A Perspective Book Review on:

CHRISTIANITY’S GREAT DILEMMA

Is Jesus Coming Again or Is He Not?

WHAT A DILEMMA CHRISTIANITY HAS ON ITS HANDS!

Side by side with the utterances of Jesus stands the vast body of ethical traditions

gradually accumulated in the effort to rationalized the developing moral experience of the

church. In the course of time, however, the lust of secularized church for power, the rise of a

feudal society in which class distinctions were based upon status, the growing emphasis of social

values due to the development of trade and the emergence of an intensive and self-conscious

civilization made imperative to the formulation of social and ethical philosophy that would

assure church the continued loyalty of men showing that the only in the church could all the

values represented by the different social activities find fitting recognition. Most world agree that

mankind is riddled with unhelpful desires that lead us away from experiencing happiness in this

life or in the afterlife. And, I could see the change, even if I was not old enough to realize what I

was actually observing. But as I looked around at what was happening, I began to see

conservatism as a desperate clinging to the past and the ways of old, of holding on to the status

quo, and a violent resistance to new and what some would describe as radical ideas.

The truth of life thought in the Bible should continue until His final coming on earth. But,

the disagreement may be largely keeping us in the middle and somehow confusing us to what

really is the dilemma from who, what, where and why it happened and reached this point.

However, all the major world religions, except for Christianity, say the solution to man’s
1
dilemma begins with man. Through your indulgence, allow me to continue fleshing out my

thoughts to you while we both journey to understand the great Christianity’s dilemma I am

talking about. But, please let me borrow an experience of someone that may be foreign to all of

us, which at some point, may get us enlighten from the discourse of many about Christianity’s

great dilemma of today. For the longest years, ministers and pastors have been preaching us for

the second coming of Jesus, to which, now is facing a great discourse for the belief our ancestors

have lived and we are actually holding at this moment.

This should not be interrupted nor distorted of the true meaning of the preaches made

about His return. For as long as I can recall, there have been times I have considered myself a

liberal. Liberal in terms of several things. But, it may be that I came to this decision because of

some remarkable experiences and observations, to which were very much conservative in

thought and I was seeking the ultimate act of childhood rebellion. But there were other factors

involved as well.

That may have been noted by other readers, could be many times before. For Eastern

religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism, meditation permits man to conquer those unhelpful

desires, Islam and Judaism both instil human effort to satisfy their deity’s necessities. Those

were times of change that was recorded in various history across the countries. That even the

author of this book I’m about to review ask question several times, “Is Jesus coming again or is

He not?” A long debated question about the greatest reverence for Jesus, the Bible and

Christianity. Reformed Jews for example, including Muslims select laws and rituals they think

are reasonable and discard the rest. This is perhaps they are hoping that God rate us on a curve.

What I mean, the great dilemma Christians have is not clear to them either.

2
 I didn’t spent all my life in search to answer the similar question that the author wants an

answer, but I did bunch of reading and digging of facts from printed literature, from conversation

with the experts, and some relevant observations I have around. Trying to extract facts that may

lead us to an answer to the author’s question. There have been no clear passage in the Bible nor

written by experts that tells exact period or season will Jesus come again on earth. But, as

always, the impossibility of fulfilling the rquirements each religion demands has led many

followers to give up complete obedience to their religion’s standards.

IN THE GOSPELS WHEN DID JESUS SAY HE WAS COMING?

Let me begin this review with a story I have read several years ago. It was about the story

of a friend who just had his vacation from California for an almost three weeks stay in the

Philippines. Were it not for some problems in the pits of the past and a misunderstanding of the

rules of the race, but I was fascinated by the change in design and how the tradition-bound US

auto racing establishment wrote off the cars before even seeing what they could do. As far as he

could remember his Dad’s fancy hobby was American racing. During that time as he storied,

while American racing began to change following the 1965 Lotus victory and the cars that race

at Indianapolis are linear descendants of those first Lotus-Fords,

I don’t think that we can say the same thing about the American automotive industry.

Earlier that same year, government officials defiantly announced that segregation would be a part

of Alabama life. “Even though I am Asian and might don’t have much knowledge about western

life”, he said. ”I guess my observation from the stories narrated to me and the insights of experts

and book I have read”. This point is intended as more subtle than it probably comes across as a

3
not. But is intended to amplify the primacy of God’s mysterious movement in our lives, world,

and times and there is no dynamic that has caught Him by surprise, or threatens to undermine His

plan.

Upon hearing his story, my understanding led me to the rules of segregation. Perhaps, it

began to question the formal and informal rules of society. I noticed there were written before

about the nature of segregation and its effect on all the children of the south, so I will not spend

much time on that point here that much. But, as the Civil Rights drama unfolded around in

Memphis and the shadow of the Vietnam War passed over many lives, as we watch them from

movies and read from books, it continued that conservatives speak with the same rhetoric,

compelling adherence to the status quo while, liberals sought change and equality. While the

town where my few of my relatives went to college were conservative, they said campus

ministers were very much in the forefront of bringing change to the area. It was their campus

ministers who gave them hope for positive change in life and these hopes invited further

questions about what liberals and conservatives were and should be. While, they begin to

question what many liberals are doing in today’s world.

At that point, I still see conservatives longing for the old days, no matter if they were

good or bad. What would happen if we presented Acts 4: 32 – 35 to people without any Biblical

reference to the people and ask them what they thought it meant? Bringing you back to the

dilemma. It is not the Bible who has mistaken but, again it’s the man, we who serve our own

purposes and direction that hold us to stay blinded and deaf of hearing the truth about His

coming.

4
 Let me get back to this thought that I wish to translate, if the whole congregation of

believers was united as one—one heart, one mind! They didn't even claim ownership of their

own possessions. No one said, "That's mine; you can't have it." They shared everything. The

apostles gave powerful witness to the resurrection of Jesus, and grace was on all of them. And so

it turned out that not a person among them was needy. Those who owned fields or houses sold

them and brought the price of the sale to the apostles and made an offering of it. The apostles

then distributed it according to each person's need.

Without a doubt, I think it would strike the reader, especially if they are a conservative,

as socialism have been given its very name and that doesn’t much satisfy the thought. Although,

I know I sound more philosophical but, revelations in this book can be felt more if the reader will

open its senses to get through the message. Considering how Jesus went to narrowly defined the

period and time frame for the fulfilment of His prophecies. That if you weren’t read and truly

understood the book written by the author, you wouldn’t not really grasp the bulk of message it

has on it. Mathew 24:23, took emphasis on the generation today that comes fitting to the

message. This journey of reviewing needs to find scriptural passage to support this claim of His

coming.

IN THE REVELATION WHEN DID JESUS SAY HE WAS COMING?

In my opinion, after reading the book which really pushed me to do more digging for

facts and keenly studied events of the past. I think one of the problems with the modern church,

and Christianity in this country, is that we have forgotten what the early church did and endured.

We confuse the corporate church of today with the real church and the message that it once

5
presented, a message that threatened the very structure of society, not because it was dangerous

but because it was radical and went against the status quo. As for me, with these facts that are

being weigh over other facts,

it seems to favour that there is a Second Coming. Although the Bible has some good

news and bad news when it comes to our eternal life and destiny. Some believers trying to get

around the prob;em and conclude that Jesus is coming soon. Some have thought that this

preaching is wrong and misleading. They believed that this is unacceptable. In keeping with the

recent academic trend, contemporary philosophers of religion have been unwilling to maintain

hard and fast distinctions between the two disciplines. As a result, it is often difficult in reading

recent work to distinguish what the philosophers are doing from what the theologians (and

philosophers) of past centuries regarded as strictly within the theological domain. Indeed,

philosophers and theologians alike are now coming to use the term “analytic theology” to refer to

theological work that aims to explore and unpack theological doctrines in a way that draws on

the resources, methods, and relevant literature of contemporary analytic philosophy. The use of

this term reflects the heretofore largely unacknowledged reality that the sort of work now being

done under the label “philosophical theology” is as much theology as it is philosophical.

We should note of what the Lord has revealed to us. “I am coming soon”, Jesus said

from Rev. 22:20. Everyone long for His return, but why do I want Him to come back? Is it

because I will be in His presence, away from sickness and death? Is it because I am tired of

living in a difficult world? Or is it because when you have loved Him so much of your life when,

he shared your tears and your laughter. How do we feel about the Lord’s return? Let us long for

the day passionately and earnestly for the Lord’s come back, that could be very soon. But, what

6
does waiting for Jesus’s return look like in your life? Have you left something undone that you

could attend to today?

Look, for many people, the image of the church is one of “old” people who still sing the

same hymns from fifty years ago and are stunned at the idea of “modern” music or prayers in a

worship service. The church itself is characterized as a monolithic if not utterly homogenous,

group that punishes innocent reformers such as Galileo. We see this over-commitment to the

formal pronouncements of faith in resource-consuming legal battles to force teaching of

intelligent design as a viable theory of science. As for me, the battles that conservatives fight

regardless, if they be political or religious, are battles of control, of saying that “I know what’s

best for you when it comes to thinking and I am going to tell you what to say and think.”

Conservatives make it sound as if the world will come to an end if liberal thoughts are allowed to

pervade this world or if innovative ideas are allowed to develop. This is clearly not a sustainable

worldview in an age that values the insights of new science and the comforts of modern

technology. That being said, I find it very disturbing that many of those who dismiss Christianity

and other religions as mere superstition also proclaim that those who believe in God are fools.

