Holy Spirit Guided Consensus

Living Water at Christianity Oasis

John 7:38  He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said,
out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

Quench your thirsty soul!

Click the link below to learn more about the Holy Spirit:

Further Musings on the Kingdom Of God,
Holy Spirit-Guided Consensus
And the World of Tomorrow

Note to the reader:

This little E-book should be looked upon as an "appendix" to my Holy Spirit-Guided Consensus (Number 5145). I should also warn that it is not without controversy but I appeal to you not to allow the controversial aspects to obscure the main message that I wish to present. I would like to suggest that the message of this ebook together with my earlier one referred to above, be prayerfully discussed and meditated upon in small groups. As the theme of both these ebooks concerns Holy Spirit-guided consensus, it is logical that what is said in each should itself be brought before the Holy Spirit by small groups with the prayer that He will guide, by the process of such consensus, the understanding and application of this in the lives and ministries of those who read them.

The Kingdom: Now Or ... When?

In my earlier ebook, I spoke about the Holy Spirit-guided consensus and gave reasons why this should be the way in which decisions are made by Christian groups, whether these groups are churches gathered for worship or Christian charitable or commercial organisations. Ultimately, it was speculated, even national governments and international political organisations would yield to Holy Spirit-guided consensus in a Christian world.

Just briefly, I mentioned that this future Christian society may be similar to a loose confederation of Christian communities more or less similar to the Bruderhof communities of today. In the present ebook I will look more closely at this wider, social, aspect.

I believe that a time will come when the kingdoms of this world will be transformed into the Kingdom of God. Many Christians today believe that this is an optimistic opinion that is not supported by Scripture. It has almost become orthodoxy that the world situation will continue to deteriorate until Christ returns in judgement and brings in God's eternal Kingdom in a new heaven and new earth.

That is a position that I believe to be mistaken. Arguments against this belief are given in my earlier ebook The Last Days: Some Thoughts and Musings (Number 5024) and will not be repeated here. Nevertheless, my position has changed a little in one respect since writing the earlier ebook.

At the time of writing The Last Days my position was essentially the partial preterism held by R. C. Sproul Snr and David Chilton at the time of writing Days of Vengeance, his scholarly exposition of the Book of Revelation. The partial preterist position understands most – though not all – Biblical prophecy to have taken place within the first century of the Christian era. In particular, it effectively divides the "Second Coming" of Christ into what might be termed a "limited" coming in the form of the judgement of Jerusalem in AD 70 and a "global" coming that is still to occur at some future date.

Chilton subsequently became dissatisfied with this position and moved to the more radical full preterist position in which all Biblical prophecy is believed to have been completed in the first Christian century. All reference to the return of Christ, according to this position, relates to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, marking the end of the Old Covenant age.

My own thoughts began to drift in a similar direction in recent years. Partial preterism as formulated by Sproul and Chilton during his "Days of Vengeance" period is not well supported by Biblical evidence. In particular, there is no real evidence for a "Third Coming" of Christ. However, although I have become more sympathetic toward the full preterist position, I am still not able to embrace it. It does not, in my opinion, deal adequately with the full range of Biblical prophecy concerning the Last Days.

* * *

One issue which full preterism fails to adequately explain is the "thousand years" in Revelation Chapter Twenty. J. S. Russell long ago drew attention to this in his masterful work The Parousia in which he gave an account of end-time prophecy that agreed with that of full preterism ... but for one notable exception. He pointed out that, whereas John prophesied that most of the events covered by Revelation were to happen "soon", those in Chapter Twenty were not to take place until the "thousand years" were over. The word "soon" is, to a certain degree, "flexible" in so far as the length of time it denotes is not a fixed period, but varies according to the context in which the word is being used. For example, suppose that two friends (let's call them Dick and Harry) agree to meet over coffee at 11 AM. Harry arrives on time, but Dick is delayed in traffic and, upon realising that he will be several minutes late, sends Harry a message informing him of his delay while reassuring him that he will nevertheless soon be arriving. "Soon" in that context would be understood by both men to refer to several minutes. On the other hand, when astronomers predict that the star Betelgeuse will soon explode, they mean that it will go pop in about 100,000 years time. By the standards of the cosmological time scale, that may reasonably be called "soon", even though it seems almost an eternity when measured against the span of a human lifetime. This "flexibility" of the exact meaning of "soon" has been taken up be some futurists in relation to how John may have used the word in Revelation. They argue that he intended "soon" to be understood in terms of how God sees time, not how human beings see it. Therefore, they suggest, when John says that the prophesied events will happen "soon" this is not inconsistent with the passage of several thousand years before the prophecies are actually fulfilled.

