Allegorical and figurative symbols are used by Preterists in literal and natural ways. I guess if you take the time statements as literal, I guess you also have to consistently take everything else as literal historic events as Hibbard and Stevens have done. Their view was that the second coming, rapture was literal historic events that actually occurred in 70ad, unlike other Preterist who claim everything was spiritually fulfilled in 70ad. I guess this why they also believe the New Heavens and Earth, or the Age to come were a literal historic post 70ad period. Notice the focus is strictly on mere past events, and natural antitypes. It is a wonder why no inspired writer ever says these things which are spiritual ever occurred in the past. It is like God is saying that spiritual things are not historic events.
Walt Hibbard
This is what the first century believers did. Therefore, it would have come as no surprise to them when they actually saw the Lord Jesus at His parousia, finding comfort in the words that John so poignantly expressed in I John 3:2 “it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is”(NKJV) No spiritually interpreted view of these magnificent promises could every meet the requirements of these inspired verses when viewed only as a “covenant change” type of “fulfillment.” These passages literally “beg” for a literal fulfillment; they are talking about real bodies, not abstract ideas of collectivism.
http://www.preteristviewpoint.com/id34.html
Michael Sullivan
Spiritual but Literally Temporal. Sullivan rightly says the New Heavens and Earth were spiritual, but then assumes that they were literal symbols that came in 70ad? What? Is this not what they accuse Futurists of doing. Making spiritual things physical. Does this mean that the kingdom is not just as much "at hand" now than it was then. Was the kingdom at hand then, and if it is no longer at hand, then what is it now?
Michael Sullivan "As I will argue later, the Christian today is residing in a heavenly Mnt. Zion that rests on a NC creation – the New Heavens and New Earth. Both spiritual Mnt. Zion and the New Heavens and New Earth are synonomous for the SPIRITUAL NC Kingdom of God that was LITERALLY “at hand” in the first century. "
Don Preston
The harvest and judgment is at the end of the age (that being represented of this temporal world, those in bondage to flesh (See Gal. 4), those found worthy enter the age to come (non-temporal, non historic, non external). Notice this passage speaks of the coming of the Son of man tied to a judgment of "every man" and judges based on their works. Thus Jesus is speaking of a judgment of a unbelieving generation (the tares) and also speaking of a faithful generation (the wheat) being judged at the time of harvest. The harvest, coming, and judgment is multigenerational and not temporal in nature. Preterists falsely point this to a single generation where as I point it to every generation, and a judgment of the heart of every man. Only those who are found faithful are allowed to enter in to the heavenly land which was promised as demonstrated by the exodus when they crossed the Jordan (New Heavens and Earth which is not a post 70ad period, but represents being born again from earthly to heavenly). Those who are not found faithful die in the wilderness (present heavens and earth, those who are dead, unregenerate).
I am not really not sure how Preterist can assume a judgment of "every man" finds its focal point in 70ad, since "every man" goes through judgment, "every man" is also part of the harvest, and men continue to be transferred in Christ from old things to new things (2 Corinthians 5:17). To assume this old to new occurs in history in 70ad is a huge assumption that is not biblical. This reveals the letter based focus of Preterism, and shows their appeal to make spiritual things temporal in nature subject to time.
Don Preston
Matthew 16:27: Jesus said he would come in the glory of his father, with his angels, to judge every man. The normal response to this is that it "obviously" must be speaking of the end of time. "Jesus has not come and judged every man has he?" we are asked. To answer this we must see that Jesus did in fact predict not only the fact of judgment of all but he said it would happen in his generation.
In Matthew 23:29ff Jesus said that all the dead all the way back to creation would be judged in that generation. In Matthew 13 he spoke of the end of the age when the righteous would shine like the stars. The wicked would be condemned at that time also. Daniel 12:1-7, the prophecy upon which Jesus' words are based, tells us it would be fulfilled "when the power of the holy people has been completely shattered."
Peter tells us that Jesus was "ready to judge the living and the dead" when he wrote 1 Peter 4:5; and Revelation 11 tells us that the time had come for the judgment of the living and the dead.
Finally, in Revelation 21:12 Jesus quoted the very words he had uttered some thirty years earlier: "Behold I come quickly, and my reward is with me to reward every man according to his work." Now unless Revelation is speaking of a different "judgment of all" from the "judgment of all" in Matthew we must believe the subject to be the same. Revelation, no less than five times tells us the events under view are imminent. Matthew 16:27-28 has a certain time-frame limit, i.e., "some standing here shall not die till they see the Son of Man coming...." Matthew speaks of the coming of Jesus to judge every man. Revelation does also. Matthew says Jesus would come in that generation. Revelation says he was coming quickly. Where is the delineation between the two?
What we see then is a pattern of consistency. From Jesus' words in Matthew 16:27 until his words in Revelation there is the prediction of judgment of all. And this is always set in a time-frame of imminency.
I am not really not sure how Preterist can assume a judgment of "every man" finds its focal point in 70ad, since "every man" goes through judgment, "every man" is also part of the harvest, and men continue to be transferred in Christ from old things to new things (2 Corinthians 5:17). To assume this old to new occurs in history in 70ad is a huge assumption that is not biblical. This reveals the letter based focus of Preterism, and shows their appeal to make spiritual things temporal in nature subject to time.
Don Preston
Matthew 16:27: Jesus said he would come in the glory of his father, with his angels, to judge every man. The normal response to this is that it "obviously" must be speaking of the end of time. "Jesus has not come and judged every man has he?" we are asked. To answer this we must see that Jesus did in fact predict not only the fact of judgment of all but he said it would happen in his generation.
In Matthew 23:29ff Jesus said that all the dead all the way back to creation would be judged in that generation. In Matthew 13 he spoke of the end of the age when the righteous would shine like the stars. The wicked would be condemned at that time also. Daniel 12:1-7, the prophecy upon which Jesus' words are based, tells us it would be fulfilled "when the power of the holy people has been completely shattered."
Peter tells us that Jesus was "ready to judge the living and the dead" when he wrote 1 Peter 4:5; and Revelation 11 tells us that the time had come for the judgment of the living and the dead.
Finally, in Revelation 21:12 Jesus quoted the very words he had uttered some thirty years earlier: "Behold I come quickly, and my reward is with me to reward every man according to his work." Now unless Revelation is speaking of a different "judgment of all" from the "judgment of all" in Matthew we must believe the subject to be the same. Revelation, no less than five times tells us the events under view are imminent. Matthew 16:27-28 has a certain time-frame limit, i.e., "some standing here shall not die till they see the Son of Man coming...." Matthew speaks of the coming of Jesus to judge every man. Revelation does also. Matthew says Jesus would come in that generation. Revelation says he was coming quickly. Where is the delineation between the two?
What we see then is a pattern of consistency. From Jesus' words in Matthew 16:27 until his words in Revelation there is the prediction of judgment of all. And this is always set in a time-frame of imminency.
Todd Dennis
This is a note worthy warning from one of the most popular, and one of the first major Preterist websites on the web. Dennis who started the Preterist Archive over 10 years ago now speaks out about the very system which he devoted his life to for so many years. To recognize that the system is now "toxic theology" speaks volumes to what he now sees being taught.
Todd Dennis
Warning: This "full preterist" related material is being archived as part of the balanced representation of all pret views, but its premise is deemed by the curator to be "toxic theology" which subtly draws people away from the things of the spirit due to the fleshly "letter-based" appeal (core components being extra-biblical history and logic -- there being not one single verse which looks back to fulfillment in ad70, the system is based entirely upon deductive reasoning). Therefore, this warning is being attached. If you have already adopted this viewpoint, please consider -- has your attention been drawn toward or away from Jesus Christ and him crucified? (i.e. what is the focal point of your Christian life.. AD70 or AD30?) Please note that the earliest known adherents of full preterism later abandoned it, as have many contemporary former full peterists, including the curator of this archive (full pret for over a decade). The "past spiritual resurrection" view is the theology that Paul condemns in II Timothy 2:17-18, so please proceed with extreme caution. - TD
http://www.preteristarchive.com/
Todd Dennis
Warning: This "full preterist" related material is being archived as part of the balanced representation of all pret views, but its premise is deemed by the curator to be "toxic theology" which subtly draws people away from the things of the spirit due to the fleshly "letter-based" appeal (core components being extra-biblical history and logic -- there being not one single verse which looks back to fulfillment in ad70, the system is based entirely upon deductive reasoning). Therefore, this warning is being attached. If you have already adopted this viewpoint, please consider -- has your attention been drawn toward or away from Jesus Christ and him crucified? (i.e. what is the focal point of your Christian life.. AD70 or AD30?) Please note that the earliest known adherents of full preterism later abandoned it, as have many contemporary former full peterists, including the curator of this archive (full pret for over a decade). The "past spiritual resurrection" view is the theology that Paul condemns in II Timothy 2:17-18, so please proceed with extreme caution. - TD
http://www.preteristarchive.com/
Don Preston
(John 12:31-32) "Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out. And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me."
Preston reveals himself to be only thinking naturally by seeing judgment as a final end point at the Destruction of Jerusalem. He states "Are we to understand that there are two totally different and disparate judgments in view in these two epistles?" This statement is designed to make non-preterists look ignorant or dumb for not seeing his own natural thinking logic. He will argue until he is blue in the face, and he still won't see. He sees a single generational judgment tied to the destruction of Jerusalem rather that seeing the unbelieving generation who do not obey the gospel which affects all generations. The unbelieving generation like the present heavens and earth, or this present age, is characterizing those who fail to put on the new man and are outside of Christ. Unless, Preston can prove that this single judgment is the final ending point (for ALL men, Universalism?), or unless he can prove that people are no longer judged for not obeying the gospel, how in the world can he draw this conclusion that this event Paul is speaking of is temporal in natural or occured in 70ad. Are we to believe judgment is temporal also? Is our flesh what is judged for spiritually breaking our covenant with the Lord? For example if you fail to obey the gospel (sin) and your judgment is frying in a electric chair (destruction of Jerusalem), is that the judgment Paul is referring to?
Don Preston
Peter's emphatic declaration of the imminent judgment and his rhetorical question about the fate of those who do not obey the gospel sheds light on another very significant eschatological text. In 2 Thessalonians 1:4-12 Paul said Christ would come "in flaming fire, taking vengeance on those that obey not the gospel." Who would these be that would suffer such a fate? It was the very ones that were persecuting the church, vs. 7-8.
What we find then is that Peter poses a question that Paul had already answered. This is why Peter's question is rhetorical. Paul's Thessalonian epistles were well known to Peter's readers, 2 Peter 3:15-16. Thus, when Peter asked the question, his readers could directly reference those epistles.
Are we to suppose that Peter was concerned with a different fate for "those who do not obey the gospel" than Paul? Are we to understand that there are two totally different and disparate judgments in view in these two epistles? (Spoken like a true Preterist)
When one acknowledges Peter's positive declaration about the imminence of the judgment upon "those who do not obey the gospel," then unless it can be categorically demonstrated that Paul and Peter were speaking of two different circumstances, two different judgments, two different groups of "those who do not obey the gospel," two different fates for these groups, then it must be admitted that Peter's chronological statement governs and identifies the judgment of 2 Thessalonians 1.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=152&Itemid=61
Preston reveals himself to be only thinking naturally by seeing judgment as a final end point at the Destruction of Jerusalem. He states "Are we to understand that there are two totally different and disparate judgments in view in these two epistles?" This statement is designed to make non-preterists look ignorant or dumb for not seeing his own natural thinking logic. He will argue until he is blue in the face, and he still won't see. He sees a single generational judgment tied to the destruction of Jerusalem rather that seeing the unbelieving generation who do not obey the gospel which affects all generations. The unbelieving generation like the present heavens and earth, or this present age, is characterizing those who fail to put on the new man and are outside of Christ. Unless, Preston can prove that this single judgment is the final ending point (for ALL men, Universalism?), or unless he can prove that people are no longer judged for not obeying the gospel, how in the world can he draw this conclusion that this event Paul is speaking of is temporal in natural or occured in 70ad. Are we to believe judgment is temporal also? Is our flesh what is judged for spiritually breaking our covenant with the Lord? For example if you fail to obey the gospel (sin) and your judgment is frying in a electric chair (destruction of Jerusalem), is that the judgment Paul is referring to?
Don Preston
Peter's emphatic declaration of the imminent judgment and his rhetorical question about the fate of those who do not obey the gospel sheds light on another very significant eschatological text. In 2 Thessalonians 1:4-12 Paul said Christ would come "in flaming fire, taking vengeance on those that obey not the gospel." Who would these be that would suffer such a fate? It was the very ones that were persecuting the church, vs. 7-8.
What we find then is that Peter poses a question that Paul had already answered. This is why Peter's question is rhetorical. Paul's Thessalonian epistles were well known to Peter's readers, 2 Peter 3:15-16. Thus, when Peter asked the question, his readers could directly reference those epistles.
Are we to suppose that Peter was concerned with a different fate for "those who do not obey the gospel" than Paul? Are we to understand that there are two totally different and disparate judgments in view in these two epistles? (Spoken like a true Preterist)
When one acknowledges Peter's positive declaration about the imminence of the judgment upon "those who do not obey the gospel," then unless it can be categorically demonstrated that Paul and Peter were speaking of two different circumstances, two different judgments, two different groups of "those who do not obey the gospel," two different fates for these groups, then it must be admitted that Peter's chronological statement governs and identifies the judgment of 2 Thessalonians 1.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=152&Itemid=61
Sam Dawson
Dawson not unlike Preston ironically use II Tim. 2.17-18 in order to fight off futurist who believe a future physical resurrection. They don't even see that they open their own system to a huge attack which puts them in the cross heirs of Paul. While I agree with them that the resurrection is spiritual, it is funny they miss the fallacy in their own system that the spiritual resurrection is a past event. If Hymenaeus and Philetus believed the resurrection was in fact spiritual which Dawson and Preston admit, and Paul says no "stupid" a spiritual resurrection can't be a past event, how is it not ironic that Dawson and Preston using the exact same argument that Hymenaeus and Philetus did to say that the spiritual resurrection is a past event. Oh I see it is about time. Their nature was correct but "they were mistaken on the time element of it". Dawson not unlike Preston make the assumption that this was a timing issue, rather than a issue about spiritual things being placed in temporal boxes. How is it that they assume that spiritual things are temporal historical events. If something is temporal and historical, is it not anti-spiritual. If something is a past event, how is it also made to apply to you or I. The only answer I find is that Paul's accusations are targeted directly at modern day Preterists who in their commitment to truth who made a huge error in their position to maintain their 70ad position. In fact is has done exactly what Paul said it would do which has overthrow the faith of many. As Dawson states at the end of his article which he applies to futurists rings so true of Preterists also. . . "how could our teaching be any more mistaken than that of Hymenaeus and Philetus"
Sam Dawson
Question: How is your teaching any different from that of Hymenaeus and Philetus, who taught that the resurrection is past already?
