Contrasting the language of the future (and end times) in the later apostolic writings, Alison notes an evolution in the language used to describe how we should live until Jesus comes back. In 1 Corinthians, we see faith, hope and love. Elsewhere we see lots of hope. Later, we see less “hope” and more “patience”.
What we perceive in the apostolic witness is something a little different. As there develops the way in which the apocalyptic imagination is subverted from within, we see ever less insistence on hope and ever more on patience, so that in the letter to Titus we read the following:
Tell the elders to be sober, grave, temperate, sound in faith, in charity, in patience. (Tit. 2:2)
That is to say, where Paul had spoken to the Corinthians in terms of faith, hope, and charity, now patience replaces hope.
-James Alison, Raising Abel, p.163
Alison suggests that the apostles own understanding of the future naturally changed as Jesus didn’t come back right away, then Jerusalem fell in AD 70, then the church grew abroad, etc. The writings in the new testament may be inspired scripture, but they were still written by human beings that didn’t know everything that was going on and who changed their minds about things. They were most certain of the resurrection. Today, we are still changing our ideas. Dispensationalism (that inspires all the Left Behind-esque fiction) is, I think highly influenced by advanced in technology in the past 100 years. Can you really imagine any of the scenarios being pushed lately if we didn’t have:
1. Instant worldwide communication
2. Nuclear weapons
3. “mark of the beast” style digital ID tags
neither could the apostles. Depending on your context, you can do about 100 different things with John’s visions in Revelation.
If we really are in it for the long haul though, perhaps our language will eventually again back away from short-term “hope” and return to long-term “patience”.