Showing posts with label eschatology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label eschatology. Show all posts

If you are reading this, we missed the Rapture



If you are reading this, we all missed the rapture. Harold Camping and the true followers of Christ have ascended to heaven to meet the Lord in air, we are instead here mired in tribulation at missing their warnings. Woe to us, especially the Christians who attend Evangelical, Lutheran, Methodist, Catholic or any other Church! We are all apostates!!

Unless of course it didn't happen. Which, as I type this Friday night, am absolutely sure it did not.

Sigh...

Here is something that you may have heard already. First, let's talk about Harold Camping and his radio show. For one, this is not the first time that he has predicted the end of the world. He did it once in 1994. After a failure like that, one should probably repent, turn off the microphone, and do a little soul-searching before speaking in public again. Instead he revised his predictions. Now, he is on record now for declaring Christianity -those who belong to the church- as apostate and his show alone the voice of salvation in the world. Incidentally, he is also on record for explicitly denying the Trinity in favor of modalism. What's that? Well, according to Camping, Jesus is not co-eternal with the God-the-Father, but is simply another form of God-the-Father. This is like ice melting into water. That is not the Trinity, and Camping knows this.

In this blog, you are about to read something I have never posted. It is something that I do not like dishing out because it so inflammatory. Yet, it ought to be said here. Please understand, this not hyperbole. I mean exactly what it reads when I say Harold Camping is a damn heretic.

(bring out the comfy chair!!)

So what of his followers? I am sure that after quitting their jobs, abandoning responsibilities, and now looking like fools, they will probably be so mad that they'll not only abandon Family Radio, but also burn Harold Camping in effigy. Actually, that's probably not going to happen either, and here's a historical precedent why.

In the book Influence Robert Cialdini related the story of a few end-times cults in the American mid 19th century. Let's play "guess who": A prophet made a prediction of a date and time. The prophet gathered followers who sold their land and abandoned their livelihoods. The day passed and nothing happened. The prophet revised the date. The followers did not dissipate, but instead their numbers grew. This process happened at least one more time. You know this group today as the Seventh Day Adventists.

If you are like many people, you either scratching your head or screaming "what the fuck?!" right now. Yet from that book, we see that this is an example of psychological consistency and social proof. As soon as someone makes a verbal or written commitment to something, they are likely to stick with in even when that commitment is shown to be completely misguided. It is the same tendency that keeps women in abusive relationships. It was also used by Chinese captors to brainwash POWs of the Korean War. Social Proof augments this. As long the entire group keeps saying the same mantra -especially if they are led by a charismatic leader- everyone will believe that the continued behavior is right and nothing is going wrong. How powerful is social proof? Two words: Kool Aid.

So in the case of Camping and his ilk, they are almost certainly going to wash, revise, and repeat. They will likely (and this Christian will add thankfully) further distance themselves other Churches. Why will they do this? Because in order to do otherwise they would have to admit to themselves that they behaved really, really, stupidly.

Now to be clear, Camping is close to Dispensationalism so his views are similar to what many Evangelicals believe. However, Dispensationalism does not deserve to be lumped in with Camping's little cult. Camping used numerology to come to his conclusion. As far as I know, Dispensationalist do not do this.

Despite that, I am certainly not a Dispensationalist. As far as I am concerned, there is no coming Anti-Christ, Black Helicopters, parenthetical "Church Age", or world exiting rapture. Yes, Camping is the lunatic fringe of American religiousity. His approach to scripture is an embarrassment and a travesty. Yet, one dispensationalist told me they guess when it comes to interpreting the Bible. Is that any better than numerology?

Regardless, Camping and his ilk are likely marching on and it won't be long before we hear the prophetic revisions. I wonder if Camping is going to claim direct inspiration from God next time, assuming he hasn't already. While he does so, I'll be happy to attend a May 22nd Sunday service. There, with others, we will all contemplate the intrinsic goodness of God's creation and the saving work of Christ within it. May God's work continue in the World!

Thanks for reading, comment, and your reposts.

if it was my funeral...


Here goes, it is time to get morbid.

