THE PURPOSE of this article is to acknowledge and to discuss the fact that extremes do exist within the framework of biblical preterism. [1] In recent years, a zealous host of “former” preterists has arisen, shielded within the ranks of Futurist evangelical “orthodoxy” and determined to destroy that for which they once rejoiced and gladly endured the reproach and disdain of their contemporaries–the same ones who now congratulate their departure from such a “damnable heresy.”
Articles have been published, books written, and websites erected whose only purpose is the tearing down and criticism of others with whom they now disagree. While the motives of each one are known only to God, their comments and actions certainly speak for themselves far beyond anything this writer could either quote or document. Their “root of bitterness” is evident to anyone who cares to investigate the matter more closely (Heb. 12:15). For some of these “former” preterists, it was the existence of certain extreme positions that caused them to fall away from the truth, instead of finding the place of balance in their own faith and lives. For others, the seeming coldness of preterist intellectualism rather than increasedspirituality caused them to run for the shelter of a more “idealistic” (subjective) theology. The problematic existence of “anti-ism” and “liberalism” as extremes within the preterist movement have lead some to conclude that Completed Redemption must be rejected and therefore that Futurist theology must necessarily now be true.
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Most readers are not familiar with the proper definition of either “anti-ism” or “liberalism” as it exists within the context of preterist theology. “Anti-ism” is a form of legalism that binds where God has not bound–elevates matters of opinion into matters of faith. “Liberalism” comes in under the guise of “grace” or “liberty” and looses where God has bound–transforms matters of faith into matters of opinion. Preterist examples of “anti-ism” are those who seek to bind their opinions on others regarding such issues as, the nature of the church since 70 C.E., the cessation of certain features of ministry, including baptism and the observance of the Lord’s Supper are no longer valid. Those who would support the continuation of Evangelists, Pastors and Teachers within the context of the local body of believers (church), including the necessity of baptism and regular observance of the Lord’s Supper are condemned by these who espouse “anti-ism.” Preterist examples of “liberalism” are manifested by those who have embraced various forms of “Comprehensive Grace” (Universalism), so-called “Beyond Creation Science,” and certain aspects of the “Emergent Church” theology fiasco. Those who reject such unbiblical concepts are considered “old-timers” and “unenlightened.” The use of such terms, while not absolute, certainly illustrates the danger and presence of a tendency on the part of some toward imbalance.
Since extremes do exist within biblical preterism, does this imply that one must “throw out the theological baby with theextremist bathwater?” Not at all. This behavior is identical to that which existed within the confines of the first-century community of faith by the Judaizers who sought to bind observance of the Mosaic Law on the Gentiles requiring them to first be circumcised when obeying the gospel (Acts. 15:1-29; Gal. 2:1-21). These brethren were practicing “anti-ism” and binding where God had not bound and therefore were corrected of their error. Likewise, a faction within the Gentiles existed that misunderstood the “liberty” of the gospel as an excuse to continue in their sinful conduct (Rom. 6:1, 2 et al). The existence of the two extremes did not and does not negate the balance of the truth that lies between the two.
Preterism has become a virtual “magnet” for everyone with a “hobby-horse” to ride. Negative encounters with various forms of Futurist evangelical Christianity has sent thousands of people on a perpetual journey with no place upon which to land–so Preterism becomes an attraction for them. The emotional need for such ones to find theological validation in some “distinctive” viewpoint that sets them apart from their former experiences only serves to perpetuate the problem. This new crop of“unlearned and unstable” preterist zealots (II Pet. 3:16) are often ” tossed and carried about by all kinds of teachings that change like the wind” (Eph. 4:14), “always studying but are never able to recognize the truth” (II Tim. 3:7). Those who are mature in the faith ought to remain ever vigilant in affirming those principles associated with “sound doctrine” rather than to allow those carried away into the extremes to perish (Titus 1:9; 2:1).
