First, do no harm

We've been thinking much about North American missionary efforts.  This statement is from a secular book, echoes-though rather coldly, the premise that you're not helping someone by doing something for them they ought to do themselves.

An important consequence of redistribution among cultures has been to make those who lived in nonindustrial civilization and adhered to non industrial values artificially competitive.  International aid, rescue missions to counter famine and disease, and technical intervention fooled many into believing that their life prospects had sharply improved--without the necessity on their part of updating their values or significantly altering their behavior.

--The Sovereign Individual, Davidson and Rees-Mogg, pg. 394

We have handed them the fruits of our faithful Christian heritage without pressing on them that this is the fruit of righteousness and their low condition looks much like the curse of God on a nation that disobeys Him.  Also at play is the our not believing that the church could so take hold of and transform their culture that they would receive the blessing promised in Scripture on a nation which obeys.

A simple argument against premillennialism

The premillennialism rise has corresponded with a decline in the understanding of english grammar.  For example Revelation 20:6 has been cited as proving Christ will reign for 1000 years.  But that is not want it says.  Plug the last part of the verse into a sentence diagrammer and you get this

The subject of the clause is "they" not "him."  They will reign and for a thousand years (a long but not infinite period of time).  If I say I worked with my neighbor for a few hours, that does not tell you how long he worked.  Information provide about the subject of the clause cannot be assumed true of the determiner of the prepositional phrase (a.k.a. object of the preposition).  To determine how long my neighbor worked or how long Christ reigns we need more information.  The Bible provides that...about Christ, not my neighbor.

"Then the seventh angel blew his trumpet and there were loud voices in heaven saying The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ and he shall reign forever and ever" Rev 11:15

"For to us a child is born to us a son is given and the government shall be upon his shoulder and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor Mighty God Everlasting Father Prince of Peace Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end on the throne of David and over his kingdom to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and forevermore The zeal of the LORD of hosts will do this" Isaiah 9:6-7

"And Jesus came and said to them All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me." Matt 28:18 

Arminianism and Pacifism

Reflecting on a recent discussion, I wondered if there was a connection between free will and not wanting to take a life (pacifism). Carrying Arminian theology to a logical end, you would not want to kill anyone because you might be sending them to Hell before they heard the Gospel. A Calvinist could be confident that if he was the means of sending someone to Hell that person had no chance of salvation anyway because he had been passed over by God. Why should be careful to not take life for personal gain or carelessness? Because that is what is taught in the Bible. We need not add reasons. God commands are enough. We should fear God and not the consequences of our actions.

And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell. (Matthew 10:28 ESV)

The destruction of the soul is something which God claims for himself. We need to fear offending God by taking a life in a way he forbid and not fear condemning someone to hell. It continues to amaze me how theology affect our actions and outlook.

What Paul was thinking....

...about the Thessalonians.

"Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers, not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness." 1 Thess 2:1-3

Is Paul laying out as eschatological principle for all time or is he writing a letter to the Thessalonians? Is the Bible written to us or for us? Reading Doug Wilson, I have taking his counsel to not immediately ask "How does this apply to me?" but what was Paul saying to the church? He was concerned about the church being shaken and alarmed by a certain teaching. He presents an argument to refute that teaching. He is actually reminding them of this argument which he presented in person (2 Thess 2:5), likely quoting Daniel to them. He is reminding them to be faithful to scripture and to wait for God to fulfill his promises, which include in this case, the Destruction of the (standing) temple.

What would they think?

So when Paul write the Thessalonians

"Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God."

and there is a standing temple, wouldn't they think that it is the existing temple of which Paul is speaking.

Futurist would say that we have not seen this yet, that it will take place in a temple yet to be built. So years later, did the Thessalonians, when they saw the destruction of the standing temple, release they hadn't seen this man of lawlessness. Did they reason "Well, we didn't see this guy so I guess God will build another temple at some point in the future. He did it in the past."

I doubt it. This was the temple that the Messiah was presented in, taught in, etc. I think this passage has application to the people to whom it was written.