Preterism

Preterism: A Damnable Heresy

IN TWELVE PARTS

Assumptions

Definitions

Origins

History

Denies the Gospel

Timing Fallacies

Refuted by Daniel

Refuted by Paul

Refuted by Peter

Refuted by Catholicism

Refuted by History

Refuted by Gentiles

Refuted by Itself

Refuted by Scripture

Refuted by Futurism

An Anti-Christian Heresy

Miscellaneous Considerations

For Further Study

Assumptions

1. God Is: The only God is Jehovah of the Bible.
2. God Gave Scripture: Revelation is the means of truth, not rationalization.
3. Scripture Is Absolute Truth: Therefore, tradition, creeds, personal beliefs, feelings, popularity, complexity, simplicity, or any other source is irrelevant.
4. The Kings James Version Is Scripture: The King James Version is the Word of God, to be trusted and argued as Holy Scripture, at the word level.
   1. There can be no proper reasoning or proving of truth or error without a final authority, so for the sake of this document (and the author’s entire life), the KJV is that final authority.
   2. For why we choose the KJV, see Proving the KJV. 
   3. For word-level argumentation, see Every Word of God. 
5. God Gave Bible Hermeneutics: The Bible is to be interpreted by spiritual men applying the Bible’s own rules for interpretation.
   1. For Bible hermeneutics, see Bible Hermeneutics.  
   2. For some interpretational examples, see Bible Topics: Scripture. 
   3. For some prophecy examples, see Bible Topics: Prophecy. 
6. God Called Men to Interpret the Bible: God gave scripture primarily to His ministers, and He equipped them by various means for interpretation.
   1. They have the calling, ability, gifts, preparation, responsibility, time, warnings, and Spirit to interpret it better and faster (Ezra 7:6; Neh 8:8; Mal 2:7; II Tim 2:2; 3:16-17; He 13:7).
   2. For more thoughts on this point, see Do We Need Teachers?  
   3. For more thoughts on this point, see I Magnify Mine Office.  
7. Satan Is at War against God and Truth: He hates the Lord Jesus Christ and seeks to pervert the truth as he did in Eden (II Cor 11:1-4,13-15; Gen 3:1-6).
   1. He first questioned the word of God and then turned God’s word upside down (Ge 3:1-6).
   2. Satan attacked Jesus directly and then the gospel directly (Matt 4:1-11; 16:21-23).
8. Arrogance Is Destructive: Arrogance is a horrible hindrance to truth, since God has promised to reveal truth to babes and hide it from the worldly wise (I Kgs 3:5-15; Matt 11:25-27; I Cor 1:19-20; 3:18-20).
9. Ignorance Is Destructive: God has commanded His servants to study diligently and correctly and to be steadfast in order to avoid His disapproval and shame in doctrine (Prov 18:1; I Tim 4:13-16; II Tim 2:4,15; Titus 1:9-11).
10. Last Days Problem: Though living in the information age with tools not imagined before, there are more deceived deceivers and less truth than ever before, no matter what you may think (II Tim 3:6-7,13; 4:3-4; Amos 8:11-13).
11. Purpose and Scope: This is a basic Bible study to refute Preterism for average to advanced Christians – it will make generalizations and deal with Bible texts at a medium level of detail and difficulty. If a doctoral candidate or professor-type wishes to take this foundation and write a tome for other academicians, he is welcome to do so, but that is consciously not the intent or result here.
12. Degree of Detail: Things will be assumed and stated which are commonly understood in the historicist school, the arguments and details of which may easily be found in standard reference works, some of which will be named. Neither preterism nor preterists deserve any further effort or time in this study.
13. Little Concern for the Heretics: The profanity and extent of this heresy does not justify much concern for those holding or promoting it. As the greatest apostle showed little mercy to their father and founder, Hymenaeus, neither do we toward them.

Definitions

1. Futurism: Generalized, all prophecies are future. This is the rapture crowd of Scofield, Lindsey, LaHaye, and Van Impe. They are generally pre-tribulationary (Christ returns before the Antichrist and a seven-year tribulation), premillennial (Christ returns before a literal 1000-year reign on earth), and Zionists (lovers of modern Israel; Jews of any era are more important than Gentiles). They interpret prophecy literally, ignoring symbolism or timing, inserting gaps if needed, and are always biased toward the future.
2. Preterism: Generalized, all prophecies were fulfilled by 70 A.D. They call their doctrine full preterism, consistent preterism, or realized eschatology. Most Christians have never heard of it, due to its recent origin and few followers. With their timing verses, they bind every prophecy to Jerusalem’s destruction, even prophecies without time parameters. Amazingly, they hold that events Christians have always taught were future … actually happened by 70 A.D.! This includes Christ’s return, the resurrection of the dead, the Day of Judgment, the destruction of Satan, the millennium, the new heaven and new earth, etc.
   1. For a brief and neutral definition and history of preterism, see http://www.theopedia.com/Preterism.  
   2. For a brief and neutral definition and history of preterism, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preterism.  
3. Historicism: Generalized, prophecy is fulfilled in history. Many prophecies are fulfilled – some in 70AD, some after 70AD – and some are yet to be fulfilled. This is the position held by most saints over the last 2000 years. Historicism rejects futurism and preterism. In general, it sees Matthew 24 fulfilled but Matthew 25 future. It sees a present man of sin in the papacy and a present gospel millennium, but a future return of Christ, resurrection of the dead, and Day of Judgment before the new heavens and the new earth.
4. Matthew 24: The Olivet Discourse is not the issue, for historicists and others know this prophecy, in part or in whole, is for 70 A.D. The heresy of preterism is assigning all of Daniel’s, Paul’s, Peter’s, and John’s prophecies to 70 A.D.
5. Variations: There are many and wide degrees or variations of the three prophetic schools defined above, so much so that it is likely that no two persons on earth agree on every point or verse; but for the purpose of this study the terms will be used as defined, unless modified in the context.

Origins

1. Corinth: False teachers denied the resurrection of the dead, whom Paul refuted and condemned in his first epistle (I Cor 15:1-58; II Cor 11:1-4).
   1. The scriptural and historical record proved Jesus Christ’s physical resurrection (15:1-11).
   2. Denying the resurrection of the dead denies Jesus Christ’s own resurrection (15:12-19).
   3. Paul built a solid prophetic system for the future on Christ’s resurrection (15:20-28).
   4. Denying the resurrection practically corrupts both ordinances and lifestyle (15:29-34).
   5. Fools or skeptics ask unlearned questions about secret details of resurrection (15:35-50).
   6. Inspired revelation proves incredible physical changes yet coming to bodies (15:51-57).
   7. It is the hope of the resurrection of physical bodies that makes great Christians (15:58).
   8. Many arguments can be raised from this glorious chapter that clearly refute preterism.
   9. Anyone attempting to spiritualize or allegorize this chapter is obviously an idiot or liar.
   10. Author’s simple notes on the chapter.
2. Thessalonica: False teachers taught an imminent return of Jesus Christ, which Paul condemned by declaring the event well off in the future (II Thess 2:1-3).
   1. The event here is clearly the second coming of Jesus Christ (1:7-10; 2:1; I Thes 4:13-18).
   2. The imminent return of the Lord Jesus could be frightening and troubling to some (2:2a).
   3. It is impossible the destruction of Jerusalem would so affect Gentiles 1000 miles away.
   4. Paul warned of a false spirit, false teaching, and a counterfeit apostolic epistle (2:2b).
   5. Paul put the second coming after a general apostasy and the man of sin revealed (2:3).
   6. This apostasy was still future when Paul died in 67 A.D. (I Tim 4:1-3; II Tim 3:1 – 4:4).
   7. Without mention, Paul declared Christ’s second coming in full agreement with Daniel 7.
   8. Author’s simple notes on the chapter.
3. Hymenaeus: A preterist false teacher, who declared the resurrection past, whom Paul condemned to Satan for blasphemy (I Tim 1:18-20; II Tim 2:14-18).
   1. He departed from the apostolic faith and corrupted the faith of others also (1:19; 2:18).
   2. Paul by apostolic authority and power turned him over to Satan for blasphemy, which we assume to be the general result of denying promises and actions of Jesus Christ (1:20).
   3. Striving about words has two evil effects – wastes time and subverts hearers (2:14), which preterists are addicted to doing with their so-called timing verses and speculation.
   4. The inspired instruction to rightly divide scripture is in a context of preterism (2:15-18).
   5. Saying the resurrection is past is profane and vain babbling leading to ungodliness (2:16).
   6. Preterism is a cancerous doctrine, which ought not to be tolerated by the godly (2:17).
   7. The truth has the resurrection in the future, and preterism denies this Bible fact (2:18).
   8. The faith of saints can be overthrown by the lie of these profane and vain babblers (2:18).

History

1. Church History: There is little evidence before the Jesuit Luis del Alcazar (1554-1613) of anyone taking a preterist scheme for Daniel’s, Paul’s, Peter’s, or John’s prophecies, and preterist efforts to prove otherwise are confirming.
   1. For more about preterism’s history, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preterism#History_of_preterism. 
   2. Generally, no one has ever believed this junk; a few loud mouths require this attention.
2. Three Prophetic Schemes: Jesuits invented two schemes of interpretation to protect the pope and their church. Along with the truth, these two schemes cover 98% of all prophetic interpretation in Christian circles today.
   1. Historicism, or the continual fulfillment of Bible prophecy in history, was the general approach to and through the Reformation – some prophecy is past; some is yet future.
   2. As part of the Counter-Reformation, the RCC invented futurism and preterism to get the attention off the papacy and their church as the antichrist and Great Whore of prophecy.
   3. For an historical view of these three schemes, see http://www.aloha.net/~mikesch/antichrist.htm. 
   4. For an historical view of these three schemes, see http://www.champs-of-truth.com/books/3schools.htm.
3. The Parousia: A Critical Inquiry of the New Testament Doctrine of Our Lord’s Second Coming. Written by the Congregationalist J. Stuart Russell (1816-1895) and published in 1878, this is the most popular and generally most highly esteemed reference book promoting and defending preterism.
   1. Russell got nervous in Revelation and allowed the millennium to be outside 70 A.D.
   2. Here is The Parousia.
   3. Robert Townley, a preterist contemporary, converted to universalism with others, as preterism and universalism were popular together in Unitarian churches at that time.
4. Church of Christ: Preterism was nearly unknown in the 20th century until Campbellite preachers began teaching, writing, and debating to promote it.
   1. These were mainly Max King, son Tim King, Don K. Preston, and Edward E. Stevens.
   2. Max King’s book in 1971, The Spirit of Prophecy, got the heresy out of the closet.
   3. Max and Tim King have taken the heresy about as far as it can go e.g. universalism.
   4. Here is the current preterist website of Tim King (Max’s son).
5. Reconstructionists: Coming after the Church of Christ, several Reformed ministries have surpassed Max King and his Campbellite friends in influence.
   1. These men are David Chilton, Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., Gary DeMar, and R.C. Sproul.
   2. Though some or all may be partial-preterists, they have indirectly helped the heresy.
   3. They all deny the historic Protestant interpretation of Daniel 7, II Thes 2, and Revelation.

