EPTA

I suppose it really depends on which arm of the pentecostal movement we are looking at. I grew up with a knot in my stomach over the fact that we were now in the end times and that soon people would start persecuting us or forcing us to take upon us the mark of the beast etc. I think an unhealthy overemphasis has caused the pendulum to swing the other direction.
Is an eschatology that drives people into ministry because they are certain the world is ending very very soon necessarily good? What's going to happen when people realize 30 years later that actually they could have gone to school and they could have prepared better? I know several people that precisely because of the emphasis on imminence did not pursue university studies, since they didn't want to waste time which could be used for evangelism. Today they find themselves at a disadvantage because of an unhealthy eschatology.

Being a young Pentecostal I find that I simply cannot accept the "traditional" pentecostal eschatology which is based on Biblical interpretation that does not stand scrutiny. The super-literal interpretation of the book of Daniel and the book of Revelation, an interpretation which largely ignores the historical background of these books, shouldn't be given any special treatment in the name of preserving our "identity."

Yes Jesus is coming and we will have to give an account for our lives. The focus should be on in light of that, not that this person is the anti-Christ and this international coalition is the beast etc. and therefore nothing that we are doing is worthwhile unless it is direct evangelism. I regularly preach on living our lives with our eyes on the finishing line, but I never preach about the "end-times." It's not about foreseeing a series of events, but rather to be prepared for whatever happens.

So if pentecostals are moving away from the simplistic super literal interpretation of selected books, that is a step forward I think.
I am personally a lot more worried about the dichotomy which seems to be brewing between those that are super-charismatic and open to strange doctrines and those that are doctrinally sound but lacking the gifts of grace (or at least not actively using them.)
For me the pentecostal identity is about being people full of joy and life, having an intimate walk with God and doing his will, this would be reflected in sensitivity to the Holy Spirit and in the practice of the gifts of the Spirit.

I think there is a shift among Pentecostals in western countries away from dispensationalist eschatology to what I would call a missions-based eschatology, including a more positive expectation for the victory of the church in this age before Jesus comes again. Acts 1:6-8 and 2 Pet.3 imply that missions is the heart of our approach to the future and maybe even a condition of the return of Jesus. I have recently written a book called "Revelation Reclaimed" (Paternoster 2009) which explores the use and misuse of Revelation especially in Pentecostal-evangelical circles. Revelation is a missions-stimulating text rather than one that should create fear in believers' hearts.

Western Pentecostals have for the most part avoided discussion on eschatological issues over the past 30 years because of the wide variance of views. We are too worried about offending one another. This is because biblical studies have become secondary for many and we have merely repeated the views of the schools of interpretation to which we belong. Dispensationalism which is an enigma in the first place and is basically antagonistic to the emphasis of the Spirit's work in the present day. I still can't understand why we embraced it so willingly. It was seen as the 'only' position Pentecostals could hold but that is no longer true. However, many, and especially Pentecostals in Britain, have fallen under the spell of fads. The most recent is that proposed by Anglicans and amillennial fuzziness about eschatology. We do need to get back to what is a clearer and more literal understanding of what both Jesus, Paul and the other NT authors saw as both a tension and a soon coming reality even if we find it diffcult to hold both together at the same time. The problem in the past has been that we have majored on individual events and what is happening in current world politics. This is where we have gone wrong and whenever we do this we only put off more who would otherwise be very interested in what Scripture has to say. I am not that naive that I don't recognise that interpretive matters will determine outcomes but if we accept that all of the central doctrines of the Bible are best understood from the clearest reading of Scripture then why should eschatology not be understood best by following the same procedures? We need to avoid a system which explains everything away and majors on allegory and spiritualisation. One thing is very clear and that is that the spirit of the anti-Christ is at work in our world in an unprecedented manner. Globalisation is the forum and Christians need to wake up and start believing that the absolutes of the Word of God still stand. Jesus will return, Judgement and accountability are going to be part of this and that there will be a very real and terrible outcome of a conscious and ongoing nature for all who do not believe. So yes missions and eschatology go together because those who do not know Christ will suffer an eternal punishment jusat as those who have submitted their wills to Christ will receive the benefit of his grace and forgiveness forever. So what is the church doing about it? Well the western Church seems to be asleep while the Two Thirds world church has become God's instrucment. Eschartology is not just a subject we can take or leave. It is the reality laid down more clearly than we like to admit that God has the final say and we had better get on board and do soemthign about it before it is too late and whether or not we agree about all the details. Active and passionate evangelism and missions (not just short term) are the only answer of the Pentecostal Church to any willingness to engage in the eschatological debate of the 21st Century.

Dave's comments are valuable and stirring though I'm worries that he falls into the trap he warns against when he focuses especially on globalisation. Perhaps this is a positive for the gospel in that it breaks down barriers against the transmission of the message?

Dave's comments are valuable and stirring though I'm worried that he falls into the trap he warns against when he focuses especially on globalisation. Perhaps this is a positive for the gospel in that it breaks down barriers against the transmission of the message?