I don’t think anyone disagrees the Bible says Jesus and his pals thought the “end” would come during their lives. They expected the end of the world momentarily.
Author/Professor Bart Ehrman ( www.erhmanblog.org ) explains how the thinking of Jesus people at that time differs from today’s version of Christianity. It begins with the observation Jesus was a member of a Jewish faction know as apocalypticists.
The apocalypticists did not see a move from life on earth to a later life in heaven or hell. They had a timeline, separating time from that of the evil and sinful period to a later period when God got everyone on the right track.
All of this would take place right here on what we call, Mother Earth. Ehrman says the apocalypticists had a horizontal plain.
Jesus and the cast of characters that followed ran into the same problem as own current end of world celebrity, Harold Camping. You may recall Camping, a Bible radio guy, predicted the world would end, May 21, 2011.
The end of the world didn’t happen either for Jesus or the Christians that followed immediately after. They, like Camping, could not say, generation after generation, “The world will end any day now,” and keep their support.
So, the faith morphed to Plan B. That was to reinterpret the apocalypse story to mean there was a heaven and a hell. The story changed from a horizontal to a vertical plain.
Heaven and hell came out of that solution.
I’m an apocalypticist. I didn’t know that. Sounds very sophisticated. Thanks Jon.
Matthew 24:2-3, 36
Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.
And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/82/Klagemauer.JPG
I still see Herod’s stones upon another. Nothing to get excited about. Just be ready and watchful. Keep some oil for your lamp.
But “The End” comes individually when your heart stops. And then the “Paradox” would cover it nicely. It need not be one or the other exclusively. An “atheist/agnostic” (Jon’s words), would have difficulty with this, in spite of his credentials. No surprises here.
One way I have read it is that the Kingdom of God is actually here on earth. After all the creation story does not speak of anywhere else. The Jewish story (according to some) has it than as humanity moved away from the total adoration and worship of God, as required, punishment was introduced and developed.
This is shown by the ideas that came out of the exile in Babylon. The Hebrews as the children of God had by this time become an accepted truth, received wisdom. The exile was seen not as a denial of the existence of God or even a sign that they were not, perhaps, the chosen people after all, but, as a sign that they had been bad – God had not deserted them so much as they were beginning to desert God and were being punished for their transgressions. A corollary to this was a change in the idea that God had only one home, could be worshipped in only one place – the Temple, the first temple was destroyed by the Babylonians.
With the defeat of the Babylonian Empire Cyrus the Great restored religious freedom and commenced building the Second Temple, not surprising that influences from the Persian religious background (Zoroastrian) started to creep in, must be something good about a people that free you from oppression, restore your liberty to believe as you want and to rebuild your most sacred symbol.
Of course, the relative benevolence of the Persian Empire could not last forever. Further suppression by the Greeks and Romans followed, eventually leading to the destruction of the Temple and the exile of the Jews. It is not surprising that the Kingdom of God was no longer thought of as Heaven on Earth but was somehow thought of as removed somewhere above waiting for the Jews to be worthy of its reconstruction as Heaven on Earth.
This is a brief background to my understanding of the apocalypticism. Apocalyptic as the end of the world as known. That there were many prophets and preachers with their own versions of the end of the world and the coming of the world of God etc. is beyond doubt, John the Baptist for example (although the only extra Gospel mention is in Josephus Antiquities, interpolations and additions to Josephus are widely discussed by scholars _ Erhman?). The preacher Yeshua the Rabbi is seen by many as the person who became known as Jesus the Christ. As a Jewish preacher in a Jewish tradition the story of his death and resurrection must be wrong, there is no tradition or belief in resurrection or reincarnation in Judaism. The apocalypse would have been the reconstitution of an earthly paradise, with the crucifixion, in the first account, we have some confusion on the part of Yeshua, “I have fulfilled all your prophecies and requirements”, “where is the Kingdom of Heaven”, the final disillusionment “Why hast thou forsaken me”. The rest is later embellishment, a refusal to admit it was wrong that lasts and grows stronger to this day. The whole exacerbated by Saul of Tarsus turning everything on its head.
“…there is no tradition or belief in resurrection or reincarnation in Judaism”. Guess Job 19:26 isn’t in the Hebrew Bible huh? Google “Life after death in the Old Testament. Several inferences. Because “Tradition” ,(Saddusees) may not contain it, it does not mean the Hebrew Bible dosen’t.
