The Restoration of God's Glory

The restoration of God’s glory has already begun ― ‘we ... are being transformed into his likeness, with ever-increasing glory’ (2 Corinthians 3:18) ― but it will not be completed in this mortal life.
The Christian faith does not begin and end with humanity. It begins with God ― ‘In the beginning, God … ’ (Genesis 1:1). He is our hope for the future, our hope for eternity ― ‘He is the true God and eternal life’ (1 John 5:20).
We look away from ourselves to Christ . He is our ‘hope of glory’ (Colossians 1:27). He is our ‘goal’, ‘the prize for which God has called (us) heavenward in Christ Jesus’ (Philippians 3:14). Our earthly present is not the last word on human experience. In the present, we see ‘the presence of the future’. In the present, we see the unfolding of God’s eternal kingdom. The eternal destiny, the glorious future, calls us on.
We are to be a people of hope, but we are not to be easy-going optimists who take lightly ‘the radical nature of evil’. Believing that ‘God is the Lord of history’, we also recognize that ‘there are hostile elements, opposing forces which seek to frustrate God’s rule’. Together with an ultimate optimism concerning the final fulfilment of God’s eternal purpose, we speak with realism concerning the present realities of our human situation.
This dual perspective ― human sin, divine salvation ― has been well expressed in the words of Howard Butt : ‘Everything is hopeless but God. Everything is hopeful because of God ... we and our societies are nothing compared with God ... we and our world are beloved of God.’
We do not concern ourselves so exclusively with God that we lose interest in what is happening here on earth. We do not, on the other hand, allow ourselves to get so caught up in the complexities of human experience anthropological study that we lose sight of the God who gives to our life on earth its true meaning, purpose and direction.
Howard Butt insists that Christ ian hope includes both heavenly hope and earthly hope: 'Transcendent hope and … immanent hope ... must cohere ... in order to intersect and overcome despair the loss of expectation, both expectation for God’s eternal Kingdom and expectation for the improvement of this world ... transcendent expectation and immanent expectation form one complete Christian hope. The first says, turn to God because the human prospect is so bleak; the second says, the human prospect can be changed because of God'.
For the full revelation of the divine glory, we await his coming kingdom. This does not prevent us from seeking glimpses of his glory here-and-now. Indeed, the hope of his glorious kingdom encourages us to seek such glimpses of glory. Our experience of his glory can never be more than partial. Nevertheless, we believe that it is a real anticipation of the glory, which will be fully unveiled at the return of Jesus Christ.
Focusing attention on this future hope does not involve diverting attention away from our present life. There is a vital connection between the two. The relevance of our future hope for this present life has been well brought out by the German theologians, W. Pannenberg and J. Moltmann. Their comments are well worth noting here. Stressing that ‘(w)e are not called to choose between concern for the Kingdom and concern for society’, Pannenberg insists that ‘The Church … must take the present social and political forms with greatest seriousness and appraise them in light of the coming Kingdom of God’. Emphasizing that God should not be viewed in terms of ‘isolated transcendency’, he points to ‘God’s intention for the transformation of the world through his rule’, highlighting the church’s role: ‘By witnessing to the future fulfilment of humanity in God’s Kingdom, the Church helps to stir the imagination for social action’.
Thinking of the ‘Church as constituted by its mission to the world in the service of the coming universal Kingdom of God’, Moltmann views our future hope as ‘not an escapist dream, but a critical, motivating perspective on the present’. Pointing out that ‘(t)he theologian is not concerned merely to supply a different interpretation of the world, of history and of human nature, but to transform them in expectation of a divine transformation’, he maintains that ‘Christian theology “proves” itself ... in opening up future prospects for reality and initiating movements towards these’. Seeking to ‘relate the expectation of an ultimate future to hopeful activity in the present’, he highlights the ‘function’ of Christian ‘hope’ in ‘liberat(ing) people’s thinking from the constraints of existing conditions’, ‘arousing hope and obedience’ and ‘produc(ing) anticipations of (the Kingdom of God) in history’.
While the insights of Pannenberg and Moltmann are most valuable, they ought to be used with caution. It has been argued that, in some of Moltmann’s writings, there is a ‘danger ... of promoting a revolutionary political attitude in too simplistic a way’. Aware of this kind of danger, Pannenberg stresses that ‘we should not be carried away into saying that the Church must always be revolutionary’. e look closely at human exoerience, we will confront many complex issues. We must not lose sight of the nature of our Christian faith. It involves allegiance to Jesus Christ, but it may never be identified with unqualified allegiance to any political system.
Whatever may be said about contemporary applications of Christian hope, it must be stressed that our future expectation centres on a real return of Christ in the coming kingdom of God. Our present experience of God can be no more than a ‘poor reflection’ of ‘the glory that will be revealed in us’ ― ‘when he appears we shall be like him’ (1 Corinthians 13:12; Romans 8:18; 1 John 3:2). Our world will be a new world. Its renewal will be greater than we could ever imagine. It will be ‘a new heaven and a new earth’ (Revelation 21:1).
There must be no attempt to speak purely ‘from above’. This would be an authoritarian imposition of theology upon anthropology. There must be no movement towards developing a ‘from below’ method which severely restricts the freedom of theology to comment on human experience. This would be an over reaction to the danger of theological authoritarianism. Speaking from the standpoint of a God who has fully involved himself with his creation (John 1:14), we emphasize that human life remains unfulfilled apart from this God.
From the standpoint of God, there is an impulse which moves him towards humanity ― the impulse of his love. From the human standpoint, there is a pull towards God ― the pull of his love. God’s love propels him into action. His initiative towards humanity is the initiative of love. God’s love calls humanity back to himself. Even in all the many demands of a world which often seems to go on from day to day, year to year, and even generation to generation, with little thought of God, still, there is the call of God’s love, the ‘still, small voice’, the ‘gentle whisper’ of God’s voice (1 Kings 19:12). Many voices call for our attention. There is one voice which must be heard above all others, the voice of God.
We do not speak of God all of the time. We must speak also of human experience. God is not to be ‘hauled in’ at every opportunity. He is there at every point. At no point is God absent. We live in his presence, even when we refuse to acknowledge him. Our voice is to be a real echo of the ancient prophets and apostles. There is a word from the Lord, a ‘living and enduring word of God’ which modern men and women, in all their sophistication, still ignore at their peril, a ‘living and enduring word of God’ which still points the way forward, the way of true progress for the human race (1 Peter 1:23). Everything that we say is to be grounded in divine revelation.
When we are wrestling with the many and varied issues raised by our experience of life in this world, we must not sight of of God. We need to remember Augustine’s well-known prayer: 'You have made us for yourself, and our hearts are restless until they rest in you'.

Created over 1 year ago