Got Preterism? The Church Fathers' Did!
Pastor Dave
<All caps are mine and are used for emphasis.>
Well, most of them were technically what we would
call, "Partial Preterists". I actually call that being a
"Mild Futurist"! <lol>
But the bottom line is, that it seems that the majority
of them did believe that Christ had already come to
destroy Jerusalem, that Zechariah was about this,
as were the other prophets and most of them are
quoted assigning passages in Revelation to the time
of Nero (including Vespasian and Titus, who followed)
and the writing of Revelation to the time of Nero.
And just FYI, the earliest translation of Revelation that
we have, which dates back to about 150 AD, is titled:
"The Revelation which was made by God to John
the evangelist in the isle of Patmos, into which he
was thrown by Nero Caesar"
I have provided many quotes from the "church fathers"
that they did believe these things. Some also believed
that Christ had returned in judgment upon that same
generation, often quoting Matthew 21:33-46 and that
Daniel's 70 weeks had been fulfilled, which included
the abomination of desolation and all that it entailed.
Now the bottom line is, that people responding TO ME,
when I post these things, are wasting their time! I am
NOT the one who wrote them and if anyone has an
argument with anything that any of these texts say,
then they should construct themselves a time machine
and go back and argue with them face to face! :)
I am simply quoting the material that proves beyond
any doubt, that these Futurists are lying when they
claim that I believe some new, heretical doctrine.
And in reality, to call me a heretic, is to call them
(the "church fathers") heretics and eliminate them
from the Christian church.
And this is the problem for the Futurists and this is
what they run away from, every time I point it out
to them!
Eusebius (260 - 340) Bishop of Cesarea, in Palestine
"For before the setting of the sun chariots and armed
troops were seen throughout the whole region in
mid-air, wheeling through the clouds and encircling
the cities" (Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History, Bk 3, Ch 8 ).
This is about the Jewish War and what happened during it.
Now ask yourselves why it is that these Futurists try to avoid
talking about this, except to try to claim it's meaningless with
regard to Christ?
Now Eusebius is obviously quoting Josephus here, but why?
Read the following and you will see that it's because
he is showing how Jesus' words were fulfilled in 70 AD
(the Jewish War, in which Rome desolated Jerusalem
and ransacked Judea).
Therefore, while the Futurists try to dismiss these events,
Eusebius states clearly that they are tied to what our Lord
said was to come. And what event was it that our Savior
said would be tied to these events? It was HIS RETURN
IN JUDGMENT! So when the Futurists try to claim that
these events have nothing to do with the return of Christ,
they are lying, trying to avoid what they know they mean!
"If any one compares the words of our Saviour with
the other accounts of the historian concerning the
whole war, how can one fail to wonder and to admit
that the foreknowledge and the prophecy of our
Saviour were truly divine and marvelously strange."
[ibid chp 7:7]
This of course means that he is saying that what Jesus
said was going to happen upon His return, DID HAPPEN!
And that's ALL it's about! And anyone who cannot tell
that Jesus tied His return to the desolation of Jerusalem,
simply has not read the Bible!
I am not saying that he directly stated, "Christ returned!",
although other "church fathers" have. I am saying that
he said that the events that Jesus tied to His return have
indeed occurred.
He is quoting Josephus to show that yes indeed, Jesus
DID indeed fulfill the prophecies that He made and so,
was a true prophet of God (and so much more, of course)
and that we can trust Jesus' words, specifically because
they WERE FULFILLED! Remember, Jesus said in what
is the most embarrassing verse in the Bible for Futurists,
that it would happen within the same generation right
there in Matt 24:34! Futurists try to reword it, or add
more words to it, but it is always translated the way
that it is for a reason, hello? :)
And now, let's look at what else Eusebius said about it.
“And all these things WERE FULFILLED when the
seventy weeks WERE COMPLETED AT the date
of OUR SAVIOR'S COMING.”
The above, of course, is about Christ's earthly ministry,
which is when Eusebius, as I do, believed that the weeks
of Daniel were fulfilled (combined with the first 3.5 years
after He ascended).
You can agree, or disagree with Eusebius and the rest
of them, but it is there and I did quote a number of them
and what should upset you, is people denying what they
see right in front of them and continuing to lie about me
as a distraction from the facts!
