 17:2; 2 Thess. 2:5, 15; cf. 1 Thess. 1:10; 2:19; 3:13; 5:23), with extensive follow-up information communicated not long afterwards (1 Thess. 4:13-18; 5:1-11; 2 Thess. 1:7–2:17). This teaching was considered just as foundational to the Christian faith as Christ’s death and resurrection (1 Thess. 1:10; 4:14; 5:10).

The apostle clearly affirmed a future eschatology, looking ahead to what was to come. Yet the doctrine was later misconstrued by some, maintaining a realized eschatology as if the day of the Lord had already arrived (2 Thess. 2:1-3).⁵ This seriously troubled and confused the young church, seeing they had learned from God’s emissaries that the day of the Lord would be sudden and unexpected (1 Thess. 5:1-6) and could not be missed (1 Thess. 4:16-17). For anyone to say otherwise was perplexing, disconcerting, and deceptive. 

Modern-day preterists insist these allusions refer to the Lord’s representative coming in judgment via the Romans against Jewish rebels in Jerusalem about two decades later. But how would this have provided comfort and reassurance to Gentile Christians, nearly a thousand miles away, who were worried about their deceased loved ones missing out on the parousía?  (1 Thess. 1:9-10; 4:13-18) 

The Thessalonians were assured of this future eschatological experience involving “the Lord himself” (1 Thess. 4:16), an emphatic statement affirming his personal return (cf. 1:10; 2:16; Acts 1:9-11). This is in contrast to past divine judgments carried out indirectly through the agency of temporal forces.⁶ The NT doctrine of the parousía is universal and Christocentric, not localized and Romanocentric.

Irrespective of when and where the Thessalonian documents were published, we see how important eschatology was in the early church and the seriousness with which misinformation was confronted. We also witness the discord generated by unorthodox teachings. 

The Resurrection of the Dead?

Paul was dismayed that some in the church, not having God’s knowledge, were claiming “there is no resurrection of the dead” (1 Cor. 15:12, 34). First-century preterests like Hymenaeus and Philetus were alleging, “the resurrection has already happened,” which Paul calls a cancerous message, a deviation from the truth, subverting the faith of some (2 Tim. 2:17-18).

Modern-day preterists believe there is no future resurrection of the dead because, they say, it has already happened. They maintain that the biblical meaning is not the bodily raising of corpses but is strictly spiritual in nature, applicable to the time immediately following the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem. It was “a release from Sheol of all who had been waiting through the centuries to be reunited with God in the heavenly kingdom,”⁷ involving a “change” in both departed and living saints to immortality and full access to God’s presence, “from being ‘dead in their trespasses and sins’ to ‘alive in Christ Jesus’ ...”⁸ However, Jesus affirmed the resurrection of “all” who have passed from this life, both “those having practiced good” and “those having practiced evil” (John 5:28-29), followed by Paul’s inclusion of “both righteous and unrighteous” (Acts 24:15).

Jesus certainly believed in the future resurrection of the dead (Matt. 22:23-33; John 5:28-29; 6:39-40, 44, 54; cf. 11:24). In fact, he makes a clear distinction between “this age,” where people “marry and are given in marriage,” and “that age,” inclusive of “the resurrection from the dead,” where people “neither marry nor are given in marriage” (Luke 20:34-38). Why do preterists still get married?

Paul’s hope was in the future resurrection of the dead (Acts 24:15), taking issue with those who denied this truth (Acts 23:6-8; 1 Cor. 15:12-58). While the apostle and his fellow believers were already raised out of spiritual death to newness of life (Rom. 6:4; Eph. 2:1-6; Col. 2:12), they were still hoping “to attain the resurrection from the dead” (Phil. 3:11; also 2 Cor. 4:14).⁹  Bodily resurrection and final judgment at the Lord’s parousía are assured by the fact that Jesus is literally and physically risen from the dead (Acts 17:31; 1 Cor. 15:20-24). 

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ The Spanish Jesuit Luis del Alcázar wrote Vestigatio arcani sensus in Apocalypsi (1614), advocating a partial preterist view of the NT book of Revelation. James Stuart Russell’s The Parousia: A Critical Inquiry into the New Testament Doctrine of Our Lord’s Second Coming (1878) is probably the earliest exposition of full preterism. Max King and his father-in-law C. D. Beagle championed this view in churches of Christ in Ohio in the 1970s. 

     ² Brian L. Martin, Fulfilled Eschatology: A Brief Introduction (Goodyear, AZ: BMD, 2018): 1, <Link>.

