Time&Eternity

202 chapter 4
theology,” as a radical eschatology. 88 The second form of eschatology readily
takes the form of a theology of history, which declares what is seen as the
will of God to be the desirable end goal of history. Sauter does not believe
that eternity is thereby moved into time. 89 In looking back at chapter 1,
however, we are reminded that in some modern hymns we find precisely
this tendency to incorporate eternity into time; however, there, this occurred
less from the point of view of universal history than from the perspective
of individual experiences. 90 Using the example of the United States,
both Sauter and Moltmann mention how a historical-theological eschatological
interpretation of the reign of God as the final stage that is to be realized
can shape a political mission in dramatic ways. 91 The third form of eschatology
blocks the path to any millenaristic theology of history by
emphasizing that God, as the one who is coming, cannot be derived from
the world or from history. Eschatology thus conceived is linked to a special
understanding of time as “an incomparably intense perception of the present,”
for “every moment in time also runs aground, so to speak, in eternity.”
92 Here, time is not a continuum that will at some time be replaced by
eternity or will merge into it; here, eternity is also not something absolutely
different from time, but rather—in the words of Sauter—it “befalls us as
that which limits us.” 93
In comparison to this, the first form, the eschatology of “Last Things,”
appears to separate time and eternity strictly from each other. It corresponds
most closely to the model of the ontological distinction of time and eternity.
94 This type of eschatology can give hope and comfort, but it can also prevent
one from acting by deferring to eternity. It can appear threatening or
senseless, but it seldom leads to social or political activism. On the contrary,
it may well encourage escapism. The second form presupposes a chronological
understanding of time and goes hand in hand with the quantitative differentiation
model of time and eternity. 95 It contains an appeal to realize, as
far as possible, the reign of God through personal, social, or political efforts,
which has brought much good to humanity even though the goal was never
achieved. Cullmann’s image of the ascending line applies extremely well to
all sorts of more or less ambiguous programs for improving the ills of the
world, regardless of whether it is Cultural Protestantism, an inner-worldly
thousand-year empire, ecclesiastical chiliasm, political imperialism, or
something else. The understanding of time in the third type of eschatology,
in comparison, corresponds most closely to what I have called the eschatological
difference of time and eternity. 96 It emphasizes the relatedness, and
even interaction, of time and eternity. It proceeds from God’s alterity and
simultaneously presupposes contact between time and eternity. For this reason,
it reckons with the breakthrough of eternity into time and that this