Thesis: The
existential interpretation of eschatological claims is more persuasive than the
millenialist, and millenialist interpretations should be reevaluated, if not
abandoned altogether. Introduction
Throughout time, all cultures have
made apocalyptic predictions. The Mayans kept a calendar that is believed by
some to have predicted catastrophic events in history and prophesied the end of
time. Native Americans had their own eschatologies, which were described as the
end of an earth cycle. Eschatological claims were made in the Old and New Testament.
Millennialism was also present in medieval Europe, Renaissance England, and the
early nineteenth and late twentieth century Existentialism provides another
interpretation of eschatology. The existential interpretation of eschatological
claims considers mortality, putting the center of attention on the death of the
individual. It puts the focus of eschatological claims in the present instead
of pushing death off to the future, making it appear insignificant. The
existential interpretation can be critical of eschatological claims, while
retaining their original power. The existential interpretation of
eschatological claims is more persuasive than the millenialist, and
millenialist interpretations should be reevaluated, if not abandoned altogether.
It is important to define certain terminology in this paper in order to have a
better understanding of the existential and millenialist interpretations of
eschatological claims. Eschatology, Millennialism,
Existentialism Eschatology, comes from the
Greek term éschato, meaning last,
and is any concept or happening concerned with the end of the world. In
mystical traditions, this word relates to the end of reality and a union with
the divine. Most monotheistic religions have eschatological doctrines that
claim the chosen members of the religion will be spared from the oncoming wrath
of God. Existentialism holds that a
person is fully responsible for the creation of meaning in his or her life. A
central notion to existentialism, existence precedes essence, implies that the
value and meaning human beings give to their lives is developed later on, and
not from birth. Therefore, according to Heidegger, humans are ‘thrown’ into the
world and must make their own decisions and actions. Millennialism, meaning one-thousand years, is a belief
generally associated with Christianity.
Millenialists have a variety of literal interpretations of scripture
that involve the end of the world, and in Christian eschatology the second
coming of Christ. Pre-millenialism is the belief that an earthly reign of
Christ will occur at some period in the future. However, in post-millennialism,
the Being-toward-death
and Acting in the Present The existential interpretation of
eschatological claims gives an awareness of ‘being-toward-death,’ putting
emphasis on the present. Martin Heidegger describes the
existential-eschatological interpretation when he writes, “Dying is not an
event, but a phenomenon to be understood existentially” (Heidegger 223). The
existential manner of interpreting death is anticipating it as an eminent
possibility. Death affects a person in their present situation because there is
the potential for death at every instant.
The event or moment in which one passes away is only a part of the death
of the individual. Death is with us on an everyday basis. The phenomenon of
death encompasses all of the events leading up to the final moment. Like the ripening of fruit toward becoming
ripe, we are coming closer to our end. Heidegger explains, although there is no
perfect metaphor for describing death, understanding that death is a constant
possibility in our everyday lives provides insight into the reality of death. Through the existential
interpretation, it is understood that we are continuously ‘fleeing’ from death
as well. Martin Heidegger describes the way in which western society deals with
death. In modern society, there is “a constant tranquilization about death”
(Heidegger 235). This tranquilization continually pushes death out of the mind
of a person. In Western society, people are put in hospitals to die. They are
buried in closed caskets, or they are cremated. Talking about death is avoided
in most cases. Elizabeth Kubler-Ross exemplifies this in this passage from her
book Death: The Final Stage Of Growth: It is interesting to note that the hospital and its culture considers
death in some ways one of its own taboos. In the hospital patients do not die,
they expire. Patients do not die in the operating room; rather, the patient is
‘lost on the table.’ (Ross 10) Similar to Ross, Heidegger
describes these societal taboos when speaking of death. This avoidance of
death-talk is not just for the dying, but even more so for those doing the
consoling. People appear to be certain that they will die, but avoid the fact
that this death could happen at any moment. Heidegger also explains the
‘potentiality’ that humans have in relation to their own death. He writes that
death is “a possibility that is certain, and yet indefinite, that is, possible
at any moment” (Heidegger 239). There are not limitless possibilities of things
that could happen to someone in one day. For example, typically a person does
not unexpectedly get married without prior knowledge or planning. However, on
any given day a person could pass away unexpectedly. He could get in a car
accident while going to work or have some sort of unforeseen medical problem
that leads to a sudden and untimely demise. Therefore, dying should not be
ignored because it is something that individuals face on a daily basis. The existential
interpretation is the authentic interpretation of death. This is
being-toward-death. Humans are mortal beings that can perish at any instant,
and must not be tranquilized by societal attempts to disassociate death from
them. Death must remain a possibility, not something that is actualized, but
something that is understood as an ever-present reality. Death must be
anticipated; from this anticipation, one becomes concerned with existence. One
cares about life right now. Heidegger describes the effect the anticipation of
death has on a person by stating, “Anticipation shows itself as the possibility
of understanding one’s ownmost and extreme potentiality-of-being, that is, as
the possibility of authentic existence” (Heidegger 242). The anticipation of
