I submitted this paper for Eschatology (TH 759) at Bob Jones University on March 4, 2005.
The subject of the “end times” has been a major topic in theological discussion throughout the last century. Yet now, more than ever, the church is consumed with the future. The early church devoted the bulk of its efforts to defending and properly formulating theology proper. The Reformers dealt largely with soteriology. This present stage in the history of the church is taken up with eschatology. It is certainly a good thing for the people of God to examine the Scriptures and learn what God has revealed about all subjects, but often curiosity about the future draws people to their favorite popular author rather than to the Bible. While the term eschatolatry may be an overstatement in many cases, surely the church is treading on dangerous ground when its preoccupation with the end yields undue dogmatism, division within the body, and failure to fulfill its present kingdom mission. What God has intended for the encouragement and sanctification of His people, they have used to their detriment. In spite of these grave errors and dangers that accompany this subject, it is important and necessary to come to conclusions on the essentials of biblical eschatology.
Part 1: Presuppositional Considerations
Before outlining the major events of NT eschatology, it is important to consider some larger issues that influence one’s approach to the whole of Scripture. Everyone comes to the Bible with a variety of assumptions, many of which are hermeneutically determinative. Most people unconsciously regard those assumptions as givens when seeking to understand what God has revealed about the future. One’s view of Scripture in general has great bearing on eschatological considerations. In addition, everyone approaches Scripture with a certain hermeneutical methodology. It is essential to identify, evaluate, and continually refine these presuppositions.
Bibliological Presuppositions
What God has revealed in the Scriptures He wants His people to know. What He has omitted God’s people must consider to be of less importance (from the standpoint of what is necessary for life and godliness). Deuteronomy 29:29 perfectly expresses this balance: “The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons forever.” At the outset of eschatological study, it is essential to acknowledge these two categories. Consequently, what Scripture addresses must set the boundaries for eschatological discussion, not human curiosity. While Scripture is certainly totally sufficient, it is at the same time limited. God has chosen to reveal and conceal based on what He has determined would be for His highest glory and our highest good.
Another important consideration is the fact that the Scriptures are perspicuous. This was one of the battle cries of the Reformation, i.e., that the average Christian could understand God’s Word and was not dependent on the church to interpret it for him. As good and necessary an observation as this was, it has often been misunderstood and abused. The Scripture is not equally clear on all points. Level of clarity is directly corollary to level of importance and consequent certainty and dogmatism. The fact that Scripture addresses something does not mean that God intends for us to figure it out. This perspective should govern all eschatological pursuits.
Hermeneutical Presuppositions
The subject of hermeneutics is too often glossed over or oversimplified in eschatological studies. But in many ways the choice of a hermeneutical approach will govern exegesis and consequently one’s position. I find most convincing the approach which (1) allows for the breadth of hermeneutics that the writers of the NT employed and seeks to interpret the OT in light of the New, (2) allows for some adaptation to the variety of literary styles in the Scripture, and (3) interprets the unclear portions of Scripture in light of the clear.
The consistently literal hermeneutic does not allow for much of what takes place in apostolic interpretation. Premillennialists often will concede this point. Clearly the writers of the NT saw fulfillment in passages where someone expecting a strictly literal fulfillment never would have. But they quickly point out that Peter, Paul, and the others had supernatural guidance to interpret the OT which we do not have. Therefore, we must interpret literally. But this does not necessarily follow. The fact that we lack the guarantee that our interpretations are accurate does not render such a hermeneutical approach illegitimate, nor does it legitimize the strictly literal approach. In fact, the literal approach suffers from the same criticism. Premillennial interpreters differ on far more points than they would like to admit.
The premillennial hermeneutic gives insufficient attention to the variety of types of literature in the Scripture. Clearly one cannot read Paul the same way he would read the parables of Jesus or the Revelation of John. Most premillennialists will acknowledge this to a certain degree, but still they maintain the necessity of interpreting every portion of Scripture in the same way, literally. Hermeneutics must adapt to genre.
