Distinction from the World (Revised)

This is a comment on the previous post.

The point of the previous post is that the church must maintain spiritual separation from the world.  But, sometimes the word "separation" has a bad image.  So, I will express what I mean by using another word -- "assimilation."  The church permeates the world, but is not to be "assimilated" to the world.  There remains a spiritual distinction from the world -- a distinction which is visible not only in worship and in personal Christian behavior and testimony, but also in the serious requirement of intra-church Christian social communion where the Lord's grace, wisdom, and encouragement is shared between the believers.  This fellowship manifests the spiritual bond which makes the believers' first priority in prayer and action to be the welfare of other believers in Christ.  We should do good to all men, but especially to the household of God.  Our lifestyle is not to dissipate ourselves by throwing ourselves into the embrace of the world to convert the world, but to draw people from the world into the embrace of Christ.  The church is a "counterculture."  That distinction of worship, life, and spiritual separation must characterize the body of believers, lest their testimony before the world lose its vitality.  My thesis in the previous post is that engaging the world while forgetting to be the counterculture is spiritually fatal to the welfare and testimony of the church.

Therefore, whether it's too much preterism, or too much visionary medieval-style communion of church and state, the spiritual effect is the same.  The church and the world become only formally, but not vitally, distinguishable, to the detriment of the church.

During the days of union and communion between church and state, it was the monks who continued to preserve the distinction between the church and the world.  In a sense the church of Christ, following Judaic principles rather than Greek philosophy, must adopt the monk's sense of spiritual separation from the world, without the asceticism.  The good that those monks did could only be done because they were monks -- separate.  Likewise, the good that we do can only be done because we are separate.  If we lose our separation, we will lose our calling and our effectiveness in the world.

Preterist Hope and Resurrection

This article keeps being revised, in order to clarify the language, remove unnecessary offense to brethren, and be more correctly adjusted to its practical environment. However, any hyperbole still present is intentional, because if there were no hyperbole, no attention would be paid to its technical language and apparent theological blandness.  This article is commented on in the next post.

In the Reformed "Covenant of Works" it is regularly assumed that the destiny of the race is properly understood from the standpoint of the original creation, as if the Fall was a fatal blot on that original plan which was cured by Christ's redemption, so that the recovered plan of world dominion can now be carried forward in the present age in Christ.  When this idea is coupled with a preterism which denies a final apostasy, the Kingdom of God becomes an immanent kingdom.  It comes here and now, in this age, though gradually.  The distinction between the "Now" of Kingdom life in the present age, and the "Not Yet" of Kingdom life in the Age of Resurrection gradually fades away as the kingdom comes, and, in the end, a saved and glorious world is made ready for the final advent of the Savior, and the destruction of the last enemy -- death.  But, resurrection is icing on the cake, in what may be a far distant future.  The focus of the church is on this age,* and on the expectation of the increasing triumph and glory of the kingdom of God in this age.  As a consequence the resurrection age inadvertently becomes distant, ethereal, disembodied, perhaps even "gnostic," compared to the realism of kingdom now, the beginnings of which we perceive with our senses.  Life is now.

This focus has a profoundly negative effect on the practical mission of the church and on the life of faith. By asserting a vision of increasing fulfillment, contentment, triumph and glory in this age, the church embraces the world, hoping to redeem the world through Christian accomplishments and good works and (hopefully) the preaching of the gospel, but the result is that the world embraces the church.  A vision of world-conquering, world-integrating moral triumph through charity (and a subsidiary profession of orthodoxy) replaces the gospel vision of salvation from the world-system, personal and corporate holiness, and Christian accomplishments and good works that preach this deliverance.  We've been here before:  Look at the policies, activities and failure of the "liberal" churches.

There are theological reasons why this is an unworthy way to conceive of the divine plan.  For one thing, the Fall occurs so early in the Scriptural record, and so little is revealed of the original creation, that it's clear that the Scriptural record is just not focused on the restoration of the original creation in its original form.  That original creation is irretrievably lost in death, just as Christ's participation in the life of this age was brought to the fullest and most complete death on the cross and in the tomb.  And yet, in triumph, Christ rose from the death of the first creation, and he himself became the embodiment of the New Creation, along with all those spiritually in him.

The New Testament is clear that this redemptive work is accomplished by our Lord's participation in the first, fallen creation (yet without sin on his part), as he dies.  But he is not resurrected back into the first creation.  He remains "dead to the Law," which killed him, for ever and ever.  Yet, He himself becomes the New Creation in Resurrection, living to God in a new way, by the Spirit, corresponding to the New Covenant.  The home of the New Creation is the resurrection body, ultimately in the resurrection age.  Therefore, we should only see our redeemed destiny in resurrection terms.  We are spiritually resurrected now, as believers, but we live in bodies which are the products of the first creation, and we live in a fallen age.  We cannot see the Kingdom of God fully manifested in this age, because this is not the age of resurrection.  The Kingdom of God is not inherited by flesh and blood (the Adamic inheritance of the first creation).  The Kingdom of God is fully inherited only in the resurrection body, in Christ.

This explains why Paul is so insistent that our spiritual attention be directed to Heaven where our treasure lies waiting for the age to come, the resurrection age, and that our spiritual attention not be directed to this age, which is groaning under bondage to corruption and death.  After all, the creation is also doomed to be delivered from death in the same glorious resurrection that we will experience at the Last Day.

