Parousia Interim

The period in which the Parousia is in temporal suspension, paused and delayed from being fully completed, the period in which Divine Wrath and Judgment are deferred, that the Gentiles might be brought in.

The Old Testament presents the First and Second Comings as one event and eschatologically they are indeed unified. This has led to a great deal of confusion for some as they seek to interpret prophecy in isolated terms apart from the Parousia which is centered on Christ.

This age of the Already-Not Yet, this time of fulfillment in earnest and expectation is one in which prophecy is in pause and in suspension. The age could be described as characterised by a temporal schism in which we as believers live in This Age and yet are participant citizens in The Age to Come.

When Christ returns the full meaning and import of the Parousia will be brought to bear as our Lord will finish not a task separate from His First Coming but will finish the tasks associated with His Coming. The events are separated by chronological time but eschatologically are essentially one. This doctrine of course defies normal categories of predication and experience. It is a source of wonder.

The Northern Kingdom Analogy

A way to view Rome as a covenantally relevant but apostate form of Christianity.

Those who say Rome has no status and never did err both theologically and historically. It's not a tenable position.

And yet those who argue Rome still has status also err.

The Confessional metanarrative which insists Rome was the Church until the Council of Trent upon which the mantle was taken up by Magisterial Protestantism also err, a point I will briefly touch on in the conclusion.

Apocalypticism (Part 1)

Amillennialism has always been a problematic term. It's a position defined by what it is not. It posits the millennium in apophatic terms, rather than stating a positive, it is instead a theological concept cast in the negative. The difficulties are further expanded by the fact that it also generates confusion for some as it seems to suggest a rejection of the millennium entirely, a concept clearly taught in Revelation 20. Based on this, some have mistakenly accused Amillennialists of being theological liberals, people who don't take the Bible seriously.

The Dynamic Principle in Sociology

This was recently added to the glossary.

The Dynamic Principle in Sociology states: All political and economic models break down due to competing interests and ideas. Academic models are based on stability or at least temporary equilibriums which do not exist in the reality of any given moment. Real world forces and contingencies always exert pressure and never allow any political or economic models to function in the sterile environment of the ivory tower. Sociological fundamentalisms are based on subjective frameworks both in terms of ideology and context and are therefore de facto invalid and unworkable.

Glossary Links- Perspectival Soteriology

Perspectival Soteriology

Others use the term Perspectivalism, and I'm certainly not advocating their theological position, but it's not entirely without validity. While I don't accept the oft used Triads and other perspective-'frame'-works, I do acknowledge that a concept of perspective helps us to make sense of passages of Scripture and concepts that seem to conflict.

Glossary Links- Hyper-Eschatologized Ecclesiology

Hyper-Eschatologized Ecclesiology and its symptom or fruit...Ecclesiastical Apathy-

These are high sounding terms for a concept that's really not too difficult. This phenomenon occurs in several different traditions and factions and yet it certainly is not enshrined in any confession.

Glossary Links- Hermeneutical Compression and the Analogy of Scripture

Hermeneutical Compression-

This is but another way of describing one or some of the various nuances that result from theological systemic thought and commitments when applied to Revelation.

Glossary Links- Sacralist Collective

 

Sacralist Collective-

The Bible deals with individuals and a collective body... the Church. The Church of course can be viewed in terms of local congregations or broadly speaking as the Church Militant (here on earth) and the Church Triumphant (the Eschatological Church). But to simplify, the Bible deals with individuals and the various categorical modes of the Church.

 Sacralism adds an additional layer which more or less ends up dominating their theology. This tier could be described as the Cultural or Civilizational layer or stratum. Historically this is referred to as Christendom or even sometimes placed within the broader category of Western Civilization. Nowhere does the Bible speak of Christian cultures or nations that are somehow sanctified and structured according to covenantal directives. This concept is derived and driven by philosophical necessity stemming from some basic theological foundations. The argument here is that this concept is not only flawed and un-Biblical, but quite destructive. Much of the contemporary language concerning Dominion and Worldview stems from this assumption. In addition this false premise establishes the framework for the so-called Biblical view of the arts, sciences, etc... views not derived from Scripture, but from philosophical deduction.

Politicizing the Gospel (Glossary)

Politicizing the Gospel

This phrase denotes the tendency among those who have tied and/or equated the Kingdom of God with power and success. The Prosperity Gospel only differs in that it defines success in terms of individual attainment and well-being. Sacralists who have embraced a political gospel tend to view the question in terms of society, cultural norms, legislation and certainly in terms of both domestic and political power.

Wisdom means that we try and examine things with honesty and integrity and in a non-partisan and non-factional way. We're determined as much as is possible to set aside pre-commitments to tradition, denomination, and cultural bias. This is by no means easy. It's a process that we have to keep working on. I believe this is the renewing of our minds and a key part of our sanctification. Pre-commitments, allegiances, and pre-suppositions will cloud our judgment and shape our thoughts and if we're determined to be Biblical in our understanding we have to be willing to set these things aside and surrender our minds and hearts to the teaching of God's Word.

This is going to lead to an embrace of nuance and a willingness to acknowledge that some thinkers though contrary to you, might have some things right.

What will seem at times like compromise, ambiguity or equivocation will in fact represent a degree of humility in admitting that some of these issues are more complicated than we can even grasp. Sometimes context and motive come into play and force our thinking to be broader and less pointed.

When the gospel is wedded to politics all these things go out the window. Truth isn't the paramount concern anymore. All that matters is to win. You must have a specific agenda. Nuance doesn't help the cause. Granting anything to another camp gives them fuel, an audience and harms your ability to dominate. If the truth calls for you to take a position that straddles factions or demands a new paradigm, it must be rejected. The politicized Gospel is a rejection of wisdom and the embrace of a strategy to win.

The only information you seek is that which is useful. The only information you give to your followers is that which serves the agenda.

This is true not just with those who have tied the gospel to a political cause. It can prove equally so with those tied in with denominational power.

Politicizing the gospel is dangerous because it leads the sheep astray. They become focused on different things and for a different purpose. It re-shapes your ethics. If you're primary goal is to win, then admitting something is wrong or that someone from your faction (past or present) is wrong will invite defeat. So deliberately or perhaps subconsciously you excuse the wrong and re-cast it so that it is right.