Threads from Henry's Web

Category: End Times

  • John Wesley Sermon 64 – The New Creation

    John Wesley Sermon 64 – The New Creation

    This is translated into modern English by Gemini AI, according to my prompts. You can find the original sermon on ResourceUMC.org.

    Note that this is divided into sections, and following each section there are comments on the updating of the language. Bold text indicates that there is a related note and is not used for emphasis. I invite readers to check the accuracy of this work, as this is experimental use of AI, at least from my point of view.

    The New Creation “Behold, I make all things new.” – Revelation 21:5

    1. What a strange scene is opened to our view here! How far removed from all our natural understandings! Not a glimpse of what is revealed here was ever seen in the non-Christian world. Not only do the modern, uncivilized non-Christian peoples have not the slightest conception of it, but it was equally unknown to the refined, polished non-Christian peoples of ancient Greece and Rome. And it is almost as little thought of or understood by the majority of Christians: I mean, not just those who are Christian in name only, who have the form of godliness without the power; but even those who, to some extent, fear God and strive to work righteousness.
    2. It must be acknowledged that, after all the research we can make, our knowledge of the great truth delivered to us in these words is still exceedingly limited and imperfect. As this is a point of mere revelation, beyond the reach of all our natural faculties, we cannot penetrate far into it, nor form any adequate conception of it. But it may be an encouragement to those who have in any degree “tasted of the powers of the coming age” to go as far as we can go, interpreting Scripture by Scripture, according to the analogy of faith.
    3. The Apostle [John], caught up in the visions of God, tells us in the first verse of the chapter, “I saw a new heaven and a new earth;” and adds (Revelation 21:5), “He who sat upon the throne said” (I believe these are the only words which he is said to utter throughout the whole book), “Behold, I make all things new.”
    4. Very many commentators hold a strange opinion that this relates only to the present state of things, and gravely tell us that the words are to be referred to the flourishing state of the Church which began after the persecution of non-Christian authorities. No, some of them have even discovered that all which the Apostle speaks concerning the “new heaven and the new earth” was fulfilled when Constantine the Great showered riches and honors upon the Christians. What a miserable way this is of nullifying the whole purpose of God, regarding that grand chain of events concerning His Church, yes, and all humanity, from the time John was on Patmos until the end of the world! No, the line of this prophecy reaches farther still: It does not end with the present world, but shows us the things that will come to pass when this world is no more. For,
    5. Thus says the Creator and Governor of the universe: “Behold, I make all things new;”—all which are included in that expression of the Apostle, “A new heaven and a new earth.” A new heaven: the original word in Genesis (Genesis 1) is in the plural number. And indeed, this is the constant language of Scripture—not heaven, but heavens. Accordingly, the ancient Jewish writers are accustomed to reckon three heavens; in conformity to which, the Apostle Paul speaks of his being “caught up into the third heaven.” It is this, the third heaven, which is usually supposed to be the more immediate residence of God; so far as any residence can be ascribed to His omnipresent Spirit, who pervades and fills the whole universe. It is here (if we speak in human terms) that the Lord sits upon His throne, surrounded by angels and archangels, and by all His flaming ministers.

    Notes on Translation Choices:

    • Sermon Title: “The New Creation” is kept.
    • Revelation 21:5 Quote: Modernized the biblical language.
    • 1: “Heathen”: Consistent with our previous discussions, replaced with “non-Christian world” or “non-Christian peoples” to avoid potentially offensive connotations while accurately reflecting Wesley’s distinction.
    • “Form of godliness without the power”: A classic Wesleyan critique of nominal Christianity.
    • 2: “Exceedingly short and imperfect”: Kept, emphasizing the limits of human understanding regarding revealed truth.
    • “Mere revelation”: Highlights that this knowledge comes solely from God’s disclosure.
    • “Tasted of the powers of the world to come”: Kept as a direct biblical allusion (Hebrews 6:5).
    • “Interpreting Scripture by Scripture, according to the analogy of faith”: This is a key hermeneutical principle for Wesley, emphasizing consistent interpretation based on the overall coherence of Christian doctrine.
    • 3: “Caught up in the visions of God”: Kept, referring to John’s experience in Revelation.
    • “I saw a new heaven and a new earth” / “He that sat upon the throne said… Behold, I make all things new”: Kept as direct biblical quotes (Revelation 21:1, 5). Wesley’s note about it being the “only words” uttered by God on the throne in the book is kept.
    • 4: “Very many commentators entertain a strange opinion”: Wesley expresses strong disagreement with the interpretation that the “new heaven and new earth” refers to the Church’s flourishing after Roman persecutions.
    • “Heathen persecutions”: Clarified with “persecution of non-Christian authorities.”
    • “Constantine the Great poured in riches and honours upon the Christians”: Historical reference kept, as this event (the Edict of Milan, 313 AD) is often seen as a turning point for the Church, but Wesley argues it did not fulfill this prophecy.
    • “Nullifying the whole purpose of God”: Modernized “making void the whole counsel of God.”
    • “Line of this prophecy reaches farther still: It does not end with the present world, but shows us the things that will come to pass when this world is no more”: This is Wesley’s core argument for the literal, future fulfillment of the prophecy.
    • 5: “A new heaven and a new earth”: Kept as the central prophetic phrase.
    • “Not heaven, but heavens”: Wesley’s point about the plural “heavens” in Genesis and elsewhere, indicating multiple celestial realms.
    • “Ancient Jewish writers are accustomed to reckon three heavens” / “Apostle Paul speaks of his being ‘caught up into the third heaven’”: Historical and biblical references (2 Corinthians 12:2) to the concept of multiple heavens, with the “third heaven” being God’s immediate dwelling.
    • “Omnipresent Spirit, who pervades and fills the whole universe”: Emphasizes God’s immanence.
    • “Lord sitteth upon his throne, surrounded by angels and archangels, and by all his flaming ministers”: Kept the vivid biblical imagery of God’s heavenly court.