Therefore, we must divert our vision from an immanent kingdom of God, with a vision of glory in outward life in dominion and triumph in this age, and direct our vision to the future and transcendent kingdom coming with resurrection, with only a hidden glory now in the triumph of our suffering, until the great day of deliverance from death comes, and we participate in the full manifestation of the Kingdom of God.  This is the only vision that separates us from the world-system and makes us a holy people of Kingdom-come, and this is the only vision which testifies to the world that Christ has come.

Unless the End comes first, we will all die a death that was ordained for our sin, and that has been transformed by Christ's resurrection into a doorway to the presence of Christ, until eternal glory dawns.  Yes, the last enemy to be destroyed is death, but what an enemy!  It's really paradigmatic of all evil and sin in our lives.  Death is the curse!  Therefore, let us no more have "boys' religion" about these things, confusing our vision of eternal life with a vision of worldly glory in this age.  No.  Our destiny is death and resurrection, following in the steps of our Lord, unless he should return first.  Focusing on the glorious manifestation of the Kingdom of God in this age will have a carnalizing influence on us and on the practical ministry of the church.  But, focusing on the eternal kingdom in resurrection will make us a holy people who preach a holy gospel, and do holy works testifying to the glory of Christ.

There is a warning here:  The true vision of the city whose builder and maker is God is held by those who view themselves, like Abraham, as migrants and pilgrims through life in this age, seeking that city and glory which is eternal, and is not of this age, but of the age to come -- the age of resurrection.  Only a converted heart can rest in that vision.  The flesh wants glory now, and anything that satisfies that urge in this life has corruption in it.

This post is commented on in the next post.

*  My claim about "focus on this age" is not vain, because, after writing this post, with my own ears I heard an ordained PCA Teaching Elder (Minister) not associated with my church, use these very words unguardedly in a comment stating that our attention should be focused on this age and not on some other (future) age.  He wasn't thinking, but the loose and uninterpreted comment nevertheless illustrates what I mean.

Covenants and Eschatology

The Covenants of Works and Grace, taken individually, illustrate the question discussed in previous posts, whether grace came to support the establishment of justice, or whether justice came to support the establishment of grace.  I have provisionally identified much later, "orthodox" Reformed Theology as tending to be based in the former (grace comes to establish justice), and the earlier "orthodox" Reformed Theology (Calvin) as tending to be based in the latter (justice comes to support the establishment of grace and mercy).

When grace comes to establish justice, then the Covenant of Works is the lead covenant, and the Covenant of Grace comes to repair the Fall by the work of Christ, and then, by grace, to make possible the fruition of the Covenant of Works established at the Creation.  On the other hand, when justice comes to support the establishment of grace and mercy, then the Covenant of Grace is the primary covenant, and the Covenant of Works is instrumental in establishing the reign of grace, in a just manner.  In this case, eschatology is taken up with the eternally planned fulfillment of the Covenant of Grace, not the Covenant of Works.  And, since the Covenant of Grace has eternally been based in the work of Christ, the fruition of this Covenant cannot be the Covenant of Works established with Adam, but can only be the fruition of the Covenant of Grace established and administered through Christ.  This means that the fruition is not something that takes place in this age, but takes place in the age of resurrection.

Now those who believe that fruition comes through the Covenant of Works believe in the resurrection also, and in the eternal state resulting from it.  But, the main outworking of the Covenant is the outworking of that covenant that was intended to be carried unto fruition in Adam and his offspring, which is a covenant that is carried out under the auspices of the present age.  The fruition of the Covenant of Grace, being a covenant of union with the resurrected Christ, is a covenant which reaches its fruition in the age to come, not the present age.

This is a major difference in eschatology, with, in my opinion, major differences in its effect on practical ecclesiology.  Do we see ourselves primarily as engaged in carrying out a vision which conquers the present age?  Or, do we see ourselves primarily as engaged in carrying out a vision which conquers through resurrection at the return of Christ for judgment and rewards?

One would be hard-pressed to make the New Testament, which is the eschatological hermeneutic for all Scripture, say anything but the latter!

Righteous by Forgiveness

When I was in the Plymouth Brethren, one of my fellow church-members said to me that Adam was created "neither good nor evil."  This conclusion was reached because in the text of Genesis, God says that Adam, in his Fall, will become like God, "knowing good and evil."  The implication is that Adam, as created, did not "know good and evil."

This friend's sentiment bothered me a great deal, because it was always my conclusion from the Scripture text that Adam was created good, which implied a created righteousness.  If he were not good (righteous in some sense), then how could he fall?  What would the Fall mean?

I believe that I've now come to realize the source of the sentiment expressed by my friend.  I think it is embedded within the later history of Reformed Theology, with the development of the doctrine of the Covenant of Works.

Before getting into this, however, let me explain concepts about the relationship between righteousness and sin.  There are two paradigms:

1)  Righteousness is a positive good, and sin is a negative evil.  One can have ones sins cancelled, but this leaves him with no positive good.  Something else must happen to create the positive good.  To use a physical analogy, good and evil are separate substances, each handled differently, though they do affect one another.  One can eliminate the evil, but this does not create the good.  Or,

2)  Righteousness is the absence of sin.  To have a sin forgiven is to be put in the position of never having done it.  If that sin is the omission of an act of righteousness, then forgiveness makes it exactly as if that act of righteousness were done.  Therefore, forgiving all a person's sins is exactly the same as reckoning that person to be entirely righteous!  All the positive evil is reckoned as if never done.  All the failed good works are reckoned as if they were done.  The process by which this is done is identically the same in both cases.  The forgiveness of sin is the reckoning of righteousness.  They cannot be separated.

