|
|
|
| ![]() Website Color Key |
|
|
|
101 Preterist Time-Indicators By David Green
“If you are living according to the flesh, you are about to die.” 1. "The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand." (Matt. 3:2)
Now it seems to me that there are only two ways to "get around" these 101 Scriptures and remain a Futurist. One of those ways is to dismiss the spirit of imminence that saturates the New Testament and to say that it only indicates things that are "soon in God's sight." There are some major problems with that approach. If the imminence saturating the New Testament was only an "in-God's-sight" imminence, then why was the Old Testament not also saturated with an "in-God's-sight" imminence? Why did God not tell Adam and Eve, "The Kingdom of Heaven is at hand?" Why did He not tell Abraham, "The Son of Man is about to come in the glory of His Father with His angels; and will then recompense every man according to his deeds?" Why did He not say to Malachi, "This generation will not pass away until all these things take place?" Why is it that a Second Coming in the 21st century was "imminent" in the 1st century, but was not imminent before the 1st century? There is no substantive defense against this objection. The fact is that what God said was near to the Apostles, He said was not near to the earlier prophets. Perhaps the clearest illustration of this truth is found in a comparison of Dan. 8:26 and Rev. 22:10: 6th century BC: "Seal up the vision; for it shall be for many days." (Dan. 8:26) 1st century AD: "Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is near." (Rev. 22:10) What God said was far away in Daniel's time, He said was imminent in the Apostles' time. The implication is inescapable: The imminence in the New Testament was real. Granted, it is not unreasonable to use an expression of imminence or brevity in reference to a relatively long period of time, (II Cor. 4:17) but it is biblically unreasonable to interpret every statement of eschatological imminence throughout the New Testament as meaning "2,000 years later." If we are going to claim scriptural support for such a hermeneutical approach, the only option is to make II Peter 3:8 ("With the Lord a day is like a thousand years") a "Code Key" that unlocks the "secret" meaning of the Spirit. But not only is that method Gnostic-like, it makes eschatology (and ultimately, soteriology) utterly impossible to understand correctly without the mystical elucidation of II Peter 3:8 (and Ps. 90:4). The second technique that is employed to "get around" the New Testament declarations of imminence is to dichotomize the spirit of imminence (and therefore the unified eschatological theme of Scripture), and to say that some or most New Testament imminence Scriptures do indeed indicate nearness in time (such as in references to the Great Tribulation in A.D. 66-70 and to a "coming" in judgment in A.D. 70.) but that other imminence Scriptures are in reality not statements of imminence at all (In this approach, all references to the Second Coming, the Resurrection of the Dead and the "Final Judgment" are said to contain no indications of imminence whatsoever.). The problem with this method is simply this: Denial. The Bible says it. They deny it. They have thereby been forced to construct a duplicitous, theological system of "Yes" and "No." They have created a kind of twilight land of both "shadow" and "substance" (the land of partial preterism and Historicism). They are rather like Saul of Tarsus, a man who sincerely and ignorantly "kicked against the goads" of the plain declarations of Scripture. Many who have found themselves in this predicament recognize that they are in abject exegetical poverty, and so they end up appealing strictly and only to the authority of "the historic Church and her creeds." Not unrelated to this sad phenomenon is the defection of many protestants to the Eastern Orthodox Church. Denial is a complicated and destructive thing indeed. Like deception, it becomes a tangled web. The incredible eschatological confusion that has plagued the Christian world since the days of the Reformation is a testimony to that fact. But in contrast to the chaos of Futurism, the Scriptures (below) have a straightforward teaching, which is this: The fulfillment of all prophecy was "at hand," "near," "soon," "about to be," etc. when the New Testament was written, and it was all to be fulfilled by the time the Old Covenant vanished and its temple was destroyed (in A.D. 70). The prophetic message is so simple, yet it is so profound. In a way, it is not surprising that we missed it for so long. Now a final note. The Apostle Peter was referring to eschatology when he said the following:
Be careful what you do with the truth. Being in possession of a true, biblical proposition is by no means an evidence of being wise, no matter how wonderful the proposition is. There is no denying that some Preterists are "untaught and unstable," and have used Preterism to "distort" the Scriptures (They are Universalists, Arians, Neo-Gnostics, etc.). They despise the collected teachings of the historic Church as being little more than the tricks of jugglers, and have blasphemed virtually every pillar of the Faith. They imagine themselves to be pioneers, but they are revilers in the tradition of II Peter and Jude. Do not follow them. Avoid them at all cost. Please see my Q&A #33 email David A. Green Send an email with your comments to todd @ preteristarchive.com Be sure to include the article name. They will be posted shortly upon receipt
CommentsPreterists and futurists don't seem to understand spiritual regeneration, and so preterists erroneously claim that the passing away of heaven and earth at Christ's first-century parousia (Rev. 21:1) is a reference to the destruction of natural Israel in AD 70. But 2 Peter 3:5-7 makes it clear that the heaven and earth that "passed away" in the first century was the Christ-rejecting, post-flood, natural world. Ask your local preterist to learn about spiritual regeneration from 2 Cor. 5:17 so that he/she can discover how the natural world could have "passed away" in the first century and yet have its existence continue for a while.
