Pauline understanding of the messianic age -eschatology U5 Best BD Materials

Table of Contents

Pauline understanding of the messianic age (eschatology)

Eschatology is a vital issue in Pauline writings, and it is also one of the most multifaceted and debated aspects of Pauline theology. Paul’s eschatology provides the background for many other vital topics that constitute the substance of Pauline theology; Christology, pneumatology, ecclesiology, soteriology, and anthropology are all built upon the eschatological foundation of Paul’s thought. In the past decade or so, several important studies of Pauline eschatology have been produced. These have served to revitalize interest in the topic and have highlighted how central eschatology is to Pauline studies. In the following pages, an attempt has been made to trace Pauline eschatology to its background also to elucidate major eschatological events to appreciate the distinctive nature of the theology of Paul even to understand its implications for building faith communities in the present Indian context.

1. Meaning and Definition

In theological usage, the term ‘eschatology’ has two distinct but closely related meanings. First of all, it is employed to designate teaching about the ‘end-things’ and includes the doctrine concerning the end of the whole world and the things associated with it, such as last judgment, heaven, hell, etc., and the state of the person after death. Secondly, it refers to what God has done decisively in Christ (the salvific work of Christ). What has been foretold to happen in the future has come true in Christ, and so the Christ-event or God’s act in Christ is an eschatological event. In this eschatology, it is not the chronological end, but the quality of the event that is important.¹

2. Background: Jewish and early Christian expectations

In ancient Judaism and Christianity, eschatology had a significant social and religious function. For both early Judaism and early Christianity, the pleasant conditions of previous periods (e.g., the situation of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden before the fall, the golden ageof David, and Solomon) became essential sources of language and imagery for describing the ideal conditions of the future. Isaiah’s vision of a world free from strife and Jerusalem as an international center (Isa 2:1–4) is based on this pervasive thought pattern. Thus, eschatological salvation conditions are usually conceptualized as a restoration of initial conditions rather than an entirely new or utopian existence with no links to the past. On the other hand, the apocalyptic conviction that a period of great stress and upheaval will precede the end’s inauguration is also conceptualized using language and imagery from the past. Though the individual’s importance and salvation are not without significance, the eschatology of early Judaism and early Christianity tended to focus primarily on the social and ecological dimensions of salvation.²

In early Judaism and early Christianity, eschatological beliefs were often linked with a sense of urgency because of the end of the age’s imminent expectation. However, the degree of urgency or imminence varies by the particular social situation in which such beliefs are thought meaningful (e.g., persecution, feelings of alienation, etc.). The future is more important than the present since the existing world order will soon be overthrown. Frequently Jewish and Christian perspectives on history have been characterized as linear, i.e., as portraying history as a line that began with creation and God’s first covenants with people and progresses straight to the future eschatological consummation. This is contrasted with the cyclical perspective of Greco-Roman culture, which knows no final and non-repeatable events.³

Paul was both a Diaspora Jew born in Tarsus of Cilicia, a Hellenistic city, and an orthodox Pharisee (Phil 3:5) who believed in the bodily resurrection shared an environment in which the religious activities were considerably conversant with apocalyptic and eschatological impulses.⁴ Hellenistic Judaism itself embraced a mosaic of different expectations. Some Jews were apocalyptic, expecting a cosmic resolution of contemporary distress and injustice. Others were not. Some Jews anticipated a resurrection. Others did not. Those who did look forward to the dead’s resurrection did not have the same opinion on how that resurrection would take place. Partof the problem was the difference between Hebrew and Greek notions of the body. The outlook reflected in Hebrew scripture is that the body and the nepes (often translated “soul” but meaning something like “personhood”) form an indissoluble whole in life and that neither survives death. Some biblical texts refer to the “ghosts” or “spirits” of the dead, but these were consigned to Sheol, the dark and silent final destination for everyone. However, a widespread view in the Greco-Roman world was that the soul (psyche) was an immortal entity, distinct from the mortal