I believe it to be the case that the two paradigms shown above imply major differences in the resulting theologies of salvation.

Now back to Reformed Theology.

It is commonly said that Adam and his elect offspring need both the de-imputation of their sins (forgiveness), and the imputation of righteousness from God.  Simply by its mode of expression, this is based in paradigm #1 above.  The need for forgiveness and the need for righteousness are regarded as separate issues.  These are commonly tied to the passive and active obedience of Christ.  In the passive obedience (the endurance of punishment) Christ bore the punishment of our sin and exhausted that punishment.  Therefore, the liability is removed and the sins are canceled.  Furthermore, the active obedience of his life is a righteousness that is put to our account.  This is a separate issue.  But, in any case, having both forgiveness and a positive righteousness, we have full acceptance before God.

Note, however, according to paradigm #1, Adam, put in the Garden at the beginning of his trial of perseverance, had no sin, but this did not mean that he was as fully developed in righteousness as God required for eternal life (Westminster Confession).  Adam obeys the Covenant of Works by persevering in it.  Similarly, in the analogy between Adam and Christ, this would imply that Christ needs to develop his righteousness, because in his human nature even he would be sinless but without developed righteousness at his human birth.  Therefore, in order to carry out the job that Adam failed at, Christ would need to fully create his active righteousness, and that, first, for himself.  Without this, it could not be imputed to our account.

But, contrarily, we are faced with Calvin's (and Augustine's) conviction that Christ in his human nature was entirely and completely righteous from the first instant of his human conception.  This is based in paradigm #2 above.  Reasoning back to Adam, this would imply that Adam was originally righteous, too.  But, if Adam is originally righteous, in the same way as Christ conceived as a man is originally righteous, then the process of perseverance in the state in which each was made does not create the righteousness that each already has by creation or conception.  Perseverance illustrates and confirms the righteousness, but does not create it.  This view of the relationship between righteousness and sin shows that each is the obverse of the other.  Adam, newly created, and Jesus, newly conceived, are each righteous, though they have done nothing.  In other words, sinlessness equals righteousness.  The absence of sins exactly is the presence of righteousness.  The forgiveness of sins which we receive through Christ exactly is the imputation of righteousness.  The imputation of righteousness is therefore not a separate imputation.  There is no distinction between the de-imputation of sins and the imputation of righteousness.  They are the same thing.

Following out the argument, then, there would be no distinction between the active and passive obedience of Christ.  His life and his death, but principally his death, all have the same effect upon us, taken together.  There are not two separate and independent imputations.  He was made sin for us, so that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.  But the "dual imputation," or two-way imputation is not an imputation of sins separately from an imputation of righteousness.  In the dual imputation, our sins going to Christ and his righteousness coming to us is not merely simultaneous, but two sides of the same coin.

This is why Calvin says somewhere that justfication by faith alone (ie, the imputation of righteousness to us) is defined as the cancellation of our sins.  That is, by cancellation of our sins we are righteous.  Or, he says in another place, that Christ by his righteousness (which he had from conception) caused the cancellation of our sins.  Or, that Christ's "merit" is that he created the Christian life in us.  Calvin vehemently denies that Christ's righteousness was obtained for himself first (as the Covenant of Works requires).  All that Christ did was not at all for himself, but all for us.

This needs a lot of thought.  The proper definition and explanation of the Covenants of Works and Grace, the definition of the purpose of the Creation, the real doctrine of Sanctification, and the real focus of Eschatology are all knotted together here.

I think it likely to be the case that the two paradigms of the relationship between sin and righteousness imply different theologies in all these realms.

Christian Suffering, Spirituality and Eschatology (revised 5/28)

This is the first post of what may be an occasional series of posts on the interrelationship of Christian Suffering and Eschatology.  

The basic thesis of these posts, which I will try to support over time, is this:  The age-long continuance of Christian Suffering is such a significant emphasis in the New Testament, that a view of the progress of this age which sees a gradual end to suffering by the time of the Second Coming of Christ must be an eschatology which is seriously at odds with the New Testament.

A few points are:

1)  The general cast of the New Testament is opposed to gradual entrance of conditions of such spiritual and experiential peace and plenty such that the transition to the eternal state is not catastrophic.  Put another way, the eternal state does not come by a process of development, or spiritual evolution, in either extent or quality.  I do not deny by this that the current age has a path of spiritual development, and that that development tends to the sharpness of the distinction between good and evil, nor do I deny that the preponderance of Christianity, and its effects, increases.

2)  The experimental suffering which is put forth as the norm in the Bible as a whole, and especially in the New Testament, must be the experience of all believers in this age, until the end of the age.  The maintenance of Christian spirituality depends on this.  Therefore, a view of the end of the age in which spiritual conditions approach conditions in the Eternal State is inimical to the New Testament vision of the spiritual value of the suffering that characterizes the present age.

3)  The whole Bible narrative of the believers' experience shows that an easy life is spiritually harmful to those still in the un-resurrected flesh.  Our fidelity to God is only guaranteed through spiritual struggle.  Christ, the perfect man, learned obedience through suffering.

