A Critique of Preterism from a Historic Premillennial Perspective

 Eschatology, the study of the end times, has been a subject of significant debate within Christian theology. Among the various interpretations, Preterism offers a distinctive perspective by asserting that many, if not all, of the prophetic events described in the New Testament—especially in the book of Revelation—were fulfilled in the first century, primarily through the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Preterism is divided into two main forms: Partial Preterism and Full (or Hyper) Preterism. This essay critiques Preterism, particularly from the standpoint of Historic Premillennialism, highlighting its interpretive challenges, theological implications, and divergence from early Christian eschatological expectations.

The Distinction Between Partial and Full Preterism

Before critiquing Preterism, it's important to understand the distinction between its two main forms:

  1. Partial Preterism:

    • Belief: Most of the prophecies in the New Testament were fulfilled by A.D. 70, particularly with the destruction of Jerusalem. However, Partial Preterists still expect a future physical return of Christ, a final resurrection, and a final judgment.
    • Prominent Supporters: R.C. Sproul, Kenneth Gentry.

  2. Full Preterism (Hyper-Preterism):

    • Belief: All prophecies, including the second coming of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, and the final judgment, were fulfilled by A.D. 70. Full Preterism asserts that these events were spiritual rather than physical.
    • Prominent Supporters: Max King.

While Partial Preterism maintains some continuity with traditional Christian eschatology by affirming a future return of Christ, Full Preterism radically departs from orthodox beliefs by claiming that all eschatological events have already occurred.

The Challenges of Preterism's Interpretive Approach

Preterism relies heavily on the interpretation that the events described in Revelation, the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21), and other prophetic passages were fulfilled in the first century. This perspective often hinges on a particular understanding of Jesus’ prophecy in Matthew 24:34.

  • Matthew 24:34: "Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place."

Preterists argue that "this generation" refers to the contemporaries of Jesus, suggesting that all the events described in the Olivet Discourse, including the coming of the Son of Man, occurred within the first century. However, this interpretation faces several challenges:

  1. Scope of Fulfillment: While the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 was a significant event, it does not seem to exhaust the full scope of prophecies described in the New Testament. For example, the cosmic signs, the universal preaching of the gospel, and the visible return of Christ as described in Matthew 24:29-31 do not align easily with a first-century fulfillment.

    • Matthew 24:29-31: "Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."

  2. Nature of Christ’s Return: Full Preterism’s claim that Christ’s second coming was a spiritual event rather than a physical, visible return contradicts the clear teaching of the New Testament. The apostles expected Christ’s return to be a visible and bodily event, as described in Acts 1:11.

    • Acts 1:11: "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven."

This verse clearly indicates that Christ’s return will be in the same manner as His ascension—visible and bodily—which conflicts with the Preterist interpretation of a past, spiritual return.

The Theological Implications of Full Preterism: A Mockery of Christian Hope

Full Preterism, in all its theological audacity, posits that every significant eschatological event, from the second coming of Christ to the resurrection of the dead and the final judgment, has already happened—spiritually, of course. This notion, to put it mildly, stretches the boundaries of credulity. According to Full Preterism, believers today are not awaiting Christ’s return because, in some mystical, imperceptible way, it has already occurred. The resurrection? Oh, that was spiritual too. Heaven on earth? You’re living in it.

If this sounds absurd, it's because it is. The idea that all of Christian eschatological hope has already been realized in some spiritual, invisible manner is not just theologically unsound—it borders on the ludicrous. Consider the implications: if Full Preterism were true, then the entire Christian Church has been mistakenly waiting for nearly two millennia for something that has already happened. The grand expectation of Christ’s return, the hope of a future resurrection, and the final defeat of death are all, according to Full Preterism, past events. How does one reconcile this with the clear and repeated promises of Scripture?

  • 1 Corinthians 15:19: "If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied."

Paul’s words here take on a tragic irony under Full Preterism. If all our eschatological hope is past, then indeed, we are to be pitied. The very essence of Christian hope—the future, bodily resurrection, the visible return of Christ, the renewal of creation—is dismissed as unnecessary.

Theological Implications of Preterism

Preterism, particularly in its Full form, raises significant theological concerns:

  1. Denial of Future Eschatological Hope: By asserting that all eschatological events have already occurred, Full Preterism effectively denies the future return of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, and the final judgment. This perspective undermines the future hope that has been a central tenet of Christian faith throughout history. The Apostle Paul emphasizes the importance of the resurrection as a future event that is foundational to Christian hope.

    • 1 Corinthians 15:12-14: "Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain."

Paul’s argument in 1 Corinthians 15 highlights the centrality of the future resurrection, which Full Preterism essentially denies by claiming it has already occurred in a spiritual sense.

  1. Distortion of Biblical Eschatology: Preterism’s approach often leads to a reinterpretation of key biblical texts in ways that distort their original meaning and context. By viewing all eschatological prophecies as having been fulfilled in the first century, Preterism can diminish the ongoing relevance of these texts for the Church today. This perspective contrasts with the Historic Premillennial view, which sees these prophecies as still awaiting fulfillment and therefore vital for understanding the Church’s mission and hope.

  2. Divergence from Early Christian Eschatology: The early Church Fathers, including those who were closest to the apostolic tradition, held to a future, literal fulfillment of eschatological events. Figures like Justin Martyr and Irenaeus anticipated a future millennial reign of Christ and a physical resurrection, in line with Historic Premillennialism. The Preterist view, particularly in its Full form, represents a significant departure from this early Christian eschatological framework.