body and separated from it at death. Indeed, it was often viewed as trapped in the body, only to be released at death for its heavenly ascent. As Jews came in contact with Greek culture to form Hellenistic (that is, Greek-influenced) Judaism, these two views combined in various ways.⁵ Ernest
P. Sanders observes:
The neat distinction between ‘Greek’ and Jewish’ categories is probably a bit misleading. Not only were they not posed as alternatives by Paul, it is quite possible that some Diaspora synagogues had long since combined immortality and resurrection. In later Jewish and Christian literature they would be explicitly harmonized: at death, the soul ascends to heaven, to await the resurrection; at the resurrection, soul and body arereunited.⁶

3. Theories of Pauline Eschatology

Once it was established that eschatology was the taproot of Paul’s fertile mind, scholars progressed in two directions. Some held to the view that Pauline eschatology remained consistent in his writings, arguing that in one way or another, the overlapping of the two ages was the key to the apostle’s thought.⁷ However, others maintained that Paul’s eschatology developed, or even contradicted itself, as time passed. But even the scholars who adopted this approach could not agree as to the specifics of that development. At least four different interpretations surface in the literature, of which a brief critique will be offered.⁸

3.1 Developmental Theory

Some scholars who have credited diversity in Paul’s eschatology sought to elucidate it through a “developmental theory.”⁹ In C. H. Dodd’s account of “the mind of Paul,” the dynamism and rationality were attested by a many-sided evolution of attitudes. The mature Paul—the Paul that matured between First and Second Corinthians — “has become reconciled to experience.” He has found new value in human institutions, mainly the state and its magistrates, and, correlatively, a new detachment from apocalypticism and its parousias. In Dodd’s view, apocalypticism was “a form of compensation in fantasy for the sense of futility and defeat,” its hallmark “a radical devaluation of the present world-order in all its aspects.”The newly mature Paul has broken with this. Whereas he had earlier thought of the saved as a tiny remnant, he now foresaw the winning over of “all Israel” and, indeed, the redemption of the whole human race and the entire material creation. What brought about the “decisive change” by which Paul suddenly “outgrew” his “harsh dualism”? Apart from naming it a “second conversion,” in which “the traces of fanaticism and intolerance disappear,”¹⁰

However, scholars take quite the opposite views concerning the “development” of Paul’s thought. Dodd is criticized for ignoring the future elements in the later epistles. John Lowe refutes Dodd’s contention that realized and future eschatologies are incompatible and that Paul could not have believed in both at the same time, but must have moved from one to the other.¹¹ Development theory is often pursued on the premise of a particular chronology of Paul’s letters. The traditional chronology, which puts 1 Thessalonians early and Philippians late best, supports the development theory. Since the chronological sequence of Pauline epistles is problematic, development theory loses its plausibility when an alternative chronology is considered. Ridderbos, while terming the development theory as “more radical and in certain respect more plausible,” contends that “all these theories are untenable.”¹²

3.2 Contingency Theory

According to Johan Christiaan Beker, contingency means “the variable element, i.e., the variety and particularity of sociological, economical and psychological situations which Paul faces in his churches and on the mission field.”¹³ Many scholars who refute the development theory try to elucidate the differences as the outcome of different issues being handled a proposalto various congregations. Hence the contingent nature of letters is cited as the reason fordiversity. Shires, Baird, Whiteley, Beker, Lincoln, Dunn, and some others explain the differencesin consideration of Paul’s letters’ contingent nature. Shires states that “A different form of presentation may be demanded by the particular immediate occasion of writing or by some crisis in Paul’s life. The emotional state of any writer will inevitably produce a fluctuation in his expressed thoughts.”¹⁴ Lincoln is of the view that instead of there being an inner evolution of Paul’s thought (with 2 Corinthians as the transition point), the differences can be wholly explained in terms of the diverse types of crises Paul was addressing in his different letters.¹⁵ Supporters of this view attempt to clarify the dissimilarities as Paul gave different answers to different problems as occasion had warranted.