The point of this is not whether or not these guys from
back then were correct or not, but that they said it,
thereby proving that what I believe is not some new
doctrine as the Futurists claim and it is about the fact
that in order to label me as a heretic, they must also
label many of the "church fathers" as heretics and
dismiss them as such. They won't do that of course,
because they have quoted them so often about other
things, to try to support their claims. That didn't work
when they tried to claim that even these same men
completely contradicted what I believe and posted
quotes of them, claiming that I took my quotes
out of context. That is of course, until I posted
more context and proved that it was the Futurists
who were actually doing that very thing!
The truth is, that it is Dispensationalism that is the new
belief and it is only about 200 years old. And they know
this, but don't care and don't care that they claim the
opposite, even after they know the truth! Their doctrine
is simply more important to them anything else, period!
--
Pastor Dave
The best Bible software: http://www.theword.net/ is free!
Theistic evolutionists are out to please men,
rather than God. They claim to believe in a
virgin birth, people rising from the dead, water
turned into wine and yet, they don't believe that
God created the heaven and the earth in six literal
days, thereby making hypocrites of themselves. Why?
Because man says it isn't so and they would rather
try to please men, instead of choosing to believe
God and stand up for Him. Preachers who claim
theistic evolution are the biggest hypocrites of all
and are in the most danger. Why? Read Isaiah 9:16;
Jeremiah 23:1, 50:6. What do YOU stand for?
"...choose this day whom you will serve. ...as for
me and my house, we will serve the Lord." - Jos 24:15
bear
<ananias917_@_gmail.com> wrote:
>
><All caps are mine and are used for emphasis.>
>
>Well, most of them were technically what we would
>call, "Partial Preterists". I actually call that being a
>"Mild Futurist"! <lol>
>
If, anyone is interested in the *real* explanation of Preterist, I
would like to suggest reading of the following.
It does not take a thermonuclear physicist to see why the preterist,
like Dave, flat refuses to engage in a debate defending their
unbiblical doctrine as it is totally impossible for them to do, if,
they must prove their statements. Those who believe the Bible says
what God meant for it to say and that it He means what He said, can
prove their views with scripture, just as it reads, in context. OTOH,
the preterist must jump through one hoop after another and mangle
scripture to the point of it being unrecognizable in an attempt to
make it conform to their views.
Unlike Dave, if you wish to challenge me on my views, I am perfectly
willing to engage in any discussion, if, you are willing to answer my
questions and provide proof of those answers if requested, as I will
do for you. I will predict that not one preterist will accept my
offer, would like to prove me wrong Dave?
I have used some upper case, for emphasis and to bring attention only.
Bear
******
Preterism1
Randall Price
IN RECENT YEARS A SYSTEM of interpreting biblical prophecy known as
preterism has invaded the church, bringing confusion and division to
many congregations that have historically held to the future return of
Jesus Christ. Promoted by popular radio teachers such as Reformed
scholar R.C. Sproul, whose book The Last Days According to Jesus,
advanced the moderate preterist position, preterism has made in roads
into evangelical seminaries and stimulated public debates on Bible
college campuses. Although MOST CHRISTIANS HAVE NEVER HEARD OF THE
TEACHINGS OF PRETERISM, ITS APPROACH TO PROPHECY DIMINISHES THE
PROPHETIC HOPE OF THE CHURCH WHILE UNDERMINING THE BASIS OF THE
PROPHETIC PROMISES FOR ISRAEL.
What is Preterism?
Preterism, which is derived from the Latin preter ("past") holds that
most (if not all) of the prophetic events of the Old and New Testament
have already been fulfilled. Like historicism, a view that interprets
the Book of Revelation as symbolic of the history of the church,
PRETERISM SPIRITUALIZES PROPHECY IN ORDER TO MAKE IT FIT HISTORICAL
EVENTS IN THE CHURCH AGE. However, unlike historicism, preterism seeks
to fit certain (if not all) prophecies relating to Christ's second
coming and the restoration of Israel into a specific historical event
in the past. As moderate preterist Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. explains,
"Matthew 24:1-34 (and parallels) in the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled
in the events surrounding the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. In
Revelation, most of the prophecies before Revelation 20 find
fulfillment in the fall of Jerusalem (A.D. 70)."2 Preterists contend
that Jesus' use of the term "this generation" in His Olivet Discourse
requires fulfillment in the first-century, and R.C. SPROUL IN
PARTICULAR, ARGUES THAT IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO REFUTE THE SKEPTICS CHARGE
THAT CHRIST'S WORDS FAILED UNLESS THIS INTERPRETATION IS ADOPTED.
