Realized Eschatology John F. Walvoord Higher criticism during the last century has been marked by an unrelenting attack on any form of literal eschatology. The concept that the Bible can actually prophesy future events in detail with accuracy is abhorrent to the liberal mind. Every effort accordingly is made to date prophetic utterances after the event prophesied as illustrated in the dating of Daniel in the second century B. C. The premise is that detailed prophecy of the future is impossible for either God or man. Although it is often couched in terms of objective scholarship, it is obvious that such a premise is extremely subjective and prejudicial to any calm evaluation of the data. It is built on a thesis that God is not sovereign, is not omniscient, and is not omnipotent. Further, it involves a theory of revelation which renders impossible communication of details to man beyond his natural wisdom. Such higher criticism spares no fundamental of orthodoxy and is free to revise its theology as well as the statements of Scripture to harmonize with the thesis involved. The concept of realized theology must be understood as an outgrowth of this approach to prophecy. The place of eschatology in liberal theology has undergone in the last generation a dramatic change. The extreme skep­ ticism expressed by Harnack1 which regarded eschatology in Scripture contemptuously has been replaced by a new study of the eschatological aspects of Scripture largely due to the influence of Albert Schweitzer's Quest of the Historical Jesus. This trend toward eschatology has been analyzed by Suggs as follows: "...during the years since World War I there has been a growing appreciation of the breadth, depth, and complexity of eschatological thought in the Bible. We have 1 Adolf Harnack, What Is Christianity ? 313 SU BIBLIOTHECA SACRA October, 1970 come a long way since Harnack spoke of eschatology as the 'husk' rather than the 'kernel' of Jesus' teaching, with the result that Christianity became the delineation of an ideal ethic rather than the proclamation of judgment and salva­ tion."2 Suggs goes on to explain the role of Schweitzer in this renewed analysis of eschatology : "We work now with a more positive appraisal of the centrality of eschatology to the early preaching The literary roots of this revival actually extend beyond the turn of the century to the work of J. Weiss on the kingdom of God in the gospels. But it was Albert Schweitzer's Quest of the Historical Jesus (German edition, 1906), which issued an inescapable challenge to the nineteenth century understanding of the New Testament message by setting the eschatological concern at the very center of Jesus' teaching. From that day, the problem of biblical eschatology became a major interest of historical study, . ."3 Schweitzer, however, had ended up with the conclusion that Jesus' eschatological hope was not fulfilled, suggesting that Jesus was mistaken. As Suggs expresses it : "Schweitzer's own answer to that question [of the relevancy of the eschato­ logical proclamation] was a simple religious commitment in­ spired by his mistaken hero [Jesus] and the development of a philosophy of reverence for life which has only tenuous con­ nections with the historical faith."4 Even liberal scholarship, however, has not followed Schweitzer, although they are probably in agreement that Jesus was mistaken. To leave Christian faith in such an impasse is not satisfactory even to a liberal. It is in this context that another point of view, that of realized escha­ tology, was advanced by C. H. Dodd in the aftermath of World War I, aided somewhat by Rudolf Otto. A third point of view relative to eschatology is that of a mediating school attempting to harmonize Schweitzer and Dodd. C. K. Barrett observes that in relation to "the eschato­ logical material in the gospels" there are "no more than three 2 M. Jack Suggs, "Biblical Eschatology and the Message of the Church," Encounter, XXIV (Winter, 1963) 4-5, cf. Adolf Harnack, What Is Christianity? p·55,· 3 Suggs, ibid., p. 5. 4 Ibid. REALIZED ESCHATOLOGY S15 fairly well defined groups."5 Barret finds that the first group headed by Schweitzer are those who held that "the thought and activity of Jesus were alike radically eschatological, determined by the prospect of an imminent coming of the kingdom of God which would be heralded by the woes of the elect. It was to secure the coming of the Age to Come that Jesus died. It follows that Jesus was mistaken, since He died and the king­ dom did not come."6 The second group is represented, according to Barrett, by von Dobschutz, R. Otto, C. H. Dodd, and others, who offered the viewpoint of realized eschatology.7 A third view is a mediating position between Schweitzer and Dodd which is neither futurist eschatology after Schweit­ zer nor