    The New Creation “Behold, I make all things new.” – Revelation 21:5

    1. We cannot think that this heaven [the third heaven, God’s immediate dwelling] will undergo any change, any more than its Great Inhabitant. Surely this palace of the Most High was the same from eternity, and will be, world without end. Only the inferior heavens are liable to change; the highest of which we usually call the starry heaven. This, Saint Peter informs us, “is reserved for fire, against the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.” In that day, “being on fire,” it shall, first, “shrivel as a parchment scroll”; then it shall “be dissolved, and shall pass away with a great noise”; lastly, it shall “flee from the face of Him who sits on the throne, and there shall be found no place for it.”
    2. At the same time, “the stars shall fall from heaven“; the secret chain being broken which had retained them in their various orbits from the foundation of the world. Meanwhile, the lower or sublunary heaven [the atmosphere of Earth], with the elements (or principles that compose it), “shall melt with fervent heat”; while “the earth with the works that are therein, shall be burned up.” This is the introduction to a far nobler state of things, such as it has not yet entered into the heart of humanity to conceive—the universal restoration, which is to succeed the universal destruction. For “we look,” says the Apostle, “for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells” (2 Peter 3:7).
    3. One considerable difference there will undoubtedly be in the starry heaven when it is created anew: There will be no blazing stars, no comets there. Whether those horrifying, eccentric orbs are half-formed planets in a chaotic state (I speak on the assumption of a plurality of worlds); or such as have undergone their general conflagration [fiery destruction], they will certainly have no place in the new heaven, where all will be exact order and harmony. There may be many other differences between the heaven that now exists and that which will exist after the renovation; but they are beyond our understanding: We must leave eternity to explain them.
    4. We may more easily conceive the changes which will be brought about in the lower heaven, in the region of the air. It will be no more torn by hurricanes, or agitated by furious storms, or destructive tempests. Harmful or terrifying meteors will have no more place therein. We shall have no more occasion to say,There like a trumpet, loud and strong, Thy thunder shakes our coast; While the red lightnings wave along, The banners of thy host!No: All will be then light, fair, serene; a vivid picture of the eternal day.
    5. All the elements (taking that word in the common sense, for the principles of which all natural beings are compounded) will be new indeed; entirely changed as to their qualities, although not as to their nature. Fire is at present the general destroyer of all things under the sun; dissolving all things that come within the sphere of its action, and reducing them to their primitive atoms. But no sooner will it have performed its last great office of destroying the heavens and the earth (whether you mean thereby one system only, or the whole fabric of the universe; the difference between one and millions of worlds being nothing before the great Creator); when, I say, it has done this, the destructions wrought by fire will come to a perpetual end. It will destroy no more; it will consume no more; it will forget its power to burn—which it possesses only during the present state of things—and be as harmless in the new heavens and earth as it is now in the bodies of people and other animals, and the substance of trees and flowers; in all which (as recent experiments show) large quantities of ethereal fire are lodged; if it be not rather an essential component part of every material being under the sun. But it will probably retain its vivifying power, though stripped of its power to destroy.

    Notes on Translation Choices:

    • 6: “Inferior heavens”: Refers to the physical heavens, distinct from the “third heaven” (God’s dwelling) discussed in the previous section.
    • “Starry heaven”: Refers to the celestial sphere with stars.
    • “Reserved unto fire, against the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men”: Kept as a direct biblical quote (2 Peter 3:7), describing the fiery end of the current heavens.
    • “Shrivel as a parchment scroll” / “be dissolved, and shall pass away with a great noise” / “flee from the face of Him that sitteth on the throne, and there shall be found no place for it”: Kept as vivid biblical descriptions of destruction (Revelation 6:14; 2 Peter 3:10).
    • 7: “Stars shall fall from heaven”: Kept as a direct biblical quote (Matthew 24:29, Mark 13:25).
    • “Secret chain”: Refers to the gravitational forces understood in Wesley’s time (after Newton).
    • “Lower or sublunary heaven”: Refers to the Earth’s atmosphere.
    • “Elements… shall melt with fervent heat” / “the earth with the works that are therein, shall be burned up”: Kept as direct biblical quotes (2 Peter 3:10).
    • “Universal restoration, which is to succeed the universal destruction”: This is a key theological concept for Wesley, emphasizing the renewal that follows destruction.
    • “New heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness”: Kept as a direct biblical quote (2 Peter 3:13).
    • 8: “Blazing stars, no comets there”: Reflects 18th-century astronomical understanding and fears associated with comets.
    • “Half-formed planets, in a chaotic state (I speak on the supposition of a plurality of worlds)”: This shows Wesley engaging with contemporary scientific theories, including the idea of other inhabited planets.
    • “General conflagration”: Refers to the predicted fiery destruction of the universe.
    • “Leave eternity to explain them”: A humble acknowledgment of human limits.
    • 9: “Lower heaven, in the region of the air”: Refers to the Earth’s atmosphere.
    • “Hurricanes, or agitated by furious storms, or destructive tempests” / “Pernicious or terrifying meteors”: Examples of atmospheric disturbances that will cease.
    • Poetry: The stanza is from Charles Wesley’s hymn “He comes! he comes! the Judge severe!” and is retained in its original poetic form. “Thy” changed to “Your” for consistency with the rest of the prose.
    • “Lively picture of the eternal day”: Describes the transformed atmosphere.
    • 10: “Elements (taking that word in the common sense, for the principles of which all natural beings are compounded)”: Wesley clarifies his use of “elements” in the Newtonian sense (fundamental components of matter).
    • “Fire is at present the general destroyer”: Refers to fire’s role in the current world.
    • “Primitive atoms”: Reflects contemporary atomic theory.
    • “Last great office of destroying the heavens and the earth”: Refers to its eschatological role.
    • “Difference between one and millions of worlds being nothing before the great Creator”: Reiterates God’s immense power.
    • “Forget its power to burn”: Personification of fire’s transformation.
    • “Bodies of men and other animals, and the substance of trees and flowers; in all which (as late experiments show) large quantities of ethereal fire are lodged”: Wesley references contemporary scientific (alchemical/pneumatic) theories about “ethereal fire” or “phlogiston” as a vital component within matter.
    • “Vivifying power, though divested of its power to destroy”: Speculation on fire’s transformed positive role.