II Tim. 2.17-18: ...and their word will eat as doth a gangrene: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; men who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already, and overthrow the faith of some.
Answer: It's a good question, as many people assume that Hymenaeus and Philetus were teaching about the resurrection of physical bodies out of holes in the ground.
But think about it: Do we know anyone today stupid enough to believe that the physical resurrection of physical bodies has occurred already? Do we know anyone stupid enough to teach such? How hard would it be for us to refute such an absurd contention. It would have been so simple for Paul to have refuted it. He could have taken those fellows to a tomb and shown them the bones of the dead! If they couldn't have understood such a demonstration, they wouldn't even have had to be baptized, would they? They could have gotten in on the "kiddie ticket." End of debate! Don't you think Paul would have thought of that? Why did not Paul suggest that? Is not the answer inescapable that Paul was not teaching and expecting that kind of resurrection?
It's evident that Hymenaeus and Philetus believed in the resurrection as the hope of Israel as the gospel which Paul preached, but they were mistaken on the time element of it. Daniel prophesied of the coming resurrection of Israel (Dan. 12.2-3--which Jesus quoted as about to be fulfilled in Mt.13.43.) "when the power of the holy people" would be "completely shattered" (Dan. 12.7) at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Dan. 9.26, 27--which Jesus quoted in Matthew 24 indicating it would "be fulfilled in his generation").
http://gospelthemes.com/eschatologyfaq.htm#hymenaus
In David Green's own words "IF futurism is true and the Resurrection has not yet happened since the time that Paul wrote II Tim. 2:17,18, then preterism is indeed -- in the words of II Tim. 2:17,18 -- "ungodliness," "gangrene," a deviation from the Truth, and a Faith-overthrowing doctrine. If the Resurrection of II Tim. 2:17,18 has still not yet happened, then preterists are certainly heretics." http://www.preteristcosmos.com/if-futurism-is-true.html
Sam Dawson
Question: How is your teaching any different from that of Hymenaeus and Philetus, who taught that the resurrection is past already?
II Tim. 2.17-18: ...and their word will eat as doth a gangrene: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; men who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already, and overthrow the faith of some.
Answer: It's a good question, as many people assume that Hymenaeus and Philetus were teaching about the resurrection of physical bodies out of holes in the ground.
But think about it: Do we know anyone today stupid enough to believe that the physical resurrection of physical bodies has occurred already? Do we know anyone stupid enough to teach such? How hard would it be for us to refute such an absurd contention. It would have been so simple for Paul to have refuted it. He could have taken those fellows to a tomb and shown them the bones of the dead! If they couldn't have understood such a demonstration, they wouldn't even have had to be baptized, would they? They could have gotten in on the "kiddie ticket." End of debate! Don't you think Paul would have thought of that? Why did not Paul suggest that? Is not the answer inescapable that Paul was not teaching and expecting that kind of resurrection?
It's evident that Hymenaeus and Philetus believed in the resurrection as the hope of Israel as the gospel which Paul preached, but they were mistaken on the time element of it. Daniel prophesied of the coming resurrection of Israel (Dan. 12.2-3--which Jesus quoted as about to be fulfilled in Mt.13.43.) "when the power of the holy people" would be "completely shattered" (Dan. 12.7) at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple (Dan. 9.26, 27--which Jesus quoted in Matthew 24 indicating it would "be fulfilled in his generation").
http://gospelthemes.com/eschatologyfaq.htm#hymenaus
In David Green's own words "IF futurism is true and the Resurrection has not yet happened since the time that Paul wrote II Tim. 2:17,18, then preterism is indeed -- in the words of II Tim. 2:17,18 -- "ungodliness," "gangrene," a deviation from the Truth, and a Faith-overthrowing doctrine. If the Resurrection of II Tim. 2:17,18 has still not yet happened, then preterists are certainly heretics." http://www.preteristcosmos.com/if-futurism-is-true.html
Jerry Bowers: Deterioration of Full Preterism is our OWN FAULT
Jerry Bowers
The exponential growth in the deterioration of Full Preterism is in all honesty; the fault of Full Preterist’s themselves just as the progressing destruction of the entire Christian faith is due primarily to Christians themselves. This destruction of Full Preterism is not due to faulty or erroneous exegeses by Full Preterist’s (LOL) but this fault has been created through Proselytizing or Converting those outside of this belief, into this belief.
http://www.freewebs.com/gapevangelising/Wolves%20in%20Sheeps%20Clothing.doc
Tim Warner
Futurists knows better than anyone that Preterist are known for their historical appeal. Their claims that historical events were really spiritual events really proves the weakness of their system. This post is affirming a core issue that is faced by the Preterist system.
Tim Warner
To help bolster their theory that New Testament prophecy was fulfilled by 70 AD, Preterists at some point usually turn to the historical record for support. We have already pointed out one example of this, the Preterists' appeals to Nero as the antichrist. Another example are the Preterists' desire to use unbelieving historians such as Josephus to back up their claims. (We will go into a more detailed analysis of both of these momentarily.) In this section we will assume Preterists will not retract their appeals to historic events. (However, it should be noted that Preterists are quite fond of appealing to the historical record when it suits them and then using appeals to Luke 17 to deny its relevance whenever it contradicts them.)
Now we will take a comparative look at the history surrounding the Roman siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD and the Biblical details of the antichrist, his empire, and the returning Christ to see if the two match up. We will find two things. First, the two do not match up. There is great discrepancy between the historical events of those days and the Biblical prophecies. These stark differences clearly prevent us from accepting the Preterist theory that these Biblical prophecies came to pass in 70 AD. Second, in attempting to reconcile the two, Preterists completely twist, distort, and even reverse some of the relationships presented in the Biblical passages they claim to be finding fulfilled in the historical record.
As we have mentioned in depth earlier, Preterists will always at some point attempt to use the historical record to prove their theory. We will begin this section by analyzing one specific example of this practice. We will then use that example as a jumping point to demonstrate the clear discrepancies between the historical record and the details of the New Testament prophecies concerning the coming of the antichrist, the mark of the beast, and the return of Jesus Christ. We will start with a quote from II Thessalonians.
By pointing to an actual historical figure, Preterists are conceding that the details of New Testament end time prophecy can and should occur literally in recorded history. As such, they subject the Preterist theory to criticism based on a comparison of history and Biblical prophecy.
http://www.biblestudying.net/studies.html#preterism
Tim Warner
To help bolster their theory that New Testament prophecy was fulfilled by 70 AD, Preterists at some point usually turn to the historical record for support. We have already pointed out one example of this, the Preterists' appeals to Nero as the antichrist. Another example are the Preterists' desire to use unbelieving historians such as Josephus to back up their claims. (We will go into a more detailed analysis of both of these momentarily.) In this section we will assume Preterists will not retract their appeals to historic events. (However, it should be noted that Preterists are quite fond of appealing to the historical record when it suits them and then using appeals to Luke 17 to deny its relevance whenever it contradicts them.)
Now we will take a comparative look at the history surrounding the Roman siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD and the Biblical details of the antichrist, his empire, and the returning Christ to see if the two match up. We will find two things. First, the two do not match up. There is great discrepancy between the historical events of those days and the Biblical prophecies. These stark differences clearly prevent us from accepting the Preterist theory that these Biblical prophecies came to pass in 70 AD. Second, in attempting to reconcile the two, Preterists completely twist, distort, and even reverse some of the relationships presented in the Biblical passages they claim to be finding fulfilled in the historical record.
As we have mentioned in depth earlier, Preterists will always at some point attempt to use the historical record to prove their theory. We will begin this section by analyzing one specific example of this practice. We will then use that example as a jumping point to demonstrate the clear discrepancies between the historical record and the details of the New Testament prophecies concerning the coming of the antichrist, the mark of the beast, and the return of Jesus Christ. We will start with a quote from II Thessalonians.
By pointing to an actual historical figure, Preterists are conceding that the details of New Testament end time prophecy can and should occur literally in recorded history. As such, they subject the Preterist theory to criticism based on a comparison of history and Biblical prophecy.
http://www.biblestudying.net/studies.html#preterism
Larry Siegle
This quote by Siegle shows the delusions that Preterists continue to face. Making the New Heavens and Earth or Age to Come Temporal. How can something spiritual "a dwelling place for the righteous 2 Pet. 3:13" be a temporal historic period of time where ALL men dwell, as Siegle maintains "began in A.D. 70."? I would agree with Siegle in that the new is in complete fulfillment of the old, but the old is representative of the earthly and fleshly things. So unless, the old completely passes, which includes the old man, the flesh, bondage to sin and death, ect., how can he maintain a complete past fulfillment of things which are spiritual in nature. Last time I checked, there are still people living to the fleshly things in the old man which is represented by the old covenant. The old has always been a visible representation of the flesh, and was not somehow gone after 70ad. It continues to be fulfilled and consummated as people continue to die to the old man. If the type are visible natural things does that mean the antitypes (which Preterist see as the destruction of Jerusalem) are visible natural things which begin and end in history? Impossible. The antitypes must be invisible non-natural things and by no means temporal events.
Eschatology to me is about the nature of ones heart. I do not place any dispensational line in 30 or 70ad which separates the old from the new unlike the Preterist view. I believe the line is only in Christ. In my opinion of the teaching of the gospel, I believe it has to do with a process of moving from darkness to light, from old man to new man, from a covenant of death, to a covenant of life, from earthly to heavenly, from this age to the age to come, from this present heavens and earth to the new heavens and earth, part of a unbelieving generation, or part of the faithful generation, part of the present Jerusalem, or the Jerusalem above. All symbols of your heart and reflective who you are serving and if you are born again.
This is not a Preterist view nor a Futurist view which both take eschatological events and make them temporal (based on historic events), which are all external in nature. As Stevens says are mere "past events" as if eschatology was all about history 101. To me this is no different than seeing the cross as a mere past event. A historical fact which is a very legalistic view of scripture in my opinion. It fails you and me, because, the Cross, is mine and yours to bare just like Jesus bore it. A historical fact has no power within me, unless, I also bare it, and die. It is only through death that all things become new.
To me saying any of the old things passed away in a historical period of time, places ALL including the ungodly in the new thing (fill in the blank) no matter if it is in 30ad or 70ad, the implications are the same. And the truth is unless I have personally taken up my cross, I can not be freed from my sin. So the historical fact, is all well and good, but unless the spiritual truths which it points to manifest within me, the cross is utterly useless. It would seem to me that nature is the essence of eschatology rather than time which has become the focal point among Preterists.
Larry Siegle
Some preterists have taken the view to an extreme insisting that almost everything ended in A.D. 70 without coming to a better understanding of what began in A.D. 70. The “New Heavens and a New Earth” represents the full and complete fulfillment of the “old” and the bringing in of all the good things that God has promised would characterize the “new.”
http://preterist.wordpress.com/2007/11/27/preterist-spirituality-is-preterist-idealism-the-answer/
Eschatology to me is about the nature of ones heart. I do not place any dispensational line in 30 or 70ad which separates the old from the new unlike the Preterist view. I believe the line is only in Christ. In my opinion of the teaching of the gospel, I believe it has to do with a process of moving from darkness to light, from old man to new man, from a covenant of death, to a covenant of life, from earthly to heavenly, from this age to the age to come, from this present heavens and earth to the new heavens and earth, part of a unbelieving generation, or part of the faithful generation, part of the present Jerusalem, or the Jerusalem above. All symbols of your heart and reflective who you are serving and if you are born again.
This is not a Preterist view nor a Futurist view which both take eschatological events and make them temporal (based on historic events), which are all external in nature. As Stevens says are mere "past events" as if eschatology was all about history 101. To me this is no different than seeing the cross as a mere past event. A historical fact which is a very legalistic view of scripture in my opinion. It fails you and me, because, the Cross, is mine and yours to bare just like Jesus bore it. A historical fact has no power within me, unless, I also bare it, and die. It is only through death that all things become new.
To me saying any of the old things passed away in a historical period of time, places ALL including the ungodly in the new thing (fill in the blank) no matter if it is in 30ad or 70ad, the implications are the same. And the truth is unless I have personally taken up my cross, I can not be freed from my sin. So the historical fact, is all well and good, but unless the spiritual truths which it points to manifest within me, the cross is utterly useless. It would seem to me that nature is the essence of eschatology rather than time which has become the focal point among Preterists.
Larry Siegle
Some preterists have taken the view to an extreme insisting that almost everything ended in A.D. 70 without coming to a better understanding of what began in A.D. 70. The “New Heavens and a New Earth” represents the full and complete fulfillment of the “old” and the bringing in of all the good things that God has promised would characterize the “new.”
http://preterist.wordpress.com/2007/11/27/preterist-spirituality-is-preterist-idealism-the-answer/
Don Preston
Preston avoids the tough answers that express the hole of Preterism. Even he has questions due to the implications and assumptions that he has made. But those assumptions can't be wrong. What about the ungodly, Mr. Preston? Are they in the Age to Come, New Present Heavens and Earth? Preston SAYS YES!!! How could this be, you might ask? Outside the New Jerusalem you say, in the lake of fire you say? How is this NOT the present heavens and earth which you say passes away in 70ad. Were they found worthy to enter in, to obtain the age to come, Mr. Preston? How about judgment Mr. Preston. "I find that a lot of the passages that I have traditionally applied to an eternal concious torment, do not have that application." Cuase it ends in 70ad!!! I don't care how you white wash Preterism, to say it is ongoing or an application of the destruction of Jerusalem. It is still Universalism.
Don Preston
Are full preterists biblical universalists or do they believe in a traditional hell? What do full Preterists believe about the nature and character of hell - is it literal or symbolic? When are unbelievers judged and when are believers rewarded?
Response: Well, this is an issue (Hell), that I am personally struggling with, and, I might add, so are a lot of other preterists. There are those who do take a hard line on this, but as I have stated to some of them (good friends of mine), until I can be shown that this is an issue of salvation, I am not going to take that hard line. To this date, no one has convinced me that this is an issue of salvific faith, so I am not going to disfellowship those on either side of the issue! I find that a lot of the passages that I have traditionally applied to an eternal concious torment, do not have that application. On the other hand, I am not totally satisfied that there is no merit to that idea either. There are passages that, to me, teach the reality of punishment after death.
