Apologetics, not Apologies

The Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 is often understood to be predicting the second coming of Christ due to the references to "the end of the age" and the language used. However, when read in the proper context of the question Jesus was answering and the similar judgment language used by the Old Testament prophets, it can easily be seen to be exclusively about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple that happened with that generation,  in AD 70.  For a detailed exposition, please see my article This Generation .  What does that imply about the doctrine of the second coming of Jesus? Why did the early church after AD 70 continue to teach that "Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again" and write it into the creeds?  The second coming is based on other verses such as the following: And while they were gazing into heaven as he went, behold, two men stood by them in white robes, and said, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking ...

Introduction In this article I will look at several topics about which Christian theologians disagree, which are not essentials of the Christian faith but important, nonetheless. The Bible - Which books should be included?  Baptism - Infant baptism; Sprinkling vs. Immersion, Symbolic or Salvific?  Communion/Eucharist - Symbolic or the real presence of Christ? Prayer and Fasting - Is fasting still expected of Christians? Creation - Old Earth or New Earth? Eschatology - When was Revelation written?  Which parts are literal and which are symbolic? This is not an exhaustive list of such topics, but it includes a number that perplexed me over the years and which I have researched extensively as well as topics that come up frequently in apologetic discussions. "In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, and in all things charity” is a famous quote that sums up the spirit in which I address the questions addressed in this article. What are the essentials? I would sugges...