The Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible defined “eschatology” as
The department of theology which is concerned with the “last things,” that is, with the state of individuals after death, and with the course of human history when the present order of things has been brought to a close. It includes such matters as the consummation of the age, the day of judgment, the second coming of Christ, the resurrection, the millennium and the fixing of the conditions of eternity.
Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible, StudyLight.org
The Book of Revelation has been the most neglected writings in the New Testament. It is rarely preached or taught from the pulpit due to the perception that it can cause division. Whenever it has been taught to Christians, controversies—often leading to arguments—ensue. As a result, many Christian congregations avoid the book, not by the members but at the insistence of their leaders. However, the relevance of Revelation cannot be ignored. Like the final words of a dying man, it conveys the last messages of Jesus Christ to the Old Covenant people of God.
The underlined phrase from Hastings sheds light on the current confusion surrounding eschatology. However, if we adjust this idea by replacing some words, we may be able to explore the unity of Scripture without contradictions. Please compare the statement below with Hastings’ original.
“Eschatology concerns the ‘last things,” with the state of individuals after death, and with the course of human history when the Old Covenant of God has been brought to a close.”
I simply change the phrase “the Old Covenant of God” to “the present order of things.” Oops! That statement could already spark controversy, though it might be nothing for ordinary readers.
Currently, biblical scholars recognize at least four different perspectives on the Book of Revelation and prophetic literature. None of these views is considered heretical or false teaching, as each is supported by passages from Scripture. The issue lies not with the Scripture itself, but with its interpretation. All four proponents of eschatology affirm the absolute authority and inerrancy of the 66 books of the Bible. Therefore, the problem ultimately stems from human error, a point on which all sides can agree.
Despite Christianity’s two-millennia-long history, many arguments and debates remain unresolved. This is why none of the four perspectives of eschatology are classified as heresy or false teaching; for now, they are simply considered “debatable.”
The four views of eschatology, namely the Futurist view, the Preterist view, the Historical view, and the Idealist view.
Christian Theology by Millard J. Erickson was a required reading for us during my time at seminary. It spanned four semesters in our Systematic Theology class. I have a particular interest in this subject, especially because it addresses the topic of death, which I feel compelled to explore in search of the truth about what happens after we die. If you’ve read all my blogs, you may know that I came to faith following the tragic death of my only son. I shared my journey in a blog post titled “Regarding Wilmer.”
Here is an excerpt from Christian Theology, by Willard J. Erickson:
At this point it will be helpful to note a system which is used to classify the various interpretations of prophetic or apocalyptic material in Scripture. While it is often most utilized as a means of classifying interpretations of the Book of Revelation or, more generally, all such prophetic literature, the system can also be applied to distinguish views of eschatology:
1. The futuristic view holds that most of the events described are in the future. They will come to fulfillment at the close of the age, many of them probably clustered together.
2. The preterist view holds that the events described were taking place at the time of the writer, Since they were current for the writer, they are now in the past.
3. The historical view holds that the events described were in the future at the time of writing, but refer to matters destined to take place throughout the history of the church. Instead of looking solely to the future for their occurrence, we should also search for them within the pages of history and consider whether some of them may be coming to pass right now.
4. The symbolic or idealist view holds that the events described are not to be thought of in a time sequence at all. They refer to truths which are timeless in nature, not to singular historical occurrences.
Christian Theology, Unabridged, one-volume edition p.1154, by Millard J. Erickson
I understand that the definition provided can be difficult to grasp, even for those who deeply appreciate Scripture. This complexity often arises from the perceived vagueness of some biblical passages. That’s why attending seminary can be beneficial for many. Even after I left the organized religious system and began my ministry independently, I encouraged someone to enroll in the same seminary, and he did. He is now serving in a local congregation.
I would like to express my gratitude for my professors during my time at the seminary. They provided me with solid training and equipped me well for studying the Bible. However, it’s important to acknowledge that, much like learning to drive a car, while skills can be taught and acquired, true excellence comes with practice and real-world experience. I want to clarify that I am not claiming to have achieved excellence, but rather that I feel eligible to engage in exegesis (the critical explanation or interpretation of a biblical text) and to apply hermeneutics (the knowledge required for interpreting the Bible).
The futurist view is likely the most familiar perspective for many people. Scripture contains revelations and prophecies that speak of the future; to them only a portion of these prophecies has been fulfilled, while the rest are still pending. Since the 1970s, numerous novels and films have been created about the anticipated Second Coming of Christ, contributing to its popularity. Additionally, the Scofield Reference Bible from the early 1900s has had a significant impact on Christians for over a century.
In this context, there’s a video teaching by Bruce Gore that offers a comprehensive analysis of the dominant futurist view and explores its questionable origins. The futurist perspective comes in various forms and continues to evolve.
Herewith also is a shorter video from Ben Witherington III, a professor of New Testament Interpretation at Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Kentucky. However, I encourage you to invest the time to watch Bruce Gore’s more detailed video, as it is well worth it.