“The apocalypticists did not see a move from life on earth to a later life in heaven or hell. They had a timeline, separating time from that of the evil and sinful period to a later period when God got everyone on the right track”
I don’t know about everyONE, but every nation:
“Now it will come about that In the last days The mountain of the house of the LORD Will be established as the chief of the mountains, And will be raised above the hills; And ALL THE NATIONS will stream to it.” (Isaiah 2:2)
God put man on the earth to subdue the earth. That didn’t change when Adam sinned and sold us out. The same theme of dominion for God’s people is repeated throughout the scripture:
“Subdue the earth”
“Possess the Land”
“Disciple and baptize the nations”
“Inherit the earth”
After the Fall, the rest of the Bible is an account of God reconciling the world to Himself.
“Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, on the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and forevermore. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will do this. ” (Isaiah 9:7)
Michael 4:33 “Subdue the earth. Possess the land. Disciple and baptize the nations. Inherit the earth.”
In my opinion, these attitudes are one of Christianity’s big problems. The world is about “US”. Further, when one gets to thinking he/she is so important there is a personal relationship with the god, the ego is stroked further. But, this problem, while turning some people like me off, it is also the key to the faith’s success. “I want to be a Christian because I am extra special” is an appealing, if false, attraction.
Jon; Your “I want to be a Christian because I am extra special”; Is a false impression. I must qualify that though, in some instances and circumstances, your reaction is partially justified. Those who have been infected with pietism do seem to present that attitude, such as the guy with the banannas on the street attacking people with unsolicited questions of “have you ever stolen a pencil, have you ever had sex outside of marriage, etc. These types are equally offensive to me as you. Pietism has done more harm to orthodoxy than any athiest could ever hope to do. The flip side to this, and back to your premise; within orthodoxy, the “I am extra special”, (code words for I am better than you) is not, or should not be a factor. A quiet, personal, healthy humility, and thankfulness for what has been provided for us on the cross through faith is the hallmark; A feature not seen in TV preachers, or in preachers involved in politics, (in general today). Your youthful experiences of no dancing, beer, etc. may have been your first experience of pietism. You questioned it then, as I dislike it now.
PS; After rereading and entering, I should have said; “Pietism has done more harm to (((CHRISTIANITY))) than any atheist could ever hope to do. You could easily equate pietism to self-righteousness, and that would be a turn off for most everyone.
Wanna 2:54 “easily equate pietism to self-rightousness”
OK, but aren’t those phrases Michael mentioned, all of which are about man dominating everything is his sight, central to much of the faith. Now, I know liberal chruches are much into the environmental movement and would not see them as central–but to the rest of the faith, they seem to be the view. Am I wrong about this?
Jon; As I see it, the liberal churches are as much into pietism as others. In some instances even more so. It is only manifested in different directions. someone involved with the environmental movement, may consider himself to be a better steward of the earth by having sheep in the yard than a gas poluting lawn mower. In general, there are three degrees of pietism; mild, intermediate, and extreme. Some of the manifestations of these can be very subtle. I would say your youthfull experience would have been of the mild type. Not to drink a beer would be a personal choice, and let it go at that, minding your own business probably wouldn’t even be pietism. Not to drink a beer, but thinking everyone who does to be wrong, would be. Consider it to be a mild form. Not to drink a beer, and politically force the whole country to be dry would be extreme. Al Capone did well with extreme pietism in place. (just one example).
To answer your question; Yes.— You may have been looking in the wrong places all along, without looking deeper. Broad brushing is not beneficial for those being brushed,— or to the one with the brush.
PS You don’t have to be religious to be pietistic.
How does that song go? “Looking For Love In All The Wrong Places”.
Jon 1:59 There is something very early in the Book which shows a basis for this attitude of superiority you talk about. For a Bible believer this attitude must be compulsory.
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
Unless, of course, the Christian has their own personal definition of dominion.