4)  The spiritual purity and "separation" of the church from the world, so important in the text of the New Testament, is at stake.  The only way to maintain our testimony and actually have an effect on the world is to maintain this separation.  The liberal churches have simply identified their eschatology with popular political and social progressivism in all its methods and results, and thereby demonstrate the result of this kind of "postmillennialism."  A theonomic replacement of the world's carnal "law" with God's Law will not fix this problem, because the problem is spiritual in a way which transcends "law."  The Church is a New Creation, not simply a renovation of the Original Creation.

5)  Finally, the "proof-texts" for the evolution of gradual spiritual perfection do not support this picture.  Any sustained argument built up from the full revelation of the New Testament will show the continuing threat of apostasy -- even a final apostasy, and the spiritual warfare between the wheat and the tares will not end until the harvest.

Good and evil will "come to a point" at the harvest at the end of the age in such a manner that Christian suffering will remain the Christian lifestyle until the end of the age.  Our hope is in the Eternal State, not some near-perfect manifestation of God's Kingdom before that time.  To focus attention and hope on the pre-Eternal State as capable of containing the near-full manifestation of God's Kingdom is to lose the eschatological vision, and potentially to fall into the trap of worldliness which is condemned in the New Testament.

Our expectations in this age must be properly focused, lest the spirituality and separation of the Church from the World be lost.  If the spirituality and separation of the Church is lost through some kind of "gospel reductionism," and if the central focus of the hope of fulfillment in an Eschaton which transcends the current aeon and its ways of life is lost, the result will just be "liberalism" again.

The Hegemony of the New Testament

Its hard to believe that so many aberrations of historic Reformed theology have developed in the 20th and 21st centuries.

Most of these aberrations can be cured by the application of two principles from the Scripture and from historic Reformed Theology.  These principles are:

1)  The New Testament reveals the hermeneutic for all of Scripture.

Then He said to them, "These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me."  And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.  Then He said to them, "Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.  And you are witnesses of these things.  Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high."     Luke 24:44-49

2)  The world-view of the New Testament is age-long.

"Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all nations for My name's sake.  And then many will be offended, will betray one another, and will hate one another.  Then many false prophets will rise up and deceive many.  And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold.  But he who endures to the end shall be saved.  And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come. Matthew 24:9-14

If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God.  Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth.  For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God.  When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory.  Colossians 3:1-4 

When these two principles are applied, all sorts of doctrinal distortions fade away.

Most of the aberrations that face Reformed theology rely on a judaizing hermeneutic which forces a foreign understanding upon the New Testament, originating from a false interpretation of the Old.  This, in turn, requires an implicit or explicit denial that the New Testament world-view is age-long.

The implications of these two principles are revolutionary for those caught in a false hermeneutic.

Millennialism

This post is about the downside of millennialism.  Not that I'm intending to promote some bland, unexciting, pessimistic "amillennial" world-view.  Actually, as an optimistic amil learning about postmil, I too want excitement and success for the Kingdom of God.  But, it's still the case that the upside and downside of millennialism must be weighed.

A scholarly article on this subject may be found in a Richard Gaffin "festschrift" called Resurrection and Eschatology, edited by Tipton and Waddington.  The chapter I'm referring to is entitled "A Millennial Genealogy: Joseph Mede, Jonathan Edwards, and Old Princeton," by Jeffrey K. Jue.

This article is worth reading (borrow the book if you have to).  Jue details an instance of close connection between historic premillennialism and postmillennialism by showing a genealogical relationship in the writings of Mede (premil), Edwards (postmil), and Hodge.

The interesting thing about the article is that it can portray the two (pre- and post-) millennialisms to be siblings in their nature and effects on theology and the church.  This is distinct from the usual taxonomy which places premillennialism off to itself, and juxtaposes postmillennialism and "amillennialism."

On the last page of the chapter Jue writes:

The similarities between premillennialism and traditional postmillennialism have been observed and analyzed by others such as Richard B. Gaffin Jr.  Gaffin writes, "like premillennialism, postmillennialism -- distinguished from amillennialism -- 'de-eschatologizes' the present (and past) existence of the church." 

footnote: Richard B. Gaffin Jr., "Theonomy and Eschatology: Reflections on Postmillennialism," in Theonomy: A Reformed Critique, ed. Barker and Godfrey, 202.

What Gaffin is pointing out is that the assertion, made by pre- and postmillennialists, that another finite age (the millennium) will precede the eternal eschaton reduces the eschatological character of the present age.  How so?  If the present church age will be followed by another intermediate state, then the church's final eschatological hope is weakened and delayed.

In other words, 'Come Lord Jesus! Come in glory!' falls into the background, the "blessed hope" is deferred to the indefinite future (or reinterpreted to refer to the millennium), and the church goes on with her business participating in the creation of a Kingdom which may be more at home in this age and this world than it ought to be.

My advice for now:  Amils, don't denigrate the progress of God's Kingdom in this age.  Postmils, don't misperceive or overglorify (in worldly terms) the look and feel of God's Kingdom in this age.

The theological regulation of the New Testament scripture is normative here.  Jesus' description of the mysteries of the Kingdom must rule. The motif of 'glory hidden in suffering' does not pass away as the millennium comes in this age.  The children of God do "shine forth as the sun" -- when He Comes to raise them from the dead!  Only then does the "last enemy," which is also the first enemy and the cause of all our tribulations, get swallowed up in victory!

Meanwhile, we may leaven the whole lump -- very quietly -- and inexorably.  We're just not the whole lump.  We share the field with the fruiting tares until the last day.

Under the Law -- Unredeemed

Galatians 4:4-5   4 But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law,  5 to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons. 

