Posted on 04/12/2007 8:31:50 AM PDT by xzins
WHY I AM NOT A PRETERIST The word "preterist" is taken from the Latin word meaning "past." This view denies any future fulfillment of the book of Revelation and sees the events it describes as already having been fulfilled within the first century after Christ. There are several different forms of Preterism. Full Preterism views all of the prophecies of the Bible as having already been fulfilled in their entirety since the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Full Preterism is a very recent innovation that has no adherents in any of the writings of the early church. Partial Preterism maintains a future return of Christ, but views His "coming in the clouds" as described in Matthew 24:29-31 as having been fulfilled in A.D. 70 with the fall of Jerusalem. 1. Jesus and Preterism.
With regards to Preterism, I am reminded of the words of Jesus when He said to the disciples, "The days shall come when you will long to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see it. And they will say to you, 'Look there! Look here!' Do not go away, and do not run after them. For just as the lightning, when it flashes out of one part of the sky, shines to the other part of the sky, so will the Son of Man be in His day." (Luke 17:22-24). It seems to me that the Preterist is one who is pointing to the A.D. 70 event and saying, "Look there! Look here!" But there is going to be no mistaking the coming of the Son of Man when He finally returns. By contrast, none of the believers of the early church viewed the 70 A.D. fall of Jerusalem as fulfilling the promise of the return of Christ. This brings us to our next point.
2. The Church Fathers and Preterism.
It is clear from a reading of the apostolic and church fathers that ALL of them expected a future return of Jesus Christ. It would be strange indeed if the entire church failed to understand the fulfillment of so many of the New Testament prophecies on such a major point. This is especially striking when we remember the promise of Revelation 1:7 that tells us, He is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him; and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over Him. A preterist interpretation calls for this to be a reference to the "tribes of the land" of Israel, even though Israel was never described in such a way elsewhere in the Bible. But such an interpretation would demand that the Jews who suffered through the A.D. 70 event would have recognized that their sufferings were a punishment for their treatment of Jesus since the prophecy is not merely that they would mourn, but that they would mourn "over Him." Just as there is no evidence that anyone in the church ever recognized the fall of Jerusalem as the return of Jesus, so also there is a complete absence of evidence that the Jews ever recognized the coming of Jesus in those events.
3. The Resurrection and Preterism.
Fundamental to full Preterism is the idea that there is no future physical resurrection of the dead. But the pattern for our resurrection is that of Jesus. The big idea presented in 1 Corinthians 15 is that Jesus arose from the dead. This was not merely some sort of spiritual resurrection. The point is made throughout this chapter that His resurrection was bodily and physical. Furthermore we are told that His resurrection serves as the paradigm for our own resurrection. But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep (1 Corinthians 15:20). He is the firstfruits and we are the "later fruits." When Paul came to Athens, he was mocked by the Greeks for believing in a physical resurrection. Such mockery would not have been forthcoming had he held that the resurrection was only going to be of a spiritual or mystical nature. But he went out of his way to side himself with the Pharisees who believed in a physical resurrection of the dead (Acts 23:6-8). In denying any future resurrection at the coming of Christ, the preterist also finds himself out of accord with the words of Paul when he says, "We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed" (1 Corinthians 15:51). The reference to sleep is used throughout this epistle as a euphemism for death (11:30; 15:6; 15:18; 15:20). While Paul says of the coming of the Lord that it will be a time when all do not die, the preterist is left with the rather obvious historic truth that everyone who lived in the first century did indeed die. When it comes to the resurrection, the Bible teaches that Jesus is our prototype. His resurrection is the forerunner and the pattern for our own resurrection. This point is made in 1 Corinthians 15 where Paul says that if there is no resurrection then even Jesus has not risen. The resurrection of Jesus was a physical resurrection. He was able to stand before His disciples in His resurrection body and say, "See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have." (Luke 24:39). 1 John 3:2 says that when He appears, we shall be like Him, because we shall see Him just as He is. Therefore we can conclude that our future resurrection will be of a physical AND spiritual nature.
4. Preterism and the Lord's Supper.
One wonders whether the Full Preterist is completely consistent in his views. After all, most Full Preterists continue to partake of the Lord's Supper in spite of the fact that Paul said that the eating and drinking serves to "proclaim the Lord's death UNTIL HE COMES" (1 Corinthians 11:26).