Futurism, by contrast, believes that the literal fulfillment of
messianic prophecy in Christ's first advent was sufficient to prove
the veracity of His words and to confirm that His prophetic teaching
likewise is to be interpreted literally. Thus, the Olivet Discourse
and the Revelation will find fulfillment in the future, particularly
during the end time during the Tribulation and the Millennial Reign of
Christ.
Two types of preterism today contend with each other for primacy. The
first is partial or moderate preterism (the most popular version)
which while arguing that most prophecy (such as the events of the
Tribulation) was fulfilled in A.D. 70, still understand some prophetic
texts teaching the second coming of Christ and the bodily resurrection
to have a future fulfillment. Partial preterism, therefore, holds to
two second comings of Christ, one that occurred in A.D. 70 as a
parousia and as a day of the Lord for the purpose of judging the
Jewish nation, and one that will occur universally at the climax of
human history as the final and ultimate day of the Lord. Leading
advocates of partial preterism who have published popular defenses of
their position include R.C. Sproul, Gary DeMar, and Kenneth.
1 This paper was first published as an edited article and side bar in
Israel My Glory (January-February 2005).
2 Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., He Shall Have Dominion: A Postmillennial
Eschatology (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1992), p.
159.
L. Gentry, Jr., as well as the late David Chilton (who changed to full
preterism after his books were published).
The second form of preterism is full or extreme preterism which
contends that all prophecy (including the second coming and the bodily
resurrection) was fulfilled by A.D. 70. Full preterism sees no future
climax or consummation of history but maintains that believers have
been spiritually resurrected and the creation spiritually restored so
that the church presently exists in the eternal state or the new
heavens and new earth.
The Development of Preterism
According to Thomas Ice, Executive Director of the Pre-Trib Research
Center and one of the foremost experts on preterism, there is no
evidence of any preterist interpretation in the history of the early
church through the Reformation.
3 THE FIRST APPEARANCE OF PRETERISTIC INTERPRETATION WAS IN A
COMMENTARY ON REVELATION BY THE SPANISH JESUIT LUIS ALCAZAR
(1554-1613). His position was that of triumphalism, which interpreted
symbols in the Revelation as the victory of the Roman Catholic Church
over paganism and especially over the Jews, whose divine rejection was
finalized in A.D. 70. HOWEVER, THE LEADING JESUIT COMMENTATOR OF THE
PERIOD, CORNELIUS LAPIDE (1567-1637), REJECTED ALCAZAR'S PRETERISM AS
"NEW AND AGAINST THE USUAL INTERPRETATIONS," "MYSTICAL RATHER THAN
LITERAL," "IS ALLEGORICAL," AND BECAUSE IT "MAKES ASSERTIONS WITHOUT
PROOF."
4 THE FIRST PROTESTANT PRETERIST WAS HUGO GROTIUS (1538-1645), A DUTCH
ARMINIAN WHO ALSO ORIGINATED THE HERETICAL GOVERNMENTAL VIEW OF THE
ATONEMENT, while Henry Hammond (1605-1660), who followed Grotius
approach, introduced to British soil. However, BOTH OF THESE MEN WERE
MORE HISTORICIST THAN PRETERIST, AND THEIR VIEWS WERE LARGELY IGNORED
BY THEIR CONTEMPORARIES, ALTHOUGH POST-REFORMATION GROUPS SUCH AS THE
HUGUENOTS DENOUNCED THEIR VIEWS, WITH ONE OF THEIR LEADERS PIERRE
JURIEU (1637-1713) STATING THAT PRETERISM "DISHONORS ITS AUTHORS" AND
CONSTITUTES "A SHAME AND DISGRACE NOT ONLY TO THE REFORMATION, BUT
ALSO TO THE NAME CHRISTIAN."