Finally, while every passage of Scripture should be allowed to speak on its own terms, it is essential to acknowledge that Scripture’s meaning is only rightly understood in its context. That means that a passage of Scripture cannot stand alone; interpretation must factor in the larger canonical and redemptive-historical contexts. It also means that the clearer passages must be given priority over the less clear when dealing with apparent contradictions.
Part 2: Exegetical Considerations
After having identified hermeneutical presuppositions, the next step is to consider the eschatological texts in the Gospels, Acts, and the Epistles. Contextual exegesis of these passages sheds light on the proper interpretation of the OT and Revelation. A literal reading of these clear, didactic portions of Scripture presents a different picture of the end than the premillennial view which is based on a literal reading of the OT. The outline of events does not include a millennium, and several considerations seem to rule it out altogether.
Outline of the Major Events of NT Eschatology
The Gospels, Acts, and the Epistles present a relatively consistent picture of the end times. Christ will come again, and when He does He will raise the dead and transform the living, judge the wicked and reward the righteous, and destroy the present order and recreate the heavens and the earth, bringing in the eternal state. All of these are viewed together as one connected series of events. A normal reading of these passages seems to rule out any significant intervening length of time.
Resurrection and Changing of Our Bodies
There are not multiple resurrections separated by a thousand years. There is one resurrection of both the saved and the lost, both of which take place at Christ’s coming. Jesus spoke of an hour when all of the dead—both good and evil—would be raised. He clearly has one event in view (Jn 5:28–29; cf. Dan 12:2). Paul spoke of a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked, apparently viewing them as one event (Act 24:15). When Christ comes He will transform the living and raise the dead (Phil 3:20–21; 1 Jn 3:2–3). Both living and dead believers will be transformed and be forever with their Lord (1 Thes 4:14–18). Paul teaches that those who are Christ’s will be raised when He comes (1 Cor 15:22–23). This transformation constitutes a becoming like Christ and is necessary preparation for entering into the kingdom (1 Cor 15:50).
Rewarding and Judgment
The NT speaks of both rewarding and judging as taking place when Christ comes. When He comes He renders to every man according to his work (Mat 16:27; Rev 22:12). The context of these passages demands that both saved and lost are in view. Paul connects Christ’s coming with His judging of the living and the dead (1 Tim 4:1; cf. Acts 17:31). In 1 Thes 1:5–10 Paul speaks in terms of God repaying those who have afflicted believers and dealing out retribution on them. He ties this to their consignment to eternal destruction, which takes place when He comes (v10). In Mat 25:41 Jesus spoke in similar terms about the judgment of the goats. He sends them into eternal fire, not a temporary place of judgment, when He comes (v31). Premillennialists attempt to see this as temporary judgment, but a normal reading of the texts parallels the description of the final, eternal punishment of Rev 20:11–15.
Recreated Universe and Eternal State
The NT also closely links the recreation of the universe with Christ’s coming. In Acts 3:19–21 Peter calls the Jews to repent and points them to the future kingdom when the Messiah would renew all things and accomplish the ultimate fulfillment of the OT hopes. This will all happen when Christ comes (v21), and it seems to include nothing less than the renovation of all creation. In 2 Peter 3 Peter connected the destruction of the present order with Christ’s long-awaited coming. He also links the burning up of the earth with the judgment and destruction of the ungodly (v7), both of which take place when Christ comes. When He comes the heavens pass away and the earth is burned up (vv 10–12). God then recreates a perfect universe of everlasting righteousness (v13). Paul ties these events together in Romans 8. In verse 18 Paul contrasts the believer’s suffering with future glory. In verse 19 he connects this expectation with the created order. The creation itself will be set free from its present subjection to futility. Paul identifies this future renovation of the universe with the adoption of believers and the redemption of their bodies (v23), events which will take place when Christ comes.
1 Corinthians 15: A Key Passage
This passage poses a challenge for premillennialists. Paul sees the end of Christ’s kingdom, not the beginning, in connection with His coming. Christ is raised, then those who belong to Christ at His coming, then the end comes when Christ returns the kingdom to His Father, after having brought everything into subjection. Premillennialists will object that if there can be several thousand years communicated by the first “then,” then surely there could be by the second as well.
