« McLaren's New Book 'Everything Must Change' - Part 1 | Main | Part 3 - Everything Must Change: The Story We Find Ourselves In »



2 Peter 3:2-13 (King James Version)

2That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:

3Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

4And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

5For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

6Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

7But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

8But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

9The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

10But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

11Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,

12Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

13Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

"Nevertheless WE", not the "willingly ignorant" Brian the "scoffer" by his own testimony.

Henry (Rick) Frueh

Chris - you have presented an organized and Scriptural treatise of a book that obviously teaches more of the same from MacLaren, error. These type of essays that inform without drawing unecessary attention to the author and with only some appropriate hyperbole are much needed today.

I look forward to more of this kind and am edified by your investigative and clear style.

Chris Whisonant

“The phrase “the Second Coming of Christ” never actually appears in the Bible." - Neither does "Trinity"...

Regarding this topic, I wrote an essay several years back titled: Against Universalism: A Response to “Biblical” Universalism

In it I combat some of the same teachings that supposed preachers or other "Christians" are using to deny a judgment and hell. It can be found here.


Hi Chris,

I personally don't agree with where McLaren has indeed veered from the Scriptures in regards to the purpose of Christ's death on the cross and other matters, but I do agree with his statement "This is why I believe that many of our current eschatologies, intoxicated by dubious interpretations of John’s Apocalypse are not only ignorant and wrong, but dangerous and immoral." He is dead on accurate there.

You lay out well the scriptures that state that Christ would return, but you left out references to clear and immanent (to 1st century Christians) time statements that are immersed throughout the New Testament stating clearly that the time was at hand, soon, near, about to be, in that generation, coming before all the apostles died... Matthew 3:2, 3:7, 4:17, 10:7, 10:23, 16:27-28 Gk 'mello' = 'about to', 24:34, Mark 13:30, Luke 3:9, 21:22, 21:32, John 21:20-22, 1 Cor 7:29, 10:11, James 5:8, 1 Peter 1:20, 4:5 also Gk. mello, 4:7, 1 John 2:18, Rev 1:3, 2:25 and 3:10 to actual churches then, 22:6-7, 22:12, 22:20. Those are just a small number of them...

All of the NT writers wrote, hoped for, taught and believed that they were living in the last days THEN. Not the last days of the end of the physical world as we know it, or the end of time, but the last days of the Old Covenant. See Acts 2:14-21 and compare to Joel 2:28-32. Also see Hebrews 1:1-2. Also 1 Cor 10:11. We call these authors of the Bible inspired by the Holy Spirit, right?

And yes, historic Christianity has laid out hope for a future, physical return to establish a physical kingdom on earth but Christ Himself even rejected the notion of a physical kingdom (Luke 17:20-21, John 18:36). Daniel 2:44-45 clearly prophesied that in the days of ROME the Kingdom of Christ/God/Heaven would be established. But modern day Christianity rejects that reality and adds a future reincarnation of Rome which is never laid out in the Scriptures. Nearly all of the NT inspired writers including Jesus Himself said the Kingdom was "at hand" and "soon" and about to take place.

Let me ask those reading a few quick questions...

First, Brent mentioned Peter's description of the New Heavens & Earth in 2 Peter 3 and emphasized the "we" in verse 13. Is that written to us or is that talking to first century Christians? Remember, this is the inspired author Peter writing here.

Next, is salvation - our redemption - complete?

And finally, are we under the New Covenant today as prophesied in the OT to Israel?

In Christ alone,



Great work, Chris. I didn't get a chance to read the whole thing yet, but what I heard, I thought was excellent. You can add to your list Paul's discussion in 2 Thessalonians 2 --- phrases like "flaming fire" and "taking vengeance" don't really sound much like peace to me!



Brian never actually rejects a second coming of Christ, simply states that this wording is never used in the Bible. Rightfully so, someone pointed out that neither is "Trinity." However, you missed Brian's point completely, and wrote an essay "proving him in the wrong" but you actually didn't prove anything and didn't even discuss his point. You see his point was that we have used and abused the idea of a second coming that will come in force and by an imperial militant Jesus. Brian's point is that this seems contradictory to Jesus' first coming and makes it a "fake-out" as he says. Jesus was all about nonviolence. Oddly enough, all of your verses you used ACTUALLY DO NOT SUPPORT VIOLENCE in the second coming, but rather JUDGMENT. The two are not one in the same. Violence and Judgment are different concepts and one can exist completely independent of the other. This is Brian's point. You completely missed that and certainly did not prove him wrong.

- Ben


I almost forgot... within that point was the point that in creating a militant imperial Jesus in the second coming, we lose the image of Jesus we see in the NT and we put up with and even subscribe to imperialistic values. This is true, especially in Western Culture. We've created a American, westernized Jesus... and the idea of an imperialistic, violent second coming only strengthens this idea. That was Brians other point within his point... If you're going to read and critique his stuff, any of you, listen to and talk about the actualy point the he is trying to make.



I spent a long time suspicious of McLaren and Co. It was mostly because of posts like this. Then I actually read his writing. I still don't always agree with him, and I think he falls in to theological provincialism, but I don't think he's overtly WRONG. His error, if anything, is imbalance.

What happens time and again with his and other emergents' writings is misunderstanding. At times, this seems almost willful. Most of these sorts of articles do very little to try to fully understand or explain what McLaren is saying. They often pick up what it sounds like he is saying (too often out of context) and then run.

If you are reading this and are curious about McLaren, I'd encourage you to actually read his books. Do so carefully, maybe even suspiciously, but do so humbly as well. Try to understand what he is saying. You don't have to agree. You can even call him names if you want to, but try to get his message concretely first.

He is in some ways a provocateur and aims for the "prophet" kind of voice, so he criticizes more than he edifies, but he has some good things to say. Give him a chance.

Allan Svensson

I found your Web Site by Google
And I wish you the best you can get,
the peace of God through Jesus Christ.

Welcome to visit my Site.
Allan Svensson, Sweden

Why does the revival tarry? It is because God's
people tarry to obey the powerful command of
the Lord in Rev. 18:4. This is the most powerful
revival message of the Lord to his people in our time.

The coming revival, a nameless revival

Why was the Pentecostal Revival stopped?

Joe White

Yes, the 'non-violent' Jesus made a whip of cords and drove men out of the Temple area, overturning their tables of money (these weren't plastic portable card tables, but most likely heavy wood or stone topped tables).

If we must acknowledge McLaren as a 'prophet', I would add 'false' as an adjective.

The comments to this entry are closed.

October 2010

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

A Little Leaven

Support This Site

Follow Me on Twitter

  • Twitter

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter