Preterism: Explained by Scripture

Preterism is a view of Biblical "end time" prophesy loosely defined as the belief that all Biblical prophesies, esp. Daniel and Revelation, were fulfilled with the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 AD.

Most authorities agree Preterism was developed as an eschatology in the 17th Century, although most preterists maintain that it was the original view of the Church. In spite of their claims, the earliest known Preterist exposition was Jesuit Louis Alacaster's argument in the counter-Reformation as a dispute that the Roman Church was historically a persecuting apostasy.

In fact, historically, preterism is basically a 17th Century Catholic defense against the accusation that the Pope is the anti-Christ.

Recently preterism has gained adherents among non-Catholics when presented outside its historic context. This is largely due to the work of Hugo Grotius, a Protestant that himself was eager to find common ground between Catholics and Protestants, and who believed that Alacaster's work could help reconnect the various elements of the Church.

The main Scriptural argument for Preterist thought is that "Full preterists argue that a literal reading of Matthew 16:28 where (they claim) Jesus tells the disciples that they would not (all) taste death until the second coming" places the second coming in the first century. This precludes a physical second coming of Christ. Instead, the second coming is symbolic of a "judgment" against Jerusalem that is said to have taken place when the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in AD 70"

(Source: Wikipedia, Theopedia, second brackets added to clarify.)

To cite the Internationl Preterist association,

"When will Christ return? This question is relevant, and can be answered by scripture. Jesus seems to have answered it very clearly in these passages (Matt. 10:23; Matt. 16:27,28; Matt. 24:34). Ever wonder why the First Century Christians expected Jesus to come in their lifetime, and where they got this expectation from? Take a look at the extreme sense of imminency in these passages: James 5:8,9; 1 Pet. 4:7; Matt. 10:23; Matt. 16:27,28; Matt. 24:34. These verses have always troubled Bible students, and have been used by liberal theologians to attack the inspiration of Scripture. They reason that these passages were not fulfilled when they were supposed to be (the first century generation), so Jesus and the NT writers failed in their predictions and were therefore not inspired. But these verses point to Christ's coming in some sense in connection with the Fall of Jerusalem at 70 AD. So, Jesus' predictions were fulfilled. He did not fail, nor do we need to engage in theological gymnastics to try to explain-away the seeming delay or postponement of His return. It happened right on schedule. Many knew the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD was important in God's scheme of redemption, but never understood its full significance. It has to do with the consummation of the plan of redemption. The final events of the redemptive drama came to pass in the first century within the apostles' generation (before A.D. 70). Christ's kingdom is here now. Paradise has been restored in Christ (spiritually-speaking). Christ has conquered all His enemies and has given us the Kingdom."

Thus we see the elements Preterism embraces, from their own words.

But before embracing a new doctrine, we should ask ourselves this above all else: Is this really what these verses mean?

This recent reinterpretation of Scripture should bother us as well.

If these eight Scripture references truly stand scrutiny, and mean what Preterists claim they do, by all means, embrace them.

But first let's look for ourselves to see if these verses truly mean what preterists maintain.

A key preterist argument is that the generation Jesus spoke to would not taste death until all eschalogical (end time) prophesies would be fulfilled. To demonstrate, the very first verse their international organization cites is Matthew 10:23:

"But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come."

Thus they use Matt. 10: 23 to claim that his coming would take place before the gospel ever travelled to all of Israel.

The question is, does this refer to his coming from Heaven, as preterists claim?

Matt. 10:5-7: "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
"But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
"And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand."

Now, one has to assume two things here. First, that the coming of Jesus is referring to his return from Heaven, and second, that the Kingdom of Heaven refers to his second coming as well. But Matt. 11:11-12 shows Jesus understood the Kingdom of Heaven to be something already in existence, not dependent upon his return from Heaven.

"Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.
"And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force."

Also, Jesus said he would give the keys to the Kingdom to Peter. Not that the kingdom would come, but that he would give Peter the keys. Matt. 16:18-19

"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
"And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

There are many such references, but the last I cite is Matt. 12:27-28: "And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges.

"But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you."

Here we see that the Kingdom of Heaven, also called (depending on emphasis) the Kingdom of God is here, but aspects of it may be referred to as coming in the future. But, we see that the preterist assumption that the preaching of the Kingdom is synonomous with the preaching of the Kingdom is in error.It does not automatically referencing eschatology.

What about their second assumption regarding Matt. 12:23?

Is Jesus actually saying, "You will not preach to all the cities before I come back from Heaven?"

Look back at Matthew 10:5-6 again: "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:

"But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

When Jesus is telling him he will come before they go to all the cities, this is the mission he is discussing. He is not discussing a return from Heaven, he is priming them on a missionary event that is to the cities of Israel.

Look at how his instruction to them in this matter ends, Matt.hew 11:1: "And it came to pass, when Jesus had made an end of commanding his twelve disciples, he departed thence to teach and to preach in their cities."

First he told them to go out to Israel's cities. Somewhere in there he told them he'd come before they were finished. Then, after giving the commandments regarding this specific missionary project, he went to the cities himself, and do you think he came to these cities before his twelve managed to get to them all? Context.

We see therefore that nothing in the context indicates Jesus was prophesying about a second coming. Such an assumption has to ignore context and has to pull an interpretation regarding such a meaning out of thin air.

So we go to their next argument: Matthew 16:27&28: "For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.

"Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom."

Literally, "Truly I say unto you all, there are among you standing here who won't taste death until perceiving the son of Man coming in kingdom."

(While some could legitimately argue using the alternation translation of "going" here, I personally see no reason to believe that's how it is used here. But "eos" as a preposition means "unto" and is usually translated that way in some versions. "Until" works, but the harder to grasp "unto" is probably more accurate: "They will not taste death until the point they see…")

While the context of Matt. 16:18 definitely refers to Christ coming in glory, the promise that some would not taste death specifically refers to Christ coming in ("en," "within") his kingdom.

Matthew 26:27-29, which refers to after his resurrection, points out that after the resurrection, Jesus Christ had already come unto his kingdom.

"And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;
"For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
"But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom."

Also, Acts 10:40-42:

"Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly;
"Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.
"And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead."

So we see that as prophesied, Jesus ate and drink, him having come unto his kingdom as prophesied, long before 70 AD.

And,
"Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them.
"And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted.
"And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth."

Had judgement come?

No.

But we can see clearly that Jesus had come into his Kingdom, that the promise of Matthew 16: 28 had come to pass. Not only was the Kingdom of Heaven already in existence, all its power was now in the hands of its new King, Jesus Christ, resurrected by God from the dead.

The way Jesus spoke of Matthew 16:27-28, I have no doubt he saw these events as proximate. After all, the aeon, the age of grace that Paul referred to as "the administration" or "the dispensation" of grace, had details that were hid in God until they were revealed to Paul.

But look at Isaiah 61:1-3: "The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;

"To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn;
"To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the LORD, that he might be glorified."

Did Isaiah preach that these would happen at various times? But Jesus understood that the events Isaiah prophesied of would take place at various times. Luke 4:17-2a: "And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,

"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
"To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
"And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down."

Why did Jesus close the scroll after reading "to preach the acceptable year of the Lord?" Because, although you could not tell it from just Isaiah's account, even though Isaiah was quite clear and literal, it was not yet "the day of vengeance of our God." His first time around, it was to preach, to heal, to recover, to set at liberty.

The day of vengeance, and the day of reward? The day of vengeance, and the day of beauty for ashes, not yet.

You see, Matthew 16:27-28 did not preclude Jesus coming back in 70 AD, but it did not, as they claim, indicate it, either.

So far, neither of the first two verses indicated by International Preterist Association actually indicate what they claim. If Matthew 16:28 is as some say their main argument for going down the road of Preterism, we should see by now they are already on a road of misunderstanding and error.

But just as the Preterist opinion of Matt. 16:27-28 deserved an answer, there are other important verses that they point to that deserve as much clarity.

Matthew 24: 34: "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled."

To get a sense of what things are to be fulfilled, lets look at the entire passage,

Matthew 24:1-44: "And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
"And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down."

We indeed know that this did take place in 70 AD.

"And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?
"And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.
"For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.
"And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet."