5. Preterism and the Promise of a Soon Coming.
Preterists like to point out that Jesus and the disciples stated that the kingdom was near and at hand. What they often ignore is that this same formula was used in the Old Testament in instances where the eventual fulfillment was a long way off. An example of this is seen in Isaiah 13:6 where, speaking of a coming judgment against the city of Babylon, the prophet says, "Wail, for the day of the LORD is near! It will come as destruction from the Almighty." Isaiah writes these words in the 8th century B.C. but it is not until 539 B.C. that Babylon fell to the Persians. The preterist attempts to make a similar case via the words of Jesus in Matthew 24:34 where Jesus says, "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place." What is conveniently ignored is the earlier context of Jesus' words in the previous chapter.
"Therefore, behold, I am sending you prophets and wise men and scribes; some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city,
Notice that it was "this generation" that murdered Zechariah, the son of Berechiah." The problem is that this murder took place 400 years earlier as recorded in 2 Chronicles 24:20-21. This tells us that Matthew's use of the term "generation" means something different than a mere life span of the people who were living at that time.
6. Preterism and the Angels at the Ascension.
Another problem facing the preterist is seen in the promise that was given to the disciples at the ascension of Jesus. The event took place on the Mount of Olives.
And after He had said these things, He was lifted up while they were looking on, and a cloud received Him out of their sight.
The promise that was given by the angels is that Jesus would come again in exactly the same way as they had watched Him go into heaven. This had not been a spiritual ascension, but a physical and visible one. It is for this reason that Christians throughout the ages fully expect a future physical and visible return of Christ.
7. Preterism and the Judgment of the World.
When Paul preaches to the Athenians on the Areopagus, he declares to them that God has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed (Acts 17:31). The Preterist interpretation of this verse is that it points to the A.D. 70 fall of Jerusalem, yet that fall would have absolutely no impact upon the Athenians who had gathered to listen to Paul. He says that they ought to repent because of this coming judgment and such a warning is nonsensical if it only refers to a local judgment in a far away land.
There are some eschatological differences that exist between Christians that I consider to be relatively benign and within the realm of Christian orthodoxy. This is not one of them. To the contrary, the teaching of Preterism comes uncomfortably close to the spiritual gangrene that is described by Paul in 2 Timothy 2:18 when he speaks of those who have gone astray from the truth saying that the resurrection has already taken place, and thus they upset the faith of some. I have yet to meet a Preterist whose focus is upon church ministry or the spreading of the gospel or the building up of the church. To the contrary, those with whom I have thus far come into contact seem to have as their primary focus the spread of this particular teaching. I cannot help but to be reminded of the litmus test suggested by Jesus: You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes, nor figs from thistles, are they?
1. The bible says: "Re 1:7 - Look, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of him. So shall it be! Amen. "
2. There is no statement in ALL HISTORY, church or secular, of anyone saying they saw Him in any RETURN OF CHRIST.
That's pretty compelling evidence to me.
False premesis lead to false conclusions.
For my part, ignoring my repeated warnings may result in suicide by moderator.
I thought we were discussing the Olivet Discourse, x. Now you’ve jumped to Revelations. I don’t mind working through these passages, but you seem to be pulling a bait and switch here. How about we stick with one passage and work from there.
For my part, ignoring my repeated warnings may result in suicide by moderator.
Mt 24:30 "At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory.
Now, we know that every eye will see him.
And we also know that not one apostle and not one writer of the early church reported this happened. They didn't even know about it.
Thank you.
Great post, TC. bttt
Clearly all the nations of the earth did not mourn in 70AD. Rome rejoiced as they plundered Jerusalem and carried all the gold and precious stones back to Rome. The ONLY nation to mourn in 70AD was Israel. The rest of the world rejoiced.
All the nations will someday mourn the second coming of Christ, but that day has not yet come. The times of the Gentiles have not been fulfilled.
I agree.
In fact, the FULL PRETERIST position tends to see the endtimes exactly as does the dispensational, EXCEPT that they’ve missed the starting point by XY thousands of years.
There’s a return, a kingdom, and a new heavens and new earth.
It’s just that the preterist return wasn’t seen and wasn’t real, and this current age “kingdom of righteousness” ain’t much of a kingdom and ain’t terribly righteous.