Preterism Denies the Gospel

1. Gospel perversions refute preterism. Denying basic facts and promises of the gospel proves preterism to be anti-Christian heresy that cannot be tolerated.
   1. It is another gospel, or rather a devilish bewitching (II Cor 11:3-4,13-15; Gal 1:6-9; 3:1).
   2. Heresy is a departure from the accepted and established teaching of scripture, which depends on the faith and doctrine of the evaluator; no creed has ever accepted preterism.
   3. The true followers of Jesus maintain the testimony of Jesus (Rev 1:2,9; 12:17; 19:10).
   4. Christianity has foundational axioms that cannot be compromised (Heb 5:12; 6:1-3), for the churches of Jesus Christ are the pillar and ground of the truth (I Tim 3:15; Jude 1:3).
   5. Many cannot believe preterists are serious about their ridiculous denial of basic facts and promises of the gospel, but remember how Satan totally reversed God’s word in Eden.
   6. The simplest and wisest course is to create an irreducible minimum refuting them, which is the fewest events the Bible declares must occur, but which did not occur in 70 A.D.
   7. Inspired scripture declares that heresies like preterism arise in churches for true saints to be identified by surviving the controversy and excluding the heretics (I Cor 11:19).
2. Saving your sanity. It is not worth the time, effort, or confusion to include how preterists explain the following subjects or passages. Their exegesis is profane.
   1. Preterists vary widely in their heretical answers; none of which would ever help the truth.
   2. Since preterist illogic and connection of unrelated scriptures is so far out, it is not worth the time or effort necessary to explore their confusion to prove the method wrong: they do not deal with passages at hand, but instead attack them by any possible outside angle.
   3. Their corruption of scripture is so erroneous and twisted that young Christians would be unable to follow their arguments and might conclude the Bible is hopelessly confusing.
   4. They argue ad nauseam about covenant eschatology, transmillennialism, theocratic kingdom transfer, 70 A.D. end of the law, and so on against 2000 years of N.T. light.
   5. Readers wanting to see how these heretics reason can study many links provided below.
   6. Since so few believe it, and they indicating little hope, we will focus on proving it wrong.
   7. The goal here is simply to identify and list facts of the gospel they openly deny, which will trouble the minds of sincere saints that so-called believers could apostatize so far!
   8. The zealous sort of believer will be outraged rather than troubled for the degree of heresy.
   9. This section alone, just one of twelve, is sufficient itself to entirely overwhelm preterism.
3. No Return of Jesus Christ! Preterism denies the gospel promise Jesus will return in the very same literal, physical, visible way He left (Acts 1:9-11; Phil 3:20-21; Col 3:4; I Cor 1:7; 15:23; I Thess 1:10; 2:19; 3:13; 4:15-17; 5:23; II Thess 1:7; I Tim 6:14; II Tim 4:8; Titus 2:13; Heb 9:27-28; I Pet 5:4; John 14:1-3; I John 2:28; 3:2; Rev 1:7).
   1. This is hard for most to believe, but preterists adamantly maintain Jesus will never return.
   2. If they say His second coming was in 70 A.D., no one saw Him or noted the event, thus history denies their claims, for the clear promise is visible, fantastic, worldwide events.
   3. If they say His second coming was in 70 A.D., but it was invisible, spiritual, or figurative, thus the Bible denies their claims, for the clear promise is a literal, bodily, visible return.
   4. We accept and believe Jesus came in judgment on Israel in 70 A.D., but preterists go much further: they deny the possibility of Him coming any other way at any other time.
   5. The gospel requires that Jesus Christ’s return includes both the bodily resurrection of all dead and the Judgment of all dead and living (I Cor 15:23; II Tim 4:1; Rev 20:11-15), which inseparable events with His return have not occurred in any way, shape, or form.
   6. Jesus Christ’s coming to judge Jerusalem had no effect, purpose, or value for all the Gentiles to whom Paul promised a literal and visible return with great attendant events.
   7. The visible return of Jesus is basic to Christianity (He 6:1-3); preterists are not Christians.
4. No Resurrection of the Dead! Preterists deny the resurrection of all dead bodies (John 5:28-29; 6:39-40,44,54; 11:23-26; Acts 23:6; 24:15; Rom 8:11; Job 14:12-14; 19:25-27; Ps 49:15; I Cor 15:1-58; Phil 3:20-21; Rev 20:11-13; Hos 13:14).
   1. Since no dead bodies were raised in 70 A.D. (there is no record of any such event by either pagans or Christians of any rank), they are guilty of denying the resurrection.
   2. Since a spiritual resurrection does not qualify (Luke 24:3-8,36-43,50-53; John 20:19-20,26-28; Act 1:3; 10:39-41; 13:31), they are guilty of denying the resurrection.
   3. Since they take those scriptures that describe resurrection of dead bodies and spiritualize them away (I Cor 15:1-58; Phil 3:20-21), they are guilty of denying the resurrection.
   4. Since they proudly say the resurrection is past, and as their name preterist declares (though it is not truly past, for it did not occur, and spiritualizing it will not fit scripture), they are heretics like Hymenaeus, who said the resurrection was past (II Tim 2:14-18).
   5. Since they deny the resurrection, only inconsistency keeps them from denying the Lord’s resurrection, based on Paul’s inspired, indivisible connection of the two (I Cor 15:12-19).
   6. Jesus rose from the dead bodily, the greatest gospel fact, so we will also (I Cor 15:20-23).
   7. Many arguments could be raised from I Corinthians 15 that powerfully refute preterism, for there is one fact, concept, and doctrine taught there – the resurrection of dead bodies!
   8. Anyone attempting to spiritualize or allegorize this chapter is obviously an idiot or liar, for it begins with the physical body of our Lord and ends with our flesh and blood.
   9. Their Gnostic rejection of the body denies Jesus Christ’s death for bodies (I Cor 6:13-20).
   10. Their heresy on this point ruins baptism (15:29) and steals the reward for labor (15:58).
   11. Resurrection of the dead is basic to Christianity (Heb 6:1-3); preterists are not Christians.
   12. It is their denial of this specific doctrine – the resurrection of all dead bodies – that makes them guilty of the crime and punishment of Hymenaeus (II Tim 2:14-18; I Tim 1:18-20).
   13. Nowhere in the Bible is shortly, soon, or at hand used for the resurrection of the dead.
5. No Day of Judgment! Preterists deny the final and great day of judgment of all men (John 5:28-29; Rom 14:9-11; II Cor 5:9-11; Heb 9:27-28; Rev 20:11-15; II Tim 4:1,8; I Pet 4:5; Matt 7:21-23; 25:31-46; Acts 10:42; 17:30-31; 24:25).
   1. While preterists are creative to get rid of divine judgment (if we had denied the gospel of Jesus Christ as they do, we might seek to do the same!), we must submit to scripture’s revelation, rather than take such a holy and terrible event and eliminate it by mysticism.
   2. They erase the great Day of Judgment from the gospel much like the JW’s do with hell.
   3. Felix trembled as Paul reasoned about righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come; even though he was on the Roman side, he would face horrific judgment later (Ac 24:25).
   4. Paul preached future judgment, as he persuaded men by conveying the terror of the Lord, which had nothing to do with 70 A.D., for that did not touch the Gentiles (II Cor 5:9-11).
   5. Judging a few Jewish adversaries by destroying Jerusalem, which we certainly believe by scriptures that describe that limited event, does not match the scriptural Judgment at all.
   6. The gospel requires the whole earth and all men to be judged, including Gentiles and all the dead (Eccl 12:14; Matt 12:36; Rom 2:3-16; Jude 1:14-15; also see verses above).
   7. The gospel requires that both the dead and the living be judged at the same time, which is at His coming (II Tim 4:1; Acts 10:42; I Pet 4:5), which did not occur at all in 70 A.D.
   8. The gospel requires that the judgment inflicts punishment on bodies (Jn 5:29; Ro 14:11).
   9. The gospel requires that the outcome is damnation or eternal life (Matt 25:46; John 5:29).
   10. A final judgment is basic to Christianity (Heb 6:1-3), so preterists are not Christians.
6. Here Is an Irreducible Minimum. At this point we have three inseparable events identified by Hebrews 6:1-3 as essential to the Christian faith, which preterists deny, thus proving themselves to be heretics and not true Christians.
   1. These three events sufficiently refute preterism, for none of them have yet occurred at all.
   2. The scriptures already provided above prove these three events inseparably connected.
   3. For recent Christians, simply hold on to these three events by the scriptures and ignore preterist drivel, twaddle, poppycock, claptrap, tripe, and balderdash to the contrary.
7. No New Heavens and Earth! Preterists deny the renovation of this sin-cursed universe for your eternal inheritance (II Pet 3:1-14; Rom 8:18-23; Ps 102:25-27; Heb 1:10-12; Rev 20:11; 21:1; Isaiah 65:17; 66:22; Matt 5:18; 24:35).
   1. Jesus Christ’s death on the cross destroyed sin and death and the curse of them by Adam.
   2. The last enemy destroyed at Christ’s coming is death – formally, finally (I Cor 15:23-26).
   3. God’s predestinating purpose in Christ’s justification brings our full and final glorification – body, soul, and spirit (Rom 8:28-30; Phil 3:20-21; I Thess 5:23-24)!
   4. Preterist spiritual or figurative explanations for the passages above are entirely ridiculous.
   5. The harder they work to put Rom 8:18-23 in the first century they approach universalism, and it is only inconsistency that keeps those who say they are not universalists from it.
   6. Preterists have allegorized and spiritualized it as death of the Law and rising of the new covenant, so that the consistent and honest ones among them end up being universalists.
   7. They presume and declare that this earth and sin in it will continue as is forever, though the Bible declares that the physical universe will be changed, as in the verses above.
   8. They spiritualize away new heavens and earth, for nothing like it happened in 70 A.D.
   9. The effect and value of the cross is reduced considerably in this and other corruptions.
   10. Even John Owen corrupted II Peter 3, proving that “great” men can be foolish heretics, for this is one of the simplest passages in the Bible – see an explanation in its section.
8. No being like Christ! Even though God promised we would be like Him.
   1. A great gospel promise by John is our yet future change to be like Jesus (I John 3:1-3).
   2. Paul promised this great wonder at Christ’s coming (Phil 3:20-21; I Cor 15:51; Col 3:4).
   3. Notice carefully – this certain gospel promise is of physical bodies being totally changed.
   4. But not a single preterist or non-preterist was so changed before … at … or after 70 A.D.
   5. Their response – the only response they ever have – is to say we are already like Him!
   6. Since they say Jesus has already returned the second time, those events attached to His coming must have already occurred as well, so there is no future hope in this promise.
9. No Destruction of Death! Preterists say death was destroyed in 70 A.D., though you know better just by remembering the last funeral you attended.
   1. Paul plainly taught Jesus would destroy death at His second coming (I Cor 15:23-26), and the evidence of it would be the resurrection of dead, corrupted, and dissolved bodies.
   2. The gospel news of death’s destruction has given hope and joy to countless saints over many millennia, but preterists presumptuously deny the victory (Luke 20:36; Rev 21:4).
   3. Preterists deny the Bible’s precious promises by saying Jesus destroyed death in 70 A.D.
   4. Though they say this about 70 A.D., and even though they also say we are now in the eternal state of things, they also say death as it now occurs will continue to occur forever!
10. No Millennium! No matter what the millennium is (Rev 20:1-10), they jam the 1000-year event between His first and second coming in the first century.
    1. It is amusing to see these sticklers for so-called timing passages take the Holy Spirit’s choice of 1000 years and reduce it to a mere 40 years … without any of its features!
    2. In fact, if preterists were honest, they might cram John’s 1000 years into five or less years, for the time between their sworn date of John’s writing (65 A.D. or later) to Jerusalem’s destruction is only five years, which is fantastic eschatological compression!
    3. Not only has the devil been bound 1000 years, he has also been released for a little season, he has again deceived the nations, and he has been destroyed by fire and cast into the lake of fire … all before 70 A.D.! Though hard to believe, this is preterism!
11. No Destruction of Satan and angels! Preterists deny the judgment of the devil and his angels, since they say it happened in 70 A.D., which we know it did not.
    1. Let them charge us with begging the question or circular reasoning, but it is their burden and duty to prove the fulfillment, since they have chosen the novel and heretical position.
    2. With the devil and his angels gone, why have we not found greater liberty for personal holiness, seen revival in all human societies, and witnessed many more godly nations?
    3. If the lake of fire is Jerusalem’s garbage dump, where is it today? Is the devil still in it?
12. No hope! Preterists offer believers no hope before or after 70 A.D.
    1. The gospel of Jesus Christ is full of great hope (Tit 2:13; I Pet 1:3,13,21; I Jn 3:1-3; etc.).
    2. They offer no hope before 70 A.D., since every event of hope is spiritualized to nothing.
    3. They offer no hope after 70 A.D., since every event of hope occurred before that date.
    4. They offer no hope to Gentiles, since events of 70 A.D. did not affect any of them.
    5. Not a single real change took place in the life of anyone outside Jerusalem before, during, or after 70 A.D., which reduces the gospel to a hopeless, Jewish fable without value.
    6. There is little difference between the children of the devil and the children of God, for distinguishing events prophesied and promised in the New Testament are eliminated.
    7. Sin, sickness, pain, and death in a corrupt universe will continue as now forever and ever.
    8. Preterists teach that believers’ spirits go to heaven when they die, but the true gospel discounts this blessing without a bodily resurrection, for God does not consider naked spirits to be a very great blessing (II Cor 5:1-5; Ps 49:15; Job 19:25-27; I Cor 15:19; etc.).
13. No full sufficiency in the cross! Preterists believe and teach that not until 70 A.D. was the Law removed and redemption complete, ascribing these and related acts to the second coming of Christ in the destruction of Jerusalem.
    1. Such soteriological confusion is beyond the scope of this study, but it should cause alarm.
    2. Confusion about the finished work of the cross or the time of reformation is unnecessary.
    3. The legal work of redemption was finished at the cross, and the law was legally ended.
    4. They deny the power of the cross to fully remove sin’s curse and renovate the universe.
    5. They deny the power of His bodily resurrection to guarantee the same for His brethren.
    6. Yet the Bible attaches the victory to the cross (Gal 3:13; Eph 2:11-17; Col 2:13-15; etc.).
    7. Preterists have sin, death, and the world as it is continuing forever. Where is King Jesus?
14. Is consistent preterism universalism? They use consistent to describe their exhaustive labors to have all prophecies fulfilled in 70 A.D. But we ask more.
    1. Max and Tim King, formerly with the Church of Christ, are consistent with universalism.
    2. J. Stuart Russell’s The Parousia at Romans 8:18-23 surely sounds like universalism.
    3. Preterism was once connected with universalist Unitarians, especially in the 19th century.
15. Why side with the Sadducees? This liberal sect of the Jews’ religion denied the resurrection, but Jesus confounded their folly and Paul voted Pharisaism.
    1. Jesus confounded them in Matt 22:23-33, and Paul voted against them in Acts 23:6-8.
    2. Preterists say they believe in the resurrection, but they deny it Biblically and historically, for the Jews understood that the resurrection was of the physical body and nothing else.
    3. Bible resurrection is of the body, which history proves is future, but they spiritualize it.