It is widely acknowledged that Paul’s letters are both occasional in character and dialogical in nature. The apostle was not keen to systematize the doctrine of a future life; he did deliberate on eschatology’s complex subject as and when the situation had demanded. However, we delineate that it is implausible to elucidate Paul’s eschatological teachings’ composite body as a mere product of contingency factors. We are unable to determine the contingent nature of some of Paul’s letters. There is no scholarly consensus in most cases, and we simply do not know enough about what occasioned the apostle to write to the congregation. Moreover, while belief inChrist’s resurrection forms the basis of Paul’s eschatological beliefs, the apostle seems to be wavering on the particularities of events such as the time of parousia, his participation in it, the very nature and character of the resurrection body, and the time of receiving it, etc. Thus we are led to look at alternative solutions to explain the multifaceted personality of Paul’s eschatology.¹⁶

3.3 Mystical Reinterpretation

According to Albert Schweitzer, because of the delay of the Parousia, Paul abandoned hope of a future return of Christ and subsequent resurrection of believers, replacing it with the belief that the elect has been “risen-along –with-Christ, even though they still have the external seeming of a natural man.” In other words, the resurrection of the end time has already happened to Christians through their union with Christ. There is, therefore, no real need in Paul’s thinking for a future Parousia..¹⁷

Despite the brilliance and coherence of Schweitzer’s thesis, there are difficulties in his view. Schweitzer’s focus on consistent (futurist) eschatology, which interprets Paul to have abandoned the Parousia because of its delay is, is too exclusivistic. It neglects the presence of inaugurated eschatology in Paul’s writings. J. C. Beker catches the significance of the weakness of this position.
If future eschatology were such a decisive matter, the delay of the Parousia would have destroyed the Christian faith. In fact, Paul can adjust himself remarkably well to
the delay of the Parousia… whereas he expects to be alive at the Parousia in 1Thess. 4:15 and 1 Cor. 15:50-52, he seems to contemplate his death before its occurrence in Phil.1:20 and possibly in 2 Cor.5:1-11 (cf. 2Cor. 1:9). Even so, he can write in what was one of his last letters, “Salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed” (Rom. 13:11; cf. Phil. 4:4). In other words, he persists in imminent expectation, notwithstanding his awareness of the delay of the Parousia.¹⁸

3.4 Demythological Hermeneutics

The term demythologize is synonymous with the existential approach of Rudolf Bultmann, whose goal was to cut through the “myths” of the New Testament to get at the core of truth residing therein. Concerning the Pauline corpus, the interpreter must recognize that Paul’s Jewish apocalypticism is a mythical construction that we should not take at face value.¹⁹ Rudolf Bultmann says:
This mythological method of representation is foreign to modern man, whose thinking is determined by science to whatever extent, if an, he himself actively participates inscientific research and understands its methods. We have learned the meaninglessness of speaking about “above” and “below” in the universe. We can no longer accept thethought of Christ coming on the clouds of heaven.²⁰

Bultmann believes that Paul himself demonstrates gradual development in his thought on the subject and takes steps toward demythologizing the Parousia hope. He abandons it for the Hellenistic idea of the immortality of the soul. Though at one time scholarship was passionate about Bultmann’s Program, few today accept it wholesale. As Becker observes, Bultmann’s removal of apocalypticism from Paul’s interpretation of the Christ–event distorted the gospel Bultmann claimed to love.²¹

4. Major Eschatological Events

4.1 The Return of Christ

The issue which we encounter first in Paul’s correspondence (reading it chronologically) is the return of the Lord, which is one of the chief topics of 1 Thessalonians. The problem in Thessalonica was that some members had died, and the survivors worried about their fate. This indicates the driving force of Paul’s original message: not those believers would be resurrected, but rather that they would live to be saved when the Lord returned. Death was not expected. Paul wrote to encourage the survivors that the dead would not miss the return of the Lord. He hoped this assurance would stop the Thessalonian Christians from grieving ‘as others do who have no hope’ (1 Thess. 4: 13). The ground for confidence was that ‘Jesus died and rose again,’ and thus those who belonged to him, even if they died, would be given life with him (4: 14).²²

