This is a continuation of yesterday’s BDBD.
“Of corroborative value is the personal history of Peter (John 21:18, 19; 2 Pet. 1:14). Jesus foretold that Peter, then middle-aged (“when you were younge”), would die at an infirm old age (“when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will gird you”). If we try to save the imminence of the Parousia by saying that Peter could have been martyred at any time, we forget that his infirmity and old age were not imminent. And if we say that the prediction concerning Peter was not common knowledge among Christians until long after his death, we overlook the presence of other apostles on the occasion of the prediction. Furthermore, John writes of the incident in order to correct a misimpression which had arisen concerning his own death. The whole matter, then, must have received some publicity in the early Church.
“To claim that these delays were “general in nature, without specific length;” merely avoids the issue. Whether general or specific, long or short, the delays were delays and, by being stated, rendered the second coming non-imminent to the apostolic Church. Moreover, the delays were not entirely general in nature. The specificity of the great commission (“in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth”), of the promise that Paul should bear witness at Rome, and of Peter’s old age as a time of infirmity to the degree of inability to dress himself make the delays much more pointed than the doctrine of imminence can allow.
“Again, to claim that “the delays had been fulfilled by the time the exhortations to watch were written” runs afoul of historical facts. At least those exhortations to watch in the epistles appeared in writing before the disciples could have fulfilled the great commission, before Paul had completed his extensive missionary efforts, and before Peter had reached old age, become infirm, and died. From the very beginning, even before the written exhortations, Christians knew that they were to watch through the oral ministry of Jesus and the apostles and prophets. In one of his earliest epistles Paul already commends believers for their watchfulness (1 Thess. 1:9, 10). The point remains that if watching could not have connoted imminence in the apostolic age, it need not connote imminence now.
“But should we not think that all else was contingent upon the second coming, that an “only if Christ does not return beforehand” qualified every other expectation? Possibly, but only possibly, in connection with the personal circumstances of Peter and Paul. It is very hard to think, however, that an imminent return of Christ might have taken away sufficient opportunity to fulfill the great commission. Moreover, when imminence becomes the ruling principle by which all else was and is rendered contingent, even the events of the tribulation do not have to take place; they might “die on the vine” just as the great commission and the predictions concerning Paul and Peter would have done had Jesus returned beforehand.” This ends the quote from “The Church and the Tribulation” by Robert H. Gundry.
