meeting the Lord

It is a not unknown counterargument to the modern doctrine of the rapture to point out the precise first-century meaning of the Greek word apantesis, "meeting", in the context of 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18. Even so, recent reflection on this text in light of my experience of certain African cultural practices of hospitality would seem to bolster just that scholarly counterargument.

The doctrine of the rapture, a sudden snatching away of believers to heaven to escape the destruction of the earth, is extrapolated from Paul's assurance to the Thessalonians that "we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up in the clouds together with them to meet the Lord in the air; and so we will be with the Lord forever" (1 Th 4:17).   In the immediate background to this verse are "the dead in Christ"; those living, those remaining, those "left" are left in relation to those who have died.  Paul wants the living not to be "uninformed about those who have died, so that [they] may not grieve as others do who have no hope" (4:13).  Thus Paul informs the Thessalonians that their dead in Christ "will rise first", that is, just before or as the living "are caught up in the clouds with them" at the Lord's coming.  Together, the living and the dead in Christ will "meet the Lord in the air."  The Greek word apantesis which the NRSV translates as a verb, "meet", is actually a noun--the living and the dead in Christ will be "caught up . . . into a meeting of the Lord in the air" (4:17).  

The critical point is that Paul has appropriated apantesis, a word from the realm of politics, to describe in anticipation the scene at the coming of the resurrected Jesus.  Just as a delegation of representatives ventured outside their city to welcome an approaching dignitary in the Greek world of the first century, just as they held an apantesis with the king as he was coming, so the living and the dead in Christ will have "a meeting with the Lord in the air" as he "descends from heaven" (4:16).  As the initial reception of the king took place outside the gates of the city to which he was coming, so believers will welcome their Lord "in the air", in the middle zone between departure and destination.  For indeed, just as the purpose of an entourage is to accompany the dignitary to his destination, so believers will not remain with their Lord "in the air".  The middle space is but the point of reception; the goal is to bring the king into his city.

As I prepare a lesson on this text for teaching on eschatology to African church leaders, I am reminded of the welcome we and a group of American church visitors received from a rural African church last month.  Like the first-century delegation coming out to meet the arriving king, so these African Christians lined our pathway outside the gates of the homestead and church premises.  Moreover, just as 1 Thessalonians paints the scene of the Lord's coming with shouts, calls, and trumpets, so we too were met with singing and instrumentation (in this case, drumming).  Of course, the point of all this was not to remain with us outside the gate, never to enter the house; the inhabitants of this village were welcoming us in order to bring us in. Inside a banquet was prepared for us.

If therefore, both the first-century practice of apantesis and an African way of "meeting" in the 21st century shed light on the New Testament's description of the Lord's coming, then an escape of believers to their Lord before the earth's cataclysmic destruction seems not to be the stuff of Christian hope.  Rather, that hope which is truly Christian "catches us up" in making our world a place in which the Lord is pleased to dwell when he comes.

-Joe

taking supper

When I taught on the theme of the Letters of Paul earlier this month, I used 1 Corinthians 11:17-34 as a case study in the thought of Paul.  As I had spent much time reading through the Pauline corpus in my preparation, I was drawn to a threefold emphasis on Paul’s personal call (or his relationship to the Lord Jesus Christ); Paul’s eschatological focus (or his focus on “last things”, which for Paul meant that the resurrection of Jesus was the fulfillment and “first fruits” of a final age, the embodiment in the present of the world still to come); and Paul’s ecclesiological focus (the centrality of the ekklesia, the church, to Paul’s thought, and also to his personal call and his eschatology).  The importance of his call, his belief that the old world was ending and the new world had come in the resurrected Christ, and his conviction that the church was the sign of the resurrection and that new world, seem to be the theological bases on which Paul formulated specific and contextually-shaped guidance on the everyday ethical issues facing his church communities.  1 Corinthians 11:17-34 is one textual illustration, among many potential options within his writings, of Paul’s theologically-based moral reasoning.

The problem with which 1 Corinthians 11:17-34 deals is “divisions among [the Corinthian church]” (v. 18), specifically manifested in the church’s common meal.  Paul summarizes the problem for the Corinthians as he has heard about it:

“For when the time comes to eat, each of you goes ahead with your own supper, and one goes hungry and another becomes drunk” (v. 21).

In contrast to what the church’s meal was purported to be, Paul, in light of the evidence, asserts that the Corinthians are indeed not eating “the Lord’s Supper” (v. 20).  Paul then proceeds to remind the Corinthian church what the supper of the Lord did entail, and assumes that the contrast between it and the Corinthians’ practice is obvious.

But is it obvious to us?  How is the remembrance of Jesus’ eating with his disciples on the night he was betrayed (v. 23) an antidote to the church’s practice of eating together?  What is it about the tradition of Jesus’ last supper that judged the Corinthians’ habits at supper?