BLOG-OLATRY
Each person ultimately renders “an account of himself to God” for that which he believes and practices (Rom. 14:12). There is no escaping the consequences of that which one does in this realm of existence (II Cor. 5:10; Heb. 9:27). Although theeschatological Judgment Day has long ago past, individual responsibility before God remains as part of the everlasting New Covenant. The fact that pre-70 C.E. believers already experiencing the fullness and power of the “age to come” understood their accountability provides the foundational basis upon which those living 2,000 later continues to stand (Heb. 6:5). Those who mistakenly believe that fulfillment implies only an “end” and nothing beyond that time are lacking the proper balance and biblical perspective necessary in order to experience the abundant life God now has to offer.
There is a great debt owed even to the strongest detractors of Completed Redemption. The ease with which many are prone to embrace whatever doctrinal notion is presented or dangled in front of them is a dangerous problem with respect to the future of past fulfillment. The extremes threaten to overshadow the glorious truth that lies between. Not every website or blog that sells or brands itself as a “Preterist” haven of rest, can be trusted as a reliable source of balanced truth. Not every “man of God” is the genuine article and therefore each person who listens to or reads his teachings must first “prove all things, hold fast that which is good” (I Thess. 5:21). This generation of believers must take care not to commit “blog-olatry” by accepting anything andeverything they see on the Internet. The old addage, “all that glitters is not gold” is true.
On the other hand, not everything posted by “former” preterists is an accurate portrayal of the facts either. Sometimes even the most honest refutation of a particular position is clouded beneath the haze of subjective human emotions and experiential disappointments. To leave behind a whole community of friends and those who were once considered “brethren” being disillusioned and disappointed often leads that one into other forms of depression, imbalance or inconsistency. There is no futurein Futurism in it’s varied forms and many manifestations–Premillennial, Post-millenial, Amillennial or even the more recent Idealist paradigms.
Todd Dennis, makes the following observation about Hyper-Preterism (a recent tag line attributed to the teaching of Completed Redemption):
The HyP teaching that the New Covenant wasn’t in its full establishment until long after the cross event shows how Hyper Preterism is fundamentally different from Christianity as it has always been known. This “AD70 storyline” is foreign to the Bible, and to Christianity as a whole throughout all of its centuries and denominations. Only the Universalists of the last 200 years have embraced this type of AD70-centrism.[2]
Futurists are far more guilty of denying the efficacy of the Cross of Christ and the establishment of the New Covenant than anything ever presented within the ranks of the preterist community. Calling attention to the extreme position of Universalism misses the point completely. What about the Futurist who denies the Cross with the implication that salvation remains incomplete and unfulfilled? Premillennial author Rene Pache, in his classic presentation on The Return of Jesus Christ states:
While his [Christ] absence continues, we are not yet in possession of complete salvation. Our sorrows continue, and alas! too often our failures also, while the enemy wages a merciless war against us. But let us take courage, for soon we shall burst into songs of happiness and adoration, when Jesus, going forth again from the heavenly sanctuary, shall come to save us totally and definitively. [3]
Is this the victorious “message of the Cross” proclaimed by apostles living under the expectation of the nearness of the Parousia of Christ of which Todd Dennis and others wish to support? 2,000 years (and counting) of failed promises and unrealized expectations are the heritage which every Futurist must embrace because no other “logical” conclusion than was expressed by Pasche exists within that faulty framework. How does this view of incomplete salvation magnify the Cross of Christ and produce a sense of joy within the hearts and minds of the waiting multitudes?
The post-Cross and pre-70 C.E. ministry of Jesus Christ was moving toward a stated “end” or “goal”–that of removing the remaining elements of an Old Covenantal system that could not provide forgiveness and salvation for people and into the realm of a New Covenant system where both forgiveness and salvation are a present reality. Certainly the Cross is the central message of God’s eternal purpose, but just as certainly also was the hope of the Parousia as the consummating act of God in the completion of the process that was set in motion. Jesus Christ “finished” His work as “the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world”(John 1:29), and “began” His work as High Priest and as King of kings and Lord of lords following His resurrection and ascention–entering into the heavenly sancuary to administer the benefits of His sacrificial death on the Cross. The rest of the New Testament is the “storyline” of consummation–how that precious message was taken to “every nation under heaven” (Acts. 1:8; Rom. 16:26; Col. 1: 23) in fulfillment of the Great Comission (Mark 16:15, 16; Matt. 28:18-20)–“unto the end (consummation) of the age” (Matt. 28:20)
CONCLUSION
There is every reason to acknowledge the existence of extremes with the framework of preterism, without the necessity of denying the truth of the total message of Completed Redemption within the confines of theological balance. Beyond the theology surrounding preterist teaching is the need now, more than ever before, for believers to actively demonstrate the power of the message as evidenced in their daily walk with the Lord. Completed Redemption demands that believers, as “partakers of the divine nature” (II Pet. 1:4) produce fruit that is consistent with the reality of that which we now affirm. The devotionalnature of what Completed Redemption means to each of us and how it affects are daily walk of victory in this world is a key element that cannot be ignored. The “fruit of righteousness” evidenced in the lives of believers can and must serve as a powerful demonstration of the truth of this message.
