#elikittim

Will Time End? Will We Become Immortal? William Lane Craig says, No!

Eli Kittim

Time, as we understand it, is deeply tied to the universe's existence, and its "end" has been predicted by Albert Einstein’s General Relativity: it might cease if the universe collapses (Big Crunch) or rips apart (Big Rip). The New Testament also teaches that worldly time will end with Christ's coming, ushering in an eternal state. While the current "age" passes away, believers will enter an everlasting spiritual reality where time as we know it will cease to exist. In the New Testament, there are key passages that signify the end of time and the beginning of eternity, as well as a transformation from mortality to immortality, marking a transition from fleeting worldly existence to eternal life with God.

But the well-known apologist William Lane Craig denies all this! He claims that time will never end and that we will never become immortal. As will be shown, he is clearly contradicting scripture. Furthermore, he seems to be advocating a form of panentheism (theistic personalism), which is similar to open theism, in his view of God as coexisting with the universe in time. Readers should therefore exercise caution with this apologist, as some of his teachings may contain misinformation.

For example, in 1 Corinthians 15, Paul uses the term “imperishable” to refer to the state of the resurrected body. The term imperishable means not subject to decay, death, or time. Imperishable means “eternal” and “indestructible.” It's the opposite of perishable, meaning “temporary” or subject to decay, entropy, or death, all of which presuppose the element of time. In this way, Paul contrasts the earthly (perishable/Gk. φθορᾷ) with the heavenly (imperishable/Gk. ἀφθαρσίᾳ). As a matter of fact, he explains that when we (the elect) will rise from the dead, we will not only be glorified (theosis) but our bodies will be transformed from the perishable to the imperishable, and from mortality (θνητὸν) to immortality (ἀθανασίαν). First Corinthians 15:50-53 reads thusly:

“I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. … For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality.”

Yet, William Lane Craig says, “We are not going to be immortal souls.”

What is more, Revelation 21 says that “there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away,” signifying the end of temporal suffering and existence. Similarly, Revelation 22 signals a complete renewal of creation replacing temporary earthly life with eternal reality. In fact, Revelation 22 suggests that the regular, observable cycles that govern time on Earth will be absent. Day and night are absent. The sun and light, which act as markers of time, are also missing. It’s important to note that the earth’s rotation relative to the sun is the basis for our 24-hour cycle of day and night. This cycle is a fundamental element of how we perceive and measure time. Thus, Revelation 22 suggests a timeless or eternal state where the physical constraints of our current temporal experience are no longer present. Revelation 22:5 says:

“There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever.”

Moreover, in Revelation 10:6, it is explicitly stated that after the mystery of God is finished "there will be no more time.” The Greek text says “χρόνος οὐκέτι ἔσται,” meaning “time will be no more” or “time will no longer exist," marking the transition from earthly time to eternity. Certain misleading translations render χρόνος as “delay.” But chronos means “time,” not delay.

Yet, once again, William Lane Craig contradicts scripture by saying, “time will definitely go on forever.” Craig also seems to think that God is not entirely outside the universe (transcendent) but that he co-exists with the universe (having entered into time), which can be characterized as a form of panentheism, at worst, or open theism, at best. In fact, Craig's view is not that different from the anthropomorphic view of the Mormon God as an exalted man! When asked “Will Time Ever End?,” he responded by saying that it will definitely not end because “He [God] once existed with the universe. And so It seems to me that this is an irrevocable decision on God’s part to enter into time.” William Lane Craig doesn’t believe in the rapture either, even though it is clearly stated in 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17:

“The dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who remain, will be caught up [ἁρπαγησόμεθα] together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.”

In essence, the New Testament portrays Christ's coming as the definitive end of the current age, bringing about a transformed existence in a renewed creation, completely free from time's limitations and sin's effects. So, I’m surprised that a philosopher of his caliber would make such a mistake confusing time with eternity.

Incidentally, everything that was mentioned about William Lane Craig’s claims (except for the rapture, which he explains away elsewhere) can be confirmed by watching this short, 1-minute, video clip:

Will Time Ever End? (William Lane Craig)

Follow Eli Kittim on MeWe

Mainstream Christianity does not Comprehend what the New Testament is Actually Saying

Eli Kittim

“Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things.”

—2 Peter 1:20

This verse tells us categorically and unequivocally that no one is allowed to interpret scripture, not even the prophets who penned it. So how come we get to interpret scripture when even the authors of the books of the Bible did not dare to do so? What then is the correct method of interpretation?

When the Old Testament prophets said "Thus says the Lord," they were declaring that the message was not their own but was directly from God, implying the words carried the ultimate authority and infallibility of the divine. This authoritative statement underscored the message's origin, emphasizing it was a command from God and not merely a human opinion, and served to identify them as true spokespersons of God. 

Similarly, when Paul says “The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons” (1 Timothy 4:1), this is not his opinion but a declaration of a message that is revealed by God. The Johannine Jesus confirms that no human interpretation is required but rather a communication with the Spirit of God:

“But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.”

—John 16:13

In other words, Biblical interpretation starts with divine revelation, not with human guesswork. Thus, the meaning derived from the text is not determined by the reader's intentions but rather by divine insight (i.e. supernatural knowledge). That the Bible is the inspired word of God is foundational to Christian faith. It is not NT Wright, Richard Bauckham, or DA Carson but the Holy Spirit who provides inner understanding of scripture. And instead of following different denominations and traditions that hold varying views on the Bible and its interpretation, we should all share the exact same divine message. This is why the multitude of debates and books written on the Bible have created more confusion than clarity. It’s because the starting point of all these readings is based on human rather than divine wisdom. Therefore, the standard Christian reading of the New Testament fails to understand the original context and intent. This is due to the fact that it lacks a spiritual or metaphysical component. In 1 Corinthians 2:14-16, Paul states that the person without the Spirit does not understand spiritual things, whereas we do because "we have the mind of Christ"!

The way proper interpretation works is that God first initiates the process by giving us the meaning of a core issue in the New Testament (i.e. the doctrine of illumination). This is revealed collectively to multiple people, not just to a single individual. This “shared knowledge" then becomes the criterion for distinguishing between the "right" and "false" interpretation. Having this knowledge at our disposal, we can then begin to see how it might fit into the scriptural context. That’s how authentic interpretation works. That’s the process. You hear from God and study.

Modern interpretation works the other way around. First, you enroll in a seminary where you are taught certain human assumptions and speculations based on the history of theology. And then you are indoctrinated into certain teachings concerning biblical methods and approaches. After several years of study, you are awarded an accredited degree which states that you’re an expert on biblical studies (which is grounded in guesswork and probabilities), even though you may not really know what the Bible is talking about due to a lack of spiritual information regarding God.

Unfortunately, these days, many Bible scholars don’t accept revelations. They don’t accept the workings and operations of the Holy Spirit. They think that God signed his last will and testament and then went on vacation. These scholars are called Cessationists. And this is the mainstream view of scholarship that is being taught in Christian universities and seminaries the world over. So it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to try to convince these inveterate naysayers that God bestows revelation even in modern times.

The Christian faith, in its current form, fails to grasp the true meaning of the New Testament. Biblical interpretation should come directly from God, not from seminary professors, who might be atheists, or who might be struggling with their own faith and salvation. Christians today are misguided because they look to famous professors and pastors for direction and guidance, thinking that they are giving them sound advice, but don’t realize that these pastors might not know what the Bible is talking about if they never received any information directly from God. Wouldn’t you rather hear someone like Paul, whose teaching is based on revelations from God as opposed to human sources? (see Galatians 1:11-12). Who would you rather listen to, someone who is basing his ideas on human knowledge, or someone who hears from God?

It’s precisely because there’s no direct knowledge coming from God that we are actually being taught doctrines based on probabilities and guesswork (what Paul calls “things taught by demons”). These are private interpretations that should never be accepted as the word of God. So despite claiming the New Testament as its foundation, Christianity has fundamentally misconstrued its central message.

In conclusion, if a doctrine is not given under the inspiration of the spirit, if it’s not a God-breathed message, I don’t want to hear it, no matter how lofty it might sound. This is not gnosticism or elitism. It is the basis of scriptural interpretation:

“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.”

—2 Timothy 3:16

Question: Does the New Testament prove the deity of Christ?

Answer: Yes, indeed!

Titus 2:13:

τῆς δόξης τοῦ μεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν ⸂Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.

Translation:

“the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.”

2 Peter 1:1:

τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ·

“of our God and savior Jesus Christ.”

What about Colossians 1:15:

“our God and Savior Jesus Christ”

John 1:1 says that “the Word was God,” and in verse 1:3 he says that this Word or Logos is the creator of the universe. Then, in verse 14, John adds that the logos became a human being. All bible scholars know that John depicts Jesus as the pre-incarnate God who took on human flesh.

Similarly, Hebrews 1:2-3 says EXPLICITLY that Jesus is the creator of the universe, “sustaining all things through the power of His word.” There is only 1 God. If that God sustains all things, then obviously there’s no other God.

What about Colossians 1:16:

"For by Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible.”

The phrase ἐν αὐτῷ means both *in him* and *by him* in Greek. And all these verses obviously mean that Jesus is God because no one other than God can create and sustain the universe by himself.

Ok. But what about Philippians 2:6? Philippians 2:6 says that even though Jesus is God, he nevertheless became man and temporarily gave up his status in order to save mankind. The phrase μορφῇ θεοῦ means he had the form or nature of God:

Philippians 2:6:

“Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage.”

Thus in his great humility, God became a nobody; a man of no reputation for our sake.

What about John 1:3 and Hebrews 1:2? Well, God creates by himself. He doesn’t use secondary sources or intermediaries, otherwise they would be God and the creator. Besides, Hebrews 1:2-3 says EXPLICITLY that Jesus is the creator of the universe, “sustaining all things through the power of His word.” If Jesus creates and sustains the universe, then how is he not God? Moreover, John 1:3 says πάντα δι’ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, namely, that all things came into being BY HIM (δι’ αὐτοῦ). And nothing came into being without Christ. And then John goes on to say that Jesus is “Life” itself, which is another way of saying the supreme being or the “ultimate Being” or God. And Hebrews 1:2-3 says EXPLICITLY that Jesus is the creator of the universe, “sustaining all things through the power of His word.” There is only 1 God. If that God sustains all things, then obviously there’s no other God.

What about Colossians 2:9:

ἐν αὐτῷ κατοικεῖ πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος σωματικῶς.

Translation:

Col. 2:9:

“in him the whole fullness of the godhead dwells bodily.”

This means that even in a human body, Jesus is fully God!

Conclusion

There are simply too many passages which corroborate that Jesus is Yahweh. That’s why the New Testament translated YHWH as “Lord” and attributed it to Jesus Christ. The phrases “alpha and omega” and “first and last” that Jesus attributes to himself are Old Testament phrases that refer to Yahweh. Daniel 7:13-14 also talks about Jesus as if he were Yahweh. And Jude 1:5 says in the original Greek New Testament that it was Jesus (YHWH) who led Israel out of Egypt (Ἰησοῦς λαὸν ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου σώσας; cf. 1 Corinthians 10:1-4). That’s why Revelation 1:8 calls Jesus the almighty (παντοκράτωρ) who is coming to earth. Hence why Jesus says “I and the father are one” (John 10:30).

So, when we add up the accumulated New Testament texts, the evidence is overwhelming that Jesus is in fact God (cf. John 14:1)!

There is also corroborating evidence about the deity of the messiah in the Old Testament as well (see Leviticus 26:12; Zechariah 2:10; 12:10; Micah 5:2; Daniel 7:13-14; Isaiah 9:6; 53:3-5; Psalm 2:12; 110:1)! But that’s another topic for another day!

What is the Unforgivable Sin?

Eli Kittim

I ran across a Tiktok video by Michael Jones of “Inspiring Philosophy,” who often provides thoughtful, intelligent, and well-researched answers to critics of the Bible. This was a reaction video featuring a Muslim apologist who was trying to convince a young Christian woman that Jesus couldn’t have possibly died for all the sins of the world because there happens to be a sin for which you cannot be forgiven, namely, the so-called “unforgivable sin.” So, if there’s a sin that cannot be forgiven, then how could Jesus have died for all sins? This is a typical Muslim attack. The idea behind this underhanded tactic is to try to undermine the legitimacy of Jesus’ atonement, thereby discrediting his status as the savior.

However, Michael Jones’ reactions to this video didn’t strike me as theologically accurate. He created a false dichotomy by saying that Jesus only died for every sin this woman has committed, not for every other sin in existence. But this suggests that Jesus didn’t die for all the sins that have ever been committed in the history of humankind. He then went on to quote New Testament scholar Craig Keener who believes that the unforgivable sin is unbelief in Jesus.

Unfortunately, there are several problems with this commentary. First, the unforgivable sin is mentioned only in connection with the Holy Spirit, not with Jesus. Second, Jones suggests that Jesus didn’t die for every sin that has ever been committed on this planet. Third, he suggests that Christ died for all sin except for the sin of unbelief. However. Christ died for all sin (past, present, and future). His atonement covers the sins of the entire world. First John 2:2 states that unequivocally and categorically:

“He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.”

So what about the unforgivable sin? Did Jesus die for the unforgivable sin as well? Yes! Jesus died for the unforgivable sin as well. In fact, Jesus died “for the sins of the whole world” (whether individual or corporate). So then why is this sin unforgivable? Well, it’s actually forgivable if God’s offering to obtain forgiveness is accepted by faith, but it’s not forgivable if it is rejected. Let me explain.

The unforgivable sin doesn’t represent a degree of sin on a scale from bad to worse, as if this is the most serious mortal sin that cannot possibly be forgiven. In other words, it’s not a degree but rather a quality of sin. So what exactly is the unforgivable sin? Simply put, the unforgivable sin is a rejection of the Holy Spirit. It is to utterly reject the very means of salvation. You can neither be forgiven nor saved without accepting the Holy Spirit. That is precisely why it’s unforgivable. Because without the Spirit you cannot be forgiven. The sin is not unforgivable because you insulted the Holy Spirit but because you rejected him. You can insult Jesus or the Father, but if you reject the Holy Spirit you cannot be forgiven, justified, regenerated, reborn, or saved.

