Was All The Prophecy in the Bible Fulfilled by A.D.70?
By Duncan McKenzie, Ph.D.
See Also by Duncan McKenzie:
Author of:
A
New Preterist Perspective
By far the most frequent
question I am asked in relation to my articles that have appeared on this web
site is, "What about Luke
Luke
Luke 21:20-22 is as
follows:
20. But when you see
21. Then let those who are
in
22. For
these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be
fulfilled. All
Bible quotations are from the NKJV unless otherwise noted.
Full
Preterists
maintain that the "all things" referred to here means that all the
prophecy in the Bible was fulfilled by AD 70. While I have a great deal of
agreement with full Preterists, I disagree with their
interpretation here. Let me emphasize, however, that I am in total agreement
with my full Preterist brothers and sisters that the
Second Coming of Jesus happened at AD 70.
My short answer to the
question of what Luke 21:22 means is that it is saying all things written about
the days of vengeance that would come upon the Jews when they violated the
covenant would be fulfilled by AD 70. It is not saying that all prophecy in the
Bible would be fulfilled by AD 70.
There are many passages
that speak of God's vengeance on His Old Covenant people if they broke the
covenant. The two major passages are found in Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy
28-32.
Leviticus 26:14&15
14. But
if you do not obey Me, and do not observe all these commandments
15. and if you despise My
statutes, or if your soul abhors My judgments, so that you do not perform all
My commandments, but break My covenant, I will also do this to you.
God goes on to list a
number of plagues and punishments He would bring on the Jews.
Leviticus 26:25 And I
will bring a sword against you that will execute the vengeance of the
covenant...
Deuteronomy chapters 28-32
also talk of God’s vengeance on the Jews if they broke the covenant.
Deuteronomy 32:40-43
40. For I raise My hand to heaven, and say, As I live forever.
41. If I whet My glittering
sword, and My hand takes hold on judgment, I will render vengeance to My
enemies, and repay those who hate Me.
42. I will make My arrows drunk with blood, and My sword shall devour flesh,
with the blood of the slain and the captives, from the heads of the leaders of
the enemy.
43. Rejoice, O Gentiles,
with His people; for He will avenge the blood of His servants, and render
vengeance to His adversaries; He will provide atonement for His land and
His people.
If I may digress for a
moment, notice how in both of these passages that speak of God's judgment on
His Old Covenant people for breaking the covenant, the judgment is associated
with a sword. With that in mind consider the following quote from Josephus.
Talking about the events leading up to the destruction of
"This is how the
unhappy people were beguiled at this stage by charlatans and false messengers
of God, while they disregarded and disbelieved the unmistakable portents that
foreshadowed the coming desolation, and, as though thunderstuck
(sic), blind, senseless, paid no heed to the clear warnings of God. It was
like this when a star that looked like a sword stood over the city and a comet
that continued for a whole year." Josephus, War of the Jews (6,5,3).
A star in the shape of a
sword loomed over
Jesus said that the
vengeance for all the righteous blood shed on the earth would be visited on the
generation that rejected him.
Matthew 23:32-36
32. Fill up then, the
measure of your father’s guilt.
33. Serpents, brood of
vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell?
34. Therefore, indeed, I
send you prophets, wise men, and scribes: some of them you will kill and
crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute
from city to city.
35. that
on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth from the blood of
righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah
whom you murdered between the temple and the altar
36. Assuredly, I say to
you, all these things will come upon this generation.
God's Old Covenant people
had been judged before for breaking the covenant (Daniel
In Revelation chapter 6 we
see the souls of those killed for the word of God crying out for God's
righteous vengeance. They are told to wait just a little while longer.
Revelation 6:9-11
9. When He opened the fifth
seal I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word
of God and for the testimony which they held.
10. And they cried with a
loud voice, saying "How long, O Lord, holy and true until You judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the
earth?" ("earth" should be translated
"land" here.)
11. Then a white robe was
given to each of them; and it was said to them that they should rest a little
while longer, until both the number of their fellow servants and their
brethren, who would be killed as they were, was completed.
