The Second Coming
Each gospel has its own approach to the ideas of death, judgement, heaven and hell. There is no “biblical” doctrine of these things. There is instead a variety of positions and approaches. This is partly a function of there being four different gospels. But not entirely. There are other points on which the gospels stand united. One approach to this variety is to vote for one of them or design your own from the bits and pieces. This depends on one's consideration of the necessity, as opposed to the usefulness of these doctrines. The evidence of the four gospels is that a uniform doctrine on these things is not necessary. If it were the gospels would have developed one. On the other hand there is no question that they have been profoundly useful. The vision of hell has been use extensively by some expressions of the church. The vision of a new age was quite useful for the social gospel.
What then is the one that is most useful to us at this juncture?
I can't see that it has any function at the moment. The assumption that Jesus blew it and that he has to do it again and this time he has to get it right is not without merit. But what exactly is it that he is supposed to get right? He is supposed to judge the earth and send the bad people to hell. For some theologians the greatest joy of heaven will be watching the damned burn in Hell. It seems to me that what the pious objected to about Jesus was his refusal to do that. The line in John 8. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." expressed the problem. If the bad people are going to burn in Hell, that means us. So I no longer believe in the traditional vision of the second coming, much as I am attracted by the imagery.
To the extent that there was a second coming, the second coming was Pentecost. There was the wind and the fire and the power. The second coming is the coming of the Holy Spirit. It, of course, does not live up to the advertising. But it is pretty dramatic and has been the experiential basis of Christian faith.
What then is the one that is most useful to us at this juncture?
I can't see that it has any function at the moment. The assumption that Jesus blew it and that he has to do it again and this time he has to get it right is not without merit. But what exactly is it that he is supposed to get right? He is supposed to judge the earth and send the bad people to hell. For some theologians the greatest joy of heaven will be watching the damned burn in Hell. It seems to me that what the pious objected to about Jesus was his refusal to do that. The line in John 8. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." expressed the problem. If the bad people are going to burn in Hell, that means us. So I no longer believe in the traditional vision of the second coming, much as I am attracted by the imagery.
To the extent that there was a second coming, the second coming was Pentecost. There was the wind and the fire and the power. The second coming is the coming of the Holy Spirit. It, of course, does not live up to the advertising. But it is pretty dramatic and has been the experiential basis of Christian faith.