본 연구는 19세기 문화-프로테스탄티즘의 낙관적 종말론을 기독교사상 사적으로 평가하는 것이다. 자유주의 신학의 다른 이름인 문화-프로테스탄 티즘은 기독교 신학을 철학화하여 정통주의의 안티테제로 등장한 신학사 조를 말한다. 계몽주의의 영향으로 등장한 합리적 회의주의로 인해 기독교 신앙이 도전을 받게 되자 그에 대한 학문적 응전이 필요했는데, 문화-프로 테스탄트 신학자들은 칸트와 헤겔의 인식론에 기초해서 그 과제를 해결하 려 했다. 특별히 인간의 선의지로 실현할 윤리적 하나님 나라에 기초해 종 말론을 내재적, 낙관적으로 이해하는 측면에서 문화-프로테스탄티즘은 근 대 이성철학의 낙관주의와 맥을 같이하고 있다. 문화-프로테스탄티즘의 주 요 학자인 슐라이에르마허와 리츨과 하르낙은 하나님 나라를 역사와 문화 속에 내재하는 것으로 해석하여 낙관적 종말론을 확립하였다. 이와 함께 근대 진보적 낙관주의에 영향을 받아 세속적 유토피아의 실현을 하나님 나 라와 일치시킴으로써 기독교 종말론의 낙관적 이해를 확립하였다. 이와 같 이 종말론에 대한 낙관적 이해는 재림의 지연에 따른 성서적 종말론의 딜 레마를 해결해 줄 수 있는 신학적 원리를 제공해 주었다는 점에서 역사적 가치가 있다. 그러나 이성철학에 기초한 근대 계몽주의적 진보주의가 실패 한 상황에서 문화-프로테스탄티즘의 낙관적 종말론 역시 사상적으로 도전 을 받을 수밖에 없었다. 20세기 기독교는 문화프로테스탄티즘이 실패한 자 리에서 새로운 신학적 종말론을 모색하면서 다양한 이해를 발전시켰다. 결 과적으로 19세기 문화-프로테스탄티즘의 낙관적 종말론은 변증법적으로 기독교 종말론을 발전시키는 하나의 계기가 되었다.

The Eschatology of Hope presented in Pannenberg's theology has a special meaning in the Christian eschatology. His eschatology of hope emerged in the historical context which needed a theology of hope in the middle of the 20th century. At that time, the Christian theology came to a crisis with emerging the radical theologies, such as theology of the death of God, the secular theology, after the era of the Neo-orthodox theology(or the existential theology). Therefore the theology of hope was required. Advocates of the theology of hope have emphasized the fact that there is a hope in the kingdom of God which will be coming in the future. Pannenberg presented the kingdom of God in the framework of universal geschichte. The universal geschichte means history as a whole, that is a history connected the past and the present from the future. In this viewpoint of the universal geschichte, history becomes to be a revelation of God, that is “revelation as history.” There is a great hope in our history, because human history is open to the future. According to Pannenberg, the kingdom of God as a ultimate hope of human history is in the future. However the hope has already been expected in the event of Christ's resurrection. The universal geschichte and the resurrection of Christ make Pannenberg's theology into the eschatology of hope. Through the theology, he emphasized that the Christian eschatology should be a theology of hope. The eschatology of Pannenberg as a theology of hope has led the Christian eschatology of 20th century to the hope for the future. The theology has overcome the theology of crisis and has solved the challenge of the radical theology. But it has failed to make Christianity as a movement of hope substantially. His eschatology of hope has been criticized as a historical optimism, because the universal geschichte presented by his revelation as history seemed to be the metaphysics of history. Furthermore, his theology of hope couldn't fulfill historic meaning of the Christian eschatology since the eschatology failed to embody the vision of the kingdom of God and the mission to realize it. In spite of the limitation, his theoretic insight of the eschatology of hope has become an element of the Christian theological hope.

This article aims to explore the relationship between John Wesley’s eschatology and sanctification. It begins with the recognition that eschatology is at the heart of Wesley’s doctrine of entire sanctification or Christian perfection. Although he did not systematically develop his eschatology, John Wesley dealt with the eschatological themes such as death, resurrection, final judgement, and the kingdom of heaven and hell. His eschatological thought was much influenced through German pietist Johann Abrecht Bengel’s works, “Gnomon Novi Testamenti” and “Erklärte Offenbarung.” However, John Wesley declared that he had no opinion about Bengel’s chronological speculations on the Christ’s millennial kingdom, which would begin in 1836. In fact, John Wesley showed so little sympathy and had so little patience with eschatological fervor, which was generated among his Methodists. He tended to identify it with enthusiasm. The reason was that these eschatological enthusiasts stimulated opposition to entire sanctification or Christian perfection. Wesley’s concern for protecting and promulgating this doctrine of perfection may provide a key for understanding his reservations about eschatological fervor. John Wesley insists that it is possible in this life to be brought to entire sanctification and Christian perfection, which is equivalent to a perfection of love for God and neighbor. This doctrine is distinctive from notions of sanctification in other Christian traditions in that it expects the finite equivalent of eschatological fulfillment (i.e. entire sanctification or Christian perfection) as something which can happen in history rather than beyond it. By differing with those who taught that Christian perfection occurs only after death, at the point of death and by holding out for the possibilities of divine grace to perfect us in love in this life, John Wesley was making room for an eschatological hope that could become more than a hope, but rather a gracious reality in the here and now. Moreover, John Wesley, as a sacramentalist, had emphasis on the importance of the sacrament of the Lord’ Supper, which is able to sustain the believers in growth and grace and to lead them through a lifetime of the pursuit of entire sanctification or Christian perfection. “Hymns on the Lord’s Supper” published under the names of both John and Charles Wesley show Wesley’s ‘already’ and ‘not yet’ eschatological thinking.