Vengeance for the blood
guilt of those who rejected Jesus was about to be poured out on the dwellers on
the land in the book of Revelation. It is the subject of most of the book. This
is no doubt the reason that David Chilton named his commentary on Revelation
"The Days of Vengeance". Let me interject here that the Greek word
"ge" which is translated "earth"
in most of Revelation, is often better translated "land" (i.e. the promised land). Compare Revelation 1:7 with Zechariah
12:10-14. It is the tribes of the land who were to mourn at Jesus’ Second
Coming not the tribes of the earth. In Revelation 13:11-18, the second beast
doesn’t come out of the "earth", he comes
out of the "land" (of
The prophet Isaiah also
wrote about God's days of vengeance. Isaiah 35:3&4
3. Strengthen the weak
hands, and make firm the feeble knees.
4. Say to those who are
fearful-hearted "Be strong, do not fear!" Behold your God will come
with vengeance, with the recompense of God; He will come and save you.
See also Isaiah 61:2 and
63:1-6
There was
much written in the Old Testament about God's days of vengeance on His Old
Covenant people when they broke the covenant. All these scriptures would
be fulfilled in their ultimate sense on the generation that killed Jesus. These
were the days of vengeance and all that was written about them would be
fulfilled in the days leading up to AD 70. This is not the same,
however, as saying that all the prophecy in the Bible would be fulfilled by AD
70.
For those who need more
convincing (which would probably be most of the full
Preterists
reading this article) consider Luke 18:31.
Then He took the twelve
aside and said to them, Behold we are going up to Jerusalem, and ALL THINGS
which are written through the prophets about the Son of Man will be
accomplished. emphasis mine
Jesus tells His disciples
that "all things" written about Him by the prophets would be
accomplished at
Now consider Luke 24:44-48.
Jesus, after His resurrection, said the following to His disciples:
Luke 24:44. Then He said to
them, "These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you
that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the Law of
Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me."
Once again did this mean
all the prophecies in the Law, Prophets and Psalms about Jesus were fulfilled
by the time of His resurrection? Of course not, Jesus’ Second Coming and millennial
reign still awaited fulfillment. What Jesus meant was that everything that
happened at
Luke 24:45 And He opened
their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.
46. Then He said to them
"Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer
and to rise from the dead the third day,
47. and
that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all
nations, beginning at
48. And you are witnesses
of these things."
Another "all
things" verse is found in Luke 21:32:
Luke
29. Then He spoke to them a
parable: Look at the fig tree, and all the trees.
30. When they are already budding you see and know for yourselves that summer is now
near.
31. So you also, when you
see these things happening, know that the
32. Assuredly I say to
you, this generation will by no means pass away till all things take place.
Once again Luke gives us an
"all things" taking place statement. Does this mean all the
prophecies in the Bible were to be fulfilled by the end of that generation or
does it mean all the things Jesus had mentioned (the great tribulation,
abomination of desolation, Second Coming, etc.) would take place in that
generation? Looking at the parallel passages in Matthew and Mark helps to
answer this question.
Matthew 24:32. Now learn
this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and
puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near.
33. So you also, when you
see all these things, know that it is near-at the very doors!
34. Assuredly, I say to
you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things are
fulfilled.
Mark
29. So you also, when you
see these things happening, know that it is near-at the doors!
30. Assuredly, I say to
you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take
place.
Looking at the parallel
passages helps to answer the question as to the meaning of "all
things" taking place, in Luke 21:32. According to
Matthew and Mark the "all things" in Luke 21:32 means "all these
things", the things Jesus had been talking about, not all the prophecies
in the Bible being fulfilled by that generation.
To summarize, Luke
Having said that all the
things Jesus spoke about the days of vengeance (not all the prophecy in the
Bible) happened by AD 70, a logical question would be "So what is left to
be fulfilled?" Allow me a somewhat lengthy digression to address this by
talking about the judgment of the nations. This was one of the things Jesus had
said would happen before the generation that was listening to Him had passed
away (Matthew 25:31-46). Full Preterists posit that
this judgment, that happens at Jesus’ Second Coming,
happens at the end of the millennium. Since Jesus came at AD 70 their reasoning
is that the millennium must have ended at that time. I of course agree that the
Second Coming happened at AD 70 but I believe that the judgment of the nations
happened at the beginning of the millennium not the end.