Preterism’s Timing Fallacies

1. Preterism lives or dies by their timing verses. Daniel, Paul, Peter, and John did not limit their prophecies to the first century, so Preterists hunt for so-called timing verses to use as mauls to force all their prophecies into 70 A.D.
   1. They talk and argue ad nauseam about the immediate expectation of all N.T. writers and audiences for all N.T. prophesied events to be fulfilled in their very N.T. lifetimes.
   2. Jesus limited some prophecies to the first century (Matt 10:23; 16:27-28; 21:33-46; 24:34; etc.), but this does not limit all prophecies to that century nor does it require that all first century prophecies were fulfilled at Jerusalem’s destruction, for we must rightly divide similar-sounding events (II Tim 2:15), especially that involve His second coming and the resurrection, as God and Paul gave this interpretive rule against the first preterist.
   3. To force all the prophecies they can find into 70 A.D., preterists search for any timing words or phrases in the context that appear to mean soon to apply literally and strictly.
   4. In all cases and at all times, they ignore any inspired instruction (II Pet 3:8-9) or warning (II Thess 2:1-3) that denies their demand for imminency of the Lord’s second coming.
   5. They are partial and superstitious like Sabbatarians, who quote 20-100 uses of Sabbath from the O.T. or the gospels, conveniently ignoring Paul’s clear rejection of the Sabbath.
2. Preterism timing verses often have little time aspect. Relying on sound bites like shortly, high time, at hand, nigh, ready, and quickly, they ignore the fact that these words or phrases have little specific time meaning or time limitation.
   1. For illustrative purposes, here are a few examples: Romans 13:11-12; 16:20; Phil 4:5; Heb 6:8; 8:13; 10:37; James 5:8-9; I Peter 1:5; 4:5,7; Revelation 1:1,3; 22:6,7,10,12,20.
   2. If these words have specific time value, preterists should be able to prove to us exactly how many hours, days, years, decades, or centuries are intended by each such expression.
   3. This fact about the wide latitude in definitions for such terminology is especially true in prophecy, as is demonstrated in this section’s following points. Prophets use similitudes!
   4. This is especially true about the Lord’s Second Coming, as the Holy Spirit actually defined and explained an intentional delay in His coming for our profit (II Peter 3:8-9).
   5. This subject has merit on its own, without preterist considerations, as scorners have long used the imminency language of the New Testament to discredit the Bible. See Jonathan Edwards dealing with this subject 275 years ago.
3. Preterists conveniently ignore O.T. timing verses. O.T. prophecies with so-called preterist timing expressions clearly require no imminency of fulfillment.
   1. If preterists would start at the end of the Bible God wants them to (by the order of books), instead of starting at the other end, they might learn something about Bible interpretation.
   2. If preterists would compare the Spirit’s words as instructed (I Cor 2:13), they might learn that their timing texts are prophetic phrases without definite time limitations or meanings.
   3. If preterists could leave their agenda and search and submit to scripture, they might learn, for these prophetic examples from the O.T. scriptures simply and thoroughly refute them.
   4. Deut 4:26-27 threatened Israel’s soon destruction and scattering, warning that they would not prolong their days upon the land, though in round numbers the Assyrian dispersion was 800 years away, the Babylonian 1000 years away, and the Roman 1500 years away!
   5. Deut 32:35 used at hand and make haste, but His wrath in due time may take centuries! Paul in Heb 10:30-31 used it for the Jews’ judgment; see 32:36 also, 1500 years later! Deuteronomy 32 is a general prophecy of 70 A.D., but it came 1500 years earlier!
   6. Psalm 68:31 foretold Egypt and Ethiopia soon worshipping God, a prophecy of the times of Messiah in the New Testament, a full millennium away. Compare Acts 2:10 about Egypt, 18:24-28 about Apollos of Egypt, and 8:26-39 about a eunuch of Ethiopia.
   7. Isaiah 13:6 described the destruction of Babylon at hand, though the Medes and Persians would not actually fulfill this prophecy for another 200 years (13:17); Isaiah 13:22 saw a much more distant final desolation as near to come and her days shall not be prolonged.
   8. Isaiah 21:9 foretold Babylon’s fall in the past tense, though the fall was 200 years distant.
   9. Isaiah 29:17-18 described in a very little while the regathering from Babylon, at the earliest 200 years distant, or better yet the gospel era of Messiah, though 700 years away!
   10. Isaiah 46:13 described Israel’s deliverance from their captivity in Babylon by Cyrus as near, not far off, and shall not tarry, though 200 years distant in the future.
   11. Isaiah 51:5 described deliverance from Babylon as near and that had gone forth, though 200 years away. If not Babylon, then the gospel, much farther yet! See also Isaiah 56:1.
   12. Isaiah 60:22 described great growth of the church by the verses preceding it, which He will hasten, though many centuries in the distant future to the prophet and his audience.
   13. Isaiah 63:18 stated Israel possessed the land (1400 yrs) or temple (400 yrs) only a little while! Compared to the promise, it was short. 2000 years is short compared to eternity.
   14. Habakkuk 2:3 has a prophecy of an appointed time tarrying and needing to be waited for, but it will not tarry, and it will surely come, to be fulfilled in about 100 years; observe wisely the two different senses of tarry within the same verse … it will not tarry too long.
   15. Zephaniah 1:7,14,18 described Jerusalem’s destruction by Babylon as at hand, near, hasting greatly, and speedy though still 25 years away!
   16. Haggai 2:6-7 foretold Christ’s first coming as a little while away, yet 400 years distant!
   17. Malachi 3:1 prophesied Christ’s first coming as suddenly arriving at His temple, 400 years away! Or else we understand this qualitatively of how He came. Compare Rev 2:5.
   18. Jeremiah 48:16 describes Moab’s calamity as near to come and hasteth fast, which occurred five years after the destruction of Jerusalem, 23 years distant from the prophecy.
   19. See also Deuteronomy 7:4; Psalm 37:10; Isaiah 10:25; Jeremiah 1:10-12; 51:33; Hosea 1:4; Joel 1:15; 2:1; 3:14; Amos 8:2; Obadiah 1:15.
4. Preterists miss prophetic language. Prophetic language, often poetic or apocalyptic, may use time symbolically, as it uses everything else symbolically.
   1. The Holy Spirit clearly declared that prophetic language is not literal (Hos 12:10; I Pet 1:11), which allows or requires us to take timing words or phrases very loosely.
   2. The examples just given from the Old Testament should have already proven this point.
   3. An example is the thousand years (Rev 20:2,3,4,5,6,7), which follows other Bible uses of thousand as a round number for very many (Ps 50:10; Deut 7:9; I Chron 16:15; Ps 105:8), though consistent and honest preterists must jam the thousand years into forty years!
   4. An example is one hour, which is far too short to be considered literal at all, for there is no confederation of authority at all if it is in force for only sixty minutes (Rev 17:12).
   5. The past tense is used in at least three places for future events (Is 21:9; Rom 4:17; 8:30)! which should cause honest preterists to forget their timing verses, but they are few.
   6. Charles Spurgeon asked preterists what is intended by the present tense in Isaiah 9:6, “For unto a child is born,” when that event of Christ’s first coming was 600 years away.
   7. Charles Spurgeon asked preterists what is intended by the past tense in Isaiah 53:4, “Surely he hath borne our griefs,” when that event was 600 years in the future.
   8. While the verb tense in both cases is actually the perfect tense, he thus ridiculed preterist timing texts, which prompted his two illustrations of how bankrupt the theory actually is.
5. Preterists miss the eternal perspective. Lengthy judgments, especially eternal judgment at Christ’s return, make any ordinary length of time short, very short.
   1. Consider Isaiah 63:18 above, where a very long time is considered short in perspective.
   2. God’s reckoning of time in both testaments is stated to be different (Ps 90:4; II Peter 3:8).
   3. Though a life of 70-80 years is a considerable length of time, various metaphors in the Bible describe it as exceeding short (Job 7:6; 9:25; Ps 39:5; 89:47; 90:9-10; Jas 4:14).
   4. Paul reasoned that this life is only for a moment if compared to eternity (II Cor 4:17-18).
6. Preterists miss prophetic purpose. Prophecies of Christ’s second coming have a purpose, and that purpose justifies the variation in timing language.
   1. The grammatical choice of the first and third person in I Thess 4:13-18 is to comfort, for Paul did not believe at all that he or any of his audience would be alive (I Cor 6:14).
   2. The plain statement of II Thess 2:1-3 against imminency is to warn against preterists.
   3. The first person in other prophecies is to exhort to godliness (I Jn 3:1-3; II Pet 3:10-14).
   4. The mystery of the exact timing is designed to produce watchfulness (I Thess 5:1-10).
   5. Peter reminds of Psalm 90:4 to explain the role of God’s longuffering (II Peter 3:8,9,15).
   6. Imminent language teaches certainty of fulfillment, solidarity with the early church, personal relevance and motivation, and perpetual encouragement and exhortation, etc.
7. Preterists miss extended prophecies. Prophecies covering centuries may occur shortly or soon, as initial events in long prophecies might start tomorrow.
   1. Preterists like Russell must do this with Revelation 20, for the millennium there has 1000 years to deal with, and they consider it part of the things to shortly come to pass (1:1).
   2. They are hypocrites about such timing, but some will even cram it all into 30-70 A.D.!
   3. Historicism does not violate Revelation 1:1-3, since some events began to occur shortly.
   4. If Revelation covers long political movements of the Dark Ages, they did begin shortly.
   5. Note how Habakkuk 2:3 describes an end to a prophecy both tarrying and not tarrying.
8. Preterists mock Paul’s rebuke of preterists. While using at hand wherever they can find it as a sound bite for first century imminency, Preterists ignore, reject, or corrupt Paul’s inspired warning and proof that Jesus Christ’s second coming was definitely NOT at hand!
   1. They respond to II Thes 2:1-3 with authorship in 53 A.D. and say 17 years is not at hand, thus allowing the possibility for their fantasy that all prophecies yet occurred by 70 A.D.
   2. They miss the fact that Paul’s falling away was still future in 67 A.D., when he wrote his last epistle after appearing before Nero, whom they say is the man of sin in II Thess 2.
   3. But before these things, they change “at hand” in 2:3 to “had come,” perverting God’s word in a very important passage to allow their 70 A.D. fulfillment. See the NKJV.
   4. How can it be both ways? At hand and not at hand? Same as tarrying and not tarrying (Hab 2:3)! It is not at hand in real terms, but at hand in God’s view and our expectation.
   5. II Thess 2:1-3 is very important, and it should provide spectacles through which to read every other prophecy, whether of Paul or others, which sound of imminency.
9. Preterist timing verses reject God’s time warning. In a context about timing of the Lord’s return, the Holy Spirit gave one key rule that preterists reject.
   1. God’s timing is different from ours – one day or a thousand years is the same (II Pet 3:8)!
   2. The context of the rule is exactly our controversy – the time of the second coming (3:4,9).
   3. God is not guilty of slackness, for He measures time differently and for a good reason.
   4. Peter did not invent this rule or use it to defend himself. God used it to justify Himself!
   5. This rule of timing was declared in the O.T. (Ps 90:4), which was illustrated above by various O.T. prophecies that were fulfilled slower than timing words would indicate.
   6. There had been sufficient delay of His promise for scoffing, slackness, and longsuffering.
   7. The second coming was not at hand: the earth was reserved in storage for that day (3:7).
   8. Why emphasize this rule – be not ignorant of this one thing – unless very important?
   9. This is an inspired answer for questionable timing phrases of events you know are future, and wise saints will hang on to it just as Jesus hung onto God’s word against the devil.
   10. Of course, such a Bible explanation has no meaning to those obsessed with their agenda.
   11. Preterist efforts to rip this verse out of context and pervert it are damning to their cause.
   12. If you miss this point, then you take the risk of falling from your own stedfastness (3:17).
10. Preterist timing scorn is crushed by Paul in Romans. Preterists hate II Peter 3:8 and do all they can to minimize the text and ridicule those who use it.
    1. II Peter 3:8 is an inspired rule of time given by God relative to Christ’s delayed coming!
    2. But preterists whine loud and long about the plain reading of their timing texts, saying that God would never use them other than how simple readers would understand them.
    3. Let God be true! How do preterists explain the past tense of glorified in Romans 8:30?
    4. Should we let its plain reading convince us we are glorified? Consider how much stronger this text is by its past tense than any timing words like at hand that preterists use, yet the event was far future to the writer and every reader of Romans, even by millennia!
    5. God does not communicate prophetically by our timing or by our verb tenses, as He had explained earlier in Romans 4:17! Compare to Genesis 17:4-6. Let God be true!
11. Preterists ignore God’s longsuffering. After defining the rule of God’s time perspective (3:8), Peter explained the Lord’s delayed return was due to God’s longsuffering for His elect to repent and be saved (II Pet 3:9,15).
    1. God’s longsuffering would not have been mentioned twice unless needed for explanation.
    2. In context of scoffing and slackness about His promise to come, longsuffering was added.
    3. Unbelievers or scoffers count God slack, but we are to rather account Him longsuffering.
    4. God’s counting or accounting rules are missed by natural men, loved by spiritual men.
    5. God’s longsuffering and patient waiting are recorded elsewhere (Gen 6:3 cp I Pet 3:20; Gen 15:16; Ex 34:6; Ps 86:15; Rom 2:4; 9:22; I Tim 1:16).
12. Preterists neglect timed prophecies. Instead of vague sound bites, the Bible has timed prophecies of seventy weeks, prerequisite events, 1260 days, an existing generation, historical reference points, etc., but Preterists slight them.
    1. Daniel’s prophecy of the little horn of Rome does not allow a first century fulfillment, for the contemporary horns of the fourth beast require a divided Roman Empire, like Greece.
    2. Paul’s prophecy of the man of sin after a falling away did not occur in the first century, for the falling away was still future to Paul just before he died in 67 A.D. (I Tim 4:1-3; II Tim 3:1; 4:3), and the great falling away from apostolic doctrine was yet centuries away.
    3. A thousand-year prophecy, even if taken symbolically, cannot fit into 70 A.D. (Rev 20).
13. Preterists ignore timing statements that oppose them. They are quick and thorough to find only those sound bites that serve their first century imminency.
    1. The parable of the virgins has tarrying long enough to slumber and sleep (Matthew 25:5).
    2. The parable of the talents describes the lord coming after a long time (Matt 25:19); Luke, recording false assumptions of imminency, has Jesus saying that the nobleman went into a far country, long enough for them to need to occupy in his absence (Luke 19:11-15).
    3. In Matthew 22:1-14, Jerusalem’s destruction in 70 A.D. is only the midpoint of a timeline of future events, as the time of the Gentiles, Christ’s marriage supper, and the King coming in judgment follow long after 70 A.D. Preterists are partialists in the scriptures!
    4. Paul spoke of God showing His grace to us in ages to come (Eph 2:7), which is entirely unnecessary to write in such a way, if eschatology was realized just a few years later.
    5. Paul did not expect Christ to come in his lifetime, for he wrote that those then living would rise from the dead at Christ’s coming (I Cor 6:14); the power of this argument is partially based on their foolish emphasis of audience relevance in I Thess 4:13-18.
    6. Scripture twice puts the times and seasons in God’s hand (Acts 1:6-7; I Thess 5:1-2), which is intended to remove any confidence we have of the timing, which Paul had taught perfectly to the Thessalonians, but which is perfectly rejected by preterists.
    7. If all scripture pointed to 70 A.D., as preterists assume and declare, then with each passing month there would have been greater certainty of His coming (Heb 10:25)! While this might be true of 70 A.D., it is not and cannot be true of the Lord’s second coming.
    8. Consider the debate among the apostles about the time of John’s death (John 21:21-24), which indicates that they, including John, knew that they would not live until His return.
    9. Jesus declared that God bears long with His elect (Luke 18:7), but preterists pass over it.
14. Preterism dates the Lord’s coming. Preterism removes all doubt or suspense for the time of Christ’s coming, for they say the N.T. gave countless short-term signs and prerequisite events that would have left none waiting or surprised.
    1. If this is true, then how could a man think that the coming was delayed, as in Matt 24:48?
    2. If this is true, then it minimizes or negates “in such an hour as ye think not” (Matt 24:44).
    3. If this is true, how can the times and the seasons be in the Father’s own power (Acts 1:7)?
    4. If this is true, how can Jesus Christ surprise men with perfect readiness (I Thess 5:1-2)?
    5. Scripture twice puts the times and seasons in God’s hand (Acts 1:6-7; I Thess 5:1-2), which is intended to remove any confidence we have of the timing, which he had taught perfectly to the Thessalonians, but which is rejected by preterists.
    6. If all scripture pointed to 70 A.D., as preterists assume and declare, then with each passing month there would have been greater certainty of His coming (Heb 10:25)! While this might be true of 70 A.D., it is not of the second coming.
15. Preterists assume too much of 70 A.D. Because Matthew 24:1-35 is a 70 A.D. event does not mean other passages with similar words or other N.T. prophecies must be the same event or occur at the same time.
    1. Before futurism (1830), the vast majority of Christians read Matt 24 in light of 70 A.D.
    2. But these same believers never considered preterist forcing of all prophecies into 70 A.D.
    3. When 70 A.D. was well known and best understood in prophecy, there were no preterists.
    4. Preterists use clouds and alterations to heavenly bodies in Isaiah 13:10 or Jeremiah 4:13 as examples of God’s judgment to explain Matthew 24:29-30, though they are different events, so it is just as possible that I Thess 4:13-18 is unrelated to Matthew 24:29-30.
    5. The necessity of rightly dividing scripture, the rule given in a context of corrupting the timing of the Second Coming, becomes of great important to differentiate from 70 A.D.
16. Preterists must time Revelation before 70 A.D. Though the Holy Spirit gave no details about its date other than John’s lifetime, the Preterist interpretation of Revelation totally depends on the speculation of early authorship.
    1. They must have Revelation written before 70 A.D., or all their timing verses are lost.
    2. They must have Revelation written before 70 A.D., or their prophetic scheme is false.
    3. This problem affects many partial preterists as well for their interpretation of Revelation.
    4. The conclusion is likely, as ancient tradition and evidence indicates the reign of Domitian and about 95 A.D., either of which leaves any form of preterism bankrupt in Revelation.
    5. See some links at the end of this document for pursuing Revelation’s dating further.
17. Preterists are scoffers counting the Lord slack. Peter warned about scoffers in the last days that would mock His promised coming and count Him slack, since they would not understand the Lord’s timing perspective (II Pet 3:3,8-9).
    1. Preterists mock His coming so much that they reduce it to a spiritual illusion in 70 A.D.
    2. Read any preterist dealing with their so-called timing texts in the New Testament: you will see their scoffing mockery of any return by Christ outside that existing generation.
18. Preterists confuse apostolic timing by pronouns and verbs. Preterists limit scripture’s statements and their application to only those who first read them.
    1. If they cannot find a timing text, they limit scripture to the writer and his primary readers.
    2. They say prophecy had primary, if not exclusive, value for those reading it and no others!
    3. The first and second grammatical person is to them overwhelming proof that a prophecy of the New Testament had to be fulfilled during the lives of both writer and readers.
    4. They call this audience relevance, meaning the prophecy had to have relevance for writer and first readers (obviously ignoring any relevance for millennia of readers ever since!).
    5. For example, I John 3:2 required Jesus to return while John and first readers were living, or he would have used the third person for future saints being like Him and seeing Him.
    6. For example, I Thess 4:13-18 required Jesus to return while Paul and first readers were living, or it would use the third person for future saints being caught up with the dead.
    7. If they read the O.T., they would see this to be a hermeneutical farce, as the O.T. applied to many generations of Jews, including those of 70 A.D. (Deut 4:25-27; 28:68; etc., etc.).
    8. What did Joseph mean in Gen 50:25, God will surely visit you, and ye shall carry up my bones from hence? When and how did God visit? Who carried up his bones? When? He did not say, God shall visit your posterity, and they shall carry up my bones from hence. But though he did not, Joseph knew it would not happen in that generation. [J. Edwards].
    9. Did Isaiah limit Christ’s redemption to 700 B.C. by audience relevance in Isaiah 53:1-6?
    10. Is salvation from sins limited to Corinth and Paul by audience relevance in I Cor 15:1-3?
    11. If preterists read the N.T., they would find audience relevance proving the resurrection of the dead after Paul’s death (I Cor 6:14), contradicting their view of I Thess 4:13-18.
    12. If their concept of audience relevance stands in even one place, where there are no other limiting factors in the context, then the Bible is totally irrelevant for all other generations!
19. Preterists assume last days must mean today or tomorrow. They cannot see this final dispensation of the New Testament to be the last days in its entirety.
    1. Verses with the words last days or last times must mean imminency to preterists.
    2. Yet there are last days in about 30 A.D., as in Heb 1:2; Acts 2:17; I Peter 1:20; Heb 9:26.
    3. Yet there are later last days in about 67 A.D., as in I John 2:18 and I Corinthians 10:11.
    4. Yet there were last days still future and events to be fulfilled in them, as in I Timothy 4:1; II Timothy 3:1; James 5:3; II Peter 3:3; I Peter 1:5; and Jude 1:18.
    5. The whole gospel era is the last days, in that it is the last dispensation (Gal 4:4; Ep 1:10).
    6. Compared to the Jews in earlier ages, the ends of the world are the latter times of earth’s existence, not the generation that would see the world come to an end (I Cor 10:11).
    7. Compare the Spirit’s usage of the day of salvation (II Cor 6:2; Heb 3:7,13,15; 4:7-8).
20. For Jonathan Edwards on timing texts, see here.