That may have sound not so good. While I can accept their choice to not believe in God, I must

ask what it is that they do believe in. For you simply cannot have a life in which everything is

empirical and there is no belief.

There may be those who have removed emotion from their lives and try to live and make

decisions according to pure logic as though they might transcend the problem of fitting theory to

imperfect and unfolding experience. But, it is a life devoid of laughter and crying, of joy and

wonder. I may have mentioned several emotions I have while reviewing the book but, my stand

is there is a Second Coming. I believe with conviction that there will be this sacred homecoming

7
of Jesus. That He will bring us to His Kingdom and these things that He promised will be

fulfilled in God’s time. There are several factors that affect the thinking of other groups that

distracts the believers’ direction. Those that warrants the people to be swayed in favour of them

to dismantle the belief of the Christian’s community.

The book may have shed some insight that finds Christianity some sort of troubling, and

has come to be associated with political conservatism. No doubt, it is possible one can be both,

but when there are people in need and your words speak against helping, for any reason, when

you put the blame for a person’s poverty on the person instead of the system, it is hard for me to

see you as a Christian. When Jesus started his mission, he announced that he had come to bring

health to the sick and relief to the oppressed. Jesus was a radical from the very beginning of his

ministry and I don’t see how you can be a conservative and accept that idea. Look, for many

people, the image of the church is one of “old” people who still sing the same hymns from fifty

years ago and are stunned at the idea of “modern” music or prayers in a worship service. The

church itself is characterized as a monolithic if not utterly homogenous, group that punishes

innocent reformers such as Galileo. We see this over-commitment to the formal pronouncements

of faith in resource-consuming legal battles to force teaching of intelligent design as a viable

theory of science. As for me, the battles that conservatives fight regardless, if they be political or

religious, are battles of control, of saying that “I know what’s best for you when it comes to

thinking and I am going to tell you what to say and think.” Conservatives make it sound as if the

world will come to an end if liberal thoughts are allowed to pervade this world or if innovative

ideas are allowed to develop. This is clearly not a sustainable worldview in an age that values the

insights of new science and the comforts of modern technology. That being said, I find it very

disturbing that many of those who dismiss Christianity and other religions as mere superstition

8
also proclaim that those who believe in God are fools. That may have sound not so good. While I

can accept their choice to not believe in God, I must ask what it is that they do believe in.

The use of this term reflects the heretofore largely unacknowledged reality that the sort of

work now being done under the label “philosophical theology” is as much theology as it is

philosophical. Some have thought that this preaching is wrong and misleading. They believed

that this is unacceptable. In keeping with the recent academic trend, contemporary philosophers

of religion have been unwilling to maintain hard and fast distinctions between the two

disciplines. As a result, it is often difficult in reading recent work to distinguish what the

philosophers are doing from what the theologians (and philosophers) of past centuries regarded

as strictly within the theological domain. Indeed, philosophers and theologians alike are now

coming to use the term “analytic theology” to refer to theological work that aims to explore and

unpack theological doctrines in a way that draws on the resources, methods, and relevant

literature of contemporary analytic philosophy.

. As is the case in so many instances of longstanding abuse of power and authority,

Christians have come to accept one translation of Jesus’s message as the “true” translation. To

bring health to a nation where there was no healthcare, to offer homes to the homeless, and to

bring relief are very much liberal ideas in a world where it is everyone for themselves and what I

have is mine and no one else’s. I will be honest and say that when I hear someone tell me that the

Gospel message is to make disciples of all mankind I cringe. I do so because they often say it in

terms of finalityBut one translation of the words that Jesus spoke and I am borrowing from

Clarence Jordan, another Southern Rebel in the liberal sense is that we are not to insist on a

particular, narrow interpretation of scripture but to show the world what it is that Jesus did and

can do.

9
 Let me use this Gospel passage John 20: 19-31 as a reference, which speaks of those who

believe in Christ, not because they had seen the Risen Christ but because of what others had done

and said. John repeats essentially the same message. It is what others see and hear from Jesus’s

followers that will lead them to Christ. This is a real evidence that other groups is trying to

induce confusion and conflict regarding the teaching that there is a Second Coming. Different

factions that surround the Christian community is luring that attempted to split the churches of

believers of Jesus’ second coming.

Unfortunately, when you have a group whose words and actions run counter to the

message of the Gospel, it is very difficult to bring them to Christ. It was through my reading of

the Scriptures and my own life that lead me to that view. Somewhere along the line, I came to

think that it was those good civil works that were going to save me from sin and death. It was

pointed out to by a liberal pastor that one could not get into heaven by proclaiming to be a

Christian yet not believing in Christ. It is by the grace of God and our belief in Christ that we are

saved, not by the good that we do. But in proclaiming that Christ is our saviour, we must work to

bring about what he first proclaimed. Good works are not the admission ticket but the natural and

expected thing of one who professes Christ as their personal saviour.

In my opinion, good alternatives will only come through Christ and a new life. I may be a

voice in the wilderness but I hope this is a call for others to speak out against injustice and

inequality, against the lack of healthcare and educational opportunities in this country, against

war. I encourage all of us to do what Jesus told Thomas that day in the upper room so many

years ago. To show the people that Christ has risen so that they too will believe. Show the people

by working for the same things that Christ worked for and be proud that you are a Christian and

a liberal. It’s a dilemma day! Let’s open a mixed bag of Christian predicaments. As we open the

10
bag we consider how a Christian is to react to some issues of the day. Walking in this world, can

be difficult, but as God has placed us here at this time in history we must reflect on the Biblical

responses.

For now, let me throw you questions to answer that might help us all get through the

message of the book. How to deal with beggars? Should we be able to choose who can or cannot

come into our country? A reflection on how our bodies although breaking down now, will

eventually be replaced by God with perfect bodies. Are “church coffee shops” a real issue?

Should the modern church be regarded in the same way as the Old Testament Temple? Does

Christianity evolve to conform to culture? Let us try to grab the meaning of these by looking

back to the regarded dilemma of time on Christianity’s.

One of the striking characteristics of the present time is its uncertainty as to the nature of

the ultimate religious loyalties. We all know perhaps, some may accept and some may not,

science, higher criticism, the disconcerting effect of evolution upon authoritarianism, even the

rise of a secularized social conscience, and the unfortunate alliance of Protestantism with

discredited pecuniary individualism of business. To count with, the sudden and radical transition

from the provincial estate of a nation of villagers to a tense, highly mutualized, industrial

civilization, dominated by the chaotic and irresponsible life of the city. Lastly, the catalyst of a

world-war. To which some of these things have bewildered our spiritual leaders and made them

loose their bearings.

When the Baptizer began to prepare the way, he called for repentance, when Jesus began

his ministry in the Galilee, he called for repentance. Repentance is not just saying one is sorry for

11
what one has done in the past, repentance is the act of changing one’s life and beginning anew.

The people will see you proclaiming to be a Christian but if your life is still focused on the “rat

race” and your concern is for yourself and not others, if you hold onto the status quo and deny

others the same opportunities that you have, then it will be very difficult for them to see in you

what is seen in Christ. Everyone, be they liberal or conservative today, seems stuck in their own

old mind-set and, and just as the Indy cars of the late 1950’s and early 1960’s were quickly

outclassed and outperformed by the new cars of the 1960’s, our retrograde left/right political

commitments are likely to go the way of dinosaurs.

Unless better alternatives are offered, this society, this civilization will not continue the

progress forward that it has made up until this point in time. Seemingly, others abuse riding the

trend just to sound cool and rock that they have intelligent opinion of seeing facts and clever

enough to make others believed that second coming is a superstition only. This has been a long

battle against those who patiently stand that the concept of second coming is theatrical which

serves the purpose of confusing the believers of Jesus homecoming.

The conscience of the church if this sounds not sarcastic to you, together with the

community, is little more today than a heterogeneous collection of moralities. This prevailing

uncertainty as to the bearing of religion upon life appears in the intense attempts that are being

made to reconcile of Jesus with the Christian’s patriot duties in the present time.

There is in spite of individual utterance of Jesus to the contrary, a very general conviction

that the essential spirit and intent of his teachings are opposed. This general conviction has given

rise to an uncomfortable dilemma. As orthodox Christianity, has always professed to do that

have been built up within the historical Christianity of false and should be repudiated. On the

12
other hand, this reality as hypothetical statement involves vicious and intolerable rearranging

with the facts of psychology and social evolution. Jesus developed from childhood to maturity

within the present social order would be an entirely different personality, with a different

measure of moral values, from the historical Jesus whose moral sentiments were shaped by

simple, peace-loving village life of the Palestine of the first century. Although various attempts

have been made to avoid this dilemma reveal that chaos are prevalent in contemporary religious

thought back, then.

For hundreds of years already come and passed our generation, it has been a similar

preaching of pastors and ministers in their own churches. Believing that there is second coming

and that mere concept of waiting for several decades now, there is born a doubt and asking

questions if there really is a second coming? What are the proof which has been written that

prove that He has not come yet and when He is actually coming? God continues to speak to us

through His word through the Bible. His counsel is always sure and true for all people and every

generation which we could find from each pages of the book we are to review the God’s

promises from which to draw wisdom, courage and strength. Let us face this second coming of

Jesus with a renewed confidence in the Lord for indeed He promised never to leave us nor

forsake us.