In looking at the
resurrection at the beginning of the millennium (Rev. 20:4), notice that one of
the categories of people that come alive are the souls of those "who had
not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads
or on their hands" (Rev 20:4). The beast and his mark had to do with
events that happened around AD 70. Whoever a full Preterist
may say the beast was (most say he was Nero), all would say he existed around
AD 70. This is because he was destroyed around the time of the Second Coming of
Jesus (Rev. 19:11-21). To make the time of the first resurrection (Rev. 20:4)
AD 30 and the time of what appears on the surface to be the second resurrection
(Rev. 20:11-15) AD 70 (the usual full Preterist
proposal) does not fit. If the first resurrection happened at AD 30 what mark
of the beast had the martyrs who came alive for the 1000-year reign overcome?
And why were Christians just finally being warned about this mark some 35 years
after AD 30? Rev. 14:8-13 (Revelation was probably written around AD 65). Once
again, to try and make the resurrection at the beginning of the millennium
happen around AD 30 simply does not fit. Full Preterists
have to try to make it fit because they need to have the millennium end by AD 70
(all prophecy fulfilled by AD 70). Thus they end up trying to fit the 1000-year
reign into the forty-year period of AD 30 to AD 70. The 1000-year reign didn't
end at AD 70 it began at that time. One reason God was revealing it was to
provide encouragement to those who would face the beast and his mark (Rev.
13:7-10). That is, He was encouraging those who were about to face the beast to
be faithful until the Second Coming by showing how they would reign with Him at
that time (Rev. 2:25-27; 3:20& 21; 20:4).
At the resurrection of
Revelation 20:4 (which I maintain happened at AD 70) John saw "thrones,
and they sat on them and judgment was committed to them" (Rev 20:4). The
word "judgment" here (Greek, "krima")
has to do with "the power and business of judging" (Thayer's
Greek-English Lexicon). In other words it is talking about believers being
involved with God in the decision making process and verdict as He judged the
world. This was the judgment that Jesus told His disciples they would
participate in at His Second Coming (AD 70).
Matthew 19:28 So Jesus said
to them, "Assuredly I say to you, that in the regeneration, when the Son
of Man sits on the throne of His glory, you who have followed Me will also sit
on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
29. And everyone who has
left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or
lands, for My name's sake, shall receive a
hundredfold, and inherit eternal life.
The resurrection at the
beginning of the millennium shows the thrones, the judging and the eternal life
that Jesus had promised to His disciples at His Second Coming.
Revelation 20:4 And I saw thrones,
and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw
the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the
word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received
his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and
reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
Those who would want to say
the regeneration of Matthew
Matthew 25:31&32
31. When the Son of Man
comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on
the throne of His glory.
32. All the nations will be
gathered before Him and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd
divides his sheep from the goats.
The time when Jesus had
promised His disciples they would sit on thrones judging
At the beginning of the
millennium (which I maintain began at AD 70) John saw "thrones, and they
sat on them and judgment was committed to them" (Rev. 20:4). This judgment
was the same one that Paul said would be committed to believers at Jesus’
Second Coming (AD 70).
1 Corinthians 6:2 Do you
not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged
by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
3. Do you not know that we
shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life?
The Lord’s judgment began
at the house of God (1 Peter
Jesus judged the world at
His Second Coming (AD 70), when He sat "on the throne of His glory"
(Matthew
My position sees the
resurrection and judgment at Jesus' Second Coming (AD 70) as the resurrection
of Rev. 20:4-6. Originally I had posited that the judgment in Rev. 20:4 and
Rev. 20:11-15 were two different judgments separated by the millennium. This is
the same sequence that full Preterists propose but my
view of the timing was different. Full Preterists see
a resurrection (believers coming alive spiritually) at AD 30 (Rev. 20:4) and
one at AD 70 (Rev. 20:11-15) with the millennium in between. I had seen
a resurrection at AD 70 (Rev. 20:4) and one at the end of time (Rev. 20:11-15)
with the millennium in between. I have now come to agree with J.S. Russell that
Rev. 20:4 and
"The result of the
whole is, that we must consider the passage which
treats of the thousand years, from ver. 5 to ver. 10, as an intercalation or parenthesis. The seer,
having begun to relate the judgment of the dragon, passes in ver. 7 out of the apocalyptic limits to conclude what he
had to say respecting the final punishment of ‘the old serpent,’ and the fate
that awaited him at the close of a lengthened period called ‘a thousand years.’