Critiquing Partial Preterism

While Partial Preterism avoids the more radical implications of Full Preterism by maintaining belief in a future return of Christ, it still faces significant challenges. Partial Preterism asserts that most eschatological prophecies were fulfilled by A.D. 70, particularly through the destruction of Jerusalem. However, this approach raises several concerns:

  1. Inconsistencies in Fulfillment: Partial Preterism often results in interpretive inconsistencies. By dividing eschatological prophecies into those that were fulfilled in the first century and those that are still future, Partial Preterism can struggle to maintain a coherent and unified eschatological framework. For instance, it can be difficult to explain why some events, such as the destruction of Jerusalem, are seen as definitive fulfillments, while other prophecies, like the visible return of Christ, are still expected in the future.

  2. Downplaying the Significance of Future Events: By emphasizing the fulfillment of many prophecies in A.D. 70, Partial Preterism can inadvertently downplay the significance of future eschatological events. This perspective may lead to a reduced sense of urgency and anticipation regarding Christ’s return and the final judgment, which are central to Christian hope and doctrine.

    • 2 Peter 3:10 (ESV): "But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed."

    This passage underscores the dramatic and universal nature of the events associated with Christ’s return, which seems difficult to reconcile with the notion that many prophecies were already fulfilled in a localized event like the destruction of Jerusalem.

  3. The Tension Between Already and Not Yet: Partial Preterism introduces a tension between the "already" and the "not yet" aspects of eschatology that can be difficult to balance. While it acknowledges that some prophecies have been fulfilled, it also holds that others are yet to come. This can create confusion and uncertainty in understanding the full scope of God’s redemptive plan.

  4. Impact on Eschatological Hope: By focusing heavily on the past fulfillment of prophecies, Partial Preterism risks shifting the emphasis away from the future hope of Christ’s return and the establishment of His kingdom. This shift can lead to a diminished expectation of the transformative power of Christ’s return and the final consummation of all things.

Conclusion

Preterism, in both its Partial and Full forms, presents significant challenges from a Historic Premillennial perspective. By asserting that most or all of the New Testament’s eschatological prophecies were fulfilled in the first century, Preterism risks undermining the future hope that has been central to Christian faith. The interpretive approach of Preterism often leads to a spiritualization of key biblical texts that distorts their original meaning and diminishes their relevance for the Church today.

In contrast, Historic Premillennialism maintains a future-oriented eschatological hope, affirming the literal fulfillment of biblical prophecies regarding Christ’s return, the resurrection of the dead, and the establishment of His millennial kingdom on earth. This perspective aligns more closely with the teachings of the early Church Fathers and offers a coherent and robust understanding of the end times that preserves the full scope of Christian hope. As believers, it is essential to hold fast to the future promises of Scripture, anticipating the return of Christ and the ultimate fulfillment of God’s redemptive plan for creation.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Justification for a Post-Tribulational Rapture

 The debate surrounding the timing of the rapture in relation to the tribulation is one of the most contentious within Christian eschatology. The pre-tribulation rapture, which posits that believers will be taken up before a period of intense suffering, has gained significant popularity, especially in evangelical circles. However, a growing number of Christians are turning towards the post-tribulation rapture belief, which asserts that the church will endure the tribulation and that the rapture will coincide with Christ's second coming. This essay aims to justify the post-tribulation belief through a comprehensive examination of scriptural evidence and theological reasoning. Historical Context Early Church Beliefs The early Christian church predominantly held a belief in a singular second coming of Christ, which would follow a period of tribulation. This perspective is evident in the writings of early church fathers such as Irenaeus, who described a future tribulation period that w
Read more

A Response to Andy Woods’ Interpretation of Hebrews 6:4-6

 Hebrews 6:4-6 has been a focal point of theological debate, with interpretations ranging from warnings about losing salvation to discussions of forfeiting rewards or blessings. Andy Woods, in his paper "THE PARADIGM OF KADESH BARNEA AS A SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM OF HEBREWS 6:4-6", advocates for the latter, positing that the passage addresses the loss of spiritual blessings rather than the possibility of a believer losing salvation. While Woods’ interpretation is thoughtfully presented and aligns with his commitment to Eternal Security, a closer examination of the text, its language, and the broader biblical context suggests that his view may not fully capture the severity and intent of the warning in these verses. This essay argues that Hebrews 6:4-6 indeed speaks to the real and grave danger of apostasy—falling away from faith in such a manner that leads to an irreversible separation from God. The Context of Hebrews 6:4-6 Woods argues that the passage should be understood t
Read more

Conditional Security: Faith as the Anchor of Salvation

 The doctrine of Conditional Security asserts that salvation, while a gift of grace through faith, can be forfeited through a subsequent loss of faith. This perspective acknowledges the dynamic nature of faith, emphasizing that the same faith that initiates salvation must be continually nurtured and sustained. This version of Conditional Security posits that a believer can lose their salvation only in the same way they received it—through faith, or more specifically, through a lack of faith. The Foundation of Salvation: Faith Salvation is intricately tied to faith. Ephesians 2:8-9 states, "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God—not the result of works, so that no one may boast." This passage highlights that faith is the conduit through which the grace of salvation is received. Faith, therefore, is not merely an initial step but the foundation upon which the entire Christian life is built. The Possibility of Aposta
Read more