There are several problems with this, but the most significant is the clear textual indication that links Christ’s coming with the end of His kingdom. According to verses 23 and 50 the transformation of believers takes place at Christ’s coming. At the end of the chapter, Paul makes it clear that this event marks the final defeat of death (vv 54–55), the last enemy to be destroyed and brought into subjection to Christ (vv 25–26). It has already been established that believers are changed when Christ comes. In verse 54 Paul says that when this transformation takes place, then death will be swallowed up in victory. The resurrection of believers is the end of death and marks the defeat of Christ’s final foe. In verse 26 Paul states in no uncertain terms that the last enemy to be abolished is death. His reign will continue until this happens (v 25). Paul, then, sees Christ reigning until His coming when all believers are transformed and death, the final enemy, is forever destroyed. A normal reading of this passage is incompatible with premillennial theology which sees Christ reign and the continuation of death after His coming.
Part 3: Response to Objections
Amillennialism is not without its problems. I make no claim to have the answers to all the difficulties that arise. Any such claim would be the epitome of arrogance. Pretending that a system has no weaknesses is itself an ironic testimony to weakness. As I currently understand all the issues and the best exegesis of the passages, amillennialism accounts for data most satisfactorily. The following two passages are among the most problematic.
Isaiah 65:20
One of the most common arguments leveled against amillennialism concerns OT prophecies that speak of conditions that fit neither this present age nor the eternal state. The preeminent example of this is found in the second half of Isaiah 65:20: “For the youth will die at the age of one hundred and the one who does not reach the age of one hundred will be thought accursed.” The premillennialists take this as convincing proof of an age prior to the eternal state, one in which people still die yet live much longer than we do in the present age. But this seems unlikely for several reasons.
(1) Isaiah is speaking of the new heavens and new earth (65:17). This phrase only occurs three other times in the Scripture (Isa 66:22; 2 Pet 3:13; and Rev 21:1). The NT is clearly drawing on Isaiah’s terminology, and there is no indication in Isaiah or in 2 Peter or Revelation that different events are in view. Revelation 21 also makes it clear that there will have been only two heavens and earths—the first and the new—not three (v1).
(2) Isaiah also speaks of this time as a time when all sorrow has ceased (v 19). This parallels what John describes in Rev 21:4. It is difficult to see how this passage could be describing an earthly millennium in which people will still die. Surely at the very least unbelievers would mourn the death of those whom they love. If this were a reference to the millennium, it would be impossible to harmonize it with Rev 21:4 where God will wipe away every tear from their eyes and there will be no more sorrow. How can he wipe away what is not there? Taking the language literally requires that sorrow has ended forever.
(3) The parallels between Revelation 21 and Isaiah 65 seem unmistakable. It is exegetically irresponsible to ignore or minimize them. John was no doubt greatly influenced by Isaiah 65 when he penned the end of his Revelation. The similarity in vocabulary argues strongly that John had Isaiah 65 and 66 in mind.
| Isaiah 65 | Revelation 21 | |
| New Heavens and Earth | ἔσται γὰρ ὁ οὐρανὸς καινὸς καὶ ἡ γῆ καινή (17) | Καὶ εἶδον οὐρανὸν καινὸν καὶ γῆν καινήν (1) |
| End of Former Things | καὶ οὐ μὴ μνησθῶσιν τῶν προτέρων (17) | ὁ γὰρ πρῶτος οὐρανὸς καὶ ἡ πρώτη γῆ ἀπῆλθαν (1) τὰ πρῶτα ἀπῆλθαν (4) |
| New Jerusalem | ἐγὼ ποιῶ Ιερουσαλημ ἀγαλλίαμα (18; cf. 19) | καὶ τὴν πόλιν τὴν ἁγίαν Ἰερουσαλὴμ καινὴν εἶδον (2) |
| No More Sorrow | οὐκέτι μὴ ἀκουσθῇ ἐν αὐτῇ φωνὴ κλαυθμοῦ οὐδὲ φωνὴ κραυγῆς (19) | οὔτε πένθος οὔτε κραυγὴ οὔτε πόνος οὐκ ἔσται ἔτι (4) |
(4) The most likely candidate for “the promise” that Peter had in mind when he wrote, “But according to His promise we are looking for new heavens and a new earth” (2 Pet 3:13) is Isaiah 65 and 66. Peter then gives the inspired interpretation: Isaiah spoke of the final state.