The Preterists claim that Matt. 24:34 indicates immediancy. But Jesus says "wars and rumors of wars," which take time, but "be not deceived…the end is not yet."

"For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.
"All these are the beginning of sorrows."

Immediacy? These things are just the beginning.

"Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.
"And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.
"And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
"And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.
"But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."

The end, what end? This end of the world.

World?

Remember, Jesus is answering two questions. When is the sign of his coming, and when is the end of the world. Here he is answering the question, "When is the end of the world?"

But "world" is not the word for "planet earth," or even of "the nations," as we surely think of it.

It is the word "aeonos," or "age." They were asking him when the sign of his coming, and when the end of the age.

What age? Colossians 1:26: "Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:"

The "agiois," the age now Paul referred to is the age of the mystery, the age of the Church. He also refers to the gospel reaching the world.

Preterists are always asking, "Did Jesus lie when he said some would not taste death before seeing him in his kingdom?" As we have seen, he did not lie, he was not mistaken.

But is the gospel reaching all nations a necessary fulfillment? We must now ask the preterists, "Did Jesus lie, was he mistaken when he said the gospel shall reach all nations?

Unlike some, we should not pick and choose which verses to give more credence. We should search till they all fit perfectly together, or admit we don't yet know. But we should never cling to one verse and say it negates many clear verses, or a few and say it negates the clear testimony of the majority of Scripture.

Matthew 24:15: "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)
"Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
"Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
"Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
"And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
"But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
"For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be."
"And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened."
"Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not."

Then, sometime after the flight to the mountains, After this flight from Jerusalem, after the destruction that we know took place in 70 AD, then people will say Christ has actually come back. But has he? NO, NO, NO. Let's see how we know the real deal:

Matthew 24:23 "For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
"Behold, I have told you before.
"Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
"For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be."

Preterists claim Jesus came secretly to the world when Jerusalem was sacked. But Jesus himself warned this would not be the case. But Jesus himself said do not be deceived, he is not in the secret chambers. When he comes, it will be as when the lightning comes out of the east and shineth unto the west…a massive, global event. Or did he lie, or was he mistaken?
"For wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be gathered together.
"Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
"And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
"And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other."

Immediately after the tribulation of what days? Of the days around when Jesus makes his reappearance. Doesn't this match perfectly with what is foretold in 1 Corinthians 15:22,23; 51-52: "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
"But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming."
"Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
"In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed."

And 1 Thessilonans 4:13-18: "But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
"For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
"For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
"For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
"Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
"Wherefore comfort one another with these words."

Over and over again, we are told our hope lies in this return. But if there be no return, we have no hope.

Indeed, Revelation itself speaks of judgments on the Church, and then seven seals and seven trumpets heralding great tribulation, then at the last trump the end of times and the fulfilling of the mystery of God, then a period of persecution and rule by the devil, then the victory of Christ. How does that differ from what Jesus promises here in Matthew?

Matthew 24:32: "Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:
"So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors."

Then comes the great, so-called preterist verse, one of the few they hang their doctrine on and on which they try to refute entire sections describing the
"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled."

On this verse and the one like it in Luke, preterists hang their entire doctrine, indeed, the very way they choose to understand and interpret scripture: that a few verses they will not and cannot reconcile must negate and reinterpret the greater body of Scripture. Such immediacy, that all these things will come to pass before the generation he spoke to passed.

But what does verse 34 really say?

The word "parelthe" is the word "elthe," meaning "go" or "come," with the prefix "par," or "through." Its literal meaning is to "come through" or "go through," and has been translated "Come along" or "pass through," the latter its idiomatic connotation. I.E., it is a homonym, a word with two meanings. Here, its literal meaning of "come along," as we will see, contrasts to its idiomatic usage in the next verse.

"Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away."

A literal rendition of Matthew 24:34 placed next to verse 35 sheds light on this verse so many have had trouble with.

"Verily tell you no not come along this generation unto (the next word, "an," makes the rest of the sentence conditional or hypothetical, "an" is called the "untranslatable particle") perchance these become.
"Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words shall not pass away."

Preterists say, "Wow, taking a long time for this to happen."