CommentsIt is a common dodge, and a desperate one at that, to attempt to spiritualize away the clear meaning that Peter is talking about. The person who wrote that comment misses one of many crucial points--the main one being that the word "elements" that Peter mentions ALWAYS means the elements of religion,society, etc., in their day. It's clear, beyond a doubt, that Peter is talking about the passing away of the Old covenant-if you do your homework!
Comments2 Peter 3:4,5 refers to the original creation (Gen. 1:1), which occurred long before the creation of Israel. 3:6 says that the ancient world, not Israel,"being overflowed with water perished," and 3:7 says that the first-century world, not Israel, was "reserved unto fire against the day of judgment" -- fire referring to the first-century spiritual judgment of the world because God promised Noah that he wouldn't judge the world again by water (Gen. 9:11). 3:10 refers to the first-century change in the world's culture, from pagan to Christian, that resulted from the church's worldwide preaching of the gospel. There is no reference to Old Covenant Israel in 2 Peter 3:3-10. Also, the accusation of spiritualizing the interpretation of the New Testament is usually resorted to by desperate dispensationalists rather than by desperate preterists.
CommentsOnce again it appears we have a writer that takes a single scriptural passage in an attempt to debunk the preterist theology. WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER 100 listed by Mr. Green? Preterism is established by the whole of scripture and many building blocks - not a single passage! II Peter 3 does not negate the imminence of the entire New Testament, and even if it did, the parousia is tied to EVENTS such as men's life spans (Matthew 16:27; John 21:22), going through the cities of Israel (Matthew 10:23), the destruction of Jerusalem (several passages including Daniel 12:7). Maybe we can use the rubber band (stretching) theorey on imminence words but how is this done with the lifespan of men and the destruction of Jerusalem? If the writer above can explain this, I will be the first to listen.
CommentsOnce again it appears we have a writer that takes a single scriptural passage in an attempt to debunk the preterist theology. WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER 100 listed by Mr. Green? Preterism is established by the whole of scripture and many building blocks - not a single passage! II Peter 3 does not negate the imminence of the entire New Testament, and even if it did, the parousia is tied to EVENTS such as men's life spans (Matthew 16:27; John 21:22), going through the cities of Israel (Matthew 10:23), the destruction of Jerusalem (several passages including Daniel 12:7). Maybe we can use the rubber band (stretching) theorey on imminence words but how is this done with the lifespan of men and the destruction of Jerusalem? If the writer above can explain this, I will be the first to listen.
CommentsThen the first thing you should be willing to listen to is the fact that Christ's first-century parousia did not occur in AD 70 but rather "in those days (Greek "hemera") AFTER that tribulation" (Mk. 13:24) -- hemera being used figuratively to mean years, as in Mt. 2:1 (did Herod reign for only a few days?) and Lk. 1:7,18 (were Elisabeth and Zacharias old after just a few days?) and Mt. 24:37, 1 Peter 3:20 (did Noah live for just a few days?) and Mt. 24:38 (were there just a few days before the flood?) and Acts 7:45 (did David live just a few days?) and Heb. 5:7 (was the time of Jesus' flesh just a few days?). However, your agreement that 2 Peter 3 refers to the first-century natural world, not to first-century natural Israel, is greatly appreciated.