There have been a few funerals around my world recently. I won't mention whose, as anyone reading this can probably guess if they know me. At these funerals, there are some peculiar practices that -if it where mine- I would probably not like. No, I think of something else entirely.

Sometimes, there is a bit sermonizing at funerals. It is usually about the need to accept Jesus so you can get into heaven when you die. Apparently, this is sometimes accompanied by a full on altar call. So after everyone remembers the deceased, there is a need for the minister to make sure everyone is going to get to heaven too. It seems to make sense. If the Gospel is about going to heaven when you die, then what better time than a funeral to make sure everyone gets to heaven when you do?

Now, don't think that this practice is wrong. Yet, if it were my funeral, I think I would resurrect from the dead right then and give the minister an earful. I am not a fan of altar calls in general. Now altar calls at a funeral seem just plain thoughtless. It is as if evangelical ministers do not know how to do much except evangelize, and they only way they know how is via altar calls. It seems a tacky -and perhaps even manipulative- practice.

Christians believe in things other than making everyone Christian, right? We believe things beyond "go and preach the Gospel", right? We have entire traditions of devotions, practices, and above all hope, yes? Wouldn't some of those be more appropriate for a funeral? This leads me to my next thought...

At many funerals there is a lot of talk about heaven. The soul of the deceased is in eternity with God. The deceased may even still be with us in spirit and watching down. I am reminded of the old Family Circus cartoons in which a ghostly apparition of the deceased grandfather happily watches his grand children from the clouds. This hallmark image of heaven is what is so often invoked at a Christian funeral.

In contrast to altar calls, please do think that this is wrong. This is not what the Bible teaches. It is not what Christian hope is. This is not what Christians are supposed to believe about life-after-death. As one blogger put it, this belief is a second rate consolation prize compared to what God really has for us.

Paul speaks of the redemption of the the body (Romans 8:23) and elsewhere he talks of the raising for the dead (1 Corinthians 15). This is not some metaphor for salvation. This means that our bodies, which are now cursed by sin and will die, will be physically raised up and returned to perfection with the rest of God's good creation some day. It is for this reason that early Christians dug catacombs for their dead, rather than burning them. Their bodies were simply to sacred to be burnt on a Roman funeral pyre.

I think of it this way: my last earthly memories of my late grandfather were when he was tired, sick, old and unable to remember our names. He was so weak that he could not swallow applesauce. But when the dead are raised, his body will not suffer anymore and stroke that so damaged his mind will be of no consequence. I do not think of my grandfather as floating on the clouds watching my life right now, but I look forward to telling him all about it when the dead are raised on the last day.

At my funeral, this is what I want people to talk about it. We can forget about an altar call. We can forget about souls floating to heaven. Whenever I die, and am buried in the dirt, I want whoever speaks to emphasize the future bodily resurrection. That is what I look forward to with the entire Christian world.

I guess that wasn't so morbid after all, huh?

And The Wicked Shall Inherit Your Pets?

Most folks know that I am no fan of dispensational futurism, including its dogma of the rapture. Part of the reason I reject is the outright strange impasses it creates: such as what unworthy pagan will care for your pets once Jesus takes you away from earth? After all, good Christians care for their pets.

"Why not Us?" says a clever and enterprising atheist. Businesses Week reports that wicked pagan Bret Centre has started a foundation to care for your pets as the world inevitably goes to shit during the tribulation. Futurists are at an uncertain about this, but some are paying the fee.

Yeah, it's weird.

Personally, I can't help but have some respect for Bret Centre. I imagine he thought to himself something like this: "if members of their religion capitalize on the rapture, why shouldn't I?" (LaHaye and Jenkins, after all, aren't exactly living below the poverty line.) Since he never expects the rapture to come, he will never actually have to provide a service. This is, pretty much, free money. If he ever runs out of atheists to care for his pets, I'd like to volunteer myself, every other preterist, and Catholic and Orthodox Christians, who many dispensationalists believe will be left behind.

Perhaps my cynicism is getting the better of me.

In all seriousness, I wonder if this semi-overt exploitation of hysteria is going to warrant a little bit of self-reflection among those who read things like the rapture index. Futurists (like any group I suppose) can make themselves look very silly. More than once folks have racked up their credit cards or called their kids home from college because they expected the tribulation. There has been a small fortune made in selling things like rapture dog tags. Even groups like the SDA started with irrational growing popularity of an end-times prophet who kept failing in his predictions.

