Topics of Concern Regarding Preterism

Full-Preterism, that doctrine which teaches that the Lord Jesus Christ returned in 70 A.D. and that all of prophetic scripture has already been fulfilled, has been gaining an increasing acceptance among some over the past few years. The full-Preterist, or simply "Preterist" as he shall be called here, likes to assert that his doctrinal position is the result of being consistent in his interpretive methodology of the Bible.

It is true that the Preterist is more logically consistent than the Partial Preterist. However, generally the Preterist does not acknowledge the price it has cost him to achieve this consistency. He has been forced to embrace doctrines which contradict reality, doctrines which are specifically stated by Scripture to identify its proponents as unsaved, and doctrines which can destroy a person's personal relationship with God.

It is not necessary for one to be forced into logical inconsistency or to develop heretical doctrines in order to be honest in his interpretation of Scripture. Properly interpreted, the Bible naturally leads to dispensational teaching. An Appendix is included which will demonstrate how Dispensationalism is the natural result of consistent Biblical interpretation.

Ward Fenley is a leading Preterist. He has written a book, The Second Coming of Jesus Christ Already Happened (abbreviated SCOJCAH), which is a major document defining the Preterist position. Mr. Fenley has an internet web site, is active on Preterist-oriented e-mail lists, and has written numerous other articles on Preterism. In this article we will use Mr. Fenley's documents as representative of the Preterist position.

1. The Fundamental Flaw of Preterism - - Misunderstanding God's Timing.

The basic premise of Preterism may be summarized as follows: Jesus said to His disciples that He would return shortly after His resurrection in order to set up His Kingdom. Therefore, He came back within the lifetime of at least some of the disciples.

Of course, it is obvious even to the most casual observer that Jesus has not been physically present, ruling for the past 2,000 years from a visible throne in Jerusalem. This gives an apparent paradox: Jesus has supposedly been ruling over the world in fulfillment of those prophecies predicting and teaching these things, yet the world is going on as if He were not here. There is no visible throne; ungodly men are still ruling over ungodly citizens; and sickness, death, pain, and suffering have not ceased. The Preterist claims that the resolution of the paradox is found by restricting the fulfillment of the prophecies about the return of Christ to the spiritual realm.

There are several Scriptural problems to the basic, fundamental tenant of Preterism. In the course of this study, we will examine them in fairly great detail. However, for now we will mention three of them briefly and elaborate on them later.

First, Scripture discloses that God desires His servants to expect Christ's return at any time. The first three-fourths of the Olivet discourse in Matthew 24 discuss various events related to the second coming. The final one-fourth makes clear with emphasis that NO ONE, not even the angels in heaven, know when the return will be (see verses 36, 42, 44). God wants us to have the attitude that Jesus could return at any time, as shown by the phrase "Watch, therefore ..." in verse 42 and the phrase "Therefore you also be ready..." in verse 44. In other words, to summarize these passages, God says that no one knows when the coming will be, but-- even from the beginning-- He wants everyone to have an attitude of expectancy. He goes on to describe in verse 48 the behavior of the evil servant who in his heart does not expect the Lord to return.

So, we see two things at work in the passages involving the time of the Lord's return: First, very explicit statements that no one knows when the time of the return will actually be, and second, that God wants us to have an attitude of expectancy that it could be at any time. The wording of the New Testament time passages regarding the second coming merely implements these principles. God wanted the early church to expect that Jesus could have come back within their lifetimes-- this was for their own spiritual benefit. He likewise wants every generation since then to continue to have this same expectation, as indeed the godly of each generation have had and still do. But, He also made it very clear that no one actually knew when the time would be. The passages of Scripture have been worded the way they have in order to accomplish this Biblically stated purpose.

God has given us two more principles to keep in mind, lest we overreact if the first generation did not actually see the return of Christ.

One of these is that in the Old Testament, as a rule without exception, extensive periods of time lapsed between the prophetic promises about the first coming of the Messiah and their fulfillment by Jesus. It was 1,500 years between Moses' recordings of God's promise to Adam that the seed of the woman would crush the head of the serpent until Jesus defeated Satan at the cross. There were literally hundreds of specific, literal prophecies given in the Old Testament between 750 and 1,000 years before they were fulfilled by His first coming. So, it should not be thought unusual if now in the New Testament period we see many generations of men come and go between the giving of the new prophecies and their fulfillment,. This would simply be following the pattern God had already established in the Old Testament.