5 Even so, the form of preterism that appeared to this point was mild.
WHILE THE ENGLISH PROTESTANT SCHOLAR JOHN LIGHTFOOT (1602-1675) ALSO
ADOPTED A MILD PRETERISM, THE PRETERIST INTERPRETATION WAS NOT SEEN IN
PROTESTANT SCHOLARSHIP UNTIL THE 1800'S WHEN IT EMERGED AS A PRODUCT
OF GERMAN RATIONALISM. THIS LIBERAL SCHOOL, WHICH REJECTED
SUPERNATURAL REVELATION AND ORIGINATED BIBLICAL HIGHER CRITICISM,
ADOPTED THE PRETERISM AS A MEANS TO AVOID PREDICTIVE PROPHECY AND GIVE
A NATURALISTIC INTERPRETATION TO THE BOOK OF REVELATION THROUGH A
COMPARISON WITH THE APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE OF THE APROCYPHA AND
PSEUDEPIGRAPHRA. With the spread of German rationalism from Europe,
THE PRETERIST INTERPRETATION BECAME ESTABLISHED IN PROTESTANTISM IN
THE BRITISH ISLES AND THE UNITED STATES AND INFLUENCED LATER
EVANGELICAL ACADEMICS SUCH AS J. STUART RUSSELL (1816-1895) AND MOSES
STUART (1780-1852) WHOSE WORKS REPRESENTED THE MODERN FORMS OF
PRETERISM. The popular rise of partial preterism among American
Protestants of the Reformed tradition can be traced to the 1970's and
the Christian Reconstruction movement through the influence
of the late Greg Bahnsen and its popular promotion by his students
David Chilton, Kenneth L. Gentry,
3 Thomas Ice, "The History of Preterism," The End Times Controversy.
Edited by Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice (Eugene, OR: Harvest House
Publishers, 2003), pp. 42-46.
4 As cited in LeRoy Froom, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers: The
Historical Development of Prophetic Interpretation (Washington, D.C.:
Review and Herald, 1950), 2:506, 512.
5 As cited in Jean-Robert Armogathe, "Interpretations of the
Revelation of John: 1500-1800," in John J. Collins, Bernard McGinn,
and Stephen J. Stein, editors, The Encyclopedia of Apocalpticism (New
York: Continuum, 2000), 2:198.
Jr., and Gary DeMar, as well as R.C. Sproul (who became a preterist in
the 1990's). The rise of full preterism can be credited to the
Churches of Christ and specifically to one of their pastors, Max R.
King, whose disciples include present full preterists Don K. Preston,
John L. Bray, and John Noe.
Preterism's View of Israel
Preterism teaches that the purpose of Christ's second coming in A.D.
70 was to judge the Nation of Israel and end the Jewish age. Like
historicists, preterists argue that the spiritual promises made to
Israel were misunderstood as national promises and therefore with the
rejection of Christ the spiritual promises passed to the Church, the
true Israel. Preterism, however, which forces the fulfillment of most
prophetic texts into the events of the First Jewish Revolt, and
particularly the fall of Jerusalem and the Temple, especially views
the destruction of the Jewish People as the central focus of prophecy.
AS PRETERIST DAVID CHILTON STATES: "THE BOOK OF REVELATION IS NOT
ABOUT THE SECOND COMING OF CHRIST. IT IS ABOUT THE DESTRUCTION OF
ISRAEL AND CHRIST'S VICTORY OVER HIS ENEMIES IN THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
THE NEW COVENANT TEMPLE … Revelation prophecies the judgment of God on
apostate Israel; and while it does briefly point to events beyond its
immediate concerns, that is done merely as a 'wrap-up,' to show that
the ungodly will never prevail against Christ's Kingdom."
6 FOR PRETERISTS, THE JEWS ARE THE TRUE ENEMIES OF CHRIST AND THEIR
OVERTHROW BY THE ROMAN ARMY, SENT BY CHRIST TO DO HIS BIDDING, IS THE
TRIUMPH OF CHRIST OVER ANTICHRIST. In fact, Christ came (spiritually)
in the judgment by the Roman army (hence, a judgment-coming),
fulfilling His promise "to come quickly." The Jewish Temple is
likewise seen as the center of spiritual apostasy and its destruction
as the fulfillment of the abomination of desolation, which was God's
holy judgment for the wicked crucifixion of Christ by the Jews.
PRETERISTS, THEREFORE, REJECT ANY ASPECT OF A FUTURE FOR ETHNIC ISRAEL
(apart from the Church) and contend that any eschatological system
that looks for a restoration of Israel and its Temple as heretical,
for such would be tantamount to rejecting Christ and restoring
blasphemy. Preterist Gary DeMar explains: "There is nothing in Jesus'
teaching in this Gospel [Matthew] which suggests that after this
period of judgment there will be a restoration … the Apocalyptic
Discourse (ch. 24) moves away from Jerusalem …" and: "Does the Bible,
especially the New Testament, predict that the temple will be rebuilt?
