The Problem with Preterism - Michael Macon

Preterism Defined

“Preterism” is the systematized opinion that all the prophetic events of the eschaton, short of the Second Advent itself, have already been fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in A.D. 70. The preterist rejects sound eschatology, including the Doctrine of Imminency, the Rapture, and the Tribulation.

Preterism Refuted

There are several rather obvious problems with the preterist position; we will focus in this article on the prophecies of Jesus concerning the eschaton.

There are three parallel passages in the Gospels where Jesus lays out for His disciples the signs indicating that the end of the age is at hand. To list the signs:

A rise in false religion, including an epidemic of persons or systems claiming to be Jesus Himself.
An unprecedented increase in the number of wars.
An unprecedented increase in natural disasters, including famines, pestilences, and earthquakes.
Unprecedented tribulation and mass martyrdom, and universal hatred of Christians.
Mass betrayal, and General Apostasy.
The Gospel shall be preached to all nations.
The Abomination of Desolation will be set up in the reconstructed Tribulation Temple.
Tribulation so great that there has been none like it before, nor none since; in fact, if the days had not been shortened, no flesh would survive.
An increase in false signs and lying wonders.
Immediately after the Tribulation of those days, there will be great atmospheric/astronomic disturbances.
Coincident with this, the “sign of the Son of Man” will appear in the heavens, and “all tribes of the earth” will see Jesus’ mighty Second Advent.
Coincident with this, the saints of God will be gathered together from the four corners of the earth.

The first nine items deal with the events leading up to the yet-to-occur “Tribulation Period,” and the last three with those events immediately succeeding it.

The preterist position is that all this has already occurred. They cite the fact that the events surrounding AD 70 saw an increase in local wars, in famines, and general upheaval. However, the Text seems to indicate far more than a localized increase in these things, and rather points to a global increase of such titanic proportions that it would be a readily discernible sign.

Now, why do we state that these things speak of the end of the age, and not simply of the destruction of the temple? Because of the Holy Spirit’s very careful choice of words: “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” [Matthew 24:3] That Jesus is not presently “here” in the sense that He will be during the Millennium is very readily apparent.

The Signs Examined Point-By-Point

The rise of persons claiming to be Christ — as in, claiming to be Jesus Himself, rather than just a general conception of a “saviour” of sorts — was not a widespread problem in the first century AD. Even though right now we have witnessed a vast increase in false Christs since the middle of the 1800’s, the Scripture indicates that the number and frequency of such claims will increase even more so.
The unrest surrounding AD 70 was actually nothing new or strange [study, for instance, the terrible times surrounding the Assyrian invasion of the Northern Kingdom, and the time of the Maccabean Revolt] nor historically unique afterwards. It was hardly the universal, cataclysmic clashing of nations that Jesus seems to indicate in His prophecy. On the other hand, it is a well-known fact that international violence has, if anything, increased century-by-century until the present. In fact, the 20th century has been the bloodiest in the history of mankind. This trend will only get worse, until finally those years immediately preceding the advent of antichrist will see the most turbulent period in human history. This will be partially responsible for the relative ease with which antichrist usurps the final vestiges of national sovereignty. Essentially, however, the key is that the unrest is so pervasive and so unusual that Jesus could use it as a sure sign that the end was in sight.
The twentieth century has seen an exponential increase in natural disasters. The present popular fascination with natural disasters (“Twister, Volcano, Dante’s Peak, etc.”) is an outgrowth of this geologic/meteorologic trend. The upheavals are so pervasive that Jesus could use them as a definite sign of the end of the age. The geologic upheavals surrounding AD 70, by way of comparison, were hardly universal, and have been more than outmatched in recent history.
The mass martyrdom of the first century was perhaps more pandemic on a per capita basis, but the blood spilled since the beginning of the second century till now far outweigh that spilled in the first century, much less the few years leading up to AD 70. The mass martyrdom and universal hatred of Christians being spoken of by Jesus rather refers to a universal tribulation yet future that is so intense and all-encompassing that it can serve as a definite sign of the end of the age.
No general apostasy has yet overtaken the Church. The majority of professing Christians in the first century did not turn aside to false gospels; rather, the majority seemingly lived and died for the True Gospel of Jesus. No, this definite sign is speaking of a general apostasy yet future, which is so awesome in scope that it can serve as a definite indication that the end of the age has come.
The Gospel has obviously not been preached to all nations. The Acts 2 outpouring does not constitute that preaching (as some preterists would argue). First, all nations weren’t covered in the Acts 2 list. And as a wise man once said, “All means ‘all,’ and that’s all ‘all’ means.” Rather, there are still a great many nations who have yet to hear the glorious Gospel. This sign is yet future.
The desecration of the Temple in AD 70 did not fulfill the requirements of being the “Abomination which makes desolation.” Titus destroyed Herod’s Temple; he did not usurp it. Heterodyning Jesus’ prophecy with Paul’s in II Thessalonians 2:4, we note with interest that antichrist will seat himself in the Temple of God, claiming to be God. Antiochus Epiphanes was the clearest type of antichrist in Old Testament apocalyptic literature. Titus did not set himself up as God, but rather desecrated the Temple by obliterating it; he did not even get to deport its treasures as did Nebuchadnezzar, according to Josephus, as the Temple was first gutted by fire, causing the gold of the Holy Place and Most Holy Place to melt and run into the cracks in the stones, necessitating the stone-by-stone dismantling that Titus ordered. This event, predicted by Jesus, is yet future, and is a definite sign of the end of the age.
The tribulation surrounding AD 70 has certainly been far surpassed in recent history. Most notably for the Jewish nation is Hitler’s Holocaust. For the Gentiles, there are untold examples. Jesus is predicting a tribulation even more severe than this (the tribulation will be so severe that no tribulation will ever surpass it in intensity, either in the past or future to it [v. 21]), and this tribulation is yet future.
Today we are seeing a true exponential increase in false signs and lying wonders. First, we have the Tornado Blessing; then there is the Pensacola Abomination. The New [Old] Age [Lie] Movement is reporting a vast number of paranormal occurrences, signs, wonders, healings, past-life regressions, “UFO” encounters, avatar visitations, messages from the “Ascended Masters,” and a host of other stuff that is not fake but real (just not what they think of as real; the UFOs are, for instance, demonic manifestations, etc). I grew up in the New [Old] Age [Lie] Movement, and can unequivocally vouch for the reality of the lying signs and wonders within that camp. It is out-and-out demonic deception at its height, and is increasing. It has infiltrated the church with the Kenyonist movement (“Word-Faith”), and is simply the most recent incarnation of the ancient Mystery Religions of Babylon (check out the superb book En Route to Global Occupation by Gary Kah for a detailed examination of this) and Nimrod.
Jesus uses the amazing “immediately after the tribulation of those days…” Immediately. Immediately after the tribulation of those days, there will be great signs in heaven. Such signs have not yet occurred.
The nations of the earth will see the Son of Man (Jesus) coming in His Second Advent immediately after the tribulation of those days, according to verse 30; that Jesus did not return at or around AD 70 is somewhat obvious…
The saints of God will be gathered together immediately after the tribulation of those days. Such a gathering has never occurred. Even the reforming of Israel as a nation in the ’40s does not constitute this (if you intend to make “the saints” equate with “Israel” only), since the majority of Jews still live outside Israel proper.