The other of these is that there are Old Testament references to the "Day of the Lord" which were written some 600 to 900 years before the Resurrection of Jesus, which were still unfilled during the lifetime of Jesus. Yet, these passages were stated as being “at hand" or "near" in their fulfillment at the time they were written. The passages are Joel 1:15 and 2:1, Isaiah 13:6, and Zephaniah 1:14; these will be specifically analyzed in Chapter 10. In other words, the Bible itself used the terms "at hand" and "near" in the Old Testament to refer to events which were at least 600 to 900 years future when they were written. This would amount to about 15 to 25 generations. So, the Bible itself clearly establishes that when God uses phrases such as "at hand" or "near" concerning Messianic prophecy, the standard of comparison is His timeframe and not man's.

These three items in themselves are sufficient to invalidate the foundational premise of Preterism.

2. Biblical Proof Modern-day Preterism is False

II Thessalonians 2:1-8 specifically identifies as false the teaching that Jesus has already come back, if it is made before certain very specific events have taken place historically:

Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. And then the lawless one will be revealed whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming.

1. Paul here identifies as a deceiver anyone whose doctrine claims that Jesus has come back before the man of sin, the one who sits in the temple at Jerusalem and claims to be God, is destroyed.

2. God says we are to take special care not to let these people deceive us: "Let no one deceive you by any means...."

This passage was not fulfilled in 70 A.D. or at any time within past church history. It is yet future, even to us. Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 A.D. by the Roman General Titus. Titus was not the fulfillment of this passage. He did not "exalt himself above all ... that is worshipped." He was only a general-- he did not even exalt himself above Caesar, let alone God. In fact, any attempt by Titus to exalt himself "above all" would have been a capital, treasonable offense, for he would have been setting himself above Caesar. This, Titus did not do.

Furthermore, Titus was not destroyed in 70 A.D. by the "return of Christ". In fact, about a decade later, Titus himself became Caesar. The details of this passage simply contradict too much of recorded history to have any relevance to what took place in 70 A.D.

Actually, Revelation 19 tells how that at the time when Christ DOES physically return to the earth, that the beast (i.e., the antichrist) will gather the kings of the earth and their armies together to fight against Christ at His return. The response of Christ will be capture him and then cast him alive directly into the Lake of Fire. At that time the Antichrist will be completely, totally, and absolutely stripped of even the slightest degree of power or authority. The beast and the false prophet are unique in that they appear to bypass the Great White Throne Judgment of Revelation 20. Apparently, God hates them so much that they are cast directly into Hell at the time when Jesus comes back to rule as King of Kings and Lord of Lords. The Lake of Fire is also called the second death.

Even with lots of twisting, one simply cannot honestly match the prophecies of these passages to what happened in 70 A.D. or at any point in history up to out own time. The prophecies are still future. A primary purpose of the book of 2 Thessalonians is to declare that those who teach that Jesus has already come back, but before the man of sin has not only been revealed but has been explicitly destroyed by Jesus at His coming, are false teachers.

It should be clear in reading 2 Thessalonians 2 that Paul is referring to a specific individual as the man of sin, not just a symbolic one. God has very specifically and with emphasis given this passage as a test. If the events surrounding the man of sin's rise and fall cannot be identified, then we are NOT BY ANY MEANS TO BE DECEIVED by those who claim that the Day of Christ has come.

If Jesus came back at 70 A.D., then the man of sin had to be in power then, and Jesus had to destroy him at that time. There are two candidates for the man of sin. Flavius was emperor at the time. However, Flavius was in Rome during this time, not Jerusalem. Titus was the general who destroyed Jerusalem, including the temple. Flavius continued as emperor until 79 A.D. That doesn't sound like he was destroyed in 70 A.D. Then, Titus became emperor after Flavius died. That doesn't sound like much of destruction, either. So, this passage remains yet unfulfilled, and any doctrine such as Preterism that claims Jesus has already come back is specifically identified as false.

I believe the writings of Josephus concerning the destruction of the temple are extremely relevant. Basically, he records that Titus was given the responsibility to squelch a rebellion by the Jews in Jerusalem. Eventually the rebels retreated to the temple, and finally to the Holy of Holies in the temple. Titus did all in his power to get the Jews to surrender and wanted to preserve the temple as an honor to the Jew's God. When his soldiers saw the ready availability of all the gold in the temple, they went wild. By the time they were brought back under control, the temple had been completely destroyed. At no time did Titus do anything even remotely resembling what 2 Thessalonians 2 describes, hence, he is not its fulfillment, A.D. 70 is not the time of its fulfillment, and it cannot be fulfilled until some yet future date after a new temple has been built in Jerusalem. This passage is yet future.