The difficulty with this suggestion is the fact that John was writing to human beings who would naturally interpret "soon" in terms of the familiar everyday sense of referring, if not necessarily to the immediate future, at least to some time within the next several years or (at the most) decades. It is easy to lose sight of the fact that what we call "The Book of Revelation" is actually a letter and, in common with the other letters in the New Testament, was written primarily for a specific readership (contemporary with the letter's author) dealing with specific issues of pastoral significance to that readership. Certainly, they are also relevant to later generations (otherwise, they would not have been included in the New Testament!), but that does not alter their primary purpose. With respect to Revelation, John's primary readership consisted of Christians living in dangerous times that promised to become even more dangerous in the very near future. Their concern was therefore immediate, not about events in the far future, and it was these immediate concerns about which John's letter principally dealt. These concerns were about what was soon to occur – "soon" in the usual everyday sense. The "thousand years" were an encouraging glimpse of the final victory, some time well in the future. Some people take the thousand years to refer to a literal thousand-year time span (principally those who see the period as still being in the future) while may others understand it to be symbolic of a very long expanse of time (probably well exceeding a literal thousand years). One popular interpretation equates the "thousand years" with the church age which, of course, has already lasted for twice that period of time in the literal sense! We will take a look at how full preterists deal with the "thousand years" shortly.

First however, it may also be worth noting that Jesus, during His earthly ministry, did not speak of the end of the Age and His return as being "soon", although He strongly indicated that the time would not be very far in the future. Although He declares that the exact time is known only to the Father (Matt. 24:36), He clearly gives hints as to the approximate time. For example "There are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom" (Matt.16:28). "This generation will by no means pass away till all these things are fulfilled" (Matt.24:34). "before you have gone through all the towns of Israel the Son of Man will have come" (Matt.10:23).

All these statements suggest that the return of Jesus would be in the relatively near future – "fairly soon" rather than "soon". It would happen within the lifetime of at least some of the folk to whom Jesus was speaking. J. S. Russell argues that the use of "generation" suggest a time frame of around 30 – 40 years. If that is correct and if we agree with those scholars who place the date of Revelation during the reign of Nero, that time span would have been already nearing its end when John was writing his letter. With this in mind, it is therefore noteworthy that the risen, ascended and glorified Jesus who spoke to John in his vision said "I am coming soon" (Rev.22:20). The time predicted by Jesus during His earthly ministry had, by then, almost expired.

* * *

How do the "thousand years" fit into this picture according to the full preterist? Ideas differ somewhat, but the general agreement is that the phrase "thousand years" is used in a non-literal sense. Many scholars agree with this. However, whereas most who hold this opinion understand the phrase to mean a very long period (probably far longer than a literal thousand years) full preterists must understand it to refer to a time period far shorter than a literal thousand years. It must be a period of time that both began and concluded during the first century! Opinions differ concerning the exact duration of the period as well as the actual period to which John is referring, but the general consensus is that the period is about 35 – 40 years duration. This is remarkably close to Russell's interpretation of "generation" (but, as already noted, Russell did not take a full preterist view of the thousand years). If the full preterist is correct, I cannot understand why John would have referred to the period as a "thousand years". Surely, we might think, the events he speaks about at the end of the period would have also been occurring "soon."

