Dealing with Delay, or An Integral Tension Within Biblical Thought?

This topic has been one to cause much cognitive disonance within Christian circles, and a deadly threat to the Christian faith. I know from personal experience, after having dealt with this subject for quite sometime. I do not claim that what I am going to say resolves the problem indefinitely, but I think it may make the issue a little bit more clear to believers and unbelievers alike.
When coming to the topic of what New Testament Critics have called the “delay of the Parousia”, it is assumed out of hand that this causes a insurmountable problem for the Christian faith, or worse, totally invalidates it and shows that it is in fact a false worldview. There is no getting around the fact that there is imminence language in the New Testament, as Ben Witherington has shown quite clearly in his book Jesus, Paul, and The End of the World. The problem stated in a very general fashion is: Jesus and the rest of the New Testament characters believed that Christ’s return would happen with in the lifetime of Jesus’ disciples, and when this belief was proven wrong when Christ did not return after the fall of Jerusalem the early Church then reverted to doing theology.
I think that most of the explanations that have arisen to tackle this very thorny problem in believing scholarship has failed. I also believe that this is the most significant objection to the Christian faith, quite possibly rivaling the problem of evil for the truth or falsity of the Christian faith.
In this paper I will attempt to, first show that the traditional approaches to this topic have failed. I will show that first the most recent attempt to answer this problem by scholars like N.T. Wright have failed, because they try and squeeze biblical language to fit a certain mold across the board that I do no think the New Testament, History, nor scholarship will uphold. Second, I will attempt to show that the traditional position of critical scholarship is off target on this topic. I think that they plaster the early Christians with too much naivety. Finally, I will attempt to show that there is something more profound going on in the OT and NT, and even the rabbis when they use the language of imminence for the coming of God. This paper will depend much upon the work of C.E.B Cranfield, Ben Witherington, Albert Schweitzer, Dale C. Allison, and Richard Bauckham and his article “The Delay of the Parousia” in the Tyndale Bulletein. I have never seen his position critiqued other than to say it is just “a way around the problem”. Bauckham in his examination of the Rabbinical literature and select passages from the OT shows that “nearness” was a way of speaking about the coming of YHWH, and it was more for ethical imperative than any form of date setting.
Series I. HIstory of the Problem in New Testament Studies
A. Remairus and Wrede
B. Schweitzer
C. Others?

Series II. An Old Testament Problem?

Series III A Rabbinical Problem?

Series IV. A New Testament Problem?

A) Jesus
B) Paul
C) Peter
D) Jude
E) John (emphasis on Revelation)
F) Conclusion

Series V. The Problem Critically scrutinized. In...
A) Jesus
B) Paul
C) Peter
D) Jude
E) John
F) Conclusion
Series VI. Summary and Conclusions from Study

I am sure this outline will change, this is how I think I will proceed.