My challenge to the Preterist is this: God has specifically told us not to be deceived by any means if someone claims that the resurrection is already past and yet they are unable to identify the man of sin. So, the challenge is this: 1). tell me who the man of sin is; or 2). Explain to me why I am not to consider you to be the deceiver God specifically warned me about when He said, "Let no one deceive you by any means..."

3. The Spirit Not of God. Not all professions of faith lead to salvation.

1 Corinthians 15:2 talks about a belief which is "in vain", meaning "without success". By context this references a belief which was not effective in bringing about a person's salvation. In order to be saved a person must properly understand who Jesus is - - the unique God-man Savior who is fully man and fully God, he must understand the elements of the gospel - - justification by grace through faith apart from works, and he must believe or "rely on" these things in a spirit of repentance. Failing in any of these areas, either through ignorance, misunderstanding, or rejection by one's heart, results in a false conversion. A Biblical example of just such an instance is given in the person of Simon the Magician. In Acts 8:13 we read: "Then Simon himself also believed; and when he was baptized he continued with Philip, and was amazed, seeing the miracles and signs which were done." Yet, Simon's actions were not consistent with his profession of faith. Ultimately, Peter said to him in Acts 8:21-23, 21"You have neither part nor portion in this matter, for your heart is not right in the sight of God. ²²"Repent therefore of this your wickedness, and pray God if perhaps the thought of your heart may be forgiven you. ²³"For I see that you are poisoned by bitterness and bound by iniquity."

Apparently Simon believed the technical aspects of the gospel, but was lacking repentance when he believed. Peter's comment that he had neither part nor portion in this matter" seems to be a strong indication that he was unsaved.

In 2 Corinthians 13:5 Paul explicitly encourages the Corinthians to test themselves, to confirm to themselves that they truly have been saved:

^"5Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves that Jesus Christ is in you? -- unless indeed you are disqualified."

One of the saddest things that can happen is for a person to blindly assume he had been saved when his salvation experience was deficient in some manner and he actually was continuing without salvation, having never truly been saved. But, just how is one to test himself, to see if he is truly in the faith? There is at least one such test provided in the Bible.

In 1 John chapter 4, God provides a specific test for us to use in determining whether a spirit is from God; a few verses down this test is extrapolated to people as well. This test is particularly important to this discussion, because it applies directly to certain tenants of Preterism:

¹Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.

² By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God,

³ and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world. I John 4:1-3

It is very easy for us to misunderstand this verse, because a key part gets lost in translation. Specifically, the phrase "has come" is in the perfect tense.

I have in my possession three Greek grammars, two at the intermediate level and one advanced. All of them are in agreement with the following discussion.

The Greek verb has different emphases than the English verb. In English, we are very concerned about the time sequence relationships as designated by tenses. In Greek, quality of time is the main focus of interest. Sequential relationships tend to be implied by context.

The following are the main Greek verb tenses and their significance; the explanation of the perfect tense is what primarily concerns us here:

Present: Continual Action, normally in the present time, sometimes the future. Best translated by the present participle "He is running."

Imperfect: Continual action in the past time. Best translated by the past participle, "He was running."

Future: Continual Action in the future. "He will be running."

Aorist: An action which took place at a point in time. The aorist normally represents past action, although occasionally it can be used for present or future activity. A typical example of the aorist tense might be translated “He ran up the stairs."

Perfect: This is a compound tense. It involves the combination of point-wise activity in the past and which continues to persist into the present time. This is totally unrelated to the English perfect tense. Thus, a phrase reading "He has run” should more accurately be translated "he started running and still continues to run."

Past Perfect: Similar to the perfect, except the action only continued for a while and has now stopped. This is totally unrelated to the English past perfect tense. Thus, a phrase reading "He had run” should more accurately be translated "he started running, and ran for a while."

Again, these definitions or their equivalent are standard and quite easy to verify from a Greek grammar of any level.

These things are mentioned because verb tense is a significant component of the test given above for evaluating the spirits. A more proper translation of the passage would be as follows:

"Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ came in the flesh and still continues in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ came in the flesh and still continues in the flesh is not of God."

In other words, the perfect tense of the passage indicates that Jesus is still in the flesh. After making this statement, the passage proceeds to state that if one rejects this teaching, then he does not belong to God.