death yields the realization that death could come at any moment. The
anticipation of death allows a person to understand their being in the most
accurate way. Heidegger describes this
anticipation of death as “being their ownmost and extreme potentiality of
being,” or living an authentic existence. When a person realizes that every day
could be their last, they live their lives to its fullest potential, in an
authentic manner. The individual who adheres
to the existential interpretation of eschatological claims takes action in the
present. The story Ivan Ilich, by Leo Tolstoy, is a good example of
someone who does not face death until his final moments. When Ivan Ilich
realizes he has contracted a fatal disease, he comes to grips with the fact
that he has not lived life as he has wished. He has been greedy and careless
towards others. He has not lived an ethical life. He fears his oncoming death
and tries to deny its existence. However, he eventually confronts his death and
realizes that he has lived life inauthentically, meaning he has been fleeing
from his death. In this passage he is encountering his eminent death: Death yes, death. And none of them
know or wish to know it, and they have no pity for me. Now they are playing.’
(He heard through the door the distant sound of a song and its accompaniment.)
It’s all the same to them, but they will die too! Fools! I first, and they
later, but it will be the same for them. And now they are merry…the
beasts! (Tolstoy 444) Ivan has discovered that
death has given him incredible anxiety about his existential situation. He can see
his family outside playing and acting happy. They are avoiding death. They are
trying to comfort themselves from the fear of death, particularly the fear of
Ivan’s death. Ivan realizes that death will happen to his family as well, and
they should anticipate their own deaths. If Ivan had confronted his death
sooner, he could have lived an authentic life and done the things that were
truly important. He could have taken action and made right the wrongs in his
life. He did not understand the profound affect death would have on him until
it was too late.
Existential Authenticity The existential-eschatological
interpretation reveals meaning that the millenialist avoids—the present reality
of death. The millenialist flees from death by tranquilizing their fears about
it. Heidegger
writes, “Being toward the end has the mode of evading that end-reinterpreting
it, understanding it inauthentically and veiling it” (Heidegger 235). Humans
reinterpret death by evading it. It is uncertain to us what will happen in and
after death. Humans guard themselves against this fear of the unknown by
believing in a comfortable scenario. This scenario has a way of veiling the
reality of death. The millenialist believes when the eschatological event
occurs, humans will live in a safe and comfortable existence. At this time,
Christ will return and there will be no more concerns. This relieves the tension of having to face
death. In Contemporary Options of Eschatology, researcher Erickson
describes the millenialist-eschatological interpretation: In common with postmillennialism, premillenialism asserts that there will
be a period in which the will of God is done on earth, a period in which
Christ’s reign is an actuality among men. This reign means that there will be
complete peace, righteousness, and justice among men. (Erickson 97) The concept of entering into a
realm of ‘peace’ and ‘justice’ takes away the frightening possibility of
death. The existential interpretation,
however, is authentic because man achieves freedom on his own accord; man is
responsible for his own actions. According to the millenialist interpretation,
man does not free himself on his own, but is given freedom as a gift. Through
the millenialist interpretation, man loses his individuality – the choice to
act towards the oncoming apocalypse has been made for him. The millenialist
does not worry about his death. The existentialist, however, has to live in the
presence of his own mortality. The Inauthentic Interpretation The millenialist
interpretation of eschatological claims does not understand death as a present
reality. It avoids death, putting it into the category of a future event,
making it appear insignificant, thus postponing and perhaps eliminating, the
anticipation of death. By avoiding death, the millenialist does not take action
in his or her life. A good example of this is the The argument can be made,
however, that the Postmillenialist interpretation of the New Testament does
put one’s focus on the present reality. This is because the Postmillenialist
interpretation sees the Millennialism:
A Negative Impact on Society The existential
interpretation of eschatological claims is more persuasive than the
millenialist because millenialist interpretations have a negative impact on
society. Literal interpretations of scripture, such as the millenialist, can
lead to fundamentalist interpretations of eschatological claims. Fundamentalist
principles are founded on the same set of religious principles as those of the
larger religious group. However, fundamentalists more purposefully try to
approach the modern world based on strict adherence to these principles, by
means of preserving a distinctness of their doctrine and their lives. Fundamentalism is not always a negative thing—sometimes
it allows people to connect deeply to their religious traditions. However, when
people strictly adhere to these religious principles it may lead to a form of
extremism. Certain millenialist groups, such as the Seventh-day Adventists,
take a literal approach to the New Testament and believe that the second coming
of Christ is imminent. An offshoot of this group is known as the Branch
Davidians. David Koresh, the leader of one of these Davidian groups, isolated
himself and his followers from the rest of society to live in a commune in Do you think you have the power to stop My Will? I have told My prophets
regarding “time no longer.” My “seven thunders” are to be revealed (Revelation
10:7)…Fear Me and “the hour of My judgment,” for it has come…I forewarn you,
the Koresh uses biblical
imagery from the Book of Revelation in a twisted and demented manner because he
believes he has the power of God and the supernatural power of the ‘seven
thunders’ mentioned in the New Testament. Koresh’s followers communicated these
extreme beliefs to their children as well.