The Fifth Quest for the Historical Jesus: The Kittim Factor

Kittim’s eschatology is a view in biblical studies that interprets the story of Jesus in exclusively futurist terms. This unique approach was developed by Eli of Kittim, especially in his 2013 work, The Little Book of Revelation. Kittim doesn’t consider Jesus' life as something that happened in history but rather as something that will occur in the last days as a fulfillment of biblical claims. It involves a new paradigm shift! Kittim holds to an exclusive futurist eschatology (i.e. future/anticipated history) in which the story of Jesus (his birth, death, and resurrection) takes place once and for all in the end-times. Kittim’s eschatology provides a solution to the historical problems associated with the historical Jesus.

Kittim views God's revelation of Jesus in the New Testament gospel literature as a proleptic account. That is to say, the gospels represent the future life of Jesus as if presently existing or accomplished. They are written as historical fictional stories, meaning that they are fictional narratives set in a specific historical period, incorporating real events and details while allowing for invented characters and plotlines to drive the stories. The term “prolepsis,” in this particular case, refers to the anachronistic depiction of Jesus as existing prior to his proper or historical time. This is based on a foreshadowing technique of biographizing the eschaton as if presently accomplished.

By way of illustration, Second Peter 1:16-19 demonstrates that the so-called “eyewitness accounts” were actually based on visions that were then written down as if they had already happened (proleptically). The same holds true in Acts 10:40-41 in which we are told that Jesus’ resurrection was based on visions because it was only visible “to witnesses who were chosen beforehand by God.” We find the same motif in Luke’s gospel! No one saw Jesus during or after the so-called resurrection. The women saw a “vision” (Lk 24:23–24). Likewise, Paul’s knowledge of Jesus is based entirely on visions (Gal. 1:11–12).

Acts 3:20-21 also says that Christ will not be sent to earth until the consummation of the ages (cf. Mt. 19:28). Put differently, the gospel stories were written down as if the events they were depicting had already happened (proleptically). Similarly, First Peter 1:10-11 claims that the New Testament prophets “predicted the sufferings of the Messiah” in advance (cf. Isa. 46:10)!

In contrast to the gospels, the epistles demonstrate that all these events will occur at the end of the ages, or at the end of the world. For example, Galatians 4:4 proclaims that Jesus will be born during the consummation of the ages, expressed by the apocalyptic phrase τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου, which is defined in Ephesians 1:10 as the end of the world! Christ’s birth in Revelation 12:5 is also set in the future. Verse 5 describes the birth of the messiah, and the immediate next verse talks about the great tribulation of the end times. Even Luke 17:30 claims that the Son of man has not yet been revealed! In First Peter 1:20 it is explicitly stated that Jesus will be initially revealed “at the final point of time”. Hebrews 9:26 leaves no room for doubt about what is being communicated when it states that Jesus will die for the sins of humankind once “at the end of the ages” (ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων)! A word study of the phrase ἐπὶ συντελείᾳ τῶν αἰώνων demonstrates that it refers to “the end of the world” (cf. Mt. 13:39-40, 49; 24:3; 28:20; Dan. 12:4 LXX). Revelation 19:10 also informs us that the testimony to Jesus is prophetic (not historical).

In fact, most of the evidence with regard to the Messianic timeline in both the Old and New Testaments is consistent with the epistles rather than the gospels. For example, Zephaniah 1:7-8 declares that the Lord’s sacrifice will occur during “the day of the Lord” (not in antiquity; cf. Zeph. 1:14-18). Isaiah 2:19 says that people will hide in the caves of the rocks when “the Lord … arises to terrify the earth.” In other words, the Lord’s resurrection is not separate from but contemporaneous with judgement day (cf. Rev. 6:15-17)! Similarly, Daniel 12:1 puts the death and resurrection of the anointed prince just prior to the great tribulation of the end times. In fact, First Corinthians 15:22-24 tells us explicitly that Christ will be resurrected in the end-times (an idea also entertained by James Dunn). That’s precisely why the New Testament accounts of Jesus are essentially futurist (Mk 13:23). Kittim’s method is therefore revolutionizing the field of historical Jesus Studies.

Kittim’s new findings falsify the conclusions drawn from the previous quests for the historical Jesus both epistemologically and methodologically. Epistemologically because what we thought we knew was derived from fiction, not fact. And methodologically because the approaches were not, in fact, based on historical or expository data. Therefore, if we take all the research into account, especially from the Greek New Testament epistles, the future story of Jesus makes the most sense and fits with all the evidence!