Our god is the God of unravelled starts and new beginnings for He is the one true concept

of constant in a world of change and uncertainty. That satisfies, restores, and renews heart and

soul of many. And, in almost many books about His coming, would say “this could be the year!”

There’s this pastor that on the first Sunday of each new year he preached about the return of

Christ, often quoting from 1 Thessalonians 4. His point was always the same as everyone thinks.

“This could be the year that Jesus will return.

13
 Are you ready to meet Him? Many will never forget hearing the sermon. If that’s true,

I’m not sure I will be among those He’s coming for. But, I felt certain that my parents would be

going to heaven and I wanted to go too. In an increasingly chaotic world, what a hopeful thought

that this could be the year Jesus returns. More comforting still is the anticipation that all who

trust Him for salvation will be gathered together, relieved from this world’s dilemma, sufferings,

sorrow, and fear. We thus leave aside such staple topics in philosophy of religion as traditional

arguments for the existence of God, the problem of evil, the epistemology of religious belief, the

nature and function of religious language.

We also leave aside a variety of important but less-discussed topics in philosophical

theology, such as the nature of divine revelation and scripture, original sin, the authority of

tradition, and the like. This may be relevant principle into the moral order, but without it would

have hardly able to include the radical pacifism of Jesus and the profession of arms in the same

general ethical scheme. The church in the blessing of sword of the knight recognized the moral

value of it. The modern conception of the individual insists that the attainment of the moral ideal

is only possible where each shares as far as possible in the larger life of the whole. The principle

of love is so fundamental in the ethic of Jesus, is a comprehensive philosophy of civilization.

Filled with the passion and desire for justice comes to the ethic of Jesus which demands

something more sentimental to the passivism ethic of love. Religion and ethics are not only

differentiated, but the latter is preferred as giving the most effective basis for action. There is,

indeed inherent in the nature and constitution of which, represent for the most part staunch

churchmen who are more interested in demonstrating the patriotism and loyalty of the church at

this crucial moment than in critical interpretation of the mind of Jesus. The gospel has nothing to

do primarily with the temporal but concerned with the eternal life. In this sense, it does not deal

14
with external arrangements and institutions but with the heart and its relations to God, its divine

grace and the forgiveness of sins. Apparently, the somewhat dubious role God is forced to play

in this philosophy. In so far as men succeeded in reorganizing their religious loyalties it was

from the subjective point of view. Moral obligations became for the most part matters of inner

attitudes. Spending ten hours a week in discussion with other students presents some universal

truths about human nature.

THE LAST DAYS

Christianity’s dilemma is grounded primarily in the history, because Christianity is a

historical religion, hence the need for a brief historical analysis of the key lessons of church

history. The story of Christianity shows that it is possible to read the Bible as a textbook on the

pathology of religion giving rise to hypocrisy, idolatry, group egotism and collective blindness.

On the other hand the Bible can be read as a therapeutic text overcoming the maladies of society

by being a source of political renewal. The Christian church has always played an ambiguous

socio-political role throughout its history. In some cases, the church has blessed and legitimated

the state like the post-Constantine era, while at times, the church observably some individual

characters, has rejected the status quo by affirming the reign of God and by calling for social

justice against political evils of the state. I feel it is essential to discuss this in the intention to

give more light of the facts laid down from the previous discussion.

In a time when ideological pragmatism 'distorts seeing and deafens hearing. In conclusion

believers do not have to proof that God exist through arguments for the most they will get to be

is great orators experts in the art of rhetorical presentation of ideas. Strong arguments in favor of

15
the existence of a Superior Intelligence exist but they of necessity cannot demonstrate or proof

God's existence. The second would transform God into precisely that which the atheist criticize,

an autocratic, tyrannical ruler. For were God to create the ultimate utopia for mankind that would

mean that he would have to make people be good towards one another. He would have to control

them as a Puppet Master.

Last days, end of the world, and Judgement day. For others they said, time is nearing to

end and second coming is very soon so, people must repent. One such universal truth is that

human beings do not like to change even for the better, and so require some strong motivation

before they budge. By strong motivation, of course, I mean the pain of not changing outweighs

the pain of changing, like a frog whose pot of water has got just two degrees too hot. This

confirms an observation that human life tends to alternate between fruitless conversation and

thoughtless action. We do, but do not reflect on what we have done, and do not plan what we

will do tomorrow. We think about things, but generally avoid thinking about matters in which we

might have to reform our daily behavior or long-term goals.

Thus we remain in our comfortable but not that comfortable little bubble-boy zone of

intellectual and pragmatic stagnation. One great way out of this dilemma is to find yourself in an

even more uncomfortable dilemma. This time a formal logical dilemma, of the kind so

heuristically effective in Plato’s writings. Supposing divine revelation of some kind, let us

conservatively call the Christian Scriptures a divine revelation. The words on the page are of

God, from God, and for God’s purposes with men.

The Bible is divine in its teachings. It seems that human beings have a natural

understanding of how mind and body, how spirit and flesh interact. Looking at other

16
perspectives, Christian try too hard to convince naturalists to become dualists. Could be,

everyone is a dualist empirically, if not in their conscious worldview, being acquainted as they

are by everyday life with the connection of the immaterial conscious self with the material

unconscious world of body. We know that if you hurl an insult in sound at someone’s eardrum, it

will hit their soul.

So if God has successfully communicated something deeply spiritual to us by manifesting

it in the physical form of a piece of paper, then whether or not the spiritual fact and the physical

fact are two different things, we must treat them with as one. For a very long time in history,

Europe and Asia knew little of each other, even though sharing the same land mass. In the

context of such a society, people tend to question the justice of God and the relevance of the

church as a primal move toward the search for justice.

A dilemma has two seemingly innocent premises and one conclusion. The first is usually

a pair of statements. The second is an either/or. The third is a conclusion that follows

deductively. Firstly, if the Bible is divine, then the physical book ought to be treated with great

respect, more respect even than that given human beings, who are merely mortal; If it is not

divine, then it’s teachings ought not to have a specially high place in our lives. Secondly, either

the Bible is divine or it is not divine remains a comprehensive discussion. Therefore, either it

ought to be treated with more respect than human beings, or else its teachings ought not to have a

special place in our lives. If you do not like the conclusion, then what might be your opinion

about this? The first counter-argument that might surfaced was the book was reverencing itself.

THE END OF THE WORLD

17
 At the heart of Christianity is the conviction that God has a purpose for creation, and that

her will impinges on the history of the world. In keeping with this conviction, the Church, as a

community of believers, consistently tries to interpret God's will in order to align their lives and

the lives of those around them to God's will. Theologically, the church is an assembly of the

faithful who are called out to be instruments of grace in a broken world. The understanding of

the church as an instrument of grace to a broken world is based on the Biblical text that the

believers/disciples are the salt and light of the world - a metaphor of justice and righteousness.

Look at Matthew 5:13-16. The church as an instrument of grace defines the mission and its

nature of the church in terms of its authority to 'preach. The church as an institution is a formal

organization that sets out to accomplish a specific purpose. It has its own proper sphere. Perhaps,

from an authentic theological perspective, the mission of the church cannot be understood and

fulfilled outside the world in which it exists, because its concern is not only the individual's

relationship with God but also the relationship between the same individual and the world in

which he/she lives.

Augustine argued that it was the obligation of the Christian to bring the state into order

because Christians are 'an assembly of reasonable beings bound together by a common

agreement as to the objects of their love. Augustine operated on the level of a thin trajectory

because he believed that even though the church was superior to the state, the state was also

obliged to help the cause of the church whenever it mattered most. In addition, an authentic

church with relevant modes of ministry remains the only option for promoting a faithful and

practical discourse within the present reality in an attempt to move toward a meaningful future.

Theologically, the church is modelled around action and praxis propelled by the desire to image

Christ's mission of redeeming the world from all forms of societal evil, as evidenced by the

18
declaration: 'I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly (John 10:10b). It then follows

that the church's prophetic role in the context of social disintegration and national polarization

demands a socio-political and economic engagement with the relevant arms of governance and

political players toward a socio-political contract which will give birth to peace and democratic

space for all. Any other option would be a disgrace to the church of Jesus Christ who came to

declare the good news to all.

Others said, the first Christians were uncompromisingly confrontational with regard to

the secular order. They believed that the state was ungodly while on the other hand the state also

viewed Christians as being in a deadly collision with the Roman Empire. The post-Constantine

era allowed the church to become an ally of the state. Emperors became the compatriots of the

bishops. In the same spirit the sovereign autocrat was inevitably and immediately involved in the

development of the church, and conversely the church became more and more implicated in high

political decisions. The emperors saw Christianity as a means of promoting social stability for

the common good of the empire. During the medieval era, St Augustine's imperial theology

promoted a critical solidarity between church and state, hence he could argue that at times the

church has to say no and at times yes to state ideologies.

The modern church is characterised by powerful justice-conscious movements within the

established church denominations. These movements have promoted popular pastoral

declarations and affirmations which have become the rallying point of the social renewal spirit in

church circles. This is a good lesson regarding the meaning and cost of discipleship, emphasising

that there is no neutral ground for the church when it comes to matters of faith and justice. In

Latin America, the Medellin Conference (1968) addressed issues of faith and justice in an honest

way. We have a God given Biblical and theological mandate to guide the nation and all leaders

19
in making God's voice to be heard at particular times when He chooses to speak to His people on

issues of justice, peace, reconciliation, poverty and the liberation of the oppressed, please see

Luke 4:18-19. In the same way we applaud and encourage positive actions and developments.