Preterism Refuted by Daniel

1. Preterists should start in Daniel. Jesus said Daniel gave understanding for prophetic interpretation (Matt 24:15), and Daniel’s timing would correct their efforts to force Paul’s, Peter’s, and John’s prophecies into the first century.
   1. It is frustrating to meet novice Bible readers starting in the N.T. to learn Bible prophecy.
   2. Note the timing phrases from the O.T. shown above, which correct preterist assumptions.
   3. There is so much they could learn from the book of Daniel to open the N.T. prophecies.
   4. The fulfillment of prophecies pertaining to Babylon, Persia, and Greece are very helpful.
   5. The day-year option is proven to be a valid interpretation by the 70 weeks (Dan 9:24-27).
   6. It is an option and not a requirement by 2300 literal days of Antiochus IV (Dan 8:13-14).
   7. If Daniel has a prophecy occurring after 70 A.D., preterism fails by its own axiom; this is especially true if the event after 70 A.D. is Jesus Christ’s coming, Day of Judgment, etc.
2. Revelation is the last place to go. Paul’s man of sin and John’s beast and whore were identified 500 years earlier by the beloved prophet.
   1. Daniel’s fulfilled symbols are the Spirit’s inspired school for prophetic interpretation.
   2. Beasts, heads, and horns for Babylon, Persia, and Greece help interpreting Revelation.
   3. The day-year option, useful for considering length of prophecies, is valid from Daniel 9.
3. Daniel’s prophecies cover all. He detailed Israel’s future to their final scattering in 70 A.D. (chapters 8-12). He outlined Gentile world history affecting the saints of God to Jesus Christ’s second coming (chapters 2 and 7).
   1. His detailed prophecy of Alexander and Antiochus IV are within Greek history (Dan 8).
   2. His 70-weeks prophecy has a very clear start date and last week events (Dan 9:24-27).
   3. Daniel’s last vision has a very clear beginning date and ending date (Daniel 11:1-2; 12:7).
   4. Nebuchadnezzar’s image and beasts from the sea are for Gentiles (Dan 2:31-45; 7:1-11), as Nebuchadnezzar had as much interest in Israel’s future as preterists do with the truth.
4. Daniel 7 identified Paul’s man of sin and John’s beast. Solitary authorship of the Bible by the Holy Spirit requires unified scripture; prophecies will agree closely, according to the first rule of inspired hermeneutics (II Peter 1:19-21).
   1. There are not three great enemies of the saints – there is only one, prophesied three ways.
   2. This study cannot deal in depth with all of Daniel’s prophecies or even all of this one.
   3. For the best intro to Dan 7.
5. Daniel’s four beasts are easy (Dan 7:1-7). A beast is no more than a kingdom, nation, or empire. The four are Babylon, Media-Persia, Greece, and Rome.
   1. There is not the slightest justification for any variation in these four, though infidels try.
   2. Media-Persia is not to be divided – it is always viewed together (Dan 2:39; 7:5-6; 8:3).
   3. The little horn of chapter 8 is Greek (8:21-25) and that of chapter 9 is Roman (7:6-8).
   4. There is no hope for those who cannot grasp this simple prophecy of world history.
6. The ten horns of the fourth beast – Rome – are key. Since the little horn of Rome comes into existence after the ten horns, it dates the rise of the little horn.
   1. The ten horns are contemporary kingdoms or nations: this point is important as a starting place in this prophecy to stop preterists from vainly imagining consecutive Caesars.
   2. They are kingdoms, for kings and kingdoms are used interchangeably (7:17,23-24; 8:21), and horns represent Media and Persia in 8:3 and the divided kingdoms after Alexander in 8:8, and it is impossible for ten kings to rule one kingdom (one beast) at the same time.
   3. A king, not a kingdom, is seen by direct language or growing out of a horn (8:8-9,21-23), or in language so obvious and history so definite, as in the case of Alexander (8:5,21).
   4. They are contemporary kingdoms, not consecutive, as they appear together (7:7-8,20,24).
   5. When God wants to show consecutive kingdoms, he describes them as such (7:5; 8:3,20).
   6. Preterists are dead in the water, for they foolishly imagine 11 consecutive Caesars, which idea involves more difficulties and impossibilities than the number of horns squared!
   7. The ten kingdoms are after Rome ends as an empire, like Greece’s horns (Dan 8:8,22), where we see Antiochus IV (Epiphanes) growing out of the Seleucid kingdom (horn).
   8. If preterists bark about Daniel 8:9 being an individual man, which they want in Daniel 7:8 for Vespasian or whoever they can imagine, note the inspired difference in growing out of a horn (Dan 8:9) and growing out of the beast alongside the horns (Dan 7:8).
   9. When the Roman Empire disintegrated, its chief territories were divided into ten powers, which have been and are still vaguely seen in the division of nations in modern Europe, and there is no greater difficulty identifying Rome’s ten than identifying Greece’s four.
   10. Rome did not disintegrate into this tenfold division of power until about the fifth century!
   11. Therefore, the little horn and everything in Daniel 7 after verse 7 is after the fifth century!
   12. There is nothing in Daniel 8-12 about this little horn, for those prophecies are Jewish and are expressly limited to fulfillment before 70 A.D., centuries before this prophecy began.
   13. Preterism has already been refuted by the timing of Rome’s decline into ten powers.
7. The little horn of Rome is key. This is the first indication in scripture of an enemy of the churches of Christ that is later picked up by Paul and John.
   1. The little horn of Rome was a kingdom developing after the ten kingdoms were in place, for Daniel described it coming up after seeing the ten contemporary horns (7:8,20,24).
   2. What is more Roman than the papacy, taking the name, capital, and language (Latin)?
   3. The little horn was different from the others, for it was religious – the Catholic papacy.
   4. Why a little horn? The papacy began with the bishop of Rome, but grew to be very great.
   5. In order to provide for itself, the little horn subdued three of the other existing ten horns, which cannot in any meaningful way be applied to consecutive Caesars, as some imagine.
   6. The little horn did not get full authority until about the sixth, seventh, or eighth centuries.
   7. The little horn made war with the saints and prevailed for 1260 years; having identified it, we know the day-year option is right for this prophecy by history. Think Inquisitions.
   8. The little horn and the beast it grew from are destroyed at the final judgment, which ties this prophecy in with Paul’s in II Thessalonians 2 and John’s throughout Revelation.
   9. The details of this explicit prophecy are found in various historicist commentaries and books identifying the papacy as the little horn, man of sin, and beast/whore of Revelation.
   10. Paul’s man of sin is this little horn, the withholding power the Empire and its Caesars.
   11. It is Christ’s second coming here and in II Thessalonians 2 that ends the horn and beast.
   12. If this is not the papacy, then it settles for an interpretation and application far inferior.
   13. If this is not the papacy, then the Bible misses the greatest enemy of N.T. Christianity.
   14. If this is not the papacy, then the martyrs for 1200 years died in vain believing a lie.
   15. Preterism has been refuted here by the prophecy’s timing and exclusive interpretation.
8. Vespasian or any other Caesar cannot possibly be the little horn. There is not one descriptive factor in Daniel 7 that fits any Caesar even close to how they all fit the papacy in fulfillment.
   1. This point is unnecessary; we have already proved the little horn cannot be a Caesar by the prophecy’s timing, but let us compare the descriptive phrases to Caesars and popes.
   2. It was a little horn (7:8) – no Caesar could be called little when becoming dictator of the Empire, but the popes began as the mere bishops of Rome and later ruled the world.
   3. It had eyes like those of man (7:8,20) – eyes here are intelligent oversight, and no Caesar matched the popes in sagacious politics and conspiracies throughout their vast reaches.
   4. It was diverse from the other horns (7:23) – no Caesar was truly diverse from others, but the pope was certainly diverse from other temporal kings by having a spiritual kingdom.
   5. It subdued three other kingdoms (7:24) – no Caesar removed three other Caesars, but the popes of Rome by various means gained early possession of several temporal kingdoms.
   6. It had a look more stout than his fellows (7:20) – no Caesar, especially Vespasian, appeared more pompous than the others; but the popes were carried about and adored like God Himself, as they sat in a temple in attire and glory crushing Caesar’s look altogether.
   7. It had a blasphemous mouth (7:8,11,20,25) – no Caesar, like Vespasian, was exceptionally blasphemous as were popes claiming to be God on earth and Christ’s vicar.
   8. It thought to change times and laws (7:25) – no Caesar corrupted Christian doctrine at all, but the popes of Rome have made hundreds, or thousands, of changes to the gospel.
   9. It shall war against the saints and wear them out (7:21,25) – no Caesar, including Nero, prevailed in war against saints, but the popes drove Christians into hiding for centuries.
   10. It shall dominate the saints for 3½ years (7:25) – no Caesar, including Nero, had saints under persecuting dominion like the popes for 1260 years, shown by 9:24-27 and history.
   11. It shall be consumed by God’s judgment to the end (7:26) – no Caesar was consumed to the end – they died, and it was the end; the papacy has been consumed by Christ’s gospel to be but a shadow of its former self (II Thess 2:8), and the final and formal end comes!
9. Preterists corrupt Daniel 7 as much as SDA’s corrupt Daniel 8 and futurists corrupt Daniel 9-12. It is amazing how severely God blinds intelligent men, when they choose a sacred cow over, “Thus saith the Lord.”
   1. William Miller corrupted it first.
   2. Ellen G. White followed his miserable failure by covering it with a spiritual fulfillment.
   3. They confuse the simple beasts of Daniel 8, the timing, the starting point, the events, etc.
   4. Futurists have no regard for scripture, inserting an indeterminate gap that now approaches 2000 years into a dated and timed prophecy of only 490 years in total duration.
   5. Futurists have no regard for scripture, ignoring express time limits in 10-12 and leaping at 11:36 from its careful Greek chronology to a future antichrist they have invented.
   6. Preterists are no different – Daniel 7’s horns are consecutive Caesars, the descriptive statements are wildly corrupted to fit whatever they can scrounge from history books, etc.
   7. Preterism is refuted already, so there is no need to find or explain their hallucinations.
10. Good commentaries on Daniel will be of the historicist school. Both the preterist and futurist schools of interpretation were invented by Jesuits to divert attention away from the RCC and papacy as part of the Counter-Reformation.
    1. The fourth section of Ralph Woodrow’s, “Great Prophecies of the Bible,” is excellent.
    2. For Daniel chapters 9-12, Philip Mauro’s, “The Seventy Weeks of Daniel….”
    3. For Daniel chapter 7, see the author’s outline.
    4. For Daniel chapter 7, Albert Barnes.
    5. For Daniel chapter 7, John Gill.
    6. See also Clarke, Thomas Newton, Isaac Newton, H. Grattan Guinness, E.B. Elliott, etc.
    7. It is a horrible shame that the vast majority of Christians have rushed to the ditches of futurism or preterism, leaving the road of historicism which our faithful fathers traveled.
    8. Many partial preterists exist among the Reformed churches today, where they protect their own reputation by focusing on Vespasian or Nero, rather than their Mother Church.