I have no idea how those who believe in the rapture will deal with this impasse regarding their pets. I do think, however, that Bret Centre will make a nice amount of free money.

The Crow: Are There Crimes That Cannot be Forgiven?

This blog is dedicated to my cousin, Christine Apa-Gonzaga


Pardon the short departure from plans in my last blog, but I now return to my reviews of The Crow. In my last blog, I talked about the character of the Crow himself, but now I’d like to deal with the major theme. The book asks whether there are crimes that can be forgiven. Implicit in that question is a certain view of justice that leaves a taste a disappointment. I will deal with both in this blog.

Two Contrasting Views of Justice

The Crow is a revenge tragedy. In a revenge tragedy, there is a view of justice that is best called retributive justice. In retributive justice, the emphasis is on the perpetrators. Those who commit crimes or injustice must be brought to account and be punished for their wickedness. This may also be done in order to prevent them from doing more crimes, but the main purpose is that they have committed some crime and they must now pay. The scales must be balanced. Typically, the perpetrators are brought to account by an avenger who acts on the victim’s behalf, but in the Crow the victim himself rises again to overpower his enemies.

Retributive justice, whether in comic books or not, contrasts with restorative justice. Restorative justice, as far as I understand it, is part Christian theology, as expounded by Jurgen Moltmann’s In the End-The Beginning: The Life of Hope. Restorative justice does not place an emphasis on the perpetrators, but rather on victims. Justice, in this case, is not concerned about balancing scales of wrongs, but rather restoring what was lost to evil. So if a person is terribly traumatized by having a loved one taken from them, restorative justice seeks to bring that loved one back or at least heal the trauma of the victim. If a relationship between two people is broken, restorative justice seeks to repair the relationship not punish who was the wrongdoer. Moltmann takes this even further as he believes that all people are victims, including those who perpetrate evil*. The wicked man who abuses his spouse was first abused as a child.

Reprobates and Tragedy in the Crow

Is there any room for forgiveness in the Crow? Not really. The Crow is merciless and wrathful, as I mentioned in an earlier blog. Already, it is clear that J. O’barr thinks that there are things that cannot be forgiven –and one can hardly fault him for his feelings. The character of Fun Boy embodies this theme.

None of the characters the Crow kills are repentant, but Fun Boy is nearly the antithesis of repentance. The ugly criminals the Crow kills all have rotten souls, but none of them have any since of self-examination to acknowledge it. Fun Boy is different. Fun boy is fully aware of his state. He is not sorry for the crimes he has done. He knows that he is monster deserving of death. Yet at no point does he ask for or presume mercy. When the Crow kills him his dying request is not “forgive me” but only “kill that bastard slow.” (He refers to T-bird, the next person the Crow intends to kill). Fun Boy’s dying request is not forgiveness, but only more hatred, of which he is fully aware of.

Not only is there no forgiveness in the Crow, but there is not even the preceding penitence either.

After the killing of Fun Boyd, the story quickly moves into its final movement of tragedy. The Crow spends one night in his loft. He burns all of his memoirs of Shelly and then shouts out the window, “Shelly I’m coming home.” He confronts his final murderer, T-bird. The Crow’s last fight scene is long, insane, and bloody. He kills not only T-bird, but everyone who works for T-bird. T-bird dies in a panic, and the final time we see him is when the Crow veers over with holding a hammer.

After the last killing, the Crow returns to grave. The final pages of the comic are still, serene, scenes of a snow covered graveyard. The Crow is dead. He rests again with Shelly. This is the tragedy of the Crow. The avenger completes his task, and then just dies.

Happy Vengence?

I can now only speak for myself, and not what the story attempts to communicate. Is there such a thing as happy vengeance? I am not sure. In the story of the Crow, every evil doer is killed. But the hero leaves the dark world to its darkness. With justice done, he returns to his grave. The ending is sad, as it leaves the reader wanting. It is not enough to know that all the murderers will no longer murder. We all want to see the happy couple alive again and the Crow free from his mourning. Anger and wrath sprinkled with kindness leave a disappointed taste in the mouth not matter how one serves up the revenge platter. This feeling of let-down seems to go beyond the novel itself: J. O’barr admitted that writing the Crow did not prove the emotional catharsis he hoped it would become.