Having come from a farming culture, and raised on a farm, I’ve always looked at this verse to be reminded of the gift of life, and to pass it on in the form of responsible behavior. To care for our livestock, (horses, pigs, cattle, chickens), to plant and maintain our crops, and care for the land. I’ve talked with others about this, and that too is their take. For someone raised in city/ urban areas, this may be out of consideration. All our livestock were more like pets than property, and were raised from birth. It was a sad day when some of them were shipped. Even the poultry from the incubator. You have never known returned love until you have hand raised a runted pig, or had geese imprinted on you. Putting up hay or silage was providing for them, and through this, they provided for us. Dominion/domination was not even considered.
Just another memory; Walking out into the stock yard during a particularly bad mosquito season with a hand sprayer full of Watkins Fly Spray. They knew what that meant, and they would come running, not walking to be sprayed. To the point of bunting me as if to say “My turn next”. I’d like to smell that Watkins spray again. They probably don’t make it anyore. The Watkins salesman was a regular, in our yard, and he had 5 gal. cans in his trunk to fill our 1 gal. cans. He also sold us pepper, cinnamon, other spices, orange and cherry nectar concentrate, bag balm (for cows), and salve for our cuts and scratches. In his own way, he too was involved with husbandry.
http://www.tractorumbrellas.com/files/hfp/imagecache/hfp_image_original/files/hfp/OCR1005.JPG
The good ol’ days before malathion resistant flies.
Henry; Thanks. I see it says 1960 formula. My memories were before that, but the pre 60′s formula worked pretty good too.
Wanna 12:32 “1960 formula” would have been DDT. Henry’s malathion would have been after the mid 1960′s. Our DDT canisters would stick open sometimes and fog the milking room like London before we could toss them out. Lots of good DDT in my lungs I’m sure.
I don’t think there was DDT in the Watkin’s spray. Never saw it in the papers. Nor was it under pressure. Most likely a kerosene or light vegetable oil base. We did have DDT spray, but never used it on cattle.
Did not use DDT on cattle knowingly I should have said.
Actually, Henry said ” ..”days before malathion resistant flies”.
Jon: “Lots of good DDT in my lungs I’m sure.”
Jon, you’ve just made an excellent case study as to why DDT is safe to use. You are still full of hot air, not hindered in the least by intense exposure to that “dangerous” chemical. We could literally save millions of people’s lives from Plasmodium falciparum if DDT was reintroduced.
Henry 4:13 There are plenty of folks who think I’m Satan. Maybe they are right and it all started by breathing that DDT.
Well, there is a T in satan, and a T in DDT. Coincidence? You be the judge. Smilie face.
Wanna 2:39 “..there is a T in satan, and a T in DDT. Coincidence?”
Is that part of the Da Vinci Code?
Jon; It’s as reliable.
Funny thing though, the Watkins man always seemed to stop abou dinner or lunch time, and he was always invited in. sometimes he had free samples of spices in his pockets when we sat down to eat. Hadn’t thought about that for 60 yr.
I have a dairy farm background and can really identify with your post! All the animals were our pets and got a slice of the best hay/special cat & dog treats/special or extra grain mix on Christmas eve………..although we were agnostics!!! Talk about incongruity!!!! Lol
Margaret; Ever pick up and snuggle a barn cat in the morning after it slept in good prarie hay overnight? A smell better than Evening in Paris. I guess that dates me.
Yes I have! I’ll never forget the scent of fresh hay in the hay mow!
In the parable of Lazarus and the rich man, both have died and Lazarus is in heaven and the rich man is in hell. The rich man asks for God to send Lazarus over with a wet finger that he can relieve the rich mans thirst. God states there is a great divide between the two and no one can cross. Then the rich man asks that Lazarus be sent to his brothers on earth to warn them what awaits in hell. God says that they have the prophets to warn them, that should be enough.
Paul also tells of a man he knew which was bodily taken to heaven before death and shown around. Some scholars feel this WAS Paul.
Then in revelations Heaven was opened to the author.
Three examples where the New Testament states that Earth and Heaven are in existance concurrently.
Oops, one more, at the Transformation it states that Moses and Elijah came from heaven to talk with Jesus. As far as Old Testament, I believe Elijah was taken to Heaven without dying and there was the dream that angels were able to travel between heaven and earth via a ladder.
Having dominion over the earth to a Christ, man carries more responsibility, nurturing, Love and fruitful planting and harvesting rather than an domination or an ego effect. A lot of good non judgemental dialogue in this post.