 

Preterism Refuted by Paul

1. Paul directly refuted Preterism (II Thes 2:1-3). In response to Thessalonian concerns about the imminency of Jesus Christ’s return, Paul declared it far off.
   1. By his epistles, Paul had taught the Thessalonians more about Christ’s Second Coming than other churches (I Thess 1:10; 2:19; 3:13; 4:13-18; 5:5:1-11,23; II Thess 1:7-10).
   2. The Thessalonians had heard preterist rumors and anticipated the Lord’s imminent return.
   3. Paul emphatically and expressly told them it was still far off, and he proved his response by reminding them of two major prerequisite events that were also both still future.
   4. If preterists had not already made up their minds to defend their 70 A.D. agenda at all costs, they could read this prophecy and know they greatly err from Pauline eschatology.
   5. Knowledge of Daniel 7 is very useful here, as the man of sin is the little horn of Rome.
2. Regardless of source, Christ’s return was not close. Paul listed dangers then present of a false spirit, teachers, or fraudulent epistle indicating otherwise.
   1. Here is one issue – no matter what futurists or preterists say – Christ’s second coming.
   2. He besought these believers to disregard any source of information to the contrary (2:2).
   3. There was no reason to be soon anxious about this event, for it was definitely not at hand.
   4. Paul had taught this church about the second coming in each chapter of the first epistle.
   5. Paul had told them in person (referred to in 5:1-2) that the timing was quite uncertain.
   6. He had used pronouns for the purpose of comfort that could be construed as imminent, but here he sets the matter straight – the second coming of Jesus Christ was not at hand.
3. Paul warned of much deception about timing. The Preterists are guilty, for their whole perversion of the gospel is lying deception about timing.
   1. Paul warned against deception from any quarter and by any means teaching imminency.
   2. Isn’t it marvelous that Paul would address the very deceptive heresy that preterists teach?
   3. It should not cause marvel, but thanksgiving, for God inspired scripture for saints’ safety.
   4. It behooves you to be very cautious, careful, and skeptical about any timing emphasis.
   5. Futurists pervert the timing by putting Christ’s secret “rapture” first before the antichrist.
   6. Preterists are worse than futurists, who only corrupt the order, but do not deny the events.
4. Preterists adore at hand except here. Paul used a Preterist mantra, at hand, to refute prophetic deception about timing and declare Christ’s return far off.
   1. Here is a real timing passage by successive events, but they reject it and then corrupt it.
   2. They will wax loud and long about at hand in I Peter 4:7 and Revelation 1:3 and 22:10.
   3. They will not even accept the words here, but instead evilly change the text to help them.
5. II Thessalonians 2:1-3 burns down Preterism’s house of cards. Paul lists events that must precede Christ’s coming, which Daniel and he prove far away.
   1. Russell’s efforts in The Parousia to discount this text valued his agenda over inspiration.
   2. Changing God’s word, “at hand,” to, “had come,” allows preterists their idea of 70 A.D. timing against Paul’s timing of the distant future. [See his notes on the text or the NKJV.]
   3. This passage is also abused by futurists, particularly C.I. Scofield in his introduction to the epistle, just as Paul warned that the doctrine in it would be despised by deceivers.
6. A falling away, or apostasy, had to occur before Christ’s coming. This general and widespread departure from the faith was still centuries away.
   1. Jesus Christ could not return and gather His saints together until after a falling away.
   2. A falling away, or an apostasy, is a departure from true apostolic doctrine and practice by leaving the truth, introducing corruptions, ignoring scripture, adding to scripture, etc.
   3. Leaving the true gospel for heresy was often warned against in the New Testament (Gal 1:6; 5:4; Col 1:23; I Tim 1:19; II Tim 1:15; 4:4; Heb 6:6; 10:38; II Pet 3:17).
   4. Trouble by Jewish legalism occurred while Paul lived, for he had to oppose it throughout his ministry and wrote several epistles against it, but this falling away was still future.
   5. Paul warned Ephesus of apostasy in the church (Acts 20:28-31), which had not occurred when John wrote them in 67 A.D., according to preterist timing assumptions (Rev 2:1-7).
   6. Paul told of a future falling away consisting of two chief Catholic doctrines (I Tim 4:1-6), celibacy and fasting from meats, involving satanic deception just as with the man of sin, which did not originate until several centuries after 70 A.D.
   7. Paul also prophesied of a falling away from sound doctrine involving great immorality, ritualism, silly women, much deception, and fables (II Tim 3:1 – 4:4).
   8. Paul wrote these two epistles around 58-65 A.D., but these apostasies were still future.
   9. Peter warned of false teachers arising within the church and seducing many (II Pet 2:1-2).
   10. John admitted many little antichrists, but the big one had not yet come (I John 2:18-19).
   11. Daniel had identified a falling away with the little horn of Rome, or Catholic papacy, for it would blasphemously and arrogantly think to change times and laws (Dan 7:25).
   12. The widespread defection from the apostles occurred after Paul by several centuries, as countless Roman Catholic alterations and inventions deceived a large majority.
   13. The RCC apostasy stands alone in extent, duration, blasphemy, delusion, popularity, etc.
   14. Preterism has been refuted here by the falling away being several centuries after 70 A.D.
7. The man of sin had to be revealed before Christ’s second coming. After the falling away, a great enemy of the church had to arise before Christ’s return.
   1. As Daniel taught honest Bible readers starting there, Rome had to disintegrate first, so the little horn could not be revealed prior to the fifth century after Rome fell in 476 A.D.
   2. The withholding power that kept Rome’s bishop down was the civil rule of the Caesars, which was taken out of the way by the overthrow of the western empire by the Visigoths.
   3. Paul referred to Rome’s Caesars and the end of the Empire obscurely to save his readers from political trouble, which had already occurred in Thessalonica earlier (Acts 17:5-9).
   4. Rome did not disintegrate until the fifth century, so the pope’s rise matches the apostasy.
   5. The man of sin, a collective noun like man of God (II Ti 3:17), is a series of wicked men.
   6. The man of sin, like a man of war, describes a man fully proficient and dedicated to sin.
   7. The man of sin is a collective noun for successive Roman popes until Christ’s coming, and this application is confirmed by Daniel’s description of 1260 years of the little horn.
   8. They clearly sat in the temple of God (a church) and professed themselves above God.
   9. Paul also called him the son of perdition by the Spirit for his likeness to Judas (Jn 17:12), and is there anyone on earth more worthy of the title than the popes of Rome?
   10. Perdition is judgment (I Tim 6:9; Heb 10:39; II Pet 3:7), as John’s beast (Rev 17:8,11).
   11. As Daniel taught Bible readers that started there, Jesus will destroy him at His coming.
   12. Antiochus, Nero, or Vespasian could not and did not fulfill any of his features here.
   13. Preterism has been further refuted by the popes of Rome arising centuries after 70 A.D.
8. The man of sin cannot be Nero by any measure. For the descriptions Paul wrote about this enemy cannot be applied to him or any Caesar; it is the popes.
   1. We have established this certainty by the timing of Daniel 7 and its many descriptions.
   2. We will use Nero here for our comparison, as he is most commonly assumed by preterists for this prophecy, and because any other Caesar has far less going for him than this man.
   3. He could only come after a falling away (2:3) – which was yet future even during Nero’s last years (54-68), given by Paul’s prophecy of it (I Tim 4:1-3; II Tim 3:1 – 4:4; 4:16-17).
   4. He was the man of sin (2:3) – which does not identify Nero or other Caesars like it does the popes, who in personal and doctrinal perversion and persecution have gorged on sin.
   5. He was the son of perdition (2:3) – which title of Judas cannot apply to the pagan Nero.
   6. He would sit in the temple of God (2:4) – which is a church, as that was Paul’s doctrine (I Cor 3:16; Eph 2:21; I Tim 3:15). This is an important distinction. Nero nor any other Caesar ever sat in God’s temple. Note the Catholic dogma of ex cathedra, which means the pope is infallible when sitting in the bishop’s seat. Find St. Peter’s chair here.
   7. He would be against God, above God, and like God (2:4) – as evil as Nero was, his vain titles and juvenile conduct do not even approach the divine presumptions of the popes.
   8. He was held back by a withholding power (2:6-8) – Nero was not held back, for he was so immature and inexperienced when he did take office that his mother Agrippina ruled; the popes were held back by the civil authority of the emperors until deposed in 476 A.D.
   9. He would be consumed by the spirit of the Lord’s mouth (2:8) – Nero committed suicide; the gospel had no affect on him; the popes’ influence has been well curbed by the gospel.
   10. He would be destroyed with the brightness of Christ’s coming (2:8) – Nero died in 68 A.D., two years before even the preterist notion of Christ’s coming! The popes still reign from Rome, and they will be destroyed at the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.
   11. He would arise through satanic signs and lying wonders (2:9) – neither Nero nor any other Caesar had sign gifts or attempted such, but the “miracles” of the RCC are Legion.
   12. He would take leadership through great deception and delusion (2:10-12) – Nero did not come to power any such way or ever use such to remain in power; the popes have created more lies and more farfetched and unbelievable lies than any other leader of any kind.
9. Preterists corrupt II Thess 2 as much as futurists do for their cause. Both must oppose this passage for its order of events and timing of Christ’s coming.
   1. The order – apostasy, man of sin, Christ’s return – is opposite the futurist order of events.
   2. Futurists lie by inventing Christ coming for His saints and separately with His saints!
   3. They arrogantly concoct a “day of the Lord” as a separate coming from “day of Christ.”
   4. C.I. Scofield wrote in his introduction to II Thessalonians, “The theme of Second Thessalonians is, unfortunately, obscured by a mistranslation in the A.V. of 2.2, where ‘day of Christ is at hand’ (I Cor. 1.8, note) should be, ‘day of the Lord is now present’ (Isa. 2.12, refs.). The Thessalonian converts were ‘shaken in mind’ and ‘troubled,’ supposing . . . that the persecutions from which they were suffering were those of the ‘great and terrible day of the Lord,’ from which they had been taught to expect deliverance by ‘the day of Christ, and our gathering together unto him’ (2.1).” [SRB, 1271.]
   5. Preterists must make the falling away identical with Matthew 24:11,24 in content and timing, though Paul still saw it future at the end of his life (I Tim 4:1-6; II Tim 3:1 – 4:4).
   6. Preterists must make the man of sin Nero, though he never sat in God’s temple, nor was destroyed by Christ’s coming of any kind, nor differed that much from predecessors, etc.
   7. Preterists must ignore Daniel 7’s little horn of Rome here or corrupt it to Nero or others.
   8. Preterists force a 70 A.D. fulfillment on this passage, though the Thessalonians lived 1000 miles away and would not be affected by the destruction of Jerusalem at all.
10. Good commentaries on II Thess 2 will be of the historicist school. Both the preterist and futurist schools of interpretation were invented by Jesuits to divert attention away from the RCC and papacy as part of the Counter-Reformation.
    1. The fourth section of Ralph Woodrow’s, “Great Prophecies of the Bible,” is excellent.
    2. For II Thess 2, see the author’s outline.
    3. For II Thess 2, see Albert Barnes.
    4. For II Thess 2, see John Gill.
    5. For II Thess 2, see Adam Clarke’s appendix .
    6. For II Thess 2, see Geneva Bible notes.