CommentsThe first six items on the list (and many more) apply to Christ's first presence on the earth. John said the kingdom (spiritual reign) of heaven was at hand at Christ's baptism (his anointing as King) in autumn of AD 26, and the references to fire in Mt. 3 refer to the spiritual judgment of natural Israel that occurred at the moment of Christ's resurrection in the spring of AD 30. God's failed, natural missionary nation had to be spiritually judged to prepare the way for God's successful, spiritual missionary nation (spiritual Israel, the church) so that, after the worldwide preaching of the gospel in the first century (Mt. 24:14), the natural world could be spiritually judged. The fire in 2 Thes. 1:7,8 and 2 Peter 3 refers to the spiritual judgment of the natural world in the moment of the resurrection of the dead in Christ at his parousia at the end of the first century.
CommentsThe first six items on the list (and many more) apply to Christ's first presence on the earth. John said the kingdom (spiritual reign) of heaven was at hand at Christ's baptism (his anointing as King) in autumn of AD 26, and the references to fire in Mt. 3 refer to the spiritual judgment of natural Israel that occurred at the moment of Christ's resurrection in the spring of AD 30. God's failed, natural missionary nation had to be spiritually judged to prepare the way for God's successful, spiritual missionary nation (spiritual Israel, the church) so that, after the worldwide preaching of the gospel in the first century (Mt. 24:14), the natural world could be spiritually judged. The fire in 2 Thes. 1:7,8 and 2 Peter 3 refers to the spiritual judgment of the natural world in the moment of the resurrection of the dead in Christ at his parousia at the end of the first century.
CommentsSo now we presumably have explanation of the first six items (?) What about the folowing 95 items? Is there more than one parousia, resurrection? What about none of the law being fulfilled until heaven and earth pass away and ALL being fulfilled? Has that occurred? Or do we await a second, third, fourth parousia judgment? Daniel 12 speaks of the tribulation and the resurrection ocurring when the power of the Holy People is shattered (scattered). What Holy people are these? The same Holy people that Daniel would have understood? Wasn't this the "end of days"? Is there a second, third, or fourth end of days??? Come on folks, how many hairs do we need to split. Use some context, careful lexicon, common sense, and first century ears. It's accomplished or we are yet dead in our sins, the Messianic age has not begun, and Jesus has not found faith on the earth.
CommentsGod made SEPARATE promises to the world (Adam and Noah) and to Israel that resulted in SEPARATE first-century spiritual fulfillments. Because preterists don't recognize that basic fact, they erroneously combine the world promises and the Israel promises and try to cram a joint fulfillment into AD 70.
CommentsWorld promises? Israel promises? Huh? Didn't God make promises regarding the seed and the serpent way back in Genesis 3? Wasn't this a reference to Christ? Different promises? Didn't Christ reconcile ALL things to Himself? What about breaking down the wall of enmity and individuals drinking of ONE Spirit! Didn't Christ pray they would become ONE as He and the Father are ONE. Weren't ALL the law, the prophets and the saints pointing toward ONE promise - the Messiah? Different promises? What different promises? Promises to the world - and promises to Israel ??? Huh?
Comments
CommentsDear Bro. Green: My problem has usually been that sincere persons can not conceive putting the Scriptures in a pre-70 A.D. context. I am sixty eight years old, spent my pre-retirement years in an Independent Baptist pastorate, tried to be as clear as I knew how in handling the Truth, but men do not like to have their "formula" changed. In and By His Grace, In His Everlasting Kingdom, Robert G. Williams usmc1div@earthlink.net
Comments
CommentsHi David. I have found that the futurists do not have any thing to argue about Time Statements. The problem they have is that their minds have been filled with preconceived ideas from their teachers. Juan C. Peña Marrero
CommentsSo a Man died on the cross, shed his blood, and now the laws are in our minds and our hearts? Noone shall teach the other for everyone shall know the Lord from the least to the greatest! Hum, when does the everyone take place? All this debating over second comings, which laws apply, really sounds like fulfillment to me. Boy oh boy, what a difference it has all made, some guy died foe us all and now everything is just hunky dory!