     ³ Gunther Bornkamm, Paul 206-207; Donald Coggan, Paul: Portrait of a Revolutionary 87, 236; James Denney, The Epistles to the Thessalonians 177; James E. Frame, Thessalonians (ICC) 172-73; Arland J. Hultgren, “The Pastoral Epistles,” in Cambridge Companion to St Paul (ed. J. D. G. Dunn) 143; Alan F. Segal, Paul the Convert 161-62. For a response, see K. L. Moore, “Did Paul believe and teach …” Moore Perspective (24 Jan. 2018), <Link>.

     ⁴ Unless otherwise noted, scripture quotations are the author’s own translation. In describing the Lord’s coming presence, the word parousía mostly occurs in the Thessalonian letters (1 Thess. 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23; 2 Thess. 2:1, 8), and just one other time in Paul (1 Cor. 15:23). Elsewhere in the NT only in Matthew (24:3, 27, 37, 39) and in the writings of the three “pillars” (Jas. 5:7, 8; 2 Pet. 1:16; 3:4, 12; 1 John 2:28). Other descriptive terms include epipháneia (“appearing,” “manifestation”) in 2 Thess. 2:8; 1 Tim. 6:14; 2 Tim. 1:10; 4:1, 8; Tit. 2:13; and apokálupsis (“revelation”) in 2 Thess. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:7; 1 Pet. 1:7, 13; 4:13; cf. Rom. 2:5.

     ⁵ The text reads “has come” [enéstēken – perfect active indicative] (v. 2), not “at hand” (ASV, KJV); cp. “has come” (CSB, ESV, NASB, RSV), “had come” (NKJV), “has already come” (ISV, NIV). 

     ⁶ The six occasions in the OT described as “the day of the Lord”: (a) judgment against ancient Israel (Amos 5:1-27), fulfilled in 722 BC by the Assyrians; (b) judgment against ancient Judah (Lam. 1:12; 2:1, 21-22; Ezek. 7:19; 13:5; Zeph. 1:7, 14-18; 2:2-3), fulfilled around 586 BC by the Babylonians; (c) judgment against ancient Egypt (Jer. 46:1-28; Ezek. 29:1–32:32), fulfilled in 568 BC by the Babylonians; (d) judgment against ancient Babylon (Isa. 13:1-22), fulfilled in 538 BC by the Medo-Persians; (e) judgment against ancient Edom (Isa. 34:5-12; Ob. 1-21), progressively fulfilled between the 4th and 1st centuries BC by the Maccabees; (f) judgment against ancient Jerusalem (Joel 1:15; 2:1, 11, 31; 3:14; Zech. 14:1-2; Mal. 4:1-6), fulfilled in AD 70 by the Romans (cf. Luke 1:16-17; 21:20; Acts 2:16-21). See K. L. Moore, “The Day of the Lord,” Moore Perspective (1 Feb. 2014), <Link>. If the number seven is employed throughout scripture to symbolize completeness, should we not expect a seventh and final “day of the Lord”?

     ⁷ David B. Curtis, “The Resurrection from the Dead,” The Preterist Archive (9 May 1999), <Link>.

     ⁸ Edward E. Stevens, Stevens Response to Gentry: Detailed response to Dr. Ken Gentry’s critique of the Preterist view entitled, “A Brief Theological Analysis of Hyper-Preterism” (Bradford, PA: International Preterist Association, 1999): 65.

     ⁹ Paul taught extensively on the general resurrection of the dead (Rom. 8:11, 23; 1 Cor. 6:14; 15:12-57; 2 Cor. 4:14; 5:1-5; 1 Thess. 4:13- 18; 2 Tim. 2:18), as did others (Matt. 22:29-32; Luke 20:37-38; John 6:39-40, 44, 54; 11:25; Acts 4:2; 17:18; 23:6; 24:15; Heb. 6:2; Rev. 20:4-6, 13).

Related Posts: Preterism: Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, When Was Revelation Written? (Part 1)

Image credit: modified from https://coactivehealth.uk/articles/nutrition-advice/confused-about-fat/

The Man of Lawlessness (Part 2 of 3): Description and Fate

     The descriptions of “the man of lawlessness” in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 readily fit into the genre of apocalyptic literature, which “needs to be recognized, along with the degree to which their literary medium has shaped the message they give” (J. D. G. Dunn, Theology of Paul 304-305).