When one examines this verse in the larger context of all of Scripture, this is the significance of the passage. In John 12:31 John said that Isaiah saw the glory of the Messiah (the King, the Christ). This refers to Isaiah 6; it was at this time that Isaiah saw the preincarnate Jesus on the throne. In Philippians 2, we read about how Jesus emptied Himself and took on the form of a servant. This took place when Jesus was born of a virgin, becoming the unique God-man. This was the King, the One sitting on the throne of Isaiah 6, coming in the flesh. After Jesus had died for our sins, He rose from the dead. The significance of 1 John 4:2-3 is that it teaches that Jesus not only came in the flesh, but that He continues in the flesh. Hence, His resurrection was of a fleshly body and when He returns He will still have a fleshly body. The implications of this verse are straight forward: when Jesus comes back to set up His kingdom, it will not be in some secret, invisible manner hidden from the world. Jesus is not coming to set up a kingdom limited to the spiritual realm. He is coming back in the flesh to set up a kingdom in this physical world.

God elaborates on the significance of this doctrine a little bit more. Continuing down to verse 6 we read, “We are of God. He who knows God hears us; he who is not of God does not hear us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error. "

This verse indicates that there will be people who will not get these verses right. They will be in error in their understanding and will not respond appropriately when corrected. I.e., they will not hear one who tells them the truth in this area. This doctrine is so important that God says that we are to consider such a person as not belonging to Him (verse 3) and that the person has a spirit of error (verse 6).

I am not aware of any other doctrine in the Bible stating this issue so strongly. It says specifically that if a person will not respond to efforts of correction in this doctrine, then he does not belong to God. Such a person indeed, then, fails the test.

Also, we read in I John 5:10

"He who believes in the Son of God has the witness in himself; he who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed the testimony that God has given of His Son."

God has testified that Jesus has come and still is in the flesh. God says that if a person does not believe this, then that person makes God into a liar because the person did not believe what God said about Him. God is not interested in a person's reasons for improper belief. Either you get this right or you make God into a liar and do not belong to Him. End of discussion, there is nothing more to say. If a person rejects these things, his argument is with God and not man.

****************

This is heavy stuff. These verses indicate that when Jesus rose from the dead, it was indeed a physical, fleshly resurrection and that this was to be a continuing condition. In order to explain away the invisibility of Jesus from Jerusalem for the past 2,000 years, the Preterist claims that the resurrection of Jesus was merely spiritual, not physical, and that His kingdom is only spiritual, not physical. Hence, 1 John 4 cuts right into the heart of Preterist doctrine and exposes it as severe heresy. The passage goes on very clearly to teach that a person who will not respond to correction in these things does not belong to God and makes Him out to be a liar. This is the only doctrine in the Bible containing such a serious warning. This passage should strike terror in the heart of anyone tempted by the Preterist train of logic.

It is true that a significant portion of the verse gets lost in translation, i.e. that of the continuing aspects of Jesus being in the flesh. However, for a person willing to do the study, material is readily available for confirmation. Also, the passage simply teaches that the person who doesn't respond to correction is condemned. God is not interested in His reasons for getting it wrong; he needs to get it right.

A similar passage to this one is found in II John 1:7

For many deceivers have gone out into the world who do not confess Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

In this passage, the word "coming" is a present participle. According to the Greek grammars, a present participle is a descriptive noun-verb which describes continuing action which takes place at the time of the main verb. Thus, the significance of this verse is that it teaches that a person is a deceiver and an antichrist who does not confess that Jesus is continuing in the flesh even as of the time during which the confession is being made. When John wrote the passage, he was obviously referring to people who were denying the fleshly, physical body of the Lord Jesus Christ in a time which was after the resurrection and ascension. The Preterist is guilty of the same thing. He is forced into this heresy in order to explain away the lack of the visible presence of Christ in Jerusalem for the past 2,000 years. Hence, according to this verse, the Preterist is a deceiver and an antichrist.

This passage confirms our interpretation and understanding of 1 John 4.

4. Satan the source of Preterist doctrine

Preterism is not a new doctrine. Even the early church was plagued with its own brand of Preterists. We read in 2 Timothy 2:16-18

^"16But shun profane and idle babblings, for they will increase to more ungodliness. ¹⁷And their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort, ¹⁸who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some."