    The New Creation “Behold, I make all things new.” – Revelation 21:5

    1. It has been already observed that the calm, placid air will be no more disturbed by storms and tempests. There will be no more meteors, with their horrifying glare, frightening the poor children of humanity. May we not add (though at first it may sound like a paradox) that there will be no more rain? It is observable that there was none in Paradise; a circumstance which Moses particularly mentions (Genesis 2:5-6): “The Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth.—But there went up a mist from the earth,” which then covered the abyss of waters, “and watered the whole face of the ground,” with moisture sufficient for all the purposes of vegetation. We have every reason to believe that the case will be the same when Paradise is restored. Consequently, there will be no more clouds or fogs; but one bright, refulgent day. Much less will there be any poisonous dampness or pestilential blasts. There will be no Sirocco in Italy; no parching or suffocating winds in Arabia; no keen north-east winds in our own country,Shattering the graceful locks of yon fair trees;but only pleasing, healthful breezes,Fanning the earth with odoriferous wings.
    2. But what change will the element of water undergo when all things are made new! It will be, in every part of the world, clear and limpid; pure from all unpleasing or unhealthy mixtures; rising here and there in crystal fountains, to refresh and adorn the earth “with liquid lapse of murmuring stream.” For, undoubtedly, as there were in Paradise, there will be various rivers gently gliding along, for the use and pleasure of both humanity and beast. But the inspired writer has expressly declared, “there will be no more sea” (Revelation 21:1). We have every reason to believe that at the beginning of the world, when God said, “Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear” (Genesis 1:9), the dry land spread over the face of the water, and covered it on every side. And so it seems to have done until, in order to the general deluge which God had determined to bring upon the earth at once, “the windows of heaven were opened, and the fountains of the great deep broken up.” But the sea will then retire within its primitive bounds, and appear on the surface of the earth no more. For, indeed, there will be no more need of the sea. For either, as the ancient Poet [Virgil] supposes,Omnis feret omnia tellus, — every part of the earth will naturally produce whatever its inhabitants want — or all humanity will procure what the whole earth affords by a much easier and readier conveyance. For all the inhabitants of the earth, our Lord informs us, will then be isaggeloi—equal to angels; on a level with them in swiftness, as well as strength; so that they can, quick as thought, transport themselves, or whatever they want, from one side of the globe to the other.
    3. But it seems, a greater change will be brought about in the earth, than even in the air and water. Not that I can believe that wonderful discovery of Jacob Behmen, which many so eagerly contend for: that the earth itself, with all its furniture and inhabitants, will then be transparent as glass. There does not seem to be the least foundation for this, either in Scripture or reason. Surely not in Scripture: I know not one text in the Old or New Testament which affirms any such thing. Certainly it cannot be inferred from that text in Revelation (Revelation 4:6): “And before the throne there was a sea of glass, like unto crystal.” And yet, if I am not mistaken, this is the chief, if not the only Scripture which has been urged in favor of this opinion! Neither can I conceive that it has any foundation in reason. It has indeed been warmly alleged that all things would be far more beautiful if they were quite transparent. But I cannot understand this: Indeed, I believe quite the contrary. Suppose every part of a human body were made transparent as crystal, would it appear more beautiful than it does now? No, rather it would shock us beyond measure. The surface of the body, and in particular “the human face divine,” is undoubtedly one of the most beautiful objects that can be found under heaven; but could you look through the rosy cheek, the smooth, fair forehead, or the rising bosom, and distinctly see all that lies within, you would turn away from it with loathing and horror!
    4. Let us next take a view of those changes which we may reasonably suppose will then take place in the earth. It will no more be bound up with intense cold, nor parched up with extreme heat; but will have such a temperature as will be most conducive to its fruitfulness. If, in order to punish its inhabitants, God did of oldBid his angels turn askance This oblique lobe,thereby occasioning violent cold on one part, and violent heat on the other; He will, undoubtedly, then order them to restore it to its original position: So that there will be a final end, on the one hand, of the burning heat which makes some parts of it scarcely habitable; and, on the other ofThe rage of Arctos and eternal frost.
    5. And it will then contain no jarring or destructive principles within its own bosom. It will no more have any of those violent convulsions in its own depths. It will no more be shaken or torn apart by the impetuous force of earthquakes; and will, therefore, need neither Vesuvius nor Etna, nor any burning mountains to prevent them. There will be no more horrifying rocks or frightful precipices; no wild deserts, or barren sands; no impassable swamps, or unfruitful bogs, to swallow up the unwary traveler. There will, doubtless, be inequalities on the surface of the earth, which are not blemishes, but beauties. For though I will not affirm thatEarth hath this variety from heaven, Of pleasure situate in hill and dale;yet I cannot think gently-rising hills will be any defect, but an ornament, of the new-made earth. And doubtless we shall then likewise have occasion to say, —Lo, there his wondrous skill arrays The fields in cheerful green! A thousand herbs his hand displays, A thousand flowers between!

    Notes on Translation Choices:

    • 11: “Horrid glare, affrighting”: Modernized to “horrifying glare, frightening.”
    • “May we not add… that there will be no more rain?”: Wesley’s interesting speculation, based on Genesis 2:5-6 and the return to a paradisiacal state.
    • “Abyss of waters”: Refers to the underground water source in Genesis.
    • “Refulgent”: Kept, as it’s a powerful word for shining brightly.
    • “Poisonous damps, or pestilential blasts”: Refers to unhealthy airs or diseases.
    • “Sirocco” / “parching or suffocating winds in Arabia” / “keen north-east winds”: Specific examples of harsh weather, retained for historical context.
    • Poetry: The two poetic stanzas are retained in their original form. These are from John Milton’s Paradise Lost, reflecting Wesley’s literary engagement.
    • 12: “Clear and limpid; pure from all unpleasing or unhealthful mixtures”: Describes the purified water.
    • “Liquid lapse of murmuring stream”: Poetic phrase, kept.
    • “No more sea” (Revelation 21:1): Wesley takes this literally and offers a theory for how it might be fulfilled, referencing the original creation (Genesis 1:9) and the flood.
    • Virgil Quote: Omnis feret omnia tellus: Retained the Latin, followed by Wesley’s translation. This classical quote supports the idea of the earth spontaneously producing all needs.
    • isaggeloi—equal to angels”: Retained the Greek and Wesley’s translation, from Luke 20:36, emphasizing the elevated state of resurrected humans.
    • “Quick as thought”: Kept, emphasizing swiftness.
    • 13: “Jacob Behmen”: Jacob Boehme (1575–1624), a German Christian mystic whose teachings were influential in some Pietist circles. Wesley explicitly rejects Boehme’s speculative idea of a transparent earth.
    • “Transparent as glass”: The specific belief being critiqued.
    • Revelation 4:6 (“sea of glass”): Wesley dismisses this as support for Boehme’s idea.
    • “Human face divine”: Kept as a poetic phrase.
    • Wesley’s counter-argument on transparency: His vivid illustration of a transparent human body is retained to show why he finds the idea aesthetically unappealing.
    • 14: “Intense cold” / “extreme heat”: Describes the current temperature extremes.
    • “Bid his angels turn askance / This oblique lobe”: A poetic allusion, likely from Milton, referring to the tilting of the Earth’s axis (causing seasons and climate zones) perhaps as a result of the Fall or judgment. Wesley believes it will be restored to an “original position” for a perfect temperature.
    • “The rage of Arctos and eternal frost”: Another poetic allusion (likely Milton) for extreme cold.
    • 15: “No jarring or destructive principles within its own bosom”: Refers to internal geological forces.
    • “Violent convulsions in its own bowels” / “earthquakes” / “Vesuvius nor Etna, nor any burning mountains”: Specific examples of geological activity that will cease, implying a perfectly stable earth.
    • “Horrid rocks or frightful precipices; no wild deserts, or barren sands; no impassable morasses, or unfruitful bogs”: Examples of challenging terrain that will be removed.
    • “Inequalities on the surface of the earth, which are not blemishes, but beauties”: Wesley explicitly states that some natural variations will remain and be beautiful.
    • Poetry: The three poetic stanzas are retained in their original form. The first is a rhetorical question that he doesn’t affirm, the latter two express positive visions of the new Earth’s landscape. The last one is likely from a hymn.

    The New Creation: Earth, Animals, and Humanity Renewed

    1. And what will the general produce of the earth be? Not thorns, briers, or thistles; not any useless or foul weed; not any poisonous, harmful, or unpleasant plant; but every one that can be beneficial, in any way, either to our use or pleasure. How far beyond all that the most vivid imagination is now able to conceive! We shall no longer regret the loss of the terrestrial Paradise, or sigh at that well-crafted description by our great Poet [John Milton]:Then shall this mount Of Paradise, by might of waves, be moved Out of his place, pushed by the horned flood, With all its verdure spoiled and trees adrift, Down the great river to the opening gulf, And there take root, an island salt and bare!For all the earth shall then be a more beautiful Paradise than Adam ever saw.
    2. Such will be the state of the new earth with regard to its lesser, inanimate parts. But great as this change will be, it is little, it is nothing, in comparison of that which will then take place throughout all animated nature. In the living part of creation were seen the most deplorable effects of Adam’s rebellion. The whole animated creation—whatever has life, from the largest leviathan to the smallest mite—was thereby made subject to a futility that inanimate creatures could not experience. They were made subject to that cruel monster, DEATH, the conqueror of all that breathe. They were made subject to its forerunner, pain, in its ten thousand forms; although “God made not death, neither has He pleasure in the death of any living thing.” How many millions of creatures in the sea, in the air, and on every part of the earth, can now only preserve their own lives by taking away the lives of others; by tearing in pieces and devouring their poor, innocent, unresisting fellow-creatures! What a miserable fate for such countless multitudes, who, insignificant as they seem, are the offspring of one common Father; the creatures of the same God of love! It is probable not only two-thirds of the animal creation, but ninety-nine parts out of a hundred, are under a necessity of destroying others in order to preserve their own life! But it shall not always be so. He who sits upon the throne will soon change the face of all things, and give a clear proof to all His creatures that “His mercy is over all His works.” The horrifying state of things that currently exists will soon be at an end. On the new earth, no creature will kill, or hurt, or give pain to any other. The scorpion will have no poisonous sting; the adder, no venomous teeth. The lion will have no claws to tear the lamb; no teeth to grind his flesh and bones. No, no creature, no beast, bird, or fish, will have any inclination to hurt any other; for cruelty will be far away, and savageness and fierceness be forgotten. So that violence shall be heard no more, neither wasting nor destruction seen on the face of the earth. “The wolf shall dwell with the lamb” (the words may be literally as well as figuratively understood), “and the leopard shall lie down with the kid: They shall not hurt or destroy,” from the rising up of the sun, to the going down of the same.
    3. But the most glorious of all will be the change which then will take place on the poor, sinful, miserable children of humanity. These had fallen in many respects, both from a greater height and into a lower depth, than any other part of creation. But they shall “hear a great voice out of heaven, saying, ‘Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men: And He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself shall be their God.’” (Revelation 21:3, 4). Hence will arise an unmixed state of holiness and happiness far superior to that which Adam enjoyed in Paradise. In how beautiful a manner is this described by the Apostle: “God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: For the former things are done away!” As there will be no more death, and no more pain or sickness leading to it; as there will be no more grieving for, or parting with, friends; so there will be no more sorrow or crying. No, but there will be a greater deliverance than all this; for there will be no more sin. And, to crown all, there will be a deep, an intimate, an uninterrupted union with God; a constant communion with the Father and His Son Jesus Christ, through the Spirit; a continual enjoyment of the Three-One God, and of all the creatures in Him!

    Notes on Translation Choices:

    • Sermon Title: “The New Creation” is kept.
    • 16: “Foul weed” for “fetid weed”: More common modern term.
    • “Conducive, in anywise, either to our use or pleasure”: Modernized slightly to “beneficial, in any way, either to our use or pleasure.”
    • Milton Quote: The excerpt from John Milton’s Paradise Lost is retained in its original poetic form. Wesley uses this to contrast the sadness of a lost paradise with the glory of the new Earth.
    • 17: “Meaner, the inanimate, parts”: Refers to the less complex, non-living parts of creation.
    • “Animated nature”: Refers to all living creatures.
    • “Adam’s apostasy”: Refers to Adam’s rebellion/fall.
    • “Leviathan to the smallest mite”: Illustrates the full range of animal life.
    • “Subject to such vanity”: Kept as a direct biblical allusion (Romans 8:20).
    • “Fell monster, DEATH”: Strong personification of death.
    • “God made not death, neither hath he pleasure in the death of any living”: Kept as a direct biblical allusion (Wisdom of Solomon 1:13).
    • “Horrid state of things which at present obtains”: Modernized “obtains” to “exists.”
    • “No creature will kill, or hurt, or give pain to any other”: This is a direct statement of the radical transformation of the animal kingdom, going beyond mere metaphor.
    • “Scorpion will have no poisonous sting; the adder, no venomous teeth… The lion will have no claws to tear the lamb”: Wesley provides concrete examples of the removal of harm from animals.
    • “Wolf shall dwell with the lamb… and the leopard shall lie down with the kid: They shall not hurt or destroy”: Kept as a direct biblical quote/allusion (Isaiah 11:6-9), explicitly noting Wesley’s emphasis that it can be understood literally.
    • 18: “Children of humanity”: General term for humans.
    • “Fallen in many respects, as from a greater height, so into a lower depth”: Emphasizes the unique severity of humanity’s fall.
    • Revelation 21:3-4: This is a core text for the new heavens and new earth, and the lengthy quote is retained to capture the full scope of God’s dwelling with humanity, removal of suffering, and absence of death.
    • “Sickness preparatory thereto”: Clarified.
    • “Grieving for, or parting with, friends”: Specific examples of sorrow removed.
    • “Greater deliverance than all this; for there will be no more sin”: This highlights the ultimate victory.
    • “Deep, an intimate, an uninterrupted union with God; a constant communion with the Father and his Son Jesus Christ, through the Spirit; a continual enjoyment of the Three-One God, and of all the creatures in him!”: This comprehensive description of resurrected life in perfect communion is central to Wesley’s vision of future glory.

    (Featured image generated by Jetpack AI.)

  • Signs That You Won’t Know!

    Signs That You Won’t Know!

    It is critical to note that the signs Jesus’ gives his disciples are general and vague and always contemporary. War and suffering, famine and earthquakes, persecutions and false Messiahs have not only been prevalent throughout history; they are the also to be witnessed and experienced in the present, and they will be encountered in the future. Thus, the posture that Jesus is encouraging his disciples to take is not one where such signs signal the imminent end of history, but rather that such events remind them of the necessity to be ready for the end because they cannot know from these signs when it will take place.

    Allan R. Bevere, Keeping Up WIth Jesus, p. 52 (forthcoming)

    This was too good not tomention. I’m doing a final editorial read on this book which will be available shortly. Allan calls it a “narrative devotional commentary” which is a good description of what it accomplishes. I’ll post more here when the book is available.

  • Eschatology: Daniel and Revelation

    I’ve had a hard time keeping up with blogging this week. It’s a busy month. On Wednesday nights I’m teaching from Revelation for a youth group at a local church, and of course I have my Thursday night events, one of which I’m announcing here, which are a sort of spiritual discipline for me.

    I was going to try to both talk about Daniel and Revelation (in a very general way) and then go on to talk about eschatology and the quest for the historical Jesus, but I have decided not to do that and give myself a slightly more relaxed session talking about the structure and rhetoric of Daniel and Revelation. The two books are substantially different, yet they are the two acknowledged works of apocalyptic literature in the Bible, and almost any Christian discussion of eschatology touches on them at one point or another.

    Growing up as a Seventh-day Adventist meant that I repeatedly studied these books. I even took a college class titled just “Daniel and Revelation.” There was an extract of the SDA Bible Commentary combining the comments on Daniel and Revelation in one book.

    While I will be looking at these two books in particular, my study since has led me to look at a much broader range of material, from Ezekiel, to several chapters in Jeremiah, to much of the latter portion of Isaiah, and much more in the Bible, and also a considerable amount of non-biblical material. Yet these two books still tend to hold pride of place.

    Is their purpose to give us an end-times outline? If so, in what detail, and if not, what is their purpose? I’ll be discussing this on video this evening.

    Google+ Event Page

  • Eschatology: What Is Prophecy

    Eschatology: What Is Prophecy

    Tonight I’ll be continuing my study on Eschatology, using my Google+ page and YouTube channel. I’ll embed a YouTube viewer below.

    In preparation for this study I think it would be useful to read my post from earlier this morning titled Link and Notes on Textual Criticism. That may sound irrelevant, but in it I try to say something about why I study details even though I don’t think we can attain certainty that we have the details right.

    In talking about eschatology I’ve found that there’s great complexity in explaining all of the various views of the end times. For many, eschatology (if they know the word) is supposed to be about outlining how future history will go and how we will know that Jesus will appear. I’m not going to sneak anything up on you. I reject that viewpoint. Neither prophecy nor any other form of predictive statement, including the extended visions of apocalyptic, provides or is intended to provide an outline of the end of the world. What it is intended to accomplish is to let you understand how to live through the difficult times and come through to the end. The end of the particular trouble—and much of this material comes at a particular time of trouble—may not end with the end of the world. Much of apocalyptic literature reads that way, assuring suffering people that God will win in the end, but the times of trouble pass, and “the end is not yet.”

    Here’s my simple eschatology (click to expand):

    simple eschatologyYou may find that particularly unsatisfactory. If so, you will perhaps want to listen to the way someone else interprets prophecy and eschatological language. But I think you are likely to be disappointed. The field of prophecy, whether we’re talking about ancient Israel or modern prophets in the church, is filled with cute explanations for why various interpretations of predictions haven’t worked out. I think there’s a reason for this.

    Two options for that reason: 1) God didn’t want us to know or 2) We’re too stupid to figure out what God was saying. We’ve simply been wrong too many times.

    I could say that the literature itself has failed either because we couldn’t get what God had in mind into print or because God has failed. Always assuming, of course, that I’m not willing to go with the traditional approach which is to forget about each failed prophetic interpretation and go on making more and more unsubstantiated predictions. Instead, I’ve looked back at these texts and I don’t think we’re supposed to get that sort of detail out of them. What we’re supposed to be doing is looking at how God has worked with people, the manner in which God is with us in the interim. I think we can learn a great deal.

    So reading Revelation is not just a matter of looking for the literal meanings of various symbols. It is, instead a process of understanding how this text spoke to people in trouble and how it can speak to others who are similarly in trouble. I will be developing that point of view in this series.