In the early Christian community, the exaltation of the risen Christ carried with it an earnest expectation of his return of Christ in glory. And it was to his anticipated coming that the community attached this biblical terminology of the “day.” The language itself appears six times in Paul’s letters, all concerning Christ’s second coming. In three of these moments, Paul uses the precise wording of the prophets, “the day of the Lord”; in another, “the Lord” is further identified as “Jesus Christ”; and in the two later passages, the phrase is simply “the day of Christ [Jesus].” This is a specific instance where Paul appropriates language that belonged solely to Yahweh and applies it to the risen Lord’s anticipated eschatological return, Jesus Christ. This language transfer is the result of Christ’s having “the name” bestowed on him, so that the day of Yahweh is now the day of the return of the Lord, Jesus Christ, frequently expressed in terms of his appearing or coming again.²³

Paul uses three terms to describe the return of the Lord

a) Parousia: The coming (parousia) of Christ (1 Cor. 15:23), or of our Lord Jesus (1 Thess. 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23; 2 Thess. 2:1, 8). The word “parousia” means coming, arrival, andpresence. In Hellenism, it frequently serves to denote the visit of dignitaries, kings, generals, etc.,as well as the coming, the appearance of gods. The term “parousia” has this technical meaning inPaul but then, with content entirely its own, especially in 1 and 2 Thessalonians. The earlychurch expects that Christ, the Lord, who had ascended and thus had assumed the ultimate place of authority at God’s “right hand,” will return in power and glory. Therefore, the parousia of the Lord would be the chief event in the new understanding of the day of the Lord, and as in the Old Testament, this parousia would be an event of both salvation and judgment.

b) Epiphaneia: A second term with which Paul denotes the great future is that of the epiphany of our Lord Jesus Christ (1 Tim. 6:14); of our Savior Jesus Christ (2 Tim. 1:10); his epiphany andhis kingdom (2 Tim. 4:1; cf. v. 8); the epiphany of the glory of our great God and Savior (Tit. 2:13). Epiphany is generally employed solely for Christ’s definitive coming in glory. The word was particularly suited for this purpose because, in the Hellenistic world, it had acquired the additional significance of a solemn, glorious appearance or entrance, as, for instance, of the Hellenistic rulers.

c) Apokalypsis: The word “revelation” ( apokalypsis) is used for Christ’s coming in glory (2 Thess. 1:7: “at the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ from heaven”; cf. 1 Cor. 1:7: “waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ from heaven”). In these combinations, it is not Christ who reveals “something,” but he is himself revealed, that is to say, he emerges from the hiddenness in which he now is. In that same sense, although with another word ( phaneroo), there is mention in Colossians 3:4 of the appearance of Christ, with which then the manifestation of the church with him in glory is joined. In distinction from the first two words, there is in “revelation” the thought of a preceding period of concealment or hiddenness.²⁴

4.2 Resurrection of the dead

Paul’s best contribution to this issue is seen in his reply to the Corinthian believers. The Corinthian converts, or at least some of them, denied the future resurrection (see 1 Cor. 15: 13f.). It seems that they thought that the spiritual gifts which they had already received constituted the new life: already, they were ‘kings’ (1 Cor. 4: 8). Paul emphasized that what was most important lay ahead. As in 1 Thessalonians, he equated the future state of the living with that of the dead in Christ: they will all be transformed. (1 Cor. 15: 51–2). The change would make them like the risen Lord. ‘Just as we have borne the image of the man of dust [Adam], we shall also bear the image of the man of heaven [Christ]’ (1 Cor. 15: 49). Just what would this be like? Paul reasonably had difficulty in saying precisely what the transformed body would be. He was convinced that he had seen the risen Lord (1 Cor. 9: 1), and thus it follows that the ‘man of heaven’ was both visible and identifiable, On the other hand, there had been (and would be) a real transformation. ‘Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven’ (1 Cor. 15: 10). The chief characteristic of flesh and blood bodies is that they are perishable, and the perishable cannot inherit what is imperishable (15: 42, 50).²⁵