This we believe to be the sole instance in the whole book of an excursion
into distant futurity; and we are disposed to regard the whole parenthesis as
relating to matters still future and unfulfilled. The broken continuity of the
narration is joined again at ver. 11, where the
Seer resumes the account of what he beheld in vision, introducing it by the
familiar formula ‘And I saw.’"
J.S. Russell The Parousia pg. 523
What Russell was saying was
that the description of the judgment in Rev. 20:4 is continued in Rev. 20:11.
Revelation 20:5-10 (the millennium, the release of Satan from the abyss for a
season, the Gog and Magog
invasion, Satan cast into the lake of fire) forms a parenthesis of things that
happen during and at the conclusion of the millennium. If one puts aside the
parenthesis of Revelation 20:5-10 for a moment the following description of the
judgment appears:
Revelation 20:4-12
4. And I saw thrones, and
they sat upon them, and judgment was given to them. And I saw the souls of
those who had been beheaded because of the testimony of Jesus and because of
the word of God, and those who had not worshipped the beast or his image, and
had not received the mark upon their forehead and upon their hand; and they
came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years
(Verses 5-10, parenthesize of things future to AD 70)
11. And I saw a great white
throne and Him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away,
and no place was found for them.
12. And I saw the dead, the
great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and
another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged
from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds… NASB
Russell saw the parenthesis
of Revelation 20:5-10 (the millennium, the release of Satan from the abyss for
a season, the Gog and Magog
invasion, the casting of Satan into the lake of fire) as the only part of
Revelation that projected into the distant future (future to AD 70). I have
come to agree with him that Revelation 20:5-10 is the only part of Revelation
that deals with post AD 70 subject matter. My previous position had seen
Revelation 20:5-15 as dealing with things that were to happen after AD 70. I
now view my previous extension of Russell’s parenthesis (extending it from Rev.
20:5-10 to Rev. 20:5-15) as untenable.
Getting
back to the original subject of my paper. The second most common argument used by full Preterists for saying all prophecy was fulfilled by AD 70
would probably be the immanency of the time
statements in the book of Revelation. That is, the many statements of the
nearness of the things predicted in Revelation. J.S. Russell, the author of The
Parousia and one of the biggest influences on modern
Preterism
was one of the staunchest spokesmen for the immanency
of the time statements in Revelation.
"If there be one thing
which more than any other is explicitly and repeatedly affirmed in the
Apocalypse it is the nearness of the events which it predicts. This is stated,
and reiterated again and again, in the beginning, the middle, and the end...
As this is a point of the
highest importance, and indispensable to the right interpretation of the
Apocalypse, it is proper to bring forward the proof that the events depicted in
the book are comprehended within a very brief period of time.
The opening sentence,
containing what may be called the title of the book, is of itself decisive of
the nearness of the events to which it relates:
CHAP. 1:1 'The Revelation
of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew
unto his servants what things must shortly come to
pass.' J.S. Russell, The Parousia, pg.
367
As vehement as Russell was
about the nearness of the time statements of Revelation necessitating an AD 70
fulfillment, he made an exception in the case of the millennium and the
subsequent casting of Satan into the lake of fire. As I have stated, Russell
saw the millennium as beginning in AD 70 and extending into the future. Thus he
saw Revelation 20:5-10 as a parenthetical passage of things not yet fulfilled.
He saw the rest of the book (the new heaven and new earth, the new Jerusalem
etc.) as going back to things that were about to happen (around AD 70). Thus
Russell saw Revelation 21 and 22 as being fulfilled at AD 70. He said the
following about those who would try to fit the millennium in before AD 70.
"Some interpreters
indeed attempt to get over the difficulty by supposing that the thousand years,
being a symbolic number, may represent a period of very short duration, and so
bring the whole within the prescribed apocalyptic limits; but this method of
interpretation appears to us so violent and unnatural that we cannot hesitate
to reject it. The act of binding and shutting up the dragon does indeed
come within the 'shortly' of the apocalyptic statement, for it is coincident or
nearly so, with the judgment of the harlot and the beast; but the term of the
dragon's imprisonment is distinctly stated to be for a thousand years, and thus
must necessarily pass entirely beyond the field of vision so strictly and
constantly limited by the book itself. We believe, however, that this is the
solitary example which the whole book contains of this excursion beyond the
limits of 'shortly'." J.S. Russell, The
Parousia, pg. 514
What Russell was saying was
that those who were trying to fit the millennium in before AD 70 were very
wrong. Current day full Preterism is trying to do
just that. The usual full Preterist solution for the
1,000-year reign is to try and make it the 40 year period from AD 30 to AD 70.