This is amazing for several reasons.  Firstly, Paul takes the opportunity to object to Jewish complacency under the law, by the simple fact of stating that such people need to be redeemed!  Secondly, Paul makes it clear that (historically) redemption did not happen until Christ died and rose again.

Of course, even Abraham in ancient times before Christ was saved by his faith.  Christ was always the lamb slain from the foundation of the world.  The ancient saints were as secure as we are, but yet without us they were not made perfect.

Christ himself, in his appearing on earth, is the fountain of salvation and eternal life.  Everything else, even creation itself, is designed to lead to this fulfillment.  Before this point, redemption was in prospect only.  Only after this point is redemption accomplished.

This is a paradigm for thinking about Covenant Theology.  The "axis" of Covenant Theology is Christ, and his death and resurrection -- in history. 

All the other covenants are understood in terms of this one.

Hermeneutics and the Mystery of the Kingdom (v3)

And He [Jesus] said to them, "To you it has been given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God; but to those who are outside, all things come in parables, ...                     Mark 4:11

We are aware of how much the zealous Jews of Jesus' day looked for the coming of the Messianic Kingdom.  We are also aware of how their wishes did not seem to be satisfied by Jesus' deportment, even though he said that the Kingdom of God had come.  They did not see him or those associated with him organizing the army and all other things necessary to bring in that Kingdom in its fullness.  Jesus even said to Pilate that "my Kingdom is not of this world, else my servants would fight."

Jesus' answer to the common messianic expectation was to preach and teach in parables "so that those who were outside would not understand."  There are several astounding revelations made here.  For one, it is a clear premonition of what Paul (and Jesus) speak of, when they note that the Kingdom has been taken away from the Jews and given to the Gentiles until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.  The parables were spoken to the Jews, but only the rare elect, who were mostly personally instructed by Jesus, really understood them.  Secondly, the phase of the Kingdom of God introduced by Jesus' advent does not look like the Jewish Messianic expectation.  All this is covered by the term 'mystery,' to emphasize that there were developments in the manifestation of the Kingdom at Jesus' time which were not prophesied in the prophetic scriptures (Old Testament), and that these unrevealed aspects are more than important -- they are paradigmatic.  That is, the newly revealed (former) mysteries change the whole look and feel of the Kingdom in ways that could not be understood from the messianic prophecies alone.

Now, we need not overplay the 'mystery,' as if nothing about Gentile salvation and the nature of the future Kingdom were prophesied.  But there were many mysteries unrevealed, since those prophets desired to look into the things that they prophesied which pertain to us, but they were providentially limited in their understanding.  (1 Pet 1:10-12)  There were 'mysteries' of the Kingdom which were unrevealed to them, but which are revealed during the ministry of Jesus.

The Biblical-Historical hermeneutic to be drawn from this is that we must, in our Kingdom expectations and eschatology, be centered on the interpretation of the Kingdom which is provided for us in the New Testament.  The New Testament canonically elucidates and interprets the Old, not the other way around!

If this procedure is not adhered to, then a "judaizing" hermeneutic can pervade our interpretation of the scripture.  This judaizing can either disconnect the Old Testament from the church (as in dispensationalism), or (as in some elements of dominion theology) can color our expectations in this age to expect glory in worldly terms rather than seeing it to be hidden (but real), and experienced most often in our tribulations.

The lesson:  The New Testament teaching on the Kingdom of God must guide and direct our understanding of the prophets and the messianic age.

Church Life and Eschatology

It is interesting to ponder the connection between eschatology and church life.

For instance, it is sometimes alleged that standard amillennialists and premillennialists might not be so interested in cultural influence or "Christianization," simply because they don't expect it to happen this side of the Second Coming.  This would supposedly mean that "premills" and "amills" spend most of their time on evangelism, personal spirituality, inward fellowship and separation from the world.

Likewise, all kinds of postmillennialism may be alleged by their opponents to be so interested in the conquest of all the spheres of sovereignty in life that ministry focus is mainly oriented to cultural and personal achievement, and to reputation in the world, to the detriment or redefinition of evangelism, personal holiness, internal Christian fellowship, and "separation" from the world.

Regardless of the ambiguity in these facile characterizations, it remains clear, especially to someone like me who has experienced church life according to all three main eschatologies, that the eschatological persuasion that reigns in the church does make a difference in the nature of church life.  Part of our theological mandate, then, is to ponder this connection, with a view toward the well-being of the church.

Perhaps one way to seek out the correlation is to consider known deficiencies in church life, and then to ask whether the reigning eschatology or world-view may be may be contributory to these deficiencies.  This may not mean that the reigning eschatological persuasion is wrong, but it may mean that its understanding or application needs correction.

Continued:
http://christocentry.blogspot.com/2010/04/preterism-and-theology-of-glory.html

Our Life and Destiny in the Kingdom of Heaven

Jesus, the Great Prophet like Moses (whose coming was prophesied by Moses), teaches the Gospel from a mountain made holy by his presence, just as Moses taught the Law from a mountain also made holy by God's presence.

And, just as Moses laid down the rule in his day, so Jesus does for ours, as he describes our calling, what our experiences and expectations should be, and what our rewards will be (Matt 5:1-12):

1 He went up on a mountain, and when He was seated His disciples came to Him.  2 Then He opened His mouth and taught them, saying: 

3 "Blessed are the poor in spirit, For theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 

4 Blessed are those who mourn, For they shall be comforted. 

5 Blessed are the meek, For they shall inherit the earth. 

6 Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, For they shall be filled. 

