A theology left behind?

Amillennialism is the idea that Jesus Christ won't set up a literal, one thousand year reign on Earth at his second coming. Rather, his second advent will be immediately succeeded by the eternal state. Amillennialists believe that the famous reference to the millennium in the Book of Revelation refers to the Church age, the period in between the earthly ministry of Jesus and his second advent. Nor is it necessarily a period of exactly one thousand years. Thus, the millennium is figurative rather than literal.

Amillennialism is, of course, the traditional position of Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Lutherans and Calvinists. In the United States, however, many evangelicals have adopted a weird and cultish eschatology known as Dispensationalism. It's main tenets have been popularized by Hal Lindsey's "Late Great Planet Earth" and the more recent "Left Behind" series (attributed to Tim LaHaye).

Kim Riddleberger's "A case for amillennialism" is a Calvinist response to Dispensationalism. The book also critiques other eschatological positions the author considers erroneous, including Historic Premillennialism and Postmillennialism, especially its Preterist variety. The book is relatively easy to read for a theological tract, and seems to deal with all of the important arguments and relevant Biblical texts.

From a historical-critical perspective, I believe there are only two serious contenders when it comes to the eschatology of the early Church. One is historic premillennialism, which was the position of Papias, Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, who all based themselves on a literal interpretation of the relevant passage from Revelation. The other is amillennialism. The question isn't entirely easy to answer, but some form of amillennialism is probably the original position, since the millennium is hardly ever mentioned in the New Testament, except in Revelation (one of the latest NT texts). Rather, the reader gets the impression that the second coming of Jesus leads directly to the new heavens and the new earth, without an intervening literal millennium.

Riddleberger's book isn't a historical-critical study, however, but a Calvinist theological exposition of the amillennial view. Riddleberger points out that the New Testament itself re-interpreted many Old Testament prophecies, while Dispensationalists tend to read the OT prophecies literally (or at least quasi-literally). This is indeed one of the more curious traits of Dispensationalism, making it sound as a weird blend of fundamentalist Christianity and some kind of pseudo-Judaism. Thus, Dispensationalists believe that a literal Jewish temple like that described by Ezekiel will be built during the millennium, but the animal sacrifices will commemorate the crucifixion of Jesus! They also believe that national Israel will become a world power of sorts during the millennium, but of course, a national Israel suitably converted to Christianity (note the subtle combination of Judaizing and anti-Semitism). Riddleberger has no problem proving that the New Testament writers rejected such a literal interpretation of the Jewish scriptures. Rather, they applied many of the OT prophecies to Jesus or the Church. James' use of Amos and Peter's of Joel are cases in point, not to mention the Gospel of Matthew. From this follows that Riddleberger doesn't believe that Israel or the Jews have any special role to play in the eschatological drama. Nevertheless, Riddleberger insists that his interpretation is more literal than that of his dispensationalist opponents, which he terms "literalistic".

"A case for amillennialism" further deals with the Calvinist understanding of the various covenants in the Bible, the equally Calvinist interpretation of key terms such as "kingdom of God" and "Israel of God", and the already/not yet tension. Naturally, the author doesn't believe in the bizarre idea known as the Rapture. There is also an extensive section interpreting the prophecy of the 70 weeks in Daniel, the Olivet Discourse, Romans 11 and Revelation 20.

But will anybody listen?

The Dispensationalist scenarios may be too entrenched in the popular culture for anyone to care about the traditional Reformed approach. Indeed, Dispensationalism is probably more exciting, with its detailed, intriguing prophecies which can be seemingly matched with real events in the Middle East, and its speculations on the identity of the Anti-Christ, not to mention the Rapture! Amillennialism can only offer the perspective that Jesus will come as a thief in the night, and that the Church will be forced to undergo tribulations until that time. I therefore predict (non-prophetically) that the feverish American imagination, which has spawned so many cults and pseudosciences, will continue to feed the wild speculations of the Dispensationalists, especially since the Mideast conflict isn't going away any time soon.

In a sense, amillennialism might be a theology left behind.