Conclusion The now and the not yet
I began in the Introduction with the tension between the ‘then’ (past) and the ‘now’ (present); I end with another tension, between the ‘now’ (present) and the ‘not yet’ (future). These two tensions belong together. For it is in and through Jesus Christ that the past, the present and the future are brought into a creative relationship. Christians live in the present, but do so in thankfulness for the past and in anticipation of the future.
As I conclude this book, I’m going to focus on balanced biblical Christianity. Balance is a rare commodity these days in almost every sphere, not least among us who seek to follow Christ.
One of the things about the devil is that he is a fanatic, and the enemy of all common sense, moderation and balance. One of his favourite pastimes is to tip Christians off balance. If he cannot get us to deny Christ, he will get us to distort Christ instead. As a result, lopsided Christianity is widespread, in which we overemphasize one aspect of a truth, while underemphasizing another.
A balanced grasp of the now–not-yet tension would be very beneficial for Christian unity, and especially to a greater harmony among evangelical believers. We may agree on the doctrinal and ethical fundamentals of the faith. Yet we seem to be constitutionally prone to quarrelling and dividing, or simply to going our own way and building our own empires.
Kingdom come and coming
Fundamental to New Testament Christianity is the perspective that we are living ‘in between times’ – between the first and the second comings of Christ, between kingdom come and kingdom coming.
The theological basis for this tension is to be found in Jesus’ own teaching about the kingdom of God. Everyone accepts both that the kingdom featured prominently in his teaching and that he announced its coming. Where scholars have disagreed, however, is over the time of its arrival. Has the kingdom already come, because Jesus brought it with him? Or is its coming still in the future, so that we await it expectantly? Or does the truth lie between these positions?
Albert Schweitzer is an example of a scholar who thought that, according to Jesus, the kingdom lay entirely in the future. As an apocalyptic prophet, Jesus taught (mistakenly) that God was about to intervene supernaturally and establish his kingdom. The radical demands he made on his disciples were an ‘interim ethic’ in the light of the imminent arrival of the kingdom. Schweitzer’s position is known as ‘thoroughgoing’ or ‘consistent’ eschatology.
At the opposite extreme was C. H. Dodd, with his belief that the coming of the kingdom is wholly in the past (known as ‘realized eschatology’). He laid a heavy emphasis on two verses whose verbs are in the perfect tense, namely ‘The kingdom of God has arrived’ and ‘The kingdom of God has come upon you.’ Dodd concluded that there is no future coming of the kingdom, and that passages which speak of one were not part of Jesus’ own teaching.
In place of these extreme polarities, most scholars have taken a middle position – that Jesus spoke of the kingdom as both a present reality and a future expectation.
Jesus clearly taught that the time of fulfilment had arrived; that ‘the strong man’ was now bound and disarmed, enabling the plundering of his goods, as was evident from his exorcisms; that the kingdom was already either ‘within’ or ‘among’ people, and that it could now be ‘entered’ or ‘received’.
Yet the kingdom was a future expectation as well. It would not be perfected until the last day. So he looked forward to the end, and taught his disciples to do so also. They were to pray ‘your kingdom come’ and to ‘seek’ it first, giving priority to its expansion. At times he also referred to the final state of his followers in terms of ‘entering’ the kingdom or ‘receiving’ it.
One way in which the Bible expresses the tension between the ‘now’ and the ‘not yet’ is in the terminology of the two ‘ages’. From the perspective of the Old Testament, history is divided between ‘this present age’ and ‘the last days’, namely the kingdom of righteousness to be introduced by the Messiah. This simple structure of two consecutive ages was decisively changed, however, by the coming of Jesus. For he brought in the new age, and died for us in order to deliver us ‘from the present evil age’. As a result, the Father has already ‘rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves’. We have even been raised from death and seated with Christ in the heavenly realm.
At the same time, the old age persists. So the two ages overlap. ‘The darkness is passing and the true light is already shining.’ One day the old age will be terminated (which will be ‘the end of the age’), and the new age, which was introduced with Christ’s first coming, will be brought about at his second. Meanwhile, the two ages continue, and we are caught in the tension between them. We are summoned not to ‘conform to the pattern of this world’, but rather to ‘be transformed’ according to God’s will and to live consistently as children of the light.
Nevertheless, the tension remains: we have already been saved, yet also we shall be saved one day. And we are already God’s adopted children, yet we also are waiting for our adoption. Already we have ‘crossed over from death to life’, yet eternal life is also a future gift. Already Christ is reigning, although his enemies have not yet become his footstool.
Caught between the present and the future, the characteristic stance of Christians is variously described as hoping, waiting, longing, and groaning, as we wait both ‘eagerly’ and also ‘patiently’.