A holistic approach towards an authentic theological discourse takes note that God's

salvific plan is non-selective and is premised on the call for peace, justice and restoration without

fear or favour. A living theology of the church has to appreciate that there is need for both

internal and external critique of ministry and service alike, as well as rulers and systems of

governance. Failure to take note of this aspect can result in a selective approach to the church's

prophetic responsibility. Given this instance, what is of interest of the population which claims to

be Christian? When it comes to the political ideologies, the political field is characterized by

violence. But considering the numerous accounts of God's revelation in history, it is clear that

God's majesty is inextricably bound to social justice and holiness. What is clear is that true

religion has to concern itself with human and social transformation as it does with the spiritual

dimension of life. It is this reality which must inform Christian leadership that God's justice

makes men and women tremble because God judges the sinful world and God's holiness is

attractive.

THE JUDGEMENT DAY

Christianity should not be simply spiritualized because it is basically a way of life in its

holistic sense. It is an essential ingredient for existence and the promotion of good. This

perspective of Christianity projects a clear prophetic responsibility. Many citizens tend to

interpret the lukewarm attitude of the church as compliance with the state's institutions of

20
repression and its ideology. Yet it is the divine mandate of the church to be concerned about the

well-being of God's people, just as God was concerned about the welfare of the Hebrews who

were slaves in Egypt. (Exodus 3:7-8). Historically, the willingness to change (on the part of

political players) comes about when ecclesiastical institutions rise to challenge the stakeholders

who are beneficiaries of the unjust social structures and ideologies. The church must be

conscious of the fact that throughout the Biblical text the accounts of God's activities relate very

closely to the marginalized communities and the ordinary citizens whose existence is threatened

by those who rule over them.

Therefore, confessing faith in the transcendent God of the Bible within our socio-political

context is also a call to challenge the contemporary political and social ills of our day. A prophet

is a charismatic and fearless messenger of God. A prophet speaks and declares divine oracles of

faith without any attempt to edit the message. A prophet calls people to order and right action. A

prophet warns, corrects, rebukes and encourages people toward keeping a clean sheet. Prophets

seek to make a difference, they fight for both moral and social justice and tell forth the

consequences of disobedience or indifference. They are concerned about deontology to which,

obedience to the will of God. A prophetic ministry does not compromise the universal truth that

the church believes in. It is from this paradigm that the church should give birth to a vision that

seeks to eradicate the social injustices that create negative class struggles. Sadly, the church is

not spared from the demon of wealth accumulation while its congregants go hungry.

Therefore, the church should set a clear agenda toward redeeming the situation caused by

socio-economic injustices, because it is a disgrace to all good and loving citizens just as God is

against all forms of oppression which are implicit or explicit in our communities. The tendency

for church leaders to be comfortable in their enjoyment of the pleasures and privileges of this

21
world, while the people they preach to be trampled down by the evil structures of society

promoted by the rich and powerful, is ungodly and must be condemned as such.

From a social and historical perspective, it is common for people to turn to religion and

religious institutions for solutions to those problems that they lack power to deal with. From the

aforesaid perspective, the Christian church (as the largest single religious institution in the land)

has a moral responsibility to guide and counsel people toward fighting for justice and peace in

the land; the total good for God's creation. Theologically, to emphasise social stability at the cost

of renewal or to insist on the indiscriminate dismissal of the social order in affirmation of God's

eschatological kingdom, is to fail to be Christo-centric.

From a theological viewpoint, it is proper to argue that without the church's vision and

guidance. The established fundamental thrust is that the church must be the face of Christ in a

hurting world so that it can bring about peace, justice and freedom to all. It is therefore

paramount that genuine church leaders should be able to discern God's plan for an effective

ministry in any setting and act as prophets and priests toward truth telling and healing of the

social order. Both academics and church leaders have a moral obligation to show the face of

Christ in their society they live in without fear or favour, because duty calls them to act. Jesus

has been challenging the ultimate authority of earthly kings, queens, presidents, and prime

ministers ever since. We are ambassadors for Christ. (2 Corinthians 5:20).

While this world may be our temporal home, it does not mean we are vagrants. Being

guests or ambassadors implies a level of responsibility and respect for our hosts. If we visit

family or friends and stay in a guest room, we dare not destroy the furniture, leave a mess, or

otherwise act like barnyard animals. As ambassadors, we will have better results in the land of

22
our service (ministry) if we understand the residents, culture, economics, beliefs, and concerns.

Good ambassadors do not become the people in the land of their service; but, they know and

understand them. We humans, even those of us who are redeemed, struggle not to place too

much faith in what we see. Despite the scriptural admonition “what is unseen is eternal” (2

Corinthians 4:18) the things that are seen are very appealing.

That which can be touched, seen, smelled, heard, and tasted is apparent and appealing.

Give a man of basket of fresh peaches right now and his mind probably will not wander to the

tree of life in the New Jerusalem that bears fruit each month of the year. Similarly, we sometimes

struggle to place the priority of earthly kingdoms within the broader context of God’s kingdom.

God’s kingdom challenges earthly political paradigms, but is not itself earthly. It challenges the

system of the cosmos without absorbing the cosmos into itself. Christians in every generation

and in every country of the globe are to make disciples of all the peoples by means of the good

news of Christ. We are salty and light-emitting when we bring the ethics, values, and

righteousness of the kingdom of God to bear on the ethics, values, and institutions of the

kingdoms of man.

In conclusion believers do not have to proof that God exist through arguments for the

most they will get to be is great orators experts in the art of rhetorical presentation of ideas.

Strong arguments in favor of the existence of a Superior Intelligence exist but they of necessity

cannot demonstrate or proof God's existence. The second would transform God into precisely

that which the atheist criticize, an autocratic, tyrannical ruler. For were God to create the ultimate

utopia for mankind that would mean that he would have to make people be good towards one

another. He would have to control them as a Puppet Master. There may have been false teachings

that have not screened and spread already in literature and preached by known spiritual leaders to

23
mislead the people and believers, us Christians, to think of a problem that will eventually put us

to a great dilemma. Looking beyond this point of understanding, we must review although some

facts about His return and go back to the ancient histories written for our understanding and

refenece. Like the post-Constantine era allowed the church to become an ally of the state.

Emperors became the compatriots of the bishops. In the same spirit the sovereign autocrat

was inevitably and immediately involved in the development of the church, and conversely the

church became more and more implicated in high political decisions. The emperors saw

Christianity as a means of promoting social stability for the common good of the empire. During

the medieval era, St Augustine's imperial theology promoted a critical solidarity between church

and state, hence he could argue that at times the church has to say no and at times yes to state

ideologies. Augustine argued that it was the obligation of the Christian to bring the state into

order because Christians are 'an assembly of reasonable beings bound together by a common

agreement as to the objects of their love. These kind of writings done by others will help our

study of finding the truth of life and bring the dignity of the Bible not destroy nor distract the

minds of the Christian community.

Human responsibility would be gone and we would be diminished to be less than we can

be. God may be hoping that we use our freedom and our conscience to act in the best interest of

others and not back-stab others to get what we want. He may be respecting the freedom he

endowed us with in order for us to be more than mere animals driven just by instincts. For me if

no one is willing to undergo such a test then they should understand that their importunate

demand for a proof of God only demonstrates their lack of perception and failure to grasp what

the idea of God entails. Christianity is more often than not installed by the sword, anyone who

does criticize it up until now has found their head on a spike.

24
WHEN DID THE APOSTLES SAY JESUS WAS COMING?

It was never even revealed to who gets responsible about the dilemma or it is not actually

given in the different writings when really could be the Second Coming. If there could be

arguments, there may be in theIn the entire discourse of what churches teaches about the Second

Coming of Jesus and what the Bible actually tells us is the kind of dilemma which the author

wants to discuss in his writing.

The Apostle Peter

The foregoing discussion might be out of tone but, likely seeing my point would

add up to the kind of understanding we can share towards this end of the review. Into the High

Middle Ages, Augustine's views were widely defended. According to the Thomasic model,

philosophy and theology are distinct enterprises, differing primarily in their intellectual starting

points. Philosophy takes as its data the deliverances of our natural mental faculties, what we see,

hear, taste, touch, and smell. It was during this time however that St. Thomas Aquinas offered

yet another model for the relationship between philosophy and theology. These data can be

accepted on the basis of the reliability of our natural faculties with respect to the natural world.

Theology, on the other hand takes as its starting point the divine revelations contained in the

Bible. These data can be accepted on the basis of divine authority, in a way analogous to the way

in which we accept, for example, the claims made by a physics professor about the basic facts of

physics. Truly it is, and the return of Jesus is very near in this generation of time. “And when the

chief Shepard shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away”.

25
 This verse though is not as specific as we can expect but, it has something to tell us to

prepare about Jesus Second Coming. Undeniably, this promise of Jesus to those who believes in

His teachings and words became the structure of faith and tower of hope and love that fuels the

dedication and devotion of people to serve the purpose of Christian life. Evidently, apostle Peter

truly spread the word right and Jesus second coming is not a mere gimmick or just a drama so

others would have sympathy on something not real. Jesus apostle like Peter have revealed on

many different occasions for us to prepare ourselves to the promised second coming of Jesus. In

many passages in the Bible itself have proved that Jesus will come on earth for the second time

to redeem the world and live together in His Kingdom in Heaven.

