https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyaQiI70Bqs
Let's discuss the different viewpoints Christians have on the end times.
What do Christians believe about the future? A lot of different things, as this chart I made shows, and we’ll get into those details very soon. But first, some definitions.
The Bible talks about “last days”[1] the “time of the end”[2], the end of the world[3], and is also the source of several words that people use today for end-of-the-the world type events like Armageddon[4] and Apocalypse.[5] In Christian theology, the categorical term used for this discussion is “Eschatology” which comes from the Greek “eskhatos” meaning “last” and logy, which refers to a branch of study. So Eschatology means the study of last things.
Similarly, you may sometimes hear the word “eschaton” used, which refers to the final event. Now realize that in Christian theology this refers to the last things in the current state of the world. For most, though not all, there is a belief in a yet future new heaven and new earth that will continue for eternity.
Another term we must define is the “second coming.” This one is pretty simple. Christians believe that Jesus came to earth the first time, you know, when he was born in a stable in Bethlehem, and the wise men showed up and brought him gifts and stuff – except that the wise men came later to a house,[6] not on the night Jesus was born, but that would make the nativity scene much too complicated. But that’s the first coming. Then later Jesus was crucified, and then rose from the dead, and ascended to Heaven. That all was the first coming.
But Christianity teaches that Jesus is still alive today and will be coming back – the second coming. That’s a big part of what Eschatology is all about. Most Christians believe that around this time of the Second Coming will be a final judgment.[7] By the way, notice the chapter and verse that comes from? Sound familiar?[8] Just kidding. There’s disagreement on exactly how close this judgment will be to the second coming, but we’ll get to that in a moment. Another word sometimes used for second coming is “Parousia”[9]
Another definition we need to give right away is that of the word “Millennium” as much of the modern discussion of eschatology surrounds this concept. You’re probably already familiar with the word – Millennium simply means a thousand years. So in the year 2000 people talked about entering a new Millennium, although the Millennium technically didn’t begin until 2001 since there was no year zero.
But that’s just a millennium. In Christian theology, the millennium is a technical term, and it refers to what is mentioned in Revelation 20, where it says things like “…they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.” And “…the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.” And “they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.”
Some people see other Bible passages as referring to this same “thousand years”, like that Bible passage about the lion laying down with the lamb. You know, the one that doesn’t really exist? But it does say that the wolf will dwell with the lamb.[10] That’s in a passage that some believe in referring to events that happen in this thousand-year “millennium.”
Today there are three main positions on the Millennium. One is called premillennialism, one is postmillennialism, and the third is amillennialism. The problem is Christians throw these terms around sometimes but they need explanation. You know what pre and post mean, right, like a prequel, which is a movie that tells the “before” story, so “pre” means before, and post, like in post production, editing done after-the-fact, so post means after. So these views says that something comes before or after the millennium. But what? The answer is the second coming.
A premillennialist believes that the Second Coming is before the Millennium. A postmillennialist believes the Second Coming is after the Millennium. And the third view just has “a” which negates something. Theists believe in God, a-theists don’t. So a-millenialism or “amillennialism” refers to “no millennium.” Now this is somewhat of a misnomer, because amillennialists don’t really believe in no millennium. Rather, amillennilism would be better referred to as “nuncmillennialism” meaning “Millennium Now”
Let me take just a moment to flesh out these three views a bit more. Premillennialism says that the timeline we are living in will eventually be stopped by the second coming. Jesus will return. Then will be this 1,000 year Millennium. They normally take the thousand years literally. It will be a glorious Kingdom of God on earth with Christ physically present and reigning over it, in most premillennial views. Following this will be the final judgment and New Heaven and New Earth.
Postmillennialists though don’t believe that we’re waiting for Christ to come back before the Millennium can begin. Rather, the Millennium comes before Christ’s return. So in most cases, they believe that there will a be a “ramping up” of the Millennium. The world will become more and more Millennial throughout. No, not that kind of Millennial. Basically, Christians usher in a golden age, and at its peak, Christ comes back, and the final judgment happens, and new heaven and new earth. Postmillennialists sometimes believe this to be a literal thousand years, but the majority view is that it isn’t necessarily so, the thousand years just represents an indeterminate but somewhat lengthy period of time.