Where I am at for the moment (I call this my A-T-T position, because it is where I am at "At This Time"), is that the wicked are punished, without any doubts whatsoever. I think Revelation presents this clearly, for, after the time of the end, there are still nations outside the city, and outside the city are those who reject the Truth, liars, etc.. Those outside the city can, however, enter the city for healing! (RIGHT! ALL THE UNGODLY IN THE NEW HEAVENS AND EARTH. 2 PET 3:13 SAYS ONLY RIGHTEOUS.) That punishment of the wicked is eternal. Permanent, unchangeable. I thus reject the doctrine of universalism, and have written against it in my book on 2 Peter 3. A person is judged today, when they either come into Christ, or reject Him. When they die physically, they receive the results of that judgment.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=482&Itemid=90
Don Preston
Are full preterists biblical universalists or do they believe in a traditional hell? What do full Preterists believe about the nature and character of hell - is it literal or symbolic? When are unbelievers judged and when are believers rewarded?
Response: Well, this is an issue (Hell), that I am personally struggling with, and, I might add, so are a lot of other preterists. There are those who do take a hard line on this, but as I have stated to some of them (good friends of mine), until I can be shown that this is an issue of salvation, I am not going to take that hard line. To this date, no one has convinced me that this is an issue of salvific faith, so I am not going to disfellowship those on either side of the issue! I find that a lot of the passages that I have traditionally applied to an eternal concious torment, do not have that application. On the other hand, I am not totally satisfied that there is no merit to that idea either. There are passages that, to me, teach the reality of punishment after death.
Where I am at for the moment (I call this my A-T-T position, because it is where I am at "At This Time"), is that the wicked are punished, without any doubts whatsoever. I think Revelation presents this clearly, for, after the time of the end, there are still nations outside the city, and outside the city are those who reject the Truth, liars, etc.. Those outside the city can, however, enter the city for healing! (RIGHT! ALL THE UNGODLY IN THE NEW HEAVENS AND EARTH. 2 PET 3:13 SAYS ONLY RIGHTEOUS.) That punishment of the wicked is eternal. Permanent, unchangeable. I thus reject the doctrine of universalism, and have written against it in my book on 2 Peter 3. A person is judged today, when they either come into Christ, or reject Him. When they die physically, they receive the results of that judgment.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=482&Itemid=90
Don Preston
Don Preston
Well, you are correct about Josephus, but the reason why people have a problem with the A.D. 70 coming of Christ is because they believe, as you seem to, that while Jesus may have come in the destruction of Jerusalem, that he is also coming at the "end of the world." I reject that concept, and believe that the A.D. 70 coming of Christ was the end of the age parousia predicted in the scriptures, and that there is not another yet future, "end of the world" coming of Christ.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=508&Itemid=90
Well, you are correct about Josephus, but the reason why people have a problem with the A.D. 70 coming of Christ is because they believe, as you seem to, that while Jesus may have come in the destruction of Jerusalem, that he is also coming at the "end of the world." I reject that concept, and believe that the A.D. 70 coming of Christ was the end of the age parousia predicted in the scriptures, and that there is not another yet future, "end of the world" coming of Christ.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=508&Itemid=90
David Green
David Green
I think that you and Keith Mathison and I all agree that according to II Tim. 2:17,18, IF futurism is true and the Resurrection has not yet happened since the time that Paul wrote II Tim. 2:17,18, then preterism is indeed -- in the words of II Tim. 2:17,18 -- "ungodliness," "gangrene," a deviation from the Truth, and a Faith-overthrowing doctrine. If the Resurrection of II Tim. 2:17,18 has still not yet happened, then preterists are certainly heretics.
http://www.preteristcosmos.com/if-futurism-is-true.html
I think that you and Keith Mathison and I all agree that according to II Tim. 2:17,18, IF futurism is true and the Resurrection has not yet happened since the time that Paul wrote II Tim. 2:17,18, then preterism is indeed -- in the words of II Tim. 2:17,18 -- "ungodliness," "gangrene," a deviation from the Truth, and a Faith-overthrowing doctrine. If the Resurrection of II Tim. 2:17,18 has still not yet happened, then preterists are certainly heretics.
http://www.preteristcosmos.com/if-futurism-is-true.html
Don Preston
Preston is another which believes spiritual things are really just temporal events. Just look at the quote below. The key to understanding the book of Revelation is placing them in the proper historical context. All allegorical symbols, and symbolic terms are really just about nations, and events that occurred so long ago. Mere PAST EVENTS. I love this particular quote, because it expresses Preston's letter based approach to focus on the temporal rather than the spiritual. While he tells us it is spiritual in 70ad, it is really just temporal events that occurred in 70ad. He is no different that any futurist who places the fulfillment at the end of time. Still it is focused on a external non spiritual event, tied to historic cataclysm. The failure of his system, is the direct result of his own dispensational line which he establishes in 70ad, where he places ALL including the ungodly in the New Covenant, or New Heavens and Earth, or in the Age to Come. I guess this is the only conclusion one draws from a system that removes the OLD things in history rather than Christ.
Don Preston Article: Why Debate the Dating of Revelation?
Most paradigms today, either totally ignore the temporal parameters, or deny them. They deny the historical context, the covenant source of the symbolism, and the covenant nature of the book, and extrapolate it into our future, resulting in one failed prediction of the end after another. This is a shameful situation that needs to be corrected. Setting Revelatin {sp} within its proper context of history can help us correct these hurtful situations.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=579&Itemid=61
Don Preston Article: Why Debate the Dating of Revelation?
Most paradigms today, either totally ignore the temporal parameters, or deny them. They deny the historical context, the covenant source of the symbolism, and the covenant nature of the book, and extrapolate it into our future, resulting in one failed prediction of the end after another. This is a shameful situation that needs to be corrected. Setting Revelatin {sp} within its proper context of history can help us correct these hurtful situations.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=579&Itemid=61
Don Preston
Preston removes the old heavens and earth in 70ad as do most Preterists. What he does not tell you is that he places ALL in the New Heavens and Earth. According to his view, along with the FINAL dissolution of the present heavens and earth, the judgment of ungodly men also sees its FINAL dissolution in 70ad.
Don Preston
(On Matthew 24:36)"We believe we have shown that in Matthew 24:36, when Jesus said "But of that day and hour knoweth no man," that his reference was to "that day" that would climax "those days" leading up to the final dissolution of the Old Heaven and Earth of Israel at the return of Messiah in 70 AD." (Those Days - vs - That Day)
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=307&Itemid=61
Don Preston
(On Matthew 24:36)"We believe we have shown that in Matthew 24:36, when Jesus said "But of that day and hour knoweth no man," that his reference was to "that day" that would climax "those days" leading up to the final dissolution of the Old Heaven and Earth of Israel at the return of Messiah in 70 AD." (Those Days - vs - That Day)
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=307&Itemid=61
Kurt Simmons
Preterism is a authoritarian letter based system which believes that the natural fulfillments that occured during the desturction of Jerusalem were REALLY spiritual fulfillments.
Kurt Simmons
What is Preterism? Preterism upholds the authority and integrity of the word of God against theories of purported postponement and double fulfillment. Preterism is the affirmation that prophecy culminated and came to an end in Christ, and that Christ's prophetic utterances were fulfilled when and as he said they would.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=346&Itemid=61
Kurt Simmons
What is Preterism? Preterism upholds the authority and integrity of the word of God against theories of purported postponement and double fulfillment. Preterism is the affirmation that prophecy culminated and came to an end in Christ, and that Christ's prophetic utterances were fulfilled when and as he said they would.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=346&Itemid=61
Sam Frost
Preterist believe that the kingdom is a here it is . . . there it is . . . They can not see that the kingdom does not come with observation. If it is not with observation, how can Jerusalem's fall be the point when the kingdom is made complete or is consumated in 70ad? The kingdom is eternal. It has no beginning nor does it ever end. The kingdom is also spiritual but Preterists seem to make the kingdom into a temporal period of time, subject to their assumptive system.
Sam Frost Article: Todd Dennis and Preteristic Idealism
Jesus announced that his kingdom, the one that was "near" and "at hand" and would "come" within that "generation" and was already making pre-parousaic preparations within his people, would be "like a mustard seed." Jerusalem's Fall would point to and mark the arrival of this kingdom on earth within God's people. But, the Fall was natural, and, naturally, was loud. The arrival of the kingdom was spiritual, and came with a still, small drop of a tiny mustard seed. You could hardly see its arrival. But, it would grow, and is growing, and will continue to grow so that "all the birds of the air" can come in and find rest among its branches.
http://www.thereignofchrist.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=244&Itemid=48
Sam Frost Article: Todd Dennis and Preteristic Idealism
Jesus announced that his kingdom, the one that was "near" and "at hand" and would "come" within that "generation" and was already making pre-parousaic preparations within his people, would be "like a mustard seed." Jerusalem's Fall would point to and mark the arrival of this kingdom on earth within God's people. But, the Fall was natural, and, naturally, was loud. The arrival of the kingdom was spiritual, and came with a still, small drop of a tiny mustard seed. You could hardly see its arrival. But, it would grow, and is growing, and will continue to grow so that "all the birds of the air" can come in and find rest among its branches.
http://www.thereignofchrist.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=244&Itemid=48
Jesse Mills
Jesse Mills
These things really happened in the first century! They have been fulfilled! Josephus, an eyewitness (LOL) of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD gives a full and clear account of it.
http://www.biblicalfulfillment.org/id41.html
These things really happened in the first century! They have been fulfilled! Josephus, an eyewitness (LOL) of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD gives a full and clear account of it.
http://www.biblicalfulfillment.org/id41.html
Kurt Simmons
Kurt is really drawing straws on this one. The New Heavens and Earth are being described by Kurt as the removal of the oppression and persecution during the events of 70ad. If that is the case, then how is it destribed by Peter as a dwelling place for the righteous. So does that mean if those who survived that period were some how found worthy or righteous to gain entry into the New Heavens and Earth or the Age to Come. Preterists have messed this all up. They are back peddeling themselves right into a huge pit in the ground. They are making that which is spiritually representative of the reward from our trails and tempations, and making it historical. Where should our treasures be? Are we to believe our treasures are of this life, or in the life to come?
Kurt Simmons
The new heavens and earth describe the changed circumstances of God’s people, in which the former troubles were now forgotten. Whereas they had been under oppression and persecution by their fellow countrymen who refused to heed God’s word, they would see happier times. The time of national and personal sorrow under the Assyrians and Babylonians (in the first instance, but in the Messianic context, under the Jews and Romans,) would give way to a time when the faithful of God’s people would enjoy security and peace. The Jerusalem that had suffered siege and famine would give way to a Jerusalem that enjoyed an abundance of peace. The inhabitants of the new Jerusalem would “dwell every man under his vine and under his fig tree.” (Isa. 65:21) We should not mistake the poetic description of the new Jerusalem for the new heavens and earth.
http://www.preteristcentral.com/what-is-preterism.htm
Kurt Simmons
The new heavens and earth describe the changed circumstances of God’s people, in which the former troubles were now forgotten. Whereas they had been under oppression and persecution by their fellow countrymen who refused to heed God’s word, they would see happier times. The time of national and personal sorrow under the Assyrians and Babylonians (in the first instance, but in the Messianic context, under the Jews and Romans,) would give way to a time when the faithful of God’s people would enjoy security and peace. The Jerusalem that had suffered siege and famine would give way to a Jerusalem that enjoyed an abundance of peace. The inhabitants of the new Jerusalem would “dwell every man under his vine and under his fig tree.” (Isa. 65:21) We should not mistake the poetic description of the new Jerusalem for the new heavens and earth.
http://www.preteristcentral.com/what-is-preterism.htm
Kurt Simmons
This comment by Kurt is sooo funny. He admits that most preterist spiritualize the fulfillment of prophecy then Preterists turn right around and completely place those spiritual events in the context of 70ad. Beyond that, I have seen Kurt take elements of the book of Revelation and place historic timelines on what every smybolic word really means. They pick and choose which natural event best fits the description of the text, then say this is really what it means. It amazing to me how Preterists continue to make spiritual and eternal truths temproal and external in fulfillment. It is so ironic that eternal things are made temporal by Preterists, yet they maintain it is spiritual. Right, and this is different than the Pharisees how?
Kurt Simmons Article: What is Preterism?
Preterism maintains that the eschatological teaching of the Lord and his apostles was fulfilled when and as prophesied. However, Preterists insist that the manner of fulfillment was essentially spiritual, not physical, and that language which on its face appears to describe the dissolution of the chemical elements in a cataclysmic end of time and space must be given a figurative construction and interpretation. This is required, not only because of the confines for fulfillment imposed by statements of time, but by the usus loquendi (manner of speech) of the prophets.
http://www.preteristcentral.com/what-is-preterism.htm
Kurt Simmons Article: What is Preterism?
Preterism maintains that the eschatological teaching of the Lord and his apostles was fulfilled when and as prophesied. However, Preterists insist that the manner of fulfillment was essentially spiritual, not physical, and that language which on its face appears to describe the dissolution of the chemical elements in a cataclysmic end of time and space must be given a figurative construction and interpretation. This is required, not only because of the confines for fulfillment imposed by statements of time, but by the usus loquendi (manner of speech) of the prophets.
http://www.preteristcentral.com/what-is-preterism.htm
Kurt Simmons
Unlike most Preterists, Kurt Simmons NOW believes the LAW did not pass in 70ad but still continues today, becuase he knows sin and death must continue past 70ad else there is no seperation between those in Christ and outside of Christ. So if the law of sin and death according to Simmons did not pass in 70ad, so what exactly passed away in 70ad???? It would seem like Simmons would tend to believe that the passing from old things to new things would be IN CHRIST. Christ would be the seperating line, not 70ad.
Kurt Simmons Article: Simmons’ Response to Simmons
The source death is not the Mosaic law; the source of death is the law of sin and death. (Rom. 7:23; 8:2) This law existed in the garden; it was the penalty attached to transgression of God’s moral law by disobedience to his commandments. “In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” (Gen. 2:17) The law of sin and death has existed in every age and generation; it existed in the garden; it existed under the law of Moses; and it exists even now.
http://www.preteristcentral.com/pret-simmons'response.htm
Kurt Simmons Article: Simmons’ Response to Simmons
The source death is not the Mosaic law; the source of death is the law of sin and death. (Rom. 7:23; 8:2) This law existed in the garden; it was the penalty attached to transgression of God’s moral law by disobedience to his commandments. “In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” (Gen. 2:17) The law of sin and death has existed in every age and generation; it existed in the garden; it existed under the law of Moses; and it exists even now.
http://www.preteristcentral.com/pret-simmons'response.htm
David Curtis
David makes it sound like the Age to Come came in 70ad. This places ALL men into the Age to Come. Luke 20:35 "But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage." So is this the age which came in 70ad. If so, were the ungodly found worthy to obtain it?
David Curtis
Let's dissect what he says here. He said, "In other words, the whole Old Testament is authoritative until the age to come." This is exactly what Jesus was saying! But what this commentator doesn't understand is that the "age to come" came in AD 70. Jesus lived in what the Bible calls "this age". We today live in what the Bible calls the "age to come". He goes on to say, "Matthew means the whole Old Testament is authoritative between the two advents of Christ down to its minute details." - This is absolutely correct! But what he doesn't understand is that the second advent took place in AD 70 at the end of the Jewish age. So, when the Jewish age ended with the destruction of the temple, so did the law.