7 Blessed are the merciful, For they shall obtain mercy. 

8 Blessed are the pure in heart, For they shall see God. 

9 Blessed are the peacemakers, For they shall be called sons of God. 

10 Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, For theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 

11 Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you falsely for My sake.  12 Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

Summarizing some information from this passage in a chart:

Experience Now	Reward	When
Spiritual poverty	Possession of the Kingdom	Now
Spiritual mourning	Comfort	In the Future
Meekness	Possession of the whole earth	In the Future
Hunger and thirst for righteousness	Their hunger and thirst shall be filled	In the Future
Merciful	They shall receive it	In the Future
Pure in heart	They shall see God	In the Future
Peacemakers	They shall be called sons of God	In the Future
Persecuted for righteousness sake	Possession of the Kingdom	Now
Reviled and persecuted for Jesus' sake	They have the great prophets' reward	In heaven

Our spiritual experience in the Kingdom of God is described in the terms shown in column 1.  We have a life of spiritual victory, but not so to carnal vision. None of this looks to the world like "victory." Therefore, we must look upon our meekness and lowliness with spiritual eyes, and see the glory in it, and not be like that seed sown on rocky soil, that is disappointed and apostatizes when persecution comes.  Our hope is sourced from Heaven, not from earth.

Columns 2 and 3 show that our lives now are characterized by a hidden victory in tribulations, but later by visible glory and reward, when heaven comes to earth.

But, it is not as if we have nothing but trouble now, while we wait for peace and glory.  It is in the midst of the tribulations that our glorification begins, just as it did for Our Lord on earth.  He is the Lamb slain, reigning from the Cross!  Likewise, we also reign as kings in our Christian ministry in the world (like leaven pervading it and sustaining it), though all the while high powers of the world may laugh, despise or revile.

Therefore, Christian, have faith in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, who even now brings us peace and hope, and the certain promise of mighty rewards, as Paul says (Rom 5:1-5):

1  Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,  2 through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God. 

3 And not only that, but we also glory in tribulations, knowing that tribulation produces perseverance;  4 and perseverance, character; and character, hope. 

5 Now hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us.

Faith and Obedience -- Not Double Justification

It's clear from Paul and from James that those with a spiritual allegiance to God have the Holy Spirit, and thus show evidence of an imperfect righteousness.

By the strict judgment of the Law, this imperfect righteousness is sin, and yet by the cleansing judgment of God, made in light of the death of his Son, these imperfect works are cleansed and accepted by him.

Furthermore, it is a commonality of Scripture that those who are in a right state with God do show evidence of these works (visible to God at least -- an important caveat), and that the Lord often declares such persons to be "righteous," even though they are sinfully imperfect.

Beyond this, God even justifies -- approves -- the right, though imperfect, actions of his saints, and indicates the eternal, heavenly destiny of people who act like this from a true heart.

But, at root, it is clear that the presence of the Holy Spirit who generates these works in us is a free gift of God, whose coming to us is evidenced by "faith alone" in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Therefore, the favorable judgment that God makes of the believers' works is a consequence of the favorable judgment he makes of the believers totally apart from their works.  Justification by works is brought about by complete justification apart from works.  There are not two separate hoops to jump through:  first, the judgment of faith; later, the judgment of works.  It is not as if one could have faith and then fail the judgment of works.  Rather, the judgment of works is a vindication of the efficacy of justification by faith only.

Double justification could have been asserted if the first justification (by faith) were incomplete or temporary, so that the threat of doom (in the judgment of works) hung over even those justified by faith.  But, the Paul who asserted "justification by obedience" in Chapter 2 of his Epistle to the Romans, goes on to teach "justification by faith and no works at all" in immediately following chapters of his epistle.

We have to conclude that the term "justification" is a flexible term used with various meanings, just as we use it in ordinary conversation.  We say that a man "justifies himself" when he gives good reasons for his actions that have been questioned.  Likewise, we are justified by our behavior because it reveals who we are spiritually.  But, the power relationship that leads to Christian behavior is a power relationship not to the "do this and live" of the Law, but to salvation as a total gift of free grace in Christ.

This is why the zeal to teach that our faith does inevitably eventuate in good works must be tempered by a larger zeal to make plain the active spiritual connection to Christ, by faith only, which is the source of such a life.

It ought to be considered that the one who is really justified, when the believers are justified in their works, is God.  This is why:  In bringing us to salvation and righteousness, God's method of salvation by grace alone is what is being justified, contrary to the accusations of Satan!

What is God's Real and Greatest Glory?

This is a vital question, and it resolves into important sub-questions, which, in turn, imply some things about theological systems.

1)  Is it God's greatest glory that he is served by his creation, or that he serves his creation?  Who made whom?  Who sustains whom?  Who saves whom?  Who feeds whom?  Who is the only giver?

2)  Is it God's greatest glory that he creates, or is it his greatest glory that he saves?  Is salvation Plan B, to fix up Adam's Fall, so that Plan A can proceed?  Or, is the provision of salvation really Plan A?  Which redounds to the greater glory of God?

3)  Is it God's greatest glory that he legislates obedience, and achieves that control over his creation which he originally intended, in spite of the Fall?  Or, is it that he forgives sin, and creates a new people, giving them the gift of the Spirit?  Who has the "name above every name" in all the cosmos, and what did he achieve to get it?  What is God eschatologically thanked for (Rev. 5).