It was never told even the precise period of His, Jesus coming on earth but, a lot of

predictions from the Bible already happened. Was it not enough for us to see the truth? These

data can be recognized on the basis of divine authority, in a way similar to the way in which we

accept, for example, the privileges made by a physics professor about the basic facts of physics.

Truly it is, and the return of Jesus is very near in this generation of time. This can be called a

modern day prophecies that are not healthy to the spiritual health of Christians. This have

ventured these to commercialize their thoughts and sell books to serve their own good.

Something is really wrong, that I could sense.

At this point, we can tell that not most of the prophecies have been fulfilled. Thus, it is

absolute that the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ is nearing to refresh all our sins and let us

receive the Heavens above as He promised He will be coming for us. Look again at Acts 3 of

verse 21 with which Peter foretold “until time of restitution of all things”. To which God Himself

have spoken through His apostles in spreading His teachings and Word of life about His holy

return on earth to redeem the people of God.

26
The Apostle Paul

The foregoing discussion might be out of tone but, likely seeing my point would add up

to the kind of understanding we can share towards this end of the review. Into the High Middle

Ages, Augustine's views were widely defended. It was during this time however that St. Thomas

Aquinas offered yet another model for the relationship between philosophy and theology.

According to the Thomasic model, philosophy and theology are distinct enterprises, differing

primarily in their intellectual starting points. Philosophy takes as its data the deliverances of our

natural mental faculties, what we see, hear, taste, touch, and smell. These data can be accepted

on the basis of the reliability of our natural faculties with respect to the natural world. Theology,

on the other hand takes as its starting point the divine revelations contained in the Bible.

These data can be accepted on the basis of divine authority, in a way analogous to the

way in which we accept, for example, the claims made by a physics professor about the basic

facts of physics. Truly it is, and the return of Jesus is very near in this generation of time. Many

of the doctrines central to Christianity have important philosophical implications or

presuppositions. In this review, we begin with a brief general discussion of the relationship

between philosophy and Christian dogma, and then we turn our attention to three of the most

philosophically challenging Christian doctrines. Looking beyond this question of His coming

again. Let ourselves understand the trinity, the incarnation, and the atonement. We take these

three as our focus because, unlike doctrines about providence or the attributes of God, these are

distinctive to Christian theology and, unlike for example the doctrine of original sin or the Real

27
Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, these have been the subject of a great deal of discussion over

the past couple of decades.

“So the coming of the Lord was getting near and near. It is indicatively true to the

testament of Apostle Paul about the glory about to be revealed which was similarly sounding

from 1 Peter 5:1 which was “also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed and the glory as

about to come! There have been no traces of deception to the teachings of Jesus apostles. The

word of God has been preserved thousand years, now. And the fact that will never be wipe out is

Jesus though, didn’t use time as measurement to let the people get aware about His return on

earth remains us the middle of intrigue really when the Lord is coming again for us. Although, if

you are going to read carefully the II Timothy 4:6 that the coming of the Lord is not hard to see

and believe in.

The reality of God is clearly primary to the “script” of that reality. This point is intended

as more subtle than it probably comes across as a not. It even took me a long journey before I

landed understanding the truth and allow not be shaken by others of the truth in my hands. It

hasn’t been until very recently that we all are able to pick up a “book” and own a copy of “Holy

Scripture.” Our salvation is secured in these dynamics of God and His gift - this all goes to the

primacy of “journey” in “hope of salvation,” trust in His “cosmic” resolution of “end-game”

strategy and sovereignty, and our desire to participate in some small way within this comic plan

battle. And, I’m reminded that while the Bible is clearly critical to capturing, sharing, and

protecting that story and history, it is indeed secondary to the living reality of the Spirit of God -

and this is demonstrated through the observation that the “reality” of Christ and the movement of

God through history without an accompanying story in script of Holy Scripture, is entirely

different than a reality of a world with a book of script of Holy Scripture without an

28
accompanying reality of a Messiah and accompanying God moving through history. But is

intended to amplify the primacy of God’s mysterious movement in our lives, world, and times

and there is no dynamic that has caught Him by surprise, or threatens to undermine His plan.

On this way of seeing the two disciplines, if at least one of the premises of an argument is

derived from revelation, the argument falls in the domain of theology; otherwise it falls into

philosophy's domain. Since this way of thinking about philosophy and theology sharply

demarcates the disciplines, it is possible in principle that the conclusions reached by one might

be contradicted by the other. According to advocates of this model, however, any such conflict

must be merely apparent. Since God both created the world which is accessible to philosophy

and revealed the texts accessible to theologians, the claims yielded by one cannot conflict with

the claims yielded by another unless the philosopher or theologian has made some prior error.

But, generally the point of view of many the coming of the Lord is a promised He never

abandoned to fulfil His words and promises to the people.

On the other hand, in the history of Christian theology, philosophy has sometimes been

seen as a natural complement to theological reflection, whereas at other times practitioners of the

two disciplines have regarded each other as mortal enemies. Some early Christian thinkers such

as Tertullian were of the view that any intrusion of secular philosophical reason into theological

reflection was out of order. Thus, even if certain theological claims seemed to fly in the face of

the standards of reasoning defended by philosophers, the religious believer should not flinch.

Other early Christian thinkers, such as St. Augustine of Hippo, argued that philosophical

reflection complemented theology, but only when these philosophical reflections were firmly

grounded in a prior intellectual commitment to the underlying truth of the Christian faith. Thus,

29
the legitimacy of philosophy was derived from the legitimacy of the underlying faith

commitments.

Since the deliverances of the two disciplines must then coincide, philosophy can be put to

the service of theology (and perhaps vice-versa). How might philosophy play this

complementary role? First, philosophical reasoning might persuade some who do not accept the

authority of purported divine revelation of the claims contained in religious texts. Thus, an

atheist who is unwilling to accept the authority of religious texts might come to believe that God

exists on the basis of purely philosophical arguments. Second, distinctively philosophical

techniques might be brought to bear in helping the theologian clear up imprecise or ambiguous

theological claims. Thus, for example, theology might provide us with information sufficient to

conclude that Jesus Christ was a single person with two natures, one human and one divine, but

leave us in the dark about exactly how this relationship between divine and human natures is to

be understood. The philosopher can provide some assistance here, since, among other things, he

or she can help the theologian discern which models are logically inconsistent and thus not

viable candidates for understanding the relationship between the divine and human natures in

Christ.

A third reason is that a great many academic theologians also became skeptical of our

ability to think and speak meaningfully about God; but, rather than simply abandon traditional

doctrines of Christianity, many of them turned away from more “metaphysical” and quasi-

scientific ways of doing theology, embracing instead a variety of alternative construal and

developments of these doctrines—including, but not limited to, metaphorical, existentialist, and

postmodern construal. This, we might add, seems to be one reason why the methodological rift

30
between so-called “analytic” and “non-analytic” philosophers has to some extent been replicated

as a rift between analytic philosophers of religion and their counterparts in theology.

For most of the twentieth century, the vast majority of English language philosophy—

including philosophy of religion—went on without much interaction with theology at all. While

there are a number of complex reasons for this divorce, three are especially important.

The first reason is that atheism was the predominant opinion among English language

philosophers throughout much of that century. A second, quite related reason is that philosophers

in the twentieth century regarded theological language as either meaningless, or, at best, subject

to scrutiny only insofar as that language had a bearing on religious practice. The former belief

(i.e., that theological language was meaningless) was inspired by a tenet of logical positivism,

according to which any statement that lacks empirical content is meaningless. Since much

theological language, for example, language describing the doctrine of the Trinity, lacks

empirical content, such language must be meaningless. The latter belief, inspired by

Wittgenstein, holds that language itself only has meaning in specific practical contexts, and thus

that religious language was not aiming to express truths about the world which could be

subjected to objective philosophical scrutiny.

In the last forty years, however, philosophers of religion have returned to the business of

theorizing about many of the traditional doctrines of Christianity and have begun to apply the

tools of contemporary philosophy in ways that are somewhat more eclectic than what was

envisioned under the Augustinian or Thomistic models. In keeping with the recent academic

trend, contemporary philosophers of religion have been unwilling to maintain hard and fast

distinctions between the two disciplines. As a result, it is often difficult in reading recent work to

31
distinguish what the philosophers are doing from what the theologians (and philosophers) of past

centuries regarded as strictly within the theological domain. Indeed, philosophers and

theologians alike are now coming to use the term “analytic theology” to refer to theological work

that aims to explore and unpack theological doctrines in a way that draws on the resources,

methods, and relevant literature of contemporary analytic philosophy. The use of this term

reflects the heretofore largely unacknowledged reality that the sort of work now being done

under the label “philosophical theology” is as much theology as it is philosophical.

In what follows, we provide a brief survey of work on the three topics in contemporary

philosophical theology that aside from general issues concerning the nature, attributes, and

providence of God have received the most attention from philosophers of religion over the past

quarter century. We thus leave aside such staple topics in philosophy of religion as traditional

arguments for the existence of God, the problem of evil, the epistemology of religious belief, the

nature and function of religious language. We also leave aside a variety of important but less-

discussed topics in philosophical theology, such as the nature of divine revelation and scripture,

original sin, the authority of tradition, and the like. For discussions of work falling under some of

these topics, see the Related Entries section below, as well as the works under the “General”

heading in the bibliography.