But it seems Jesus was making an important point. Preterists are right, figures are used in Scripture. Here in two verses, we see several.

We see the juxtaposition of various concepts using the same word This generation will no not come along unto, but on the other extreme, heaven and earth will pass.

We see juxtaposition of heaven and earth passing, but not Jesus' words. Talk about the opposite of a supposed sense of immediacy! Jesus is saying, even if these events are not seen by this generation (since he didn't know how long that could be, he probably was no more sure than Isaiah how long it would take), that even if heaven and earth passed away, his words would still come to pass.

Does it sound like he was certain of a relatively quick resolution?

Remember, "And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.?"

Remember, "Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not.?"

Now, "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words shall not pass away."

Which of these give the sense of urgency claimed by preterists? That's right, none do, and understanding that at best their linchpin verse 34 is conditional and hypothetical, and at worst (and likely) mistranslated because of that, why would you base an entire doctrine on it when it flies in the face of huge portions of clear Scripture, even in this very section?

Now, the conclusion of this section. Matthew 24:36-44

"But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
"But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
"For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
"And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
"Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
"Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
"Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.
"But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.
"Therefore be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh."

Everything all the way through verse 35 indicates we need to be ready for the long haul, including the supposed "preterist verse" 34. But when it happens, Jesus said, it will be as sudden and unexpected as the days of Noah. Jesus did not know the mystery hid in God, he did not know of the gathering of the Church in the clouds as revealed to Paul.

Therefore, one understands that the "one taken, the other left" is not a good thing. Remember, tribulations such as never seen even before the really bad stuff?

Whether later, as has been the gist of this section until verse 35, or sooner, as this allows the possibility of, it will be unexpected by certainly most.

After preparing them that heaven and earth would pass, but his words wouldn't, no matter how long it took, he said "Therefore be ye also ready."

We would be wise to hold these words to heart even now, and not be discouraged by those who basically say, "He isn't REALLY coming back."

Let's look real quick at another account of Jesus' words in Matthew 24 as recorded by Luke. Since it's nearly an identical account, we will concentrate on the part which is different.

Luke 21:20-22: "And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
"Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
"For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled."

Here is a key verse preterists use to claim all Scripture was fulfilled when Jerusalem was sacked. But does it say all scripture is fulfilled by this, as they claim?

No. It says this must happen for all Scripture to be fulfilled. This is an important distinction.

Furthermore, while this must happen since it is foretold by prophesy of Scripture, is this the prophesy of Revelation as preterists claim? Again, no.

While Luke may have been written after the revelation of the mystery, maybe (but not likely) after the Revelation given to John, it simply records what Jesus told his disciples, and at that time, not one of the Gospels or the Church Epistles or Revelation were written.

Jesus was clearly stating that these things would happen as at least part of fulfilling "all things which are written."

Even if the preterists were right that these things fulfilled all Scripture written, which it doesn't actually say as we have seen, we should not assume that it would affect the Scriptures yet to be written. These are prophesies fulfilled of Old Testament days of vengeance toward rebellious Israel.

Luke 21:22-24: "For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
"But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
"And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled."

We know that "they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles" indeed happened in 70 AD. Up to this point, indeed this was the fulfillment of Old Testament prophesy, but look at the last line of Luke 21:24: "…and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled."

Brothers and sisters, the feet of the Gentiles marched into a ravaged Jerusalem in 70 AD. But guess what? The feet of Gentiles, Jesus said, would remain in Jerusalem until when?

Until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Are Gentile feet still trodding down Jewish Jerusalem? Yes, they are. The times of the Gentiles, then, are they fulfilled? No.

Romans 11:25-26: "For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
"And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:"

The preterists say that this world is forever in its fallen state. That Israel is forever in a fallen state.

But Jesus said that Jerusalem would be trampled under the feet of Gentiles until the fullness of the times of the Gentiles, and Paul says after that time there would be a deliverer to Sion, which like Jacob is another reference to Israel.

Luke 21:25-26: "And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring;
"Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.

Sometime during this time of the Gentiles, there will be global events, as testified to in Matthew 24, and in Revelation, and in many, many verses and sections of Scripture, of New Testament Scripture pertaining to Christ's return.