The fact that Russell considered this interpretation "violent and
unnatural" should have full Preterists examining
their position closely. Probably no one more than Russell would have liked to
fit the millennium into the things that were about to happen (AD 70). Russell
of course saw the millennium as about to happen in terms of it beginning at AD
70 not ending at that time. J.S. Russell was as motivated as one could be to
fit the millennium in before AD 70. Six verses, Revelation 20:5-10 (the
millennium, the loosing of Satan for a season, the Gog
and Magog invasion, and subsequent banishment of
Satan to the lake of fire) out of the whole book of Revelation that he could
not in good conscience fit in between AD 30 and AD 70. For Russell to fit the
millennium in before AD 70 may have put all his ducks in a row, but apparently
he thought it would have been the wrong row! Russell's refusal to crunch the
millennium in before AD 70 and his denouncement of the method of those who do,
are reason enough to reconsider the "all fulfilled by AD 70" rule of
full Preterism.
The fact that J.S. Russell
saw the millennium beginning at AD 70 and extending into the future means that
he would not be a full Preterist by today's
standards. This brings up a very important point. Current day full Preterism, (with its hermeneutic that all the prophecy in
the Bible was fulfilled by AD 70) is a relatively recent development. As near
as I can tell it had its start in the late sixties and early seventies with Max
King's writings. Now being new does not in and of itself
make a position right or wrong, and I am certainly not impugning the integrity
of Max King. Ultimately it is Scripture alone that is the final authority. I do
think, however, that new theological ideas need to be scrutinized very closely.
What is new about current
day full Preterism is the hermeneutic that all prophecy
has to have been fulfilled by AD 70. Full Preterists
have developed this as a meta-hermeneutic (if I may coin a term). A hermeneutic
is a rule or principle of how to interpret the Bible. By "meta" I
mean something that is higher or transcending. So by meta-hermeneutic I mean a
hermeneutic that is higher or more important; that is, a higher order, guiding
interpretative rule or principle. If a full Preterist
violates the meta-hermeneutic of "all fulfilled by AD 70" they are,
by definition, no longer a full Preterist. So while
full Preterists use other rules of interpretation for
a given passage, ultimately the fulfillment of a passage has to fit in before
AD 70. If it doesn't then a full Preterist would have
to change his or her paradigm.
The concept I am employing
of meta-hermeneutic is not necessarily negative. For example I would call the
belief in the inerrancy of Scripture a
meta-hermeneutic. Thus those of us who hold to it seek to have a given passage
be consistent with the rest of Scripture. Those who are more liberal in their
interpretation of the Bible don't feel this need to make the Bible consistent.
For them to say the Second Coming didn't happen in the first century (when the
NT writers said it would) is no problem. They don't adhere to the higher order,
guiding rule of inerrancy.
Creedalists use the creeds as a
meta-hermeneutic. Thus, whatever passage they are interpreting has to fit in
with their creed's statement of a future physical Second
Coming. This brings up a very important point. One has to examine one's
meta-hermeneutics very carefully. This is because they draw the parameters or
boundaries for the rest of one's interpretive principles. That is, they become
the underlying assumptions that one bases one’s whole approach to the interpretation
of Scripture on. For example the creedalist as long
as he or she accepts the creeds as a meta-hermeneutic can never see AD 70 as
the time of the Second Coming, most of church tradition doesn't allow for it.
Instead the creedalists have to go through all sorts
of theological gymnastics trying to differentiate between a coming in judgment
(AD 70) and the "real" Second Coming in the future. As long as they
hold their creeds as a meta-hermeneutic, creedalists
will have to strain to come up with artificial distinctions between two comings
of Jesus. Once again, one’s higher guiding interpretative rules need to be
examined very carefully, they limit the possibilities
of one's interpretive system. This is why I am advocating for a closer
examination of the "all fulfilled by AD 70" meta-hermeneutic. To my
knowledge the "all prophecy fulfilled by AD 70" rule has never really
been questioned by those who see AD 70 as the time of the Second Coming. John
L. Bray would be an exception to this but even he just came to the conclusion
that AD 70 was the Second (and final) Coming of Jesus in the last few years.