He goes on to say this: "According to Matthew 5:17, 18, the Law and the Prophets (the whole Old Testament) have their place under the administration of Christ under the New Covenant." Is that true? NO! The Old Covenant has NO place in the New Covenant! Why is that so hard to understand? The New Covenant replaced the Old. And believers today live under the New, not the Old Covenant:
Hebrews 8:13 (NKJV) In that He says, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.
In AD 65, when this epistle was written, the old covenant was "ready to vanish away". The Greek word for "vanish" is aphanismos which means: "disappearance or abrogation".
Matthew 5:18 (NKJV) "For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.
The law remains in tack, every bit of it, until it is all fulfilled and heaven and earth pass away. That's what Jesus said, isn't it? Now compare that to what Jesus says in:
Matthew 24:35 (NKJV) "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.
Jesus uses the same Greek word (parerchomai) here for "pass away" as he did in Matthew 5:18. So, in Matthew 5:18 he says that heaven and earth will pass away when the law is fulfilled, and in 24:35 he says that heaven and earth will pass away, but His words will not pass away. So, Jesus' words would last forever, but the "Law" and the "heavens and earth" would pass away.
Believers, we are to live by the words of Jesus Christ, which will never pass away. Jesus brought in the New Covenant, which is an everlasting covenant. The old is passed away, and we live in the New Covenant age. (Are ALL in this new age? I thought the old things pass only in Christ, and not 70ad, "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; all things have become new." (2 Cor 5:17) )
David Curtis
Let's dissect what he says here. He said, "In other words, the whole Old Testament is authoritative until the age to come." This is exactly what Jesus was saying! But what this commentator doesn't understand is that the "age to come" came in AD 70. Jesus lived in what the Bible calls "this age". We today live in what the Bible calls the "age to come". He goes on to say, "Matthew means the whole Old Testament is authoritative between the two advents of Christ down to its minute details." - This is absolutely correct! But what he doesn't understand is that the second advent took place in AD 70 at the end of the Jewish age. So, when the Jewish age ended with the destruction of the temple, so did the law.
He goes on to say this: "According to Matthew 5:17, 18, the Law and the Prophets (the whole Old Testament) have their place under the administration of Christ under the New Covenant." Is that true? NO! The Old Covenant has NO place in the New Covenant! Why is that so hard to understand? The New Covenant replaced the Old. And believers today live under the New, not the Old Covenant:
Hebrews 8:13 (NKJV) In that He says, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.
In AD 65, when this epistle was written, the old covenant was "ready to vanish away". The Greek word for "vanish" is aphanismos which means: "disappearance or abrogation".
Matthew 5:18 (NKJV) "For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.
The law remains in tack, every bit of it, until it is all fulfilled and heaven and earth pass away. That's what Jesus said, isn't it? Now compare that to what Jesus says in:
Matthew 24:35 (NKJV) "Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away.
Jesus uses the same Greek word (parerchomai) here for "pass away" as he did in Matthew 5:18. So, in Matthew 5:18 he says that heaven and earth will pass away when the law is fulfilled, and in 24:35 he says that heaven and earth will pass away, but His words will not pass away. So, Jesus' words would last forever, but the "Law" and the "heavens and earth" would pass away.
Believers, we are to live by the words of Jesus Christ, which will never pass away. Jesus brought in the New Covenant, which is an everlasting covenant. The old is passed away, and we live in the New Covenant age. (Are ALL in this new age? I thought the old things pass only in Christ, and not 70ad, "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; all things have become new." (2 Cor 5:17) )
David Curtis
David Curtis
When I first came to see as truth the fact that the Lord had come in 70 AD and all prophecy had been fulfilled my first objection was, "This means we are living in the new heaven and the new earth!" My response to that was "Yea right! If this is the New heaven and earth we got ripped off." Why did I feel that way? It was because I was looking for a physical fulfillment of 2 Peter 3 and Revelation 21-22. I thought that those passages were speaking of physical truths, I now know differently, I didn't understand apocalyptic language. The thing that changed my mind was seeing how the OT Scripture used the concept of heaven and earth. Lets look at how the Bible uses the concept of heaven and earth, I think you'll see that it is not always used physically.
Jesus does not have in mind here some specific statement of prophecy. He is not talking about a judgement of Israel, he is not speaking about a specific aspect of his atonement. The Jewish idiom "the law and the prophets" means the totality of the OT revelation. Jesus said he did not come to destroy it but fulfill it. Jesus is saying here in Matthew 5 that the old law has to be fulfilled, every jot, every tittle has to be fulfilled before it can pass away. If 2 Peter 3 is based upon the OT prophets, and it is, and if 2 Peter 3 has not been fulfilled then we are still under the OC law. That is quite simple. Do you believe that we are in the NC? If we are then the OC must have passed away. And if the OC has passed then 2 Peter 3 has been fulfilled.
http://www.bereanbiblechurch.org/transcripts/eschatology/heaven_and_earth.html
The passing away of heaven and earth is another way to speak of the end of the Old Covenant.
http://www.bereanbiblechurch.org/transcripts/som/5_18.htm
When I first came to see as truth the fact that the Lord had come in 70 AD and all prophecy had been fulfilled my first objection was, "This means we are living in the new heaven and the new earth!" My response to that was "Yea right! If this is the New heaven and earth we got ripped off." Why did I feel that way? It was because I was looking for a physical fulfillment of 2 Peter 3 and Revelation 21-22. I thought that those passages were speaking of physical truths, I now know differently, I didn't understand apocalyptic language. The thing that changed my mind was seeing how the OT Scripture used the concept of heaven and earth. Lets look at how the Bible uses the concept of heaven and earth, I think you'll see that it is not always used physically.
Jesus does not have in mind here some specific statement of prophecy. He is not talking about a judgement of Israel, he is not speaking about a specific aspect of his atonement. The Jewish idiom "the law and the prophets" means the totality of the OT revelation. Jesus said he did not come to destroy it but fulfill it. Jesus is saying here in Matthew 5 that the old law has to be fulfilled, every jot, every tittle has to be fulfilled before it can pass away. If 2 Peter 3 is based upon the OT prophets, and it is, and if 2 Peter 3 has not been fulfilled then we are still under the OC law. That is quite simple. Do you believe that we are in the NC? If we are then the OC must have passed away. And if the OC has passed then 2 Peter 3 has been fulfilled.
http://www.bereanbiblechurch.org/transcripts/eschatology/heaven_and_earth.html
The passing away of heaven and earth is another way to speak of the end of the Old Covenant.
http://www.bereanbiblechurch.org/transcripts/som/5_18.htm
Don Preston: Seventy weeks ends in 70AD
Don Preston Contradictions
Let me make an argument based on Daniel 9:24-27 and Matthew 5. Not one jot or tittle would pass from the Law until it was all fulfilled. "The Law" included the prophets, the Psalms, and the Decalogue. Daniel 9:24-27 posited the fulfillment of the entire body of prophecy, i.e. the Law, within the confines of the 70 weeks. (Seventy Weeks are determined to seal vision and prophecy). Since not one jot or tittle of the Law could pass until it was ALL fulfilled, it is therefore impossible for "the Law" to have passed at the Cross, while constituent elements of "the Law" remained valid and unfulfilled. Remember, none could pass until all was fulfilled.
Jesus did not say some will pass when some is fulfilled! He did not say all would pass when some was fulfilled. He said none would pass until all was fulfilled.
Back to Daniel 9. Daniel 9 posits the fulfillment of vision and prophecy within the confines of the seventy weeks. Vision and prophecy is "the Law." The terminus of the seventy weeks is the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 (as Terry seems to agree). Thus, the Law, and obligation to keep the Law, would remain valid until the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=541&Itemid=61
Don Preston
I do not use a precise mathematical calculation for the 70 Weeks. I believe that it is a symbolic period of time, marked out by the beginning point, and the termination point, with "markers" in between. I do this for several reasons. There is no mathematical calculation that I have ever seen that comes out precisely.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=538&Itemid=92
Don Preston: Seal Up Vision and Prophecy
"In other words the seventy weeks are not to be seen as absolute mathematical markers. But the passage, while not giving mathematical precision does provide a definite terminus a quo [point from which to begin] and a terminus ad quem [point up to, or ending] . . . This view, that the seventy weeks are not precise mathematical markers, allows the text and words of Daniel 9 to stand without doing astounding mathematical acrobatics or resorting to saying the DECREE of the destruction would fall within the 70 weeks but not the destruction itself."
(Page 12)
Let me make an argument based on Daniel 9:24-27 and Matthew 5. Not one jot or tittle would pass from the Law until it was all fulfilled. "The Law" included the prophets, the Psalms, and the Decalogue. Daniel 9:24-27 posited the fulfillment of the entire body of prophecy, i.e. the Law, within the confines of the 70 weeks. (Seventy Weeks are determined to seal vision and prophecy). Since not one jot or tittle of the Law could pass until it was ALL fulfilled, it is therefore impossible for "the Law" to have passed at the Cross, while constituent elements of "the Law" remained valid and unfulfilled. Remember, none could pass until all was fulfilled.
Jesus did not say some will pass when some is fulfilled! He did not say all would pass when some was fulfilled. He said none would pass until all was fulfilled.
Back to Daniel 9. Daniel 9 posits the fulfillment of vision and prophecy within the confines of the seventy weeks. Vision and prophecy is "the Law." The terminus of the seventy weeks is the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 (as Terry seems to agree). Thus, the Law, and obligation to keep the Law, would remain valid until the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=541&Itemid=61
Don Preston
I do not use a precise mathematical calculation for the 70 Weeks. I believe that it is a symbolic period of time, marked out by the beginning point, and the termination point, with "markers" in between. I do this for several reasons. There is no mathematical calculation that I have ever seen that comes out precisely.
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=538&Itemid=92
Don Preston: Seal Up Vision and Prophecy
"In other words the seventy weeks are not to be seen as absolute mathematical markers. But the passage, while not giving mathematical precision does provide a definite terminus a quo [point from which to begin] and a terminus ad quem [point up to, or ending] . . . This view, that the seventy weeks are not precise mathematical markers, allows the text and words of Daniel 9 to stand without doing astounding mathematical acrobatics or resorting to saying the DECREE of the destruction would fall within the 70 weeks but not the destruction itself."
(Page 12)
Sean Hyatt
70ad is when Christ kingdom became eternal or everlasting? The end of the age arrived? Here it is. . . There it is . . . NOT WITH OBSERVATION!
Sean Hyatt
In 70A.D., just one 40-year Bible generation after Christ's ministry, the end of the age (the age of the Jewish Mosaic law) arrived as Christ returned with a vengeance against his backslidden Old Testament people. His instrument of judgment was the Roman army which he used to thoroughly destroy the Jewish temple and forever scatter the 12 tribes. This promised coming in the clouds of judgment meant deliverance and vindication for the infant Christian church, and "weeping and gnashing of teeth" for Christ's enemies. The Messiah-ship of Jesus was proven without a doubt as his end-times predictions came true, and the new age of the everlasting kingdom of Jesus Christ was officially and finally ushered in!
http://www.onlythescriptures.com/
Sean Hyatt
In 70A.D., just one 40-year Bible generation after Christ's ministry, the end of the age (the age of the Jewish Mosaic law) arrived as Christ returned with a vengeance against his backslidden Old Testament people. His instrument of judgment was the Roman army which he used to thoroughly destroy the Jewish temple and forever scatter the 12 tribes. This promised coming in the clouds of judgment meant deliverance and vindication for the infant Christian church, and "weeping and gnashing of teeth" for Christ's enemies. The Messiah-ship of Jesus was proven without a doubt as his end-times predictions came true, and the new age of the everlasting kingdom of Jesus Christ was officially and finally ushered in!
http://www.onlythescriptures.com/
David Curtis
Preterist after Preterist focus on the year 70ad when old things pass away and new things begin. Again, this places ALL in the new covenant, or the new heavens and earth. If the present heavens and earth which are reserved for judgment of the ungodly, and those outside of Christ, how can it ever pass away while this world remains. Are Preterist saying they are are worthy to enter the new heavens and earth where only the righteous dwell. (2 Pet 3:13) Are they saying the ungodly are also in the New Jerusalem which is the ONLY thing pictured in the New Heavens and Earth in Rev. 20? How can this be? All old things must continue to remain as symbols of those outside Christ.
David Curtis Article: Heaven & Earth and the Law Have Passed Away
Isaiah 65:17 (NKJV) "For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; And the former shall not be remembered or come to mind. This prophecy had to be fulfilled before the law could pass away. Until God created a new heaven and earth, the old covenant remained in tack, every bit of it. So, if we are not living in the New Heaven and Earth today, then we are under the law, every bit of it. But I know of no Christian who would say that ALL the Old Testament Scriptures are binding on us. If they did, they would have to be keeping the Sabbath, and the feasts, and they would have to be sacrificing animals. Are we bound by the Old Covenant Law today? No! Hopefully, we learned in our last study that we are not under the law. And if we are not under the law, then heaven and earth must have passed away.
He goes on to say this: "According to Matthew 5:17, 18, the Law and the Prophets (the whole Old Testament) have their place under the administration of Christ under the New Covenant." Is that true? NO! The Old Covenant has NO place in the New Covenant! Why is that so hard to understand? The New Covenant replaced the Old. And believers today live under the New, not the Old Covenant. (If the Old Covenant has no place in the new covenant, then the ungodly have no place in the new heavens and earth, or in the age to come.)
http://www.preteristviewpoint.com/id40.html
David Curtis Article: Heaven & Earth and the Law Have Passed Away
Isaiah 65:17 (NKJV) "For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; And the former shall not be remembered or come to mind. This prophecy had to be fulfilled before the law could pass away. Until God created a new heaven and earth, the old covenant remained in tack, every bit of it. So, if we are not living in the New Heaven and Earth today, then we are under the law, every bit of it. But I know of no Christian who would say that ALL the Old Testament Scriptures are binding on us. If they did, they would have to be keeping the Sabbath, and the feasts, and they would have to be sacrificing animals. Are we bound by the Old Covenant Law today? No! Hopefully, we learned in our last study that we are not under the law. And if we are not under the law, then heaven and earth must have passed away.
He goes on to say this: "According to Matthew 5:17, 18, the Law and the Prophets (the whole Old Testament) have their place under the administration of Christ under the New Covenant." Is that true? NO! The Old Covenant has NO place in the New Covenant! Why is that so hard to understand? The New Covenant replaced the Old. And believers today live under the New, not the Old Covenant. (If the Old Covenant has no place in the new covenant, then the ungodly have no place in the new heavens and earth, or in the age to come.)
http://www.preteristviewpoint.com/id40.html
Definition of HERESY
HERESY
a: dissent or deviation from a dominant theory, opinion, or practice
b: an opinion, doctrine, or practice contrary to the truth or to generally accepted beliefs or standards
c. A PRETERIST!