The answers to these questions are intensely practical, and inform all our dealings with God.

There is also controversy here.

Some try to say that emphasizing salvation like this is man-centered, and that our religion should instead be God-centered.  His glory should be the highest thing, and not even our own salvation.

But, the Scriptures are plain that His greatest glory is to be the Savior and Sustainer of the world he has made -- the Taker of Nothing and the Giver of All.

For a long discussion about theological systems see here.

Separation from the World as Witness to the World

Consider our Lord's High-Priestly Prayer:

John 17: "Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You, as You have given Him authority over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as You have given Him. ... I have manifested Your name to the men whom You have given Me out of the world. ... I pray for them. I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours. ... Holy Father, keep through Your name those whom You have given Me, that they may be one as We are. ... I have given them Your word; and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. I do not pray that You should take them out of the world, but that You should keep them from the evil one. They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth. As You sent Me into the world, I also have sent them into the world. ... I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me. ..."

One thing we see in this passage is that we are sent into the world, just as our Lord was sent from Heaven into the world.  We are not of the world, just as he is not of the world.  When our mission is over, we will return to be with our Lord, just as he has returned to Heaven to be with the Father.  Therefore, our tour through this world is a mission to call men into the fellowship of the Father and the Son, just as was our Lord's mission into this world.

The witness to the world is not that we love the world (though we do), nor is it that the Father loves the world (though he does).  Our mission is characterized in this passage as witnessing to the world that God sent Christ into the world.  The proof of this is that his followers bear within themselves the love of God for one another which transcends all knowledge and natural human capacity.

The Church's internal fellowship of love, witnessed by the world, is the divine apologetic for the mission of Christ and the truth of the Gospel.

The implication of this is that it is our 'separation' from the world and our allegiance to one another in the church -- in the right manner -- which is the saving testimony to the world.

Spiritual Separation in the World

To speak of "Separation" sounds like something from Fundamentalism, doesn't it?  But is there a Scriptural "separation" from the world, and what is it?

Let us examine the parable of the wheat and the tares:

Matthew 13:24-30  Another parable He put forth to them, saying: "The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field; but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat and went his way. But when the grain had sprouted and produced a crop, then the tares also appeared. So the servants of the owner came and said to him, 'Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?' He said to them, 'An enemy has done this.' The servants said to him, 'Do you want us then to go and gather them up?' But he said, 'No, lest while you gather up the tares you also uproot the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and at the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, "First gather together the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn." ' "

From this parable we draw certain conclusions.  (And, by the way, we don't want to abuse the parable to draw conclusions out of the range of our Lord's intention in giving it.)

It is clear that the intention of the parable is to show that good and evil grow simultaneously and in mixed proximity with one another in the world.  Good produces a crop, and bad produces a crop.  It's also clear that this is not a parable about evangelism.  There is no converting of tares into wheat, or vice versa.  The emphasis is on the distinction between the wheat and the tares.  This is an agelong distinction, as the two parallel crops grow to their final fruitage.

The explanation of the parable is like this:

Matthew 13:36-43  Then Jesus sent the multitude away and went into the house. And His disciples came to Him, saying, "Explain to us the parable of the tares of the field." He answered and said to them: "He who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. The field is the world, the good seeds are the sons of the kingdom, but the tares are the sons of the wicked one. The enemy who sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the angels. Therefore as the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of this age. The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness, and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears to hear, let him hear!

There is a clear doctrine of "separation" in this parable.  This must be kept in mind when perusing other parables, such as the parable of the leaven, which teach the secret (but thorough) permeation of the world with the leaven of God's Kingdom.  There is a conquering by the good seed, but there is a constant mixture in the world with the bad seed, which will only be removed at Judgment Day.

Now, no one would say that we should abuse this parable to teach such an isolation of the good from the evil that no evangelism is possible, or that Christians leave the world.  The parable isn't about these things.  But, it is about the present phase of the Kingdom of God, as being a field containing a mixed crop until the end -- crops which don't mix their natures or their fruit, until their ongoing separation is made final in the Great Separation on the Day of Judgment.

Then will the Sons of the Kingdom shine forth as the sun!

Righteousness Higher than the Law

It has been maintained that the holiness, righteousness and glory of God is far higher than anything revealed even in his Holy Law.   

It has been maintained that, before the Lord, even the holiness of the unfallen angels is inadequate.

This divine "extra" is certainly associated with the essential separateness of the divine essence of the Triune God from all his creation, but this is not all that is meant by this divine "extra."

We know that Christ overcame death -- a death mandated by the Law.  But, in overcoming death, the text of The Epistle to the Romans, Chapter 7:4-6 is clear that we, though now living, still remain "dead to the Law."  We are not simply delivered from its curse, but are also delivered into a new resurrection life -- a new way of life before God, married to Christ and producing his fruit by his whole Word and Spirit -- not just a renewed life under the Law.

We have a higher life than the Law could ever have delivered to even the unfallen Adam in the original creation.  We are in the New Creation.  We have been delivered into this creation by the divine power of the God-Man, Jesus Christ, in his death, burial, resurrection and session at the right hand of God.  And, we are in this New Creation only because we are in him, the God-Man.

By our union with Christ we receive entrance into a righteousness that is higher than the Law, and have a level of fellowship with God which is higher than any revealed in the First Creation -- a level of fellowship unknown to the angels, and which they must learn about by watching and caring for us!

