u/Ok_Care_3459

Hello Everyone,

I’ve been reading a lot of Dale Allison recently (Christian NT scholar) and he is one in a long line of scholars that point out the major thread in the Synoptic Gospels that positions Jesus (among many other things) as an apocalyptic prophet.

Delayed eschatology is a tough enough subject when we are talking about Paul, but when its words attributed to Jesus in the Gospels it adds an even more challenging layer.

It leaves a few options (and probably more), none of which are ideal for me:

- Jesus Himself truly preached about a near-term apocalypse and it did not come to fruition as He expected

- The Synoptic Gospel writers “exaggerated” this part of his teaching (later corrected by John, epistles?)

- We totally misread the near-term eschatological declarations across the gospels

Heavy topic for a Friday evening (at least in the USA) but this community never fails to give balanced and pastoral thoughts.

I am curious to get people’s takes, particularly those with some theological training or expertise, on the myriad views on that concept. For me, framing it inside “time” as we know it or the “world” as we know it is nigh impossible. I know it’s part of the Nicene Creed, and it’s typically the hardest one to believe or understand. At least for me.

Thank you in advance. This is a great community.

I listen to sermons via YouTube at a few churches across the country, and follow a few Substack that cover the same. I was disappointed that more a couple of them chose not to preach on this text today, “because it’s Father’s Day and this is a tough text”.

I am frustrated with that, as I think shying away from tougher texts is has innumerable problems. It’s important for everyone to be seek comfort AND challenge in the church. And sometimes the mainline plays into stereotypes with this type of stuff.

I spent a bit of time looking at how mainline scholars have exegeted this text and there is some really interesting stuff, and it’s just a shame when this approach is taken.

Hopefully I am not generalizing too much but I figured so would share.

EDIT - it’s clear I have been generalizing a bit. Amazing and thoughtful responses here from many clergy and laypeople!

Hello Friends,

This question is for everyone, but I am especially curious interested in perspectives from clergy or those who have been to seminary.

One thing I struggle with a great deal is the historicity of the Old Testament. I’ve read scholarly works (like those of John Collins and James Kugel) and theological works (like those of Bruegemann).

The “best” I can do is believe that there are some historical kernels (starting with Moses and the Exodus) that get elaborated on and “mythologized” (theologized?) and serve as origin stories of a people and their relationship to God.

I am a natural skeptic and I tend to be a minimalist on miracles / flashy divine intervention, with a focus on Jesus’ ministry and his resurrection as the core part of that.

It seems like most 20th century theology (Barth, Moltmann, Williams, etc.) is just super focused on doctrine of creation, Christ, grace, the Trinity, discipleship, eschatology. In those circles, deep discussion of the OT hardly exists.

If I can try to synthesize this:

- I take the OT seriously.
- It seems to me the OT, particularly the older texts, have limited historicity in the modern sense.
- This makes it very hard to for me to discern God’s action in the OT, which is essentially the “story” that leads up to the Messiah.
- I feel like I am living in this weird disconnect where the OT is “ancient myth” and in the NT the story comes alive in some sense, and God’s action become clear and definitive in the person of Jesus.
- I feel like most folks (across denominations) just ignore the OT in practice and may not have any idea the state of scholarship and the challenges to historicity. Or they simplify Christianity to the NT, or even further to just Jesus. That’s a much easier package to “believe”, especially in 2026.

I will almost certainly have follow-up questions!

God be with all of you. Thanks.

I wanted to get any pastoral perspectives you folks have on this. I have a family friend who I talk theology with. This person is part of a conservative, biblical inerrancy, penal substitutionary atonement non-denomination evangelical church.

This person’s family wants to start teaching their young child about faith. One part of the family wants to start immediately teaching about why Jesus died on the cross (atonement theory). The person I speak with is really not on board with that type of theology despite going to that church.

In any event, how would you talk to a child about “why Jesus died on the cross?” Let’s call the child 10 years old.

My initial thought is just “he died for our sins” as that captures all atonement theories and is a standard Anglican framing that allows for discussion and agreement / disagreement.