Eschatology

or the Theology of the Future

Most of the debates that divide Christians are over areas such as baptism and predestination that may be important, but are not essential to Christian belief. However, the most controversial topic concerns one of the most central doctrines of Christianity - the Second Coming. Denying that Jesus is going to return to Earth is heresy on the same level as denying that Jesus is God or that He rose from the dead.

However, the details surrounding Jesus' return are the subject of great controversy. Because the New Testament nowhere gives us a simple and easy to follow timetable of events, a whole range of ideas has emerged as to what is going to happen, and when. Most of the things due to happen are mentioned in all the theories. What I'm going to do in the rest of this page is give a brief explanation of what each of these things are, discuss the main theories on what goes where, and then give a few general thoughts on approaching the key book of Revelation.

Things that will happen

Jesus' Return

Jesus physically coming back to Earth. This is mentioned so often in the New Testament (and even in the Old) that I shouldn't need to give any references. Revelation describes this in chapter 19.

The New Heaven and New Earth

In Revelation 21-22, God creates new heavens and a new Earth. The Church will live on the New Earth.

Judgement Day

Jesus judges everyone who ever lived. You get to be with God forever or go to Hell. One of many mentions is at the end of Revelation 20.

The Great Tribulation

The huge amount of global suffering mentioned in Matthew 24 and most of Revelation. In most of the theories, it includes a great persecution of the Church.

The AntiChrist

Mentioned in 1 John 2.18, usually identified with the man of lawlessness in 2 Thessalonians 2.1-10 and the Beast in Revelation 13. The general picture seems to be some kind of world ruler (whether a person or an organisation) that persecutes Christians and demands worship. The term antichrist actually means someone who sets himself up in the place that Christ should have rather than just someone who opposes Christ.

The Rapture

Christians being caught up in the air to meet Christ when He returns, as mentioned in passages like Matthew 24.40-41, or 1 Thessalonians 4.16-17. One school of thought, Dispensationalism, has a very different take on this concept to everyone else, which I will explain when I outline their position.

The Millennium

This is the most controversial element. The key passage is Revelation 20, the only place to describe the millennium. It talks about Christ and the Saints (i.e. Christians) and Martyrs reigning over Earth and Satan being bound for a thousand years. The four schools of thought I will discuss are mostly defined by where they place the millennium. Although the passage talks about a thousand years that is almost certainly symbolic of a very long time, rather being literally 1,000 years - no theory requires it to be literally 1,000 years, and one requires that it is not literal.

Classic (or Historic) Premillenialism

This is the first recorded viewpoint on the order of events. It basically placea the millennium (Revelation Chapter 20) between Jesus' return (Revelation Chapter 19) and the new heavens and new earth (Revelation 21-22). It sees the millennium as a period when Christ directly rules Earth with Satan bound up so that he cannot influence anything or anybody. At the end of this period, he is let loose and decieves the nations - proving the sinfulness of the human heart. This is followed by judgement day and the new heavens and Earth.

There are several Old Testament passages which describe a period very similar to this view of the millennium. Some notable ones are Isaiah 11.6-9, Isaiah 65.20-25, and Psalm 72. These passages could be descriptons of the New Earth, but seem to fall short of the picture of perfection presented elsewhere. In particular, Isaiah 65.20 mentions people dying - when Revelation 21.4 says that on the New Earth there will be no more dying.

Premillenialism literally means that the second coming happens before (pre) the millenium.

Amillenialism

This view was first recorded (and advocated) by Augustine of Hippo - one of the most influential Christian Theologians ever. It views the millennium as being a reference to the Church Age (i.e. from the time of the original Apostles to the second coming). Revelation is considered to be written in a series of cycles - so it keeps going back to the beginning. Amillenialists see such a break in between Revelation 19 and Revelation 20. The binding of Satan is taken to mean that he is powerless to prevent the spread of the gospel, the church, and the kingdom of God.