Preterism Refuted by Peter

1. Peter directly refuted Preterism (II Peter 3:1-17). Defending, explaining, and applying Christ’s sure return, Peter proved it has not happened even yet!
   1. What is preterism? That all prophecies are past, including the Day of Judgment, destruction of the present heavens and earth, and introduction of a new heaven and earth.
   2. Peter flatly denied these ridiculous assertions by declaring the specific events yet future and fully defining and explaining any timing misconceptions about their occurrence.
2. Peter dealt directly with the timing of the second coming. Comparable to Paul in II Thess 2, there could not be a plainer denial of preterism with signal events to prove Jesus did not return in the first century or the twentieth century!
   1. Peter by the Spirit took up the very argument of preterism, why is His coming delayed?
   2. Peter explained by definition and explanation that God’s timing is not ours for good reason, strongly implying that Christ’s second coming was considerably off in the future.
   3. Peter described events connected to the Lord’s coming that certainly have not happened.
3. Preterists are scoffers. Peter warned that scoffers would attack the timing of Christ’s promised coming; Preterists do so by their first century non-event.
   1. Peter wrote around 65 A.D. (before dying; 1:13-15), but the scoffers were future (3:3,17).
   2. With 70 A.D. months away, why bring up a 1000-year timing rule, if preterism was true?
   3. Preterists make their living by scoffing at the faith of all believers for the last 2000 years, who following apostolic religion looked for stupendous events with Jesus Christ’s return.
   4. These preterist scoffers, future to Peter, would take Christ’s promise of coming and twist it to be a first century event, thus mocking anyone still looking for it after 70 A.D.
   5. How can they scoff, since they are so wrong? Obsessing over their perverted timing texts.
   6. How can they scoff, since so wrong? Spiritualizing away texts like this to mean nothing.
4. II Peter 3:1-13 burns down Preterism’s house of cards. Peter gave two timing explanations and foretold a catastrophic event that is yet future in 2012.
   1. He gave a rule of God’s perspective of time, and he explained why God delayed events.
   2. Every seeing and thinking Christian for the last 2000 years knew these events are future.
   3. Every seeing and thinking Christian for the last 2000 years appreciated the time rule here.
   4. How would diligent holy living help Peter’s audience prepare for His coming with Titus in 70 A.D. (3:12,14), since they lived 600 miles away over the Mediterranean (I Pet 1:1)?
   5. How could they perish (3:9) so far away from the very localized events at Jerusalem?
   6. The drivel and twaddle of these heretics are buried here as well as by Daniel and Paul.
5. Preterists deny new heavens and a new earth. The Lord’s future return will destroy and replace the present physical universe, which remains unfulfilled.
   1. The context is clearly and only the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ (3:4,9-14).
   2. The great events connected to His coming are the Day of Judgment of ungodly men (3:7) and the total dissolution of the physical universe and replacement with a new (3:7,10-14).
   3. The parallel explanation is the destruction of the physical earth by water in Noah’s time, which had been created and preserved by God’s word prior to His sending the flood (3:5-6), with the creation declared in Genesis 1 and Psalm 33:6 and the Flood in Genesis 6-9.
   4. Even after He told Noah that He would destroy the earth with a flood – it took 120 years.
   5. The heavens and earth that presently exist are kept by God’s word for destruction by fire.
   6. This destruction will take place in conjunction with the Day of Judgment of wicked men.
   7. There is absolutely no ground or room for introducing an irrelevant spiritual event, unless one has a heretical agenda that is more important to him than submitting to scripture.
   8. The event must be a physical change of incredible proportions, for it is prophesied as such in numerous places. See point E in the section above, Preterism Denies the Gospel.
   9. Peter addressed this audience about the change in covenant and worship (I Peter 2:4-10), but when he did so he used language that does not leave the matter in doubt.
   10. Paul wrote Jews about the new covenant as past (He 8:13; 9:10; 12:25-29; 13:9-10; etc.).
   11. Paul addressed mixed congregations about the changeover as past (Gal 4:21-31; etc.).
   12. The change here is yet future and cannot be religious or spiritual by clear terminology, by the past actual change of covenants, and by the timing explanation for a deferred coming.
   13. The New Testament is a shaking of the heavens and earth (Hag 2:6-9), not a burning and dissolving of the universe (3:10-12), and Paul said the former was past (Heb 12:26-29).
   14. As Peter wrote in 3:16, Paul had also written about the renovation of the creation, to a Jewish audience like Peter’s (Heb 1:10-12) and also to the Gentiles (Rom 8:18-23).
   15. Peter also wrote of Paul dealing with these subjects in all his epistles, so we see Pauline examples of a great physical change (Rom 8:18-23; I Cor 15:1-58; I Thess 4:13 – 5:11; Phil 3:21; Col 3:4; Heb 1:10-12; Acts 3:21), which was future then and is still future now.
   16. Preterism is clearly refuted by the heavens and earth still kept in store long after 70 A.D.
6. Preterists deny the great Day of Judgment. The Lord’s future return will include a great Day of Judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
   1. These Bible corrupters audaciously eliminate the great Day of Judgment of Jesus Christ.
   2. See all that they deny with point D in the section above, Preterism Denies the Gospel.
   3. The Day of Judgment is the result of Christ’s coming upon the wicked (II Thess 1:7-9), when they shall be destroyed with everlasting destruction for rejecting Christ’s gospel.
   4. But the same event of His coming will be for admiration by true believers (II Thess 1:10).
   5. The gospel requires that both the dead and the living be judged at the same time, which is at His coming (II Tim 4:1; Acts 10:42; I Pet 4:5), which did not occur at all in 70 A.D.
   6. The gospel requires that the outcome is damnation or eternal life (Matt 25:46; John 5:29).
   7. A final judgment is basic to Christianity (Heb 6:1-3), so preterists are not true Christians.
   8. It is this final and eternal judgment considered here by virtue of men perishing (3:9).
   9. Holy conversation and godly living is applied from the coming event (3:11), which cannot refer to the little events of 70 A.D. affecting only those across the Mediterranean.
   10. Peter called for diligence to be blameless in light of this coming and its connected events, which precludes the destruction of Jerusalem, since it would not affect them at all.
   11. Preterism is refuted by the Day of Judgment of all men dead and living being yet future.
7. Preterists reject God’s timing rule. In defending and defining Christ’s return, Peter gave an inspired timing rule that denies Preterist timing sound bites.
   1. This important text (3:8) directly and specifically answers Preterist rants about timing.
   2. The Holy Spirit specifically emphasized this essential rule: “Beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing.” This is the singular most important rule about the timing of Jesus Christ’s coming and its attendant events, and honest and sincere saints will make it most valuable.
   3. Without their timing sound bites, which generally are timeless, they have no position.
   4. The context is clearly and only the timing of the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.
   5. The Lord and the apostles, including Peter in I Peter 4:7, had prophesied such an event.
   6. The argument assumes some sort of delay, provoking scoffers, raising accusations of slackness, and a need for Peter to comfort, instruct, and explain timing matters to saints.
   7. Regarding the timing of Christ’s coming, this is the most important rule for Christians.
   8. This rule is for believers, not scoffers, and it explains any promise and/or delay questions.
   9. In general aspects of the timing of Christ’s return, God’s timing is quite unrelated to ours.
   10. What is shortly or at hand to us (vague terms to begin with, and as the O.T. shows clearly can be long periods of time) is not so imminent or soon in the providence of God.
   11. How does preterist timing logic explain the PAST TENSE of glorified in Romans 8:30?
   12. God does not communicate prophetically by our timing or by our verb tenses, as He had explained earlier in Romans 4:17! Compare to Genesis 17:4-6 to see future verb tenses.
   13. 1No matter what scoffers say, we know it will occur, though as a thief, when unsuspected.
   14. 1When God specifies a prophetic length of time e.g. seventy weeks in Daniel 9, we can calculate its duration, because it was for Daniel’s skill and understanding (Dan 9:20-27).
   15. 1But when God inspires His prophets to write a nonspecific, vague, indirect reference to time e.g. shortly, soon, at hand, or quickly, we understand it by the rule of divine perspective here for the considerations in the section above, Preterism Timing Fallacies.
   16. Preterism is silenced about timing texts by this inspired rule of time for Christ’s coming.
8. Preterists reject God’s timing explanation. Why does Christ’s return linger in light of His promise, so that a divine perspective on time had to be given?
   1. The context is clearly and only the timing of the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.
   2. With scoffers mocking and God defending by a rule to extend timing, there is a reason.
   3. God is longsuffering while holding back coming judgment for His elect to repent (3:9), for until each and every one of them has been regenerated, He cannot and will not come.
   4. The perishing here is primarily eternal by the context of the Day of Judgment, by the burning up of the present earth, and by the intended effect of godly and holy living.
   5. This perishing was not Jerusalem’s destruction, for Peter’s audience was in Asia Minor.
   6. This perishing was not the changeover of covenants, for how could that affect believers?
   7. He is not being slack about His word, as scoffing Preterists say for anything past 70 A.D.
   8. The time delay tempting scoffers and necessitating 3:8 is for the saints’ salvation (3:15).
   9. Preterist scoffers count God slack (3:9), but believers account Him longsuffering (3:15), which show the difference between faith-based, Spirit-led thinking and agenda-bondage.
   10. Peter acknowledged in 3:15 that Paul had written to this audience about the longsuffering of God (compare Hebrews 4:1,11; 6:9-18; 10:35-39; 11:39-40; 12:1-3; etc.).
   11. Here is a precious declaration and example of God’s longsuffering and mercy toward sinners. Consider yourself – how many times have you sinned, yet God has spared?
   12. Preterism is silenced about delays by this inspired explanation for His beloved children.
9. Preterists corrupt II Peter 3 in order to avoid the refutation of their heresy. Since the renovation of the physical universe has not occurred, preterists must spiritualize it away as Ellen White did the Great Disappointment of 1843/1844.
   1. When William Miller’s prophecy proved as false as Harold Camping’s, a troubled little girl named Ellen G. Harmon took up the explanation that Jesus had come! He came to the heavenly sanctuary and cleansed it, and they invented the investigative judgment heresy to bolster their heretical whitewashing of William Miller’s Legion of errors in Daniel 8.
   2. Though preterists can read Noah’s flood destroying the earth is the parallel event, they insert a covenant changeover that is nonsensical in context (and had already occurred!).
   3. The type and antitype are the physical universe, but they replace it by a religious and covenantal change from the Old Testament to the New, and God gave them “elements” to deceive them (Gal 4:3,9; II Pet 3:10,12). Believe it, for God does such (Ezek 14:1-11).
   4. They do not dare here or in Hebrews 1:10-12 or in Romans 8:18-23 or in other similar places admit a real event, for none has occurred in any respect, leaving their 70 A.D. hallucinations entirely bankrupt of meaning, purpose, reality, substance, or validity!
   5. They mock any use of 3:8 to differentiate human and divine time reckoning, for even the slightest concession would crush their total dependence on their timing phrase mantras.
   6. The exhortations and warnings of 3:11-17 are worthless from a preterist perspective, because the events are 2000 years old, and this world is here forever for you to enjoy!
10. Preterists destroy the fabulous application of this prophecy for holiness. Since they deny any future event as described, there is no reason to take the warning and exhortation serious, or even to receive it as helpful at all.
    1. Consider II Peter 3:11,14,17-18 and the clear warning and exhortation to careful living.
    2. Preterists, by spiritualizing this event away, and by putting the Day of Judgment in 70 A.D., remove all the teeth (and every other part of a mouth) from this pressing passage.
    3. There was no event to fear for Peter’s audience in Asia Minor around 70 A.D., for the destruction of Jerusalem was quite irrelevant to them other than a fulfilled prophecy.
    4. Since this is all past for us Gentiles, and actually all that was ever intended was a change in covenants from Old to New, there is no incentive to care or to alter our lives … at all!
11. Good commentaries on II Peter 3 will be the historicist (or futurist) school. We may include futurists here, for they are not so bold and deluded as to deny the renovation of the physical universe clearly described and required here.
    1. That John Owen lost his mind here does not prove anything beyond the fact that he was very human. He could thus corrupt this passage and still write The Death of Death!
    2. For II Peter 3, see Albert Barnes.
    3. For II Peter 3, see Adam Clarke.
    4. For II Peter 3, see John Gill.
    5. For II Peter 3, see Geneva Bible notes.
    6. For II Peter 3, see Matthew Henry.
    7. For II Peter 3, see Jamieson, et al.

Preterism Refuted by Roman Catholicism

1. Roman Catholicism is Bible Christianity’s greatest enemy. Any prophetic scheme that has no place or warning of this devilish fiend hiding under the cloak of apostolic authority as a church of Jesus Christ is a bankrupt scheme.
   1. Is this eisegesis rather than exegesis? Read on and find out, if you truly believe the Bible.
   2. In magnitude, duration, debauchery, heresy, compromise, and violence, the Jews of Jerusalem, the pagan Roman Empire, and all individual Caesars do not even come close.
   3. There has been no other enemy that has corrupted more doctrine, presumed more preeminence, and killed more Christians than the so-called Mother Church in Rome.
   4. For aged John to wonder with great admiration at Revelation 17:1-6 proves it was most definitely not merely Jewish or merely Roman, for he knew those little enemies well.
   5. To suggest anything else as the prophetic adversary of Christianity is ignorant thinking.
2. Preterism has no role for Roman Catholicism. Cramming every prophecy into 70 A.D., they ignore its origin, rise, heresies, persecutions, or destruction.
   1. If preterism is true, the Bible misses a very important issue for Christians after Pentecost.
   2. If preterism is true, the Bible only sees Jews and their enemies, not Christians and theirs.
   3. It is discouraging to read their exaggerated descriptions of Nero, Vespasian, or Titus, who were minor enemies of Christians, and combined they never came close to Rome’s popes.
   4. The silence about Roman Catholicism is deafening – they are meticulous to avoid mentioning it, for the historicist school of prophetic interpretation is their greatest enemy.
3. Preterism ignores the biggest prophetic enemy! The largest, most corrupting, most presumptuous, most persecuting, and longest-lasting enemy of Jesus Christ and His saints is entirely ignored by Preterists! Who bought them off?
   1. Since all the martyrs knew their RCC enemy was the man of sin, why not consider it?
   2. How can Bible readers get worked up over little enemies of Christ and miss the biggest?
   3. Both prophecies and doctrinal instruction deal often with this evil enemy of the church.
   4. Church history for 1200+ years dealt with the RCC only – Jews and Rome were gone!
4. Preterism was invented and systematized by a Jesuit. There is a reason that preterism misses the Roman church and papacy as enemies of the gospel – it was a Jesuit that designed their prophetic scheme for that very purpose.
   1. Luis del Alcazar (1554-1613) wrote a commentary on Revelation, Vestigatio arcani sensus in Apocalypsi, which was published in 1614, as part of the Counter-Reformation.
   2. Try to find anyone before that date that ran everything into 70 A.D. and ignored the pope.
   3. Preterists are quick to show the RCC origin of futurism, while also embracing Jesuits!
   4. For more about Rome’s role in prophetic heresy.
5. All roads lead to Rome. A study of Daniel 7 and II Thessalonians 2, dealt with earlier in this study, point clearly and exclusively to the RCC and papacy as the greatest enemy of the saints of the most high God.
   1. See the sections above, Preterism Refuted by Daniel, and, Preterism Refuted by Paul.
   2. Compare this simple schematic of Bible chapters all pointing to papal Rome by various combinations of the same descriptors.
6. Preterism rejects ministerial faithfulness. Paul told Timothy good ministers will preach against Roman Catholic heresies (I Tim 4:1-6), which Preterists never do, as they are too busy quoting their timing verses and studying Nero.
   1. The prophesied heresies of I Timothy 4:1-3 are long after 70 A.D., for Paul wrote this pastoral epistle in the mid-60’s, expressly stating that this apostasy was still in the future.
   2. Even little knowledge of church history shows these heresies were centuries in the future, as they were unknown before 70 A.D., and they only gained popularity centuries later.
   3. Paul specifically lauded ministers of the gospel that would preach against these heresies repeatedly, thus keeping such doctrinal departures fresh in their hearers’ consciences.
   4. How bad is Catholicism? See here.  
   5. The Bible is an anti-Catholic book, for its prophecies identify this man of sin and great whore, and its doctrinal instruction corrects Catholic practices on many unique heresies.
   6. Here is a sample of Bible verses that can be identified as directed mainly at Catholicism.
      1. I Timothy 4:1-3 condemns required celibacy as a latter-times doctrine of the devil.
      2. I Timothy 4:1-3 condemns required fasting from meats as a doctrine of the devil.
      3. Matthew 6:7 condemns the Rosary for its vain and repetitive prayers like the heathen.
      4. Luke 11:27-28 condemns Mariolatry and exalts true Bible Christians over Mary.
      5. John 20:6-7 condemns the Shroud of Turin as absolutely and totally fraudulent.
      6. Matthew 26:27 condemns withholding the cup from the laity. See Luke 22:17-20.
      7. I Corinthians 9:5 condemns required celibacy, as Peter their first pope had a wife!
      8. II Thessalonians 2:4 condemns the infallible ex cathedra declarations of the popes.
      9. Matthew 23:5 condemns their religious garments for a public display of holiness.
      10. Matthew 23:9 condemns their titular use of “Father” for priests and other clergy.
      11. I Corinthians 7:1-5 condemns celibacy as the cause for their sodomy and pedophilia.
      12. Jeremiah 44:15-27 condemns their pagan name for Mary of Queen of Heaven.
      13. Matthew 12:46-50 condemns their notion of Mary’s preeminence. Compare John 2:4.
      14. Luke 1:47 condemns their heresy of immaculate conception … of sinless Mary.
      15. Matthew 1:25 condemns their heresy of Mary’s perpetual virginity. See Psalm 69:8-9.
      16. Hebrews 9:27 condemns their assumption of Mary’s assumption into heaven.
      17. Mark 7:6-13 condemns their exaltation of human tradition over God’s word.
      18. Acts 17:11 condemns their prohibition of the Bible from their members by law.
      19. Matthew 23:33 condemns their invention of purgatory between heaven and hell.
      20. Job 32:21-22 condemns their use of exalted titles for any man, including their popes.
      21. Psalm 111:9 condemns their use of “Reverend” for their priests and other clergy.
      22. Matthew 5:32 condemns their prohibition of divorce for any cause. See I Cor 7:15.
      23. I Timothy 2:5 condemns their priests for ever acting as mediators in forgiving sins.
      24. Exodus 20:1-17 condemns their images and their perverted Ten Commandments.

Preterism Refuted by History

1. Historical Orthodoxy. No one in church history, regardless of where you look, believed the incredible leaps of Preterists to force every prophecy into 70 A.D.
   1. Christianity has always promised Christ’s return, a resurrection, Day of Judgment, etc.
   2. No creed or confession of any church or churches at anytime included Preterist doctrine.
   3. While we do not measure orthodoxy by church history, nevertheless it is a prudent check.
   4. What may appear to be historical exceptions to this rule were partial Preterists, if studied.
   5. The audacity of preterists to ignore this overwhelming testimony of church history shows their arrogant rebellion and profane disrespect for scripture and the kingdom of Christ.
2. Historical Events. First century history does not even mention the Lord’s return, a bodily resurrection, a Day of Judgment, the universe renovated, etc.
   1. Preterists declare loudly how God raised up Josephus to confirm Jerusalem’s destruction.
   2. They will use the historian Eusebius to confirm that many saints left Jerusalem for Pella.
   3. Why silence for a long list of events that individually were greater than the city falling?
   4. Why total silence from John, Polycarp, Irenaeus, Clement of Rome, Eusebius, etc., etc.?
   5. How could the early disciples and fathers entirely miss the facts that Jesus had returned as promised? That they and their teachers had been resurrected and judged? That they were living in the new heavens and earth? That they were now free of Satan and sin?
3. Worldwide ignorance. The gospel was preached throughout the world in Paul’s day (Col 1:6,23; etc.), yet no one ever heard of preterism until a few since the 17th century and a very few others in recent decades.
   1. Other than Paul’s condemnation of heresy from Hymenaeus and Philetus, there is silence.
   2. There is also silence in church history about the heresy of circumcision for salvation, as Paul and Jerusalem’s council had effectively destroyed it.
   3. After Paul’s general epistles with their prophecies and his ministerial epistles with their condemnation of Hymenaeus, the heresy of preterism was also dead.

