The King Is Appearing

I am currently reading Paul: In Fresh Perspective by N. T. Wright. It appears that everyone who is faithfully reading this blog is, by now I am sure, at least some what familiar with the Bishop of Durham. Thus, I will probably make more assumptions than any non-regular would like. Nevertheless, I have been instructed to “keep this pithy.” So I will do my best. The following is not an argument per se; rather, it is my best summary of someone else’s argument. I am interested to hear your thoughts on the matter. Any mistakes or misunderstandings are due to solely to my ignorance.

In chapter three of his book Wright argues that Paul’s theology can be characterized as an “inaugurated eschatology.” That is, “a sense that God’s ultimate future has come forward into the middle of history, so that the church is living within—indeed, is constituted precisely by living simultaneously within!—God’s new world and the present one. The age to come has already arrived with Jesus; but it will be consummated in the future” (57).

Wright says we might view Paul’s theology as a “covenantal and apocalyptic theology.” This covenantal and apocalyptic theology can be understood as God having “unveiled his plan, his character, and not least his saving, restorative justice through the events concerning Jesus the Messiah, and would complete this revelation once for all at Jesus’ final appearing, his eventual royal presence” (57).

It’s important to understand that these are not mere assertions disguised by beautiful rhetoric. This is a conclusion from a very convincing argument that Wright has just laid out. Wright argues that this inaugurated eschatology can be found in Paul’s writings, particularly in his use of the word parousia and more particularly in his use of the word parousia in 1 Thessalonians 4.

Wright makes three points about this language of “coming.” First, he argues that the word parousia (usually interpreted as “coming”) actually implies “presence” as opposed to “absence.” This is understood more fully when one understands that in the cosmology of apocalyptic Judaism, heaven and earth are not “different locations within the same spatial continuum.” Rather, it is better to think of heaven and earth as “interlocking dimensions.” Thus, “what matters is not Jesus’ ‘coming’ as though from a great distance, but his ‘personal presence,’ or indeed ‘royal presence’ since this is how parousia was often used in relation to the emperor or other monarchs.” Wright argues, and I agree as I have recently discovered this myself, that Col. 3:4 and 1 John 3:2 use a better verb (phaneroo) to refer to this same event. The verb means “to appear,” and thus the verb used to refer to this same event is not “when he arrives,’ but ‘when he appears’—when he is unveiled, when, in the coming apocalyptic moment, the final secret of the world, already announced in the gospel, is made clear to all people, when every knee shall bow at his name.” This parousia is not a secret event, but it is a glorious revelation!

Second, Wright argues that 1 Thessalonians 4 should not be treated as if it predicts a rapture in which “God’s people will be caught up literally into mid-air, leaving homes, cars and family behind and escaping for ever the space-time world as it goes spinning off to its doom.” Rather, 1 Thessalonians 4 was meant to comfort the mourners of those who had already fallen asleep. Consequently, “Paul’s main aim is to insist that those who have died, and those who are still alive when Messiah appears in his royal presence, will together inherit the new age which he will usher in.”

Third, Wright beautifully argues that the parousia discussed in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 “evokes the scene…of a king or emperor paying a state visit to a city or province. As he approaches, the citizens come out to meet him at some distance from the city, not in order then to hold a meeting out in the countryside, but to escort him into the city. ‘Meeting the Lord in the air’ is not a way of saying ‘in order then to stay safely away from the wicked world.’ It is the prelude to the implied triumphant return to earth where the Messiah will reign, and his people with him, as Lord, savior and judge.” Wright insists that we must keep this context of imperial rhetoric alive. What Paul is arguing is that “Jesus the Messiah claims to be the reality of which Caesar’s empire, with all its trappings, is simply a parody.”

“The age to come has already arrived with Jesus, but it will be consummated in the future. The church must order its life and witness, it holiness and love, along that access.”

Forgive me for not keeping this pithy. I suppose I am not a pithy person…just ask my wife!