The Apostle John

Throughout the gospels, the first two persons of the trinity are referred to as

‘Father’ and ‘Son’. This suggests the analogy of a family, or, more generally, a society. Thus, the

persons of the trinity might be thought of as one in just the way that the members of a family are

32
one: they are three individual human beings, but taken together they are a single family. Since

there is no contradiction in thinking of a family as three and one in this way, this analogy appears

to solve the problem. Those who attempt to understand the trinity primarily in terms of this

analogy are typically called social Trinitarians. A passage which happen I read have been

adopted to help us out understand this book review. Until recently, it was fairly common to

distinguish “Latin” or “Western” models of the Trinity from “Greek” or “Eastern” models.

Against this practice, see especially Ayres 2004 and Barnes (1995b).Still, many regard the sort

of unity just described as not strong enough to secure a respectable monotheism. Thus, some

social Trinitarians have attempted to give other accounts of what unifies the divine persons.

Perhaps the most popular such account is the part whole model. C.S. Lewis's version of this

analogy (Lewis 1958, Bk IV, Ch 2) has it that God is “three Persons while remaining one Being,

just as a cube is six squares while remaining one cube”. More recently, J. P. Moreland and

William Lane Craig (2003) have argued that the relation between the persons of the Trinity can

be thought of as analogous to the relation we might suppose to obtain between the three dog-like

beings that compose Cerberus, the mythical guardian of the underworld. One might say that each

of the three heads or each of the three souls associated with the heads is a fully canine individual,

and yet there is only one being, Cerberus, with the full canine nature. Three “persons” of a sort,

and yet just one dog.

The Holy Spirit was upon Simeon so, it was no coincidence that he was in the temple

when Mary and Joseph presented their first born son to God. Simeon was not longing for the

glory days of Israel history, but looking ahead for the promised Messiah who would come to

redeem all nations. Like Simeon we could have an expectant, a forward look in life because we

know that one day will see the Lord. When Jesus returns He will come down from Heaven with a

33
group of powerful angels. He will give relief to you who are troubled no matter what we endure

on earth, we are safe for eternity (2 Thessalonians 1:3-12). I am coming soon, Jesus said from

Rev. 22:20. Everyone long for His return, but why do I want Him to come back? Is it because I

will be in His presence, away from sickness and death? Is it because I am tired of living in a

difficult world? Or is it because when you have loved Him so much of your life when, he shared

your tears and your laughter. How do we feel about the Lord’s return? Let us long for the day

passionately and earnestly for the Lord’s come back, that could be very soon. But, what does

waiting for Jesus’s return look like in your life? Have you left something undone that you could

attend to today?

Let us always remember to ask God to keep us always mindful of His inevitable return.

Thank Him for the assurance that this world is not all we have but that a blessed eternity awaits

all who trust in Jesus. I just recalled a story told by a pastor in our church stirring the sermon

about “forward look. The sermon was a brief but meaningful one. The pastor retold about a great

Dutch painter Rembrandt died unexpectedly at the age of 63, an unfinished painting was found

on his easel. It focuses on Simeon’s emotion in holding the baby Jesus when he was brought to

the temple in Jerusalem, 40 days after His birth. Yet the background and normal detail remain

unfinished. Some experts believe that Rembrandt knew the end of his life was near and like

Simeon was ready to be dismissed (Luke 2:21-35).

I may have mentioned several emotions I have while reviewing the book but, my stand is

there is a Second Coming. Instead He is the one who is vital to understand, and there won't be

any wisdom to find, no matter if any of you become old and grey and have studied all the books

that these theologians have, if the wisdom is not gained by faith it is not about Christianity at all.

It is worthwhile reflecting on the fact that the vast majority of human history has been set out

34
within a context as a movement of God through human history and shared personally and

verbally, messaging in art, simple stained glass murals, songs, etc.

It hasn’t been until very recently that we all are able to pick up a “book” and own a copy

of “Holy Scripture.” And, I’m reminded that while the Bible is clearly critical to capturing,

sharing, and protecting that story and history, it is indeed secondary to the living reality of the

Spirit of God - and this is demonstrated through the observation that the “reality” of Christ and

the movement of God through history without an accompanying story in script (Holy Scripture),

is entirely different than a reality of a world with a book of script (Holy Scripture) without an

accompanying reality of a Messiah and accompanying God moving through history.

Therefore, keep watching because you do not know the day or the hour (Mathew 25:13).

Jesus told this parable to emphasize that we need to be prepared for when He comes again we

will give an account over the state of our hearts. Are we waiting and ready? In reading the Bible

on Mathew 25:1-13, every single detail will be revealed and that should be the focus of our

understanding.

This is in the context that there is also a differentiation of forces existing just beyond a

veil that has been self-constructed for the purposes of deceit and strategic counter-movement to

the forces of Light. To which we have to not only be vigilant and bring to light, but to be as

“wise as serpents.” This “counter movement of darkness” and deceit is significantly different

than scriptural content that works to deal in meaningful truth and pursuit of life and love - even if

it is rooted in what might be considered a theological dogma within a particular Christian

theology. There is no "dilemma". Faith is choosing to believe something that empirical evidence

35
does not indicate to us. Believe whatever you choose to believe but don't expect others to make

the same choices. Science and religion are not in conflict with each other.

Believe exactly the same things. Jesus himself said that scriptures, the bible, with or

without Apocrypha included is not what gives eternal life, and so evidently not such an important

thing when it comes to the big questions of life and death. I don't pretend to think there is any

chance of piercing your indisputable command of theology and the history of the church and the

process of myth making. For our information, there have been roughly around and over 40,000

acknowledged "sects" or denominations of the reformation, the Catholic Church, and the

different branches of Orthodoxy might be enough to render your last sentences as pretty close to

meaningless. That being said, I find it very disturbing that many of those who dismiss

Christianity and other religions as mere superstition also proclaim that those who believe in God

are fools. That may have sound not so good. While I can accept their choice to not believe in

God,

I must ask what it is that they do believe in. For you simply cannot have a life in which

everything is empirical and there is no belief. There may be those who have removed emotion

from their lives and try to live and make decisions according to pure logic as though they might

transcend the problem of fitting theory to imperfect and unfolding experience. But, it is a life

devoid of laughter and crying, of joy and wonder.

The reality of God is clearly primary to the “script” of that reality. This point is intended

as more subtle than it probably comes across as a not. But is intended to amplify the primacy of

God’s mysterious movement in our lives, world, and times and there is no dynamic that has

caught Him by surprise, or threatens to undermine His plan. And, our salvation is secured in

36
these dynamics of God and His gift - this all goes to the primacy of “journey” in “hope of

salvation,” trust in His “cosmic” resolution of “end-game” strategy and sovereignty, and our

desire to participate in some small way within this comic plan battle.

They are by definition two separate things that cannot prove or disprove the validity of

the other. Unlike every other religion in the world, Christianity does not require that we earn

God’s favour in exchange of His forgiveness but provides an answer to our greatest dilemma.

For how can a man be in the right before God? In Job 9:2, every other religion answers that

question with “work on it” but, Christians answers “through His graces only”. So, my final

opinion and my spiritual insight there is a Second Coming that we all need to prepare with. Jesus

won’t give us promises that will be made to be just broken.

Let us be ready for His coming again and may the Lord bless us to this journey of waiting

and preparing ourselves! There should be no dilemma. No one should stop asking everyone to

prepare themselves for the second coming. One should not stop preaching of the second coming.

No one should regret of waiting too long. Because Jesus never fails His children nor forsaken

them for nothing. We should ask everyone diligently of preparing our soul and our deeds should

always follow the path that the Lord has given us. A believer who have seen the problem may be

blinded by the details and had struggled in so many angles of a believer.

Their faith may have founded on the rocks and sands that hold its roots loosely grounded.

Basing on facts, events and disasters happened or passed the country already happened and

revealed. It was actually written without time period provided in the Bible. So, as to the coming

of Jesus in our generation. With an ever increasing number of students studying the Bible,

reading and researching alone would not suffice understanding mere facts stated in the Bible.

37
One should have the ability to read between the lines. The Bible should not be read shallowly nor

interpreted just depending in their own minds. The Bible should be read with plain sight or just

the understanding of a worldly apprehension of man. The prediction from the Bible is precise

but, the lacking part was the time frame provided when these things will occur or happen.

The Bible needs a soul prepared to understand the real meaning and message of the

Messiah, our Lord has given clear instructions of His Coming and delivered these instructions to

His disciples which have spread the words of God. Is Jesus coming again or is He not should not

be the question at this point. But how much are we prepared to receive this understanding that

our souls should follow the Holy instructions to get focus on the necessary things for His return.

The purpose of this reverence of Jesus is to save us from hell and we should follow His direction

and work hard to follow his intention of bringing us to His Kingdom, our Almighty Lord Jesus,

for he is coming soon! We have to desire meeting Him to heaven where He have prepared rooms

for each one of us. Although no time forecasted of

His coming we should not get blinded nor hindered of believing for His return. So, one

has to spend our lifetime preaching and teaching to the Return of the King Jesus Christ. We will

rejoin His Kingdom and be glad and feel only the joy of coming with Jesus on His side in

Heaven and paradise that He have prepared for us. Certainly, the author have heavy feeling

answering that there is no second coming. The Bible will never mislead us to the truth, instead it

is opening our eyes to see the real message without worldly interpreting them alone. Up to this

time, many may question but, this message of offering eternal life continues to be preach by

those who believe of His faithful coming and that certainly soon!