Thinking of those who would still be alive when the Lord returned, he wrote that the ‘perishable nature must put on the imperishable, and this mortal nature must put on immortality.’ This would fulfill the Scripture, ‘Death is swallowed up in victory’ (1 Cor. 15: 53ff.). He used the same imagery in 2 Corinthians 5. The living are in an ‘earthly tent,’ and they wish not to be ‘unclothed,’ ‘but that we would be further clothed so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life’ (2 Cor. 5: 4). The metaphor changes from ‘tent’ to ‘clothing,’ but the meaning is nevertheless straightforward. Immortality is ‘put on’ and replaces mortality.²⁶

In Paul’s discussion of eschatology, there is a timetable. The Christ event is the first in the series of events (15:20-22). Then there is a chronological sequence in the eschatological process: Then there is a chronological sequence in the eschatological process: Christ was raised first who is first one to be raised from the dead: the first fruit (aparche Vv.20, 23), then those who belong to Christ, i.e., both the living and the dead will be raised in a new body, then comes the consummation of the Kingdom, when Christ becomes the Lord of all (15:24). The last act in the eschatological process is the total vanquishing of death (15.26). Thus, there is a tension between ‘the already’ (Christ-event) and ‘the not-yet’ (consummation) in Pauline eschatology.²⁷

4.3 Judgment

Paul develops the doctrine of Judgment clearly in Rom.2, where God will judge all humans according to their works. To the righteous, he will give eternal life and wicked wrath and fury (vv.6-10). Both Jews and Gentiles will be judged based on the law they have (Rom 1:18ff.); the Jews based on the Torah and Gentiles based on God’s law written on their heart (Vv.14-16). Since God has performed his redeeming work through Christ, the basis of judgment will be the gospel (Rom.2:16; 2Thess.1:18). Paul distinguishes between constantly the plural, ‘works,’ and ‘work’ in Paul. By ‘works,’ he designates humans’ autonomous action, by which humans can gain no standing before God (Rom.13:12) and the singular, which describes the action of the Christian. Therefore Paul exhorts the Philippians that he who has given a good work in you will complete it unto the day of Jesus Christ (Phil. 1:6).²⁸

References to future judgment occur from time to time in Paul’s letters. He prays that the Philippians may be ‘pure and blameless’ on Christ’s day (Phil. 1:10). Writing to the Corinthians, he seems less confident about their fate: those who enter a race do not all win the prize, and the Corinthians need to put all their endeavors into running this particular race (1 Cor. 9:24). Paul recognizes that there is still an option that, after proclaiming the gospel to others, he may be ineligible (v. 27). It is an image he uses again, in Philippians 3:12–14, pointing out that he hasnot yet reached his goal. The Corinthians’ arrogance may well lead them into a disaster (1 Cor. 10:1– 13). Paul has already exercised discipline on one member of the Corinthian community, hoping that he will be saved on the day of the Lord (1 Cor. 5:1–5). Others are eating and drinkingjudgment on themselves because of their selfish behavior at the Lord’s Supper and will be judgedby the Lord (1 Cor. 11:29–32). Paul himself, as a ‘servant’ of Christ, was accountable to him,and expected to be judged by the Lord when he came (1 Cor. 4:1–5).²⁹

Paul contrasts between the judgment of unbelievers and that of believers. Unbelievers will be judged on account of their unbelief and constant rejection of the gospel and the outcome is eternal doom and punishment, i.e., the everlasting separation from God. Believers’ judgment is on account of the good works they performed during their lifetime, and the result is the issue of rewards according to the quantity of their works (1Cor.3:12-15). The claim that we will all “appear before the judgment seat of God” or Christ (Rom 14:10; 2Cor 5:10) borrows the imageof the public place (bēma) where officials evaluated cases and made judgments. Christ’s ruling isthe judgment of God.³⁰

