image banner

Common Biblical sources for Eschatology

OT- Daniel, Isa, Jer, Eze, Zech, (Prophets).

Olivet Discourse Math 24, Mark 13, Luke 21.

Book of Revelation

The Four Common Eschatologies

Futurism: All Prophecy concerning the second coming is still future.

Partial Preterism; some prophecy is fulfilled others are not.

Full Preterism: All prophecy has been fulfilled.

Common paradigms listed under Futurism

1. Dispensationalism

2. Amillenialism

3. Post Millennialism

4. Pre Millennialism

5. Historicism

6. Idealism

**Dispensationalism is a subset of Pre-Millennialism.

What is Eschatology?

Eschatology IS a study from the Bible of everything that God talks about concerning the last days or last things. They concern the events that are to transpire at the end of time as we understand it.

In the beginning God created man for fellowship, not as robots or as angels, but people who choose to love and know him. People are given a free will are not given a choice. God is love and love is not forced upon a person. God can not make us love him or reject him. Love being the supreme ethic, demands that people are free to choose to love or not. Because of man's free will the choice exists to do what is right or what is wrong. Angels rebelled and found no redemption, the punishment was immediate expulsion from heaven and there is no way for them to find their way back to God. God made man differently, knowing that he will rebel, he made a way for us to be forgiven and restored and not lost forever upon death. Eschatology is the prophetic decree of God's promises to show us what will come to those who he loves and that he rewards those who are obedient to him. Eschatology is the promise of how we will receive all of what God has said he will do for us who believe.

Is Full Preterism an enemy?

While many Eschatologies are acceptable which means they don't lead to a major problem, Full Preterism is. It is the one view that redefines words in the Bible, changes the meanings, and restructures almost every other Theology of the Bible. When a teaching denies the physical bodily resurrection of the saints, its wrong. When it teaches that Christ did not come bodily or physically from heaven and appear at his second coming, its wrong.

“Christians now realize that both comings of Jesus Christ took place in the same generation. They can see this truth in the Scriptures. The modern preterist movement is of God. Not since the days of Martin Luther have we seen such a turning back of spiritual darkness. It is a time of awakening… Preterism has an enormous job in pushing back the darkness of entrenched futurism; it’s an uphill struggle, but it will succeed because it is of God… We’re dealing with two types of people when we consider the adherents to these diabolical doctrines: 1. Real Christians who are babes, immature, or generally not Christ-centered in their understanding of the Bible. 2. Wolves (unconverted religionists) in sheep’s clothing who desire to eat up the true sheep and scatter the rest of the flock. (Acts 20:29-30)”. Ed Stevens Preterist.org

Ed Stevens makes three claims about any one who disagress with full Preterism.

Ed makes the first claim that any Futurist who teaches the doctrine of a future second coming is called false for teaching a "diabolical doctrine". Yet this is the very position of the church has held for 2000 years and we all have been deceived and wrong? Every Christian from Barnabas to Luther, to Calvin were all deceived? This is a tell tale sign of a "cult" such as Mormonism where Joseph Smith was told by the angel Maroni that the church has been all wrong for years. Barnabas who wrote his letter soon after AD 70 and lived through the events of AD 70, never declared it was the second coming but instead declared he was still to come. The Apostle John himself never declared he came in AD 70, yet had many years and opportunities to declare Christ returned. We have not one ECF who ever declared he came in AD 70.

Ed makes the claim that any Christian who teaches a future return of Christ, (which includes the Pope himself) are babes, immature, or generally not Christ-centered in their understanding of the Bible

OR we are all wolves in sheep's clothing seeking to fleece the flock for our own personal gain.

In the absence of any historical proof, testimony, or eyewitness accounts Full Preterism claims are rejected and labeled as heretical.

Is Christianity Under Assault?