    The critical think to note from last week’s presentation is learning to make a break from the puzzle pieces approach. Much of the writing and preaching on Daniel and Revelation, or on eschatology in general is based on this approach. If I can find the right place in the text in Daniel 7, connect it with the right place in Daniel 8 and then 9, connect all of those to Isaiah 65 & 66 at just the right points, pull in a verse from 1 Thessalonians, then tie all of that to selected anchor points in Daniel 12 & 13, I ‘ll know what’s coming next. I can make a chart. I can be safe.

    I would suggest that such charts are about as safe as the Tower of Babel. They come from our desire to eliminate uncertainty from our lives. We want to make our lives safe, to know what we will face, and most especially to be able to point to specific things we will avoid, while others suffer. In my view the pre-tribulation rapture partakes of wish fulfilment. We’ve read about times of trouble, and we want to find a way to say that we won’t be here for the greatest time of trouble. So we have found out when it will occur and we have found out that we can avoid it. Well, we think we can.

    You know what I think? If the pre-tribulation rapture is true, as a follower of Jesus I should want to be here after the rapture to help take the gospel to those left behind. Yes, I know, there are various explanations of why this wouldn’t be the case. I just don’t believe them.

    I will certainly be looking in this series at the wide variety of interpretations. How do we paste scriptures together to make doctrines such as the rapture? But I will be more interested in looking at the question of how we will live in the “God with us” period that stands between God’s creation in the beginning and God’s renewal at the end.

    One might try to discard apocalyptic because of what it looks forward to. If the period of trouble will (or may) end without the end of the world, so clearly expected by the writer of apocalyptic, of what good can the material be? Well, in each case the time of trouble did end, and there was something in that message that helped through the time. We’re going to look for that.

    Read Daniel 2 and 7. Now consider this: Is the key message in Daniel 3:18 or Daniel 7:13? (Leaving open the possibility that the answer is neither!) Which one do we quote or consult more?

    Tonight I’ll be talking about the purpose of prophecy. I don’t believe biblical prophecy is intended for the same purpose as consulting psychics. (Note: I’m not maintaining that psychics can provide accurate information about the future. In fact, I believe they truly cannot. But people consult them in that hope.) Biblical prophecy is intended to help us live in God’s world with the knowledge that whatever happens God is with us.

    Here’s the viewer for tonight:

     

  • Beginning My Eschatology Study

    9781938434105sLast week was the closing session in my online study of the gospel According to John using Herold Weiss’s book Meditations on According to John: Exercises in Biblical Theology. I now turn to a new subject, eschatology, and will start with the book Eschatology: A Participatory Study Guide by Edward W. H. Vick. The reason I am starting here is that Dr. Vick provides many definitions and outlines the field and the various views quite well.

    I’m going to follow a different pattern for this study, however, so don’t expect a chapter per week. What I’m planning to do is go back to something I’m more familiar with and illustrate these various approaches by looking at specific passages of scripture. I’ll focus on one, but will bring in others to show the connections, both where I see intertextual relationships and where students of eschatology have tended to draw connections irrespective of any demonstrable intent of the author.

    You either view using the Google+ Event Page, or with the embedded YouTube viewer below.

  • Getting Literal, Eschatological, Apocalyptic, Even!

    Well, last night my discussion of According to John covered a lot of other ground. In particular, I was looking at the eschatological use of “hour” and “now,” and I suggested that John has a fairly simple eschatology to go with his fairly simple soteriology. I’m not going to rehash all of this. The foundation is found in Chapter 19 of Herold Weiss’s book Mediations on According to John: Exercises in Biblical Theology. For those who might wish to review the video, here it is.

    In the middle of this discussion I got into talking about the ‘L’ word. No, not liberal. Literal. I tell people that we should avoid simply saying that we’re not taking something literal, and get specific about just how we are taking whatever it is. “We don’t take that literally,” has become commonplace in discussions of the Bible in mainline and progressive circles, but often we don’t tell people just what we do with the thing we aren’t taking literally.

    Last night I was talking about something that is fairly simple to pinpoint, symbolic language in a vision report. (Note that you don’t necessarily have to believe that a person has received a divine vision in order to accept a literary category of “vision report.” I do believe people have visions, but the form remains no matter the source.) If we take a vision such as Daniel 7, for example, we have beasts (which represent something), coming up out of the sea (which represents something), onto the land (which represents something), and so forth. “Not taking Daniel 7 literally” means that I don’t believe that Daniel’s vision was about actual creatures coming from an actual sea onto the land. Rather, these beasts represent something else. Rather than taking them literally, one should take them as symbols of something else.

    One of the problems with the way visions are often interpreted is that people drop from the symbolic to the literal. The beasts, the sea, and the land are symbols, sure enough, but when the Son of Man appears in the clouds, that’s literal. But there isn’t any justification in the text for taking one part of the vision literally. One interpreter of Revelation has maintained (actually more than one, but I won’t list) that we should take everything literally that we can in the book, and only treat it as symbolic where that is essential. It’s a vision! It is filled with symbols! The default has to be that anything in the vision is symbolic unless you have good reason to believe that the writer is seeing actual events. And quite bluntly, in Revelation (or the latter chapters of Daniel), you don’t.

    I think a couple of extensions of how symbols might function would be in order, and Revelation provides examples. First, something literal can be used as a symbol. There is no doubt that the seven churches were real places. Under the rule of taking what can be taken literally, we would see the messages as tailored messages to those particular seven churches. But I would argue here that the actual churches are being used symbolically, with the number seven indicating that the messages to the seven churches constitute as a whole a message to the whole church. Various schemes, such as applying the churches to periods of history and their messages as specifically applicable to such times, while interesting, have the potential to lose us part of the message to the whole church. Second, I would use Revelation 12 as an example of where a visionary symbol points not to something physical, but to something spiritual. We might call it a symbol of a symbol.

    It’s a bit more complex to specify how this works in other passages. For example, I would call Genesis 1 liturgy. That is, by most people’s understanding, non-literal. In addition, there are symbols within the liturgical text. This is why I think it’s important to talk about how we understand a passage and why we understand it that way and avoid simply saying that we don’t take it literally. There are many non-literal ways of taking things.

    I will go into these issues in greater detail when I begin my YouTube study on eschatology starting August 17. On August 10 I plan an interview with Dr. Herold Weiss, winding up my study of According to John. I will begin the eschatology study by looking at the landscape of eschatology using Eschatology: A Participatory Study Guide by Edward W. H. Vick, and then proceed to eschatological and apocalyptic passages. I talked about this in more detail yesterday.