The essence of the interim period between the ‘now’ and the ‘not yet’ is the presence of the Holy Spirit in the people of God. On the one hand, the gift of the Spirit is the distinctive blessing of the kingdom of God and the principal sign that the new age has dawned. On the other, because his indwelling is only the beginning of our kingdom inheritance, it is also the guarantee that the rest will one day be ours. The New Testament uses three metaphors to illustrate this. The Holy Spirit is the ‘firstfruits’, pledging that the full harvest will follow, the ‘deposit’ or first instalment, pledging that the full payment will be made, and the foretaste, pledging that the full feast will one day be enjoyed.
Here are some examples of the tension between the ‘now’ and the ‘not yet’.
Revelation, holiness and healing
The first example is in the intellectual sphere, or the question of revelation.
We affirm with joyful confidence that God has revealed himself to human beings, not only in the created universe, in our reason and our conscience, but supremely in his Son Jesus Christ, and in the Bible’s witness to him, as we saw earlier. We dare to say that we know God, because he has himself taken the initiative to draw aside the curtain which would otherwise hide him from us. We rejoice greatly that his Word throws light on our path.
But we do not yet know God as he knows us. Our knowledge is partial because his revelation has been partial. He has revealed everything which he intends to reveal, and which he considers to be for our good, but not everything that there is to reveal. There are many mysteries left, and so ‘we live by faith, not by sight’.
We should take our stand alongside those biblical authors who, although they knew themselves to be agents of divine revelation, nevertheless confessed humbly that their knowledge remained limited. Even Moses, ‘whom the Lord knew face to face’, acknowledged, ‘O Sovereign Lord, you have only [rsv] begun to show to your servant your greatness and your strong hand.’ Then think of the apostle Paul, who likened his knowledge both to the immature thoughts of a child and to the distorted reflections of a mirror.
So, then, although it is right to glory in the givenness and finality of God’s revelation, it is also right to confess our ignorance of many things. We know and we don’t know. ‘The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children for ever, that we may follow all the words of this law.’ It is very important to maintain this distinction. Speaking personally, I would like to see more boldness in our proclaiming what has been revealed, and more reticence about what has been kept secret. Agreement in plainly revealed truth is necessary for unity, even while we give each other freedom in secondary matters. And the way to recognize these is when Christians who are equally anxious to be submissive to Scripture nevertheless reach different conclusions about them. I am thinking, for example, about controversies over baptism, church government, liturgy and ceremonies, claims about spiritual gifts, and the fulfilment of prophecy.
The second tension is in the moral sphere, or the question of holiness.
God has already put his Holy Spirit within us, in order to make us holy. The Holy Spirit is actively at work within us, subduing our fallen, selfish human nature and causing his fruit to ripen in our character. Already, we can affirm, he is transforming us into the image of Christ.
But our fallen nature has not been eradicated, for ‘the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit’, so that ‘if we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves’. We have not yet become completely conformed to God’s perfect will, for we do not yet love God with all our being, or our neighbour as ourselves. As Paul put it, we have ‘not . . . already become perfect’ (gnt), but we ‘press on towards the goal’, confident that ‘he who began a good work in [us] will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus’.
So, then, we are caught in a painful tension between the ‘now’ and the ‘not yet’, between dismay over our continuing failures and the promise of ultimate freedom. On the one hand, we must take God’s command, ‘Be holy because I . . . am holy’, and Jesus’ instruction, ‘Go, and do not sin again’, with the utmost seriousness. On the other hand, we have to acknowledge the reality of indwelling sin alongside the reality of the indwelling Spirit. The sinless perfection we long for continues to elude us.
The third tension between the ‘already’ and the ‘not yet’ is to be found in the physical sphere or the question of healing.
We affirm that the long-promised kingdom of God broke into history with Jesus Christ, who was not content merely to proclaim the kingdom, but went on to demonstrate its arrival by the extraordinary things he did. His power was especially evident in the human body as he healed the sick, expelled demons and raised the dead.
He also gave authority to both the Twelve and the Seventy to extend his mission in Israel, and to perform miracles. How much wider he intended his authority to go is a matter of dispute. Generally speaking, miracles were ‘the signs of a true apostle’. Nevertheless, it would be foolish to attempt to limit or domesticate God. We must allow him his freedom and his sovereignty, and be entirely open to the possibility of physical miracles today.
But God’s kingdom has not yet come in its fullness. For ‘the kingdom of the world’ has not yet ‘become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ’ when ‘he will reign for ever and ever’. In particular, our bodies have not yet been redeemed, and nature has not yet been entirely brought under Christ’s rule.