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/heresy
a: dissent or deviation from a dominant theory, opinion, or practice
b: an opinion, doctrine, or practice contrary to the truth or to generally accepted beliefs or standards
c. A PRETERIST!
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/heresy
Jim Gunter
Gunter maintains 70ad was the passing of the present heavens and earth and the beginning of the new heavens and earth. He questions a assumption that the new heavens and earth are temporal in nature due to the 70ad line which Preterists have drawn in the sand. "Wouldn’t we, of necessity, conclude that it was on planet Earth?" This is a stretch of the imagination and a complete delusion. The problem extreme prets have made is making the age to come or the new heavens and earth temporal in nature. It is by no means of this earthly realm. Saying the old passed in 70ad places ALL in the New Heavens and Earth where ONLY RIGHTEOUS dwell. (2 Pet. 3:13) I guess Preterist miss the implications that if the present heavens and earth pass in 70ad that ALL are in the NEW.
Jim Gunter Article The New Heavens and Earth
With all of those bits of internal evidence, I am persuaded that the prophecies in this marvelous epistle were penned before 70 A.D., and their fulfillments culminated with the fall of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 A.D., because I see this as the destruction of the old heavens and earth. (Jerusalem as the Destruction of the Heavens and Earth????) Yes, it was at that time that the old covenant world (NO MORE SEPARATION FROM GOD), with the temple as its epicenter, the earthly priesthood, and the typical holy of holies, was destroyed and removed. And because of this, it was then time for the creation of the "new heavens and earth."
You may recall Peter’s words of 2 Pet. 3, where he spoke of the soon-coming "day of the Lord" [v-10] or, "day of God" [v-12], when the old "heavens and earth" were destroyed and removed, and the new "heavens and earth" were created. (old heavens and earth which are reserved for judgment of ungodly men is removed and destroyed, NICE!!! So does that not mean there is no longer judgment of the ungodly, or does judgment of the ungodly fall in the new heavens and earth, and they are simply in the lake of fire. And how is that different than the present heavens and earth? If they are in the lake of fire, then are they not still in the present heavens and earth?)
Beloved, there are several observations that need mentioning here. First of all, John was shown the capital city of the new heavens and earth, and he said in v-2 that it was "new Jerusalem." Now take careful notice of the source of this new Jerusalem. He said with unmistakable clarity, that he saw it "coming down out of Heaven from God." My dear friends, I understand that to be of great significance! For, if John saw the new Jerusalem coming down out of Heaven to occupy its rightful place in the new heavens and earth, then what does that tell us about the location of the "new heavens and earth?" Wouldn’t we, of necessity, conclude that it was on planet Earth? (WATCH OUT! Can you make the spiritual promises any more temporal and earthly?)
Yes, beloved, the things of that old "heavens and earth" were only types and shadows of which Christ was the substance and body [Heb. 10:1-4; Col. 1:19; 2:16, 17]. (If the present heavens and earth represent those outside of Christ, would not the new heavens and earth represent those inside Christ. )
http://www.eschatologyreview.com/newheavensandearth.htm
Jim Gunter Article The New Heavens and Earth
With all of those bits of internal evidence, I am persuaded that the prophecies in this marvelous epistle were penned before 70 A.D., and their fulfillments culminated with the fall of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 A.D., because I see this as the destruction of the old heavens and earth. (Jerusalem as the Destruction of the Heavens and Earth????) Yes, it was at that time that the old covenant world (NO MORE SEPARATION FROM GOD), with the temple as its epicenter, the earthly priesthood, and the typical holy of holies, was destroyed and removed. And because of this, it was then time for the creation of the "new heavens and earth."
You may recall Peter’s words of 2 Pet. 3, where he spoke of the soon-coming "day of the Lord" [v-10] or, "day of God" [v-12], when the old "heavens and earth" were destroyed and removed, and the new "heavens and earth" were created. (old heavens and earth which are reserved for judgment of ungodly men is removed and destroyed, NICE!!! So does that not mean there is no longer judgment of the ungodly, or does judgment of the ungodly fall in the new heavens and earth, and they are simply in the lake of fire. And how is that different than the present heavens and earth? If they are in the lake of fire, then are they not still in the present heavens and earth?)
Beloved, there are several observations that need mentioning here. First of all, John was shown the capital city of the new heavens and earth, and he said in v-2 that it was "new Jerusalem." Now take careful notice of the source of this new Jerusalem. He said with unmistakable clarity, that he saw it "coming down out of Heaven from God." My dear friends, I understand that to be of great significance! For, if John saw the new Jerusalem coming down out of Heaven to occupy its rightful place in the new heavens and earth, then what does that tell us about the location of the "new heavens and earth?" Wouldn’t we, of necessity, conclude that it was on planet Earth? (WATCH OUT! Can you make the spiritual promises any more temporal and earthly?)
Yes, beloved, the things of that old "heavens and earth" were only types and shadows of which Christ was the substance and body [Heb. 10:1-4; Col. 1:19; 2:16, 17]. (If the present heavens and earth represent those outside of Christ, would not the new heavens and earth represent those inside Christ. )
http://www.eschatologyreview.com/newheavensandearth.htm
Kurt Simmons
Simmons maintains that the old heavens and earth were "symbolic of the covenantal system embodied in fleshly Israel and the Mosaic law". I would agree with this statement however I personally do not believe the present heavens and earth passed in 70ad unlike most Preterist assume is true. I believe it is representative also of those outside of Christ, the ungodly and believe it is reserved for those who have not been born again. I believe the present heavens and earth also represent all false religion and modern Judism which continues to bind, and result in a shift away from a Christ focal point. Maintaining the passing occurred in 70ad as Simmons maintains, results in the ungodly being found worthy or righteous to dwell in the New Heavens and Earth. Simmons seems to omit this from his book Consummation of the Ages. I believe his view of passing old things and the beginning of new things in 70ad is the core issue resulting in Universalism within Preterism.
Kurt Simmons on Rev. 20:11-15
The heavens and earth stand for a system ordered and ordained of God. The old heavens and earth were symbolic of the covenantal system embodied in fleshly Israel and the Mosaic law. More than this, the old heavens and earth answered to the elements of the world from and after the fall of our first ancestor until the restitution and regeneration of all things in Christ. (Gal. 4:9; Col. 2:20; Heb 5:12; 6:1-2; Matt. 19:28; Acts 3:21) Death reigned from Adam to Moses. (Rom. 5:!4,17) The world lay under the power of sin.
However, until the great consummation at AD 70, the church was still in expectation, not possession, of its inheritance as looking for the adoption and redemption of their collective body. (Rom 8:19-23) For the church temporal, this meant redemption from sin and their manifestation as the sons of God by the casting out of National Israel; for the church ad requiem, this meant resurection unto eternal life: These would recieve at the passing of the old heavens and earth. This is the earth and heaven depicted here, fleeing from the face of the throne.
Kurt Simmons on Rev. 20:14
Death and hades were the last enemies to be destroyed. (1 Cor. 15:26) Death and hades have no part of the new creation under Christ. During the dominion of sin, man was separated from God in life, and in death was sequestered in hades. However, by his substitutionary death and atoning blood, Jesus "abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel." (2 Tim 1:10) "Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." (1 Cor. 15:54-57) Although death and hades are now destroyed and Christians go on to be with God in heaven after death, the specter of the second death remains for all that fail to obey the gospel of Christ.
Kurt Simmons on Rev. 20:11-15
The heavens and earth stand for a system ordered and ordained of God. The old heavens and earth were symbolic of the covenantal system embodied in fleshly Israel and the Mosaic law. More than this, the old heavens and earth answered to the elements of the world from and after the fall of our first ancestor until the restitution and regeneration of all things in Christ. (Gal. 4:9; Col. 2:20; Heb 5:12; 6:1-2; Matt. 19:28; Acts 3:21) Death reigned from Adam to Moses. (Rom. 5:!4,17) The world lay under the power of sin.
However, until the great consummation at AD 70, the church was still in expectation, not possession, of its inheritance as looking for the adoption and redemption of their collective body. (Rom 8:19-23) For the church temporal, this meant redemption from sin and their manifestation as the sons of God by the casting out of National Israel; for the church ad requiem, this meant resurection unto eternal life: These would recieve at the passing of the old heavens and earth. This is the earth and heaven depicted here, fleeing from the face of the throne.
Kurt Simmons on Rev. 20:14
Death and hades were the last enemies to be destroyed. (1 Cor. 15:26) Death and hades have no part of the new creation under Christ. During the dominion of sin, man was separated from God in life, and in death was sequestered in hades. However, by his substitutionary death and atoning blood, Jesus "abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel." (2 Tim 1:10) "Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." (1 Cor. 15:54-57) Although death and hades are now destroyed and Christians go on to be with God in heaven after death, the specter of the second death remains for all that fail to obey the gospel of Christ.
Ed Stevens
Preterism= Believing everything that the Bible does not record occurred in the past (Preter), and expecting you to do the same (ism).
Stevens continues to demonstrate his self-assurance by declaring things which he can not prove as facts like "all the books of the NT were written before 70ad". It is funny how God seems to omit saying things occured in history becuase just maybe it was not about history. It is also funny how a non-literal book like Revelation can be taken to mean literal historic events like the Fall of Jerusalem. It is as if I can hear God laughing at the irony of all the dedicated Preterist trying to interprete every symbol in Revelation to the historic period of 70ad in order to support their false assumptions. Clearly this is ironic.
Ed Stevens on the Silence of the Scriptures
All the books of the NT were written before AD 70, so there is no record of His statements after AD 70. But He gave us enough information that we can know that He kept His promise to come soon after the book of Revelation was written (cf. Rev. 22:6, 7, 10, 12, 20).
Stevens continues to demonstrate his self-assurance by declaring things which he can not prove as facts like "all the books of the NT were written before 70ad". It is funny how God seems to omit saying things occured in history becuase just maybe it was not about history. It is also funny how a non-literal book like Revelation can be taken to mean literal historic events like the Fall of Jerusalem. It is as if I can hear God laughing at the irony of all the dedicated Preterist trying to interprete every symbol in Revelation to the historic period of 70ad in order to support their false assumptions. Clearly this is ironic.
Ed Stevens on the Silence of the Scriptures
All the books of the NT were written before AD 70, so there is no record of His statements after AD 70. But He gave us enough information that we can know that He kept His promise to come soon after the book of Revelation was written (cf. Rev. 22:6, 7, 10, 12, 20).
Ed Stevens
Stevens continues to crack me up with his self-assurance and assumptions. He blasts the Jews for not seeing beyond the physical, and historical yet Stevens blast non-prets for not seeing the historical events in 70ad of Christ's coming and resurection. It is funny that he judges the Jews for their quest for a physical king, yet maintains a temporal kingdom period of post 70ad. Stevens does not get that if something is Spiritual it can not also be temporal and thus is not about time. It is not a matter of here it is or there it is as he continues to assume that spiritual things are mere past events that occured in 70ad. It is also funny that he does not use the Bible to make his case, becuase he knows he can't. He has a long essay on why the Bible is silent and does not support his view. It is fun bit of bathroom reading, especially to wipe with after you are done. Stevens has continued to focus on natual historic events as the antitype which continues to always result in disagreement. If the types are natural things, how can the antitypes also be natural things.
QUESTION: If Jesus Christ came back in AD 70—corporately, invisibly, symbolically, spiritually or however—why didn’t anybody notice? Why hasn’t history recorded this cosmic event?
ANSWER: They did notice. It has been recorded. See all the quotes from Josephus, Eusebius, and Tacitus, and Yosippon that we have listed below in answer to the question on 1 Thess. 4:16-18. The problem is, no one reads history with spiritual discernment. We are making the same mistake the Jews did. They were looking for a physical king and materialistic kingdom. They missed the spiritual kingdom Christ established. People today are missing the spiritual kingdom for exactly the same reason: they are looking for a physical paradise and fleshly, materialistic fulfillments. The kingdom is here now, we just need to open our eyes and realize it. -Edward E. Stevens
http://www.preterist.org/preteristQA.asp
QUESTION: If Jesus Christ came back in AD 70—corporately, invisibly, symbolically, spiritually or however—why didn’t anybody notice? Why hasn’t history recorded this cosmic event?
ANSWER: They did notice. It has been recorded. See all the quotes from Josephus, Eusebius, and Tacitus, and Yosippon that we have listed below in answer to the question on 1 Thess. 4:16-18. The problem is, no one reads history with spiritual discernment. We are making the same mistake the Jews did. They were looking for a physical king and materialistic kingdom. They missed the spiritual kingdom Christ established. People today are missing the spiritual kingdom for exactly the same reason: they are looking for a physical paradise and fleshly, materialistic fulfillments. The kingdom is here now, we just need to open our eyes and realize it. -Edward E. Stevens
http://www.preterist.org/preteristQA.asp
Ed Steven: Christ was with them ONLY UNTIL 70AD
I am so happy to tell you that according to Ed Stevens, the Holy Spirit is no longer with you. He was only with the apostles until 70ad while they accomplished the great commission. That is not for us, the Holy Spirit is a past event. So all of you who seek and long for the Spirit to guide your path, you need to build a time machine, and go back to that historic period, when God could be with you in your daily walk.
Ed Stevens Questions and Answers
QUESTION: Matt. 28:19, 20 “..lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.” (AGE) Does this imply that he was “with them” always, or only until AD 70?
ANSWER: The Greek here is very interesting. Literally translated, it reads, “...and behold I am with you all the days until the consummation of the age.” There is an unfortunate translation here. It should say, “the whole time” (lit. “all the days”) rather than “always.” He would be with them the whole time they were announcing the coming of the kingdom, down to the very consummation of that age. HE WAS SIMPLY TELLING THEM THEY WOULD NOT BE ALONG DURING THIS PERIOD when the great commission was being accomplished (from 30 to AD 70). He would be Spiritually present with them (through the work of the Holy Spirit) TO SEE THEM THROUGH to the very end of that old Jewish age. In AD 66-70, Christ Himself returned to put down His final enemies and give His saints their kingdom inheritance. They had only a temporary and partial “pledge, earnest or seal” of that inheritance from 30 to AD 70. The great commission given to the twelve apostles was completed by the time Jesus returned at the end of that Jewish age. -Edward E. Stevens
preterist.org/preteristQA.asp
Ed Stevens Questions and Answers
QUESTION: Matt. 28:19, 20 “..lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.” (AGE) Does this imply that he was “with them” always, or only until AD 70?