No one can stand in judgment of the Crow or J. O’barr for the feelings they have, least of all me. Anyone who has lost someone they love has a right to feel angry and to want the murders brought to account. Yet I cannot help but think that the let-down feeling at the end of the Crow is part of the failure of retributive justice. The grief at losing a love one to murderers is to fold: the desire for that person to be back in your life, and for the death to be avenged. It seems to me, that the first is the stronger emotion. The desire to overcome our own grief is what turns into anger and wrath directed at those wicked people who hurt us. But vengeance does not remove sadness and grief from the heart of the victim. It only adds more dead bodies.

I cannot help but see the restorative justice of the Christian Gospel as the only hope for the victims of evil, both living and the dead. The Gospel tells us that God-the-Son became a victim of horrendous evil at the crucifixion. It tells us that God the Father is well acquainted with the feelings of grief and injustice. The answer is that of a Resurrection from the dead and overcoming of evil with restorative justice. Christians look forward to a glorious future in which every victim of murder, every dead prisoner from the gulags, every refugee who was gunned down by soldiers, and every martyr who was fed to lions will one die rise again in resurrected bodies and meet their savior who suffered as they dead. Death and injustice are not avenged. Death and injustice are reversed. The feelings of anger, wrath, and trauma will likewise be defeated in the all-encompassing victory of God. There will be no need for vengeance in the new heaven’s and new earth.
Behold, I will create
new heavens and a new earth.
The former things will not be remembered,
nor will they come to mind. –Isaiah 65:17


In that place, the Crow dances joyously with his untarnished bride, and the atrocity of their deaths never comes to their minds.

Thanks for reading.



========================
*I can never forget that Moltmann was a German soldier in WWII and knew fully the kind of evil that infected his whole society.

Why I Prefer Preterism

I meant what I said when I wrote that I don’t want my blog to be excessively negative. The last post, on my frustrations with dispensational futurism, was quite deconstructive. In this post, I’ll be positive instead. I will explain why I prefer preterism.

I realize that many people reading this have probably never heard of preterism. It is fairly new to me too. Briefly put, preterism is the view that many of the prophecies in Revelation and the Olivet discourse were fulfilled by the end of the first century. More information can be found a The Preterist Site or you can listen to the Preterist Podcast if you (like the Podcast's author) are a Mac loyalist, or at least own an iPod.

As a caveat, I reiterate that I am relatively new to preterism. I missed the “Biblical Apocalyptic” class at Azusa Pacific. Eschatology in general is not my area of expertise. Additionally, I would like to make it clear that I support orthodox preterism. What this means is that I reject the kind of preterism that denies a future bodily resurrection among other essentials to the Christian faith. I find that there are those who automatically equate preterism with heresy. I hope that those reading this won’t have such a knee jerk reaction.

Here goes:

Preterism understands literal and temporal context well. If there is one fundamental reason why I like preterism, it is the fact that I never scratch my head and wonder why preterists believe what they believe. Preterists know what their hermeneutic is and they understand how it is distinct from actually interpreting the bible. N.T. Wright, who is often invoked by pretestists, spends a whole four-hundred page volume explaining his method before he proceeds to exegete the Gospels in later works. I know his assumptions, he knows his assumptions, and consequently I understand him when he gets into the story of Christ’s ministry.

Preterists, when commenting on things like the Olivet discourse or revelation are upfront with their hermeneutic and I see that. For instance, when reading through Jesus’ words at Olivet they rightly point out that condemnation of the Jewish Apostates was a major theme in Matthew, and they understand Olivet in that light. Preterists then, look to the surrounding literally context of a passage to get to an understanding of what that passage is talking about.

Preterists also get deep into the time period of when a passage is written. First, they rightly assume that when Jesus was talking about things happening “soon” and when he refers to “this generation” they ought to be understood as if they were written to another audience, in another time, and in another place –because they were (in fact!) written to another audience, in another time, and in another place.

