Apocalyptic expectations of Armageddon and a New Age have been a fixture of the American cultural landscape for centuries. With the year 2000 fast approaching, such millennial visions are becoming increasingly popular. In Arguing the Apocalypse Stephen O'Leary sheds new light on the age-old fascination with the End of the Age by proposing a rhetorical explanation for the widespread appeal of millennialism.

Using examples of apocalyptic argument from ancient to modern times, O'Leary identifies the recurring patterns in apocalyptic texts and movements and shows how and why the New Testament Apocalypse has been used to support a variety of political stances and programs. Looking at works as diverse as William Miller's nineteenth-century lectures and Hal Lindsey's bestsellers, he probes the apparently fundamental human need to view history as symbolic drama - either comic or tragic.

The book concludes with a critical review of the recent appearances of doomsday scenarios in our politics and culture, and a meditation on the significance of the Apocalypse in the nuclear age.

Arguing the Apocalypse is the most thorough examination of its subject to date: a study of a neglected chapter of our religious and cultural history, a guide to the politics of Armageddon, and a map of millennial consciousness.

It will be of keen interest to scholars and students in numerous fields, including the history of religion, biblical criticism, rhetoric, communications, philosophy, political science, sociology, anthropology, and literary criticism, as well as anyone intrigued by doomsday politics.