Preterism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Christian Eschatology
The Judgements Preterism talk Idealism talk Historicism talk Futurism talk The Millennium Premillennialism talk Amillennialism talk Postmillennialism talk Christian Eschatology Christian Eschatology talk Eschatological Differences talk Biblical texts The Book of Daniel talk The Olivet Discourse talk The Book of Revelation talk See also Covenantalism talk Dispensationalism talk
This box: view • talk • edit

This article or section is missing citations or needs footnotes. Using inline citations helps guard against copyright violations and factual inaccuracies. (April 2007)

Preterism is a variant of Christian eschatology which holds that some or all of the biblical prophecies concerning the Last Days or End Times refer to events which actually happened in the first century after Christ's birth. The term preterism comes from the Latin praeter, meaning "past". Adherents of Preterism are known as Preterists.

Contents 1 Preterist divisions 1.1 Preterist sub-variants 2 Partial Preterism 3 Full Preterism 4 Influences of Preterism within Christian thought 5 People 6 Preterism versus Futurism 7 Preterism versus Historicism 8 References 9 See also

[edit] Preterist divisions

The two principal schools of Preterist thought are commonly called Partial Preterism and Full Preterism. Preterists disagree significantly about the exact meaning of the terms used to denote these divisions of Preterist thought.

Some Partial Preterists prefer to call their position Orthodox Preterism, thus contrasting their agreement with the creeds of the Ecumenical Councils with what they perceive to be the Full Preterists' rejection for the same.^{[citation needed]} This, in effect, makes Full Preterism unorthodox in the eyes of Partial Preterists and gives rise to the claim by some that Full Preterism is heretical. (Partial Preterism is also sometimes called Classical Preterism or Moderate Preterism.)

On the other hand, some Full Preterists prefer to call their position Consistent Preterism, reflecting their extension of Preterism to all biblical prophecy and thus claiming an inconsistency in the Partial Preterist hermeneutic.^[1]

The correct labeling of the positions in relation to each other is a matter of heated dispute amongst some Partial Preterists and Full Preterists who would reject those labels and argue for others, most notably, which view may simply be called "preterism".^{[citation needed]}

[edit] Preterist sub-variants

Sub-variants of Preterism include one form of Partial Preterism which places fulfillment of some eschatological passages in the first three centuries of the current era, culminating in the fall of Rome.

In addition, certain statements from classical theological liberalism are easily mistaken for Preterism, as they hold that the biblical record accurately reflects Jesus' and the Apostles' belief that all prophecy was to be fulfilled within their generation. Theological liberalism generally regards these apocalyptic expectations as being errant or mistaken, however, so this view cannot accurately be considered a form of Preterism.^[2]

[edit] Partial Preterism

Main article: Partial Preterism

Partial preterism is the older of the two views, dating back to even the 2nd century Church fathers,^{[citation needed]}. Partial Preterism holds that prophecies such as the destruction of Jerusalem, the Antichrist, the Great Tribulation, and the advent of the Day of the Lord as a "judgment-coming" (Last Judgment) of Christ were fulfilled c. AD 70 when the Roman general (and future Emperor) Titus sacked Jerusalem and destroyed the Jewish Temple, putting a permanent stop to the daily animal sacrifices. It identifies "Babylon the Great" (Revelation 17-18) with the ancient pagan City of Rome or Jerusalem. Some adherents of Partial Preterism see the Emperor Diocletian as the fulfillment of the "little horn" prophecy of Daniel 7. Partial Preterism is also known by several other names: Orthodox Preterism, Historic Preterism, Hypo-Preterism (a term used by some opponents of the partial preterist position and considered to be derogatory by partial preterists), and Moderate Preterism.

Most (but not all) Partial Preterists also believe that the term Last Days refers not to the last days of planet Earth, or the last days of humankind, but rather to the last days of the Mosaic Covenant, which God had exclusively with the nation of Israel until the year AD 70. (see also New Covenant and The Fig Tree).^{[citation needed]} The "last days", however, are to be distinguished from the "last day", which is considered still future and entails the last coming of Jesus, the Resurrection of the righteous and unrighteous dead physically from the grave in like manner to Jesus' physical resurrection, the Final Judgment, and the creation of a literal, non-covenantal New Heavens and New Earth free from the curse of sin and death which was occasioned by the fall of Adam and Eve. Thus Partial Preterists are in agreement and conformity with the historic ecumenical creeds of the Church and articulate the doctrine of the resurrection held by the early Church Fathers. Partial preterists hold that the New Testament predicts and depicts many "comings" of Christ.^{[citation needed]} They contend that the phrase Second Coming means the second of a like kind in a series, for the Scriptures record other "comings" of God even before Jesus' judgment-coming in AD 70^{[citation needed]}. This would eliminate the AD 70 event as the "second" of any series, let alone the second of a series in which the earthly, physical ministry of Christ is the first. Partial Preterists believe that the new creation comes in redemptive progression as Christ reigns from His heavenly throne, subjugating His enemies, and will eventually culminate in the destruction of the "last enemy", i.e., physical death (1 Cor 15:20-24). In the Partial Preterist paradigm, since enemies of Christ still exist, the resurrection event cannot have already occurred.

Nearly all Partial Preterists hold to amillennialism or postmillennialism. Many postmillennial Partial Preterists are also theonomic in their outlook. Partial Preterists typically accept the authority of the Creeds on the basis that they believe the Creeds are in conformity to what the Scriptures teach.