So how then should these statements regarding death be understood? It is essential to keep in mind the occasional purpose of these prophecies. They were intended to give God’s people hope in the present by pointing them to the future, to a time when all their pain, suffering, and loss would be reversed. The statements of Isaiah must be understood in terms of the reversal of the horrible conditions that presently plagued the people. The third clause in verse 20, “for the youth will die at the age of one hundred,” parallels the first clause, “no longer will there be in it an infant who lives but a few days,” while the fourth clause, “and the one who does not reach the age of one hundred will be thought accursed,” parallels the second, “[no longer will there be] an old man who does not live out his days.” The language bears a poetic nature, and the details must not be pressed. God is speaking in terms of the reversal of their suffering.
Revelation 20:1–10
Revelation 20 is from anyone’s perspective the crux interpretum. All views struggle here to some degree. If the premillennialist were to be consistent with his own literal hermeneutic, he would have to acknowledge that John sees only believers who were martyred—and that by beheading!—ruling and reigning with Christ during the millennium. So a literal reading of the text fits no one’s system. Yet it is the amillennialist who admittedly struggles more from an exegetical standpoint.
The premillennialists argue for a chronological sequence from chapter 19 to 20, yet the case is not conclusive. (1) Visionary sequence does not prove chronological sequence. The order in which John saw and recorded his visions is not necessarily the order in which they will happen. (2) It fits logically that the struggle with and defeat of Satan would be at the end of the book, since the whole of redemptive history begins with him and his deception of man (i.e., Gen 3), without necessarily implying that all the events described take place chronologically at the end.
Satan’s Bondage
Premillennialists argue that Satan could not be bound presently in any sense because he is still at work in the world and because Scripture still speaks of him as such (Eph 2:2; 2 Cor 4:4; 1 Pet 5:8). The later point is significant. Yet two strands of truth run throughout the NT: (1) Satan has been defeated, bound, and stripped of his authority, yet (2) that he is still active. Premillennialists chide amillennialists for explaining away the latter, while being equally (if not more) guilty of failing to handle satisfactorily the former. Christ has dealt to Satan a fatal blow (Gen 3:15), triumphing over him by His death and resurrection (Col 2:15). He disarmed him (Col 2:15) and rendered him powerless, stripping from him authority over death (Heb 2:14). He cast him out of the world, robbing him of his title “the ruler of this world,” and is now saving the nations (Jn 12:31–32). Christ overpowered Satan (Lk 11:22), bound him (Mt 12:29; Mk 3:27), and continues to plunder his kingdom throughout this age as people are transferred into His own kingdom (Col 1:13). He ascended to His kingly throne only after Satan and his minions had been subjected to Him (1 Pet 3:22).
Both of these themes are true, and we are not justified to reason away either. Satan is both bound and active. Though he is opposing Christ and His kingdom, Christ is plundering his kingdom as He saves men from every tongue, tribe, people, and nation. This fits with the precise language of the binding in Rev 20, “that he would not deceive the nations anymore.” Having bound Satan and cast him out, Christ is now saving the world (Jn 12:31–32).
