Today’s New Reason To Believe

Kenneth Richard Samples

How can a Christian think about eschatology (the study of “last things”) in a careful and intellectually responsible manner?

Let me offer three suggestions for believers to carefully consider when approaching the controversial theological topic of the “end times.”

1. Understanding the Bible’s Apocalyptic Literature

Evangelical theologian and eschatology specialist George Eldon Ladd notes the following:

Revelation is the most difficult of all New Testament books to interpret, primarily because of the elaborate and extensive use of symbolism.

Both apocalyptic books of the Bible (Daniel and Revelation) are very challenging to understand and properly interpret. Throughout church history biblical scholars and theologians have come to a variety of different positions on how these books are to be understood.

Acknowledging this diversity of thought should cause Christians to be measured and cautious in what they assert about the Bible’s teaching on eschatological issues. Far too many believers think that their specific interpretation of end times passages is synonymous with what the Bible actually reveals about the topic. Remember, the Bible must be responsibly studied through a careful analysis of literary genre, grammar, and context.

2. Mere Christian Eschatology

While significant differences over the final events of human history exist, nevertheless all historic Christian theological traditions affirm essential core orthodoxy when it comes to eschatology. Parts two and three of this series elaborate on five significant events on which believers agree. Here’s that list enumerated once again:

Five Point Mere Christian Eschatology

Second Coming of Jesus Christ

General Resurrection of the Dead

Final Judgment of Humankind

Eternal State

New Creation

3. Learning the Major Views on Eschatology

Because the study of future things is a hotly contested topic in Christian theology, believers should take the time and effort to study the field. If you have only been exposed to a form of premillennialism (which is very popular today among evangelicals), then consider looking into one of the best books on the amillennial and postmillennial positions. Or if you have only been exposed to amillennialism (probably the overall Christian consensus position over the centuries), then try reading the best books that defend a form of premillennialism.

Our churches stand to benefit when its members grow in their knowledge of the Bible and of historic Christian doctrine. I strongly recommend that pastors and teachers in churches and colleges encourage their people to read broadly on the topic of eschatology. It is certainly acceptable for churches and Christian colleges to affirm and defend a particular view concerning last things, but those affirmations mean a whole lot more when all the major views have been considered.

Here are a few good books explaining the different evangelical Christian positions on eschatology:

Historic Premillennialism:
George Eldon Ladd, The Blessed Hope.

Dispensational Premillennialism:
John F. Walvoord, The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation.

Postmillennialism:
John Jefferson Davis, Christ’s Victorious Kingdom.

Amillennialism:
Anthony Hoekema, The Bible and the Future

Future articles explore other issues relating to Christian eschatology.

For an introduction to the topic of general eschatology, see Donald G. Bloesch, The Last Things and Robert Clouse ed., The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views.

by Hugh Ross

The capacity of individuals within an insect colony to divide their labor for the overall benefit of the whole group highlights an outstanding design feature seen in all species of social insects (such as ants and bees). Each of these tiny creatures appears to be pre-programmed to focus all their energies on achieving just one of the many tasks necessary for the survival of the colony. Where this “software” lays within the organism no scientist yet knows. More humbling still, this software appears to be more sophisticated than the best computer programs written by human engineers. Evidently, the Creator of social insects is a lot more knowledgeable and intelligent than we human beings.

Now, two biologists, one from the University of New Orleans and the other from Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, have discovered that for Atta colombica, a species of leaf-cutting ants, the ensemble of different software programs manifested in each ant making up the colony is designed for optimal task-partitioning among the individuals.¹

The researchers found the forager ants capable of a much higher efficiency of cutting and delivering leaf tissue to nest workers than what the ants actually cut and delivered. Instead, the foragers cut the leaves into smaller portions and, consequently, delivered less leaf tissue to the colony. The job of the nest workers was to distribute, clean, shred, and implant the tissue in fungal gardens. By delivering a sub-maximal amount of leaf tissue to the colony’s nest the forager ants optimized the productivity of the nest workers.

This particular biological research study showed that not only is the software for each of the worker castes in Atta colombica amazingly designed, but that an even higher order of design exists in the ensemble of software programs. The design at both levels brings about the optimal productivity for the species.

Consider a factory assembly line. On the production floor each machine is designed to perform a particular function. The ensemble of machines are geographically placed and organized for maximal productivity. Likewise, the delivery of raw materials to the factory, the discharge of waste, and the export of product are all optimized for maximum throughput.

A factory observer recognizes that it takes careful, intelligent planning, design, and organization to make a successful, efficient factory. Similarly, a careful observer of nature’s insect communities can recognize that it takes a very intelligent and powerful Creator to plan, design, and organize both the hardware (ant bodies) and software (ant instincts) for a successful, efficient ant colony.

1. Martin Burd and Jerome J. Howard, “Optimality in a Partitioned Task Performed by Social Insects,” Biology Letters 4 (December 23, 2008): 627-29.

Previously Posted on Feb 1st, 2008 by David H. Rogstad, Ph.D.

Early in my career as a scientist, the most difficult activity, next to writing peer-reviewed papers, was standing up in front of an audience of peers to talk about my research. I was terrified of being asked a question I couldn’t answer or of someone spotting a weak link in my reasoning. While I still struggle with the writing part, speaking to a group has become less frightening thanks to some advice I received from a friend.

“As one trying to follow the Master,” he said, “our focus should be less on making ourselves look good and more on making others successful.” For one whose primary concern was the furtherance of my own career this posed quite a switch, but it made sense in light of what Jesus said to his disciples about how to become great (Matthew 20:25-26).

My first opportunity to test this idea arrived when I started a new position working at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory where I was paid to do a job instead of pursue my own research interests. My superiors gave me the task of developing real-time, interrupt-driven control software for a Very Long Baseline Interferometry correlation system. I barely had a clue about what to do. Day after day, I prayed for God’s wisdom and help. After struggling with it for a good part of a year, my boss wanted me to give a review and status report to some higher-level managers. Needless to say, the prospect terrified me.

In this circumstance I remembered my friend’s advice and thought it might be applicable. Instead of worrying about how I would appear, I chose to focus on giving a presentation that would make my boss look good. I was surprised at how effective this viewpoint proved, both in relieving me of fear and resulting in a presentation that was well-received. From that time on I decided to work on making others successful and to trust God for my own success. In time, I discovered that this principle related to Jesus’ claim that there is more joy in giving than in receiving (Acts 20:35).

When I became a technical group supervisor a few years later, I had plenty of opportunities to practice this principle. My goal became to figure out what I could do to make each member of my team productive in their jobs. What resources did they need? What special training was required? Did they need help getting past a difficult problem? Did they need to switch tasks? How could I encourage them? If they were successful, then I was successful. In fact, I received a lot of the credit when my team did a good job. If I focused on myself, I became jealous, competitive, anxious, and prideful. When I worked on making them a success, I experienced the joy that God promised to those who give. As a side benefit, the team members were much more willing to help each other and to receive help and correction from me.

Putting this biblical principle into practice provided me with one more example of how God’s commands are meant to bring us abundant life, not to interfere with our freedom.