So we have to recognize the ‘already’–‘not-yet’ tension in this sphere too. To be sure, we have ‘tasted . . . the powers of the coming age’, but so far it has been only a taste. Part of our Christian experience is that the resurrection life of Jesus is ‘revealed in our mortal body’. At the same time, our bodies remain frail and mortal. To claim perfect health now would be to anticipate our resurrection. The bodily resurrection of Jesus was the pledge, and indeed the beginning, of God’s new creation. But God has not yet uttered the decisive word, ‘I am making everything new!’ Those who dismiss the very possibility of miracles today forget the ‘already’ of the kingdom, while those who expect them as what has been called ‘the normal Christian life’ forget that the kingdom is ‘not yet’.
Church and society
Fourth, the same tension is experienced in the ecclesiastical sphere, or the question of church discipline.
Jesus the Messiah is gathering round him a people of his own, a community characterized by the truth, love and holiness to which he has called it. But Christ has not yet presented his bride to himself ‘as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless’. On the contrary, her present life and witness are marred by error, discord and sin.
So, then, whenever we think about the church, we need to hold together the ideal and the reality. The church is both committed to truth and prone to error, both united and divided, both pure and impure. Not that we are to accept its failures. We are to cherish the vision of both the doctrinal and ethical purity and the visible unity of the church. We are called to ‘fight the good fight of the faith’, and to ‘make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace’. And in pursuit of these things there is a place for discipline in cases of serious heresy or sin.
And yet error and evil are not going to be eradicated completely from the church in this world. They will continue to coexist with truth and goodness. ‘Let both grow together until the harvest,’ Jesus said in the parable of the wheat and the weeds. Neither the Bible nor church history justifies the use of severe disciplinary measures in an attempt to secure a perfectly pure church in this world.
The fifth area of tension between the ‘now’ and the ‘then’, the ‘already’ and the ‘not yet’, is the social sphere, or the question of progress.
We affirm that God is at work in human society. This is partly in his ‘common grace’, as he gives the world the blessings of family and government, by which evil is restrained and relationships are ordered. And it is also through the members of his redeemed community, who penetrate society like salt and light, making a difference by hindering decay and dispelling darkness.
But God has not yet created the promised ‘new heaven and . . . new earth, where righteousness dwells’. There are still ‘wars and rumours of wars’. Swords have not yet been beaten into ploughshares and spears into pruning hooks. The nations have not yet renounced war as a method of settling their disputes. Selfishness, cruelty and fear continue.
So, then, although it is right to campaign for social justice and to expect to improve society further, we know that we shall never perfect it. Although we know the transforming power of the gospel and the wholesome effects of Christian salt and light, we also know that evil is ingrained in human nature and human society. Only Christ at his second coming will eradicate evil and enthrone righteousness for ever.
Here, then, are five areas (intellectual, moral, physical, ecclesiastical and social) in which it is vital to preserve the tension between the ‘already’ and the ‘not yet’.
Three types of Christian
There are three distinct types of Christian, according to the extent to which they manage to maintain this biblical balance.
First, there are the ‘already’ Christians who emphasize what God has already given us in Christ. But they give the impression that, in consequence, there are now no mysteries left, no sins that cannot be overcome, no diseases that cannot be healed, and no evils that cannot be eradicated. In short, they seem to believe that perfection is attainable now.
Their motives are blameless. They want to glorify Christ – so they refuse to set limits to what he is able to do. But their optimism can easily degenerate into presumption and end up in disillusion. They forget the ‘not yet’ of the New Testament, and that perfection awaits the second coming of Christ.
Second, there are the ‘not-yet’ Christians who emphasize the incompleteness for the time being of the work of Christ and look forward to the time when he will complete what he has begun. But they seem to be preoccupied with our human ignorance and failure, the pervasive reign of disease and death, and the impossibility of securing either a pure church or a perfect society.
Their motive is excellent too. If the ‘already’ Christians want to glorify Christ, the ‘not-yet’ Christians want to humble sinners. They are determined to be true to the Bible in their emphasis on our human depravity. But their pessimism can easily degenerate into complacency; it can also lead to acceptance of the status quo and to apathy in the face of evil. They forget the ‘already’ of what Christ has done by his death, resurrection and gift of the Spirit – and of what he can do in our lives, and in church and society, as a result.
Third, there are the ‘already–not-yet’ Christians. They want to give equal weight to the two comings of Jesus. On the one hand, they have great confidence in the ‘already’, in what God has said and done through Christ. On the other hand, they exhibit a genuine humility before the ‘not yet’, humility to confess that the world will remain fallen and half-saved until Christ perfects at his second coming what he began at his first.
It is this combination of the ‘already’ and the ‘not yet’ which characterizes authentic biblical evangelicalism, and which exemplifies the balance that is so urgently needed today.
Our position as ‘contemporary Christians’ rests securely on the person of Jesus, whose death and resurrection belong to the ‘already’ of the past, and whose glorious second coming to the ‘not yet’ of the future. As we acclaim in faith and triumph:
Christ has died!
Christ is risen!
Christ will come again!