Preterism Refuted by the Gentiles

1. There were more than Jews living in 70 A.D. If Jews were 1% of the population, the profound events prophesied did not affect the other 99%.
   1. This is the case, even though the apostolic age became the time of the Gentiles (Acts 1:8).
   2. Paul’s epistles were to Gentile churches, but there is no recorded fulfillment of prophetic events that affected them, other than those after 70 A.D. maintained by historicists.
   3. Paul, the apostle of the Gentiles (Rom 11:13; 15:16-19), did not mention Jerusalem’s desolation to a Gentile audience other than his brief note in I Thessalonians 2:14-16.
2. Jerusalem’s destruction did not affect the world. It happened fast enough with only a few legions involved that most Gentiles gave it little thought.
   1. For nearly 2000 years of the times of the Gentiles, Jerusalem’s destruction has not altered any of their lives, and the events preterists tie together with 70 A.D. never occurred.
   2. If all was finished at Jerusalem in 70 A.D., what can be identified as happening for or to the Gentiles? Nothing! So the greater part of the kingdom in size and duration is ignored!
   3. Though we may call this an appearing or coming of Christ (in judgment), yet it included none of the features or attendant events that Paul prophesied would affect the Gentiles.
3. Preterism denies Gentile prophetic relevance. This in spite of many prophecies in both testaments of the salvation of the Gentile nations.
   1. Daniel’s first two visions include Gentile world history past 70 A.D. (chapters 2 and 7).
   2. The stone that smashed Nebuchadnezzar’s image filled the whole earth (Daniel 2:35).
   3. The saints of the most high in Daniel 7 cannot be the Jews and became such after 70 A.D.
   4. See previous sections about Daniel and Paul that prove Gentile events long after 70 A.D.
4. Preterism misses an important parable. Jesus in Matt 22:1-14 covered Jews and Gentiles, with the events of 70 A.D. being merely the timeline’s midpoint.
   1. The Jews made light of Christ’s kingdom and God burned up their city (Matthew 22:1-7).
   2. After this event – yes, after 70 A.D. – God sent forth His ambassadors to call the Gentiles to the kingdom of Messiah, which terminated with eternal judgment (Matt 22:8-14)!
   3. In the scriptures, this is the times of the Gentiles (Luke 21:24), which preterists ignore.
   4. This long period of time for Gentile persons included many stupendous events foretold by Paul to them, which never occurred in 70 A.D. or since, in agreement with orthodoxy.
5. When did Jesus judge all the nations as sheep or goats? Matthew 25:31-46 is not a Jewish judgment – it is eternal life or eternal damnation of nations.
   1. It clearly depicts Jesus sitting in glory and judgment on his throne against all nations.
   2. The result is not the destruction of a city by siege but eternal punishment with the devil.
6. What did Jesus mean by a Day of Judgment for Gentile cities? In Mat 10:15 and 11:22, He spoke of judging Sodom, Gomorrha, Tyre, and Sidon. When?
   1. When would Sodom and Gomorrha be judged in the future? It was surely not in 70 A.D.
   2. The destruction of Jerusalem did not have any effect on these cities, past or then present.
7. When did the Day of Judgment affecting the Athenians occur? In Acts 17:31, Paul declared that God had made Jesus judge of the world. When?
   1. Paul’s audience and terminology was not Jewish whatsoever, but rather about Gentiles.
   2. The destruction of Jerusalem did not have any effect on Athens or other Gentile cities.
8. Jesus and Paul had different audiences. They spoke at different times to different men with different messages.
   1. Jesus was a minister to the Jews (Matt 15:24; Rom 15:8; John 1:11; Acts 3:26; Gal 4:4).
   2. Paul was apostle to the Gentiles (Rom 11:13; 15:16-19; Ac 22:21; 26:17; Gal 1:16; 2:7).
   3. Christ’s prophecies had Israel as object, emphasizing 70 A.D., like Daniel chapters 8-12.
   4. Paul’s prophecies emphasized the church and world by later events, like Daniel 2 and 7.
   5. This is a key reason to divide Christ’s prophesied coming from that of Paul, especially since Paul said it was not at hand, though much of Christ’s “generation” had passed.
   6. Matthew 24:34 cannot be used to pound Paul’s prophecies into a first century fulfillment.
   7. For differences between Jesus and Paul: Jesus or Paul? 

Preterism Refuted By Itself

1. Baptism is obsolete! These hypocrites are baptized and tell others to do so, which is a clear and powerful symbol of the future resurrection of the dead!
   1. If you ever met a consistent preterist (their chosen name), they would reject baptism, for it symbolizes Jesus Christ’s bodily resurrection and our own (I Pet 3:21; Rom 6:3-6).
   2. Paul argued, if there is no future resurrection of the dead, baptism had no role or value.
   3. Or, if the resurrection was between I Cor 15 and now, baptism has no role or value today!
   4. The Mormon text is truly Baptist, “Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?” (I Cor 15:29).
   5. Paul illustrated this inspired means of reasoning with preterist heretics – their eschatological error ruined the simple gospel ordinance of water baptism by immersion!
2. Communion is obsolete! These hypocrites sit at the Lord’s Supper, where the inspired declaration is made, “For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come” (I Cor 11:26).
   1. If you met a consistent preterist (their chosen name), they must reject communion, for they would not keep communion with this apostolic goal of a future coming after 70 A.D.
   2. For, if Jesus Christ finally returned in Jerusalem’s fires in 70 A.D., communion has no role or value today in the sense that Paul gave it in I Corinthians 11:26!
3. Marriage is obsolete! Since Jesus taught there is no marriage in the resurrection (Matt 22:30), and since Preterists teach the resurrection occurred in 70 A.D., you did not actually marry and are not married now!
   1. Since preterists are the modern counterpart to the Sadducees of our Lord’s time, they deserve to take the same rhetorical heat that Jesus poured on the Sadducees.
   2. In what sense are preterists like the angels, since Jesus declared this would be the result of the resurrection? But we have not met a single preterist with a single similarity!
4. Death is destroyed! The last enemy to be destroyed is death at Christ’s coming (I Cor 15:23-26); since Preterists teach He came in 70 A.D., why do they die?
   1. This is more than death’s legal claims destroyed, for He did that in 30 A.D. (II Tim 1:10).
   2. These jokers play games with scripture, but we deny their absurd and profane claims.
   3. Since all is fulfilled, where is their Christ’s great victory over death and the grave?
   4. When will their Second Adam undo the effects of the first Adam? They are ridiculous!
5. No judgment for rejecting Preterism. Since there is no future judgment, for it occurred in 70 A.D., there is no fear to reject this heresy, since no one will ever have to give account of himself to God or Christ for denying it or anything else.
   1. The implications of no future accountability or judgment, which preterists hold as part of their heterodoxy, may be used to ridicule them numerous different ways.
   2. There will never be another Paul, for no one will or should labor as diligently, since there is no resurrection as reward (I Cor 15:58) or judgment as incentive (II Cor 5:9-11).
   3. The judgment seat of Christ and other warnings of accountability and judgment are past.
6. Perspicuity of Scripture. Is scripture clear and understandable? If preterists are right, no one had a clue about the Bible until a few wild radicals today.
   1. Preterists hold that every N.T. reader knew exactly what they now teach, but no Christian in history since them thought the Lord had returned, the resurrection had occurred, etc.
   2. If no one believed Preterist conclusions before now, how can the Bible ever be rightly understood, since all the saints for 2000 years had no clue of what preterists teach? This point is even truer now, since none of scripture applies to us living beyond 70 A.D.!
   3. No one in the first century believed preterist fulfillments, for they looked to the future, as this document proves, thus preserving the perspicuity and integrity of scripture.
7. A very quick Millennium! Preterists say John wrote Revelation about 65 A.D., but he wrote that a 1000-year millennium preceded the Day of Judgment (Rev 20); how can they squeeze a 1000-year event into their “quickly” scheme?
   1. Remember, they are sticklers for timing phrases … except here, where they are caught!
   2. Applying their dogmatic arrogance, there is no way 1000 years occurred in 5 years!
8. Why do Preterists labor? Since the resurrection is the reward for labor on earth (I Cor 15:58), and since Preterists follow Hymenaeus in saying that the resurrection is past, how can it be a reward for those living after 70 A.D.?
   1. Paul believed and taught the resurrection of his body was a great reward (II Cor 5:1-4).
   2. He was not satisfied to go to heaven in his spirit and be without his body for eternity.
   3. Of course, since there was no resurrection of dead bodies in 70 A.D., preterists must spiritualize the resurrection, I Corinthians 15, and any other place that has resurrection.
9. Ministerial Succession. Paul told Timothy to commit the body of Paul’s public preaching to faithful men who would in turn convey it to others (II Tim 2:2).
   1. Since most of what Paul wrote was about 70 A.D., at least on every page, according to J. Stuart Russell in The Parousia, how were second-generation preachers to declare Paul’s prophecies and warnings, since not a single one of them was any longer applicable?
   2. Since Timothy obeyed Paul’s instruction, and ministerial succession has occurred over the last 2000 years, why have there been no ministers preaching preterist doctrine?
10. An Overreaction. New drivers may over-steer to avoid danger in one direction, so can undisciplined Bible students overreact when leaving heresy.
    1. Futurism’s ignorance of the Bible and history and their wild speculations about the future with failed prophecies cause some to overcompensate when pursuing prophetic truth.
    2. Futurism is an extreme – every prophecy is for the future – requiring much correction.
    3. But turning too sharply from one error can easily point you in the direction of another.
    4. Preterists, excited with historicism’s truth, over-compensated to another, worse extreme.
11. Audience Exclusivity. Preterists assume and argue that Paul’s use of first person pronouns limit his prophecies to him and his audience e.g. 70 A.D.
    1. Many preterists were or are Campbellites; they have heard a foolish little ditty as children that runs like this: the Bible means what it says and says what it means. Sound good?
    2. They claim Paul believed he would be caught up in the air at the coming of Jesus Christ by including himself in the first person, plural pronoun we (I Thessalonians 4:15-17).
    3. But Paul also used we for being dead and raised and changed in I Cor 6:14 and 15:51-52!
12. Audience relevance. Preterists assume and argue that all original audiences of N.T. epistles had perfect understanding of the epistle.
    1. They do this to magnify the value of their timing sound bites of at hand and such like.
    2. Yet Peter said Paul’s epistles had things hard to grasp by their readers (II Pet 3:15-16).
    3. If this point of theirs is true, then the Bible has been quite worthless for two millennia.
13. Preterists Unchanged. Christ’s second coming will radically and forever change our vile bodies (Phil 3:20-21; I Cor 15:51; Col 3:4), and preterists claim Christ came in 70 A.D., but their bodies are no more changed and glorious than was the most deformed wretch in the Old Testament.
    1. Their games in the word of God about 70 A.D. events are not supported by the evidence.
    2. Their Christ is quite powerless, for His coming did nothing at all except to a little city.
14. Is Partial-Preterism Possible? A partial preterist interpreting Revelation as a first-century prophecy due to so-called timing statements may end up a full preterist or be inconsistent. They are clearly wrong by Daniel 7 and II Thess 2.
15. Association with Universalism. The history and nature of preterism includes connections with universalism.
    1. Research indicates a connection.
    2. By forcing certain prophecies e.g. Romans 8:18-23 and I Corinthians 15 to have different meanings than intended, it is only inconsistency that keeps preterists from universalism.
    3. Church of Christ preterists like Max and Tim King are universalists by their doctrine.
    4. If the law of sin and death was destroyed in 70 A.D., there is nothing to condemn men.
16. Arrogance. Preterism tends toward arrogance, as is often admitted, which is a grave danger, especially when you deny the resurrection of the dead.
    1. It takes conceit to blow off all the faith and learning of Christians for 2000 years and concoct a scheme that turns many well-known passages upside down (Prov 26:12).
    2. When the general depth of learning and study is quoting sound bites (their timing texts) to prove the overthrow of the N.T., preterism further appeals to the baser sort.
17. Parousia is a deceitful distraction. Why use the word? Because they are trying to bake more into Christ’s coming in judgment in 70 A.D. than scripture says.
    1. Tell the truth or lie in English, but do not lie to me in Greek or any other lost language.
    2. The word simply and only means the second coming of Jesus Christ. Why complicate it?
    3. Do not use the word, as Russell does 500 times, to imply an event more than a coming.
    4. This superstitious obsession with a word includes the Sabbatarians with advent, Pentecostals with charisma, Reformed with their solas, etc.
18. Preterists are condemned by association. Examining their doctrine and practice in church history shows them aligned with heretics, not the orthodox.
    1. First, they are quasi-gnostic. Why? For two reasons. The first is that they do not believe the physical body, or physical world, is important enough to be redeemed from corruption.
    2. Second, they believe their full-preterist gnosis has been hidden from the whole Christian community for two millennia, and that only they have seen the light, starting with J. Stuart Russell in the late nineteenth century. The rest of benighted Christendom has missed it.
    3. A second naughty name to apply to the consistently foolish preterists is quasi-Manichean. The original Manicheans believed that evil existed coeternally with the good, and since we are now in the preterist universe as it shall always be, we have evil and good coexistent.
    4. A third naught name is quasi-liberal. Whether politics or religion, the liberal operates from the dark side. Heretical preterists differ from liberals in some areas. Hyperpreterists believe in the virgin birth, the inerrancy of Scripture, the physical resurrection of Jesus, etc. But notice how many beliefs they have in common with theological liberals: (1) no visible return of Jesus, (2) no physical resurrection of the believer, (3) no Judgment Day at the end of the world, (4) the world will go on forever and ever until it peters out, (5) the devil is not active today in the world, and (6) the miraculous is not active today in the church.
    5. For the four points above and similar reasoning, see here.

