John A.T. Robinson Study Archive @ = PreteristArchive.CD

Defense=20 of the Orthodox View of the Second Coming of Christ In Response to the = Teachings=20 of Full Preterism | Jer= usalem=20 earthquake seen as "finger of God" | Ramp's=20 Collapse Foreshadows Greater Temple Mount Disaster | Program=20 Schedule | The passion of the Christ - Mel=20 Gibson

Add=20 Your Comments at Bottom

=20

Henry=20 Alford
Andreas=20 <= STRONG>
Martin=20 Anstey
Aphrahat
Thomas=20 Aquinas
Arethas
Athanasius
Carl=20 Auberlen
Augustine
Barnabus
Albert=20 Barnes
BarSerapion
Beasly-Murray
Venerable=20 Bede
John=20 Bengel
G.C.=20 Berkouwer
John=20 Broadus
David=20 Brown
<= STRONG>John=20 Brown
F.F.=20 Bruce
George=20 Caird
John=20 Calvin
B.H.=20 Carroll
Cassian
David=20 Chilton
Chrysostom
Adam=20 Clarke
Clemens
Clement=20 of Rome
Conyb./Howson
Henry=20 Cowles
Cyprianus
Gary=20 DeMar
<= STRONG>P.S.=20 Desprez
Philip=20 Doddridge
Isaak=20 Dorner
Alfred=20 Edersheim
Jonathan=20 Edwards
E.B.=20 Elliott
Epiphanes
Eusebius=20
Farquarson
Austin=20 Farrar
F.W.=20 Farrar
A.R.=20 Fausset
J.C.=20 Fenton
Geneva=20 Notes
Ken=20 Gentry
John=20 Gill
W.B.=20 Godbey
Ezra=20 Gould
Steve=20 Gregg
Gregory=20 of Nyssa
Hugo=20 Grotius
Henry=20 Hammond
Hampden-Cook
Hengstenberg
Matthew=20 Henry
G.A.=20 Henty
Samuel=20 Hinds
Hippolytus
George=20 Holford
Henry=20 Hudson
Irenaeus
Apostle=20 James
Robert=20 Jamieson
St.=20 Jerome
Jesus/Israel
Jewish=20 Sibylline
and Talmud
Apostle=20 John
B.W.=20 Johnson
Dr.=20 Jortin
Jo= sephusBenjamin=20 Jowett
Justin=20 Martyr
Benjamin=20 Keach
K.F.=20 Keil
<= STRONG>John=20 Kelly
Kett's=20 History
J.=20 Marcellus Kik
Lactantius
Johann=20 Lange
John=20 Lightfoot
Abiel=20 Livermore
<= STRONG>John=20 Locke
James=20 Macdonald
Thomas=20 Manton
Mathetes
Apostle=20 Matthew
Philip=20 Mauro
Melito=20 of Sardis
Heinrich=20 Meyer
<= STRONG>Dale=20 Moody
Stan=20 Moody
Robert=20 Mounce <= STRONG>
Johann=20 Neander
William=20 Newcome
Sir=20 Isaac Newton
Thomas=20 Newton
N.=20 Nisbett
Gary=20 North
Origenes
Dr.=20 John Owen
Blaise=20 Pascal
Apostle=20 Paul
Apostle=20 Peter
Bishop=20 Pierce
Arthur=20 Pink
Maurus=20 Rabanus
St.=20 Remigius
Ernest=20 Renan
Eduard=20 W.E. Reuss
John=20 Robinson
Edward=20 Robinson
Theodore=20 Robinson
James=20 S. Russell
Cecil=20 Sanders
Philip=20 Schaff
Thomas=20 Scott
Sulpicius=20 Severus
Dr.=20 John Smith
R.C.Sproul
C.H.=20 Spurgeon
Dr.=20 T.P. Stafford
William=20 Stevens
Rudolph=20 Stier
A.H.=20 Strong
Moses=20 Stuart
Milton=20 Terry
Tertullian
Theophylact
Thomas=20 Torrance
Touttee's=20 Cyril
Av.Veronica
Victorinus
John=20 Walvoord
William=20 Warburton
Benjamin=20 Warfield
Noah=20 Webster
John=20 Wesley
Richard=20 Weymouth
William=20 Whiston
N.T.=20 Wright