Hymenaeus and Philetus were preaching that the resurrection was already past, even though it wasn't. This is indeed the same as the Preterist is doing today. We may look at them as being the Preterists of the early church. The Bible has some interesting comments to say about them and those like them whom they represented:

1. God views their arguments as profane and idle babblings. He is not at all impressed with what they have to say. This does not mean that they had no case to present. Indeed, they may well have had a train of logic which appeared convincing, otherwise the doctrine would not have spread. But, God Himself viewed the arguments with such contempt that He judged their teachings to be nothing more than profane and idle babblings.

2. The doctrine may spread, but this is not an indication of God's blessing- - rather God viewed the spread of Preterism in the early church as being analogous to cancer spreading in a human body.

3. God says that those taking this position have strayed from the truth. Our analysis of 1 John 4:2 and 2 John 1:7 already showed us how the doctrine leads one into heresy.

4. The doctrine will have the effect of overthrowing the faith of some. From my own background and experience I can speculate on at least two ways this could happen. The first concerns a person who initially believed sound doctrine, but having become convinced by the Preterist's false logic, departed from the truth and latched onto error. Thus, the doctrine has the effect of overthrowing an initially sound faith. A second is when there is a person who has at one time latched onto Preterism and then later come to realize that it is false. However, he had become so poisoned against the truth that he continued to reject it even after leaving Preterism. Feeling that he had no place acceptable to turn, he just walked away from everything. So, two possible effects of Preterism on a person would be either to lead him into further and deeper heresy or to get him to abandon his faith altogether. These things are not the mark of godly doctrine.

I personally would be terrified, reluctant, and very cautious about involvement with any doctrine given this evaluation by God at any stage of the church's history.

Yet, this is not all. The chapter ends with the following statement:

²³But avoid foolish and ignorant disputes, knowing that they generate strife. ²⁴And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, ²⁵in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, ²⁶and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will. 2 Timothy 2:23-26

The charge to avoid foolish and ignorant disputes we just read seems a rewording of the profane and idle babblings mentioned in the early part of the chapter. The evaluation given here in this portion for such people is not very favorable. It states that those promoting these false disputes have lost their senses and have been taken captive by the devil to do his will.

This is a heavy statement. One is using strong words whenever he says about anyone that they have been taken captive by the devil and their actions are now actually accomplishing the devil's will. Yet, the context surrounding the passage leads us to apply this to the Preterist in particular, as it was apparently meant for the Preterists plaguing the early church in Paul's day. However, to those who may think this is a rather strong statement, does it not really provide the only reasonable explanation for a person hanging onto a doctrine with the characteristics discussed in the next section?

5. The Blasphemy of the Preterist Argument

On page 26 of SCOJCAH, Mr. Fenley makes the following statement:

In order for the apostles and Jesus to be telling the truth, and in order for

the Bible to be fully inspired by God, the signs in Matthew 24 would have

had to have taken place for the integrity of the apostles and Scripture to be

upheld.

It is difficult to imagine a person having the audacity to speak this arrogantly. The statement is made that if a certain personal interpretation of Scripture is not true, then the apostles were liars, Jesus was a liar, and Scripture is not inspired. This is NOT godly reasoning led by Holy Spirit.

I frequently take part in discussions involving the Biblical basis for many different doctrinal positions. Issues such as speaking in tongues, eternal salvation, mode of baptism, and Calvinism versus Armenianism are just a few of these. Normally, people pretty much limit their discussions to what they understand the Bible to teach or to what they believe common sense dictates. Arguments for one side or the other may become heated, and a person may question the spirituality or intellect or any number of things about a person who disagrees with him. However, the argumentation typically is pretty much limited to these things.

However, there is one exception and that is the modern full-Preterists in their presentation of their doctrines. They seem barely to begin their case when they start claiming that if their interpretation is not right, then God lied to them. They make themselves the judge of God. They establish standards of behavior they require from God before they will serve Him or have anything to do with Him. This entire approach is forbidden by Scripture. (The approach parallels things discussed in Romans 9:14, 20 and 1 Corinthians 12:3). It is blasphemous to God's character and is a practical rejection of His sovereignty.

In all honesty, there are some statements which my spirit finds so offensive that I do not like to quote them even in order to deal with them. Yet, in Ephesians 5:11-12, we are told to expose the works of darkness, so we will have at least a limited discussion of these things.

In his book SCOJCAH, on page 23 Mr. Fenley makes the following statements:

There is one of three possibilities: Either Paul was mislead, thus, the Holy

Spirit lied and did not lead him and the rest of the apostles in all truth; the

apostles were liars and deceived thousands of church members; or they

were telling the truth and Jesus Christ did return when He and the apostles

said He would. Using the thousand-years-as-a-day argument to interpret

time statements in Scripture is vanity and makes God out to be a liar. God

forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar!