Many pastors today, being futurists, often claim that Jesus Christ is coming soon. However, many may not realize that according to the dispensational futurist view, the kingdom of heaven has yet to arrive. In contrast, Jesus Christ clearly stated the presence of God’s kingdom, as seen in Matthew 12:28.
But if it is by the Spirit of God that I [Jesus Christ] cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.
Studying the Bible is essential. If you clicked on the link for the Scofield Reference Bible, you’ll find that GotQuestions.org offers positive remarks about it. However, Bruce Gore and Ben Witherington III have differing opinions. Their disagreement isn’t about the Bible itself, but rather about its notes and commentary.
It has been two millennia since the Book of Revelation was written, where Jesus promised He is coming soon, not just once, but repeatedly, as stated in Revelation 1:1-3.
The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His servants the things that must soon take place. He made it known by sending His angel to His servant John, who bore witness to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw. Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear, and who keep what is written in it, for the time is near.
“I am coming soon. Hold fast what you have, so that no one may seize your crown.” (Revelation 3:11)
“And behold, I am coming soon. Blessed is the one who keeps the words of the prophecy of this book.” (Revelation 22:7)
“Behold, I am coming soon, bringing My recompense with Me, to repay each one for what he has done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.” (Revelation 22:12-13)
“He who testifies to these things says, ‘Surely I am coming soon.’ Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!” (Revelation 22:20)
Proponents of futurism, particularly the dispensationalist view commonly associated with contemporary Christianity, are known for their constant vigilance in searching for signs that could indicate the impending arrival of the Second Coming. In light of our current situation, the COVID-19 pandemic has sparked both excitement and fear, with many believing that Jesus Christ’s return is near. However, we can look back to the early 1900s when the “Spanish Flu” pandemic likely generated similar expectations. If that had been the case, Christians would have been proclaiming that Jesus was coming soon for a century now. I find it difficult to consider a hundred years as “soon.” Unfortunately, the futurist perspective may have become akin to the fable of “The Boy Who Cried Wolf.”
Here is a well-reasoned and valuable presentation by Bruce Gore on the historical context of the Book of Revelation. To view it, click on the highlight. I won’t delve deeper into this perspective, but it’s worth noting that it is also futurist, clearly overshadowed by futurist interpretations.
Below is an excerpt from GotQuestion.Org on the idealist view. Click the link to read.
In the idealist interpretation, the symbols in Revelation are not normally thought to refer to specific individuals and historic events but to typical individuals and events. For instance, every generation will have an “antichrist” and a “mark of the beast”—any number of individuals, world leaders, or empires who exalt themselves against God are the “antichrist,” and those who follow those leaders receive his “mark.” Some part of the church is always going through tribulation, and there will be martyrs in every generation. The idealist interprets Revelation as the ongoing struggle between God and His people and Satan and those who follow him.
The idealist perspective’s refusal to recognize a singular fulfillment of biblical prophecies, viewing them instead as repeated events throughout human history, may unintentionally align closely with the futurist approach. However, the issue arises from the implication that there would be no actual fulfillment of these prophecies, even if this conclusion has not been explicitly stated.
The Preterist view stands apart from the other three interpretations, but that shouldn’t lead us to dismiss it outright. I admit that I was once guilty of this during my seminary days. I recall a moment when my professor briefly introduced the idea that the second coming might have already been fulfilled. Not a single student in the class considered this possibility or took the initiative to reexamine the Scriptures; it was dismissed without thought. Perhaps that explains why the professor didn’t delve deeper into the topic.
The professor may find himself in trouble later for exploring and teaching certain ideas, given the strong influence of futurism among local congregations across the country. If you’re familiar with Martin Luther’s struggles during the Reformation in the 16th century, you can understand the potential challenges he might face if he were to delve deeper into the Preterist view. Herewith is a short video explaining the Reformation.
Looking back, despite its shortcomings, the Reformation opened the floodgate for believers to freely study and rediscover the original teachings of Jesus Christ and the apostles.
“And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers”
ESV Bible, Acts 2:42
Yet, like any movement, left in the hands of man, combining Scripture and human ideas, the Reformation movement somehow went south. To read more about my perspective on the Reformation, click on this link “Reformation Went Poof!“
Again quoting Christian Theology by Millard J. Erickson, here is the written discourse of Charles Harold Dodd (7 April 1884 – 21 September 1973). Though not an adherent of the Preterist view per se, he is actually considered a proponent of Realized Eschatology.
In formatting his eschatology, Dodd pays particular attention to the biblical references to the day of the Lord. He notes that whereas in the Old Testament the day of the Lord is viewed as a future matter, in the New Testament it is depicted as a present occurrence
Christian Theology, Unabridged, one-volume edition, p.1159, by Millard J. Erickson
“Present occurrence” means, at the time of its writing – first-generation Christianity. Herein lies the strong argument for a Preterist view of the Bible. It has been more than a decade since I became a Christian. As you can read from my blog “Regarding Wilmer,” it was due to the death of my only son that I became a Christian. The reality of death came staring at me. All my previous beliefs failed to answer a simple question about human existence – what happens after death? To make the long story short, my earnest desire to find the answer to life’s most practical question and in the course of studying and leading Bible studies, I was led back to that brief moment in the seminary when we were asked if we would consider the possibility that Jesus had returned.