Don't forget that the Preterist position is that Satan is currently chained. Which of course explains why the world is in such a righteous and holy state right now.. and has been since 70AD.
All those wars and rumors of wars are just spiritual symbols. They aren't really happening. It's just a mass vision.
It's interesting that preterism is inherently self-contradictory in its hermeneutic. On the one hand, when confronted with the fact that not everyone saw the Messiah coming on the clouds of the sky, there was no period in which locust-like creatures tormented people for five months without anyone dying, or that the earth was not covered by darkness, the preterist decries our "woodenly-literal" approach. On the other hand, they insist on a woodenly-literal interpretation of every time-based statement like, "the time is near."
Chains...
An Angel’s got me locked up in Chains
But they ain’t the kind
That you can see ee ee ee
Whoa oh, these An-gel chai ai ains got a hold on me ee...yeh eh
Yes they do. :)
It is refreshing to actually see someone deal with the text in detail rather than just spouting as bunch of nonsense.
The modernist dispensational are much like the modernist evolutionist and other scoffers. They are poorly schooled in hermeneutics and Bible language. They come along and demand that you interpret the Bible as they understand it rather than as the Bible intended to be understood by God and His human authors. And when you can’t meet their unreasonable demands all they can say is, “Well, see”.
As Kik has plainly demonstrated the word “clouds” in the Bible often does not mean the natural, atmospheric phenomenon we see everyday. So in the modern scoffer’s mind they hear the question as, “when did Jesus come with atmospheric phenomenon?” They think they are making sense (they do but only to themselves), and are all self-congratulatory, but they are left with an empty vessel.
Ask them a simple question like what does Matt. 16:28 mean and they go all to pieces.
“Assuredly, I say to you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.”
It destroys their system. Using their logic, either Jesus was confused about terms, “His kingdom”, “coming”, etc. or He was being purposely deceptive to His listeners (His coming was really thousands of years in the future and He was playing word games).
And then they dig a deeper hole by forcefully redefining a phrase like “this generation”, ignoring the way Jesus and the disciples used it (“It could mean ‘this race’.” “Problem is it never does.”), just to make the word “clouds” mean “atmospheric phenomenon”.
Oh? So you believe that in 70 AD the world beat its swords into plowshares and ceased to learn war any more (Isa. 2:4, Mic. 4:3)? Do you go up every year during the Feast of Sukkot (Tabernacles) to Jerusalem to worship the King (Zec. 14:16)? Do men no longer die young, but always make it to old age (Isa. 65:20)?
Funny, I hadn't noticed.
It seems to me that to say that God's kingdom has been consummated but that the promised blessings of God's kingdom have not been fulfilled is to make a liar out of God.
And the partial preterist would affirm that when Christ returns in the full consumation of His Kingdom and in final judgement that it will be visible and unmistakable to all.
Of course, the fact is that people DID write about many prophecies in the Olivet Discourse being fulfilled in 70AD...a fact at gets repeatedly ignored.
