Pre-millennialism from the Social Perpective

Currently in my American Religions class, my professor is lecturing on American Christian fundamentalism. Today, he brought up the distinction between post-millennialism and pre-millennialism.

Post-mil was tightly associated with the social gospel developed by Walter Rauschenbusch, and was essentially the idea that if societal structures could be transformed/redeemed, people within the societies would then be transformed/redeemed--and this would be the exhibition of the coming of the Kingdom of God (otherwise known as the millennial reign of Christ described in the Bible). Pre-mil, however, arose from the era that Christian fundamentalism sprang from. It was essentially the idea that the worsening state of the world (corruption, war, poverty, societal evil, etc) is a sign of the impending return of Jesus. Pre-millennialism is most prominent idea within Conservative Evangelical Christian circles (which dominate the current perception of Christianity in general) today in America.

Sitting in lecture, when my professor brought up this distinction, I instantly thought: so if the fundamental Christian community believes that the onset of evil is a sign of the second coming (which is something, I assume rightly, they want to happen), than why do they get so outraged/up in arms against the onset of evil they see in their country? Why this fierce belief that if evil becomes celebrated in one's culture that it is something to be vehemently opposed to at all costs. After all, according to their own belief, should they not be excited about the onset of evil since it signals the return of Jesus? Should they not, in a sense, encourage the ongoing depravity of their earthly home?

I have some ideas of why this is so--some are kinder than others.

1) they are in love with idea of America. This is not uncommon or unique, the United States' history is marked vividly with groups/individuals almost literally worshiping the idea of a free country and even having the belief that democracy is a gift from God and that He wills us to spread this democracy to the world. In this sense, the United States is a..."perfect example" of God's will. So, now that such intensely rapid secularization is occurring, fear of God's wrath abounds--the idea that they have failed their stewardship. Or perhaps, their patriotism is too mixed up in their religion--they see the United States as their state of heaven so to speak and they want no one nor nothing to violate their perception of it.

2) they fear being judged for their country's choices. Since we do live in a country where we are all somewhat involved in deciding what gets implemented in policy, we do elect leaders, etc, we are somehow responsible for our country's actions and beliefs. In this sense, when the United States becomes secularized and even immoral--this is the cause for a great amount spiritual stress and worry. The fear of judgment is a very powerful force in the human psyche.

3) directly related to the second point is the idea that when Jesus comes back, Christians should be discovered to be working for Him in the dying world. This point, I think, is truly commendable. When the master returns, the servants should indeed be found to be doing what their master wishes--there is nothing worse nor more embarrassing than having him come back to the servants carousing, spitting all over his reputation, etc.

While I think #3 is the most commendable reason for not just apathetically letting the world die as we await the second coming, I still question the resulting actions. If they want to be found doing the will of Jesus when he returns, why spend so much time vehemently opposing things like, for example, gay marriage? I'm fully aware that Christian fundamentalists (as a general rule) believe homosexuality to immoral and all that. Regardless of that belief, would they, as the servants, be proud to say to their master: "sir, we've made sure all the heretics and sinners are aware of their lack of you and their fate!"? For myself, as a servant--hell no, I would be ashamed if that's what I had to say. I am inclined to believe that the master wouldn't be pleased either. What then would be pleasing? I think, to be truly not ashamed when the master returns, would be to actively care for the unfortunate, the poor, the orphans and widows, the exploited, the hated, etc. Is this just the Rauschenbusch's social gospel? Probably.

Do I therefore, think that post-mil is better than pre-mil? Not necessarily. Post-mil represents a utopian ideal--and is therefore something I don't think can ever be achieved. Additionally, I think some of the presuppositions within post-mil are flawed. For example, people make the structures of society; therefore, to redeem the structures, you must redeem the people who compose them. Such a mass scale redemption is impossible to guarantee due to the concept of free will--people may and do choose to reject the redemption. I am more inclined to the post-mil camp because of their emphasis on working toward the betterment of society--even though I think their goal is impossible.

In closing, some general questions:

Is it not better to strive to be constructive as opposed to destructive?

Are the legalization of ideas deemed immoral really worth getting paranoid about?

Would it not be more worthwhile to actively work to live out what we know Jesus commanded--love the Lord your God and love your neighbor as yourself?

peace and brain stimulation my friends.