Thanks to Kris Minefee for this article, lifted from his Facebook page.
I don't intend to do an extensive study of all the scripture involving the return of Christ or to rehash all the arguments for the pre, mid and post positions. My only goal in the article is to hopefully present a logical argument. Simply put this is the premise: If Christ's return is imminent then there can be no signs that would precede it, therefore His return must precede the tribulation since signs fill the tribulation.
First does the Bible teach the imminent return of Christ? By imminent we don't mean immediate we mean that Christ could return at any time, therefore His coming would be imminent at any and all times. If Christ coming is not and always has been imminent then the apostles were mistaken in their beliefs and teachings that the church should always be ready for Christ return.
Notice the following scriptures.
1Pe 4:7 But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.
Re 1:3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.
Re 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.
Php 4:5 Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand.
1Th 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
1Co 15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
In all these scriptures the sense is that the Lord's coming was imminent. The specific phrase is “The Lord or the time is at hand.” If the Lord's return was at hand it meant either shortly or it meant at any time. Obviously it wasn't shortly as it has been 2000 years since these words were written therefore it must mean at any time unless the scripture is wrong. The preparedness of the Christians is encouraged in either sense but only one means that the apostles and even Christ were not mistaken in their expectation of Christ's second coming.
1Ti 6:14 That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ:
1Co 1:7 So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:
John McCarthur on this point states “All those texts suggest that in the early church expectation of Christ’s imminent return ran high. A solid conviction that Christ could return at any time permeates the whole NT.”
We of course are to live our lives in the same readiness, believing that the Lord may return at any time. Now here is where the logic impossibility of the mid and post-tribulational positions exhibits itself. If we are to believe as the NT writers told us to be ready at all times because the coming of Christ is “at hand” then we can't instead be looking for signs to precede that coming. If that were the case then we should be waiting for signs that are the landmarks of the tribulation and then we would look for His parousia and apokalupsis. Unfortunately that is exactly what many Christians are doing because of the misunderstanding of the imminent return. The tribulation begins with the the sign of the creation of the covenant that give Israel universal peace, its midpoint is marked by the sign of the covenant's breaking. It is filled with wars, pestilence, disease, earthquakes and death all these we are told are signs but not for us as New Testament believers but for the nation of Israel to know that their Messiah will save them. For us the only sign given is that which was given, the sign of Jesus risen from the grave and promising us “And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. - John 14:3”
We are told to walk by faith not by sight until “...the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words.” 1 Thess 4:16-18
To be logically consistent we either live in readiness of the Lord's imminent and therefore sign-less return or we live looking for signs and then make ourselves ready. One position walks in the principle of faith, the other looks for signs. You can't have both an imminent return and a return heralded by signs else it is not imminent, therefore any position that looks for the return of Christ for his church after the signs of the tribulation begin is logically flawed.
27 January 2011
25 January 2011
A letter to God from Lovingdoubt
A letter to god.
Thanks to Godless Girl for bringing this to my attention.
What would I write?
My god would have to be chance and randomness. It has no consciousness. It does not see what will happen next, but through a number of events to an almost infinite power, I sit here contemplating my place in the cosmos, because of my god.
I can see why people need to believe in their own personal deity, if not for salvation, then to give order to the random mutations that gave birth to their ancestors and to believe that there are checks and balances in place to ensure that good and bad are noticed and acted upon at some higher level.
The clinical randomness, the cause and effect is what gives my world its beauty and makes me feel so honoured to have walked this way for such a short time. It saddens me that many of my fellow humans do not realise what a special and unique place in the universe we inhabit. Perhaps then, they would do more to protect it and less to hasten its demise.
Thanks to Godless Girl for bringing this to my attention.
What would I write?
My god would have to be chance and randomness. It has no consciousness. It does not see what will happen next, but through a number of events to an almost infinite power, I sit here contemplating my place in the cosmos, because of my god.
I can see why people need to believe in their own personal deity, if not for salvation, then to give order to the random mutations that gave birth to their ancestors and to believe that there are checks and balances in place to ensure that good and bad are noticed and acted upon at some higher level.
The clinical randomness, the cause and effect is what gives my world its beauty and makes me feel so honoured to have walked this way for such a short time. It saddens me that many of my fellow humans do not realise what a special and unique place in the universe we inhabit. Perhaps then, they would do more to protect it and less to hasten its demise.
19 January 2011
15 January 2011
Why people will believe despite the evidence.
The religious people I come across have certain traits.
God is their friend. He makes their life better in some way. They are happy to worship and praise him because of this. They feel that by knowing him their life is better, that he looks out for them and even talks to them. They are special.