The passage quoted above allows for only 3 possibilities: 1. The apostle Paul was misled by the Holy Spirit or 2. all of the apostles were liars or 3. the Preterist interpretation of the passages is the correct one. Then the frosting on the cake comes with the next sentence. "Using the thousand-years-as-a-day argument to interpret time statements in Scripture is vanity and makes God out to be a liar." We have already established and will later confirm with more detail that the Bible can use phrases such as "at hand" and "near" to mean dozens of generations. In Chapter 12 we will examine in detail 2 Peter 3:8, which discusses the thousand years as a day passage just mentioned. During the analysis, we will show that God has actually supplied this argument as the proper response to the Preterist position. If the Bible teaches a certain truth and Mr. Fenley claims that anyone who teaches that truth is making God out to be a liar, then it is really Mr. Fenley who is calling God the liar. This is blasphemy.

The blasphemy quoted above is not unique. It is actually the foundational rhetoric used for the entire Preterist argument. It is repeated over and over. In fact, much of the rhetoric used I find so offensive that I do not even like to read the material.

Are the arguments for Preterism so weak that they cannot stand on their own merit? Is the blasphemy added to them in the attempt to give the argument a weight which is simply not there without it? To me, this appears to be the case.

I could fill several pages with quotes for SCOJCAH where the only alternatives given are that Preterism is right or God has lied. However, I do not believe that dwelling on this theme is spiritually edifying and will leave this discussion at this point. Hopefully, those who are sensitive to the Lord will not need more of this discussion for the point to be made.

6. Methodology of interpretation.

The Bible is capable of many different interpretive approaches. One approach is dogmatic. Organizations such as the Roman Catholic Church, the Mormon Church, and the Watchtower Society take this approach. A passage in the Bible means whatever they say it does. They assert that their reasons are irrelevant, beyond the capacity of the lay person to understand. All interpretive authority resides in them, and their statements are final. Another approach is the allegorical approach, such as taken by the Christian Scientists. In this approach, the physical content is simply a tool to communicate higher, philosophical truths and otherwise has no significance. Then there is the higher critical approach of the modernists. Their position is that the Bible is simply a record of how people used to think about God; they claim the Bible has no innate supernatural validity within itself.

What is the correct approach? Does the Bible itself explain to us how it should be interpreted? Yes, the Bible itself provides the standard of interpretation - - not explicitly, but by example. The Bible was written over a period of time spanning approximately 2,000 years. Much of the Bible comments on passages which were written during earlier times. A study of how the Bible interprets itself leads one into the literal, historical, grammatical hermeneutic which in turn leads to Dispensationalism.

In particular, the prophecies concerning the first coming of Jesus Christ were filled literally:

Micah 5:2 Messiah would be born in Bethlehem. Matthew 2 records how this was properly understood even by the unbelieving priests, who told Herod and the wise men how that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem and quoted Micah 5:2. Matthew 2 then proceeds to record that Jesus was indeed born there. There was a literal physical event associated with the fulfillment of this prophecy.

Isaiah 53 predicts the offering of Jesus' soul for our sins, the resurrection, and many other specific details, some almost trivial, about the crucifixion of Jesus. These were all fulfilled literally.

There are 200 to 300 Old Testament prophecies which were specifically fulfilled by Jesus at his first coming. These were all fulfilled by physical events taking place within our world system. The passages relating to the first coming of Jesus were fulfilled by a literal, historical man, descending from His throne in heaven and taking on the form of human flesh. He was fully man, even while being fully God.

Many of the Old Testament prophecies concerning Christ seem to jump from his first coming to His second coming. If that portion pertaining to the first coming was fulfilled literally, that would seem to confirm that we should expect the second coming should also be fulfilled literally.

The basis of the literal interpretation is the analysis of Scripture itself.

Even if there are things hard to understand, it still remains improper to discard Biblical principles of interpretation. Indeed, 2 Peter 3:16 teaches that untaught and unstable people can twist Scripture to their own destruction. We need to study the Bible to discover a Biblical methodology of interpretation, then apply this methodology with honesty to the Bible itself. Indeed, this is the approach which leads to the literal, grammatical, historical interpretation of Scripture, which in turn leads to Dispensationalism.