We see rather apparently — even after limiting our examination to Jesus’ prophecy in Matthew 24, and not even touching on Paul’s eschatology — that the preterist position is worse than precarious.

Problematic Preterism

Not only is preterism untenable, but it is unwise as well. Preterism undermines the encompassing nature of Scriptural prophecy, spiritualizes/allegorizes Scriptural passages, robs the saint of the hope of Jesus’ imminent appearing, and produces a “lazy virgin” syndrome.

Undermines

The Bible encompasses human history from its inception to its end. It accurately taught history in advance, as it were; the dead-accurate prophecies of Moses, Isaiah, and others demonstrated God’s Word’s accuracy and divine origin.

The Bible also encompasses the entirety of human history this side of the Eternal State. Genesis describes in perfect detail the Beginning, and the Revelation (and other passages) predicts the End.

Preterism knocks out one of those “bookends.” It leaves one with the feeling that Jesus’ return is far, far off, when in fact it is very near.

This is borne out by reading the works of preterists attacking dispensational eschatology. The chief aspect which is ridiculed seems to be the Doctrine of Imminency. This is Paul’s teaching that Jesus’ return is an “it-can-happen-at-any-moment” kind of thing.

Spirutalizes/Allegorizes

The preterist is forced to allegorize obviously literal passages of Text. He comes to Revelation 7:5-8 and is forced to assign spiritual meaning to the listed Twelve Tribes, and the numbers given. He comes to the Seal, Trumpet, and Bowl Judgments, and is forced to allegorize the obviously literal scenery; the “great burning mountain” of 7:8 suddenly becomes something other than a “great burning mountain.” The Two Witnesses of Revelation 11 become the Old and New Testaments, or something else other than what is obviously meant: That they are two literal humans who will prophesy for 3.5 years in the city of Jerusalem during the yet-future Tribulation Period. Etc.

The preterist, then, is forced to reject sensus literalis in the apocalyptic passages. It is not surprising, then, to note that most modern preterists also reject the Biblical account of a six-day Creation Week, but rather allegorize Genesis 1&2.

Robs

Hebrews 9:28b reads: “To those who eagerly await for Him He will appear a second time apart from sin, for salvation.” In multitudinous other places in Scripture we are exhorted to “watch eagerly” for Jesus’ coming. Preterism robs the saint of this “Great Hope of the Gospel;” the Pretribulational, Premillennial Return of Jesus Christ for His saints.

“Lazy Virgin”

Jesus speaks a parable about the end in Matthew 25 (immediately after He prophesies about the eschaton in chapter 24), in which there are ten virgins. Five kept oil in vessels, five were foolish. Five were prepared for the Bridegroom’s return, five were not. Now, this parable is not speaking about believers (the Bridegroom does not allow the five foolish virgins in, but “casts them out into outer darkness,” a fate reserved for unbelievers), but note Jesus’ words at the end of the parable:

“Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour in which the Son of Man is coming.”

We are commanded to watch. To watch with expectancy, for the Bridegroom’s coming is imminent (that is, it can occur at any time). Preterism falsely assumes that all the signs of the end have already been fulfilled, so there is no need to “watch,” except in some vague sense of “Yeah, Jesus can return… someday…” Jesus’ return to the rank-and-file preterist is a far-off ideal, not an imminent reality.

Conclusion

Preterism as a system is untenable, indefensible, and should be rejected outright.

The Problem with Preterism – Michael Macon