Luke 21:27-28: "And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
"And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh."

Then, he says, then, when they see the son of Man coming in the clouds with power, and with great glory, then look up: your redemption, the redemption promised of a deliverer to Sion, draweth nigh.

Not now when I speak, not when Gentiles trod the holy city, but when you see the Son of man in power and great glory, your redemption draweth nigh.

So much for imminency.

Preterists use the urgency of James 5:8&9, 1 Peter 4:7, and other verses point to a "truth" that he promised he would come back quickly, whereas we have seen through Jesus' own words that being ready for a quick return was an "also" in relation to his main point that this could take a while.

In fact, half the verses they have cited as an argument for imminency of his return, we have seen do not actually mean what they think, or are speaking of his coming to the cities in his itinerary, or actually mean the opposite of what they claim, that it will actually possibly take a long time.

Expect it to take a while, even if heaven and earth pass, but also be ye ready. But remember, only the Father actually knows when.

James 5:8-9: "Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.
"Grudge not one against another, brethren, lest ye be condemned: behold, the judge standeth before the door."

You may say "The Lord draweth near" and the "the judge standeth before the door" sound imminent. But "near" and "soon" are not synonymous, remember, as much as we would like to think of them so.

Isaiah 51:3-5: "For the LORD shall comfort Zion: he will comfort all her waste places; and he will make her wilderness like Eden, and her desert like the garden of the LORD; joy and gladness shall be found therein, thanksgiving, and the voice of melody.
"Hearken unto me, my people; and give ear unto me, O my nation: for a law shall proceed from me, and I will make my judgment to rest for a light of the people.
"My righteousness is near; my salvation is gone forth, and mine arms shall judge the people; the isles shall wait upon me, and on mine arm shall they trust."

The Lord shall comfort Zion, his righteousness (that will be part of this) is near, His salvation IS gone forth, and His arms shall judge the nations. Yet this was still almost 800 years before the sack of Jerusalem, and the Holy City is still tread under the feet of Gentiles nineteen centuries after that.

Is "near" actually synonomous with "soon?" Does it actually connote imminency, or does it rather connote the truth that God is not slack in his promises, even when it seems to us He is?

Does it mean he came in secret to judge the earth way back in 70 AD, or does it mean that our works, righteous or unrighteous, are not lost because he is near?

James 5:7-11: "Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain.
"Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.
"Grudge not one against another, brethren, lest ye be condemned: behold, the judge standeth before the door.
"Take, my brethren, the prophets, who have spoken in the name of the Lord, for an example of suffering affliction, and of patience.
"Behold, we count them happy which endure. Ye have heard of the patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord; that the Lord is very pitiful, and of tender mercy."

Be patient. Why? Not because the fruit is delivered soon, but because it is delivered in due time. Was Isaiah patient, confident the righteousness of the Lord is near? Confident that righteous judgment is manifest now? Patience is required of things that don't come quickly, not of things that are at hand. Again, a section encouraging us to wait for due time is taken to mean they didn't and we don't have to wait.

2 Thessalonians 2:4-5: "And we have confidence in the Lord touching you, that ye both do and will do the things which we command you.
"And the Lord direct your hearts into the love of God, and into the patient waiting for Christ."

Hebrews 10:35-39: "Cast not away therefore your confidence, which hath great recompence of reward.
"For ye have need of patience, that, after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise.
"For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry.
"Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.
"But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul."

Yes, to live by faith goes beyond the grace of our salvation for "pie in the sky." It works the salvation of grace into the very fabric of our breath-life.

But is Paul literally promising that Christ was coming back in their life time?

Immediately he goes into an entire chapter explain this "living by faith," beginning with Hebrews 11:1-2: "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
"For by it the elders obtained a good report."

But note Hebrews 11:13: "These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth."

There will be a day that they will not be strangers and pilgrims on the earth, when that which was promised shall be established.

But why point out that faith means standing until the end, which for these believers, was death, then pointing out that we are to follow their example, if the wait was known or believed to certainly be a short one?

Faith by its very nature is believing in a future event. Why say "Jesus is coming soon?" simply because Paul points out the coming would, have a great recompense of reward?