Another, and related, problem encountered by the full preterist position concerns the picturesque descriptions of the Kingdom in, eg. Isaiah 65, 17 - 25 and Ezekiel 47,1 - 12. In Ezekiel's vision the spring flowing from the Temple and becoming the mighty river is symbolic of the growing Kingdom, but we should also note that he also spoke of salt swamps that were not refreshed by the river. In other words, some parts of society are not revived. Evil still lurks in the stagnant pools. Moreover, the beautiful description of the Kingdom in Isaiah 65 also notes that those who do not reach the age of one hundred years will be considered accursed (Is., 65:20). This implies that sin will remain (albeit at a very low level) during the times of this vision's fulfilment. Moreover, although the blessed in that era will live as long as the trees, they will eventually die. Neither sin nor death, it seems, will be completely eradicated during the times of this vision.

Now, if these prophetic visions refer to the "thousand years", principally to the later period of that era if history has already entered the "thousand years" (see below), this does not present a problem. But they cannot reasonably be taken to be descriptions (even highly symbolic descriptions) of a time-period of 35 – 40 years in the First Century AD as required by a full preterist interpretation. Full preterism must therefore interpret these visions as referring to the final state of God's Kingdom on Earth. But if it is to be consistent, the full preterist position must admit that (according to its own parameters) neither sin nor death will ever be eliminated. This is freely admitted by at least some full preterists. Ed Stevens, of the International Preterist Association, specifically states that the persistence of the "stagnant pools" means that evil will always be present. The problem with this position is its apparent denial of the full victory of Jesus. If Stevens is correct, how could Paul say that Christ will rule until "God has put all enemies under His feet" (1Cor. 15:25), with the last enemy being death itself (1Cor. 15:26) or that, in the final situation, God will be "all in all" (1Cor. 15:28)?

My personal opinion, which (as I have already mentioned) has changed slightly from the one I held when I wrote The Last Days, is that the prophecies concerning the return of Jesus all refer to the events of the end of the Old Covenant age and the destruction of the Temple in AD 70. At that time the "thousand years" began and still continues. Increasingly, the rule of Christ will become apparent until, eventually, His presence in the world will be so obvious that it cannot be doubted. There will not, however, be another sudden "coming" as I earlier believed; rather a progressive revelation of the Christ who has already come and whose Kingdom is already spreading through the world. His Kingdom is the spring flowing from the Temple that will become a river, ever widening (as more people come into it) and growing ever deeper (as the relationship with, and experience of, the Kingdom members becomes stronger and more profound). This position presents a via media between the partial preterism of, eg., Sproul and the early Chilton and the full preterism of the later Chilton, Stevens etc.

It may be significant that, during relatively recent decades, the faith of increasing numbers of Christians has become more "experiential". "Ordinary" Christians have been experiencing the presence of Christ in ways that in earlier generations have been largely confined to monks and nuns or experienced by those with special calling. For instance, Seventeenth Century England hardly knew what to make of George Fox. Today, he would have had far greater acceptance from within the mainstream church.

Another (albeit closely related) trend within the church today is the increasing interest in and practice of Holy Spirit-guided consensus. As we mentioned in Holy Spirit-Guided Consensus, this typically Quaker approach is being adopted in other Christian settings, both in the worship context and in the operation of some Christian charitable organisations. This, together with the increase in dramatic spiritual experiences within the broad Christian population, would appear to be indicative of an increasing awareness of the real presence of Christ and of God's leading His people to an increasing degree of awareness of the guidance of the Holy Spirit and obedience to His will. All of this will, I believe, increase in the future. As the corporate Body of Christ (the global company of Christians and local meetings of Christians, each of which manifests Christ's presence in the world) becomes increasingly open to the guidance of the Holy Spirit, so the presence of Christ will become increasingly apparent in the world.

This presents an optimistic outlook for the future, however it is not a Pollyanna optimism. The long run is optimistic, but that does not necessarily mean that there will not be reversals and global disasters in the shorter term. Such have happened in the past and, although they are not inevitable in the future, they certainly remain possible. Yet, I believe that we as Christians can be optimistic about the growth of the Kingdom despite any temporary setbacks and periods of darkness that may occur along the way. The vision of the mature Kingdom is what must remain before our minds and it is this toward which we should direct our thinking. The Kingdom will become more clearly manifested on Earth as Christians increasingly conform to its distinctive nature – as we think, act and live in increasingly conformity to its essential characteristics.