7. The Disappearance of Pain and Death.

The Bible very clearly teaches that in the new heavens and earth, there will be no death, sorrow, nor weeping. It then goes on specifically to state that there will be no more pain. From the perspective of the new heavens and the new earth, these will all be "former things":

"And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away." Revelation 21:4

This passage very clearly states without qualification that death, sorrow, crying, and pain will NOT exist in either the new heavens or in the new earth. They will have passed away; that is, they will have ceased to exist. Whether one's focus is in heaven or on earth, the view will be the same: no more death, no more sorrow, and no more crying, no more pain. Hence, if one can see any of these things, he is not in either of the new heavens or the new earth.

The reality is that there is still death in the world today. There is still sorrow. And there is most definitely still pain. When a late-stage cancer patient is pleading for more morphine to deaden a pain which seems unbearable, all the philosophical rhetoric in the world is useless to soothe him. He is experiencing pain and pain so great he cannot bear it. He is not interested in philosophical discussions about whether pain still exists or not. He is overwhelmed by his pain. He knows he himself is not yet in a world in which there is no longer any pain.

A parent who has just had a lovely child molested and permanently scarred for life by a perverted criminal will be overwhelmed by sorrow and weeping. This sorrow is real and the weeping is real. Criminal statistics indicate that this is all too common an occurrence.

A Saudi Arabian Moslem who converts to Jesus Christ as Savior and then has both of his hands cut off as a judgment against his conversion will experience sorrow and pain.

The promise of Scripture is that God will someday create a new heavens and a new earth, and in them death, sorrow, weeping, and pain will no longer exist. The Preterist claims that these promises have been fulfilled. Yet, a person living in reality can see that these things are still in the world today. It does God a very real disservice to claim that what we are in today represents His fulfillment of verses promising a time when these things will no longer exist. The Preterist may attempt to designate these verses as valid in a spiritual realm only, but to a person who is suffering intensely and in need of relief, this is not satisfying.

This verse alone should be sufficient to demonstrate to the Preterist that he has misunderstood something somewhere along the line. His doctrine is inconsistent with reality.

Before proceeding along this train of thought, we need to lay a scriptural foundation for the subsequent discussion. There are two separate items to consider. The first is a situation associated with the death and resuscitation of Lazarus. The second involves God's evaluation of His physical creation. With this foundation laid, we will then look in SCOJCAH and examine certain attitudes proclaimed within it.

First. Sometimes young children like to brag and quote that they know the shortest verse in the Bible, John 11:35, "Jesus wept." Jesus wept because He was moved by the grief and sorrow of Martha and Mary, the sisters of Lazarus, who had died several days earlier. What impresses me most about this passage is how Jesus was moved with grief to the point of weeping alongside Martha and Mary, even though He knew that in a few minutes they would have Lazarus back with them and would be rejoicing. Jesus is moved by our sorrow, even though He can see the bigger picture in which that sorrow will only be temporary.

Second. All that God made was good. God made the physical universe and it was good. Indeed, as God was making the world during the six days of creation, he paused regularly and commented that the work was good: "... And God saw that it was good." Genesis, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25

Finally, after it was all completed, including the creation of man, God commented that it was very good: "Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good." Genesis 1:31

Because of Adam's sin, even the ground is cursed at the present time (Genesis 3). However, this is only a temporary situation. In Romans we read about how even though the creation is in bondage to corruption at the present time, it will be delivered from it:

¹⁸For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. ¹⁹For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. ²⁰For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; ²¹because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. ²²For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. ²³Not only that, but we also who have the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body. Romans 8:18-23

Hence, it is strongly implied that it the creation will someday again be "very good." The bondage to decay and sin which is so evident when we look out into the world will someday end.

Now, to continue our discussion. While reading through SCOJCAH, I came across the following statement on page 18:

There was no deluded hope. There were no hopes in physical realities, only a certain hope that every aspect of God’s promises of a spiritual everlasting kingdom was about to be fulfilled.

In this statement Mr. Fenley confirms that the Preterist limits the domain of Messianic prophecy to the spiritual realm and that it has nothing to do with the physical realm. Of course he is forced into this position since it is so obvious that what we see taking place in the physical realm is not even remotely a reasonable fulfillment of such promises as there being no more pain or suffering.