ANSWER: The Greek here is very interesting. Literally translated, it reads, “...and behold I am with you all the days until the consummation of the age.” There is an unfortunate translation here. It should say, “the whole time” (lit. “all the days”) rather than “always.” He would be with them the whole time they were announcing the coming of the kingdom, down to the very consummation of that age. HE WAS SIMPLY TELLING THEM THEY WOULD NOT BE ALONG DURING THIS PERIOD when the great commission was being accomplished (from 30 to AD 70). He would be Spiritually present with them (through the work of the Holy Spirit) TO SEE THEM THROUGH to the very end of that old Jewish age. In AD 66-70, Christ Himself returned to put down His final enemies and give His saints their kingdom inheritance. They had only a temporary and partial “pledge, earnest or seal” of that inheritance from 30 to AD 70. The great commission given to the twelve apostles was completed by the time Jesus returned at the end of that Jewish age. -Edward E. Stevens
preterist.org/preteristQA.asp
Ed Stevens
Spoken like a true Preterist. See Stevens display of self assurance, and arrogance! His comments that "We know the exact date of his coming." WOW!!! It is kind of funny that he is so confident, yet he shows his assumption by his comments that it "must have happened!!!" It is so sad to see major eschatological events called mere past events which is quite typical of most Preterists. It sounds so heretical even to speak of such important events as a past event. Like the cross being nailed down to a past historical event rather than a event that occurs within the heart. This is heretical if I have ever seen it. Not one passage says Christ came in 70ad in a past tense. Maybe God was telling us that Christ's coming had nothing to do with time. Maybe God was telling us that it was not a here it is, or there it is, but his coming is within the heart, not tied to historical events, and certainly not a mere past event as Steven believes.
Ed Steven's Article That Day and Hour?
Since that generation passed, those events (including His return) must already have happened. Therefore, the passage about not knowing the day or hour no longer applies to us, because the return is a past event. We now know (historically) the day and hour of His return (70 A.D.). We no longer need signs to tell when it is getting close. It is a past event. That day and hour has already come.
preterist.org/articles/that_day_and_hour.asp
http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/2007/11/ed-stevens_26.html
Ed Steven's Article That Day and Hour?Since that generation passed, those events (including His return) must already have happened. Therefore, the passage about not knowing the day or hour no longer applies to us, because the return is a past event. We now know (historically) the day and hour of His return (70 A.D.). We no longer need signs to tell when it is getting close. It is a past event. That day and hour has already come.
preterist.org/articles/that_day_and_hour.asp
http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/2007/11/ed-stevens_26.html
Jake Magee: The Layers of Prophecy
Jake Magee
"However, if we instead allow the usage of prophecy to inform our theory of interpretation, it is not at all unreasonable to affirm that some prophecies have multiple layers. Each layer taken by itself fulfills particular elements of the immediate context; however a layer taken by itself will be insufficient to fulfill the totality of the prophecy."
http://jakemagee.blogspot.com/2007/12/cautioning-preterism.html
"However, if we instead allow the usage of prophecy to inform our theory of interpretation, it is not at all unreasonable to affirm that some prophecies have multiple layers. Each layer taken by itself fulfills particular elements of the immediate context; however a layer taken by itself will be insufficient to fulfill the totality of the prophecy."
http://jakemagee.blogspot.com/2007/12/cautioning-preterism.html
Tony Warren
I believe Tony sees the issue at hand. There are two ages which Preterists believe are pre-70ad and post 70ad. Believing the age to come consisted of the post 70ad period results in ALL being included in the age of eternal life.
Tony Warren Article: This Generation Shall Not Pass, TillAll These Things be Fulfilled.
This is the exact same Greek word [aion], meaning world/age. If that present time Jesus spoke in was before 70 AD when they received manifold more, and the age to come was eternal life for them, then obviously 70 AD being the coming next age (according to their theory), must have been the age of eternal life Jesus spoke of. That is blatantly unbiblical. Did life everlasting start in 70 AD? No, not at all, it started at the cross, and is consummated at the end of the world. So their theory is bankrupt and void of any scriptural basis. Jesus is obviously speaking not about an alleged coming age in 70 AD, but about the end of the world/age when He would return and "all" would be fulfilled. That is the world/age to come, when we would receive the everlasting life.
The fact is, Preterist doctrine is confused on many fronts, because there was never any Biblical foundation for making such a prophecy of a new age in 70 AD in the first place. Biblical Theology must be established on biblical foundations, not on inconsistent and contradictory theories. Of necessity these theologians would have to place another age between the cross and the end of the world for this theory to be true. In effect, splitting the New Testament period into diverse ages. One before 70 AD established by Christ's cross, and another age after 70 AD, because their position on 70 AD is untenable without it. However, it is also unbiblical with it!
Number one, While some make the claim that the end of the age was in 70 AD, there is not one single scripture that supports such a conclusion, and many scriptures that preclude it. There was instituted a new dispensation (age) when Christ died, was resurrected, and sent His holy Spirit that the Church witness with power. But there was no new dispensation or age instituted in 70 AD.
http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/faq/generation.shtml
Tony Warren Article: This Generation Shall Not Pass, TillAll These Things be Fulfilled.
This is the exact same Greek word [aion], meaning world/age. If that present time Jesus spoke in was before 70 AD when they received manifold more, and the age to come was eternal life for them, then obviously 70 AD being the coming next age (according to their theory), must have been the age of eternal life Jesus spoke of. That is blatantly unbiblical. Did life everlasting start in 70 AD? No, not at all, it started at the cross, and is consummated at the end of the world. So their theory is bankrupt and void of any scriptural basis. Jesus is obviously speaking not about an alleged coming age in 70 AD, but about the end of the world/age when He would return and "all" would be fulfilled. That is the world/age to come, when we would receive the everlasting life.
The fact is, Preterist doctrine is confused on many fronts, because there was never any Biblical foundation for making such a prophecy of a new age in 70 AD in the first place. Biblical Theology must be established on biblical foundations, not on inconsistent and contradictory theories. Of necessity these theologians would have to place another age between the cross and the end of the world for this theory to be true. In effect, splitting the New Testament period into diverse ages. One before 70 AD established by Christ's cross, and another age after 70 AD, because their position on 70 AD is untenable without it. However, it is also unbiblical with it!
Number one, While some make the claim that the end of the age was in 70 AD, there is not one single scripture that supports such a conclusion, and many scriptures that preclude it. There was instituted a new dispensation (age) when Christ died, was resurrected, and sent His holy Spirit that the Church witness with power. But there was no new dispensation or age instituted in 70 AD.
http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/faq/generation.shtml
David Green, Sam Frost, Kurt Simmons
So who is right? David Green says that those in the new heavens and new earth that sin is defeated. Notice that Green only maintains that the new heavens and earth only includes "God's holy ones". Should I assume that since the ungodly are not also in the new heavens and earth, that they remain in the present heavens and earth. But Sam Frost and Kurt Simmons concludes the ungodly have entered the new heavens and new earth due to the assumption that the present heavens and earth has passed away. So by Sam and Kurt's viewpoint does that mean sin has been defeated for those outside of Christ also? So who is really in the New Heavens and Earth?
David Green
The “wages” of sin is Death (condemnation and alienation with God). But when Death was destroyed in the Kingdom of God in A.D. 70, sin was “shut up” and forever “sealed.” Death no longer issues forth from the sins of God's children, because the power of His Cross swept away the Ministry of Condemnation and Death (the Law) in A.D. 70, robbing sin of its power, and robbing Death of its sting. Through the work of the Son, Death is nullified and Sin is defeated. In the New Heavens and New Earth, the sins of all God's holy ones, living and dead, are "covered over," buried in the depths of the sea (Micah 7:19), forever forgotten, and hidden from the eyes of God. http://www.preteristcosmos.com/question5.html#note100
David Green
The “wages” of sin is Death (condemnation and alienation with God). But when Death was destroyed in the Kingdom of God in A.D. 70, sin was “shut up” and forever “sealed.” Death no longer issues forth from the sins of God's children, because the power of His Cross swept away the Ministry of Condemnation and Death (the Law) in A.D. 70, robbing sin of its power, and robbing Death of its sting. Through the work of the Son, Death is nullified and Sin is defeated. In the New Heavens and New Earth, the sins of all God's holy ones, living and dead, are "covered over," buried in the depths of the sea (Micah 7:19), forever forgotten, and hidden from the eyes of God. http://www.preteristcosmos.com/question5.html#note100
David Green 70AD Ended the Old Covenant
Preterist believe that 70ad brought the end to the old covenant age. It's replacement the new covenant age includes ALL men including the ungodly. This is another example of how a doctrinal system which declares old things end within the timeline of any historical event can lead one to believe that ALL are in the new covenant age. God establishes his covenant only within his people, the elect. He writes his covenant on their hearts. So how can his covenant be about 70ad when the covenant is eternal and internal, and not temporal and external like the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem were?
David Green
Thus, there was always one Way of justification, as there is one God, one human family and one Eternal Covenant. That salvation was predicted, foreshadowed, and proclaimed in the old testament; it was a salvation that would be fulfilled and realized at the Cross of Christ, and fully consummated at His Presence in the end of the old-covenant age in A.D. 70. That Salvation is the heart of the old and New Testament.
Through the cross then, it was revealed that mankind was, spiritually and covenantally speaking, dead. He was dead in sin. For the death of the Messiah was the death of man. By A.D. 70, man was twice dead, for he was not only judged as a breaker of the old covenant, but of the New Covenant as well, and God's fiery judgment against sin, and His fierce vengeance was meted out in the end of the age. The time for man's righteousness and glory was over. Every possibility for him to aspire toward Heaven was exhausted. There was no conceivable hope left of man ever receiving the blessing of God.
http://www.preteristcosmos.com/ncs.htm
David Green
Thus, there was always one Way of justification, as there is one God, one human family and one Eternal Covenant. That salvation was predicted, foreshadowed, and proclaimed in the old testament; it was a salvation that would be fulfilled and realized at the Cross of Christ, and fully consummated at His Presence in the end of the old-covenant age in A.D. 70. That Salvation is the heart of the old and New Testament.
Through the cross then, it was revealed that mankind was, spiritually and covenantally speaking, dead. He was dead in sin. For the death of the Messiah was the death of man. By A.D. 70, man was twice dead, for he was not only judged as a breaker of the old covenant, but of the New Covenant as well, and God's fiery judgment against sin, and His fierce vengeance was meted out in the end of the age. The time for man's righteousness and glory was over. Every possibility for him to aspire toward Heaven was exhausted. There was no conceivable hope left of man ever receiving the blessing of God.
http://www.preteristcosmos.com/ncs.htm
Duncan McKenzie
You might be a Preterist if you believe that Revelation is really just symbolic of historical, natural, or temporal events centered around 70ad. The clear antitype being focused on natural visible things. It would seem the focus is on more patterns, more shadows, and more earthly things.
Duncan McKenzie
Preterism is also known as “covenant eschatology.” While futurism says that Revelation is a more or less literal depiction of the end of the world, preterism says that Revelation is a symbolic depiction of the AD 70 end of the old covenant order and full establishment of the new covenant order.
http://www.planetpreterist.com/news-5109.html
Duncan McKenzie
Preterism is also known as “covenant eschatology.” While futurism says that Revelation is a more or less literal depiction of the end of the world, preterism says that Revelation is a symbolic depiction of the AD 70 end of the old covenant order and full establishment of the new covenant order.
http://www.planetpreterist.com/news-5109.html
Marvin Jacobs
How can a eternal kingdom which has no beginning or end, begin in 70ad or become complete in 70ad, or become eternal in 70ad? How can something invisible in nature be said to have come or gone in a temporal event like the Destruction of Jerusalem. Jacob's assumes that becuase the temple was destroyed that the kingdom came. What he is calling eternal is in fact a temporal event. He has no scriptural proof that says anything came, completed, began or ended in 70ad. But he wants us to assume, just like he is assuming, that becuase the temple was destroyed, we must know and believe this historic event was the focal point of the coming kingdom. If the kingdom comes not with observation, how can it be observed in the Destruction of Jerusalem?
Marvin E. Jacobs Article: Eternal Kingdom
Probably one of the reasons there are such differing ideas regarding the kingdom and the time of its establishment is a failure to think Spiritually. In 1 Corinthians 2:13-14, Paul said, "which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
Since the writer is comparing the law system and all that is involved, the temple and priesthood, etc., to the new system with the spiritual temple, priesthood, etc., would it be illogical to expect a physical observation of the removal of the physical, and spiritually by faith perceive the eternal system remaining? One can see that the temple was destroyed and the priesthood removed in A.D.70. If one really believes God, he can be assured that Christ came in his eternal kingdom.
Christ came in His eternal, Spiritual kingdom "in the days of these kings", "in the last days" of the Judah and Jerusalem system of things, "immediately after the tribulation of those days", (referring to the besiegement and destruction of Jerusalem), "before that generation ceased," and before "some which stand here taste death." Those who truly believe Him have eternal life and if they continue to believe Him, they will never die. (John 11:25-26).
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=46&Itemid=61
Marvin E. Jacobs Article: Eternal Kingdom
Probably one of the reasons there are such differing ideas regarding the kingdom and the time of its establishment is a failure to think Spiritually. In 1 Corinthians 2:13-14, Paul said, "which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
Since the writer is comparing the law system and all that is involved, the temple and priesthood, etc., to the new system with the spiritual temple, priesthood, etc., would it be illogical to expect a physical observation of the removal of the physical, and spiritually by faith perceive the eternal system remaining? One can see that the temple was destroyed and the priesthood removed in A.D.70. If one really believes God, he can be assured that Christ came in his eternal kingdom.
Christ came in His eternal, Spiritual kingdom "in the days of these kings", "in the last days" of the Judah and Jerusalem system of things, "immediately after the tribulation of those days", (referring to the besiegement and destruction of Jerusalem), "before that generation ceased," and before "some which stand here taste death." Those who truly believe Him have eternal life and if they continue to believe Him, they will never die. (John 11:25-26).
http://www.eschatology.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=46&Itemid=61
Michael Bennett
Bennett believes that ALL are in the Age to Come, or in the New Heavens and Earth and that they are simply outside the New Jerusalem which he believes is the covenant. It is interesting that this view is becoming more prevelant in Preterist circles and clearly is very much Universalistic. They implications are that sin and death and that the present heavens and earth pass in 70ad. We are now ALL simply living in an age of grace. What stands to seperate one from being inside or outside the New Jerusalem? It would seem to me that the present heavens and earth did not pass in 70ad, but remain as a classification of the ungodly. Since according to Bennett's view it has passed and everyone is in the age to come, that they invent a new death, a new law, in order to keep the ungodly out of the New Jersualem. Were does the Bible say the ungodly will enter into the New Heavens and Earth? How bout 2 Pet 3:13. The ungodly can not enter the New Heavens and Earth, becuase they are judged in the present heavens and earth which was reserved for judgement of ungodly men. How can they be translated from one to the other if one is for the ungodly, and one is for the righteous. Clearly Bennett is adding to what is written. Another fish in the frying pan of Full Preterism.