Perhaps Paul’s intended contrast can be found in his use of the Greek verb lambano , to take, as he applies it to the supper etiquette of both the Lord Jesus and the Corinthian church.  Whereas “each” of the Corinthian believers or “each” of the Corinthian church factions, according to Paul, “goes ahead [prolambanei, literally takes before] with your own supper”, “the Lord Jesus . . . took [elaben] a loaf of bread and gave it to others.  Whereas the Corinthian Christians took and consumed the common food before everyone had had a chance to eat, Jesus—the honored head of the household—took the bread of the meal, gave thanks, broke it, and said, “This is my body that is for you” (v. 24).  Whereas the Corinthians take their meal before everyone has been served, Jesus gives that which is his to others before serving himself.

It is this Jesus way of taking supper that Paul commends as the antidote to the Corinthians’ hunger and drunkenness, and which forms Paul’s specific counsel to the Corinthian church: not take before (v. 21) but “wait for one another” (v. 33).

As Paul moves from the problem (“taking before”) to the solution (“wait for one another”), his call, his eschatology, and his ecclesiology are clearly in view.  In reciting the Jesus tradition of supper for the Corinthians, Paul claims it as his own.  “For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you” (v. 23).  That which Paul saw fit to hand on to others he first had to welcome in his own life.  Paul’s personal connection to Jesus, his experience of being embraced by his Lord, is the strength by which and for which he hands on the way of Jesus to others.

Moreover, Paul’s purpose in handing on the way of Jesus to others is eschatological; by eating the bread and drinking the cup in the manner of Jesus the church “proclaims the Lord’s death until he comes” (v. 26).  Though the resurrection of Jesus is not here explicit (but see chapter 15!), it is here for Paul the invisible pivot between the Lord’s death and his coming again.  Because he is raised, the Jesus who died will come again.

Finally, it is up to the church, the ekklesia, to proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes, that is, to embody now within its common life—indeed in the ordinary but essential practices of eating and drinking—the just and equal sharing of the age to come.  In the time between the passing of the old and the arrival of the new, the community of God’s people is the frail but precious witness to the hope of a new creation, the cause for which Paul urges greater faithfulness to the one in whom all things hold together.

-Joe

"great suffering" (Matthew 24:1-31)

This post reflects my thinking in preparation for an upcoming lesson at the Bible school on eschatology, or "last things." A pastor friend here recently told me that "Israel is our clock." In other words, according to him, events that occur within the present-day nation of Israel hasten the day and hour of Jesus' coming again. Through a close study of such texts as Matthew 24:1-31, however, I hope to switch the emphasis--as I believe Jesus did--from the "when" in his disciples' original question to the "what": not "when" will these things be but "what" is the sign. Even that "what", however, was not what the disciples--still enamored of the temple (v. 1) and expectant of a messiah who would "suddenly come to his temple", increasing its splendor (Mal. 3:1; Hag. 2:9)--expected.

"When will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and the end of the age?"
(Mt. 24:3)

So the disciples asked Jesus.

Earlier he had told the scribes and Pharisees that "a wicked and adulterous generation asks for a sign" (Mt. 12:38-39).

Now his disciples ask for a sign.

Jesus, in his response, speaks of wars and rumors of wars, famine, earthquakes. He speaks of betrayal and the love of many growing cold (vv. 6, 7, 10, 12).

He also warns of false prophets and false christs (v. 11, 24).

It is his discussion around these false prophets that introduces the key words in the text.

First, the false prophets are those who "produce great signs" (v. 24). That is, the false prophets are those who produce the very thing that the disciples ask Jesus to give them.

Second, the false prophets perform their signs with the intent of "leading astray, if possible, even the elect" (v. 24). That is, those who have asked Jesus for a sign are themselves vulnerable to the deceitful signs of false prophets.

Third, as opposed to the false prophets who produce great signs, the disciples will experience great suffering, "such as has not been since the beginning of the world and never will be again" (v. 21). That is, just as the suffering of the Son of Man who, like Jonah in the belly of the sea monster, will be in the earth three days and nights, so the only sign given to the disciples is their inevitable suffering (Mt. 12:39-40).

Their great suffering (Greek: thlipsis, vv. 9, 21, 29) is not, however, pointless; it is for the sake of righteousness; it is the sign of blessedness (Mt. 5:10-11). In fact, "the one who perseveres to the end will be saved" (v. 13).

The disciples will be handed over to suffering and they will be killed, but for their sake--"for the sake of the elect"--"those days will be cut short" (v. 22). Moreover, just "after the suffering of those days," after "the sign of the Son of Man has appeared in heaven", "he will send out his angels to gather his elect" (vv. 29-31).

Though suffering is their lot, their mark, their sign, the Son of Man is coming for his own. "And remember," he says, "I am with you always, to the end of the age" (Mt. 28:20).

"Let the reader understand" (v. 15) what then is the cost--and the hope--of discipleship.

-Joe