Resurrection

Resurrection is not simply the reversal of death, though it's a right thing to say.  Death is certainly vanquished.  The curse is reversed and changed into blessing.

It is important to remember that there is only one Resurrection in the history of the cosmos.  This is the Resurrection of Christ.  We who are resurrected are only resurrected because we are in him.  We are not resurrected at the same time, since Christ is the firstfruits, but we, the full harvest, are resurrected only because we are in him.

In the first place resurrection only occurs after real death under the curse of the Law.  This real death, in our case, apart from Christ, would be an eternal death.  The wrath of God would abide (rest, dwell) upon us, forever and ever.

Christ did not escape this curse.  He did take the death we deserved, and we in him.  Except for his eternal power and Godhead we would both have remained in the state of death!  And, as far as the Law is concerned, we are still in that state.  Before the Law we are dead!  It has destroyed us for our depravity (Christ bearing our sins for us), and this destruction is eternal.  Our connection to the realm and age of the Law, as conveyed to us and to which we were bound in the original creation, is over.  There is no life for us, or for Christ, in that age any more.  The only exit from this terminal state is the Resurrection of Christ.

Christ has died!  Christ is risen!  Christ will come again!

Even now Christ himself, in his human nature, lives a new life in resurrection, and we live it with him, in him.  We live in a new way, not under Law, not lawlessly, but under Grace.  Spiritually, we are already in heaven, seated with Christ in the heavenly places.  When the birth-pangs of the New Creation are finished, we shall be like him, soul and body, for we shall see him as he is.

Until that day we only live by resurrection life that comes from him.  This is not just a life that doesn't face death any more, but it is a life in glory, moved by the grace of God in the New Creation, which longs for the day when Heaven and Earth will be one, wrapped in the majesty and glory of God forever and ever.

How the Kingdom Comes

If then you were raised with Christ,
     seek those things which are above, 
         where Christ is, 
         sitting at the right hand of God.

Set your mind on things above, 
    not on things on the earth.  

For you died, and
    your life is hidden with Christ in God.  

When Christ who is our life appears,
    then you also will appear with Him in glory.   Col 3:1-4

This mindset was the guiding principle of the First Christendom.  It will also be the guiding principle of the next.

What is Plan A?

The material which is presented cryptically in this table is discussed at length here.

If Plan A was the original creation, then:

Plan A	Plan B	Result
Creation	Redemption	Restores plan A
Low (but definite) revelation of the trinity.	Trinity fully revealed only in redemption.	Full revelation of the Trinity was originally unnecessary for divine religion. Was, and is, the religion of “God.”
No Incarnation.	Incarnation, only to repair the problem of sin, and to restore the original creation.	Christology was originally unnecessary for divine religion.
Establish social and political order of the First Creation.	Restoration of the order of the First Creation.	The  order of the First Creation can now be implemented in the present aeon. No “deification” (2 Pet 1:4).
First Creation based on Law, not Gospel.	Restoration of the First Creation through the Gospel restores the effectiveness of the Law.	The Current (and Final) Kingdom is based on the restored Law.
The Old Testament is the Canon of Creation. No Messiah in the original creation.	The New Testament restores the Covenant and Canon of the original Creation through contingent Messiah.	The New Testament is not the normative revealer of God’s purposes.
		Not Redemptive-Historical

If the original intent of creation is actually redemption, then:

Plan Zero	Plan A	Result
Creation.	Redemption.	Implements plan A  (redemption).
Low (but definite) revelation of the trinity.	Trinity fully revealed only in redemption.	Full revelation of the Trinity is necessary for divine religion. Is the religion of Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
No Incarnation.	Incarnation, to save mankind and elevate them to a higher level than the original creation.	Christology is truly necessary for divine religion. “Deification” possible (2 Pet 1:4).
Social and political order of the First Creation.	Elevation of the mankind to a new level in the New Creation.	The New Creation is fully inherited only in resurrection.
First Creation based on Law, not Gospel.	Redemption and Elevation of the First Creation through the Gospel, not the Law.	The Kingdom is based on the Gospel, not the Law.
The Old Testament promises the New, in the Person of Messiah.	The New Testament fulfills the Old, in the Person of Messiah.	The New Testament is the supreme revealer of the prophet, priest and king, in the Person of Messiah.
		Redemptive-Historical

The Canon of the New Testament

A well-known teacher of the Restoration of the Law wrote that when the Kingdom comes, we'll know how to punish all those face-slappers who bother us now, and we won't have to keep turning the other cheek.

What he meant by this was that the New Testament ethic is temporary -- that there will come a time in the progress of the Kingdom when the personal ethic taught by Jesus in the New Testament will be superseded by one that is more "just."

This can't be right.

First, the courage that it takes to teach this way is boldly disrespectful to the authority of Christ.

Secondly, the doctrine of the canon of Scripture is reversed.  He intends the Mosaic case law to take precedence over the teaching of the New Testament.  Redemptive history runs backward.  The Old Creation is being restored, rather than the New Creation inaugurated.

This is all wrong because he has rejected the New Testament as the canonical guide for the interpretation of all Scripture.

The whole "look and feel" of the Christian religion is at stake here: our daily experience (often tribulation, and not glory), our future expectation (the return of the Lord), our ethic (forgiveness, servanthood), our preaching (the gospel), our life (mutual love, distinct from the world).

How vital a difference this makes to the whole spirit of Christianity !