Hopefully, readers are starting to get the picture that, so far, the best support for the Hyper Preterist (HyP) view of "time indicators" is assuming the the point in question -- as though AD70 was always in view, even if the fall of Jerusalem is not in the text or the context. It was certainly a shock to me once I realized that so much of what had seemed unassailable was now being recognized as the pure wishful thinking that it was, being based upon a lot of presuppositions and a couple of filtered eyes. For those who are willing to see, such has been revealed with Matthew 10:23 and Matthew 16:27-28.

Well, Matthew 26:64 represents the worst argument in support of HyP yet. After all, it could be understandable to equate the judgment of Matthew 16:27-28 with the undeniable events of AD70. Lightfoot certainly did, although he didn't make the extraordinary leaps with that belief that HyP does.. as though this one judgment was the final judgment of the Lord!

Jesus' prophecy in Matthew 26:64 is consistently listed among the "preterist time indicators" (PretCoz #13) ; and yet, I would be very surprised if most seasoned Preterists who claim such were not actually aware that there are very serious problems with using this text as an indicator of AD70. If that is so, it hasn't seemed to have effected the promotion of this passage as a support of the HyP view... But with this passage, there is just no excuse except (at best) a lamentable inability to see beyond the presupposition of AD70 fulfillment or, at worst, callous indifference as to whether it is a tight fit or not. This is the tendency to consider a verse "troublesome" at best or a "trouble text" at worst when it does not support the presupposed conclusion.

Read more »

It is very easy to read our ideas into the text of the Bible. In theological terms, this is known as Eisegesis (Greek: eishègeisthai 'to lead in'), which is the process of interpreting in such a way as to introduce one's own ideas into the text or context. With Hyper Preterism's "time texts," eisegesis is oftentimes the rule rather than the exception. In my opinion, such is the case when it comes to the "coming of the son of man" reference in Matthew 10:23.

It has become a working assumption in Hyper Preterism that the "coming" passages in the New Testament refer only to AD70. And the eisegetical presupposition that Matthew 10:23 is a "(Hyper) Preterist time indicator" is considered to be unassailable. This is true, despite the fact that there is not a hint or reference regarding AD70 in the text or context of the chapter from which to support this conclusion.

The "time indicator" claim is likewise made in reference to Matthew 16:27-28. However, as we have seen, there is not a hint of AD70 in the text or context of Matthew 16:27-28. This exposes a very embarrassing situation for Hyper Preterist scholarship. I have seen my fair share of HyP books (including a much heralded book recently released) which lead off with Matthew 16:27-28 as the cornerstone proof of the AD70 narrative. In short, Matthew 16:27-28 is not a "preterist time indicator" supporting Hyper Preterism, even tough it oftentimes is given more emphasis as a "proof text" than even Matthew 24:34!

Read more »

After having been a futurist, a partial preterist, and then a full preterist, I came to the realization that attempting to limit the redemptive and prophetic acts of God to a single moment in time is the cause of most confusion regarding eschatology.

Why would we expect the Lord to perform His acts of power and glory just once — be it at a moment in time in the past or the future? What good does that do for all other generations? That incredibly narrow focal point robs every generation of so much contemporary strength -- by saying either that "it hasn't come yet" (Futurism) or "it is already over" (Preterism).

It seems to me that all prophecy ultimately finds its accomplishment in Jesus Christ Himself, as scripture states (Gal. 3:16, II Cor. 1:20, Col. 2:9, much etc.). The working of our Lord - translating His people from darkness to Light, and from old to new -- happens internally and personally for each, as opposed to externally and historically for a single generation of people. Even the cross must be received, and each follower must bear it in their own day. TODAY is the day of salvation, and TODAY if you will harden not your heart, etc...

An example of the mistaken external/historical realignment of eschatology can be found in commentaries on Matthew 16:27-28, which is a passage all Hyper Preterist (HyP) systems apply to AD70.


The Stoning of Stephen

Consider the “son of man” passage of Matthew 16:27-28 in light of its immediate textual context : persecution and martyrdom.

Read more »

Eschatology is a theological term used to describe the study of consummation. Others refer to this area of study as being about "final" or "last things." Two primary Greek root words used in reference to eschatology are eschaton ("last" - Strong's 2078) and telos ("end" / "ending" - Strong's 5056).

Some assume that "the end" that is the focus of eschatology is the end of the world. Hyper Preterists assume that "the end" that is the focus of eschatology is the end of the Mosaic sacrificial system in the year 70. However, recognizing the consummation motif utilized by these words (as well as by sunteleia and others), we can see that these references do not look forward to the chronological end, but look back to the cross as the accomplishment.

Read more »

This blog is being developed for all who are interested in the doctrinal spectrum of the "First Century Fulfillment Model" (1CFM) of general Preterist theology.

Specifically, HYPERpreteristarchive.com will be focusing on the extreme end of that range, which is represented by the "Total Fulfillment Model" (TFM).

This view teaches that bible prophecy was totally fulfilled by AD70, when the Romans sacked Jerusalem, bringing the Mosaic religious era to a close. This extreme preterism is being categorized as "hyper" -- as in beyond the biblically acceptable -- due to its fundamental divergence from the Christian storyline of the cross of Christ's sole basis and effectiveness for redemption. Sadly, Hyper Preterism (HyP) teaches that when Jesus said "it is finished", there remained still another 40 years before the redemptive work was complete. Another fundamental difference is the teaching that the Christianity displayed in the New Testament was only representative of the pre AD70 era. (teaching instead that the world entered a new age/dispensation when the temple fell in the year 70 of the first century).

Read more »