Stars, Comets, and LightsFurthermore, in reference to Matt 24:16, Eusebius wrote that Christians did in fact flee Jerusalem during the Jewish war "in obedience to a prophecy."Perhaps the most strange, even bizarre, report in Josephus' narrative is the sightings of heavenly apparitions:
Thus were the miserable people persuaded by these deceivers and such as belied God himself; while they did not attend, nor give credit, to the signs that were so evident and did so plainly foretell their future desolation; but, like men infatuated, without either eyes to see, or minds to consider, did not regard the denunciations that God made to them. Thus there was a star resembling a sword, which stood over the city, and a comet, that continued a whole year. Thus also, before the Jews' rebellion, and before those commotions which preceeded the war, when the poeple were come in great crowds to feast of unleavened bread, on the eighth day of the month Xanthicus [Nisan], and at the ninth hour of that night, so great a light shone round the altar and the holy house, that it appeared to be bright day time; which light lasted for half an hour. This light seemed to be a good sign to the unskilful, but was so interpreted by the sacred scribes, as to portend those events that followed immediately upon it. At the same festival also, a heifer, as she was led by the high-priest to be sacrificed, brought forth a lamb in the midst of the temple.Josephus says these astronomical phenomena triggered false prophecies of hope for Jerusalem and its people. Others have seen in them a different significance. The bright light shining round the temple area may be related to the presence of the Shekina glory, the sign of God's presence. False prphets read it in much the same way that false prophets in Old Testament times viewed the coming day of the Lord -as a time of unqualified weal, a day of pure brightness and glory. They missed the dreadful darkness that would accompany it as a sign of judgment. It is significant, however, that signs in the sky were reported by other historians of events surrounding the destruction of jerusalem. The Ropan historian Tacitus, for example, writes this:The history of which I am entering is that of a period rich in disasters, terrible with battles, torn by civil struggles, horrible even in peace. Four emperors fell by the sword; there were three civil wars, more foreign wars, and often both at the same time. There was success in the East, misfortune in the West. Illyricum was disturbed, the Gallic provinces wavering, Britain subdued and immediately let go. The Sarmatae and Suebi rose against us; the Dacians won fame by defeats inflicted and suffered; even the Parthians were almost roused to arms through the trickery of a pretend Nero. Moreover, Italy was distressed by disasters unkown before or returning after the lapse of ages. Cities on the rich fertile shores of Campania were swallowed up or overwhelmed; Rome was devastated by conflagrations, in which her most ancient shrines were consumed and the very Captiol fired by citizen's hands...The sea was filled with exiles, its cliffs made foul with bodies of the dead. In Rome there was more awful cruelty... Besides the manifold misfortunes that befell mankind, there were prodigies in the sky and on the earth, warnings given by thunderbolts, and prophecies of the future, both joyful and gloomy, were uncertain and clear. For never was it more fully proved by awful disasters of the Roman people or by indubitable signs that gods care not for our safety, but for our punishment....In addition to the account of the comet, the sword-like star, and so forth, Josephus provides a most remarkable record of an even more astonishing celestial occurrence, one so extraordinary that the historian himself seems reticent about mentioning it:Besides these, a few days afer the feast, on the one-and-twentieth day of the month Artemisius [Jyar], a certain prodigious and incredible phenomenon appeared; I suppose the account of it would seem to be a fable, were it not related by those that saw it, and were not the evens that followed it of so considerable a nature as to deserve such signals; for, before sun-setting, chariots and troops of soldiers in their armor were seen running about among the clouds, and surrounding of cities. Moreover, at that feast which we call Pentecost, as the priests were going by night into the inner [court of the] temple, as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that, in the first place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after that they heard a sound as of a great multitide, saying, "Let us remove hence."(The Last Days According to Jesus by R.C. Sproul pp. 121-124)
My point here is that you need to get better informed about the historical Reformed interpretations of these passages before you make overly simplified arguments like the one you're making.
“Assuredly, I say to you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.” ~ topcat54
Exactly.
An Evaluation of a Debate on Preterism
James Patrick Holding
We have asked and received permission to comment upon a debate on the subject “Is the Great Tribulation Past or Future?” held on the Theology Online Forum between Tekton author Dee Dee Warren and a certain Jerry Shugart. Permission was granted with the proviso that we provide a link to the debate, which is presently here. Please note that Dee Dee no longer participates at TOL and may now be found at TheologyWeb. Interested parties may wish to check out the Eschatology Wrestlefest.
Since my agreement is with Dee Dee as a whole, our comments on her side will of course be limited, and we will have much more to say to Jerry, who, though perhaps earnest, in my estimation is of a regrettable class of believer who is committed to the type of thinking http://www.tektonics.org/qt/solex.html that causes those of weaker faith to stumble.
Dee Dee won the “coin toss” and was permitted to lay out a position first:
When I make the statement that the Great Tribulation spoken of in Matthew 24 is over, futurists are inevitably drawn like a magnet to Daniel 9. Now this is understandable since Jesus mentions the phrase “the abomination of desolation” which finds its place in either Daniel 9:27 or Daniel 12:11 or both. However, the futurist then inserts a handy-dandy gap in between the 69th and the 70th week of Daniel’s prophecy (which is illegitimate and has blasphemous implications for other reasons) and through somewhat circular reasoning uses this to “prove” that the Great Tribulation is future.
