Is HISTORY materialist or theological with it messianic motifs

Our perception of HISTORY  for some scholars has s for many years preoccupied with the question of whether it is essentially ‘theological’ or ‘materialist’ in character (or how it could possibly be both at once), occasioned by the conjunction of Benjamin's self-identification with historical materialism and his continued use of explicitly messianic motifs.

This overview of History culminates in a quasi-messianic conception of revolution as an ‘interruption’ of history or an ‘arrest of happening’: “Classless society is not the final goal of historical progress but itmiscarried to an  achieved interruption, annihilated within itself the idea of progress”, taking as its founding concept… not progress but actualization.  Think of the current progressive movements in the US, their aim is actualization not progress as they cannot articulate that, banging your fists against giant wooden doors is actualization but it is not progress. Such futile actions smacks of messianicity and is essentially theological,