The Man of Lawlessness Described

     “The [one] opposing and exalting himself above every so-called god¹ or object of worship, so as to sit down in the temple of God, setting forth himself that he is God” (2 Thess. 2:4).² At the time of writing, “the man of lawlessness” was already at work. The word for “temple” here is ναός, which is not the whole temple but the innermost sanctuary, representing the presence of God (cf. Rev. 7:15; 11:1, 19; 15:8; 16:17; 21:22). False religion, in drawing people away from God and his church, essentially takes the place of God.

     “Do you not remember that, still being with you, I said these things to you?” (2 Thess. 2:5). In the next verse and in 3:7 there are reminders of what these Christians already know, as noted multiple times in the previous correspondence (1 Thess. 1:5; 2:1, 2, 5, 11; 3:3, 4; 4:2; 5:2). Here, however, the rhetorical “do you not remember” is comparable to “do you not know,” serving as a mild rebuke. During the inaugural evangelistic campaign, the missionaries had done extensive teaching (1:10; 1 Thess. 1:5–2:13; 3:4; 4:2, 11), particularly Paul (cf. Acts 17:2-3). The imperfect active indicative form of the verb ἔλεγον (“I said”) indicates that he had repeatedly spoken of these things (cp. Acts 20:27-31).

     “And now the [thing] restraining [τὸ κατέχον – neuter], you know, for him to be revealed in his time, for the mystery of the lawlessness is already working; the one restraining [μόνον ὁ κατέχων – masculine] now, until he might be [taken] out of [the] midst [‘out of the way,’ cf. Col. 2:14]” (2 Thess. 2:6-7). The ESV offers a smoother translation: “And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way.” The adverb “now” [νῦν] indicates something current, of which the Thessalonians are presently aware. The verb κατέχω [to “restrain”] means to (a) hold back or detain; (b) hinder or restrain; (c) hold fast or keep secure; (d) possess or take possession of.

     Contextually, “the [thing] restraining” may simply be “the love of the truth” (vv. 10, 12) that keeps false religion at bay, and “the one restraining” characterizes the one who loves the truth (vv. 13-15; cf. 2 Tim. 3:17; also Matt. 12:35a; 1 Cor. 2:15), refusing to yield to the enticement of false religion. The word “mystery” [μυστήριον] is descriptive of the subtle and deceptive nature of false religion (cf. v. 10a; Eph. 4:14; 5:6; Col. 2:8; 1 John 2:26), while the phrase “of the lawlessness” reveals its actual nature, i.e., contrary to the law of God (cf. Matt. 7:21-23; 13:41; 23:28; 24:11-12; Rom. 2:12, 20-23; 7:22–8:8).

     The fact that this “is already working” indicates something happening at the time of writing (cf. Acts 20:27-31; Rom. 16:17-18; Jude 4; 1 John 2:26; 4:1, 3). After issuing a similar warning to the Ephesian elders, Paul commits them “to God and to the word of his grace” (Acts 20:29-32). What the Thessalonians “know,” having repeatedly been reminded, is that they have eagerly embraced the truth of God’s word (vv. 13-14; cf. 1 Thess. 1:5–2:13), “which also is working in you, the believing [ones]” (1 Thess. 2:13) as the restraining force against religious deception and corruption.

The Man of Lawlessness Destroyed

     “And then the lawless [one] will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will destroy with the breath of his mouth, and will abolish by the appearing of his coming” (2 Thess. 2:8). The “lawless [one]” is clearly “the man of lawlessness” (v. 4), responsible for “the lawlessness” (v. 7). While many commentators maintain that the lawless figure will be revealed prior to the Lord’s return, this is an assumption not explicitly stated in the text. The restraining continues “until” [ἕως] the Lord’s return (vv. 6-7). Contextually the circumstances involve “the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ …. the day of the Lord” (2:1-2), at which time “the man of lawlessness is revealed” (2:3), viz. “in the revelation of the Lord Jesus” (1:7). In other words, all will be exposed as Christ returns, and those drawn into the deception of false religion will finally see the error to which they have allowed themselves to be blinded; see esp. 1 Thess. 2:14-16. From the revealing of “the lawless one,” the text immediately speaks of his destruction.

     False religion (personified) is doomed, “whom the Lord Jesus will destroy … and will abolish …” The principal character of the second coming is “the Lord Jesus” who executes the judgment (cf. 1:7; 1 Thess. 1:10; 4:16). The verb ἀναιρέω means to “take away, do away with, destroy” (BAGD 54-55), and the verb καταργέω means to “abolish, wipe out, set aside …. bring to an end” (BAGD 417). This will be accomplished “with the breath of his mouth [cp. Isa. 11:4] … by the appearing of his coming.” The apocalyptic imagery here reiterates 1:7b-8, “… in the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with angels of his power, in a fire of flame inflicting vengeance on the [ones] not knowing God and the [ones] not obeying the gospel of our Lord Jesus.” False religion will be annihilated, and those entangled in it will face the Lord in judgment.

