A Death Blow to Full (Hyper) Preterism

[John of Japan]

We must understand that preterism is not fundamentally based on a mistaken view of prophecy, but this mistaken view of prophecy is based on an un-Biblical hermeneutic. A Biblical view of prophecy and its fulfillment strikes a death blow to the full (hyper) preterist doctrine.

It's very simple and I believe completely unanswerable by the preterist. Here it is. We all know that OT prophecies of Jesus Christ were fulfilled literally and precisely. I could give many, but most of you know them, I'm sure. So just a few of the most obvious ones:

Birth at Bethlehem of Ephratah (Micah 5:2 & Matt. 2:5-6)
Birth of a virgin (Is. 7:14 & Matt. 1:23)
Lived in Egypt (Hos. 11:1 & Matt. 2:14-15)
Tribe of Judah, house of David, etc. etc.

You can easily find many more with a quick Internet search, or in a good book on Biblical prophecy. The best and one of the only books on the interpretation of prophecy is The Interpretation of Prophecy, by Paul Lee Tan. Tan calls prophecy "prewritten history." And history is literal facts, not allegory.

Now since all OT prophecies of the first coming of Jesus Christ were fulfilled literally for all to see, it naturally follows that prophecies of Christ will be fulfilled literally. Any other view--any preterist view that denies a literal, physical 2nd coming of Jesus Christ is simply wrong and un-Biblical.

Oh, and by the way. Until the end of the 2nd century all church fathers, all Christian writings interpreted literally. According to Tan, Pantaenus in about 180 AD was the first to suggest allegorical interpretation (p. 48), and of course Origen was the one who popularized it in the 3rd century. Those early Christians all simply believed the literal sense of the Bible.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Any other view--any preterist view that denies a literal, physical 2nd coming of Jesus Christ is simply wrong and un-Biblical.

:thumbs: Absolutely right!

 

[JesusFan]

We must understand that preterism is not fundamentally based on a mistaken view of prophecy, but this mistaken view of prophecy is based on an un-Biblical hermeneutic. A Biblical view of prophecy and its fulfillment strikes a death blow to the full (hyper) preterist doctrine.

It's very simple and I believe completely unanswerable by the preterist. Here it is. We all know that OT prophecies of Jesus Christ were fulfilled literally and precisely. I could give many, but most of you know them, I'm sure. So just a few of the most obvious ones:

Birth at Bethlehem of Ephratah (Micah 5:2 & Matt. 2:5-6)
Birth of a virgin (Is. 7:14 & Matt. 1:23)
Lived in Egypt (Hos. 11:1 & Matt. 2:14-15)
Tribe of Judah, house of David, etc. etc.

You can easily find many more with a quick Internet search, or in a good book on Biblical prophecy. The best and one of the only books on the interpretation of prophecy is The Interpretation of Prophecy, by Paul Lee Tan. Tan calls prophecy "prewritten history." And history is literal facts, not allegory.

Now since all OT prophecies of the first coming of Jesus Christ were fulfilled literally for all to see, it naturally follows that prophecies of Christ will be fulfilled literally. Any other view--any preterist view that denies a literal, physical 2nd coming of Jesus Christ is simply wrong and un-Biblical.

Oh, and by the way. Until the end of the 2nd century all church fathers, all Christian writings interpreted literally. According to Tan, Pantaenus in about 180 AD was the first to suggest allegorical interpretation (p. 48), and of course Origen was the one who popularized it in the 3rd century. Those early Christians all simply believed the literal sense of the Bible.

seems that they have a problem is seeing that the Bible teaches that:
There is the aspect of the Kingdom being present in person/ministry of Jesus
That is the spiritual Kingdom He spoke about while here
There IS coming the fullness of that Kingdom. when he returns to the earth, to have Kingdom in earnest here, with Him ruling as the messiah over earth
that there ARE partial fulfillments to OT prophecies back than, full fulfillments not yet
That God made literal promises to isreal. Jews, why fulfill them strictly at His first coming, yet turn to fulfilling them in allegorical"spiritua;" sense at His Second coming?
When did Armegeddon occur? When we translated into heaven glorified? When did jesus take His"direct" rein over the earth?