38
 This coming of Jesus which I don’t question nor doubt. Jesus is a perfect God that would

not put His children to hang and would never leave a message to mislead His people on earth.

His love is sufficient and His graces would always provide and guide His children on this earth.

He would not allow anyone to use His coming for the churches to just commercialize His coming

again on earth. Our grandparents and ancestors have believed this promise of His return and we

should hang on that promise of His.

This generation should understand and should not receive wrong messages to shy away to

the true meaning of His coming again. This must not just touch our knowledge nor create

controversy and lead us to doubt if Jesus is not yet coming and when He would really come. It is

evidently written in the Bible. His disciples have preached His message to the people and have

revealed life to many who have received Jesus’ message. Everyone should began their journey

inside the rim of their faith not the mere understanding of earthly soul. This would have

probability of misleading us and convex the truth of life and His return on earth. No one should

be wronged by the message of His coming again on earth. In many revelations that Jesus is

coming and all the fever that has been intended only to serve their own good and purposes, are

distractions laid to put away our focus on the very meaning of His return.

We should not allow this be hampered by many detractors around us. We must find were

we are wrong and bring back the integrity of teaching the Bible and Jesus words for our souls to

be saved. While I can accept their choice to not believe in God, I must ask what it is that they do

believe in. For you simply cannot have a life in which everything is empirical and there is no

belief. There may be those who have removed emotion from their lives and try to live and make

decisions according to pure logic as though they might transcend the problem of fitting theory to

imperfect and unfolding experience. But, it is a life devoid of laughter and crying, of joy and

39
wonder. I may have mentioned several emotions I have while reviewing the book but, my stand

is there is a Second Coming.

There are reasons for this why it is happening and we should be guarding our times

because it is our duty to prevent wolves trespass our backyards. In keeping with the recent

academic trend, contemporary philosophers of religion have been unwilling to maintain hard and

fast distinctions between the two disciplines. As a result, it is often difficult in reading recent

work to distinguish what the philosophers are doing from what the theologians (and

philosophers) of past centuries regarded as strictly within the theological domain. Indeed,

philosophers and theologians alike are now coming to use the term “analytic theology” to refer to

theological work that aims to explore and unpack theological doctrines in a way that draws on

the resources, methods, and relevant literature of contemporary analytic philosophy.

The use of this term reflects the heretofore largely unacknowledged reality that the sort of

work now being done under the label “philosophical theology” is as much theology as it is

philosophical. Our faith and thoughts should not be shaken that easy about the facts that is

surrounding us nor, distract us to move away from the truth which God, our Lord have offered

us, as His gift to the mankind. What would happen if we presented Acts 4: 32 – 35 to people

without any Biblical reference to the people and ask them what they thought it meant? Bringing

you back to the dilemma. It is not the Bible who has mistaken but, again it’s the man, we who

serve our own purposes and direction that hold us to stay blinded and deaf of hearing the truth

about His coming. Without a doubt, I think it would strike the reader, especially if they are a

conservative, as socialism have been given its very name and that doesn’t much satisfy the

thought. Although, I know I sound more philosophical but, revelations in this book can be felt

more if the reader will open its senses to get through the message. Considering how Jesus went

40
to narrowly defined the period and time frame for the fulfilment of His prophecies. That if you

weren’t read and truly understood the book written by the author, you wouldn’t not really grasp

the bulk of message it has on it. Mathew 24:23, took emphasis on the generation today that

comes fitting to the message.

Our understanding to that message and our natural reaction to such demand is no can

measure up to the standard. If we are going to evaluate our status, we all actually failed to

deserve Jesus retribution. But God did for us the things we have never done. He endured the

punishment of men to gain our souls be saved from hell. And for our transgression that these

messages of God found our faith on Him not shaken by distractions of the truth. Conservatives

make it sound as if the world will come to an end if liberal thoughts are allowed to pervade this

world or if innovative ideas are allowed to develop. This is clearly not a sustainable worldview

in an age that values the insights of new science and the comforts of modern technology. That

being said, I find it very disturbing that many of those who dismiss Christianity and other

religions as mere superstition also proclaim that those who believe in God are fools. That may

have sound not so good.

While I can accept their choice to not believe in God, I must ask what it is that they do

believe in. For you simply cannot have a life in which everything is empirical and there is no

belief. There may be those who have removed emotion from their lives and try to live and make

decisions according to pure logic as though they might transcend the problem of fitting theory to

imperfect and unfolding experience. As we open the bag we consider how a Christian is to react

to some issues of the day. Walking in this world, can be difficult, but as God has placed us here

at this time in history we must reflect on the Biblical responses. For now, let me throw you

questions to answer that might help us all get through the message of the book. How to deal with

41
beggars? Should we be able to choose who can or cannot come into our country? A reflection on

how our bodies although breaking down now, will eventually be replaced by God with perfect

bodies. Others say that Jesus had not returned in the past and with all sincerity the promise of

the Lord is not lacking. But, Jesus is maybe delaying His coming to be able to save more people

to be saved and receive the message of the lord about His return for the second coming.

This scenario for others doesn’t make sense, but for some it is equally important to know.

It continued that conservatives speak with the same rhetoric, compelling adherence to the status

quo while, liberals sought change and equality. All these efforts trying to explain the passage for

our understanding that Jesus failure to come again t=in the first century. But this is just a rhetoric

scenario offered by the skeptics. In fact this idea only intends for us to look foolish of the details

that lacks basis and reference from the Bible. Many detractors claim that Jesus is with the man

for some 1,000 years lived on earth and preach the meaning of life and about God’s love. The

other 2,000 years many people in this time believe that Jesus will come in this generation. But

they have further concluded that this delay of His return is intending for many people to know

the Savior’s coming on earth and have them realize the need to prepare for his coming again. It

seems that human beings have a natural understanding of how mind and body, how spirit and

flesh interact.

This objection sounds like saying, “Jeffrey’s soul is criminal, sure, but the physical body

in which the soul lives and moves is not criminal. So let’s not put his body in jail, which would

be pointless.” The remaining option is what, to have “spiritual respect” for the teachings of the

Bible? We do, but do not reflect on what we have done, and do not plan what we will do

tomorrow. We think about things, but generally avoid thinking about matters in which we might

have to reform our daily behavior or long-term goals. Thus we remain in our comfortable but not

42
that comfortable little bubble-boy zone of intellectual and pragmatic stagnation. One great way

out of this dilemma is to find yourself in an even more uncomfortable dilemma. This time a

formal logical dilemma, of the kind so heuristically effective in Plato’s writings. Supposing

divine revelation of some kind, let us conservatively call the Christian Scriptures a divine

revelation. The words on the page are of God, from God, and for God’s purposes with men. A

dilemma has two seemingly innocent premises and one conclusion. . Filled with the passion and

desire for justice comes to the ethic of Jesus which demands something more sentimental to the

passivist ethic of love.

Religion and ethics are not only differentiated, but the latter is preferred as giving the

most effective basis for action. There is, indeed inherent in the nature and constitution of which,

represent for the most part staunch churchmen who are more interested in demonstrating the

patriotism and loyalty of the church at this crucial moment than in critical interpretation of the

mind of Jesus. Th egospel has nothing to do primarily with the temporal but concerned with the

eternal life. In this sense, it does not deal with external arrangements and institutions but with the

heart and its relations to God, its divine grace and the forgiveness of sins. Apparently, the

somewhat dubious role God is forced to play in this philosophy. In so far as men succeeded in

reorganizing their religious loyalties it was from the subjective point of view.

Moral obligations became for the most part matters of inner attitudes. Spending ten hours

a week in discussion with other students presents some universal truths about human nature. One

such universal truth is that human beings do not like to change even for the better, and so require

some strong motivation before they budge. By strong motivation, of course, I mean the pain of

not changing outweighs the pain of changing, like a frog whose pot of water has got just two

degrees too hot. This confirms an observation that human life tends to alternate between fruitless

43
conversation and thoughtless action. Although various attempts have been made to avoid this

dilemma reveal that chaos are prevalent in contemporary religious thought back, then. Side by

side with the utterances of Jesus stands the vast body of ethical traditions gradually accumulated

in the effort to rationalized the developing moral experience of the church. In the course of time,

however, the lust of secularized church for power, the rise of a feudal society in which class

distinctions were based upon status, the growing emphasis of social values due to the

development of trade and the emergence of an intensive and self-conscious civilization made

imperative to the formulation of social and ethical philosophy that would assure church the

continued loyalty of men showing that the only in the church could all the values represented by

the different social activities find fitting recognition.

I would need to see direct quote before responding to any such allegations, but if it were

true it is not really material and doesn't disprove an event. Major news media organizations of

today often misreport known historical events order all that time, doesn’t disprove these events

occurred. Nazareth did exist at the time. Pre-pottery Neolithic b shows human habitation since

9000BCE in Nazareth. You seem to have a delude view of the bible, probably to justify you

Christian hatred and atheism. "The Franciscan priest Bellarmino Bagatti, "Director of Christian

Archaeology", carried out extensive excavation of this "Venerated Area" from 1955 to 1965. Fr.