Some may object that this is placing too much stress on human works, as if it is our effort that brings about the maturity of the Kingdom in the world. But the works are not ours. They are Christ's works through His corporate Body. We are simply the organs of His Body. Norman Percy Grubb, who placed great emphasis on the spiritual union of the individual Christian and Christ, used the expression "Christ as us" to emphasise the fact that when an individual acts according to God's will, it is Christ Himself who is responsible for such acts. For individuals, I prefer to speak of "Christ through us" rather than "Christ as us" although I appreciate what Grubb is saying. Nevertheless, when a Christian meeting acts upon Holy Spirit-guided consensus, we can truly say that it is Christ acting as this group of Christians – His corporate Body.

Think of a windmill grinding wheat into flour. Is it the wind or the mill that is doing the work? We could say it is both, but not in the sense that the wind supplies X percent of the effort and the mill supplies Y percent. Rather, the wind is responsible for one hundred percent and the mill is responsible for one hundred percent; with the total being one hundred percent. If the mill broke down, it would not matter if a gale was blowing, no work would be accomplished. Likewise, if the mill was in perfect working order but the air was calm, no work would be accomplished.

It is not difficult to see this as an analogy of the Christian or group of Christians responding to decisions arrived at through Holy Spirit-guided consensus. We do one hundred percent, He does one hundred percent, but the total is one hundred percent!

The "Lamb's War"

John writes of his symbolic vision of Christ the Victor mounted on a white horse with a sword held in His mouth. The sword projects from His mouth because it represents the Word of God by which the Universe was called into being and which is even now smiting all that opposes the rule of the Lord. This is Armageddon and it continues throughout the "thousand years". It is not a war between the nations of Earth, but a spiritual war fought by Christ against all opposition. To borrow James Nayler's perceptive phrase, it is "the Lamb's War".

At the end of the "thousand years" John says that Satan (who is held back from deceiving the nations during the "thousand years") must be released for a short time (Rev. 20:7-9). Why does John use the imperative here? Why must Satan be released? I suggest that it is to flush out the stagnant pools; to gather together the remaining forces of evil. They prepare themselves for battle against the people of God, but are consumed by fire from heaven, thereby cleansing the world so that God may truly be "all in all." As an aside, I might suggest that the "fire from heaven" is nothing less than the Holy Spirit, who came upon the disciples in a form like tongues of fire (Acts 2:3). The Holy Spirit, by contrast, came upon Jesus in the form of a dove, as He had no sin to burn away. May it be that the rebel nations are not destroyed by the fire so much as converted? Throughout the Bible, "the nations" are always contrasted with the people of God. In the verses referred to here, they try to attack God's people but are consumed by God's holy fire. Yet, in the very next chapter of Revelation (21:24) the nations walk in the Light and their leaders bring their "splendour and wealth" into the Holy City. Are these two sets of nations the same? I suggest that they are as nowhere in the Bible is there a fundamental division of the nations. This is only a suggestion however, and this is not the place to pursue it further.

The Characteristics of the Kingdom

Earlier, we spoke of the characteristics of the Kingdom to which Christians should increasingly conform. We must now ask what these characteristics are? What, in other words, will be the mode of living in the mature Kingdom?

Any answer to this question must necessarily involve a good dose of speculation, but I do believe that certain suggestions can be made.

First, the presence of God will surely be apparent to all. God will be experienced in a very real sense. Secondly, I believe that people will be far less individualistic than our present culture (at least in the West) takes for granted. A society full of spiritually mature Christians cannot be a selfish society in which each person is principally concerned with himself or herself. Society will be a family, brothers and sisters in Christ. More than that, because each is indwelt by the same Christ through the Holy Spirit, there will be (as this great and miraculous fact is increasingly realised) a relationship between one another that is even closer than that between members of a natural family.

Thirdly, motivation for actions will spring from the inward guidance of the Holy Spirit (including, and maybe even principally, through the Holy Spirit-guided consensus of groups of Christians which, depending upon circumstances, may be either a family group, a congregation, a commercial business board or a body governing society).