 

[John of Japan]

Any full preterists have the guts to answer this?

 

[Grasshopper]

Any full preterists have the guts to answer this?

If that is the best evidence against full preterism then I predict full preterism will grow by leaps and bounds in the coming generations.

Did all those early Christians also interpret the time statements literally?

 

[John of Japan]

If that is the best evidence against full preterism then I predict full preterism will grow by leaps and bounds in the coming generations.

That's no answer. Since you are so sure of this, give an answer. Since all the OT prophecies of the first coming of Jesus Christ were literally fulfilled without fail, why then will the prophecies of the 2nd coming of Christ not be literally fulfulled instead of "spiritually" fulfilled?

We have a clear, obvious and literal hermeneutic taught in the interpretation of OT quotes in the NT. Christians ignore this and "spiritualize" at their spiritual peril.

Did all those early Christians also interpret the time statements literally?

Yes they did, absolutely. All the early Christian writers who touched on the subject without fail wrote of a literal 2nd coming of Christ. I have shown on another thread how the Didache did so (never answered by a preterist). There was no allegorical, "spiritual" interpretation of the Word of God until the end of the 2nd century, and it did not become popular until Origen in mid-3rd century.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Any full preterists have the guts to answer this?

Wow....sounds so threating ....also laughable. all at the same time. Are you spoiling for a fight? :laugh:

 

[DHK]

If that is the best evidence against full preterism then I predict full preterism will grow by leaps and bounds in the coming generations.

That is quite a statement you have made. On what grounds or basis do you make it. I believe there are some 300 prophecies in the OT that were made concerning the first coming of Christ, all of which were literally fulfilled. Based on those promises and the integrity and veracity of the Word of God, do we have any reason to doubt God when he says he is coming a second time "in the same manner as he went."

Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven. (Acts 1:11)

 

[Grasshopper]

That's no answer. Since you are so sure of this, give an answer. Since all the OT prophecies of the first coming of Jesus Christ were literally fulfilled without fail, why then will the prophecies of the 2nd coming of Christ not be literally fulfulled instead of "spiritually" fulfilled?

There is no reason to assume such a thing. Jesus' parousia is a NT prophecy, not an OT prophecy. however, as Tom has shown in other threads, God came many times in the OT and none were physical manifestations. Perhaps a word study of parousia would help you out. But one does not have to be a full preterist to see parousia in a non physical way.

John Gill comments on Matthew 24:27

so shall also the coming of the son of man be; which must be understood not of his last coming to judgment, though that will be sudden, visible, and universal; he will at once come to, and be seen by all, in the clouds of heaven, and not in deserts and secret chambers: nor of his spiritual coming in the more sudden, and clear, and powerful preaching of the Gospel all over the Gentile world; for this was to be done before the destruction of Jerusalem: but of his coming in his wrath and vengeance to destroy that people, their nation, city, and temple: so that after this to look for the Messiah in a desert, or secret chamber, must argue great stupidity and blindness; when his coming was as sudden, visible, powerful, and general, to the destruction of that nation, as the lightning that comes from the east, and, in a moment, shines to the west.

We have a clear, obvious and literal hermeneutic taught in the interpretation of OT quotes in the NT. Christians ignore this and "spiritualize" at their spiritual peril.

You mean like Acts 2:16-21 or like Acts 15:16-17?

Yes they did, absolutely. All the early Christian writers who touched on the subject without fail wrote of a literal 2nd coming of Christ. I have shown on another thread how the Didache did so (never answered by a preterist). There was no allegorical, "spiritual" interpretation of the Word of God until the end of the 2nd century, and it did not become popular until Origen in mid-3rd century.

So they took the time statements of Rev 1:1,3 literally? Interesting how dispies take words like near and shortly literally and claim they stretch like a rubber band for over 2000 years. Then they mock others for not for not taking the words of the Bible literally.