It does not … To make the temple of stone a permanent structure in the
light of Jesus' atoning work would be a denial of the Messiah and His
redemptive mission."7
PROBLEMS WITH PRETERISM
The Date of the Book of Revelation
In order for preterism to fit the prophecies of the Book of Revelation
into the events of the Roman conquest of Jerusalem it is necessary to
date the composition of the book before A.D. 70. Preterists understand
the necessity of dating the book early (A.D. 64-67) in the time of
Nero's reign, CONFESSING THAT "IF THE BOOK WAS WRITTEN AFTER A.D. 70,
THEN ITS CONTENTS MANIFESTLY DO NOT REFER TO EVENTS
6 David Chilton, Paradise Restored: An Eschatology of Dominion (Tyler,
TX: Reconstruction Press, 1985), p. 43.
7 Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church. 4th
ed. (Atlanta: American Vision, 1999), pp. 52, 61.
SURROUNDING THE FALL OF JERUSALEM."
8 However, IF THE DATING OF THE BOOK WAS SO CRUCIAL TO THE
INTERPRETATION OF ITS MESSAGE WHY DID NOT JOHN CLEARLY INDICATE
SOMEWHERE IN ITS 404 VERSES THE TIME OF ITS WRITING? However, as Mark
Hitchcock, who has written a doctoral dissertation on the subject,
concludes: "I DO BELIEVE THAT THE CASE FOR THE LATE DATE (A.D. 95) CAN
BE PROVEN AT LEAST BY A PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE, IF NOT BEYOND A
REASONABLE DOUBT."
9 This evidence includes the external testimony of THE MOST RELIABLE
OF THE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS SUCH AS IRENAEUS (A.D. 120-202) WHO MADE
THE UNAMBIGUOUS DECLARATION: "FOR IF IT WERE NECESSARY THAT THE NAME
OF HIM [ANTICHRIST] SHOULD BE DISTINCTLY REVEALED IN THIS PRESENT
TIME, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN TOLD BY HIM WHO SAW THE APOCALYPTIC VISION.
FOR IT [THE REVELATION] WAS SEEN NO LONG TIME AGO, BUT ALMOST IN OUR
GENERATION, TOWARD THE END OF DOMITIAN'S REIGN."
10 IN ADDITION, THE INTERNAL EVIDENCE FAVORS THE LATE DATE IN THE TIME
OF DOMITIAN. THIS SUPPORT INCLUDES THE CONDITION AND DESCRIPTION OF
THE SEVEN CHURCHES IN REVELATION 1-3 (WHICH MAKE NO MENTION OF PAUL'S
MISSIONARY JOURNEYS), JOHN'S BANISHMENT TO PATMOS (RATHER THAN
EXECUTION AS WITH PETER AND PAUL UNDER NERO), AND THE PROPHECY OF THE
NEW JERUSALEM (REVELATION 21:9-22:5), WHICH IMPLIES THAT THE OLD
JERUSALEM HAS ALREADY BEEN DESTROYED.