[edit] Full Preterism

Full Preterism differs from Partial Preterism in that Full Preterists believe all prophecy was fulfilled with the destruction of Jerusalem, including the resurrection of the dead and Jesus' Second Coming or Parousia. Full Preterism is also known by several other names: Consistent Preterism, Covenant Eschatology, Hyper-Preterism (a term used by some opponents of the Full Preterist position and considered to be derogatory by Full Preterists), and Pantelism (the term "Pantelism" comes from the Greek and means, "all things having been accomplished"). Full Preterism holds that Jesus' Second Coming is to be viewed not as a future-to-us bodily return, but rather a "return" in glory manifested by the physical destruction of Jerusalem and her Temple in AD 70 by foreign armies in a manner similar to various Old Testament descriptions of God coming to destroy other nations in righteous judgment. Full Preterism also holds that the Resurrection of the dead did not entail the raising of the physical body, but rather the resurrection of the soul from the "place of the dead", known as Sheol (Hebrew) or Hades (Greek). As such, the righteous dead obtained a spiritual and substantial body for use in the heavenly realm, and the unrighteous dead were cast into the Lake of Fire. Some Full Preterists believe this judgment is ongoing and takes effect upon the death of each individual (Heb. 9:27).^{[citation needed]} The New Heavens and the New Earth are also equated with the New Covenant and the fulfillment of the Law in AD 70 and are to be viewed in the same manner by which a Christian is considered a "new creation" upon his or her conversion.

Full Preterists typically reject the authority of the Creeds to condemn their view, stating that the Creeds were written by uninspired and fallible men, and that appeals should be made instead to the Scriptures themselves (sola scriptura).^{[citation needed]}

[edit] Influences of Preterism within Christian thought

Partial Preterism is generally considered to be an historic orthodox interpretation as it affirms all eschatological points of the ecumenical Creeds of the Church.^[3][4][5] Still, Partial Preterism is not the majority view among American denominations founded after the 16th century and meets with significant vocal opposition, especially by those denominations which espouse Dispensationalism.^[6][7][8] Additionally, concerns are expressed by Dispensationalists that Partial Preterism logically leads to an acceptance of Full Preterism, a concern which is denied by Partial Preterists.^[9]

Although Full Preterism is viewed as heretical by many,^[10][11][12] this condemnation is not universal. Many of those who condemn Full Preterism do so not based solely upon the historic creeds of the church (which would exclude this view), but also from biblical passages that they interpret to condemn a past view of the Resurrection or the denial of a physical resurrection/transformation of the body — doctrines which many Christians (but not all) believe to be essential to the faith. Critics of Full Preterism point to the Apostle Paul's condemnation of the doctrine of Hymenaeus and Philetus (2 Tim 2:17-18), which they regard as analogous to Full Preterism. Adherents of Full Preterism, however, dispute this assertion by pointing out that Paul's condemnation was written during a time in which the Resurrection was yet future (i.e., pre-AD 70). Their critics assert that if the resurrection has not happened yet the condemnation would still apply.

[edit] People

• Justin Martyr^[13]
• Tertullian^[14]
• Irenaeus^[15]
• Origen^[16][17]
• Eusebius of Caesarea^[18]
• Athanasius^[19]
• Chrysostom^[20]

[edit] Preterism versus Futurism

Like most theological disputes, the divide between Preterism and its opposite, Futurism, is over how certain passages of Scripture should be interpreted. Futurists assert that Preterists have ignored prophecy recently fulfilled and spiritualized prophecies they interpret as describing literal, visible events, whereas Preterists believe that Futurists do not take certain passages such as Matthew 16:28 literally enough and do not give sufficient weight to scriptures that seem to show that the first century Church believed that a major eschatological event would certainly take place in their lifetime.^{[citation needed]} Many "time texts" in the New Testament appear to indicate this, e.g., Matthew 10:23, Matthew 16:27-28, Matthew 24:34, Matthew 26:64, and Rev. 1:1-3. Full Preterists would assert that there are passages which also place the Second Coming and Resurrection at that time (Dan. 7:18; 12:1-7). Partial Preterists, however, assert that there are additional long-term indicators and futuristic goals of the Consummation that include the complete eradication of sin and the restoration of the Earth from its fallen state.

[edit] Preterism versus Historicism

Expositors of the traditional Protestant interpretation of Revelation known as historicism have often maintained that Revelation was written in AD 96 and not AD 70. E.B. Elliott, in the classic Horae Apocalypticae (1862), argues that John wrote the book in exile on Patmos "at the close of the reign of Domitian; that is near the end of the year 95 or beginning of 96". He notes that Domitian was assassinated in September of 96.^[21] Elliot begins his lengthy review of historical evidence by quoting Irenaeus a disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of the Apostle John. Iraneus mentions that the Apocalypse was seen "no very long time ago [but] almost in our own age, toward the end of the reign of Domitian".^[22] Other Historicists however have seen no significance in the date that Revelelation was written, and have even held to an early date.^[23]

Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., Th.D., wrote the book "Before Jerusalem Fell" (1989) to provide evidence in support of an earlier date. The book was meant to be an exegetical and historical argument for the pre-A.D. 70 composition of Revelation.^[24]

[edit] References

[edit] See also

• Christian eschatology
• Dispensationalism
• Covenant theology
• Summary of Christian eschatological differences
• Amillennialism
• Postmillennialism
• Premillennialism
• New Covenant
• Expounding of the Law