 

[Benjamin]

I have no eggs in either basket (Dispensationalism or full Preterism) but since JOJ seems to have put on gloves and pulls "literal" out in the round ...:smilewinkgrin:

 

[Grasshopper]

That is quite a statement you have made. On what grounds or basis do you make it.

Just an observation over the past few years, people are leaving the pre mill Dispie view in favor of a more preterist position. The Hal Lindsey, Tim LaHaye nonsense is finally starting to hit it's breaking point the farther away we get from 1948.

Acts 1 is in my opinion the best case for a physical return of Christ. The problem I have is divorcing it from the other "comings" I am convinced speak of the AD70 events. Though I am a solid preterist I am open to all views in that realm.

Does Jesus return on a cloud or a horse?

 

[John of Japan]

There is no reason to assume such a thing. Jesus' parousia is a NT prophecy, not an OT prophecy. however, as Tom has shown in other threads, God came many times in the OT and none were physical manifestations. Perhaps a word study of parousia would help you out. But one does not have to be a full preterist to see parousia in a non physical way.

Let me get this straight. You believe that OT prophecy fulfilled literally in the NT birth, life and death of Christ have nothing to do with NT prophecy? What is your epistemology on this?

And the comings of God in the OT were not physical manifestations? Agreed. So does that to you mean that the birth of Christ in the NT was not a physical birth? Surely you'll admit that the first coming of Christ was physical. And the resurrection of Christ was physical, right? So once again, why would not the 2nd coming of Christ be physical?

This issue of the 2nd Coming of Christ is hardly an exact parallel to God, who is a Spirit, manifesting Himself in spirit form to OT saints. Let's even go further. Do you agree that there are preincarnate appearances of Christ? And that those were physical? If so, then why will not the 2nd coming be physical?

Christ came physically in literal fulfillment of OT prophecy, therefore He will come physically in literal fulfillment of NT prophecy. To say otherwise is to ignore the fact that Christ is God become flesh.

So, we have preincarnate appearances of Christ in the flesh, we have the literal, physical birth and literal, physical resurrection of Christ. This clearly means that in any Biblical hermeneutic Christ will come the 2nd time in the flesh.

So they took the time statements of Rev 1:1,3 literally? Interesting how dispies take words like near and shortly literally and claim they stretch like a rubber band for over 2000 years. Then they mock others for not for not taking the words of the Bible literally.

Trying to derail the thread, eh?

 

[John of Japan]

Does Jesus return on a cloud or a horse?

This is actually a problem to you? Incredibly simple. That's like saying, "Is a man on a horse on a truck on the truck or on the horse?" Just plain silly!

 

[revmwc]

Just an observation over the past few years, people are leaving the pre mill Dispie view in favor of a more preterist position. The Hal Lindsey, Tim LaHaye nonsense is finally starting to hit it's breaking point the farther away we get from 1948.

Acts 1 is in my opinion the best case for a physical return of Christ. The problem I have is divorcing it from the other "comings" I am convinced speak of the AD70 events. Though I am a solid preterist I am open to all views in that realm.

Does Jesus return on a cloud or a horse?

Depends on what you are asking. At the rapture of the church we meet Him in the air.
1st Thessalonians 4: 16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

18Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

Revelation 4:1 After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.

2 And immediately I was in the spirit: and, behold, a throne was set in heaven, and one sat on the throne.

3 And he that sat was to look upon like a jasper and a sardine stone: and there was a rainbow round about the throne, in sight like unto an emerald.

4 And round about the throne were four and twenty seats: and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold.

5 And out of the throne proceeded lightnings and thunderings and voices: and there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.

At his second coming He comes on a Horse.

Revelation 19: 11And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.

13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God;

18 That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.

19 And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.

20 And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.

21 And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.

 

[John of Japan]

So they took the time statements of Rev 1:1,3 literally? Interesting how dispies take words like near and shortly literally and claim they stretch like a rubber band for over 2000 years. Then they mock others for not for not taking the words of the Bible literally.