Lack of Historical Agreement with First Century Fulfillment
IF PRETERISM BASES ITS INTERPRETATION OF PROPHECY ON THE EVENTS OF
A.D. 70 FULFILLING THE BIBLICAL TEXT, THEN THE HISTORICAL RECORD
SHOULD SUPPORT SUCH DETAILS. HOWEVER, THE OPPOSITE IS THE CASE. For
example, SUCH A DETAIL AS THE DIRECTION OF CHRIST'S ADVENT [TO
JERUSALEM], IN MATTHEW 24:27 IS COMPARED WITH LIGHTNING FLASHING FROM
EAST TO WEST, WHEREAS THE ROMAN ARMY, WHICH PRETERISTS INTERPRET AS
FULFILLING THIS PROPHECY, ADVANCED ON JERUSALEM FROM THE WEST TO THE
EAST. Even if we take this simply to mean the Roman army advanced
"like lightning" (i.e., quickly), THE HISTORICAL RECORD REVEALS A VERY
SLOW ASSAULT ON JERUSALEM, THE WAR BEING FOR SEVERAL YEARS BEFORE
JERUSALEM WAS EVEN BESIEGED! For this reason in many cases a
"correlation" can only be made through the eschatologically biased
interpretation of Josephus (such as associating divine signs with the
Roman army's impending conquest), REINTERPRETING THE TEXT TO FIT THE
PREFERRED HISTORICAL DATA (SUCH AS TAKING "THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN" AS
THE DUST KICKED UP BY THE ROMAN ARMY'S ADVANCE), or by taking
statements that do not fit the historical events of the great Jewish
revolt as hyperbole (such as the unprecedented and unsurpassed nature
of the Tribulation), in order to claim first-century fulfillment. EVEN
THE CENTRAL CONCEPT OF PRETERISM, THAT CHRIST'S JUDGMENT-COMING WAS TO
FINALLY END THE JEWISH NATION, CANNOT STAND IN LIGHT OF JUDAISM'S
CONTINUED VITALITY AND THE RETURN OF THE MODERN STATE OF ISRAEL. The
historical consequences for Israel in the aftermath of A.D. 70 were
indeed critical, but not only did the Jewish people and Jewish
nationalism survive, but the hope for the restoration promised by the
prophets increased. Moreover, the "Temple consciousness" perpetuated
through a spiritual tranference to the synagogue by rabbinic Judaism
also expressed itself in tangible ways. Whenever circumstances favored
the rebuilding of the Temple, there existed an activist movement among
the Jewish who returned to Jerusalem to attempt this effort. TODAY,
THE ROMAN EMPIRE IS LONG VANISHED AND THE JEWISH PEOPLE ARE AGAIN IN
THE PROMISED LAND, IN CONTROL OF THE HOLY CITY AND ITS TEMPLE MOUNT,
AND MAKING PLANS TO REBUILD THE TEMPLE. IS IT REASONABLE TO ACCEPT THE
EVENTS OF A.D. 70 AS A FULFILLMENT OF GOD'S PROGRAM FOR THE JEWS BUT
NOT ACCEPT THE EVENTS THAT FOLLOWED AS ALSO PART OF HIS ON-GOING
DIVINE PLAN? Such an interpretation accords much better with
8 R.C. Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus (Grand Rapids: Baker
Books, 1998), p. 140.
9 Mark Hitchcock, "The Stake in the Heart - The A.D. 95 Date of
Revelation," The End Times Controversy, p. 125.
10 Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.30.3.
JESUS' STATEMENT IN THE OLIVET DISCOURSE THAT WHEN HE COMES THE JEWISH
PEOPLE ARE TO "STRAIGHTEN UP AND LIFT UP YOUR HEADS, BECAUSE YOUR
REDEMPTION IS DRAWING NEAR" (LUKE 21:28). CLEARLY THIS TEXT TEACHES
THAT CHRIST'S SECOND COMING INVOLVES REDEMPTION FOR ISRAEL, NOT
DESTRUCTION.
As a result of such historical and textual incongruities, Robert
Gundry comments concerning the preterist's interpretation of a
first-century fulfillment: "Whether writing just before, or right
after 70 C.E., Mark [or any of the other gospel writers] is not liable
to have suffered from very much ignorance of what went on. From
beginning to end, then, the events and circumstances of the Jewish war
disagree with the text of Mark [and also Matthew and in part, Luke]
too widely to allow that text to reflect those events and
circumstances."
11 IF THE HISTORICAL CORRELATION WITH AN A.D. 70 FULFILLMENT FOR THE
OLIVET DISCOURSE FAILS, AND PRETERISM DEPENDS ON SUCH A FULFILLMENT
FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF ITS ESCHATOLOGICAL SYSTEM, THEN PRETERISM
ITSELF FAILS AS A VIABLE ESCHATOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION.
The Interpretation of "This Generation"
Preterism argues that the textual basis for interpreting prophecy as
having been fulfilled in the past is Jesus' use of the phrase "this
generation" as only and always having reference to the first-century
generation to whom He spoke. Futurism, by contrast, accepts some uses
of "this generation" as having reference to those to whom Jesus spoke
and other uses as having reference to those about whom Jesus spoke,
with context being the determining factor. For example, the use of
"this generation" in Matthew 23:36 is applied as an indictment (in
context) to the generation of the "scribes and Pharisees" (Matthew
23:29) whose actions against Jesus demonstrate their affinity with
previous persecutors of the Prophets (verses 30-35). Jesus' then
pronounces sentence with the words "all these things shall come upon
this generation." The phrase "these things" must also be interpreted
in its context. In this case, the next verse (verse 37) describes
"these things" as the future experience of Temple desolation. It is
important to observe here that even though now historically past,
"this generation" in context was a future generation at the time of
its being originally spoken by Jesus and being recorded by Matthew. It
was future from the perspective of the sins "this generation" (in
context) would yet commit (complicity in the crucifixion) and the
judgment they would receive (the Roman destruction in AD 70 (Luke
21:20-24).