J.N.=20 Darby
Jerry=20 Falwell
Dr.=20 W.B. Godbey
Thomas=20 Ice
Irenaeus
Johann=20 P. Lange
= Hal=20 Lindsey
John=20 MacArthur
Gary=20 North
Dr.=20 E. Robinson
C.I.=20 Scofield
Rudolph=20 E. Stier
Moses=20 Stuart
Jack/Rex=20 VanImpe
John=20 Walvoord

Christ's=20 Deity/Return
Salvation=20 Incomplete
Non-Occurrence
= Scripture=20 Inerrancy
Date=20 of Matthew

John=20 A.T. Robinson
(1919-1983)

Anglican = bishop | New=20 Testament scholar

Redating = the New=20 Testament (1976) | Jesus and His Coming = (1967) | The = Body=20 (1952) | A.T. = Robinson=20 Remembered | J.S.= =20 Spong

(On Christ's Second Coming)
"The parousia = is clearly=20 understood, not as a separate catastrophic occurrence, but as a = separate=20 pervasion of the daily life of the disciples and the = Church. The=20 coming is an abiding presence." [Jesus and His Coming=20 (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1967), p .176]

(On Revelation 11:1 ; Early Date of = Revelation)
"It is indeed = generally agreed=20 that this passage must bespeak a pre-70 situation. . . . There = seems=20 therefore no reason why the oracle should not have been uttered = by a=20 Christian prophet as the doom of the city drew nigh." = (Redating the=20 New Testament pp.. 240-242).

"It was at this point that I = began to ask=20 myself just why any of the books of the New Testament needed to = be put=20 after the fall of Jerusalem in 70. As one began to look at them, = and in=20 particular the epistle to the Hebrews, Acts and the Apocalypse, = was it=20 not strange that this cataclysmic event was never once mentioned = or=20 apparently hinted at (as a past fact)? (Redating, p.=20 10).

"One of the oddest facts about = the New=20 Testament is that what on any showing would appear to be the = single most=20 datable and climactic event of the period =BE the fall of = Jerusalem in=20 A.D. 70 =BE is never once mentioned as a past fact. . . . [T]he = silence is=20 nevertheless as significant as the silence for Sherlock Holmes = of the=20 dog that did not bark". (Ibid., p. 13.)

(On the Forty Years and That=20 Generation)
"I believe=20 that John represents in date, as theology, not only the omega = but also=20 the alpha of New Testament development. He bestrides the period = like a=20 colossus and marks out its span, the span that lies between two = dramatic=20 moments in Jerusalem which boldly we may date with unusual = precision.=20 The first was when, on 9 April 30, 'early on the Sunday morning, = while=20 it was still dark,' one man 'saw and believed' (Jno. 20:1-9). = And the=20 second was when, on 26 September 70, 'the dawn of the eight day = of the=20 month Gorpiaeus broke upon Jerusalem in flames.' Over those = forty years,=20 I believe, all the books of the New Testament came to = completion, and=20 during most of that period, if we are right, the Johannine = literature=20 was in the process of maturation." (p. 311)

(On the = consequences of the=20 needed re-dating of the New Testament=20 books)
"the rewriting of = many=20 introductions to - and, ultimately, theologies of - the New=20 Testament."

"Coming - presence" (Parousia) of Christ should not be seen = as future=20 events, but as a symbolical mythological presentation of = "...what must=20 happen, and is happening already, whenever the Christ comes in = love and=20 power, whenever are to be traced the signs of His presence, = wherever to=20 be seen the marks of His cross. `Judgement DAY' is a dramatized=20 idealized picture of everyday" (His in the end... Clarke, = London, 1950=20 Pg. 69). Again I will quote the words of Robinson. "...Did Jesus = ever=20 use language which suggested that He would return to earth from = heaven?=20 A critical examination of the data leads him to answer `NO'. = Jesus'=20 sayings on the subject really express the twin themes of = vindication and=20 visitation. e.g. His reply to the high priest's question whether = or not=20 He was the Messiah (Mark 14:62+): `1 am: and you will see the = Son of man=20 sitting at the right hand of power: and coming with the clouds = of=20 heaven'. In Math 26:64 and Lk.22:69 a word or phrase meaning = from now=20 on' or 'hereafter' is inserted before `you will see"' (Jesus and = His=20 coming - S.C.M., London 1957).

WHAT OTHERS HAVE = SAID

"Robinson, the reknown late Bishop from England begins this = book, "I=20 thought I would see how far one could get with the hypothesis = that the=20 whole of the New Testament was written before 70." That, of = course, was=20 the year in which the Roman army sacked and burned the Temple of = Jerusalem. As it turns out, Robinson got much further than he = ever=20 expected, and that on a journey made more impressive by his lack = of any=20 predisposition toward a "conservative" point of view.