realized eschatology after Dodd.8 The discussion concerning eschatology, however, has to be seen in the larger context of the rise of neoorthodoxy which tended to limit the effect of Dodd's influence on liberal theology as a whole. Suggs has summarized this as follows : "The fact that the church at large was not driven to Schweitzers posi­ tion is traceable to a number of factors, only some of which are academic. First, there was the discovery of R. Otto and C. H. Dodd of the element in primitive Christian eschatology which is usually spoken of as 'realized.' Secondly, there was the appearance of a new historical skepticism in European scholarship which focused attention on the Christ of faith rather than upon the embarrassingly Jewish Jesus of history. Thirdly, there was the rise of a new theology which formed a more positive place for eschatology because of a negative anthropology which demanded a transcendent rather than an immanent hope."9 Dodd, however, has unquestionably influenced the attitude of liberal scholarship toward eschatology and an understand­ ing of his position is essential in approaching liberal theo­ logical concepts of the twentieth century. Three major areas of Dodd's contribution need to be examined: (1) Dodd's con­ cept of eschaton in relation to history and time, (2) the nature 6 C. K. Barrett, "New Testament Eschatology," Scottish Journal of Theology, VI (June, 1953), 151-52. 6 Ibid., p. 153. 7 Ibid. 9 Ibid., pp. 153-55. * Suggs, op. cit., p. 5. 316 BIBLIOTHECA SACRA October, 1970 and content of the kerygma, and (3) the resulting theological concept related to realized eschatology. THE CONCEPT OF ESCHATON IN RELATION TO HISTORY Although C. H. Dodd recognizes that Christianity is a faith based upon historical facts, his view of past as well as future history is different than that usually adopted in ortho­ doxy. Concerning history he writes: "Christianity ... is an historical religion. Some religions can be indifferent to histor­ ical fact, and move entirely upon a plane of timeless truth. Christianity cannot. It rests upon the affirmation that a series of events happened, in which God revealed Himself in action, for the salvation of men."10 As far as past history is concerned, however, he feels that history should be considered in its religious sense. Hence, he writes : "This principle of the universality of the divine mean­ ing in history is symbolically expressed in Christian theology by placing the history of the Old and New Testaments within a mythological scheme which includes a real beginning and a real end. ... I have described this as mythological, and as such it must, I think, be understood. Creation and Last Judg­ ment are symbolical statements of the truth that all history is teleologica!, working out one universal divine purpose. The story of Creation is not to be taken as a literal, scientific statement that the time series had a beginning—an idea as inconceivable as its opposite, that time had no beginning. Nor must the story of the Fall, which is the necessary complement of the creation-story, be taken as a literal, historical state­ ment that there was a moment when man first began to set himself against the will of God. The story of creation and the fall is a symbolic summing-up of everything in secular empirical history which is preparatory to the process of re­ demption and revelation."11 Dodd's view of history, therefore, determines his view of eschatology, holding as he does that neither history nor escha­ tology should be considered literally as a series of events. The Bible fundamentally is a religious document rather than a historical one according to Dodd. Hence, prophecy does not need to be taken any more literally than the doctrine of crea- 10 C. H. Dodd, History and the Gospel, p. 15. 11 Ibid., pp. 168-69. REALIZED ESCHATOLOGY 317 tion. Dodd thus finds a supra-historical factor in history which is its real significance.12 This leads to his view of eschaton, that history as well as eschatology is realized in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ. Accordingly, eschatology is now rather than future and hence, "realized." Dodd equates eschaton with "the day of the Lord" which to him is the summation of all the eschatological purposes. Eschatology is, therefore, already fulfilled in the sense that God's purpose has been completely realized. Dodd writes: "The real, inward, and eternal meaning, striving for expression in the course of history, is completely expressed in the eschaton, which is therefore organically related to history. Nevertheless, it is unique and unlike any other event, because it is final. It is not as though the Creator had arbi­ trarily fixed a certain date as the 'zero hour' of his world, so that events which might conceivably have followed it are not permitted to happen.