CommentsAs I have said over and over in preterist forums, the doctrine has flaws because its hermeneutics are not sound. Jehovah's Witnesses can probably come up with "101 Jesus is not God Passages" but the fact that Jesus claimed to be God in just ONE passage (John 8:58), and is clearly called God in several others (John 1:1;20:28; 2 Peter 1:1 in Greek), disproves and topples the whole theological system. The amount of something only amounts to committing the logical fallacy of consensus gentium. lol I'm not saying that preterists are exactly like this cult group. I am saying that posting a bunch of Scriptures, MOST of which have absolutely nothing to do with supporting preterism, does not prove anything. Flawed methodology is flawed methodology. The more I learn about what preterists (especially full) teach, the more I see that Scripture is being forced to say what it does not. John 21:22 does NOT mean John would live to the second coming. The word "IF" in the text makes it clear that Jesus was not making a statement. But that is overlooked. And as far as these so-called "timed indicators" are concerned, the fact remains that it cannot be logically or biblically denied that God's thoughts are different from ours, and that God's ways are also different. Not always, of course, but they are. Isaiah prophesied in 13:6 and said: "Wail, for the day of the LORD is at hand..." But when was this "at hand" fulfilled against Babylon? From what I am able to ascertain it was over 100 years later in 539 BC (assuming Isaiah prophesied between 740-680 BC). But can someone please tell me how THAT was "at hand" in a strict, literal sense? And of course there are other examples of how God prophesied about something in one time, and yet all those who heard the prophecy died and it was fulfilled in another time. So there is Biblical precedent for the fact that all "time indicators" that seem to be imminent are not necessarily so. I am working on producing a website right now, and as I learn more about preterism I will produce articles showing the fallacies of interpretation I see. But what I can say so far, as a student of the Bible for over 18 years who knows New Testament Greek (and teaches it) and has learned some Hebrew, is that preterism will not stand if it can be shown to misread or otherwise distort Scripture. And so far, that is what I see. Peace in Him, AD
CommentsDavid Green lists 101 references regarding imminency statements and backs it up with scripture (impressive), but you say Jehovah's Witnesses can "probably" come up with 101 Jesus is not God statements and I don't see you backing that up with any scripture (NOT IMPRESSED!).
CommentsIt is not "impressive" to quote a multitude of texts taken out of context. And I never intended to prove what the Jehovah's Witnesses believe. Their hermeneutic is just as flawed as Mr. Green's "101" so-called preterist verses. I've made my point and have never seen anyone refute what I've said. AD
CommentsI honestly would like to know how you "refute" the time statements that are throughout the New Testamant. I will list just three: 1)Matt 16:27-28 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom. Jesus Himself made this comment! The transfiguration would not make sense of His statement. 2) Acts 2:16-17 But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: Peter himself is saying that what was happening to THEM was spoken of by Joel what would happen "in the last days". 3) 1John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. So Jesus said some wouldn't die before He returned, and Peter and John taught the people that THEY were living in the last days. How do you explain this?
CommentsI would think your "at hand," "near," "soon," "about to be," exegetical grid would force you to conclude that the verses below "prove" that the day of the Lord occured during the old testament times. rod rogers Zephaniah 1:14 The great day of the LORD is near, it is near, and hasteth greatly, even the voice of the day of the LORD: the mighty man shall cry there bitterly. Isaiah 13:6 Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty. Ezekiel 30:3 For the day is near, even the day of the LORD is near, a cloudy day; it shall be the time of the heathen. Joel 1:15 Alas for the day! for the day of the LORD is at hand, and as a destruction from the Almighty shall it come. Joel 2:1 Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in my holy mountain: let all the inhabitants of the land tremble: for the day of the LORD cometh, for it is nigh at hand; Joel 3:14 Multitudes, multitudes in the valley of decision: for the day of the LORD is near in the valley of decision. Obadiah 15 For the day of the LORD is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head. Zephaniah 1:7 Hold thy peace at the presence of the Lord GOD: for the day of the LORD is at hand: for the LORD hath prepared a sacrifice, he hath bid his guests. Zephaniah 1:14 The great day of the LORD is near, it is near, and hasteth greatly, even the voice of the day of the LORD: the mighty man shall cry there bitterly. Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
CommentsWhat version of the Bible did this author use for Acts 24:15? In the article it says, "There is about to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked(Acts 24:15)" The versions that I have read say "there will be a resurrection of the dead." Where did he get "about to be"? Date: 31 May 2006 |
Email PreteristArchive.com's Sole Developer and Curator, Todd Dennis
(todd @ preteristarchive.com)
Opened in 1996 |