His conclusion is that there is no compelling evidence - = indeed,=20 little evidence of any kind - that anything in the New Testament = canon=20 reflects knowledge of the Temple's destruction. Furthermore, = other=20 considerations point consistently toward early dates and away = from the=20 common assumption (a prejudice with a seriously circular = foundation)=20 that a majority of early church authors wrote in the very late = First or=20 early-to-middle Second Century under assumed names. Whether or = not one=20 agrees with every word of Robinson's analysis, he makes his case = well=20 and should help all New Testament students rethink the = presuppositions=20 that underlie much of what is currently written about First = Century=20 Christianity." (Redating the = New=20 Testament at Presence Books)

"In the field of eschatological studies, no topic seems = thornier than=20 that of the resurrection, regardless of the particulars of one's = perspective. A great deal of misunderstanding about the = resurrection in=20 "preterist" circles stems from our tendency to see the concept = of "body"=20 largely in dualistic terms that do not reflect Paul's way of = thinking.=20 This is especially true of Paul's discussions of resurrection, = and a=20 recovery of the Hebrew understanding of body will go a long way = toward a=20 proper understanding of resurrection in first-century corporate = terms.=20 To this end, John A.T. Robinson's 1952 classic The Body: a = study in=20 Pauline theology is a valuable contribution to the = literature=20 surrounding Transmillennial=AE thought as much as his book, = Redating=20 the New Testament. "One could say without exaggeration that = the=20 concept of the body forms the keystone of Paul's theology," = contends the=20 author. Robinson's own eschatology does not embrace complete=20 fulfillment, yet this quality reprint of this classic book in = Pauline=20 studies provides the serious student a missing piece of the = puzzle of=20 Pauline eschatology." (The Body at = Presence=20 Books)

Robinson, A.T. = Remembered

By the Rt. Rev. John Shelby = Spong
Bishop=20 of Newark

One of the great mentors of my life was an = English bishop=20 and New Testament scholar named John Albert Thomas Robinson. He = burst=20 into public awareness in the United Kingdom in the late fifties = when he=20 testified before a commission seeking to ban the novel Lady = Chatterley's=20 Lover. For a bishop to favor Lady Chatterley titillated the = English=20 media who love juxtaposing religion with sexual expose. People = were not=20 aware at this time that this Bishop of Woolwich was also a = serious=20 student and a prolific, if not yet well known, writer. =

In 1962 a=20 back ailment required that John Robinson be confined to bed for = a number=20 of months. His fertile and imaginative mind was freed from other = distractions and he wrote a little book called Honest to God = that=20 appeared on the bookstands in 1963. It made the controversy = about Lady=20 Chatterley's Lover look pale by comparison. This book forced = people to=20 recognize that the language of traditional religion was not a = language=20 that people believed today whether they continued to use it or = not. An=20 advance story in London's SUNDAY OBSERVER trumpeted the = headline,=20 "Bishop says the God up there or out there will have to go." = Thus, the=20 Church was launched into what came to be known as the "Honest to = God=20 Debate," and John A. T. Robinson became a household word in the=20 English-speaking world.

That little book sold more = copies than=20 any religious book since Pilgrim's Progress. It was translated = into=20 dozens of languages. It was discussed, not just in religious = circles,=20 but in pubs, on golf courses and over bridge tables. It brought = religion=20 out of the churches and planted it firmly on Main Street. =

One=20 would think that the leaders of the churches would have welcomed = such an=20 initiative, but that would be to misunderstand the nature of=20 institutional religion. The religious establishment, instead, = recoiled=20 defensively. Every would-be theologian rushed into print to = denounce=20 this book. Calls were issued for Bishop Robinson's resignation = or for=20 him to be deposed for heresy. A book of reactions to Honest to = God was=20 published to keep the waves rolling. It revealed just how deeply = John=20 Robinson had touched the hot buttons of religious fear that the=20 traditional defenders of the faith struggle to conceal. =

The=20 echoes of this debate reached my ears in my small-town parish in = Tarboro, North Carolina. I did not rush to read the book. = Reviews=20 indicated that it quoted extensively from Rudolf Bultmann, = Dietrich=20 Bonhoeffer, and Paul Tillich. I was quite familiar with these = thinkers=20 and so I dismissed the book as a popularizing effort of no great = significance. Nonetheless I placed the book on my reading = schedule, and=20 finally got to it in 1965.