Even though in context Jesus may refer to the future "this generation"
as "you," this is a conventional usage of language with respect to
reference and does not have to ultimately apply to a present
audience.
12 Such usage is found in Old Testament prophetic sections.
For example, MOSES USES LANGUAGE SIMILAR TO JESUS WHEN HE SAYS "SO IT
WILL BE WHEN ALL OF THESE THINGS HAVE COME UPON YOU …" (DEUTERONOMY
30:1A). EVEN THOUGH HE IS SPEAKING TO THE PRESENT GENERATION ('YOU"),
IT IS EVIDENT FROM THE CONTEXT THAT HIS WORDS SPEAK ABOUT A FUTURE
GENERATION THAT WILL LIVE THOUSANDS OF YEARS LATER AND INTO THE
ESCHATOLOGICAL PERIOD. "This generation" (the "you") are those who
will have already suffered the judgment of exile (verse 1b), captivity
(verse 3), been regathered and restored (verses 4-5), and received
spiritual regeneration ("circumcision of heart," verse 6). The future
sense of "this generation" in a
11 Gundry, Mark, p. 755.
12THAT THE SCOPE CANNOT BE LIMITED TO A PRESENT AUDIENCE IS OBVIOUS
FROM THE FACT THAT SUCH USAGE CANNOT MEAN ONLY THOSE WHO HEARD THE
MESSAGE OR WHO WERE CURRENTLY PART OF THE PRESENT GENERATION, SINCE
OTHERS WHO WERE NOT PRESENT AND WHO WERE YET TO BE BORN MUST BE
INCLUDED WHILE SOME WOULD CERTAINLY HAVE DIED BEFORE THE EVENTS WERE
FULFILLED AND NO LONGER BE PART OF THAT GENERATION, ESPECIALLY SINCE
IT IS STILL FUTURE FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE SPEAKER.
judgment context sets a precedence for its interpretation in contexts
that are both judicial and eschatological. If the desolation
experienced by "this generation" in Matthew 23:36 can be understood as
a future fulfillment that came some 40 years later, it should not be a
problem to understood the Tribulation judgment as a future fulfillment
that will come on the generation that will experience it at the end of
the age. However, the difference is not simply a span of time, but the
nature of that time as eschatological. FOR THE "THIS GENERATION" OF
MATTHEW 24:34, MARK 13:30, AND LUKE 21:32, "ALL THESE THINGS" (MATTHEW
24:34; MARK 13:30; LUKE 21:28) MUST REFER CONTEXTUALLY TO THE EVENTS
OF THE "GREAT TRIBULATION," THE CONCLUSION OF "THE TIMES OF THE
GENTILES," THE COMING OF CHRIST IN GLORY, AND THE REGATHERING AND
REDEMPTION OF ISRAEL, ALL OF WHICH ARE NOT ONLY DECLARED TO BE FUTURE
BY JESUS AT THE TIME OF SPEAKING (MARK 13:23), BUT ALSO CAST IN
TYPICAL ESCHATOLOGICAL LANGUAGE (FOR EXAMPLE, "END OF THE AGE," "SUCH
AS NOT OCCURRED SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE WORLD UNTIL NOW, NOR EVER
SHALL," "POWERS OF THE HEAVENS WILL BE SHAKEN").