God is on their side. His holy book sanctions their dislike of gays, commies, pinkos, muslims and pretty much anyone who isn’t like them. Few people seem to dislike god despite the many evil things he has done. I didn’t understand the term ‘Apologetic’ for a long time but I see no-one who ‘accepts the lord’ but really doesn’t like his policies. I expect they either stop having faith or find another faith that more suits their beliefs.
God’s representatives on Earth can rape and pillage and still command respect from the faithful. Look at the Catholics. Science continues to close the gaps. We no longer need god to explain crop failure, lightening, earthquakes, so what do people need god for?
He is their ticket to eternal life. Whatever happens in this life, we get another chance, we can meet up with loved ones cruelly taken from us and all of this will occur on a level playing field called Heaven. God won’t let the wool be pulled over his eyes by the evil man who fleeced you of your life savings and retired to the Bahamas, nor will he be so lenient on those bad (insert prejudice here) who will all be roasting in hell. Death is either meeting up with old friends or payback time for those who god saw fit not to punish on Earth. For many people, that is so comforting.
He also provides people with hope, that there is some purpose to existence, that the bad things that happen, lead us to a better place through his guidance. We will have a better understanding if we just pray hard enough or ask the right question of him. Of course, if this doesn’t happen, it is we who are not doing it right and not god who doesn’t give a shit. He helps us manage pain and suffering because he loves us, even when no-one else will. All we have to do is accept him into our lives and ask for forgiveness and the ticket to eternal life is ours.
No wonder that some people will lie to themselves to protect this hope and need to believe in something. Their faith is at the core of how they define themselves and to look objectively and rationalise would cause them to have to reboot, literally. I have seen it happen. If one belief is false, what else may be false? It is often easier to construct a defence to keep out reality rather than accept that we have been living a lie. Sometimes it is impossible to maintain the lie and I know of many people who arrived at atheism via this difficult and painful route.
To have found god in the first place one of two things is likely to have happened. Someone will have been born into a ‘god fearing’, religious family and been brought up to believe (brainwashed) or they will have had some kind of personal crisis and come to god for some level of comfort or pain relief. I am sure there are others who are preachers, priests and predators who maintain a ‘belief’ in God because it suits them to do so and either pays the wages or allows access to feed on vulnerable people.
And there are intelligent people out there who buy the whole bible, creationism, 6,000 year-old earth thing and will go to all lengths to defend their beliefs. What would they lose in accepting just a little bit of reality? They have to let it in to other parts of their lives. When they fill up their cars, do they think god created petrol on the 8th day but forgot to put it in his journal?
God is their friend. He makes their life better in some way. They are happy to worship and praise him because of this. They feel that by knowing him their life is better, that he looks out for them and even talks to them. They are special.
God is on their side. His holy book sanctions their dislike of gays, commies, pinkos, muslims and pretty much anyone who isn’t like them. Few people seem to dislike god despite the many evil things he has done. I didn’t understand the term ‘Apologetic’ for a long time but I see no-one who ‘accepts the lord’ but really doesn’t like his policies. I expect they either stop having faith or find another faith that more suits their beliefs.
God’s representatives on Earth can rape and pillage and still command respect from the faithful. Look at the Catholics. Science continues to close the gaps. We no longer need god to explain crop failure, lightening, earthquakes, so what do people need god for?
He is their ticket to eternal life. Whatever happens in this life, we get another chance, we can meet up with loved ones cruelly taken from us and all of this will occur on a level playing field called Heaven. God won’t let the wool be pulled over his eyes by the evil man who fleeced you of your life savings and retired to the Bahamas, nor will he be so lenient on those bad (insert prejudice here) who will all be roasting in hell. Death is either meeting up with old friends or payback time for those who god saw fit not to punish on Earth. For many people, that is so comforting.
He also provides people with hope, that there is some purpose to existence, that the bad things that happen, lead us to a better place through his guidance. We will have a better understanding if we just pray hard enough or ask the right question of him. Of course, if this doesn’t happen, it is we who are not doing it right and not god who doesn’t give a shit. He helps us manage pain and suffering because he loves us, even when no-one else will. All we have to do is accept him into our lives and ask for forgiveness and the ticket to eternal life is ours.
No wonder that some people will lie to themselves to protect this hope and need to believe in something. Their faith is at the core of how they define themselves and to look objectively and rationalise would cause them to have to reboot, literally. I have seen it happen. If one belief is false, what else may be false? It is often easier to construct a defence to keep out reality rather than accept that we have been living a lie. Sometimes it is impossible to maintain the lie and I know of many people who arrived at atheism via this difficult and painful route.
