John Calvin, a 16th century representative theologian, agrees with the eschatological idea of “not yet” rather than “already.” On the other hand, Joan M. Martin, a womanist Christian liberation ethicist, more emphasizes on the “already” side. According to the understanding of eschatology, …show more content…
To emphasize the importance of God’s kingdom in the future, Calvin compares the present life on earth with the kingdom of God. He tries to make better effects on the hope toward the kingdom of God by accounting the vanity of the present life.
The present life is regarded with contempt (Calvin, III.ix.1). The perspective of the world as vanity and object of contempt appears also in the Second Helvetic Confession. The Second Helvetic Confession represents the devil as “the prince of this world” (The Book of Confession, 5.127). The perspectives of Calvin and the Helvetic Confession about this world make the distance between the kingdom of God and this world. Although the present life is one of God’s blessings and one of “those gifts of divine generosity”, ultimately, the purpose of the present life is “for the glory of the Heavenly Kingdom” (Calvin, III.ix.3). Calvin’s idea about the present life is just the preparation for the kingdom. The present life and the kingdom of God are completely …show more content…
Calvin and Martin’s life in this world would be very different. In my tradition, the old generation mainly believes that the Eschatology will come in the future, and they believed/believes they can get into the kingdom of God after death exactly same as what Calvin says. The old generation has stood on the “not yet” side, and most of them did/do not enjoy their live in this world because of only longing for the last day. Even the old generation did not speak up their injustice sufferings because they only longing the kingdom of God in the future after