tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-750725307342150985.post5467082170334023337..comments2022-11-30T08:07:41.811-05:00Comments on The Schooley Files Studies: N.T. Wright's Surprised by HopeKeith Edwin Schooleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06328169815024415532noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-750725307342150985.post-41324985002809705072012-03-18T07:13:35.962-04:002012-03-18T07:13:35.962-04:00Fair enough, Peter. My only contentions are 1) th...Fair enough, Peter. My only contentions are 1) that we don't treat the earth as though it were disposable, even if it turns out that God will ultimately dispose of it; and 2) that what we do in this lifetime <strong>matters</strong>, and that includes <strong>everything</strong> we do, not just whether we say a "sinner's prayer" and get a bunch of other people to do the same. <br /><br />To me, taking resurrection seriously means <em>some</em> sort of continuity with present existence. I don't pretend to know at all what that will look like.<br /><br />Thanks for the discussion, Peter. I really do appreciate it.Keith Edwin Schooleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06328169815024415532noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-750725307342150985.post-55024503831983711532012-03-17T22:03:29.864-04:002012-03-17T22:03:29.864-04:00I think the changes will be cataclysmic because I ...I think the changes will be cataclysmic because I think many of the foundational structures of the earth will change. I'd be quite surprised if those on the new earth have to deal with various natural disasters, many of which are the result of shifting tectonic plates.<br /><br />I think we should expect greater geological staticity to match the permanence of our glorified bodies. <br /><br />This earth as we know it was created to serve a temporary purpose. The new/renewed earth will serve a different purpose and therefore I think it likely that it will be structurally different. (I'm not even convinced that the new earth will be a rotating sphere in the Milky Way galaxy.)<br /><br />You're right that a city with the dimensions given in the Bible seems improbable, but maybe it seems improbable because we haven't considered a world very different from what we're accustomed to.<br /><br />But of course I could be completely wrong : )Peterhttp://www.simmondsfam.com/blog/faith/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-750725307342150985.post-53274455114733915252012-03-17T15:12:21.052-04:002012-03-17T15:12:21.052-04:00Hi, Peter.
I'm not sure how much of the descr...Hi, Peter.<br /><br />I'm not sure how much of the descriptions of the New Heavens and the New Earth are literal, and how much is figurative. A great deal of Revelation is clearly symbolic: nobody, no matter how "literal," has ever thought that the beast rising out of the sea was going to be physically like Godzilla rising out of Tokyo Bay. And if you think about it, a New Jerusalem significantly larger than India and extending to a height of roughly 1/5 the earth's diameter (over 200 times the height of the present-day atmosphere) seems improbable. It seems more probable to me that God is revealing to John things that are far beyond human comprehension and description. Which is not to say, incidentally, that the descriptions are unreal or unimportant, or that they refer to spiritual realities as opposed to physical ones--Wright's focus on physical resurrection seems to preclude that.<br /><br />I don't really have any problem with the possible continuance of shifting tectonic plates or polar ice caps in a restored Earth. I think that eternity will be a dynamic continual happening, not an unchanging static sameness. And if, on a literal reading, day and night predate the sun, why couldn't regional climate conditions postdate the sun? I think variety is part of the glory of God's creation.<br /><br />All that said, you may be right. It might be the case that everything we do, good or bad, to the earth at this point will be simply wiped out by a divinely-initiated catastrophe and restoration. But I think that at the very least, how we treat the earth that God gave us is a significant witness to those who are not yet believers. If we treat it simply as fodder for exploitation, as human beings have basically treated it throughout history, that says something about our character, and thus, about the faith we claim influences our actions. Conversely, if we practice a little self-denial or recognize the importance of something larger than simply our own desire for more energy and material goods as we advocate for public and social decisions, that also says something about our character and our faith. Everything we do affects our witness.Keith Edwin Schooleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06328169815024415532noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-750725307342150985.post-68003425663738992872012-03-17T11:23:57.170-04:002012-03-17T11:23:57.170-04:00After reading Surprised by Hope, these thought wen...After reading Surprised by Hope, these thought went through my head: <br /><br />Are the verses in 2 Peter and Revelation not to be taken literally? Will the new earth still have shifting tectonic plates with resulting earthquakes and volcanoes? I was kind of thinking God would create a more permanent-like home for immortal imperishable creatures.<br /><br />Isn’t it true that there will be no sun? If that’s the case it seems the polar caps would no longer be cold as a result of their location.<br /><br />I think Christians should care about ecology and be concerned for the environment because to do less would show us to be poor stewards. But it’s very hard for me to believe that trees we plant or reservoirs we dig will survive this transition, which I expect will involve far more change than the transition in Genesis from pre-flood to post-flood world.Peterhttp://www.simmondsfam.com/blog/faith/noreply@blogger.com