Saints Reigning with Christ
There is no indication that verses 4–6 describe an earthly scene, an essential point for the premillennial interpretation. John sees people who have been killed for their faith and rewarded with the right to reign with Christ. The only other time in Revelation where John mentions the souls of people is in 6:9, where the martyrs are in the presence of the Lord robed in white (cf. 3:5; 7:9, 13–14). Christ promised that overcomers would be granted life (2:10), be clothed in white (3:5), be given authority over the nations (2:26), and reign with Him on His throne (3:21). These promised blessings belong to the believer as soon as he enters the presence of the Lord at death. The vision of 20:4–6 pictures the rewarding of the suffering church with life in the presence of God, reigning on thrones in heaven. This fits with the broader theology of the NT as well (cf. Jn 11:25–26).
Conclusion
Christ is coming again. He will judge the wicked and reward the righteous, bringing in a time of eternal, unimaginable blessing. This eternal kingdom is the believer’s hope. Rather than debating how God will fulfill His Word and when this or that event will take place, the believer must live by faith and be eagerly awaiting and prepared for His coming. God has revealed this truth not for the believer to speculate about, but to live in light of it.
Bibliography
Barney, Christopher D. “Ecclesiology and Theological System: A Survey and Analysis of Covenant and Dispensational Theology upon the Interpretation of Key Ecclesiological Passages.” Ph.D. Dissertation, Bob Jones University, May 2004.
Bavinck, Herman. The Last Things: Hope for This World and the Next, translated by John Vriend, edited by John Bolt. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996.
Benware, Paul N. Understanding End Times Prophecy: A Comprehensive Approach. Chicago: Moody, 1995.
Blaising, Craig A. and Darrell L. Bock. Progressive Dispensationalism. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993.
Bock, Darrell L. “Evangelicals and the Use of the Old Testament in the New: Part 1.” Bibliotheca Sacra 142:568 (July 1985): 209–20.
__________. “Evangelicals and the Use of the Old Testament in the New: Part 2.” Bibliotheca Sacra 142:567 (October 1985): 306–16.
__________., ed. Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999.
Boettner, Loraine. The Millennium. Philadelphia: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1974.
Feinberg, John S. Continuity and Discontinuity: Perspectives on the Relationship Between the Old and New Testaments: Essays in Honor of S. Lewis Johnson, Jr. Westchester, IL: Crossway, 1988.
Hand, Brian. “A Christology of the Book of Revelation Based on Elements of Its Literary Composition.” Ph.D. Dissertation Bob Jones University, June 2003.
Hoekema, Anthony A. The Bible and the Future. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994.
Lloyd–Jones, D. Martyn. The Church and the Last Things. Wheaton: Crossway, 1998.
MacArthur, John F. The Second Coming: Signs of Christ’s Return and the End of the Age. Wheaton: Crossway, 1999.
Mathison, Keith A. Postmillennialism: An Eschatology of Hope. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1999.
Mazak, Greg. “Spirituality Applied: Galatians 6.” Biblical Viewpoint 31:1 (April 1997): 43–56.
Murray, Ian H. The Puritan Hope: A Study in Revival and the Interpretation of Prophecy. Carlisle, PN: Banner of Truth, 1998.
Pentecost, J. Dwight. Things to Come: A Study in Biblical Eschatology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1972.
Ridderbos, Herman. Paul: An Outline of His Theology, translated by John Richard de Witt. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997.
__________. The Coming of the Kingdom, translated by H. de Jongste, edited by Raymond O. Zorn. Philadelphia: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1962.
Riddlebarger, Kim. A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003.
Robertson, O. Palmer. The Christ of the Covenants. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1980.
__________. The Israel of God: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 2000.
Ryrie, Charles C. Dispensationalism. Rev. ed. Chicago: Moody, 1995.
Sproul, R. C. The Last Days According to Jesus: When Did Jesus Say He Would Return? Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999.
Symington, William. Messiah the Prince. Pittsburgh: The Christian Statesman Press, 1999.
Vos, Geerhardus. The Pauline Eschatology. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1993.
Walvoord, John F. The Millennial Kingdom: A Basic Text of Pre-millennial Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1972.
__________. The Return of the Lord. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1971.
Willis, Wesley R. and John R. Master, ed. Issues in Dispensationalism. Chicago: Moody, 1994.
This paper is also available as a Google doc.