During the siege of the compound in 1993, children were released and
taken into state custody. Investigators learned that these children were taught
that they would have to fight in a battle that would lead to the end of the
world, taking them to eternal glory. It was learned in interviews that the
children were taught to chant: “We are soldiers in the army. We've got
to fight. Some day we have to die. We have to hold up the blood-stained banner.
We have to hold it up until we die” (Gibson, Charles). This extreme eschatological interpretation
appears to lead to a terrorist-like mentality where one is fighting a battle
that will lead to the end of time. Fundamentalist principles do not always lead to such
an extreme form of thinking and many argue that, without a literal
interpretation of religious scripture, beliefs may be divergent from their
original significance. Some believe the literal interpretation of myth in the
New Testament is the “correct” interpretation. Through this interpretation,
religion is practiced as intended, and the literal interpretation of
eschatological claims is the appropriate one. Without this interpretation, the
myth has lost its power. The existential interpretation, on the other hand,
allows for the original power and significance of the myth to be applicable to
criticism. Through Paul Ricour’s interpretation of myth, one moves from
“immediacy of belief,” or trusting the myth in its literal sense, to a more
intellectually objective interpretation. Through a process of criticism and
demytholization, it restores the power of the myth while allowing clarity. This
passage, from Crucial here is Paul Ricoeur’s
conception of the hermeneutical circle by which one moves from an original
naiveté, with its easy immediacy of belief, through a necessary process of
criticism and demythologization to a ‘second-naivete’ by which wonder is
restored, chastened of its earlier confusion and credulity. He insists that the
dissolution of the myth as explanation is the necessary way to the restoration
of myth as symbol. (Lane 25) The
criticism of myth and the restoration of myth as symbol allows for a clarity
that did not exist before the demytholization—this clarity is important because
the literal interpretation of myth does not take into account the knowledge we
have acquired in our modern, technological society. Therefore, the literal
interpretation causes confusion. It makes one dismiss, or become selective of,
modern scientific knowledge. Modern Scientific, Technological
Society. The problem with literal interpretations of
eschatological claims is that we cannot accept them because they are
incompatible with our modern scientific, technological society. Human knowledge
has developed to the point where one can no longer literally accept the
worldview of the New Testament. Although many people still believe in, and have
witnessed miracles, there is little scientific evidence that they occur. In
modern society, illness is no longer considered the work of demons, and it is
widely accepted that disease is cured with medicine, rather than with
exorcisms. Mature humans no longer consider God to exist above the earth in
heaven. Scientific discovery has shown us that spirits do not literally exist
above the earth and in space. This makes the older concept of heaven no longer
applicable. The concept of hell as an underworld beneath the ground we stand is
no longer accepted either. Therefore, the millenialist interpretation of Christ
descending from the heavens is in opposition to the modern worldview. In Contemporty
Options of Eschatology, Millard Erickson describes the problems with accepting
a literal eschatology: One must remember that
Revelation is a very symbolic and figurative book. Not even premillenialists
press all of its images for literal meanings. If one would, the result would be
ludicrous. When chapter 20 speaks of binding of Satan, for example, certainly
no one thinks this will be done with a literal chain of metal. (Erickson 83) Revelation is a metaphorical book and should not
be taken as a strictly literal text. Using strictly literal interpretations
would cause one to be at odds with the beliefs in society today. Using a
non-literal interpretation of these works is still possible in our scientific,
technological world through the process of demytholization and criticism,
mentioned earlier. However, those who adhere to the literal interpretation may
say that the modern scientific and technological worldview has no influence on
the millenialist interpretation because this is a secular worldview and there
is a division between religion and science. Yet, our scientific and
technological society has made us more critical of myth, changing the religious
realm as well as the secular. Therefore, existential interpretations are more
compatible with our modern, technological society. Another reason why we are not able to accept this
literal interpretation is that Christ’s parousia never took place immediately,
as many interpret the New Testament to have predicted. The world continued for
hundreds of years and is continuing. Most believe it is much more likely for
the world to end because of some kind of natural cataclysmic event and not a
mythological one. There are threats on the environment because of human
advancements, and science that has proven that we are polluting the earth.