The usual choice has been between traditional partial
Preterism,
that sees AD 70 as a coming of Jesus in judgment (but not the Second Coming),
and full Preterism with its all fulfilled by AD 70
meta-hermeneutic. I am trying to show that there is a very viable option in
between these two traditional positions. Of course those who would chose the
position I am advocating will probably still end up being labeled as a heretic
by those who subscribe to the creeds as a meta-hermeneutic, sorry!
Russell came to many of the
same conclusions as full Preterists do (as do I) but
he did so by letting the context of each section of Scripture determine when
its fulfillment was. He did not have a meta-hermeneutic that all prophecy had
to have been fulfilled by AD 70. Thus when he came to the conclusion that the
millennium started at AD 70 he was able to adjust his interpretation of
Revelation accordingly. Again Russell wasn't working from the meta-hermeneutic
of current day full Preterists that all prophecy had
to have been fulfilled by AD 70.
In writing my paper on
Revelation chapter 12, I approached the chapter with no particular agenda in
terms of applying it before AD 70 or after. In a nutshell, the conclusion I
came to was that Satan was cast out of heaven at Jesus' resurrection and then
was loose on the earth until AD 70. It was at that time, at the Second Coming,
that Satan was bound, cast into the abyss, and the millennium began. If I was
working under the meta-hermeneutic of the full Preterist
(that all has to be fulfilled by AD 70) I would have had to drastically alter
my conclusions so I could fit everything in before AD 70. I would dare say that
a full Preterist reading my conclusions here on
Revelation 12 would be almost sure I was wrong even before reading my paper. It
would either be my being wrong or his or her paradigm being wrong. Guess which
way most people lean when they feel their paradigm is being threatened (they
usually "circle the wagons" seeking to discount the perceived
threat). In my mind having to fit all prophecy in before AD 70 is just as
stifling to the search for the Truth of Scripture as having to fit all prophecy
into a creedal formula is. We all need to be careful that it is the Truth of
Scripture that we are defending and not simply our view or paradigm.
Unfortunately many times it is not easy to tell the difference between the two.
SUMMARY
In this paper I have
examined the proposition that all the prophecies in the Bible were fulfilled by
AD 70. This proposition is used as a meta-hermeneutic (a higher order
interpretive rule or principle) by full Preterists. I
examined the two most common arguments to support this meta-hermeneutic (Luke
As one who does not
recognize the constraint of all prophecy having to be fulfilled by AD 70, let
me outline my position. I am summarizing here; for some of the rationale behind
my thinking read my other articles, "A New Preterist Perspective"
(although this paper modifies the section in that paper labeled
"Resurrections") and "Revelation Chapter 12".
First, I agree with full Preterists that the Second Coming of Jesus happened at AD
70. To me this is the heart of Preterism. I don't
look for a third coming (Jesus would have to leave for that to happen!). I also
agree that our salvation was made complete at the Second Coming. I also agree
with full Preterists that Christians have had access
to the New Jerusalem and tree of life since the Second Coming (AD 70), Praise
the Lord! Looking at Revelation chapter 12, I see that Satan was cast to the
earth at Jesus' resurrection (John
A major disagreement I have
with full Preterists is over their view of the
current status of evil. Full Preterists see Satan and
all other enemies of Jesus as being abolished (thrown into the lake of fire) at
AD 70. Thus full Preterists see Satan as totally off
the scene today, although evil still lives on in the hearts of men. In their
view evil may diminish as the Kingdom expands but it never really ceases to
exist. I look for a more definitive abolishment of all evil at the end of the
millennium (Rev. 20:7-10). My position sees Satan as being active today. He was
defeated at the cross (Matthew 28:18) but that does not mean he doesn't still
produce destruction in the world today.
I see us currently in the
end part of the millennial reign when Satan is released from the abyss to go
out and deceive the nations. That is why I think we have been experiencing such
a rise in spiritual darkness in the last 3 or 4 decades. Spiritually speaking
this is our world and we need (by prayer and sharing the word of God) to be
more active in our rule of it. The Christian army advances on its knees! In the
same manner as the children of
I see God's sovereign hand
in bringing the Jews (after the flesh) back to the
Duncan McKenzie