This might blow your mind, but amillennialists are actually postmillennialists too. Remember, postmillennialists believe that the second coming is after the Millennium. The amillennial position is that the millennium is now, and the next thing to happen is the second coming. Second coming after millennium: Postmillennial. But the thing that differentiates the two views is the nature of the Millennium. Amillennialism views the millennium as symbolic. First, it’s not a literal thousand years. It began with Christ’s resurrection and ends at the second coming, so we’re already 2,000 years into it. But also, it’s not necessarily ever going to make this earth into a very great or very Christian place, though it doesn’t preclude the possibility. Christ is reigning from heaven right now, in this view.
Now perhaps you’re thinking this is too elementary. If someone has studies Christian eschatology or even attended a Church that studies or discusses this kind of stuff, they are often familiar with these three terms. But there is a next step. If we put these three views as rows on a chart, there are actually several different eschatological perspectives which overlap with these views. These are the preterist, idealist, historicist, and futurist perspectives. Now if you like charts and stuff, Christian eschatology is where you go to get it. But surprisingly to me, very few charts have ever been made that show the overlap between these perspectives and the millennial systems – so we’re going to do that. But before we can look at the various overlapping views, let’s define these four perspectives.
To do so, let me grab an eschatology verse from the book of Matthew, which says “Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven.”[11]
The word “preterist” comes from the Latin word “praeter”, which means “past.” So preterism refers to a system which puts most of the events commonly labeled as “eschatological” into the past. Most preterists would view that passage as being a symbolic description of a literal event surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD.
The most opposite view to this is the “Futurist.” This system, in contrast, puts most of the events commonly labeled as “eschatological” into the future. Most futurists see the fulfillment of Matthew 24:29 as still in the future. There can be disagreement on what is symbolic or literal. Some would see that description as an entirely literal description of a future event, and others may view it as a symbolic description of a literal event.
Then there’s the historicist view, which views the eschatological events as things that have been happening sequentially throughout history. Historicists then take events from eschatological passages in the Bible and try to assign them to events form history. One historicist, for example, took this passage in Matthew and said it refers to May 19, 1780, which was apparently a particularly dark day in parts of the early United States.
Finally, the Idealist view. To describe it, let me summarize what I’ve said about the other views. Preterists take view eschatological Bible passages as mostly in the past, symbolic descriptions of literal events. Futurists say they are mostly future, as literal and symbolic descriptions of literal events. Historicists say that they are mostly in the current church age, sequentially, as symbolic descriptions of literal events. Idealists say the passages are mostly in the current church age, simultaneously, as spiritual truths. By simultaneously, I mean that there is no matching passages with historical events. They are all applicable through the entire church age, which means that the earliest reader of Revelation, for example, could get just as much out of it as we can today. And by symbolic descriptions of spiritual truths, I mean that the eschatology passages are speaking of spiritual realities, not about any kind of historical happening at all. Some have also called this the symbolic approach or the spiritual approach.
So now let’s look at how these overlap. First, let’s be clear, there are some combinations that are quite common and others that are less so. And it’s also changed over time. Today, Futurists are mostly premillennialists, Historicists are actually a quite rare bunch, Idealists are mostly Amillennialists, and Preterists are postmillennialists or amillennialists. Let’s look at the specifics a bit more.
First, let’s look at the Premillennial Futurist position. This box has a big crowd of people in it that have a lot of disagreement among themselves. Let’s talk about one of them – the timing of the rapture.
Before I get there, I need to define another term, which is tribulation. Now you probably know about the word “tribulation”, which just means a lot of suffering or trouble. But Premillennialists often believe in there being “The Great Tribulation”, a technical term for a seven-year period of time prior to the Millennium in which many of the eschatological events happen – such as the seal judgments, trumpet judgments, thunder judgments, and bowl or vial judgments. For reasons I’ll not explain now, it’s also referred to by many as “Daniel’s seventieth week.”
So, what is the “rapture?” Rapture refers to being “caught up,” and those who believe in it may refer to this verse in 1 Thessalonians “then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.[12]
So the idea of Christians being taken out of the world physically is the idea of rapture. You may have seen a chart with different rapture views. And there are books on it too. Some believe in a pre-tribulation rapture: Christians are taken out of the world, then the Tribulation period, then the second coming, then the millennium.
Other believe in a post-tribulation rapture: Christians live through the seven-year tribulation and then they are caught up in the rapture, to then welcome Christ into his kingdom of the Millennium and return with him to the earth.
There are those who see the rapture as sometime within the seven years, such as the Mid-trib and prewrath positions.
But the biggest thing to know is that this whole controversy over the timing of the rapture takes place in this one box: The futurist premillennial box. Everyone else, all the preterists, idealists, and historicists, whether premillennial, postmillennial, or amillennial, view the second coming as happening simultaneously with the rapture – in other words, When Christ comes back is synonymous to when Christians are “caught up.” In fact, because of this fact, many of those in the non-premillennial camps leave the word “rapture” to the premillennialists. Most people today who aren’t deep in their understanding of Christian eschatology associate the rapture with futurist pre-tribulation rapture premillennial works like the popular “Left Behind” series, which portrays the rapture happening and the earth continuing on. People who believe that this series of events is not biblical or realistic would often prefer to drop the word “Rapture” and stick to the terminology of “second coming”, which encompasses both Christ’s return and his people meeting him.
There’s actually a lot of videos and charts on the different views of the rapture as compared to the tribulation, so I won’t cover that in more detail here. One thing I do want to mention here for clarity though, is that the view that the rapture is after the tribulation is sometimes called the “historic premillennial” view, since the earlies premillennialists held to it. This is not the same as the historicist premillennial position. A historic premillennialist could be a historicist, but they could also be a futurist, which is where most historic premillennialists are today.
So what is premillennial futurism? It is the belief that the eschatological events are mostly future, as literal and symbolic descriptions of literal events, and that the Millennium is before the Second coming. Examples of people who hold and teach this would be Hal Lindsey and his book “The Late, Great Planet Earth” The Scofield Reference Bible, Charles Ryrie, Calvary Chapel churches and Regular Baptist Churches, and lots of other Baptists. Most Southern Baptists, Most Pentecostals, Most non-denominational churches. Anyone who holds to the theological framework called “dispensationalism’ fits in here. But that itself is actually a disagreement within this box, too. So if you find a dispensationalist, they go in here. A person who believes that the church and Israel are completely distinct and that there is a future eschatological purpose for national Israel, they are in here. But some premillennial futurists actually oppose this view quite a bit. If so, they are historic premillennial. For example, George Eldon Ladd and his book “Gospel of the Kingdom.”
So now let’s move over and take a look at Premillennial Historicism. A premillennial historicist believes the eschatological events are mostly in the current church age, sequentially, as symbolic descriptions of literal events. We live in this time period now, and the second coming is next, followed by the Millennium. Before dispensationalism became popular, this was the view a person held if they were premillennial. This was Charles Spurgeon’s view, A.B. Simpson’s view, and the view of Henry Grattan Guinness, but it’s actually a very rare view today, along with historicism generally. What some have viewed as the reason for this is that historicists tended to have lots of disagreements among themselves over which historical events to match up with which events in the Biblical eschatology passages. Historicism led people to try to lay the book of Revelation on top of history and match things in a one-to-one relationship, but everyone matched things differently. Nonetheless, there are still some historicists around today. What is likely the largest group of premillennial historicists around is the seventh-day Adventist Church. Ellen G White taught a historicist model in her book “The Great Controversy” and this is still the church’s position today.
Leaving premillennialism, let’s discuss the other two historicist views, postmillennial historicism and amillennial historicism. Postmillennial Historicism sees most events of Revelation throughout history, and they may still be being fulfilled in the present day. The millennium will slowly ramp up and we may be living in that time as well. After the millennium is completed will be the Second Coming and Final Judgment. This was the position of Jonathan Edwards. However, most postmillennialists today have abandoned historicism.
Amillennial historicism, likewise sees most events of Revelation throughout history, and they may still be being fulfilled in the present day. The millennium is a spiritual reality happening now, and we need not expect it to result in any earthly golden age, so at any time could be the Second Coming and Final Judgment. This is the position of the denomination the Church of God Evening Light, which has identified certain events from history as fulfillments of eschatological passages.
Now historicism was the favorite view of Protestantism, including the reformers themselves, so where did they fit? I will say that some people consider putting people like Luther and Calvin into the amillennial camp a bit of an anachronism. Some have said that since these terms are more recent and the definitions of them today, including what they exclude, may go further than what these men would have agreed with, that we shouldn’t call them amillennialists. So that’s the warning I’ll give you, but we can with some caveats put John Calvin, Thomas Cranmer, and John Knox into this box. Some postmillennialists would like to say that Calvin belongs in their view, or that he would if it had been formally in existence, but we’ll not argue that right now.
Now is as good of a time as any to mention that these perspectives, preterist, idealist, historicist, and futurist are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Some people have views that mix them. In fact, nearly everyone would say that some things that could be called eschatological are future, and that some are symbolic. So in reality there’s a bit of mixing that goes on. I bring this up, because one of the historicist views that sometimes hangs around is the view of the papacy of the Catholic Church being the antichrist. The folks we just mentioned like Luther and Calvin believed that, it even ended up in the Westminster confession, though most Presbyterians have deleted it from there now. Notably, the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod still defends this position, so on at least that one point they hold to a historicist view, and they are also amillennialists. But just because someone holds one historicist view doesn’t necessarily mean they go all in.
Let’s now discuss idealism. The most common view here is Amillennial Idealism. Idealists believe that the eschatological passages are teaching spiritual truths for the current church age. We are in the millennium now. In this category belong many Catholics, Lutherans, Presbyterians and others today. Authors include Sam Waldron with his book End Times Made Simple and Anthony Hoekema’s the Bible and the Future. [13]
Another idealist position is the postmillennial idealist position. Like the amillennial version, most of the eschatological passages are interpreted spiritually, not as literal events in the past, present, or future. However, in this postmillennial version, there is still anticipation of the millennium growing into something that affects life on earth. Perhaps we are in the millennium now, perhaps it is still future, and it’s not necessarily a literal thousand years, but it is taking place before the second coming. RJ Rushdoony is an example of this position.
The fourth perspective is the Preterist. Of all the positions we have shows so far, this is the one that has the most obvious blending between the millennial views. First, let’s describe what we’re looking at. Both the postmillennial and amillennial preterist views see most of the eschatological events being fulfilled in AD 70. Both see the second coming and final judgment in the future. And both see the millennium as before that. The difference is the view of the millennium. Is it a ramping-up millennium, or a spiritual millennium? There are those who are quite committed to the ramping-up millennium view. Among them are theonomists and Christian reconstructionists. Others don’t teach that view. And some just ride the border between. In the postmillennial preterist camp we have folks like Doug Wilson and his book Heaven Misplaced and Greg Bahnsen with Victory in Jesus. In the Amillennial side we have Craig Koester[14] and his book Revelation and the End of All things, and also NT Wright, and some Catholics like Scott Hahn and Jimmy Akin. Some people like fit in one of these two views, but either ride the boundary or have moved between them. RC Sproul is an example of this. To be clear, at opposite extremes there are clear differences between the Amil and Postmil preterist views, but they can get close enough to each other that they blend together if a person wants to hold a middling view. Jay Rogers, himself a postmillennial preterist and author of “In the Days of These Kings” says of this “In reality, an amillennialist who is optimistic about the end-times is a postmillennialist…The common church doctrine on the end-times did not distinguish between amillennialism and postmillennialism for over 1500 years.”[15]
Now there are actually several views and positions that I have not addressed. When I refer to preterism in this video, I am referring to what is sometimes called “partial preterism” in contrast to a view called “full preterism.” There’s also a quite unusual view called “premillennial preterism”, and there are also the extreme end opposing positions of realized eschatology and consistent eschatology and the more broadly spread middling position between them of inaugurated eschatology. There’s also the eclectic view which mixes the views we’ve discussed already.