Literal and temporal context are imminently basic to any hermeneutic of anything. Yet it seems to me the preterists are the only ones applying it to scripture.

Preterism is consistent when it comes to cultural idiom and genre. Idiom and genre are other important aspects of interpretation that preterists have a firm grasp on. Most people agree that there are plenty of idioms in the Bible. When Jesus says in Luke 14:26 that the disciples must hate their family and their own lives, most people will agree that Jesus did not want us to be hateful, but recognize that Jesus was using a cultural idiom for choosing between two alternatives. (“I love this, and I hate that.” Was a way of saying “I choose this.”). Likewise, genre is something that nobody wants to ignore. The parables of Jesus are understood in the way they are because we know their genre. We know this, and how they were understood, because lots of other people in that era spoke in parables. So we come to understand genre by comparing what the Bible contains with similar literature from the era the Bible was written in.

When preterists read phrases like “the moon will not shed its light” and “coming on the clouds” and even “[violence/tribulation] never to be equaled again” they are fully aware of the idioms and hyperbole of Jesus or whoever else might be speaking. Likewise, when looking at Ezekiel, Daniel, or Revelation I have noticed that preterists are also aware of the genre of apocalyptic literature, which they glean from other sources just like the non-biblical parables. From this, they learn to look at Revelation in a way the author likely intended.

Preterism makes the Good News sound like “Good News.” There is another thing that I’ve noticed about preterism, that may not be essential to it, but often goes hand and hand: the idea that the Kingdom of God was initiated with the coming of Jesus and continues to this day.

This is some serious good news! The idea that the Kingdom of God is a way of life, a political order, and/or liberation of the oppressed etc deserves an entire blog. Preterists take it as a given and often articulate that God has been growing the Kingdom of God like a muster seed since its inception in the time of Jesus. There is also an assumption that waiting for Christ’s coming is preparing the world for him to come. This is like how you would clean up your house for an honored guest. The Church, then, works in the world to make the world better. When preterists say, “The Kingdom of God is at hand” they mean things like “We intend to liberate slaves” rather than “Christians are going to disappear and the planet will pretty much literally go to hell.”

All Hail Dee Dee Warren!

I think that those three reasons are only the beginning of why I am attracted to preterism. It really boils down to one thing; even before I knew there was something besides dispensational futurism (yes, I was eye-ball deep in a church that believes it), I learned the basics of hermerneutics. When I listen to the preterists, I hear them appealing to, understanding, and applying the principles I learned. Because of this, I simply trust them a lot more than others. Additionally, the idea of end times being about regenerating and providing hope for the world is an eschatology I am instinctively drawn to.

So color me an Orthodox preterist. It was inevitable after leaving Azusa Pacific anyway.

Why I am Frustrated with Futurism

While it was never my intention to be overly negative or deconstructive when it comes to this blog, I think I finally need to comment on Dispensational Futurism, otherwise known as “end times” by the popular evangelicalism. Dispensational Futurism, for those of here who may not be familiar with it, is a specific understanding of the Olivet discourse in Matthew 24, Revelation, Daniel and such. It represents the popular dogmas like the rapture (when Christians disappear) the coming tribulation, black helicopters, and a world government of the Anti-Christ. It was popularized by the Left Behind series, which is a whole different blog entirely.

At this time, I not only think that Dispensational Futurism is off track, I think that dispensationalism faces quite a bit of problems; problems that I think are not easily overcome. Here are some of the reasons why I am frustrated with futurism.

Dispensational Futurism is not a “conservative” view. Dispensational Futurism is often taught in evangelical churches, and especially charismatic and very fundamentalist churches, “what the Bible teaches.” Deviations from futurism are often taught as “liberal” viewpoints to be viewed with suspicion. Dispensationalism is right because it is conservative.

The strange thing is, dispensational futurism is far from conservative. It began in the 1800s –very late by Church History standards- and it was incredibly novel of an idea even then. Most Christians, including the big names in Protestantism like Luther, Calvin, and Wesley, never knew of futurism like we know it today and would not endorse it if they knew of it now. Furthermore, when futurists first came on the scene, they snubbed ministers who they considered to intellectual (and were consequently the actual conservatives) as not having anything worth saying.