     Lest we get distracted by the fantastic descriptions of this extraordinary event, remember the original intent of the writing. G. Fee observes, “Everything about the passage suggests that Paul is here offering a word of encouragement to these persecuted believers, since the emphasis is now altogether on God’s ultimate, righteous judgment of their persecutors” (Thessalonians 290).

The Satanic Influence Behind the Deception

     The description continues: “of whom is coming according to [the] working of Satan in all power and signs and wonders of falsehood” (2 Thess. 2:9). The present tense, “is coming,” reaffirms that “the mystery of the lawlessness is already working” at the time of writing (v. 7) and is spawning “the apostasy” (v. 3). Readers are now informed that all this is “according to [the] working of Satan.” Satan has already been active, attempting to thwart this good work at Thessalonica and elsewhere (1 Thess. 2:18). He “masquerades himself as an angel of light” (2 Cor. 11:14). He “has blinded the minds of the unbelieving [ones], lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, shines forth” (2 Cor. 4:4b). Unbelievers have allowed themselves to fall into “the snare of the devil, having been captured by him [to do] his will” (2 Tim. 2:26; cf. 1 Tim. 3:7; 6:9). Believers, on the other hand, who are open to and enlightened by the gospel, “are not ignorant of his schemes” (2 Cor. 2:11). Satan’s devious work is not limited to sorcery, black magic, satanic cults, and pagan idolatry. He is behind every form of false religion, including so-called “Christian” movements that deviate from the narrow path of truth (cf. Matt. 7:13-23; 2 Pet. 2:1-2, 18-22; etc.).

     The “power and signs and wonders” are not genuine miracles, like those confirming divine teaching (cf. Mark 16:20; John 2:23; 3:2; Acts 14:3; Heb. 2:3-4). Rather, these are “of falsehood,” i.e. “false miracles, signs, and wonders” (CSB), cf. Matt. 24:11, 24; Acts 8:9-11; 13:6; 19:13-16, 19; Rev. 13:13. Myths, legends, superstitions, amulets, relics, shrines, mysteries of the occult, and numerous elaborate claims have been propagated by false religion throughout history.

     We read further, “and in every deceit of unrighteousness [to] the ones perishing, which instead they did not accept the love of the truth for them to be saved” (2 Thess. 2:10). The “every deceit” is the result of the aforementioned “falsehood” (v. 9; cf. v. 3). Linking this passage to the earlier discussion in 1:5-9 is another word with the δικ- root, viz. ἀδικία (“unrighteousness”). The judgment of God is “just” or “righteous” [δίκαιος] (1:5, 6) in taking “vengeance” [ἐκδίκησις] (1:8) and meting out the “penalty” [δίκη] (1:9) because of “unrighteousness” [ἀδικία] (2:10). Those deceived by unrighteousness are “the ones perishing,” the same who consider the message of the cross foolish, in contrast to the ones being saved who regard the same message as the power of God (1 Cor. 1:18; cf. 2 Cor. 2:15; Rom. 1:16).³

     The reason for judgment is that “they did not accept [‘receive,’ ‘welcome’] the love of the truth …” This is in stark contrast to the Thessalonian Christians, “having received the word …” (1 Thess. 1:6); “you accepted … [the] word of God …” (1 Thess. 2:13). Refusing to welcome and love the truth is a rejection of what God requires “for them to be saved,” i.e., saved from divine wrath and everlasting destruction (1:6-9; cf. 1 Thess. 1:10; 2:16).

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Should θεός here be rendered “god” (CSB, ESV, ISV, NASB, NET, NLT, N/RSV) or “God” (ASV, N/KJV, NIV)?

     ² Unless otherwise noted, scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.

     ³ In 2 Cor. 4:3, we read: “But even if our gospel [preached by Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, 1:19; cf. 1 Thess. 1:5; 2 Thess. 2:14] is veiled [‘covered,’ ‘concealed’], it is veiled in those [who are] perishing.” Not everyone understands, appreciates, or amenably responds to the preaching of the gospel, viz. “those perishing,” whose prejudices and predispositions render them incapable of receptivity, unwilling to understand and obey, leading to their spiritual demise (cf. 2 Cor. 3:14-15; 1 Cor. 1:18, 23; 2:14; also Rom. 8:5-8).

Related Posts: Man of Lawlessness Part 1, Part 3

Image credit: https://kenanmalik.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/religion-praying.jpg