Michael Bennett
The New Age and the NHNE does not guarantee that all are in the NJ and partake in "the tree". The tree is IN the city. The city IS the covenant.
In the OC Old Age we had the Present Age / those IN FAITH / those OUTSIDE FAITH and, then, HADES. The Death and the Sin of Adam which reigned in the Death, meant that those IN FAITH would face HADES along with those OUTSIDE FAITH. At the Great White Throne Judgment, a SEPARATION took place: in Hades, a separation of those IN faith and those OUTside the faith took place. On earth, a separation of those IN faith and those OUTside the faith and of the NJ took place.
Now, because it is NHNE with a NJ and an eradication of HADES and The Death, we have this: New Age / those INSIDE the NJ unto eternal life / those OUTSIDE the NJ but can come to eternal life if God so moves them / and then, continued eternal life for those inside the NJ on earth when they physically expire, and the lake of fire (the second, the Death) for those who, on earth, died while OUTSIDE the NJ, yet while in the NHNE.
So now I would say (in a nutshell) you are either in or out of the NJ since it CAME DOWN out of heaven. If you are in the NJ you have eternal life.
Michael Bennett
The New Age and the NHNE does not guarantee that all are in the NJ and partake in "the tree". The tree is IN the city. The city IS the covenant.
In the OC Old Age we had the Present Age / those IN FAITH / those OUTSIDE FAITH and, then, HADES. The Death and the Sin of Adam which reigned in the Death, meant that those IN FAITH would face HADES along with those OUTSIDE FAITH. At the Great White Throne Judgment, a SEPARATION took place: in Hades, a separation of those IN faith and those OUTside the faith took place. On earth, a separation of those IN faith and those OUTside the faith and of the NJ took place.
Now, because it is NHNE with a NJ and an eradication of HADES and The Death, we have this: New Age / those INSIDE the NJ unto eternal life / those OUTSIDE the NJ but can come to eternal life if God so moves them / and then, continued eternal life for those inside the NJ on earth when they physically expire, and the lake of fire (the second, the Death) for those who, on earth, died while OUTSIDE the NJ, yet while in the NHNE.
So now I would say (in a nutshell) you are either in or out of the NJ since it CAME DOWN out of heaven. If you are in the NJ you have eternal life.
Derek Drysdale
Christ kingdom is incomplete until 70ad? Then it was made complete. I thought the kingdom was not a here it is, or there it is issue. If Christ kingdom is eternal, how is it being made temporal by Full Preterists?
Derek Drysdale
I believe that they way into the Kingdom was made complete in AD70. I believe the Kingdom will continue to grow, as this is the age with no end.
Derek Drysdale
I believe that they way into the Kingdom was made complete in AD70. I believe the Kingdom will continue to grow, as this is the age with no end.
Kurt Simmons
Simmons is in denial that Full Preterism leads to Universalism. It is by no means his fault or the fault of the teacher, or the fault of Full Preterism. It is the fault of the student when they go beyond and make their own implications. Right!!! Simmons has said many times Preterism is not to blame. How can a statement made that is clearly Universalistic not reflect the doctrine (ad 70) that professes its truth? Another fish has been hooked and is cooking in the frying pan of Full Preterism.
Kurt Simmons on Universalism
There are many statements taken out of context that might lend themselves to Universalism. If we say that God saves mankind by the blood of Christ, taken literally, that could sound like Universalism. But, that is not what I meant. I think some of the quotes you rely upon are of this type. But even if there are some damning statements, that does not mean that fulfilled eschatology (FP) leads to Universalism. It only means that those statements do. Yes, there are some unfortunate teachings circulating about, but they are no part of my belief system or that of countless others. Hence, it is simply unfair to put us all in the same bucket and condemn all alike.
Kurt Simmons on Universalism
There are many statements taken out of context that might lend themselves to Universalism. If we say that God saves mankind by the blood of Christ, taken literally, that could sound like Universalism. But, that is not what I meant. I think some of the quotes you rely upon are of this type. But even if there are some damning statements, that does not mean that fulfilled eschatology (FP) leads to Universalism. It only means that those statements do. Yes, there are some unfortunate teachings circulating about, but they are no part of my belief system or that of countless others. Hence, it is simply unfair to put us all in the same bucket and condemn all alike.
Kurt Simmons
Kurt said "Spiritual new H/E are not received by the righteous". "The wicked are in the new H/E, but are unsaved unless and until they enter the city." "They (the new H/E) are not the new Covenant. " WOW Kurt, this is not a Full Preterist view that I have heard before. Are you sure the New Jerusalem is different from the New Heavens and Earth? GK Beale does a good job of showing how they are the same otherwise, why is the focus on the NHE ONLY the city. The ONLY thing talked about in the NHE is the city. They are synonymous, and the FP claim that there is some MASSIVE difference is a huge weakness that many are not seeing. What is missed is the connection between the New Heavens and Earth, New Jerusalem, and New Covenant, all representing the exact same things as a symbol which are reflected by those in Christ. As does the present heavens and earth, present Jerusalem, and the old covenant as a symbol of those not in Christ. Again Kurt says the H/E are spiritual, and place the endings and beginnings in a historical timeline. How can something be spiritual yet be temporal or earthly at the same time? How can Simmons say that the New Heavens and Earth are not covenantal? Where is his magic ball to say what is and is not part of the covenant. Saying something is or is not covenental does not lead one from drawing Universalistic conclusions. It is 70ad that leads one to that conclusion. It is creating a temporal line, where old things pass or end, and new things begin. Should not this line be Christ. Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; all things have become new." (2 Cor 5:17) "
Kurt Simmons On Heavens and Earth
First, it is not the natural H/E that passed away in AD 70. Second, the spiritual new H/E are not received by the righteous. I believe they are simply a symbol for the world under the reign of Christ in which the church reigns triumphant with him. The wicked are in the new H/E, but are unsaved unless and until they enter the city. They (the new H/E) are not the new Covenant.
If the New Heavens and Earth are the NT, then, yes, logically all men are partakers of grace for the simple fact that all men are under their unbrella. This is Max King's view and many FP's (myself at one time included) believe this. But I no longer see the New Heavens and Earth (or old heavens and earth of II Pet. 3:10ff) "covenantally". Hence, whatever objection there is to FP on this basis does not apply to me and others like me (who are many). We need to STOP interpreting the heavens and earth covenantally. Rev. 22:15 is very clear that the wicked are in the New heavens and earth. Hence, they CANNOT be the New Testament. It is the New Jerusalem that is the New Testament and covenantal habitation of the saints.
The new heavens and earth are merely a symbol for the post-parousia world under the victorious Christ in which the church riegns with Jesus and God is present with his people legally and covenantally (restored in relationship by Christ's blood) in the church.
Walt Hibbard
Day is to night, as fulfilled is to ongoing? If something is ONGOING and continuing being fulfilled, does that not mean that the fulfillment was NOT completely fulfilled temporally. This is a total contradiction. Either something ends and fulfilled completely or it is is never meant to end or find fulfillment in a historic timeline.
The cross did historically occur as a natural event. That which was spiritual was revealed in the natural event. The spiritual is that which is continually fulfilled and will not end in history, unlike that which the Preterist say, which focus on mere past events. The cross spiritually signifies the releasing of bondage to sin. And until that cross is bore in us, we are still in our sin in bondage to the flesh which was represented by the old covenant, the present Jerusalem. It is crazy to say that the natural events (which are visible patterns, or images), are the primary substance rather than secondary to the cross we are commanded to bare. What should be our focus of our spiritual walk? Mere past events, or relevant inner workings of the Spirit to bring us out of death into life. Spiritual things are always seen through natural things but are not the fulfillment we should be considering. True fulfillment of the cross is dying to the old, taking up (yours and my) cross, and becoming alive to the new things which has been manifested through the cross and by his resurrection. This is not a 30ad or in 70ad issue, but rather it is a only in Christ issue, as you personally die to your old man.
Walt Hibbard
All Bible prophecy found fulfillment by A.D. 70 and therefore nothing remains to be fulfilled beyond this date. This does not mean that there are no on-going aspects extending beyond this date. Just as the Cross Event was fulfilled once for all in the first century and the benefits of this once for all Atonement continue with forthcoming generations for ever, so in the case of the Resurrection of the Dead, the Christians dying physically throughout history receive their incorruptible, immortal, glorious, spiritual bodies at the time of death. Yet both events were fulfilled in the first century and do not await future fulfillment.
http://www.preteristviewpoint.com/id36.html
The cross did historically occur as a natural event. That which was spiritual was revealed in the natural event. The spiritual is that which is continually fulfilled and will not end in history, unlike that which the Preterist say, which focus on mere past events. The cross spiritually signifies the releasing of bondage to sin. And until that cross is bore in us, we are still in our sin in bondage to the flesh which was represented by the old covenant, the present Jerusalem. It is crazy to say that the natural events (which are visible patterns, or images), are the primary substance rather than secondary to the cross we are commanded to bare. What should be our focus of our spiritual walk? Mere past events, or relevant inner workings of the Spirit to bring us out of death into life. Spiritual things are always seen through natural things but are not the fulfillment we should be considering. True fulfillment of the cross is dying to the old, taking up (yours and my) cross, and becoming alive to the new things which has been manifested through the cross and by his resurrection. This is not a 30ad or in 70ad issue, but rather it is a only in Christ issue, as you personally die to your old man.
Walt Hibbard
All Bible prophecy found fulfillment by A.D. 70 and therefore nothing remains to be fulfilled beyond this date. This does not mean that there are no on-going aspects extending beyond this date. Just as the Cross Event was fulfilled once for all in the first century and the benefits of this once for all Atonement continue with forthcoming generations for ever, so in the case of the Resurrection of the Dead, the Christians dying physically throughout history receive their incorruptible, immortal, glorious, spiritual bodies at the time of death. Yet both events were fulfilled in the first century and do not await future fulfillment.
http://www.preteristviewpoint.com/id36.html
Roderick Edwards "Avoid “Preterism” at all cost!"
AMEN! I COULD NOT HAVE STATED IT BETTER! Edwards is one that constantly flip flops. Today he is a Preterist, and tomorrow he advocates leaving. It is funny, becuase he remains a Preterist despite all he sees and witnesses. I love this warning becuase he knows that Preterism is lost, but remains entangled in their system. A warning that shows once you've been hooked, there is no letting go. He is another fish in their frying pan.
Beware of Preterism
Having been a full preterist for over 15 years I’ve seen many things within the “movement”. I was originally attracted to the perspective because it tries to consider & adhere to the original intent of Scripture in context
I would rather fellowship with the most unlearned futurist that actually has an “obsession for Jesus’ words” than with men & women calling themselves “preterists” that engage in & tolerate sin among them that is not even common among the heathens.
Preterist Theology is doomed to fail because the common bond holding it together is not Christ but rather the egos of men. If you don’t believe me, just question some of these men & women about their character & behavior & you will quickly see the reaction.
My warning to you my Christian friends, is to beware & avoid “preterism” at all cost – It has no redeeming value because its main adherents are most likely not redeemed themselves…at least they don’t show the fruits of redemption.
http://thekingdomcome.com/beware_of_preterism
Beware of Preterism
Having been a full preterist for over 15 years I’ve seen many things within the “movement”. I was originally attracted to the perspective because it tries to consider & adhere to the original intent of Scripture in context
I would rather fellowship with the most unlearned futurist that actually has an “obsession for Jesus’ words” than with men & women calling themselves “preterists” that engage in & tolerate sin among them that is not even common among the heathens.
Preterist Theology is doomed to fail because the common bond holding it together is not Christ but rather the egos of men. If you don’t believe me, just question some of these men & women about their character & behavior & you will quickly see the reaction.
My warning to you my Christian friends, is to beware & avoid “preterism” at all cost – It has no redeeming value because its main adherents are most likely not redeemed themselves…at least they don’t show the fruits of redemption.
http://thekingdomcome.com/beware_of_preterism
Lee Hodges
Hodges is another who teaches that the Spiritual Resurrection is Past. I thought that if something is spiritual, it has NOTHING TO DO WITH time. Is that not Paul's point in II Tim. 2:16-18. Those men were making the Resurrection about time, which is the same thing Preterist continue to do. Hodges shows that he believes the resurrection occurred in 70ad but then says it is not a visible event. So how can something invisible occur, yet one knows it occurred? If something can not be seen, or touched, witnessed, nor can it be here nor there, how can one know it is a past event? It is impossible, and pure speculation and a addition to the word of God.
Now to your third question: I believe the text you are referring to is in I Tim. 1:20; II Tim. 2:16-18. These men of whom Paul speaks were teaching that the Resurrection had already passed prior to AD 70. In that time setting Paul was very correct, what they were teaching was false. But I do think the fact that they were so successful in leading many astray say a lot about the “nature” of the resurrection. I had pictured the resurrection coming and all the cemeteries would be emptied. If that was the concept that was taught about the resurrection I doubt seriously that these men would have been very effective at all. But in light of what was being taught about the resurrection, I can see how they could have been effective The resurrection was not a visible event (AMEN, SO HOW CAN IT BE IN 70AD IF IT IS NOT A VISIBLE EVENT) , it was a simple transformation of the dead to their final resting place when Jesus returned in AD 70.
http://www.ourchurch.com/view/?pageID=38770
Now to your third question: I believe the text you are referring to is in I Tim. 1:20; II Tim. 2:16-18. These men of whom Paul speaks were teaching that the Resurrection had already passed prior to AD 70. In that time setting Paul was very correct, what they were teaching was false. But I do think the fact that they were so successful in leading many astray say a lot about the “nature” of the resurrection. I had pictured the resurrection coming and all the cemeteries would be emptied. If that was the concept that was taught about the resurrection I doubt seriously that these men would have been very effective at all. But in light of what was being taught about the resurrection, I can see how they could have been effective The resurrection was not a visible event (AMEN, SO HOW CAN IT BE IN 70AD IF IT IS NOT A VISIBLE EVENT) , it was a simple transformation of the dead to their final resting place when Jesus returned in AD 70.
http://www.ourchurch.com/view/?pageID=38770
Ed Stevens Full Preterist Creeds
70ad is a good summary of what a Preterists believe as their focal point found in all their creeds. Its such a classic textbook stumblingblock. It is rather amazing that the concept of ad70 being counterproductive to faith is so foreign to the gospel.