It was a struggle. I often found myself wanting to ignore clear and obvious biblical passages that indicated Jesus had indeed returned, all to avoid rejection, ridicule, and persecution. However, I eventually surrendered to the teachings of Scripture. My quest to deepen my understanding of the Bible has been rewarding. I was able to reconcile the seemingly loose ends of biblical teachings, particularly regarding the unity of Scripture’s eschatology on the topics of death and the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.
A few years ago, my pastor friend, who also believes that Jesus has returned, and I had a friendly discussion with another pastor friend who is a futurist. We posed an important question: “Where do Christians go after death?” His response was, “There are actually three possibilities to that question.” He couldn’t confidently say, “A Christian goes straight to heaven,” even though we often hear that in funeral services. Is this idea just a cliché meant to comfort grieving families? Surely that was not the intention. The issue arises from conflicting passages that oppose each other, especially when we consider the eschatology surrounding death alongside the future return of Jesus Christ.
To support my point, I want to highlight that my futurist pastor friend is not alone in facing this dilemma. While some may confidently assert that Christians immediately go to heaven upon death, I challenge anyone making that claim—who also believes that Jesus has yet to return—to provide biblical passages that back it up. The reality is more nuanced. I’m quoting an excerpt from Thomas G. Long, a professor at Candler School of Theology, who addressed the question: “Do they go directly to heaven or hell, or to a holding place until Christ returns for the final judgment?”
“There are two images in the New Testament about what happens. First, the Resurrection Day, when the trumpet will sound and the dead will be raised up incorruptible. If you only had that image, what we would imagine is that when people die, they lie in some intermediate state awaiting the great Resurrection Day.
“The other image, however, is that death contains no victory over us at all. As soon as we die, we are with God. We get this in the Book of Revelation where John looks up and already the saints who have died are praising God around the throne. In terms of linear time, we can’t work this out. We’ve got two competing images: You either wait until the general resurrection or you go immediately to be with God.
“But the imposition of linear time on what is an eternal idea is what creates the contradiction. I don’t try to make a theologian out of Einstein, but he did show us that events that happen in sequence can also be events that happen simultaneously. If Einstein can imagine that in terms of physics, theologians can imagine it also in terms of the intrusion of eternity into linear time – that we are both immediately raised and raised together.”
With such an answer, it seems to me that there is no assurance that a Christian can immediately enter heaven after death. Don’t you think that poses a serious dilemma? If the Bible relies on science to explain its teachings, it raises significant doubts about the security of salvation. This is the impact of what could be called an “eschatological divide.” The doctrine of salvation is closely tied to the eschatology surrounding Christ’s return. Without a comprehensive understanding of this return, we may feel as if we’re left in a precarious situation. Clearly, the futurist perspective leaves us wanting for answers.
Fellow pastors, we can’t be pulling people’s legs just to comfort them. The Bible, in Ephesians 4:11-14, said:
And He [Jesus Christ] gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds [pastors] and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes.
Since we all affirm in unity that Scripture is true and authoritative in matters of life and death—without error—shouldn’t we approach justice with the Words of Christ? We ought to explain our declarations with firm conviction, supported by clear and valid Scriptural passages. After all, by faithfully fulfilling our duty to Christ Jesus our Lord, we will be rewarded accordingly with the unfading crown of glory.
“Shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you; not for shameful gain, but eagerly; not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory.“
1 Peter 5:2-4, ESV
It is a misconception to believe that this passage is no longer relevant if Christ has returned. Jesus Christ is the King Eternal, and His reign has no end. Therefore, pastors must continue to seek the approval of Christ Jesus, the Chief Shepherd of God’s flock.
I understand that many questions need to be asked and answered. However, I also recognize that it can be challenging to absorb everything at once. This is the goal of this blog: to unlearn traditional beliefs and relearn the teachings of Scripture. As the saying goes, “Patience is a virtue.” With time and dedication to reading and studying the Bible, you too will come to see the light.
In conclusion, all of my citations come from the futurist perspective, with the exception of Bruce Gore, who is a partial Preterist. If you find futurism lacking in substance, I recommend starting with a couple of videos: one by Bruce Gore and another by Kenneth Gentry, who is also a partial Preterist, discussing the dating of Revelation.
Disclaimer: We do not fully endorse all the sites or sources we have cited; our endorsement is limited to the ones we share here. Additionally, we cannot claim to have watched or listened to all the videos or teachings that those sites have posted. Over time, you will learn to discern which sources to embrace or disregard.
Blessings!
If you want to follow our journey of unlearning tradition and relearning Scripture, you can stay updated by heading to our about page and subscribe directly to receive notifications in your inbox.
Unlearning Tradition, Relearning Scripture 