Preterism Refuted by Scripture

1. This is not a repeat of preterism refuted by the gospel above. The Scriptures have stated or implied features and purposes that deny the validity of preterism.
2. Bible Traps. God inspired scripture to conceal truth from enemies and reveal it to saints. Preterist sound bites of first century imminency, various comings of the Lord, and the crucial need for right divisions are a few examples.
   1. The Bible seems to teach heresies, which trip the ungodly and unlearned (II Peter 3:16).
   2. Consider verses implying baptism saves, salvation can be lost, an Arminian gospel, etc.
   3. For extensive proof of this point, that the Bible is written to confuse those approaching it incorrectly, see.
   4. Since Paul in II Thess 2:1-3 and Peter in II Peter 3:7-9 deny preterist imminency verses, then we know the imminent sound bites they scrounge up are there for their destruction.
   5. Why does the Bible describe multiple comings of Christ? To confuse the presumptuous.
   6. Where did Paul command to rightly divide the scriptures? When he condemned the first preterist – Hymenaeus (II Tim 2:15)! God’s disapproval of preterists and their doctrinal shame is due to their inability to divide similar things, let alone rightly divide them.
3. Rightly dividing scripture. Paul gave a valuable rule of hermeneutics that can save you from the preterist penchant to combine similar things (II Tim 2:15).
   1. Paul would not have told Timothy to divide scripture unless there were divisions needed.
   2. The context of this interpretive rule is the heresy of Preterism introduced by Hymenaeus.
   3. Similar or identical words may not mean the same thing in different places or contexts.
   4. Consider different ways God or Jesus can come.
   5. Consider laying on of hands (Neh 13:21; Acts 4:3; 13:3; 8:17; Luke 13:13; I Tim 5:22).
   6. For example, signs and wonders in Matt 24 and II Thess 2 do not require the same event.
   7. There are many kinds of death and resurrection in the Bible; they must be rightly divided.
   8. The author has much more material on this valuable point in his outline of hermeneutics.
   9. It is much easier to be a “consistent preterist,” as they call themselves, and never divide.
   10. It also sounds more legitimate to never divide, but to connect all same or similar words.
   11. Yet, the rule from heaven for scripture is plain to please God and avoid doctrinal shame.
   12. Preterism rejects the obvious divisions of coming events, for they are not all the same.
4. Comparing spiritual things with spiritual. An interpretive rule of the Bible is to compare the words and concepts of the Spirit to arrive at truth (I Cor 2:13).
   1. The Holy Spirit often used words with spiritual or other senses different than our usage.
   2. Preterists, especially J. Stuart Russell, are obsessed with natural comparisons of words.
   3. Similar or even identical words do not mean different passages or events are the same.
   4. For example, II Pet 3:8 gave a rule how to view the timing of the Lord’s second coming.
   5. For example, the O.T.’s use of imminent phrases teach us their wide latitude of meaning.
   6. For example, the timing of the falling away of II Thess 2:3 can be discovered by finding Paul’s other expressions for the same event e.g. depart from the faith (I Tim 4:1) and turn away their ears from the truth (II Tim 4:4), both of which were yet future in 65 A.D.
5. Importance of Daniel. Rather than speculate on the symbols of Revelation, students of prophetic interpretation should start with Daniel and move forward.
   1. It is very common for foolish novices to ask many unlearned questions from Revelation.
   2. It would be better for them to read Daniel and build up some prophetic interpretive skills.
   3. Daniel’s prophecies were quite fulfilled by 70 A.D. (chs. 8-12), so much can be learned.
   4. Daniel identified John’s beast and Paul’s man of sin in a short outline of Gentile history.
   5. Jesus said knowing Daniel would help understanding of the Olivet discourse (Mat 24:15).
6. Preterism denies its own hermeneutic. No one yells louder and longer about the plain and literal meaning of words than preterists, but they are inconsistent.
   1. Preterists demand that at hand means tomorrow, for their house of cards is based on this and other sound bites of imminency, yet they will violently corrupt it in II Thess 2:2.
   2. Read them in Romans 8, I Corinthians 15, or II Peter 3 … no one ever allegorized more!
7. Preterist audience relevance reduces the Bible to a confused history book. Preterists limit scripture’s statements and application to only its first readers.
   1. If they cannot find a timing text, they limit passages to the writer and his primary readers.
   2. Their idea of I John 3:2 required Jesus to appear while John and his audience were living, or John would have written about future Christians being like Him and seeing Him, and they say this without regard for 2000 years of non-preterist believers taking it personally.
   3. If we follow this preterist rule in Paul’s epistles, we find him declaring that he would be alive at Christ’s return (I Thess 4:15-17) and that he would be dead (I Cor 6:14).
   4. How about Moses? His direct hearers never came close to the prophecy (Deut 4:25-26).
   5. They say prophecy had primary, if not exclusive, value for those reading it and no others!
   6. Thus the Bible is reduced by necessity to a book without a word for saints for 2000 years!
   7. If all expectant passages have already been fulfilled, what has been left for 2000 years?
   8. If audience relevance is a proper rule of hermeneutics, then Isaiah 53:1-6 would have Jesus coming and dying in the 7th century B.C., which is not even close to the facts.
   9. Jonathan Edwards suggested Genesis 50:25 for these superstitious Bible corrupters, where Joseph instructed his brothers regarding his burial, “‘God will surely visit you, and ye shall carry up my bones from hence.’ He does not say, God shall visit your posterity, and they shall carry up my bones from hence. Yet it cannot be argued, that Joseph concluded that the redemption out of Egypt would be in that generation.” We say, Amen.
   10. Paul wrote Corinth about Jesus dying for our sins (I Cor 15:3) and we shall all be changed (I Cor 15:51), which is equally extensive in both places – all Jesus died for shall be changed! To limit either one of these statements to the Corinthians only is absurd.
   11. The facts – no occurrence of the needed events in the first century – prove them wrong.
8. What good is Scripture? Since all important things occurred in 70 A.D., there was nothing in the canon for believers for 2000 years. We need a new Bible!

Preterism Refuted by Futurism

1. Futurism is not nearly as bad. Preterists are often the result of futurists crawling out of their ditch of error, crossing the road of truth, and falling into a deeper and more heretical ditch on the other side.
   1. As bad as futurism is, and it is a harebrained scheme of science fiction speculation with indeterminate gaps stuck into prophetic timelines, it still is not as bad as preterism.
   2. Hebrews 6:1-3 lists principles of the doctrine of Christ – preterists reject two of them, condemning themselves as not even being Christians in the basic sense of the description.
   3. Preterism denies fundamental axioms of Christianity e.g. physical return of Jesus Christ, resurrection of all dead bodies, Day of Judgment, renovation of the universe, etc., etc.
   4. Futurism, while confusing events, aggressively maintains all these tenets of the faith.
   5. The bottom line is that Hal Lindsey and Tim LaHaye have exceeded Max King, Don Preston, or other full preterists in Biblical understanding and Christian eschatology.
2. Fellowship with futurists is possible, but not with preterists. Though agreeing to disagree agreeably is not a Bible mode of unity, it could possibly work with futurists, for they do not deny the principles of Jesus Christ’s gospel.

Preterism Is Anti-Christian Heresy

1. It was invented by the antichrist. Modern preterism came from Jesuit pens working to distract and divert attention away from the RCC as the antichrist.
   1. See the “History” section above in the introductory material about the rise of preterism.
   2. The man of sin is the most deceived and deceiving character in history (II Thess 2:9-12).
2. Any connection to Hymenaeus is severe. Paul did not say anything positive about this doctrine, but he instead censured the heretic and heresy severely.
   1. See the “Origins” section above in the introductory material about the rise of preterism.
   2. His blasphemous violation of the apostolic faith was an ungodly cancer and profane and vain babblings that subverted and overthrew believers (I Tim 1:18-20; II Tim 2:14-18).
3. It denies the principles of the doctrine of Christ. Paul’s short list of basic gospel components includes two crucial principles preterists deny (Heb 6:1-3).
   1. These axioms of Christianity are necessary for an eschatological scheme to be Christian.
   2. It is by these principles of Christ that we can elevate futurism over preterism as Christian.
   3. For more on this important point, see argument #1 above, Preterism Denies the Gospel.
4. Preterists are Sadducees. This liberal sect of the Jews’ religion denied spirit and resurrection, but Jesus confounded their folly and Paul voted for Pharisees.
   1. Jesus confounded them in Matt 22:23-33, and Paul voted against them in Acts 23:6-8.
   2. Preterists say they believe in the resurrection, but they deny it Biblically and historically.
   3. Bible resurrection is of the body; history proves it yet future; so they make it spiritual.
5. There is no middle ground. Preterism, by denying basic facts of the Christian faith, must be rejected. It cannot be tolerated in any sense as an alternative.
   1. You are either a Christian or a preterist, for they are antithetical and exclude each other.
   2. If you are a preterist, you are a heretic. If a heretic, you are to be marked and avoided.
6. Are Preterists Hymenaean? Hymenaeus was the first preterist regarding the resurrection, and Paul treated him by the Spirit as we should treat preterists.
   1. Read I Timothy 1:18-20 and II Timothy 2:14-18 for history of this man and his heresy.
   2. Hymenaeus did not deny the resurrection of Christ, for it was not heresy for it to be past.
   3. Hymenaeus likely did not claim bodily resurrection past, for he himself was yet present.
   4. Therefore, we conclude Hymenaeus likely taught a past spiritual raising, like Preterists.
   5. We cannot allow preterists to avoid the stigma of this man and his damnable heresy.
   6. Here is Dee Dee Warren’s efforts to prove this point: .
7. Preterism and Universalism are connected. Why are preterism and universalism connected? Both utilize a presumptuous and profane hermeneutic.
   1. Beyond this study, see here.
   2. There is much more information available about this connection to those pursuing it.
   3. The spiritualization of passages like Romans 8:17-23 and I Corinthians 15 in a 70 A.D. paradigm leads to universalism, for it is primarily inconsistency that keeps one from it.
   4. What is so bad about universalism? It is historically and hermeneutically anti-Christian.
8. How is preterism less heretical than Mormonism? It is hard to say. Both are fictional accounts of human history with a distorted view of the future.
9. I would they were cut off. How much mercy and patience should we have for preterists? As much as Paul had for the Jewish legalists infecting Galatia!
   1. What did he say about them? I wish they were cut off – meaning their death (Gal 5:12).
   2. There is also the desire for them to be exposed and excommunicated (Gal 1:8; I Co 5:13).

Miscellaneous Considerations

1. Charles Spurgeon on James Stuart Russell’s, “The Parousia.” The full review by Spurgeon is quite different from what is often excerpted by Preterists.
   1. Here is the excerpt they often use to promote Russell and his book, “…it has so much of truth in it, and throws so much new light upon obscure portions of the Scriptures, and is accompanied with so much critical research and close reasoning, that it can be injurious to none and may be profitable to all.”
   2. Here is the whole review from Spurgeon’s, “The Sword and the Trowel,” October, 1878, “The second coming of Christ according to this volume had its fulfillment in the destruction of Jerusalem and the establishment of the gospel dispensation. That the parables and predictions of our Lord had a more direct and exclusive reference to that period than is generally supposed, we readily admit; but we were not prepared for the assignment of all references to a second coming in the New Testament, and even in the Apocalypse itself, to so early a fulfillment. All that could be said has been said in support of this theory, and much more than ought to have been said. In this the reasoning fails. In order to concentrate the whole prophecies of the Book of Revelation upon the period of the destruction of Jerusalem it was needful to assume this book to have been written prior to that event, although the earliest ecclesiastical historians agree that John was banished to the isle of Patmos, where the book was written, by Domitian, who reigned after Titus, by whom Jerusalem was destroyed. Apart from this consideration, the compression of all the Apocalyptic visions and prophecies into so narrow a space requires more ingenuity and strength than that of men and angels combined. Too much stress is laid upon such phrases as ‘The time is at hand,’ ‘Behold I come quickly,’ whereas many prophecies of Scripture are delivered as present or past, as ‘unto us a child IS born,’ &c., and ‘Surely he HATH borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows.’ Amidst the many comings of Christ spoken of in the New Testament that which is spoken of as a second, must, we think, be personal, and thus similar to the first; and such too must be the meaning of ‘his appearing.’ Though the author’s theory is carried too far, it has so much of truth in it, and throws so much new light upon obscure portions of the Scriptures, and is accompanied with so much critical research and close reasoning, that it can be injurious to none and may be profitable to all.”
2. Seventh-Day Adventists. They are historicists and have provided helpful research and awareness of historicism, but their violent corruption of Daniel 8 and obsession with the Jewish Sabbath render them prophetically dangerous.
   1. They were condemned by scripture as not being of God before they even got started by William Miller’s failed prophecies of the Lord’s second coming in 1844 (Deut 18:20-22).
   2. Their obsession with the day-year principle, while proved valid in Daniel 9, is also proved invalid in Daniel 8, where the 2300 days are literal days within the Greek Empire.
   3. They will work the Sabbath into any prophecy they wish e.g. as the mark of the beast and the popes changing times and laws (Dan 7:25), though Jesus and the apostles changed it.
   4. See the author’s work on the Sabbath.
   5. See the author’s “2300 Days,”.
   6. Their prophecy seminars are seldom identified as to source, since no one would attend.
   7. Steve Wohlberg at White Horse Media, an historicist author, is a Seventh-Day Adventist.
   8. Le Roy Edwin Froom’s, “The Prophetic Faith of our Fathers,” is an outstanding reference work on the historical development of prophetic interpretation, though from an SDA perspective as the modern era approaches.
3. Connection to Dominion Theology. Preterists leave nothing in the Bible for those living past 70 A.D., so the postmillennial mentality of taking the world for God becomes the mantra and mission statement for Christians and churches.
   1. This heresy goes by various names: theonomy, reconstructionism, kingdom now, etc.
   2. The N.T. specifies the duties of Christians and churches; nowhere is this emphasis taught.
   3. The world is not going to get better, for the apostles described it getting worse and worse.
   4. Saints under pagan governments e.g. Joseph, Daniel, Esther show a different approach, as they never wasted their time or disgraced grace by seeking to change a culture.
4. The Danger of Pride. Paul warned about pride in ministers (I Tim 3:6), and preterism creates a unique opportunity for men to make a name for themselves.
   1. It is a novel doctrine; preterists can set themselves well apart from anyone past or present.
   2. It is a simple doctrine; preterists can handle any verse by forcing every verse into 70 A.D.
   3. It is an intriguing doctrine; it has truth to expose futurism, for which many are very ready.
   4. It is a rare doctrine; preterists do not have much competition, as there are so few of them.
5. The Trouble with False Assumptions. Just as with water baptism, false assumptions corrupt gospel truth, doctrinal integrity, and practical application.
   1. Most so-called Christians (95%) foolishly assume that water baptism saves to eternal life.
   2. Assuming baptismal salvation, infant baptism is invented to save children that might die.
   3. Assuming baptismal salvation, sprinkling is invented to save if immersion is impractical.
   4. Assuming baptismal salvation, Roman Catholics go in utero in case of likely miscarriage.
   5. Assuming baptismal salvation, baptism of desire is invented to save in other difficulties.
   6. Assuming baptismal salvation, Mormons invent baptism for the dead to contact their Joe.
   7. Assuming baptismal salvation, Orthodox dunk their infants thrice to preserve immersion.
   8. Assuming baptismal salvation, Campbellites invent age of accountability to save infants.
   9. Assuming baptismal salvation, Presbyterians invent covenant theology to save infants.
   10. Preterism, just as foolish as the nuts above, by presuming the full, final, and only coming of Jesus Christ in 70 A.D., must face the heretical consequences against truth, doctrine, and practice of jamming every event related to the second coming into the first century.

For Further Study

1. Best historicist prophecy book … Great Prophecies of the Bible.
2. The author’s sermon outline for 70 A.D. … Witness of 70AD.
3. The author’s sermon outline for Daniel, … Making Sense of Daniel.
4. The author’s sermon outline for Rome.
5. The author’s outline of the Millennium.
6. Is God Author of Confusion?  
7. Russell’s, The Parousia.
8. Synopsis of the End Times.
9. Dee Dee Warren on Daniel 7 .
10. 101 Preterist timing verses.
11. Dee Dee Warren on Revelation’s timing.
12. Another early-date document for Revelation.

Preterist Websites

http://www.preteristcosmos.com/index.html

http://beyondtheendtimes.com/index.html

http://www.preteristcentral.com/

 

Opponents of Preterism (everything from Dispensationalists to Partial-Preterists)

http://unpreterist.blogspot.com/

http://www.alwaysbeready.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=33&Itemid=51

http://cicministry.org/commentary/issue100.htm

http://www.preteristsite.com/

http://www.reformed.org/eschaton/index.html?mainframe=/eschaton/gentry_preterism.html

http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/reformed/pretjv10.htm

http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/91-the-menace-of-radical-preterism

http://www.biblestudying.net/preterism1.html

http://www.angelfire.com/nt/theology/preterist.html

http://www.reformed.org/eschaton/index.html?mainframe=/eschaton/west_preterism.html

http://www.thingstocome.org/

 

Against Partial-Preterism

http://www.puritans.net/polemicaltracts.html

 

Date of Revelation

http://www.thingstocome.org/datrev.htm

 

Historicist sites

http://www.historicism.net/

http://www.historicism.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicism_%28Christianity%29