You seem to have missed the point of this thread. It is not about dispensationalism or even premil. It is about a literal 2nd coming of Christ, something that amils and postmils agree with premils on. Stick to the thread please.

 

[Grasshopper]

You seem to have missed the point of this thread. It is not about dispensationalism or even premil. It is about a literal 2nd coming of Christ, something that amils and postmils agree with premils on. Stick to the thread please.

The coming in Revelation that John said would happen shortly? The coming Jesus said would happen in His generation? The coming the writer of the book of Hebrews said would come and not tarry? Etc.......

You cannot divorce the time statements from the topic no matter how much you don't want to deal with them. Are the time statements not inspired? Does parousia mean physical coming?

God established a Kingdom in the OT, He also predicted a future Kingdom. Does it mean it must be physical as well? You probably do but many non FP do not think so. God also established a physical Temple in the OT and He promised a future Temple. Does that mean the future Temple must be physical? Paul didn't think so. So your entire supposition is moot.

 

[Grasshopper]

Depends on what you are asking. At the rapture of the church we meet Him in the air.

Then why did Jesus tell Caiaphas he would see Him coming on the clouds?

Matthew 26:64
Jesus said to him, "You have said it yourself; nevertheless I tell you, hereafter you will see THE SON OF MAN SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER , and COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN ."

 

[revmwc]

Then why did Jesus tell Caiaphas he would see Him coming on the clouds?

Matthew 26:64
Jesus said to him, "You have said it yourself; nevertheless I tell you, hereafter you will see THE SON OF MAN SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER , and COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN ."

Is Peter in Heaven? I would think his soul is. But His body is in the grave. Did Peter die after the church was ushered in? Yes, he preached at pentacost when the Holy Spirit brought in the church. When Christ comes for His church in the clouds Peter will be one who comes out of the grave and meets Christ in the clouds.

 

[John of Japan]

The coming in Revelation that John said would happen shortly? The coming Jesus said would happen in His generation? The coming the writer of the book of Hebrews said would come and not tarry? Etc.......

You cannot divorce the time statements from the topic no matter how much you don't want to deal with them. Are the time statements not inspired? Does parousia mean physical coming?

God established a Kingdom in the OT, He also predicted a future Kingdom. Does it mean it must be physical as well? You probably do but many non FP do not think so. God also established a physical Temple in the OT and He promised a future Temple. Does that mean the future Temple must be physical? Paul didn't think so. So your entire supposition is moot.

I really don't have time to deal with this whole complicated issue this morning. I'm working on the translation of Rom. 15, and have to leave for the church shortly to work with Uncle Miya on Phil.

But I will say this, that yes, parousia definitely means physical coming. It is used undisputably for that in:

1 Cor. 16:17--I am glad of the coming of Stephanas and Fortunatus and Achaicus: for that which was lacking on your part they have supplied.

2 Cor. 17:6&7--Nevertheless God, that comforteth those that are cast down, comforted us by the coming of Titus;
And not by his coming only, but by the consolation wherewith he was comforted in you, when he told us your earnest desire, your mourning, your fervent mind toward me; so that I rejoiced the more.

2 Cor. 10:10--For his letters, say they, are weighty and powerful; but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible.

Phil 1:26--That your rejoicing may be more abundant in Jesus Christ for me by my coming to you again.

Phil 2:12--Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

So since in every single case when parousia is used of humans in the NT who were not Christ, then obviously, yes, parousia means a literal coming when applied to Christ also.

 

[mandym]

The coming in Revelation that John said would happen shortly?

genea (grk) can be used in one of several ways, age, generation, nation, or time.

Which in this context it is most probable that it means nation.

The coming Jesus said would happen in His generation?

tachu (grk) can be used in one of several ways, shortly, without delay, suddenly, lightly, or quickly.

Which in this case it is most probable that it is referring to suddenly.