To have found god in the first place one of two things is likely to have happened. Someone will have been born into a ‘god fearing’, religious family and been brought up to believe (brainwashed) or they will have had some kind of personal crisis and come to god for some level of comfort or pain relief. I am sure there are others who are preachers, priests and predators who maintain a ‘belief’ in God because it suits them to do so and either pays the wages or allows access to feed on vulnerable people.
And there are intelligent people out there who buy the whole bible, creationism, 6,000 year-old earth thing and will go to all lengths to defend their beliefs. What would they lose in accepting just a little bit of reality? They have to let it in to other parts of their lives. When they fill up their cars, do they think god created petrol on the 8th day but forgot to put it in his journal?
9 January 2011
Juror reflecting on difficult subject of teenage grooming victims.
Dear
I was a juror on the trial at Sheffield Crown Court, back in October last year of the eight men accused of a range of sexual crimes against four teenage girls. I am sure you will recall that five were found guilty of at least one charge against them. This and other cases have recently been reported in the press and several prominent politicians and others are now commenting on the wider picture that is emerging, predominantly that the vast majority of offenders are Pakistani men.
Some background about why I feel the need to comment so fully: I was Director of Victim Support Sheffield ten years ago, having previously worked over ten years for Victim Support in North London. I am familiar with the facilities for vulnerable and intimidated witnesses and how the video-link system works and have supported several victims through giving evidence in Court. I have also provided extensive training for people in how to support victims of serious crime and this has included several police officers.
After a brief introduction by the prosecuting barrister, we were shown several video recordings detailing several hours of the victims’ interviews that had taken place between 20 and 24 months previously. Some of the audio quality was very poor and we strained to hear much of it. On several occasions Court was adjourned while transcripts of the interview (available to barristers already) were prepared for us.
I am sure you are aware in such a case how vital the presentation of evidence is and this process of bad audio, malfunctioning equipment requiring frequent breaks (while the victims were in attendance) did a disservice to everyone and must have had a cost implication because of the amount of Court time wasted.
We were trying to piece together which of the alleged crimes had been committed on these girls by which of the eight men on trial. All we had to start with was the indictment sheet which was a merely list of charges against names.
The girls were questioned and the interviewers were clearly finding it difficult to get the information from the victims without adding their own words. We had no background, not even an outline of which allegation the interview was in response to. We struggled to make sense of the many interviews of two of the victims and which of the 23 offences they related to.
I understand that there are procedures in place so that victims cannot be ‘led’ but some of these interviews sounded so clinical and disconnected for much of the time. I found myself questioning the ability of some of the interviewers who seemed to be floundering out of their depth. For example, asking multiple questions of the victim (and hence confusing them) or just saying, “right, right, right” in response to the victim was to the point where it became monotonous and annoying.
Can I ask what kind of training and ongoing these interviewers receive and on what criteria they are selected, particularly as their job is perhaps the most important in the entire process?
The cross-examinations after the week or so of video interviews didn’t do much help us to better understand the situation or the victims’ background and often resulted in ‘closing down’ the dialogue when it became uncomfortable or confrontational. It must have been so difficult for those girls to follow through after all the elapsed time and I feel that somehow they deserved better of everyone. I think it fair to say that it wasn’t until the victim impact statements were summarised after conviction, that the life changing impact of these crimes on the girls became clear.
Over the ensuing weeks, we began to make sense of who was accused of having done what to whom and it began to make more sense. The prosecution finished their case and each of the defendants’ barristers took their turn in outlining their client’s case for the defence. Some chose not to testify and we were each able to build an impression of our understanding of the evidence presented.
At the summing up, the prosecution barrister took a little over an hour to summarise the case for the Prosecution and then each of the barristers for the defence took a familiar amount of time on their client. It felt as if we were being brow-beaten by the defence at times as the same messages were presented in subtly different flavours. It was at this point we jurors were treated to some excellent speaking, references were made to Greek tragedies, the Boulevards of Paris and the Judge even seemed to endorse his favoured orators.
I began to feel sorrow for the defendants having to sit through what I found to be some kind of game of ‘barristerial’ one-upmanship being played out in front of people who had their freedom riding on the outcome of the trial, and their friends and family in the gallery.
After the Judge’s direction, it was our turn to deliberate. I think we took a whole week to decide all the charges. Some were easier than others and I felt lucky to have the expertise and considered viewpoints of my fellow jurors to help me. Not once did the race of the defendants or the victims become an issue.
We were trying to recall evidence from the victims that we had heard in mid-September and it was now November. We only had our memories and the notes that some of us had taken during the trial to assist us. If we wanted to clarify anything, it meant going into Court to ask the Judge. Many of us felt that it would have been so useful and only fair, to redress the balance, by having had access to the victims’ video interviews or some form of summary once again, at the close of the evidence.