Mr. Fenley then expands this on the next page, page 19:

The modern “evangelical” world has insisted upon taking God’s precise time declarations and

distorting them to fit a fleshly hope ( “Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.” (Philippians 3:19). Most professing Christians are so engrossed in an eschatological outlook that will take them out of their miserable world that they misunderstand the nature of the kingdom of God. They are so consumed with a world that will give them perfect physical peace and health, that they totally disregard not only the abundance of Scripture that explains the nature of the kingdom but also the very clear time references that pertain to the imminence of the kingdom of God. Consequently, for many, their only hope is in a physically realized future kingdom and god and not in the present riches of the glory of Christ.

This passage reveals how Mr. Fenley's assumptions are forcing him into unscriptural positions. He is now condemning those who look to a physical fulfillment of God's promises, calling them fleshly. He implies that their end is destruction, that their God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame. They are chastised for looking forward to a world which will give them physical peace and health.

Yet, Jesus was moved by compassion at the suffering of Martha and Mary, even though He knew that in a matter of minutes he would remedy the cause of their concern and they would be weeping. Jesus did not condemn Martha and Mary for their sorrow. He wept along with them.

By contrast, since SCOJCAH is claiming that we are already in fulfillment of the promises of Scripture about there being no more pain or sorrow, its doctrine forces it become callused to those who still experience it. The Preterist has no hope for the person who is in pain or suffering, all he can say is that God's promises of spiritual blessings should be adequate and that a person should not concern himself with his physical condition. So, the Preterist not only lives in a world disassociated from reality, but it destroys his compassion for those who are suffering and in need.

Also by contrast, whereas God has called his physical creation "very good," in SCOJCAH a person who looks forward to the redemption of the physical universe from its curse is considered to have a "fleshly hope". SCOJCAH further elaborates that those with such a fleshly hope are ones “Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things." In other words, instead of believing the promises of God and looking forward to the physical fulfillment they describe, the Preterist condemns those who believe them.

The awesome component of the incarnation of Christ is that the King sitting on the throne in Isaiah 6 and Ezekiel 1 gave up the outward expression of His glory in order to take on human flesh, and has done so as a permanent condition. If God the Son is willing to be identified with the physical world on a permanent basis, Mr. Fenley is starting to skate on thin ice when he condemns those believe in the physical fulfillment of prophecy.

Perhaps these things can best be summarized in Isaiah 5:20-21:

²⁰Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! ²¹Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!

8. Motivational Effect of the Time Statements.

I enjoy reading missionary stories. Missionaries are often in situations so awkward that their only hope of survival and for an effective ministry is the intervention of God into their daily affairs. The one who needs to depend upon God for his survival and effective service soon learns that a pure life is the starting point. Sin has a deadening effect upon a person's prayer life and ability to feed upon the Word of God. Just as Hebrews 11 represents a list of the spiritual "giants" of the Old Testament, I personally suspect that if God were to give such a list for the church, missionaries would occupy a significant portion of the list. What I find interesting is to hear how many of the missionaries whose stories I have read have sincerely hoped and expected that Jesus would have come back within their lifetime. Yet, their attitudes were not ones of demand, just anticipation. They recognized God's sovereignty, of His right to bring Jesus back whenever He chooses. I have never detected in any of them even a hint of disrespect towards God for the possibility that He might choose yet to delay a little longer.

A vivid hope of the soon return of Jesus Christ is an effective motivator toward godly living. Indeed, frequently in my own life I find that this hope helps me keep a proper perspective on priorities. The world can be very attractive. I am not necessarily talking about the openly sinful attractions of the world, but simply issues like jobs and recreation. These are things which are legitimate to some degree, but the world can twist them into having an importance which becomes idolatrous, or at least inappropriate, distracting one from his service to the Lord. It is the hope of the soon return of the Lord that helps me personally to keep the proper perspective.

I believe this principle is Scriptural, being inferred by the following passages.

²Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be, but we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is. ³And everyone who has this hope in Him purifies himself, just as He is pure. 1 John 3:2-3

Finally, there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will give to me on that Day, and not to me only but also to all who have loved His appearing. 2 Timothy 4:8

God, in His wisdom, knows that having an eagerness to see the revelation of Jesus Christ will have a purifying effect on the life of a believer. So, Scripture has been written in such a way as to give each generation the hope that Jesus will come in that generation's lifetime. This is the simplest explanation of the time statements and is adequate.

By illustration, there is a value in attaching imminence to impending judgment. To what extent does a person stop at a stop sign? In a small city which enforces traffic laws vigorously, people may very well come to a complete stop. In a bigger city in which traffic law enforcement is not so rigid, the word stop may mean anything less than 4 miles an hour. Ye