Pete's Blog

Until this month, John Candide had taught religion at Calvin College, affiliated with the Christian Reformed Church, for 25 years. But his “fall from grace,” as the website InsideHigherEd put it, came after he “wrote about challenges science poses to a literal reading of the gospels.” For that offense, he has agreed to leave his tenured teaching job.

As Mr. Candide explains, he recently became troubled by conflicts between science and literal readings of gospel accounts of Jesus’ resurrection: “The more I read, the more I talked with biologists, the more it became clear to me: science tells us that when people die, they stay dead.” He adds that he continues to believe in the importance of the Bible.

I invented John Candide. The actual story at InsideHigherEd, from which I have borrowed liberally above, was a bit different. The alleged offense involved challenges posed by science to a literal reading of Genesis, not of Jesus’ resurrection. And the professor in question is named John Schneider.

Let’s compare the fictitious case of Prof. Candide with the real Prof. Schneider. Clearly the gospel accounts of Jesus’ resurrection are at odds with what science tells us about the everyday workings of the world. Faced with this conflict, some Christians have reverted to damage control, saying that of course Jesus didn’t rise from the dead—that”s just silly. What would happen to our credibility if we kept insisting on that? No, the real meaning of the resurrection story is that Jesus lives on in the hearts of all those who follow his example. And so on.

The vast majority of Christians—including those who teach at Calvin College—continue to believe otherwise.

"To hit more home runs, swing with a slight uppercut at high pitches. The high swing utilizes your powerful hip and midsection muscles instead of just your hands and arms." http://www.menshealth.com/mhlists/100-best-fitness-tips/Get_Home-Run_Power.php?page=2

Dedicated to Adam Lim.

Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. (1Co. 15: 51, 52)

Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years. (Re. 20: 4-6)

Any Christian must harmonize these two passages. In 1 Corinthians 15 we read that all of a sudden, "in a moment, the twinkling of an eye," the resurrection will happen. All at once: "we shall all be changed." Not some now and some later. In Revelation 20 we read that there is a first resurrection, and that those who do not receive the first resurrection will be raised at the judgment.

Christians who hold to inerrancy must submit an interpretation of the two passages that is compatible. The amillennialist starts with the hermeneutical presupposition that you allow the clearer passages to shed light on the less clear passages. (This is not meant to be a jab at premillennialists. Yes, premillennialists also agree that more difficult passages should be interpreted in light of the clearer passages. The amillennialist simply views the premillennialist as inconsistent.) The genre of epistle (that of 1 Corinthians) is not symbolic in nature, where the genre of apocalyptic literature (that of Revelation) is symbolic. So the passage in Revelation 20 should be interpreted in light of what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 15.

This raises questions. For example, the amillennialist is claiming that the coming to life of the rest of the dead (Re. 20: 5) is the resurrection Paul is speaking of in 1 Corinthians 15. So what's the "first resurrection"? The short answer is, The first resurrection is conversion. For a more full explanation of this, refer to Sam Storms' wonderful essay on the millennium. For other questions, there are answers. Premillennialists are given too much chance to criticize the amillennial position, and don't account for their system's holes often enough.

Finally, for a quick primer on amillennialism, the talk given by Kim Riddlebarger on amillennialism is great.

"We care far more for the central evangelical quotes than we do for Calvinism as a system; but we believe that Calvinism has in it a conservative force which helps to hold men to the vital truth." Charles Haddon Spurgeon, published in his magazine, The Sword and the Trowel in April, 1887. Read second hand in John MacArthur's wonderful book Ashamed of the Gospel.