Completed Redemption means that believers are better husbands and wives, better mothers and fathers, better children,better employers and employees, and better citizens. Intellectual arguments and logical presentations are a poor substitute for actual relationship with God that is lived out in our daily interactions with people of the world and at home. Discussions about “time statements” and speculations about other points of doctrine provides little comfort for the millions whose marriages are being consumed, whose lives are being destroyed by sexual immorality, drug and alcohol abuse, homelessness and poverty. The true message of Jesus Christ alone in the context of all He has accomplished has the power to change lives and to “bind up the brokenhearted”–as was the original intention.
A final word for those whose only purpose in life has become the destruction of so-called Hyper-Preterism: Find the peace of God and devote your efforts to something positive, something that builds the Kingdom of God instead of seeking to destroy and undermine the faith of others who have gone on their way rejoicing in the reality of Completed Redemption. A sad as it may seem, there will aways be “former” preterists who somehow lost their sense of joy and who tumbled back into the darkness of the “almost” but “not quite” of Futurist eschatology.
As long as the centrality of the Cross is championed by preterists, the eschatology will remain in balance. It is just as wrong to “see” 70 C.E. in every verse of the Bible as it is in ignoring the historical significance of the events that transpired historically. The Cross was both a historical and a redemptive event–the two things are not mutually exclusive. It was God who chose to interject and the manifest Himself in human affairs and history. The Bible cannot be seen as “anti-historical” anymore than it can be seen as “anti-spiritual.” To two concepts operate in complete harmony and balance. May God give us the wisdom to preach the full and complete gospel of Christ each and every day!
FOOTNOTES
[1] Biblical Preterism is the teaching that the second or final coming of Jesus Christ, the Resurrection of the dead, and the Judgment occurred with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 C.E. More accurate terms such as “Accomplished Salvation” or “Completed Redemption” are preferred by KINGDOM VICTORY since the emphasis is correctly placed on the finished work of the Cross of Christ and those predicted events that would accompany the consummation or fulfillment of that work through the establishment of the New Covenant (Heb. 13:20).
[2] Todd Dennis, AD70 Storyline Fundamentally Different from Historic Christianity (Hyper-Preterist Archive) 01/09/09.
[3] Rene Pasche, The Return of Jesus Christ (Condensed Edition) (Chicago: Moody Bible Institute: 1975). 26.
Samuel Frost
With a B.Th., Sam completed a M.A. in Christian Studies; M.A. in Religion, and Th.M. from Whitefield Theological Seminary, Lakeland, Florida (with combined credits in Hebrew exegesis from Reformed Theological Seminary, Orlando, Florida - and in Greek exegesis from Church of God School of Theology, Cleveland, Tennessee). Author of Full Preterist works, Misplaced Hope, Exegetical Essays on the Resurrection of the Dead and House Divided with Mike Sullivan, Dave Green and Ed Hassertt. Also edited A Student's Hebrew Primer for Whitefield Theological Seminary. Samuel M. Frost co-founded Reign of Christ Ministries, and has lectured extensively for over 8 years at Full Preterist conferences, including the Evangelical Theological Society conference, of which he is currently a member. Samuel is ordained, and has functioned as Teaching Pastor at Christ Covenant Church in St. Petersburg, Florida (2002-2005). He helped host the popular debates between Don Preston and Thomas Ice (with Mark Hitchcock) and Don Preston and James B. Jordan. Samuel is widely regarded by many of his peers as being one of the foremost experts on prophecy, apocalypticism, and Preterist theology. He was highly influential in the Full Preterist movement, having been published by Don Preston (Exegetical Essays), footnoted in several Full Preterist works, and authored one Forward, Reading the Bible Through New Covenant Eyes, by Alan Bondar. He has come to denounce his Full Preterist views in 2010 and affirms the historic Christian Faith and orthodoxy. Samuel Frost owns and operates his own business and resides in Florida with his wife Ann Marie, and his children, Janet, Jacob, Hunter, and Olivia. Check out more from Sam.