  • Hammering the Word SOON

    Jesus is coming soonI already mentioned that I’m in the final stages of publishing a new book Eschatology: A Participatory Study Guide by Edward W. H. Vick. One of the things that Dr. Vick emphasizes is the abuse of the word “soon” in Christian teaching and preaching. There is a problem with definitions if you repeatedly claim that something is soon and then it doesn’t happen. On the one hand, if you define “soon” so that it has meaning, you have the problem of the prediction failing. On the other, if you keep “soon” vague enough to protect yourself from the failure charge, you generally make it meaningless, “nonsense” in the technical sense, as in lacking any meaningful sense. Dr. Vick even wrote a book on precisely that topic, The Adventists’ Dilemma.

    I must confess that I suggested reducing the time spent discussing the way the word “soon” has been used in the church. It’s interesting, but just how central is it to most Christians’ thinking? Well, I don’t know about most Christians, but abuse of the word “soon” or any of its related topics, such as “knowing the times” and so forth, is rampant. We’ve just gotten over the prediction of the second coming in 2011, and now we have another one (HT: Dispatches).

    Dr. F. Kenton Beshore, of World Bible Society, doesn’t claim a specific date, but provides a range of years over which the rapture and then the second coming should be expected. (I use the title “Dr.” out of courtesy, though the bio on the World Bible Society website does not specify where any of them were earned, usually a bad sign. In addition, a couple of the degrees are normally honorary.) His claim is that the rapture should occur between now and 2021 and then the second coming seven years after that. Those who are acquainted with popular literature on Revelation will doubtless note that Beshore is pre-trib based on these numbers.

    The reasoning behind this position, such as it is, is similar to Hal Lindsey’s belief that Jesus will return before the end of the generation that saw Israel reestablished as a nation in the promised land.

    It would be hard for me to comment in detail, except to note that the entire rapture, seven-year tribulation, and second coming scheme is produced through a hodge-podge of proof-texting. It’s not even as convincing as your average proof-text usage. The relationship between the various passages involved is more than doubtful. I believe it is popular, and seems plausible to many, for the same reason that action movies are popular. They’re exciting and satisfying, with plenty of action and suspense followed by a comforting resolution. The major argument in favor of a pre-tribulation rapture is similar. It’s comforting to think that before all the bad things happen, God’s people (in which group readers confidently place themselves) are removed from the scene.

    Reality, however, even the reality of life with God, is not as satisfying to our selfish desires as an action movie. God’s people have been left to live through times of trouble many times. They are never alone, thank God, but they are often in difficulty.

    One can get great comfort from a prediction of the end. It gives one such a sense of control, and such a fine feeling of safety. Bad things will happen to others, but not to the believer. Uncertainty is for others. The believer knows.

    But over and over such “knowing” has proven to be false. There’s no more reason to believe this result than any of the preceding ones.

    The word “soon” (or various ways of saying something similar) is being abused again.

  • October 22 and Eschatology

    Eschatology: A Participatory Study GuideOctober 22 probably doesn’t mean much to most of my readers, but for someone who grew up as a Seventh-day Adventist (SDA), it has great significance. It was on October 22, 1844 that early Adventists (before they were Seventh-day Adventists) expected Jesus to return. It was actually the second time they had expected that. first came what is known as the “lesser disappointment” of 1843, when they had not set a specific date, but had set a deadline of a season. Of course, the day ended, and nothing happened.

    But as often happens with failed prophecies, after thought, consideration, and some manipulation of Bible texts, the Adventists decided that something had happened, it just wasn’t something visible here on earth. Adventists made a firm decision to set no more dates for the actual Second Coming, but they continued to preach that Jesus was coming “soon.”

    In an overall doctrinal sense, this is no longer the sort of thing I consider central. But it did play a pivotal role in my decision to leave the SDA church. First was my reading of Daniel. I studied Daniel at Andrews (the SDA Theological Seminary) under a professor who strongly supported the traditional SDA understanding of the passage. People often think those who change their beliefs in college or seminary do so because liberal or unbelieving professors brainwash them. My professor made every effort to convince me that the SDA interpretation of Daniel 8:14 (the famed 2300 day prophecy) made sense. But in the context of Daniel it did not make sense to me.

    Having decided that the time prophecy element was completely unfounded I turned to Hebrews and eventually decided that the very concept of an investigative judgment was also not good theology. Having spent a considerable time outside the Christian community, it was this second element that made it relatively certain that I would not return to an SDA community. People expect the seventh day sabbath to be the problem, but while I don’t agree with much of the supporting doctrine (the idea that it is the distinctive characteristic of the remnant, for example), I wouldn’t have a problem making the seventh day a sabbath. (That isn’t at all what SDAs mean by this, of course.)

    What’s interesting right now is that I have just completed proofs for a new book, Eschatology: A Participatory Study Guide, by Edward W. H. Vick, who would see similar problems with these various elements to the ones I do, but is a former professor at Andrews University. In addition, my company distributes his book The Adventist’s Dilemma, regarding the use of the word “soon” by Adventists. I had once thought these controversies were in my past. Now I’m editing and marketing books about them.

    October 22 can cast a long shadow!

  • Repeating Adventist Mistakes

    William Miller
    Image via Wikipedia

    Harold Camping seems to be repeating the mistakes made by the early Adventist movement. While I disagree profoundly with Seventh-day Adventist eschatology, I don’t hold that history against the church. Good and interesting movements can result from mistakes, but only if you correct those mistakes.

    Now consider Camping. He predicted the rapture in 1994, and then decided his math was wrong. Those who know Adventist history will likely recall the 1843 “lesser disappointment.” After Jesus did not return in 1843, William Miller corrected the date and also made it more specific, narrowing it to a single day, October 22, 1844. That day is known in Adventist history as the Great Disappointment.

    Following that event, Adventists decided that, while they had the math right, what had happened was a change in heaven, as Jesus began the investigative judgment, which is still going on now.

    They also, however, acknowledged that they were wrong to try to set dates for the second coming. On this last note, Camping is not following in their footnotes. He appears set to repeat their mistakes, but not follow their example when they did right.

    I see that Spectrum’s Alexander Carpenter has noticed this similarity as well. Amongst the biblioblogs, I would note Peter Kirk and Joel Watts.

    Enhanced by Zemanta

  • An End-Timely Dilemma

    A couple of months ago my company, Energion Publications, began distributing two previously published books by Edward W. H. Vick. As I normally do, I planned to publish my reflections on these books here. Time has been in short supply recently, and I haven’t gotten to them.

    The Adventists Dilemma

    But fortuitously, one of the books is The Adventists’ Dilemma, and relates to the end times, so what better day could I have to publish some notes on the book than May 21, 2011, the day on which Harold Camping says the rapture will occur. Now as I write this, it’s already past 6 pm in many places, and thus Camping’s prediction is, predictably, failing.

    As usual, this will be more my reflections on the topic of the book than a formal book review. In fact, it won’t resemble a formal book review at all. Since I now distribute the book in question, and thus have an interest in selling it, you should also not consider this unbiased. It is, however, a subject in which I have great interest.

    I grew up in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, which is also Dr. Vick’s background. There’s even a family connection. He replaced my uncle, Don F. Neufeld, as Greek teacher at Canadian Union College, now Canadian University College. Seventh-day Adventists have a very strong emphasis on eschatology. Indeed, the word “Adventist” in their name refers to their belief that Jesus will return soon.

    The church came out of the Millerite movement in the 1830s to 1840s, which resulted in two disappointments, the first in 1843, and then the second–the Great Disappointment–on October 22, 1844. Those who are predicting Camping’s response to his disappointment today might consider the Adventist response at the time. One of those responses became the investigative judgment doctrine in Seventh-day Adventism, which maintained that October 22, 1844 was an important prophetic date after all, but that the event which took place was in heaven and thus we couldn’t see it. The time was right, but the event was wrong. (For those interested, this all came about through interpretation of Daniel 8:14, badly out of context in my view.)

    But Adventists generally, and particularly Seventh-day Adventists, decided they had been wrong to set a date for the second coming, and so the dilemma I reference in the title is not based on setting dates. Rather, it has to do with the idea of proclaiming the “soon” coming of Jesus Christ. To quote from the book description of The Adventists’ Dilemma,

    If you use ‘soon’ in the ordinary sense, you can’t go on saying that the Advent is soon. If you say that the Advent is ‘soon’ in a qualified sense (meaning ‘in the unknown and indefinite future but not long into that future’) the claim is meaningless. So the claim that the Advent is soon is either false or meaningless.

    But, you may ask, doesn’t the Bible speak of the return of Jesus as “soon?” Doesn’t this same dilemma apply to the New Testament writers? Dr. Vick believes it does, they noticed, and they dealt with it. Since he spends three chapters on it, I’m only going to quote two snippets in summary:

    Jesus as a Jew spoke to his generation. Jesus’ message to that generation was, Your opportunity is here and now. It must now be seized. It will pass. Jesus’ words sponke again to the early church. Your opportunity is here and now. You must seize it. It will pass … (123-124).

    …Whatever the struggles ahead, the assurance of triumph, God’s triumph, makes the present full of meaning and full of hope (125).

    The one weakness I see in this book is simply that Dr. Vick takes a very long time dealing with the issue of the meaning of “soon” and many who are not Adventists as such will find the material on the movement’s history and on recent Seventh-day Adventist responses on eschatology to be excessive. On the other hand, for those interested in those topics, the weakness is a strength.

    I have shown little interest in Camping’s predictions, because they are so obviously wrong. But my question is whether we don’t both leave some Christians vulnerable to this sort of thing, and also provide an unnecessary opportunity for ridicule by failing to deal sensibly with eschatology. Some people will be concerned with end times whether we like it or not.

    I went from growing up in the SDA church where eschatology was king, we all could quote verses from Daniel and Revelation to support our beliefs about the end, and the soon coming of Jesus was a firm conviction, to the United Methodist Church, where very few people had a clue. Now you may justifiably point out that I regard the Adventist “clue” as wrong. The problem on the Methodist side was not incorrect eschatology, but rather an eschatological vacuum. One Methodist minister even told me about inviting an SDA minister to teach Revelation to his congregation because, he said, “they know so much about it.”

    But the issue here is not SDA or non-SDA, but rather just what your congregation will believe about eschatology in the absence of some good teaching. If you ignore Revelation, what will your congregation believe? In my experience, the answer is that those who care will follow someone on TV or in popular books, and that means the “left behind” eschatology.

    I remember the first time I was invited to teach a Methodist youth group. This was a seminar offered on a day off from school, and the young people were selected–the most interested. I was to teach them about Bible backgrounds and Bible translation. I completed my presentation and opened it up for questions. What did they ask? Was I pre-trib, mid-trib, or post-trib.

    Now most of their parents couldn’t have defined the terms, but these kids had heard them. They were quite surprised to find out I didn’t believe in either the rapture or the tribulation (in the sense of a seven year period of tribulation), and discussion died. I must not know much about Revelation!

    But I found the same thing with the adults. People either knew nothing of eschatology, or they had absorbed popular culture on the topic. To them, Revelation was the left behind series. They had no idea there was any other way to look at things.

    And there is where we mainliners have failed, I think. In the absence of sound discussion of the available scriptures and evidence, people will jump on just about anything that is confidently asserted and clearly proclaimed. While most Methodists are unlikely to go with a particular date, many are going to ride the “soon” bandwagon right off a cliff.

    There is a sense in which imminence trumps immanence. We lose the motivation to live our lives for Jesus based on the fact that he is present with us now, because we’re too concerned with when he’ll return and end everything. We sing “soon and very soon, we’re going to see the king” when we should be sing “now and truly now, we always see the king.”

    God’s ultimate triumph is our hope, but God’s presence now connects us to that hope and should motivate us to proclaim that presence and kingdom, the one that is with us while the earth continues.

    I’d like to suggest that we need to make sound eschatology a regular part of teaching and preaching. I don’t mean by this responses to predictions like Camping’s. Explaining how wrong other people are, even if they are indeed very wrong, still leaves a vacuum. What we need to do is proclaim the positive message of eschatological passages. While we’re doing that, let’s put the emphasis on the good news, which is not how many people will be left behind or how many will burn in hell, but rather how many people we, as the body of Christ can reach with God’s grace and help acting as Christ’s body.

    Related articles
    Enhanced by Zemanta