4.4 The Cosmos and the Parousia

Paul does not talk about the Parousia in his letter to the Romans. However, he does allude to the bodily transformation of the faithful that would attend it (8:18, 23; Phil 3:21). There is no discussion of the nature of this transformation (as in 1 Corinthians), nor of the assumption of the transformed bodies into heaven (as in 1 Thessalonians), nor of the option of instant transition to heaven at death (as in Philippians). However, there is a new aspect: Paul here envisions the cosmic dimensions of the parousial transformation.³¹

As in 2 Corinthians, Paul uses the metaphor of groaning in labor pains (Rom 8:22-23; 2 Cor. 5:2-4) to explain the current anguish and eager desire of the faithful for their transformation: “We ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly while we wait for adoption, the redemption of our bodies.” Now, though, Paul asserts that all creation is groaning too, and that when the faithful receive their resurrection bodies, the whole creation will share in that transformation. “Creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and will obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God” (8:21).

This is a surprising and provocative shift. Apocalyptic scenarios often envisaged new heaven and earth, but that was generally achieved only through the destruction of the old (see Mark 13:24-27; Rev 16; 21; Isa 24). In Galatians Paul, himself spoke of redemption from the present evil age (1:4) and of being crucified to the world as the world was crucified to him(6:15). Here, he emphasizes solidarity with the world instead of solidarity with its present groaning and bondage and its future redemption. The unbroken solidarity of the faithful community at the Parousia that he envisioned in 1 Thessalonians has here been expanded to include all of creation.³²

5. Relevance of Pauline Eschatology for the present Indian context

We live in an age in which ecological health is threatened both at the global and national levels, mainly because of human ignorance about the existing internal relationship between humankind and nature. Do we find traces of eco-theology in Paul’s writings? If so, how are they related to his Gospel? What implications are available for us today?

Firstly, in Ephesians 1:9-10, the whole eco-system is included in God’s redemptive purposes in Christ. Such an eschatological fulfillment of God’s plan of salvation is called the “mystery.” The Greek word used for God’s plan in Ephesians 1:10 is oikonomia, a cognate of “ecology.” God will sum up and bring together the diverse elements of the cosmos in Christ as the focal point. God purposed to restore all creatures that had become disintegrated because of sin back to original harmony. Paul says that the humans and the things in heaven and on earth are moving in Christ toward this common goal. Paul’s deliberate use of the word oikonomia in Ephesians 1:10 betrays his ecological concern in the sense that the believers participate in God’s stewardship of administering the whole creation in two ways: by sharing their economic resources; and by taking care of creation productively with which they are moving towards the culmination of human history.³³

Secondly, Apostle Paul used eschatological language aimed at edifying the congregations. When the question of the status of the believers who died at the parousia caused apprehensions among the Thessalonians because the feared that these people who have died prematurely have somehow lost the hope of sharing the benefits promised to those who are living, Paul, in his response, directs their attention to the ministry of “consolation.” For he urges them to “encourage one another” and “build up each other” (1 Thess 4:18; 5:11).

Thirdly, Paul also frequently uses eschatological language to sanction certain types of behavior; end-time language also helped him promote higher ethical values. The eschatological language enabled Paul to standardize the conduct of the believers who were prone to moral laxity, particularly among the Gentiles. In Gal 5:21, after a list of vices, he claims, “those who dosuch things shall not inherit the kingdom of God” (cf.1Cor 6:9-10, where the warning precedes a list of types of sinners). Paul states in Rom 8:19ff, suffering not only accelerates the human urge for total redemption but also identifies with the rest of the creation (the sub-human world). Thus he underlines that the right attitude and just use of the natural resources is part of the eschatological demands.³⁴