Knoxtn_pret
…I personally would not waste any time on Todd Dennis' musings…Jim Nicolosi, Knoxville, TN
Mike Bennett
Outstanding article – I think I may reprint this one in my blog to make sure all at SGP read it !!!
Larry Siegle
Thank you for posting this article on your website…
When I first wrote this article only a short period of time had elapsed since several people had abandoned their convictions about Preterism (e.g. Roderick Edwards, Brian Simmons, Todd Dennis, and several others). There is a “follow-up” to this article that will be forthcoming here on RCM [if Sam and Jason feel the material is appropriate] that will be titled: “Acknowledgement of Extremes–Revisited” to get a sense of whether or not we are making progress, or if we are continuing to be given over to certain 'extreme' views within the scope of FULL Preterism. Perhaps some information will be included about whether or not the concept of FULLER Preterism [a term coined by Sam Frost recently] has any validity within the context of what we already understand about the nature of fulfillment. Stay tuned… Blessings Larry Siegle
Samuelmfrost
I guess one of the main questions I have is: 1. Does the Bible “foretell” of the Age to Come? 2. Does the Bible describe life in the Age to Come?
From what I am gathering, life for the People of God (“my chosen”), is one of sustained “growth” and “expansion”. Contained within this idea is, of course, “progress” (any concept of growth necessarily involves progression, and progression involves aim or goal). Thus, how far does this expansion encompass? And, for how long? I am firmly convinced that, one way or the other, Preterism must grapple with these questions.
Jesus said 1: the kingomd of God was near
2. The kingdom is like a mustard seed
3. the kingdom that was near would come as a mustard seed and grow….
This is entirely in line with the Prophets who foresaw from a “seed”, “stump” or “root” of the “remnant” of Israel would come an expansion that would “fill all the earth” – Jesus' parables reflect this – they are parables of growth.
Now, does this growth occur during the time of the end, or AFTER the end and in the Age to Come? In other words, as a result of the END, the BEGINNING of the Age to Come and the Expansion of God's People would begin. I believe that this can be fully seen (confirmed) in the expansion of Christianity in the last 2000 years. And, if that is the case, then we are still FULFILLING the expansion promises. If not, then Full Preterists would have to limit the “expansion” to A.D 70 (which, is hard to do, since the Apostasy happened then, and very little “without faith” were found! By the time Paul wrote Timothy, “all of Asia” had abandoned him!). This “falling away” at the end of the age cannot, then, answer to the glorious expansion of the seed of Abraham that would spring from the Seed (Jesus Christ) and the remnant of Israel (which involved Gentile inclusion into the Body).
What that “transition generation” set up was a laying of the foundation to prepare the start of the EXPANSION of God's people by freeing them from the shackles of the weak and beggarly elements of the old order of things. Israel never expanded as Isaiah 54 predicts – but, in Christ, she has expanded all throughout the world once her shackles were broken. And she continues to expand. But, to what end? For how long?
If one couples these ponderings with the argument I presented on infinity…..well, you do the math.
Larry Siegle
Sam
There is every reason to believe that Preterism CAN and therefore MUST address the questions posed in your comment. There must be an adequate definition given to the term “fulfillment” as it pertains to Biblical prophecies and whether or not a 'continuing result' is IMPLIED by such “fulfillment.” Some of the liberal theologians tried to divert attention away from the imminence question by coining the term “fulfillment without consummation”–a concept that is beyond contradictory with both logic and what the Bible explicitly states “in so many words.”
