The discipline of eschatology has long been maligned because of its association with bizarre "end times" scenarios and speculations. However, eschatology is not merely the study of "end times" and apocalyptic prophecy. It is the study of salvation, how it is accomplished and being accomplished; how God's plan of redemption, not only for humanity but for all of creation, is complete and being made complete.
There are two basic approaches to the question of eschatological salvation:
1) The Systematic Approach: This view is the predominant view in most of Reformed Christianity. Although there are numerous variations, this is the general approach followed by three divergent "schools" of eschatology:
(a) The Preterist School (all prophecies have been fulfilled)
(b) The Historicist School (all prophecies are being fulfilled)
(c) The Futurist School (all prophecies will be fulfilled)
The common thread in each of these three schools is an attempt to develop a systematic explanation for how God's plan of salvation was accomplished, is being accomplished, or will be accomplished. Careful attention is paid to charts, maps and timelines. All things connected with salvation--redemption, resurrection, parousia, etc.--are looked upon primarily as concepts which are, perhaps uninetentionally explained in human, materialistic terms.
2) The Incarnational Approach: This approach is presently gaining notoriety within the Anglican/Wesleyan community. It sees salvation and all things associated with it as concrete realities to be experienced in Christ who, through his life, death and resurrection, reveals decisively the eternal will and purpose of God to reconcile all things to himself. While events in human history serve as a means to point to the "end," that is, the eschatological kingdom of God toward which all of history is moving, the ultimate fulfillment of all things is Jesus Christ: God's ultimate revelation of himself. In him all things are restored, are being restored, and shall be restored; our salvation is complete, is being completed, and shall be completed. Thus, the history which this approach is most concerned with is salvation history which, unlike human history in general, is relentless in eluding any and all attempts to systematize it along a linear, chronological scale. According to the grace we have received through the power of the Holy Spirit, we must live with the history presently before us, trusting that God, in Christ, is always at work reconciling all things to himself. The completion of that work may seem nearer today than it will tomorrow, but we must trust that, in whatever degree the kingdom is apparent at any moment, that is precisely the degree which God has ordained for that moment in order that his grace may have its greatest effect in our lives and his kingdom may have its deepest impact upon the kingdoms of this world.
It should be pointed out that there are pitfalls associated with the incarnational approach. When taken to extremes, it can degenerate into a form of idealism which ultimately makes the reality of the eschatological hope merely symbolic. Taken in another direction, it can lead to a form of realized eschatology which places an undue emphasis on the present age.
Such caveats aside, however, the incarnational approach has numerous advantages over the systematic approach.
First, it avoids the either/or trap which inevitably plagues the systematic approach. Preterists, historicists and futurists are constantly arguing over the question of past vs. present vs. future fulfillment. Understanding Christ as Gods ultimate revelation of himself, and the cross as the center of Gods redemptive plan, the incarnational approach replaces either/or with both/and. This paradox preserves a decent respect for the mystery of faith. A faith free of paradox is a faith free of mystery; and a faith free of mystery is no faith at all.
Second, it avoids the excesses of the systematic approach. Consigning all of Gods mighty acts of salvation to the past or delaying a good portion of them until the future leaves us stranded in the present without any sense of Christs incarnational presence among us. It is the deepest desire of Gods heart to be Emmanuel, God with us, always and especially right now!
Third, it cultivates an awareness of the profoundly eschatological dimension of our own lives. Life in this world is a journey toward wholeness. Through the indwelling Holy Spirit, God is working within each of us to conform us to the image of Christ, in order that we may at last be able to stand blameless before him and be welcomed into the joy of his eternal kingdom. As God has decreed from the foundation of the world that all things are to be reconciled to him in Christ, so if we live our lives here in Christ, we are already participating in the ongoing fulfillment of Gods eternal plan, the completion of which is the outcome of all of history.
There are two basic approaches to the question of eschatological salvation:
1) The Systematic Approach: This view is the predominant view in most of Reformed Christianity. Although there are numerous variations, this is the general approach followed by three divergent "schools" of eschatology:
(a) The Preterist School (all prophecies have been fulfilled)
(b) The Historicist School (all prophecies are being fulfilled)
(c) The Futurist School (all prophecies will be fulfilled)
The common thread in each of these three schools is an attempt to develop a systematic explanation for how God's plan of salvation was accomplished, is being accomplished, or will be accomplished. Careful attention is paid to charts, maps and timelines. All things connected with salvation--redemption, resurrection, parousia, etc.--are looked upon primarily as concepts which are, perhaps uninetentionally explained in human, materialistic terms.
2) The Incarnational Approach: This approach is presently gaining notoriety within the Anglican/Wesleyan community. It sees salvation and all things associated with it as concrete realities to be experienced in Christ who, through his life, death and resurrection, reveals decisively the eternal will and purpose of God to reconcile all things to himself. While events in human history serve as a means to point to the "end," that is, the eschatological kingdom of God toward which all of history is moving, the ultimate fulfillment of all things is Jesus Christ: God's ultimate revelation of himself. In him all things are restored, are being restored, and shall be restored; our salvation is complete, is being completed, and shall be completed. Thus, the history which this approach is most concerned with is salvation history which, unlike human history in general, is relentless in eluding any and all attempts to systematize it along a linear, chronological scale. According to the grace we have received through the power of the Holy Spirit, we must live with the history presently before us, trusting that God, in Christ, is always at work reconciling all things to himself. The completion of that work may seem nearer today than it will tomorrow, but we must trust that, in whatever degree the kingdom is apparent at any moment, that is precisely the degree which God has ordained for that moment in order that his grace may have its greatest effect in our lives and his kingdom may have its deepest impact upon the kingdoms of this world.
It should be pointed out that there are pitfalls associated with the incarnational approach. When taken to extremes, it can degenerate into a form of idealism which ultimately makes the reality of the eschatological hope merely symbolic. Taken in another direction, it can lead to a form of realized eschatology which places an undue emphasis on the present age.
Such caveats aside, however, the incarnational approach has numerous advantages over the systematic approach.
First, it avoids the either/or trap which inevitably plagues the systematic approach. Preterists, historicists and futurists are constantly arguing over the question of past vs. present vs. future fulfillment. Understanding Christ as Gods ultimate revelation of himself, and the cross as the center of Gods redemptive plan, the incarnational approach replaces either/or with both/and. This paradox preserves a decent respect for the mystery of faith. A faith free of paradox is a faith free of mystery; and a faith free of mystery is no faith at all.
Second, it avoids the excesses of the systematic approach. Consigning all of Gods mighty acts of salvation to the past or delaying a good portion of them until the future leaves us stranded in the present without any sense of Christs incarnational presence among us. It is the deepest desire of Gods heart to be Emmanuel, God with us, always and especially right now!
Third, it cultivates an awareness of the profoundly eschatological dimension of our own lives. Life in this world is a journey toward wholeness. Through the indwelling Holy Spirit, God is working within each of us to conform us to the image of Christ, in order that we may at last be able to stand blameless before him and be welcomed into the joy of his eternal kingdom. As God has decreed from the foundation of the world that all things are to be reconciled to him in Christ, so if we live our lives here in Christ, we are already participating in the ongoing fulfillment of Gods eternal plan, the completion of which is the outcome of all of history.