6. Conclusion

As can be seen from the above discussion, regarding background, it seems Paul believed and shared an environment in which the religious activities were familiar with apocalyptic and eschatological impulses. Examining four differing interpretations by various scholars regarding the development of Pauline eschatology, it appears that the apostle seems to be wavering on the particularities of events such as the time of parousia, his participation in it, the very nature and character of the resurrection body, and the time of receiving it, etc. in spite of the assurance of a present dimension of eschatological hope, for Paul the final revelation of the eschatological age still lies in the future. The ultimate transformation of the world order, the final redemption of the believer (the giving way of the resurrection body), and the final judgment are all events that are yet to be awaited. The present is conditioned by both the past (death and resurrection of Jesus Christ) and the future (the awaited parousia at the end of time).

Bibliography

Abraham, M.V. Theology of St. Paul-An Introduction. Tiruvalla: CSS, 2008.
Aune, D. E. “Early Christian Eschatology.” In The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol.2, pp.594-609.
Bassler, Jouette M. Navigating Paul: An Introduction to Key Theological Concepts. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2007.
Beker, J. Christiaan. Paul the Apostle: The Triumph of God in Life and Thought. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980.
Beker, J. Christiaan. “Paul’s Theology: Consistent or Inconsistent?” New Testament Studies 34/3 (1988):364-377.
Bultmann, Rudolf “The Christian Hope and the Problem of Demythologizing,” Expository Times
65 (1953-54):228-230.
Fee, Gordon D. Jesus the Lord according to Paul the Apostle. Michigan: Baker Academic, 2018. Gorman, Michael J. Reading Paul. Eugene: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2008.
Hooker, Morna D. Paul: A Short Introduction. Oxford: Oneworld Publications, 2003. Lincoln, Andrew T. Paradise Now and Not Yet. Cambridge: University Press, 1981.
Lowe, J. “An Examination of Attempts to Detect Developments in St. Paul’s Theology,” The Journal of Theological Studies 42 (1941):129-142.
Marshall, I. H. “Slippery Words: Eschatology,” Expository Times 89 (1977–78) 264–69.
Meyer, Ben “Did Paul’s View of the Resurrection of the Dead Undergo Development?”
Theological Studies (45 1986):363-387.
Pate, C. Marvin The End of the Age Has Come: The Theology of Paul. Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1995.
Ridderbos, H. Paul: An Outline of His Theology, translated by J.R. De Wittt. London: SPCK, 1982.
Sanders, Ernest P. Paul: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press Inc, 1991.
Sobanaraj, S. Diversity in Paul’s Eschatology: Paul’s View on the Parousia and Bodily Resurrection. Delhi: ISPCK, 2007.
Shires, Henry M. The Eschatology of Paul in the light of Modern Scholarship. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1968.
Tunchapbo. Jesus Tradition in Paul and Pauline Circle West Bengal: Sceptre, 2015. Varghese, B. Pauline Thought: An Introduction. Adoor: El-Shalom Publishers, 2008. Whiteley, D. E. H. The Theology of St. Paul. Oxford: Blackwell, 1964.