Jesus and his apostles later made reference to “the age to come” within the context of “covenantal change” and in the achievement of “completeness” in Christ. Those who entered into “the age to come” were to receive “eternal life” and were to be called “children of the resurrection”. Their 'new' identity is one that is based in the “world” by which they are determined. This “New Creation” stood perfected, the “redemption of the purchased possession” being complete and the “New Heavens and a New earth” arriving at the end of the Old Covenant aeon. Those in covenant were being manifested as “partakers of the Divine nature” and as inhabitants of the holy city, the “New Jerusalem” into which they had entered through the applied meaning of Christ's death and their subsequent resurrection of life “in the age to come.”
Life for believers who place their faith in Jesus Christ and who enter into the City of God today therefore stand “complete” with respect to their relationship with God, holy and without blemish, while God's work in their lives CONTINUES to be MANIFESTED as representatives of Christ's Kingdom on planet earth. These believers walk the walk and talk the talk, empowered by God to overcome both “sin and death” and to live a victorious life under His Lordship. The New Covenant itself is “everlasting” and like the Old Covenant has Laws, order and boundaries into which believers enter and through which they carry on their daily lives in His Presence.
The implied future of planet earth is determined by the willingness of God's people to take their rightful place, walking as children of God and allowing the light of the glorious gospel of Christ to illuminate society. Progress (in any form) from believers is the result of “abiding in Christ” and never comes as the result of humanly devised plans, programs or social reformation. The power of “change” has always existed in “seed” form within the revealed word of God that contains the “power of God” for salvation, which includes every part of life on planet earth. The blessings promised to Abraham are the inheritance of the saints, including God's blessing in EVERY part of our daily lives. The PROMISES of God, when ACTED UPON, in FAITH, are RELEASED, to be MANIFESTED within the lives of individual believers. This does not represent a NEW or DIFFERENT “fulfillment” than what was to take place with the AD 70 consummation, but rather is simply a MANIFESTATION of what God already PROMISED would take place when believers walk in faith, believing the word of God and trusting in the power of God.
[More on this later...]
Guest
Sam, it would seem that you are trying to determine another “END.” Is that correct?
Samuelmfrost
Right now, I am in a rock and a hard place. My studies are exploring several areas right now, and I am back in dialogue with other scholars.
I can say this:
1. The Parousia was (and continues to be) an event marked by the destruction of the old covenant in A.D. 70. I say “continues to be” because the very word means “dwelling presence”. Jesus’ Parousaic event is characterized in Revelation 21,22 as the “arrival” of the “dwelling of God with men on EARTH”. It doesn’t go away, nor is it a one time event. It is an ongoing PRESENCE. The King has come. Since he didn’t come and then “go”, then I must conclude that the Parousia is still here with its ongoing dwelling.
2. Revelation was written before A.D. 70.
3. The Millennium was the end of the age period of time, or the “transition period” as we like to call it. It culminated in “the great tribulation” which, I believe, conclusively happened in 66-70 A.D.
4. There was a transference (“resurrection of the dead”) surrounding those events. That is, mainly, the OT faithful were released from Hades and came into the full inheritence in heaven and now rule and reign with Christ in heaven over earth. There are early church testimonies to this, including the epistle of Ignatius (Ireneaus seems to hint at this as well). Very early on, thehe question as to what happened to the OT dead was asked. Shepherd of Hermas even tries to deal with that. This will have to be documented later on.
5. The “fullness of the times” marks the “age to come” – and Age I see us living in now. The point of this Age is to manifest that which Christ has accomplished. He has accomplished all things set out for him to do. Death has been defeated (I Timothy 1.10), the powers of satan have been demolished, and his head has been crushed. The New Creation Israel (the church, or “body of Christ”) has been raised from the dead and glorified and sanctified. However, it is quite obvious that the FULLNESS of that which is DECLARED by His Word is not FULLY manifest (take a look in the mirror). I am at this point, not entirely solid, but still working it out, only because no Preterist has been able to say to me that “nothing changes” when we physically die. In other words, it is correct to say “I am glorified” today in the Body of Christ, as He is Glorified. However, is this glorification FULLY MANIFEST or APPARENT today? Now, ask yourself: will it be in heaven when I physically die? Will anything change? Will I still be the same, old bumbling Sam Frost that I am here on earth? Will I still be subject to occassional sin? Error? If not, why not? Do I get “something else” in Heaven? It is not so much that we “get” something else, but that that which WE HAVE (II Cor. 5.1-2) will be ENTIRELY in FULL OPERATION – FULL ON POWER. If this, then, is so, then one must concede the argument of “fullfillment already – manifestation not yet” (my argument in a nutshell).