Bagatti uncovered pottery dating from the Middle Bronze Age in 2200 to 1500 BC and ceramics,

silos and grinding mills from the Iron Age some years in 1500 to 586 BC which indicated

substantial settlement in the Nazareth basin at that time.

However, lack of archaeological evidence for Nazareth from Assyrian, Babylonian,

Persian, Hellenistic or Early Roman times, at least in the major excavations between 1955 and

1990, shows that the settlement apparently came to an abrupt end about 720 BC, when the

44
Assyrians destroyed many towns in the area." If the Director of Christian Archaeology didn't find

anything from the era, I would say it's an unbiased source. If we are to believe this, you are only

disproving your own arguments. Lack of evidence isn't evidence of absence,

It is evidence of lack of evidence. You have produced no evidence that Nazareth did not

exist at the time of Jesus. One can live in an area, that is small and leave behind no trace findable

to modern archaeology. I am a firm believer in the supernatural “unity” of Christ, Trinity, and

the “simple” nature of what it means to participate in the gift of grace, the near universal nature

of the “failure of man” to understand and participate in God’s plan much of the story of scripture.

I am reminded of the many examples of Christ’s gift of “living water” and life being as simple as

the faith to reach out and touch His garment, and we are “at the root” engaged in the “mystery”

which requires natural and supernatural revelation.

This was a terrific documentary that asks some tough questions that most Christian

fundamentalists refuse to address. The notion of a documentary of this nature existing even 50

years ago for public consumption, would not have been tolerated, with very little air time even

today. All intelligent creatures created by God had free will. One such creature challenged Gods

authority to rule and said God was a liar! Genesis 6:3. This spirit creature became known at

Satan the Devil. Which means adversary and opposer. Jesus called this one the father of the lie.

John 8:44. So in a sense evil created itself, in that spirit creature angel who rebelled against God.

Adam and Eve also rebelled against God by disobedience. There is a great deal of evil and

suffering in this world. This of course is a very condensed brief explanation. I would encourage

you to look deeper into this subject and ask the next Jehovah Witnesses who knocks on your

door about this topic. I hope this is of some assistance to you. Unknown to Adam and Eve and

45
the rest of mankind we have all come under the influence of Satan the Devil as the Bible states

he is the ruler of this system of things. 1 John 5:19.

Not surprisingly, reading many of the comments below exposes the stupidity of any

extreme nature. No thought of action, just thoughtless reaction. Those who have 'blind faith',

without critical thinking, equally to those who have none at all. Devoid of spirit – faithless.

Those who fall in the latter category, need to ask themselves how they can accept the notion of

universal creation from nothingness without intent, as much as those they chastise for not

questioning that which they are being told.

This epitomizes the nature of ignorance for those who think only in terms of black and

white, extremes closing their minds to the possibilities of potentiality. The truth of everything

since I am no better or worse than those around me, I can only be thankful that I have been

privileged to live a life where I can ponder the 'truth of existence' without the need to imply

disparity where none exists! Today we are almost at dead odds, 'for' and 'against' religion. There

is no "dilemma". Faith is choosing to believe something that empirical evidence does not indicate

to us. Believe whatever you choose to believe but don't expect others to make the same choices.

Science and religion are not in conflict with each other.

They are by definition two separate things that cannot prove or disprove the validity of

the other. Your understanding of faith appears to be your dilemma because which definition do

you choose. Act 17:11, like many, you are defining "faith" as "myth", whereas the basis of faith

is trust, which can be placed in falsehoods as well as what is real. The outcomes are the proof of

faith, as to whether your faith is based on truth or falsehood. For instance, the Bible states, Jesus

said that the scriptures do not impart life, but He will give life to those who come to Him. If you

46
do not genuinely apply a genuine test and makes claims that Jesus did not rise from the dead,

then you are false to yourself and a liar. If Jesus rose rode from the dead, then He is alive! If

Jesus is alive and you give Him opportunity to prove Himself and He doesn't then, you know that

there is not resurrection from the dead. Do whatever you like.

There is no judgment for what you do with your life on Earth. Let me tell you, my Bible

knowledge is imperfect and if God proves Himself and Jesus really did rise from the dead, you

have found out the truth about the resurrection of the dead. Now faith that has no works or

outworking or evidence that produces a result is not faith. By definition, god is intangible so no

one can produce a physical proof of his existence. Anyone is free to believe whatever they like,

claiming their belief is truly scientific is the error if they can't produce scientific evidence.

CONCLUSION

When I had my encounter with the resurrected Jesus Christ, a definite change took place.

I can tell you about it. If I were deceived, then the change in my life and attitude and disposition,

as well as the joy that entered my being, which before I did not have, convinces me that what I

feel is real. If we are to find these things in the way aligning from the purpose of the Bible, we

would admit that there should be no concept of dilemma neither confusion to what the Bible says

about the second coming of Jesus. You might want to revisit your own definitions, because what

you are saying is not making much sense; faith is a belief that has no proof nor evidence to

47
substantiate it. Faith that does not have evidence in the present is false because it cannot be

proven. Hence, faith without works (demonstrable evidence) is dead (not faith). The conscience

of the church if this sounds not sarcastic to you, together with the community, is little more today

than a heterogeneous collection of moralities.

This prevailing uncertainty as to the bearing of religion upon life appears in the intense

attempts that are being made to reconcile of Jesus with the Christian’s patriot duties in the

present time. There is in spite of individual utterance of Jesus to the contrary, a very general

conviction that the essential spirit and intent of his teachings are opposed. This general

conviction has given rise to an uncomfortable dilemma. As orthodox Christianity, has always

professed to do that have been built up within the historical Christianity of false and should be

repudiated.

We should note of what the Lord has revealed to us. “I am coming soon”, Jesus said

from Rev. 22:20. Everyone long for His return, but why do I want Him to come back? Is it

because I will be in His presence, away from sickness and death? Is it because I am tired of

living in a difficult world? Or is it because when you have loved Him so much of your life when,

he shared your tears and your laughter. How do we feel about the Lord’s return? Let us long for

the day passionately and earnestly for the Lord’s come back, that could be very soon. But, what

does waiting for Jesus’s return look like in your life? Have you left something undone that you

could attend to today?

There is, indeed inherent in the nature and constitution of which, represent for the most

part staunch churchmen who are more interested in demonstrating the patriotism and loyalty of

the church at this crucial moment than in critical interpretation of the mind of Jesus. The gospel

48
has nothing to do primarily with the temporal but concerned with the eternal life. In this sense, it

does not deal with external arrangements and institutions but with the heart and its relations to

God, its divine grace and the forgiveness of sins. So there is Second coming. Its just that we will

never know the exact period when He is coming to get us and join His Kingdom in heaven. Faith

that does not have evidence in the present is not false nor true, is it faith.

It is pretty much alive if you choose to believe it. It is clear to me that you do not have a

good grasp of the theory of evolution, and it is peculiar how you ask for proof for it, and remain

perfectly happy with the resurrection of a man that you never witnessed. Hope we get to

understand each other. We need to see someone’s intention or direction of his context of writing

about the confusion they kept on inserting to the minds of the people that Jesus have not really

returned and not really returning. This documentary is shoddy. The scholarship is poor. In

addition, an authentic church with relevant modes of ministry remains the only option for

promoting a faithful and practical discourse within the present reality in an attempt to move

toward a meaningful future.

Theologically, the church is modelled around action and praxis propelled by the desire to

image Christ's mission of redeeming the world from all forms of societal evil, as evidenced by

the declaration: 'I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly (John 10:10b). It then

follows that the church's prophetic role in the context of social disintegration and national

polarization demands a socio-political and economic engagement with the relevant arms of

governance and political players toward a socio-political contract which will give birth to peace

and democratic space for all. Any other option would be a disgrace to the church of Jesus Christ

who came to declare the good news to all.

49
 The problem with historical facts is they cannot be verified, just interpreted. Religion is

"the quest for the truth". True religion is true science. Science can be tested. For instance, if the

evolution of the peppered moth is real, then the moth would not lay eggs that produce caterpillars

that morph into chrysalises to emerge as a peppered moth. If the moth becomes a bird then we

have proven evolution. Since it is yet to happen, there is no evidence! This time a formal logical

dilemma, of the kind so heuristically effective in Plato’s writings. Supposing divine revelation of

some kind, let us conservatively call the Christian Scriptures a divine revelation. The words on

the page are of God, from God, and for God’s purposes with men.

A dilemma has two seemingly innocent premises and one conclusion. The first is usually

a pair of statements. The second is an either/or. The third is a conclusion that follows

deductively. Firstly, if the Bible is divine, then the physical book ought to be treated with great

respect, more respect even than that given human beings, who are merely mortal; If it is not

divine, then it’s teachings ought not to have a specially high place in our lives. Secondly, either

the Bible is divine or it is not divine remains a comprehensive discussion. Therefore, either it

ought to be treated with more respect than human beings, or else its teachings ought not to have a

special place in our lives. If you do not like the conclusion, then what might be your opinion

about this? The first counter-argument that might surfaced was the book was reverencing itself.

Despite all these, many believe including the researcher of this paper that Jesus has not come yet,

therefore there is second coming. This is a fact and this fact is non-reversible in the sense, that

you cannot refute what has been written through God’s Divine wisdom.

50