Ed Stevens
We believe Scripture teaches Christ would come again in that first century generation while some of His original disciples were still alive, to judge the living and the dead. And we believe in one universal body of believers (both visible and invisible), which is the Church.
http://www.preterist.org/whatwebelieve.asp
Ed Stevens
We believe Scripture teaches Christ would come again in that first century generation while some of His original disciples were still alive, to judge the living and the dead. And we believe in one universal body of believers (both visible and invisible), which is the Church.
http://www.preterist.org/whatwebelieve.asp
Don Preston
Preston really misses the mark in his book Elements will Melt. His comments below show that he sees the dangers of his own system but does not see the correct link between Universalism and Preterism due his own 70ad theory by making it the line that seperates the Old from the New rather than Christ. Maybe we should hold Preston responsible for not only the "implications of his doctrine", but also hold Preterists responsible for leading the way to the logical end of what they teach. Universalism. Preston sees Universalism as a dangerous error. Maybe he misses the fact that most Preterists placing ALL in the age to come, place ALL in the New Heavens and Earth, ALL in the New Covenant which does have the result of Universalism. So is Preston calling his own teaching a dangerous error? YEP, that is exactly what he calls his own view.
Don Prestons Quotes from Elements will Melt
First, I am not ascribing to all preterist universalists (hereafter PU), the logical implications of their doctrine. It is easy to take a position without fully understanding the implications of that doctrine. This is clear from 1 Corinthians 15. Some seemingly devout believers in Corinth took a position concerning “the dead ones,” but they did not think through their position. Therefore, Paul began by showing them the implications of their doctrine. Paul did not say that they believed what he presented. He said that if they believed what they taught, then, logically, their doctrine led to other conclusions that they themselves rejected. For Paul, to accept one was to lead to the other. He did not charge them with the implications of their doctrine. But, he held them accountable for leading the way to the logical end of what they taught.
Patently, the issue of universalism is currently a matter of widespread discussion in preterist circles. (I wonder why?)
I consider it a dangerous error to take the position that there is no such thing as sin today, and that all men, regardless of their faith in Christ or lack thereof, are destined to receive the
blessings of his atonement. (If the law of sin and death is defeated in 70ad, then what stands to condemn?, Saying this passes, logically means sin has been removed. Instead their must be a new law, and a new death in the Age to Come, or New Heavens and Earth in order to maintain this seperation. This also is a complete delusion and unscriptural.)
My point is that you cannot teach a doctrine without implications. And if the implications are dangerous, then the doctrine is dangerous. (SO IF PRETERISM HAS IMPLICATIONS RESULTING IN UNIVERSALISM, SHOULD IT NOT BE ALSO CONSIDERED DANGEROUS? LOL)
Don Prestons Quotes from Elements will Melt
First, I am not ascribing to all preterist universalists (hereafter PU), the logical implications of their doctrine. It is easy to take a position without fully understanding the implications of that doctrine. This is clear from 1 Corinthians 15. Some seemingly devout believers in Corinth took a position concerning “the dead ones,” but they did not think through their position. Therefore, Paul began by showing them the implications of their doctrine. Paul did not say that they believed what he presented. He said that if they believed what they taught, then, logically, their doctrine led to other conclusions that they themselves rejected. For Paul, to accept one was to lead to the other. He did not charge them with the implications of their doctrine. But, he held them accountable for leading the way to the logical end of what they taught.
Patently, the issue of universalism is currently a matter of widespread discussion in preterist circles. (I wonder why?)
I consider it a dangerous error to take the position that there is no such thing as sin today, and that all men, regardless of their faith in Christ or lack thereof, are destined to receive the
blessings of his atonement. (If the law of sin and death is defeated in 70ad, then what stands to condemn?, Saying this passes, logically means sin has been removed. Instead their must be a new law, and a new death in the Age to Come, or New Heavens and Earth in order to maintain this seperation. This also is a complete delusion and unscriptural.)
My point is that you cannot teach a doctrine without implications. And if the implications are dangerous, then the doctrine is dangerous. (SO IF PRETERISM HAS IMPLICATIONS RESULTING IN UNIVERSALISM, SHOULD IT NOT BE ALSO CONSIDERED DANGEROUS? LOL)
Don Preston
Preston is sure that the OLD COVENANT, and OLD HEAVENS AND EARTH passed in 70ad. Meaning ALL including the ungodly are in the NEW COVENANT, or NEW HEAVENS AND EARTH. This is the only conclusion one can make if the old things pass in history. Preston also lies when he says that Covenant Eschatology is not about Historical eschatology. But if you evaluate his writings, making 70ad the focal point which seperates the old things from the new things is ONLY about history. The Age to Come, The New Heavens and Earth, are all a state of time. It is NOT a state of Nature or your relationship with Christ.
Don Preston Elements will Melt
Rather, Peter was predicting the end of the Old Covenant world of Israel, that came to an end with the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. I am more convinced than ever that this is the proper view of 2 Peter 3. Biblical eschatology is not about the end of history, i.e. Historical Eschatology, but the end of the Old Covenant that could never bring life and righteousness. Thus, Biblical eschatology is “Covenant Eschatology.”
Don Preston Elements will Melt
Rather, Peter was predicting the end of the Old Covenant world of Israel, that came to an end with the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. I am more convinced than ever that this is the proper view of 2 Peter 3. Biblical eschatology is not about the end of history, i.e. Historical Eschatology, but the end of the Old Covenant that could never bring life and righteousness. Thus, Biblical eschatology is “Covenant Eschatology.”
Bob Stokes
Preterists are known to make the present age natural and the age to come natural in nature. They say all men are in the age to come including the ungodly. Which results in all men are in the new covenant, since the old age, the old covenant, the old heavens and earth have been removed. They say that the ungodly are in the age to come, but Jesus said that only those who are worthy can obtain that age. So I guess the ungodly have been found worthy to obtain the age to come according to their view. (Luke 20:34-36) Jesus said to them, "The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage, but those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage; for they cannot even die anymore, because they are like angels, and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection. How can the ungodly be in the new heavens and earth? According to 2 Pet 3:13, only the righteous dwell in the new heavens and earth. Those who are ungodly are in the present heavens and earth which is reserved for fire of ungodly men. If they are in the New Heavens and Earth, then those men who were ungodly only had to live past a certain point in time to enter into the new heavens and earth. Meaning their judgment was not all encompassing if ungodly survived the judgment of the present heavens and earth. Placing all men in the new heavens and earth and simply saying they are outside, the new Jerusalem is crazy. How is it that the New Heavens and Earth are different than the one being discussed in Rev? How is the present heavens and earth not the exact same picture as those in the lake of fire? Both picture a dwelling place reserved continually for those outside of Christ. If this is true than nothing passes in 70ad but rather has to do with if you are in Christ or not. This to me maintains a better view, because the old represent the old man and the new represent the new man.
If the law passes, what stands to condemn man. If this is true, then all are in a age of grace. Preterists have made a temporal line that separates the age of law, verses an age of grace in which all men are allowed entry. How is this not universalism? If the ungodly are not in the age of grace, then what separates then from receiving the same grace that has been extended to those in Christ. The line that separates the old things and the new things is Christ. Not a temporal line. It is the temporal line placed in 70ad that results in Universalism. It is mind blowing to see how so many Full Preterists deny they teach Universalism. They are teaching it to the masses, and people are eating it up like candy. Woe to those who use spiritual things and make them temporal. . .
Bob Stokes
We are living in the 'age to come' in the NT of which Jesus and His disciples spoke. There are 2 ages in Biblical history--'this age' and 'the age to come'. During Jesus' time on earth the 'end of this age' was taking place. This was the Jewish Old Covenant age. The writer of Hebrews says at the beginning: Heb 1:1-21 In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways,2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.
So the last days (of the 1st age--the Jewish age) were during Jesus time on earth. The age that was coming after His death was the 'age to come'. We are now living in that time.
The ungodly reside right with us alongside us. We are in the Kingdom and they are without. Revelation states: Rev 22:14-1514 "Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city.15 Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood. Notice, that the 'dogs, etc.' are outside, but are still with us. This represents the Kingdom of God. The children of God live alongside the children of disobedience. One is in the Kingdom and one is not.
http://members.shaw.ca/purelybiblical/index.htm
If the law passes, what stands to condemn man. If this is true, then all are in a age of grace. Preterists have made a temporal line that separates the age of law, verses an age of grace in which all men are allowed entry. How is this not universalism? If the ungodly are not in the age of grace, then what separates then from receiving the same grace that has been extended to those in Christ. The line that separates the old things and the new things is Christ. Not a temporal line. It is the temporal line placed in 70ad that results in Universalism. It is mind blowing to see how so many Full Preterists deny they teach Universalism. They are teaching it to the masses, and people are eating it up like candy. Woe to those who use spiritual things and make them temporal. . .
Bob Stokes
We are living in the 'age to come' in the NT of which Jesus and His disciples spoke. There are 2 ages in Biblical history--'this age' and 'the age to come'. During Jesus' time on earth the 'end of this age' was taking place. This was the Jewish Old Covenant age. The writer of Hebrews says at the beginning: Heb 1:1-21 In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways,2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.
So the last days (of the 1st age--the Jewish age) were during Jesus time on earth. The age that was coming after His death was the 'age to come'. We are now living in that time.
The ungodly reside right with us alongside us. We are in the Kingdom and they are without. Revelation states: Rev 22:14-1514 "Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city.15 Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood. Notice, that the 'dogs, etc.' are outside, but are still with us. This represents the Kingdom of God. The children of God live alongside the children of disobedience. One is in the Kingdom and one is not.
http://members.shaw.ca/purelybiblical/index.htm
Preterist Creeds : Articles Of Faith
Articles of faith which are strictly Preteristic. WOW.
Pensacola Orthodox Preterist Baptist Assembly
1.This is a statement of beliefs concering what we Believe and Pratice according to the PERTERIST VIEW which means that all things that God's Promised in the Law and The Prophets were Fulfilled and Accomplished by Jesus Christ by A. D.70. That is Going from being natural in the flesh. Unto being Spiritual in Jesus, and being in one of the Lord's Local Assemblies of Christ, all Assemblies make up the Spiritual Kingdom of Christ.Under the Terms,Benefits, and Blessing of the New Covenant Jn.17:20-21.Eph.1:10-12; 2:13-18; 3:5-6; Heb.8:7-13; 10:9; Rev.5:10-11
2.The preterist view of interpreing the Word of God ( Jesus christ is living Word of God. Jn.1:1;Rev19:13; and is Necessary and Essential to Rightly understanding what he came to teach and do. Then Fulfilll all He Promised.
3."Jesus Christ said" to His Disciples in Jn.4:33-34; 5:30,36 My meat is to do the will of Him that sent Me, and to Finish his Work".God's Will was to have a Spiritual Family of Sons And Daughters to Dwell with.1Cor.3:16; 2Cor.616
4."Jesus Christ said Mt,5:17-18 Think not that I AM come to Destroy the law", or the Prophets": I AM not come to destroy, but to Fulfil". He was talking to This Generation of Israel in the First Century in Mt.15:24; 10;5-7
5."Then He said, For verly I say unto you, "until heaven and the earth pass", one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, "till all be Fulfilled". And that include the 2nd appearing of Jesus Christ . Mt.4-31.
6. Jesus "Said" in Mt.24:34-35 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass untill all these things be fulfilled "Heaven and Earth shall pass away"( that is Jewish Economy and the Old natural Covenant) and the New Spiritual Covenant shall be Establish, but my words shall not pass away. Heb.10:9; 2 Cor.3:6, 13; Gal..4:25-31
7.There are Several Scriptures references that show that the phase "HEAVEN and EARTH" is a "FIGURATIVE EXPERESSION" meaning the Jewish Economy.Moses used the term in Deut. 31:30; 32:1 heaven and Earth talking to Israel. Isa.1:1-4; 34:1-4; 51:6; Hag.2:6-7,21-22; Psa.102:25-26; 2Pet.3:11-13; Heb.12:26-29; And Christ used in Mt.5:18 and 24:35.We see the Old Covenant is pass away, and the New Covenant is taking its Place
8. Jesus Christ also said in Lk.24:25-27, 44 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself. That MUST be FULFILLED.The new Covenant, Lord's Local Assemblies, and The Spiritual Kingdom of Christ. Rev.5:10
Pensacola Orthodox Preterist Baptist Assembly
1.This is a statement of beliefs concering what we Believe and Pratice according to the PERTERIST VIEW which means that all things that God's Promised in the Law and The Prophets were Fulfilled and Accomplished by Jesus Christ by A. D.70. That is Going from being natural in the flesh. Unto being Spiritual in Jesus, and being in one of the Lord's Local Assemblies of Christ, all Assemblies make up the Spiritual Kingdom of Christ.Under the Terms,Benefits, and Blessing of the New Covenant Jn.17:20-21.Eph.1:10-12; 2:13-18; 3:5-6; Heb.8:7-13; 10:9; Rev.5:10-11
2.The preterist view of interpreing the Word of God ( Jesus christ is living Word of God. Jn.1:1;Rev19:13; and is Necessary and Essential to Rightly understanding what he came to teach and do. Then Fulfilll all He Promised.
3."Jesus Christ said" to His Disciples in Jn.4:33-34; 5:30,36 My meat is to do the will of Him that sent Me, and to Finish his Work".God's Will was to have a Spiritual Family of Sons And Daughters to Dwell with.1Cor.3:16; 2Cor.616
4."Jesus Christ said Mt,5:17-18 Think not that I AM come to Destroy the law", or the Prophets": I AM not come to destroy, but to Fulfil". He was talking to This Generation of Israel in the First Century in Mt.15:24; 10;5-7
5."Then He said, For verly I say unto you, "until heaven and the earth pass", one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, "till all be Fulfilled". And that include the 2nd appearing of Jesus Christ . Mt.4-31.
6. Jesus "Said" in Mt.24:34-35 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass untill all these things be fulfilled "Heaven and Earth shall pass away"( that is Jewish Economy and the Old natural Covenant) and the New Spiritual Covenant shall be Establish, but my words shall not pass away. Heb.10:9; 2 Cor.3:6, 13; Gal..4:25-31
7.There are Several Scriptures references that show that the phase "HEAVEN and EARTH" is a "FIGURATIVE EXPERESSION" meaning the Jewish Economy.Moses used the term in Deut. 31:30; 32:1 heaven and Earth talking to Israel. Isa.1:1-4; 34:1-4; 51:6; Hag.2:6-7,21-22; Psa.102:25-26; 2Pet.3:11-13; Heb.12:26-29; And Christ used in Mt.5:18 and 24:35.We see the Old Covenant is pass away, and the New Covenant is taking its Place
8. Jesus Christ also said in Lk.24:25-27, 44 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself. That MUST be FULFILLED.The new Covenant, Lord's Local Assemblies, and The Spiritual Kingdom of Christ. Rev.5:10
http://preteristbaptist.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=articlesoffaith.index
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)