The number one assault on Orthodox Christianity today is the reemergence of the Hymenaeus and Philetus heresy in saying the resurrection is past and so by default so is the second coming, fulfilled in AD 70. This view is known as Full, Realized, or Hyper Eschatology. In this view it denies the Incarnation of Christ, the visible return of Christ still future, and the bodily resurrection of the saints, and yet still wants to be labeled as Christian and is spreading from within the Church of Christ. With the emphasis of Eschatology among the Christian populace there is a second storm that brews against the ever-popular Dispensational system in the civilized academic world. The weakness of the system has resulted in what many are calling a progressive-Dispensationalist view that rejects a two-part coming of Christ. Many accept the minor premises but reject the idea that Christ raptures the church at the beginning of the tribulation period and his second coming happens at the end of the tribulation period as the main point of contention. Knowing that there are many books on eschatology written by such men as Don Preston, Charles Meeks, Ed Stevens, David Chilton, J.S. Russel, Kenneth Gentry, Gary DeMar, Joel McDurmon, Mark Hitchcock, Thomas Ice, George Eldon Ladd, Norman Geisler, R. C. Sproul, and others, some refuting, some endorsing full/partial/hyper/proper Preterism, Realized Eschatology, Dispensationalism, and even “orthodox” Preterism, why do we need one more on a post-trib, premillennialism?  My first goal is to provide a strong case for the historic pre-mill view and then offer up a major apologetic to the full preterist heresy in a direct contrast to both paradigms. I will support this work by giving a foundation of Orthodox Theology that stands in direct contradiction to Full Preterist teachings. Let it also be known there is no Systematic Theology for Full Preterism. It simply does not exist and there is a solid reason for its absence.

 The different forms of Preterism are slowly growing among certain members of semi-quasi churches and constantly butting heads with orthodox Christianity. Full Preterism poses the greatest danger to the church and needs to be confronted. Why? Because of the aggressive nature of its adherents that demand they set the Orthodox church free from its false doctrine of futurism. Full Preterism appeals to the disgruntled church that is already defiant of the institution of church and grows among those who are hungry for truth but reject traditional avenues of learning. It must be admitted that sound doctrine is absent in many pulpits. At the heart of Full Preterism doctrine, it denies the orthodox position of the incarnation, the bodily return of Christ and the bodily resurrection of the dead as an outflow of the claims of fulfillment. People are falling for these myths and doctrines of demons in much the same way Eve fell for the lie of the serpent. It is half lies wrapped in truth. Our problem is that in most traditional denominations and churches Preterism is soundly rejected but we find strongholds scattered among many different denominations where an adequate apologetic is missing. Most people/pastors are not able to refute the arguments or offer a consistent, logical, or coherent apologetic. This web cite is a tool to use against Full Preterism. One of the main issues is that popular Christian radio personalities and teachers are gaining voice and convincing the “babes in Christ” of a form of partial Preterism that feeds the appetite of those who are looking for what is wrong. This leads to opening the door to full preterism as Full Preterist feed off the Partial Preterists teachings from Gentry, De Mar, North, and others who hold that position.

The Nicene Creed

We believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, begotten from the Father before all ages, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made; of the same essence as the Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven; he became incarnate by the Holy Spirit and the virgin Mary, and was made human. He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate; he suffered and was buried. The third day he rose again, according to the Scriptures. He ascended to heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again with glory to judge the living and the dead. His kingdom will never end. And we believe in the Holy Spirit the Lord, the giver of life. He proceeds from the Father and the Son, and with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified. He spoke through the prophets. We believe in one holy universal and apostolic church. We affirm one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look forward to the resurrection of the dead, and to life in the world to come. Amen.

The Creed was adopted by the church in about AD 340 to make the definitive statement of what Christianity is and what Christianity believes is the gospel for salvation.

William Booth quote

The Other Two

HISTORICSIM - is the belief that that the events of Revelation having been playing out in history since the book was written. Some hold to the early date and so make the events A.D. 70 as part of the fulfillment of the book. The difficulty in such a position is there is no chronology to its fulfillment and so adherent look for events in history and then go to the book and say, "this was fulfilled in such and such event", which becomes very arbitrary. The most difficult part to uphold is noting these events happen "quickly". Meaning in Revelation 1:1 John says he was "shown things that were to take place in quickness", meaning not close in time but, the events themselves were to happen in a very quick time. For example the "Beast" once he comes to rule, his Kingdom only last for 42 months, or three and a half years. It ends with the return of Christ. It is also hard to argue the Judgments found in the book are spread out over thousands of years.

IDEALISM is the belief that the events written about in Revelation are not all to happen literally but take place over time and spiritually. The exception is the Second Coming and the Great White throne Judgment. Idealism comes out in Preterist views from people like John Noe, in his book he claims there is no second coming but Jesus has been here and never left spiritually so there is no need for him to return a second time. As I said before the Preterist view leads to more error. Noe also argues against the existence of Hell.