THE DANGERS OF PRETERISM
Every teaching has consequences for the spiritual life, and therefore,
the teachings of preterism must be considered for their practical
dangers. PRETERISM TEACHES THAT CHRIST HAS ALREADY RETURNED
(SPIRITUALLY), AND IN ITS EXTREME FORM THAT HE WILL NEVER RETURN AGAIN
BODILY. HOWEVER, THE DIVINE DECLARATION IN ACTS 1:11 THAT "THIS SAME
JESUS WILL COME IN JUST THE WAY YOU HAVE WATCHED HIM GO INTO HEAVEN"
CONTRADICTS THIS TENET OF BOTH PARTIAL AND FULL PRETERISM. THE
VERDICT, THEN, IS THAT THIS TEACHING IS FALSE TEACHING, AND AS SUCH
NOT ONLY DISTORTS THE PROPHETIC PROGRAM AND DENIES THE BLESSED HOPE
(TITUS 2:13) BUT PROMOTES THE DECEPTION THAT THERE WILL BE NO END TO
HISTORY AND (WITH FULL PRETERISM) THAT EVIL HAS BEEN ERADICATED FROM
THE WORLD AND BELIEVERS ARE LIVING IN THE ETERNAL STATE. SUCH FALSE
DOCTRINE ALSO PREVENTS CHRISTIANS FROM OBEYING THE MANIFOLD COMMANDS
OF SCRIPTURE DIRECTED TO THOSE WHO ARE WAITING FOR CHRIST'S COMING (1
THESSALONIANS 1:10). SUCH PRACTICAL ADMONITIONS GIVEN IN LIGHT OF
CHRIST'S RETURN AS "AWAKEN … BEHAVE PROPERLY" (ROMANS 13:11-13; 1
THESSALONIANS 5:4-10), "LIVE SENSIBLY, RIGHTEOUSLY, AND GODLY" (TITUS
2:12), AND "PURIFY YOURSELVES" (1 JOHN 3:3), HAVE NO MEANING TO THOSE
WHO BELIEVE HIS COMING IS PAST NOT FUTURE. PRETERISM ALSO CORRUPTS THE
UNDERSTANDING OF THE PRESENT WORK OF SATAN AND HIS DEMONS BY TEACHING
SATAN WAS CRUSHED AND BOUND AT THE CROSS AND APOSTASY IS A THING OF
THE PAST. YET, THE SCRIPTURE STATES THAT "OUR STRUGGLE IS … AGAINST
THE POWERS, AGAINST THE WORLD FORCES OF THIS DARKNESS, AGAINST THE
SPIRITUAL FORCES OF WICKEDNESS IN THE HEAVENLY PLACES" (EPHESIANS
6:12), THAT "THE WHOLE WORLD LIES IN THE POWER OF THE EVIL ONE" (1
JOHN 5:19), AND THAT "IN THE LATER TIMES SOME WILL FALL AWAY FROM THE
FAITH, PAYING ATTENTION TO DECEITFUL SPIRITS AND DOCTRINES OF DEMONS"
(1 TIMOTHY 4:1). HOW, THEN, CAN CHRISTIANS OBEY THE COMMANDS SUCH AS
THOSE TO "RESIST THE DEVIL" (JAMES 4:7; 1 PETER 5:9) OR TO "AVOID SUCH
MEN AS THESE [APOSTATES]" (2 TIMOTHY 3:5). MOREOVER, THIS APPROACH TO
PROPHECY AFFECTS THE WAY CHRISTIANS UNDERSTAND GOD'S PURPOSE FOR THE
JEWISH PEOPLE AND THEIR POLITICAL VIEWS TOWARD THE EXISTENCE OF THE
MODERN JEWISH STATE. PRETERISM REPLACES ISRAEL WITH THE CHURCH,
TEACHING THAT "ETHNIC ISRAEL WAS EXCOMMUNICATED FOR ITS APOSTASY AND
WILL NEVER AGAIN BE GOD'S KINGDOM."13 IF ISRAEL'S FUTURE SALVATION AND
RESTORATION (ROMANS 11:25-27) IN GOD'S PROGRAM IS ABROGATED, THEN SO
IS GOD'S PROMISED BLESSING FOR THE WORLD (ROMANS 11:12) IN FULFILLMENT
OF THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT (GENESIS 12:3).
13 David Chilton, Paradise Restored, p. 224.
THE APOSTLE PETER SUMMED UP THE DIVINE VERDICT TOWARD PRETERIST WHEN
HE WROTE: "KNOW THIS FIRST OF ALL, THAT IN THE LAST DAYS MOCKERS WILL
COME WITH THEIR MOCKING, FOLLOWING THEIR OWN LUSTS, AND SAYING, 'WHERE
IS THE PROMISE OF HIS COMING?" (2 PETER 3:3-4).
Dr. Randall Price is President of World of the Bible Ministries, Inc.,
an organization dedicated to exploring and explaining the past,
present, and prophetic world of the Bible.