In the end, I feel that justice was done despite the process which still favours the defendant (sometimes 8 to 1). With better interviewing and more dots being joined up for we jurors at the beginning of the process, I feel that better justice could have been done for everyone.
Yours
I was a juror on the trial at Sheffield Crown Court, back in October last year of the eight men accused of a range of sexual crimes against four teenage girls. I am sure you will recall that five were found guilty of at least one charge against them. This and other cases have recently been reported in the press and several prominent politicians and others are now commenting on the wider picture that is emerging, predominantly that the vast majority of offenders are Pakistani men.
Some background about why I feel the need to comment so fully: I was Director of Victim Support Sheffield ten years ago, having previously worked over ten years for Victim Support in North London. I am familiar with the facilities for vulnerable and intimidated witnesses and how the video-link system works and have supported several victims through giving evidence in Court. I have also provided extensive training for people in how to support victims of serious crime and this has included several police officers.
After a brief introduction by the prosecuting barrister, we were shown several video recordings detailing several hours of the victims’ interviews that had taken place between 20 and 24 months previously. Some of the audio quality was very poor and we strained to hear much of it. On several occasions Court was adjourned while transcripts of the interview (available to barristers already) were prepared for us.
I am sure you are aware in such a case how vital the presentation of evidence is and this process of bad audio, malfunctioning equipment requiring frequent breaks (while the victims were in attendance) did a disservice to everyone and must have had a cost implication because of the amount of Court time wasted.
We were trying to piece together which of the alleged crimes had been committed on these girls by which of the eight men on trial. All we had to start with was the indictment sheet which was a merely list of charges against names.
The girls were questioned and the interviewers were clearly finding it difficult to get the information from the victims without adding their own words. We had no background, not even an outline of which allegation the interview was in response to. We struggled to make sense of the many interviews of two of the victims and which of the 23 offences they related to.
I understand that there are procedures in place so that victims cannot be ‘led’ but some of these interviews sounded so clinical and disconnected for much of the time. I found myself questioning the ability of some of the interviewers who seemed to be floundering out of their depth. For example, asking multiple questions of the victim (and hence confusing them) or just saying, “right, right, right” in response to the victim was to the point where it became monotonous and annoying.
Can I ask what kind of training and ongoing these interviewers receive and on what criteria they are selected, particularly as their job is perhaps the most important in the entire process?
The cross-examinations after the week or so of video interviews didn’t do much help us to better understand the situation or the victims’ background and often resulted in ‘closing down’ the dialogue when it became uncomfortable or confrontational. It must have been so difficult for those girls to follow through after all the elapsed time and I feel that somehow they deserved better of everyone. I think it fair to say that it wasn’t until the victim impact statements were summarised after conviction, that the life changing impact of these crimes on the girls became clear.
Over the ensuing weeks, we began to make sense of who was accused of having done what to whom and it began to make more sense. The prosecution finished their case and each of the defendants’ barristers took their turn in outlining their client’s case for the defence. Some chose not to testify and we were each able to build an impression of our understanding of the evidence presented.
At the summing up, the prosecution barrister took a little over an hour to summarise the case for the Prosecution and then each of the barristers for the defence took a familiar amount of time on their client. It felt as if we were being brow-beaten by the defence at times as the same messages were presented in subtly different flavours. It was at this point we jurors were treated to some excellent speaking, references were made to Greek tragedies, the Boulevards of Paris and the Judge even seemed to endorse his favoured orators.
I began to feel sorrow for the defendants having to sit through what I found to be some kind of game of ‘barristerial’ one-upmanship being played out in front of people who had their freedom riding on the outcome of the trial, and their friends and family in the gallery.
After the Judge’s direction, it was our turn to deliberate. I think we took a whole week to decide all the charges. Some were easier than others and I felt lucky to have the expertise and considered viewpoints of my fellow jurors to help me. Not once did the race of the defendants or the victims become an issue.
We were trying to recall evidence from the victims that we had heard in mid-September and it was now November. We only had our memories and the notes that some of us had taken during the trial to assist us. If we wanted to clarify anything, it meant going into Court to ask the Judge. Many of us felt that it would have been so useful and only fair, to redress the balance, by having had access to the victims’ video interviews or some form of summary once again, at the close of the evidence.
In the end, I feel that justice was done despite the process which still favours the defendant (sometimes 8 to 1). With better interviewing and more dots being joined up for we jurors at the beginning of the process, I feel that better justice could have been done for everyone.
Yours
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)