This makes absolutely no sense and does great violence to the text. When Daniel receives this prophecy, Jerusalem and the Temple are in ruins. He is told that the city will be rebuilt (and by implication the Temple will be rebuilt also). Within the same prophecy he is told that Jerusalem and the Temple will be destroyed. Gabriel also exhorts Daniel in verse 25 to know and understand this vision. Is there any chance in a billion years that Daniel knew and understood that it was not the city and Temple that he was just told would be rebuilt that are also spoken about as being destroyed?? Would he have any idea without any textual clue whatsoever that the destruction of THAT city and Temple would be skipped over and omitted… the city and Temple would be rebuilt again (without any mention of this event in the text), and it is THAT future city and Temple that are referenced as being destroyed?? This is simply unbelievable. Only one city and Temple are in view in this prophecy.
However, further to the demise of futurism, Jesus makes it clear what Temple and city are in view beyond any shadow of a doubt in the Olivet Discourse, which futurists believe is speaking of the 70th week of Daniel (preterists don’t believe that it has anything to do with the 70th week of Daniel, but does have to do with events spoken of in Daniel 9, such as the abomination of desolation, which happen “outside” of the 70 weeks). In the Olivet Discourse the disciples ask Jesus certain questions, and these were not asked in a vacuum. The questions were prompted as follows (my commentary is in black - God’s Word is in red and italics):
First using Mark as a source: Then as He went out of the temple (the Temple that existed back then), one of His disciples said to Him, “Teacher, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here!” ( they are asking about the Temple that existed back then) And Jesus answered and said to him, “Do you see these great buildings? Not one stone shall be left upon another, that shall not be thrown down.” (referring to the Temple that existed back then!)
Now as He sat on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, (that existed back then) Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked Him privately, “Tell us, when will these things be?….” (it matters not that they asked Him more questions, obviously one of the things that they wanted to know was when the Temple that existed back then would be destroyed)
Next using Luke as a source: Then, as some spoke of the temple, (the Temple that existed back then) how it was adorned with beautiful stones and donations, He said, “These things which you see- (the Temple that was before their very eyes right then) the days will come in which not one stone shall be left upon another that shall not be thrown down.” So they asked Him, saying, “Teacher, but when will these things be? (again, part of “these things” MUST include the destruction that He just prophesied that prompted their questions to begin with)
Lastly using Matthew as a source: Then Jesus went out and departed from the temple, and His disciples came up to show Him the buildings of the temple. (the Temple that existed back then) And Jesus said to them, “Do you not see all these things? (the Temple that existed back then) Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here ( notice the word “here” it is referring to those actual stones, the ones that existed then) upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”
All these of the Synoptics of the Olivet Discourse contain the very solemn declaration by Jesus, “Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place.” (Matthew 24:34, Luke 21:32, Mark 13:31)
Now we know when the city and Temple were destroyed. It was in 70AD. If that is “one” of “all these things,” then ALL of the rest of that passage, at least up to Matthew 24:33, Luke 21:31, and Mark 13:31 happened in the first century as well. It is inescapable. The destruction the then existing Temple is a completely unique, datable, and nonrepeatable event. If the prophecy was not primarily fulfilled in the first century, it can never be. This also ties in with the “abomination of desolation” and Daniel 9. Jesus in identifying what Temple He was referring to totally destroys any notion that the Temple being referred to in Daniel 9 is any other Temple than the one that existed when Christ gave His Discourse. There is NO way around this. THIS IS WHERE I LAY DOWN THE GAUNTLET. It is an intractable problem for futurism.
We offer no comment at present. Next Jerry laid down his essential case: [snip]
Go here to continue and to access the hot links in the commentary above: http://www.tektonics.org/esch/tolpret.html
Well, so far the only people I've seen accurately representing the partial preterist position in this thread are the partial preterists themselves. You're taking what you think we believe and arguing against that rather than what we actually believe. I've no indication to this point it's intentional on your part, but it's certainly annoying being called on to defend a strawman.
Do you believe any of the prophesies in the Olivet Discourse were fulfilled in 70AD?
Hmm . . . so as a partial preterist, you believe that there must be a future Coming of the Lord, which will be preceded by a time in which Satan personally deceives the whole world, per Rev. 20:8?
So other than a (relatively minor) argument over whether the Millennium is yet future and a (major) argument over whether God is actually going to keep His promises to Israel, what exactly differentiates you from a futurist?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.