A Problem Passage
No.150: March 10, 2023
Welcome to The Square Inch, a Friday newsletter on Christianity, culture, and all of the many-varied “square inches” of God’s domain. This publication is free for now, but please consider clicking on the button at the bottom to become a paid subscriber to enjoy this along with Monday’s “Off The Shelf” feature about books and Wednesday’s “The Quarter Inch,” a quick(er) commentary on current events.
Dear Friends,
A quick housekeeping item before I get into it today.
Paid subscribers are aware of this, but I remembered that I haven’t mentioned anything to the rest of you. The Gospel Coalition has released the film of my debate with Jake Meador on climate change. It’s an hour long, and I hope you take the time and enjoy it.
I promise not to belabor this issue much longer, but matters of basic Christian orthodoxy require attention.
The saga over Gary DeMar’s seeming rejection of creedal orthodoxy regarding the Second Coming, general resurrection, and final judgment continues. Much of the social media firestorm seems caught up in personalities and tribes and grudges and grievances—there is a lot of drama. What you should know is that I have no personal axe to grind whatsoever. Although I’m friends with a lot of people who have worked alongside of or have been “adjacent” to Mr. DeMar, I have never met him and don’t know him at all. I care about the substance of what he teaches (or doesn’t).
And I have cared about the topic for a long time. A number of years ago Eastern Orthodox theologian David Bentley Hart wrote an essay that essentially denied the bodily resurrection. I responded with a very lengthy tour through antiquity to demonstrate how thoroughly out of accord his view is with the ancient fathers of the church. That mattered because, as an Eastern Orthodox theologian, Hart claims—indeed, must claim—direct continuity with the Apostolic tradition; and, more than that, he claims that his view is how the ancients would have understood Paul. These claims are, to put it politely, poppycock. My essay was published in The Calvinist International, a website that appears to have vanished into thin air. However, I was able to retrieve it using an Internet archival tool. Click here if you’re interested.
I bring that essay up because this latest heresy, hyper-preterism, likewise requires a total reinvention of what scripture means by “resurrection.” It requires something like the belief that our physical bodies are left in the ground while we somehow, individually upon death, instantly obtain a “spiritual” (by which is meant, immaterial) body. If that were true, Christ’s tomb would not have been empty! And that just scratches the surface of the carnage such a notion makes of a Christian theology and worldview as a whole. The idea that this world, the one you and I are living in right now, is in fact the eternal state—yes, continued sin, misery, and death!—is anathema to Christianity. It is a species of Gnosticism, and it is an affront to Almighty God who went to ultimate lengths, a cross and a tomb, to rescue and restore his “very good” creation from sin and death. That includes our bodies, and it includes the final vanquishing of the “last enemy,” death itself.
I don’t care about “meaning well.” I don’t care about “just asking questions.” I don’t care if certain texts are complicated or if somebody says they “need to study more.” He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and we look for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. If you cannot confess it, you cannot be, objectively speaking, a Christian.
As for my participation in the social media debate, it has been extremely limited. Mr. DeMar popped in to a Facebook thread to ask, regarding the Second Coming, “Where is that taught in the Bible?” He constantly asks people to provide a “verse” to establish doctrinal claims.
Since he wanted verses to be supplied, and since this is a Facebook thread in which he was and remains active, I answered with a question of my own: “Does 1 Corinthians 15:22-28 teach orthodox creedal doctrines regarding the last things or not?” He’s been asked this question three times and he remains silent.
I am not surprised. Paul’s seminal discussion of the future resurrection harvest, the destruction of death itself, and the consummation of the kingdom of God are not remotely explicable on hyper-preterist terms. That does not stop people from trying. For example, hyper-preterists love the work of J. Stuart Russell, a 19th century Scottish pastor. He was a pioneer of hyper-preterism, and in his book The Parousia he attempted to strain the Apostle’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 15 through his pre-fabricated view that everything was fulfilled in A.D. 70. It is an exegetical train wreck.
Just a few observations. He writes on page 206 that
at the great epoch of the Parousia the dead as well as the living—not of the whole human race, but of the subjects of the Theocratic kingdom—were to be assembled before the tribunal of judgment, is distinctly affirmed in the Scriptures; the dead being raised up, and the living undergoing an instantaneous change. In this recall of the dead to life—the resuscitation of those who throughout the duration of the Theocratic kingdom had become the victims and captives of death—we conceive the ‘destruction’ of death referred to by St. Paul to consist.
First, he seems to believe that the resurrection (yes, the resurrection) happened in A.D. 70, but it only applied to the Jews of the time—those living under the “Theocratic” kingdom. But Paul is writing to Gentiles, of course, and seeking to reassure them of the certainty of their coming resurrection. Moreover, Paul’s entire resurrection argument is grounded in Adam, our first parent, not Abraham, as though referring to the Jewish people. “For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive” (1 Cor. 15:21-22). Paul is not describing a condition of death with regard to some subset of humanity. His purview is as universal as it gets. Just as in Adam all die…
Russell is then forced by his logic to downplay the sense of this “destruction” of death. It doesn’t really mean its eradication! He writes:
Meantime, it may be observed that such expressions as the ‘destruction' or 'abolition' of death do not always imply the total and final termination of its power.
To say that this is at odds with 1 Corinthians 15 ought to be unnecessary. Paul’s point of view is completely “eschatological”—that is, it pertains to the finality of the work of Christ in destroying death at the resurrection. The whole passage is about “the end” (v.24)—by which he means THE END. The end of history as we know it (“this age”) and the inauguration of the “age to come.” The end of the “perishable,” “dishonor,” and “weak” and the inauguration of the “imperishable,” “honor,” and “power” (v.42-44). The end of mortality and death by way of victory (v.54). These things are not reserved for the few (e.g., 1st century Jews), they are not temporary, not a “phase” in the ongoing flow of history, and they cannot be “spiritualized” in any way.
To put it mildly, 1 Corinthians 15 is a “problem passage” for hyper-preterists. Yes, as Russell demonstrates, they have clever ways of trying to maneuver around Paul’s point, but generally they do not try it in broad daylight, in public, or on a Facebook feed where somebody who knows something can scrutinize it. They reserve these shenanigans for their private small group Bible studies with vulnerable people, away from prying eyes. Is that cruel or mean-spirited of me?
Well, you can read some testimonials. J. Stuart Russell originally published The Parousia anonymously, and we also now know that Gary DeMar doesn’t appreciate public scrutiny, either.
Thank you for reading The Square Inch Newsletter. Please consider subscribing to receive all of my content throughout the week. Have a wonderful weekend!
Superb.