M.V. Abraham, Theology of St. Paul-An Introduction (Tiruvalla: CSS, 2008), 50; I. H. Marshall, “Slippery Words: Eschatology,” Expository Times 89 (1977–78) 264; D. E. H. Whiteley, The Theology of St. Paul (Oxford: Blackwell, 1964), 233.
D. E. Aune, “Early Christian Eschatology,” in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 6vols. Gen. ed. D.N. Freeman (London: Doubleday, 1992), Vol.2,595.
D. E. Aune, “Early Christian…, 594-596.
S. Sobanaraj, Diversity in Paul’s Eschatology: Paul’s View on the Parousia and Bodily Resurrection (Delhi: ISPCK, 2007), 60.
Jouette M. Bassler, Navigating Paul: An Introduction to Key Theological Concepts (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2007), 87.
Ernest P. Sanders, Paul: A Very Short Introduction (New York: Oxford University Press Inc, 1991), 44.
See, H.A.A .Kennedy, St. Paul’s Conception of the Last Things (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1904); Gerhardus Vos, The Pauline Eschatology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1952); Andrew T. Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet (Cambridge: University Press, 1981); George Ladd, A New Testament Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974), 550-70.
C. Marvin Pate, The End of the Age Has Come: The Theology of Paul (Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1995), 218.
E. Teichmann, R. H. Charles, C. H. Dodd, F. F. Bruce, and others construe Pauline eschatology through a development scheme. These scholars develop their hypotheses based on the evolutionary stages of Paul’s personality in his missionary cum pastoral career. Refer S. Sobanaraj, Diversity in Paul’s Eschatology: Paul’s View…, 340-41.
Ben Meyer, “Did Paul’s View of the Resurrection of the Dead Undergo Development?” Theological Studies 45 (1986):370-371.
J.Lowe, “An Examination of Attempts to Detect Developments in St. Paul’s Theology,” The Journal of Theological Studies 42 (1941):141.
S. Sobanaraj, Diversity in Paul’s Eschatology: Paul’s View…, 344.
J. Christiaan. Beker, “Paul’s Theology: Consistent or Inconsistent?” New Testament Studies 34/3 (1988):368.
Henry M. Shires, The Eschatology of Paul in the light of Modern Scholarship (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1968)38.
Andrew T. Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet (Cambridge: University Press, 1981), 182.
S. Sobanaraj, Diversity in Paul’s Eschatology: Paul’s View…, 346.
Cited in C. Marvin Pate, The End of the Age…, 223.
J. Christiaan. Beker, Paul the Apostle: The Triumph of God in Life and Thought (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980), 177-178.
C.Marvin Pate, The End of the Age…, 224.
Rudolf Bultmann, “The Christian Hope and the Problem of Demythologizing,” Expository Times 65 (1953-54):229.
J. Christiaan. Beker, Paul the Apostle: The Triumph…, 18.
Ernest P. Sanders, Paul: A Very Short…, 38-39.
Gordon D. Fee, Jesus the Lord according to Paul the Apostle (Michigan: Baker Academic, 2018)174-175.
H Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology, translated by J.R. De Wittt (London: SPCK, 1982), 649-650.
Ernest P. Sanders, Paul: A Very Short…, 40-41.
Ernest P. Sanders, Paul: A Very Short…, 41.
B. Varghese, Pauline Thought: An Introduction (Adoor: El-Shalom Publishers, 2008), 103-104.
B. Varghese, Pauline Thought: An Introduction…, 105.
Morna D. Hooker, Paul: A Short Introduction (Oxford: Oneworld Publications, 2003), 160-161.
Michael J. Gorman, Reading Paul (Eugene: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2008), 116.
Jouette M. Bassler, Navigating Paul: An Introduction to…, 95.
Jouette M. Bassler, Navigating Paul: An Introduction to…, 95-96.
Tunchapbo, Jesus Tradition in Paul and Pauline Circle (West Bengal: Sceptre, 2015), 202-204.
S. Sobanaraj, Diversity in Paul’s Eschatology: Paul’s View…, 404.

Friendly Note

Greetings in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ! We are deeply thankful for your visit to BD Materials. It is our mission and joy to serve Bible students, pastors, and believers with high-quality theological resources that strengthen faith and understanding of God’s Word.

At BD Materials, you’ll find study notes, articles, question papers, and valuable academic content designed to support your biblical and theological education. We are dedicated to helping you grow in knowledge, ministry, and devotion to Christ.

We also invite you to explore our partner sites: Telugu Gospel Lyrics, featuring inspiring gospel song lyrics in Telugu, and Theological Library, a hub for Christian book summaries and devotionals.

Your encouragement means a lot to us! We invite you to share your study materials, articles, or insights with our community. Thank you for being part of this mission—may God bless your studies and ministry abundantly!