Amillenialism literally means "no millenium", but the name is a misnomer - it actually places the millenium after the second coming.

Postmillennialism

This view has turned up all over the place. It is particularly common in times of revival, and one of its most well-known advocates is the 18th Century revivalist Jonathan Edwards. It says that the millennium is a period where the Church grows so much that it controls the world, building the kingdom of God before Jesus returns. There is very little in the Bible to back this up, though it is unquestionably the most appealing of the schools of thought. One of its major downsides is that the tribulation tends to get left out of postmillennial thinking.

Postmillenialism literally means that the second coming comes after (i.e. post) the millenium.

Dispensational Premillenialism

(And the Pre-Tribulation Rapture)

This is the most recent, and most complicated school of thought. It was first recorded in the 19th Century - and may have been invented by JN Darby around 1830. It was originally popularised by the Schofield Bible - an edition of the King James Version of the Bible with notes interpreting everything from a dispensational point of view. These notes were taken as gospel (if you'll pardon the term) by many. Most recently it has been popularised through the Left Behind series of novels.

The basic idea behind Dispensationalism is that history is divided into seven periods (called Dispensations) in which God deals with humanity in a different way. The last of these periods is said to be the Millennium, which is placed after the second coming (as in classic premillennialism). However, Dispensationalists believe that during the millennium, Christians will be living in heaven rather than Earth and that the saints said to be reigning will be the Jews.

The thing that really sets Dispensationalism apart in its Eschatology is an idea called the Pre-tribulation (or Secret) Rapture. Whereas the other viewpoints see the rapture as something that happens as Jesus returns, the Dispensationalist looks at it as Jesus secretly taking all true believers out of the world just before the great tribulation begins. There are mid-tribulation variations that, instead, place the rapture at various different points in the middle of the tribulation. However, these should be viewed as merely variations on a theme - the difference is in minor detail.

Whilst Dispensationalism may (or may not) be a useful way of looking at the shape of history, Dispensational interpretations of the Millennium seem to me to be forced on the passage. Similarly, their version of the Rapture seems more to be read into the relevant Bible passages than read out of them. For example, both aspects of this theology necessarily claim that throughout Revelation the term saints does not refer to Christians - despite its use to mean just that everywhere else in the New Testament. There is a lot more that could be said on this issue. However, most of it comes down to the same issue of whether Dispensationalism is actually found in the Bible or is a theology imposed upon it.

Conclusions

To my mind, the Classical/Historical Premillenialist position makes the most Biblical sense, though I can see why the Amillenialist might be a valid alternative interpretation. Postmillenialism has so little Biblical support that it must be rejected, and Dispensationalism seems to be reading things into the Bible - which makes me very uncomfortable.

A Couple of Notes on Revelation

The book of Revelation is key to this particular area of theology. Many people say that it is hard to understand. This is mostly because everything is written using fantastic imagery in a style with which modern readers are unfamiliar. My take on Revelation is that it is easy to understand the broad sweep, and that you shouldn't get bogged down in the details.

The broad sweep of Revelation is that John has a vision of Jesus, who dictates seven letters to churches in Asia Minor (now Turkey) telling them what he's pleased about and what he's not pleased about in those churches. He then goes on to reveal to John some things that are going to happen in the future. This revelation is in the form of symbolic pictures of things. The general pattern is that there are a whole load of major disasters, and massive persecution of the Church, followed by Jesus' return, which sets everything right. This is followed by the creation of the New Heavens and New Earth.

Delving into the details is potentially difficult. The prophetic pictures could be taken to be symbolic for all time, specific to events of the first couple of centuries AD, specific to the last few years before Jesus returns, or (least likely) a picture of history from when it was written until the second coming. It could, of course, be a combination of all of them. If the details do represent the events of the very end times, then I would say that attempting to unravel the details before they happen is a pointless waste of time - surely it is better to prepare yourself for the events, whatever they are, than to try to predict every detail ahead of time.