I remember the day I first = opened=20 this book. Vacationing on the Outer Banks of North Carolina, I = sat on=20 the beach one afternoon with Honest to God. I did not put it = down until=20 I had read it through three times. I knew from that moment that = my life=20 would never be the same.

John Robinson made me aware = that my=20 childhood understanding of God would not live in my world. He = forced me=20 to face the fact that the words of both the Bible and the Creeds = sound=20 strange to post-modern people and that my faith had to grow or = it had to=20 be abandoned. I began on that day the long, tortuous and, to = this=20 moment, not yet completed process of rethinking all of the = symbols of my=20 religious past so that I could continue to claim them with = integrity. I=20 also pledged myself never again to use pious clich=E9s that I = clearly no=20 longer believed.

This book drove me first back to the = Bible. I=20 knew that the Noah story, or the splitting of the Red Sea story, = could=20 not be literally true, to say nothing of the stories of Jesus = turning=20 water into wine, walking on water and ascending to the heaven of = a=20 Ptolemaic universe that had ceased to exist with Copernicus. My = church=20 had prepared me poorly, I discovered, to live as a believer in a = post-Copernican world, to say nothing of a world shaped by such = giants=20 as Newton, Darwin, Freud or Einstein. The Church still lived in = a world=20 of miracle and magic, where reward and punishment were meted out = by God=20 according to human deserving.

Seven years later, in = 1972, this=20 internal struggle emerged externally in the form of my first = book which=20 was deeply shaped by the "Worldly Holiness" chapter in Honest to = God. My=20 publisher entitled my book Honest Prayer, hoping, I am sure, to = be=20 pulled into the Honest to God energy that was still abroad. In = 1973 I=20 first met John Robinson. This larger-than- life man came to = speak in=20 Richmond on the 10th anniversary of the publication of Honest to = God. He=20 was very British, displaying little emotion. After the session I = was=20 introduced to him. I thanked him for what his writing had meant = to me. I=20 presented him with a copy of Honest Prayer. We talked for a = while and=20 then we each returned to our respective lives. Five years later = in 1978=20 John and I met again at the Lambeth Conference of the Anglican = Bishops=20 of the world. I was now one of those bishops and John, who had = returned=20 to Cambridge to teach New Testament, was present as a = consultant. Both=20 of us, bored by the speeches, decided to leave early and walk = through=20 the woods of Kent to discuss the New Testament. We came across a = country=20 pub and stopped to share "a pint." We even engaged in the pub = game of=20 "bowls," but all the while still discussing the New Testament. = It was=20 such a pleasant experience that we decided to repeat it each = day. So=20 while the bishops were debating, John and I probed the gospel = tradition=20 and I learned from his incisive mind.

In those years = John and I=20 both continued to write books which addressed the theme of = bringing the=20 church into dialogue with today's reality. I read everything he = wrote.=20 John Robinson's echoes were heard in me every time I spoke and = certainly=20 every time I wrote. When one reviewer referred to me as the = American=20 Bishop Robinson, I was deeply touched. After Lambeth, John and I = began=20 to correspond. I yearned to bring him to lecture to our diocesan = family,=20 and finally he agreed. Six months before his scheduled = appearance,=20 however, John wrote that he had received a cancer diagnosis and = had only=20 a few months to live. He sent me a copy of the sermon he = preached at=20 Clare College, Cambridge, the Sunday after he received the = diagnosis. I=20 was deeply touched by it, though it made me aware of how lonely = I would=20 be without this kindred spirit. John died in the early months of = 1983.=20 In my grief I was pleased to be asked to write the American = tribute to=20 him published in THE CHRISTIAN CENTURY. Someone else had = recognized how=20 important he was to me.

I did not have either John's=20 intellectual training or his Cambridge PhD. Yet after his death, = in a=20 real sense I was the only other bishop who was addressing = publicly the=20 issues he had raised. That fall of 1983 I published a book = entitled Into=20 the Whirlwind: The Future of the Church. It marked a watershed = moment=20 for me from which there was no turning back. It was not that it = was a=20 great book, but reading it today I discover that the seeds of = every book=20 I have written since were present in its pages.