Dispensational Futurism is a liberal view. In fact, if one considers how futurists approach scripture, the positions might actually be radical. This leads me to the second point…

Dispensational Futurists are hermeneutically challenged. While I am sure that there are futurists out there who are very conscious and aware of their interpretative methods, I am beginning to think that many futurists not only do not know their own hermeneutic, but do not even know what a “hermeneutic” is.

The more I talk to futurists, the more I am convinced that they do not know the difference between an interpretive method (a hermeneutic) and the act of interpreting. Furthermore, some of the most basic principles of interpretation are outright doubly ignored, such as reading a passage in its literally context or according to the time period it was written.

I believe that the conclusions of futurism are matters of presumption, and it is a presumption they are not aware of. The parable of the Purple Cow exemplifies this problem.

Dispensational Futurism has made Too Many False Prophecies. One can pick up a book at a Christian bookstore entitled “Charting the End Times” but chances are you aren’t going to find “88 Reasons why Jesus is coming in 1988.” Most books that talked about the end of the world around the year 2000 are less than likely to available for purchase too. I also doubt anyone is reading “the Late Great Planet Earth.” Why? Because these books prophesied about then current events that turned out not to be true.

There is a serious problem with consistency here. Many Christians rightly denounce the latter day prophets of Mormonism and the Jehovah Witnesses for their failed visions of the end of the world. Rightly, people invoke the test of a false prophet in Deuteronomy 18.

For even one false prophecy made by the founders of Mormonism, your average evangelical will rightly say “away with them and their theological projects.” Why then do we tolerate the failed predictions of dispensational futurism? Is it because names keep changing every ten years or so? Failed prophecies are failed prophecies. This should be enough to make at least reevaluate futurism if not dump it completely. Sadly, people seem to have a short memory about these things.

Dispensational Futurism encourages a “fire escape” Gospel I almost entitled this section as “Dispensational Futurism has a suspicious genesis.” But I think it suffices to say this, Dispensational Futurism, since its inception, has taught that the W.A.S.P.’s are alienated people, losing control in their society, and thus will eventually be sucked away from world because they’re just that special. In other words, get on board, and get out. Many articles, like those found at the preteristsite.com and the slacktivisit have already noted this same attitude in the Left Behind series, and I need not expound on them here.

I do not believe the Gospel, the Kingdom of God, and such is about escape planet earth and letting all God’s creation burn. The Kingdom of God is like a mustard seed that starts small and then grows into something huge within the soil it was planted in. It is not like a soldier in a foxhole waiting for helicopter evac. Christians should not be looking to things like the rapture index to see how horrible the world is getting and looking foreward to our escape with self-satisfactory smugness, rather we should be doing the work of God in the world and preparing it for his coming.

So there it is: Four reasons why I am frustrated with futurism. It is a liberal view supported by poor interpretation. It has a bad track record when it comes to predicting the future and encourages, if only implicitly, that Christians need not care about the condition of the world around them. This is something I have been frustrated with for years.

So suck it, LaHaye.

Greg Boyd on the Book of Revelation

I must admit, that eschatology is becoming a pet hobby of mine. Also, Greg Boyd is a nice guy.

This video, Greg Boyd comments on both.



He has a very light touch on what he thinks about futurism.

How does sound to everyone out there?

What I did for All Saint's Day/Day of the Dead

It looks like I did do something for All Saint's Day/Day of the Dead after all.

For those who did not read my Halloween rant, Day of the Dead/All Saint's Day is the day of the year when Christians remember those who have passed on and will be raised by God again on the last day. It is a day that everyone remembers not only the "big name" Christians, but also the every-day Christians.

Anyway, at the LMU library this Sunday, there was a small alter for Dia de Los Muetros (Day of the Dead). People had put a few picture of their loved ones, and written letters short letters to them. There was the usual painted skull mask, which although "creepy" was not as scary as you might think. There was an invitation to all students to take a moment, write on some canvas, and pin it to the burlap on the altar.