Historically, there have been several experiments by Christians in living as a community. The members of the very early church shared their property and attempted to build a community in which all was shared according to the needs of its members (Acts 1:44 – 45). This seemed to be successful for a time (despite the tragic incident of Ananias and Sapphira reported in Acts 5: 1 – 11) but there was a danger of the Church becoming too concentrated in one place and not moving outward into the wider world. When persecution broke out, the community was broken up and Christians were scattered far and wide, carrying the Gospel with them and planting new congregations in many regions. Nevertheless, this first Christian community clearly manifested the perception that Christians belong to the same family and that love of family members is to be demonstrated in a very practical manner.

Throughout church history, there have been numerous examples of community living, although only a small percentage of Christians have felt called to membership of these communities. Monasteries are obvious examples. Another interesting example is the "Digger" rural commune set up by Gerrard Winstanley in Seventeenth Century England. Winstanley is often held up today as an example of a proto- communist and he has even been described as the world's first hippie. But his social experiment grew from his religious beliefs, which had a good deal in common with those of the Quaker movement which he actually joined at a later date.

Quakers themselves have been involved in communal experiments from time to time as, for example, Friend's Farm founded in Queensland, Australia, in 1869 by a small group of Quakers led by Alfred Allen. Alas, the idealism and enthusiasm of Allen and his group do not appear to have been matched by their practical knowledge of farming and the commune was quite short lived.

The best known and most enduring of today's Christian communities are probably the Amish, Hutterites and Bruderhof. The first two have their roots firmly grounded in the Anabaptist movement of the Reformation era while the third was founded in 1920 by Eberhard Arnold who was influenced by Anabaptist writings as well as by George Fox and the early Quakers. Unlike the Amish, Hutterites and Bruderhof do not reject modern technology and are more open to the wider society. They differ, however, in that the Bruderhof (no doubt reflecting Arnold's acquaintance with the works of Fox) place greater emphasis on the guidance of the Holy Spirit and practise Holy Spirit-guided consensus in the running of their communities.

Although nobody (least of all Bruderhof members themselves) suggest that all Christians should join Bruderhof communities or that members of such communities are "better Christians" than those living in the broader society, I am inclined to the opinion that these communities nevertheless give us a hint of how the entire human society will function in the Christian world that will (I suggest) exist as the Kingdom becomes more apparent on Earth. This will be a gradual process as Christians are guided by the Holy Spirit, over generations, to a deeper awareness of the communal aspect of Christianity and away from the individualism that focuses on "me" rather than on "us." In the meantime, a minority of Christians will be called to join existing communities such as Bruderhof. Some may even be drawn to emulate Winstanley and Allen in forming Christian rural communes. What must never be attempted however is the forcing of these structures on wider society or on Christians as a whole. Society will evolve in God's time under His hand and must not be forced by overly enthusiastic humans!

Within Bruderhof communities, individual ownership is replaced with ownership by the community as a whole. The first Christians had a similar approach as we read in the fourth chapter of Acts. These early Christians apparently continued to live in their houses and there is no reason to believe that they did not retain personal property such as clothing, but what we would today refer to as their capital was donated to the community and shared amongst its members as they had need (Acts 4:34-37). This seems to have been voluntary, not a requirement for membership of the community (Acts 5:4). But is there any Biblical justification for thinking that the entire human society will some day be composed of communities having this approach?

It must be admitted that there is no specific Biblical passage that we can turn to that clearly states this. Nevertheless, there is an interesting parallel between Acts 4: 34 – 37 and Revelation 21:26. The Acts passage describes how the early Christians brought their possessions into the community whereas the Revelation passage predicts how the wealth of the nations will be brought into the Holy City by their leaders (their "kings" in John's words but we could equally think of presidents and prime ministers). What happened in Acts 4 may be looked upon as a small and local preview of what will occur someday on a global scale. John does not tell us how the wealth of the nations will be used once it is brought into the Holy City, but we can be sure that it will not be locked away in bank vaults! Is it not reasonable to think that it will be used for the benefit of the all?

No doubt, some readers will not agree with the opinions expressed here, but I simply repeat what I said in the introductory note that all the opinions presented should be made subjects of prayer and openness to the guidance of the Holy Spirit. May we all remain open to His direction. Amen.

Click the link below to return to
Purity Publications Free Christian Ebook Store:

Copyright © 2000-2024 All Rights Reserved.