In 1988 = Living=20 in Sin? came out. That book was for me the kind of birth to the = wider=20 public that the debate on Lady Chatterley's Lover had been for = John=20 Robinson. Because of that book and the controversy it sparked, I = increasingly found myself occupying the space in which John = Robinson=20 once stood and bearing the hostility he received. Now I was the = most=20 controversial bishop in the Anglican Communion. My vocation = clearly was=20 to transform Christianity so that it could be lived out = appropriately=20 today. Each new book fueled this growing flame. Invitations to = lecture=20 began to come in from across America, as well as from Australia, = Canada,=20 New Zealand and the United Kingdom. To be a bishop leading this = debate=20 became the heart of my vocation. Hence, I worked long hours lest = I=20 violate either the integrity of my office or of my scholarship. = I could=20 not walk away from the role for which everything in life had = equipped=20 me. I have lived this role with vigor, yearning more than once = to have=20 had John's counsel.

This past summer I returned once = again to=20 the United Kingdom on a lecture tour. I had speaking engagements = in=20 Yorkshire, Aberystwyth, Cardiff, Sheffield, Leeds, Milton = Keynes, London=20 and Leicester. There were also breaks to allow us to visit = family and=20 friends. In one of these downtimes I came face to face with John = Robinson once again.

We went to visit two friends, = formerly of=20 St. Peter's, Morristown, who now live in a tiny, secluded = village in=20 Herefordshire. To our amazement their next-door neighbor was = John=20 Robinson's only brother, Edward. We spent an evening with him=20 reminiscing about John's career and his influence. My tour ended = at a=20 conference in Leicester for an organization called "The Sea of = Faith,"=20 where I debated the radical English theologian Don Cupitt. To my = joy a=20 member of this conference was Ruth Robinson, John's widow. Once = again we=20 spent an evening remembering John Robinson. It was as if grace = had=20 touched me twice. The theological child of John A. T. Robinson = had been=20 welcomed home. I have now lived and worked twelve years beyond = the life=20 span of my mentor. I have picked up and addressed some issues = that never=20 surfaced for him. It has sometimes been a lonely journey. Today = I can=20 see the horizon of my career and wonder who the next John = Robinson will=20 be.

There will always be the "John Robinson" role = present in the=20 life of the Church. It will be welcomed by some, feared and = hated by=20 others. But that role is always the means by which growth and = the=20 renewal of the church is accomplished. I have been privileged to = walk,=20 however ineptly, in these footsteps.

TABLE OF CONTENTS: THE = BODY

Preface
Introduction
(1) The Old Testament = Background
1. Form and Matter
2. The One and the = Many
3. Body=20 and Soul
4. Boundary of Self
(2) The Pauline Usage
(i) = The=20 Concept of the Flesh
(ii) The Concept of the Body

II = THE BODY=20 OF THE CROSS
The Human Situation
The Process of = Redemption
(1)=20 Self-Identification
(2) Victory over evil
(3) Reproduced = through=20 baptism

III THE BODY OF THE RESURRECTION
(1) The = Extension of=20 the Incarnation
(2) The Origin of the Doctrine of the Body of = Christ
(3) The One and the Many
(4) Christ, the Church and = God
(5) The Old Body and the New
Dictionary of Key Greek=20 Terms
Index of Biblical References
Index of Names

Contents, Redating the New Testament = (1976)

Preface
I Dates and = Data
II.=20 The Significance of 70
III. The Pauline Epistles
IV. Acts = and the=20 Synoptic Gospels
V. The Epistle of James
VI The Petrine = Epistles=20 and Jude
VII. The Epistle to the Hebrews
VIII. The Book of = Revelation
IX. The Gospel and Epistles of John
X. A = Post-Apostolic=20 Postscript
XI. Conclusions and Corollaries

Any Comments or Quotes on this Topic=20 ?

=20

What do YOU think=20 ?

Gu= estbook=20 | Data= bases=20 | Message=20 Board | Yaho= o Pret=20 Chat

Date:
30 Nov 2003
Time:
09:31:19

Comments

Spong's silence about Robinson's later works, particularly on = the=20 dating of the New Testament is, to quote Robinson = "...nevertheless as=20 significant as the silence for Sherlock Holmes of the dog that = did not=20 bark." Whether Robinson was correct or not is not the issue. The = wonder=20 is that one who claimed to be so close to Robinson never = mentions his=20 later works. In his latter years Robinson was, of course, = pushing=20 against the edges as he had so wondrously done in "Honest To = God." Yet=20 now it was the edges of "accepted" scholarship, not the edges of = "orthodoxy" against which Robinson was pushing. 'Tis strange, = indeed,=20 that the good Bishop Spong was silent about this "pushing." =

=