I took a few moments to remember my long deceased Grandfather. He loved children (which I have inherited), and was married to the same woman for over 50 years. He came from the greatest generation and fought in World War II, yet never became a bitter man. He had a hard life when he was younger, as his parent's died, and never made it past the 8th Grade. He was devout and simple Christian of the Billy Graham generation, and I will never forget how often he prayed at dinners with and for his Grandchildren.

He died at a strange time in my life. I was in the middle of a faith crisis and generally frustrated with my life. I had, at that time, finally decided that set some goals for myself and was going to get through College and probably get a graduate degree. I am now working on that degree. In many ways, I am strangely beyond my grandfather in my understanding of my religion. Most likely, I will also see more of the world than he did, and not because I am getting shipped off to shoot people.

But I think back to that funeral and can remember that my Grandfather still is way ahead of me in many ways. Few people I know died with more loving friends and family around them. He was described as honest and humble businesses man and a gentle lover of children. He impressed even the nurses of his rest room with his kindness. And yes, he remained faithful and married all the years of life.

In that letter, I pinned to the altar, I wrote that my Grandfather's life still inspires me.

Expectamus resurrectionem mortuorum et vitam futuri saeculi. Amen.*

Who did you remember on November 1st?


=========
*we look foreward the the Resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come.

The Preterist Podcast

I do not believe in dispensationalism.

Some may be shocked that I reject something that is so conservative. Thing is, dispensationalism is not a conservative position. It is fairly liberal position that has only be around since the 1830s, and is only believed by Christians in the United States (not even all of them) and not shared by most Christians throughout the world.

Now, I don't comment much on eschatology beyond that, mostly because it is far beyond my knowledge. This is frustrating, because I still think it is important.

But where to turn when everyone around me reads Tim Lahaye?

Thankfully, I found Dee Dee Warren's Preterist pod cast!!

You can listen to the promo here Here it is!

You can find the site here, the Preterist Podcast

For all my Christian Hipsters Homies, sign up and start listening on your iPod today!!

When Grandfather's Pass On

A close friend recently lost her grandfather. The grief I felt for her and her family made me think back to when my grandfather passed on several years ago. The process I went through taught me a few things that I am sure all Christians share.
My Grandfather died in May of 2004 after several years of mental and physical deterioration. He was well into his 80s and had never really recovered from a stroke. As he began to forget things (like our names), he never became angry or irritable as some of the elderly do. He still remembered that we were his family and that he loved us. He was still thrilled when he saw small children come into his room. He even saw his first two great-grandchildren scant months before he passed on.

His funeral came at a strange time in my life. I had just decided that I was going to pursue education further than most. I learned I loved learning, thinking, and the honor that comes with it. This wasn’t simply me growing into arrogance, it was in fact what had kept my faith afloat at the time. Besides, many people saw my intellectual tendencies long before I did.

The sum of my grandfather’s life was so different than my goals of honorific academia. Due to circumstances outside of his control, he never made it past an eighth grade education. He made his living from a humble plumbing business. He never read anything deeper than Billy Graham. Yet, throughout the funeral, I realized that my Grandfather was exceptional in life. His faithfulness to his spouse, his kindness towards strangers, the honesty of his business, his devotion to Christ among other things made him a paragon. It made me re-evaluate myself then and still does now.

But that is not even the end of it. During the funeral –somewhere in between the rifle salute and the old hymn – the closing line of the Nicene Creed came into my mind:

We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.


I cannot remember a time when I did know the Nicene Creed. I recited Sunday after Sunday as a child. Furthermore, in my time of crisis, I had spent some time reading on the historicity of Christ’s resurrection.

The Creed and historical Jesus are of great importance, but at that funeral was the first time I ever really took emotional ownership of this last line and the idea of Christ coming before his disciples after dying. Because of Christ’s resurrection, we can look foreward to a world not full of angelic ghosts playing harps, but glorified and repaired resurrected bodies that are immune to decay and corruption of this world.

For this reason, the early Christians buried –not cremated –their dead. As Christians today, when we bury our dead, we remember that we don’t have to think of them in their last moments here. Instead, we look forward to what they will be, when God raises all from the dead and frees us from corruption and death.
Ping your blog, website, or RSS feed for Free