There is the new threat of global warming and people are becoming more
concerned with the threat of natural disasters over the mythological ones. Eschatology: Here and Now Existential interpretations are more capable of
being appropriated into existence as well. This is because the existential
interpretation involves an individual, transformative event, while the
millenialists interpretation involves a cosmological event. The individual
transformation occurs often. People continuously have religious
transformations, their lives are changed by these experiences and religious
conversions occur on a daily basis. However, a cosmological event that
transforms reality as we know it does not often occur – no one living today has
witnessed one of these events. Also, the existential interpretation occurs in
terms of chronos, relating to time in the present. For example, Rudolph
Bultmann writes: The prime text for a
demytholologized understanding of the crucifixion is Galatians 2:20, ‘I have
been crucified with Christ.’ The real meaning of the cross is not something
that happened centuries ago; it is something that applies to me here and now. (Erickson 40) We do not need to look to the past or the
future to understand this form of eschatology, we can look to our present
reality. The literal interpretation of eschatological claims is more difficult
for us to bring into our lives because we do not connect to the historical time
it was written during. Ricouer explains this disconnect when he writes, “…nor can
we connect mythical places with our geographical space” (5). The mythical
places in the New Testament are not compatible with some modern ideas of
society. For example, in the past, when humans looked up at the sky they saw
the heavens—the place where God existed. Now, humans travel to space and know
that heaven is not literally in the sky; the mythological depiction of the
heavens does not fit into the modern geographical description. By using demytholization, humans understand heaven
to be in a different realm of existence. The existential interpretation allows
the myth to be true in the present and not restricted to a historical time that
did not have the same advancements in science and technology as today. Thus, the existential interpretation is far more
persuasive than the millenialist. In Contemporary Options of Eschatology,
Erickson gives insight into why the existential interpretation is so
persuasive: Perhaps the greatest strength
of this type of eschatology is the relevance it gives to eschatological
teachings. Instead of referring to something that happened once long ago or is
yet to transpire, the teachings of eschatology are true in the present. They
have immediate pertinence. They are not for persons who lived in the past or
who will live sometime in the future. They are for me, living now. (Erickson
43) Humans live in the present, not the past or the
future. Therefore, they need a mythology that relates to them now. Through the
existential interpretation of scripture, humans connect to mythology better
because they relate these claims to their lives in the present. The existential
interpretation of eschatological claims allows for an anticipation of death,
allowing a person to lead an authentic life, living to their fullest potential. Conclusion Arguably,
the existential interpretation of eschatological claims is more persuasive than
the millenialist. The existential
interpretation of these claims involves interpreting eschatological claims in
relation to one’s being-toward-death, where there is a consciousness of death
and mortality. This allows the individual to focus on the present and live an
authentic life, opposed to the millenialist looking towards the future while
ignoring their relation towards death in the present. These millenialist interpretations of
eschatological claims also have negative impacts on society. Literal
interpretations can lead to the extremism of David Koresh in Works Cited Martin , Heidegger. Being And Time. Erickson, Millard. Contemporary Options In Eschatology. Second
Printing. Kubler-Ross, Elisabeth. Death: The Final Stage of Growth. Tolstoy, Leo. The Short Novels of Leo Tolstoy. Dial Press, 1944. Marcus, Joel. "Modern and Ancient Jewish Apocalypticism ." The
Journal of Religion 76(1996): Lane, Belden . Landscapes of the Sacred: Geography and Narrative in
American Spirituality . Sullivan , Lawrence. "No Longer the Messiah ." Religion,
Law and the Construction of
Identities 43(1996):
Author: Jacob Porter
Date: 09 February 2008
Key Words: Existentialism, eschatology, millennialism, death, postmillennialism,
myth, demytholization, interpretation,
transformative events, cosmological events