5. My argument for God’s omniscience must concede that God, according to the Scriptures, knows all of his people – therefore, they are a finite number – which means the Preterist doctrine of “infinite procreation” must be false. This has been countered with “paradox” (which is absurd to me), or has even been countered with “well, yea, it may all end one day” (which weakens the force of the doctrine of infinite procreation, because the Bible either teaches that His people shall increase “forever” or it does not. It does not say His people shall increase forever, maybe!). However, I do not believe that verse (Isa 9.6) refers to “people” but to His “government” and “rule of peace”. His Kingdom shall not ever end. Therefore, history will come to an end as we know it.
6. Your question, am I trying to “find another end”? The “end of the age” is unquestionably A.D. 70. Those were the ‘last days’. Is there a textual difference between “the last days” and “the last day”? Maybe. It is explorable on textual, contextual and linguistic grounds. Haven’t done a full study as of yet, but I am no longer chanting comfortably “the last day is the last of the last days”. There is room to explore options here (and, if that bothers any readers, oh well….sorry for exploring)
7. It is not so much an “end” as it is the bringing about of that which “the end of the age” accomplished – the manifesting of that which the Wife of the Lamb IS “on EARTH as it IS in Heaven”. This “IS” is all important. And, it is here that I have spotted what tends towards a gnostic-like approach (no version of Full Preterism that I have found is Gnostic in the classical definition of the term used for those heretical movement in the second century – which had a full blown scheme that no one today even holds to except for some wacky new age cults or something – so I use the term “gnostic-LIKE” or “gnostic tendencies”). To define this, then, would be a teaching that RADICALLY separates “spirit” from “physical substance” to such an extent that our physical substance, or the physical “stuff” of the Genesis creation has, or receives, absolutely NO BENEFIT to the fact that the New Jerusalem has come “to the EARTH.” In my last post on this article, I noted the EXPANSION of the Kingdom in the Age to Come – and if the New Covenant is the Law of Moses written in our heart, then there should be “blessings” that come with that which, in turn, would effect change not JUST in our souls, but since we live on earth, would effect also changes in society, law, government, commerce, art, entertainment, you name it. This, in turn, would also be blessed by God – and if expanding, where does it go? How far? What are the potentialities? And, if there is an end to history as we know it, what will that look like but a full MANIFESTATION of heaven “on earth”? This is our Vision for the future. God has not left us “future-less”. Preterism, therefore, must grapple with the FUTURE based on its view of the past.
8. What does that mean for the “resurrection of the dead”? Still out to lunch. I am still corporate. I still have those issues in I Cor 15. One thing at a time. This is a long, long road I am on….and, it may pan out to a more solid return to the type of “everything was done in A.D. 70, so good luck with the future” view.
9. I noted before that Amillennialism believes in a admixture of “good and evil” in the world, with evil having the upper hand. For now, those Preterists who advocate a non-postmillennial view, must accept what I will call: “endless Amillennialism”.
over and out
Samuelmfrost
Thanks Wanda S., who recently wrote, “Do I always do these things…of course not but I do strive to follow my own ministry’s (Reaching Out Ministry) tagline “Seeing a Need and Filling It, Because He Saw THE Need and Fulfilled It!” (thanks sam frost for that!)” See, that’s kind of what I am saying here: we have a FILLING to accomplish because it is FULFILLED – the FILLING is the MANIFESTING of that which IS the reality: He came, He saw, He conquered.
Bible Study
That “root of bitterness” is creeping up everywhere we turn today in the churches. There are so many who remain in the bitter bondage of egypt, the bondage of legalism. While I believe that there will be a change in the new creatures of Christ, I am sure that there is no profit in our own righteousness of the flesh. We must worship God in spirit, our righteousness must be of him in spirit. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. Without faith, it is impossible to please him.