Weens kerke se eskatologiese verskille is daar twee hoofstrome van millennialisme: chiliasme en
antichiliasme, wat tradisioneel as alternatiewe teenoor mekaar gestel word.
Hierdie verhandeling behels egter 'n holistiese vergelyking van verskillende eskatologiee en hulle
gepaardgaande millennialismes, ten einde die drie hoofstrome van millennialisme: pre-, post- en amillennialisme,
met Konig se millennialisme te vergelyk.
'n Literatuurstudie toon dat Konig eskatologie definieer as die realisering van God se doel (die verbond) met
die skepping deur die persoon van Jesus Christus. Die realisering van hierdie doel het met Christus se eerste koms
in die Nuwe-Testamentiese bedeling begin. Derhalwe handhaaf Konig 'n Christosentriese eskatologie i.p.v. die
tradisionele 'verdinglikte' eskatologie wat die eskatologie definieer as die allerlaaste dinge wat moet gebeur voor die
einde van die wereld. Waarteoloe dus in die algemeen slegs 'n gedeelte van die N.T. as eskatologiese veld beskou
(soos bv. Barth wat die eskatologie by Christus se opstanding begin, en Moltmann wat dit by Christus se kruisiging
begin), sien Konig die hele N.T. as eskatologie in 'n Christologiese sin. Teenoor sommige teoloe wat weer die O.T.
as eskatologie klassifiseer, betoog Konig dat hoewel die O.T. toekomsgerig is, dit nie ware eskatologie kan wees nie,
want toe was God se doel/verbond/koninkryk nog nie in die mens Jesus Christus verwesenlik nie. In 'n toekomsgerigte
sin kan die O.T., volgens Konig, wel 'eskatologie' genoem word, maar dan sal dit 'mislukte eskatologie' wees. Maar
die werklike realisering van God se doel met die skepping deur Christus, het eers in die N.T. met die eerste koms van
Jesus Christus begin.
Die resultaat van ons evaluering van Konig toon duidelike teologiese verskille wat Konig met die chiliaste en
met die antichiliaste het. Konig kan bv. nie saamstem met die chiliaste se idee van 'n millennium wat vir 'n bepaalde
tydperk sal bestaan nie. Ook gaan hy nie akkoord met die antichiliaste se sg. millennium wat vir 'n onbepaalde tydperk
sal duur nie. Dog ten spyte van verskille tussen Konig en die antichiliaste, is daar wel betekenisvolle ooreenkomste.
Hier dink ons bv. aan die felt dat Konig saam met die antichiliaste betoog teen die chiliaste se siening van 'n letterlike
vrederyk op die ou aarde wat presies eenduisend jaar sal duur.
In ons konklusie is dit duidelik dat die verskille tussen Konig en ander millennialiste te wyte is aan veel meer
as net hulle onderskeie hermeneutiese interpretasies van die eskatologie en die sg. millennium. Teenoor die
tradisionele eskatologie se verengde teleskopiese tonnelvisie wat die eskatologiese veld beperk net tot 'n allerlaaste eindtydelike bedeling, staan Konig se bree makroskopiese voelvlugvisie wat die eskatologiese lyn vanaf Christus se krip tot by sy troon op die nuwe aarde laat strek. Maar aangesien dit in die lig van Konig se ekumeniese teologie tog moontlik is om eerder die punte van ooreenkoms as die van verskil tussen die millennialistiese benaderings te beklemtoon, word 'n ekumeniese toekomsblik vir die millenniumdebat voorgestel.
Because of eschatological differences amongst churches, there are two main streams of millennialism:
chiliasm and antichiliasm, which is traditionally set as alternatives against each other. This dissertation, however, contains a holistic comparison of different eschatologies and their accompanying millennialisms, in order to compare the three main streams of millennialism: pre-, post- and amillennialism, with Konig's millennialism.
A literary study shows that Konig defines eschatology as the realization of God's purpose i.e. the covenant)
with the creation through the person of Jesus Christ. The realization of this purpose had started at the first coming
of Christ in the dispensation of the N.T. Therefore Konig maintains a Christocentric eschatology in stead of the
traditional 'thing-ifying' eschatology that defines eschatology as the very last things to happen before the end of the world. Whereas theologians in general would envisage only part of the N.T. as the field of eschatology (as for instance Barth who starts his eschatology at the resurrection of Christ, and Moltmann who starts it at the crucifixion of Christ), Konig would deem the whole N.T. as eschatology in a Christological sense. Over against some theologians that would also classify the O.T. as eschatology, Konig would argue that although the O.T. is oriented towards the future, it could not be true eschatology, since God's purpose/covenant/kingdom was not yet realized through the man Christ Jesus in the O.T. Because of the futurological force of the O.T., it could well be called 'eschatology' according to Konig, but then it would only be an 'unsuccessful eschatology'. But the true realization of God's purpose with the creation through Christ, had only started in the N.T. at the first coming of Jesus Christ. The result of our evaluation of Konig shows distinct theological differences that Konig has with both the chiliasts and the antichiliasts. Konig could for instance not agree with the chiliasts' idea of a millennium that will exist for a definite period of time. Neither could he agree with the antichiliasts' notion that the socalled millennium will continue for an indefinite period of time. Though despite the differences between Konig and the antichiliasts, there are also meaningful similarities. Take for instance the fact that Konig joins the antichiliasts in their argument against the chiliasts' idea of a literal kingdom of peace on the old earth, which will presumably last exactly for one thousand years. In our conclusion it is quite clear that the differences between Konig and the other millennialists are the result of much more than their respective hermeneutical interpretations of eschatology and the socalled millennium. In contrast to the narrow telescopic tunnel vision of the traditional eschatology that limits the eschatological field to an ultimate endtime dispensation, stands Konig's broad macroscopic birdflight vision that stretches the eschatological line from Chrtist's crib to his throne on the new earth. But since it is possible in the light of Konig's ecumenical theology to rather stress the points of agreement than that of disagreement amongst the various millennialistic approaches, an ecumenical vision for the future of the millennium debate is proposed