2 Corinthians 4:16-18: "For which cause we faint not; but though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is renewed day by day.
"For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory;
"While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal."

Was their affliction literally a light one? But compared to eternity, yes. Compared to the reward promised in Hebrews, the wait was very, very little.

Not "soon" as we would think, but "little." It was a comparison, for which Paul immediately pointed out, might not come until after they were dead and in any case certainly required patience. So much for literal imminency.

1 Peter 4:7: "But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer."

Once again, preterists say this translates as "soon" or connotes a sense of immediacy. Actually, "at hand" again connotes a sense of proximity, as in "That coffee cup is at hand." Is that coffee cup soon? Whoa, that doesn't even make sense!

And I could say, "Children, behave, the "time out" chair is at hand." Did I say I was using it soon? No. There is a sense of urgency, but as we see, not one of guaranteed immediacy.

Indeed, the end of all things is at hand. Whether it happens tonight or at the end of our lives, it is as quick as God the Father telling His Son, "It is time."

Or whatever it is He will tell him.

But as we have seen, Jerusalem is still tread under the feet of the Gentiles. The fullness of the times of the Gentiles spoken of by Paul, Luke and Jesus is not fulfilled.

1 Peter 5:4-6:"And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.
"Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.
"Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time:"

Again, "due time" does not mean "soon." It means "in due time," when it is supposed to.

Indeed, what does Peter say with his second epistle? 2 Peter 3:1-4: "This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
"That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:
"Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
"And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation."

If Peter thought in his first epistle Christ's coming was certain to be very, very soon, why is he warning in "this second epistle" that the very first thing is that scoffers will come saying, "Where is the promise of his coming?"

Look at the Preterist doctrine: "At the AD 70 resurrection, souls in Hades were resurrected out of that waiting state, the righteous into the presence of Christ in His kingdom, and the wicked to eternal conscious punishment "outside" the gates of heaven (Rev. 22:15). Since then, when the righteous die biologically, they immediately receive their new immortal bodies and go directly into heaven to live forever in the presence of God, while the wicked go away to eternal conscious punishment."

First, a second coming that will be a visible global event is promised in the very scripture section Preterists claim as their "proof" in Matthew 24, and Luke 21.

Second, look at the rest of 2 Peter 3, which stands in direct contrast to the supposed permanence of the world as it supposedly exists since 70 AD:

2 Peter 3:6-13: "Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
"But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
"But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
"The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
"But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
"Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
"Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
"Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness."

The world only appears that it continues as it always has. The day is still at hand, waiting for Father to give the order. When that happens, there will be global events, not something that seventeen hundred years Papal defenders decided has happened all along.

The day will indeed not take us as a thief if we believe the truth and stand on it.

To remind you, 1 Thessalonians 4:13-ff But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.
"For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
"For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.
"For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
"Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
"Wherefore comfort one another with these words. "

According to the preterists, this should say,
"For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
"Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air; then, whenever anyone who is righteous dies, they too shall be lifted: and so shall we ever be with the Lord."

But it does not say that. It says we are caught up 'then," "together," "with them." This is a double redundancy, a triplet of truth highlighting the truth of this.

The resurrection of the Church takes place at once, with the trump of God.

And say the final judgment indeed took place in 70 AD, and all Scripture prophesy was indeed fulfilled? If this is what is left?

Revelation 22:10-12: "And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.
"He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.
"And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be."

Here we have one of the few verses that supposedly "prove" the second coming took place in the day of the first generation Christians. First, if true, guess what? There would then be righteous dying biologically, because the righteous alive would righteous and holy would have been risen righteous and holy, and those left, the unjust and unrighteous, remain the same way.

But if so, it would simply prove there remains no more redemption, tghat we are forever in a righteous or unrighteous state.

In fact, none of this states what preterists claim, none of it fits the way they state it does.

They are scoffers, denying the literal truths, making up their own version of how these verses should be imterpretted to fit their doctrine.

Do they deserve answers as to what these things that to them mean "immediately" really connote, answers that fit in with the greater body of Scripture?

Well, a better question might be, don't we want to know the truth?

Look at the two phrases, "the time is at hand," and "behold, I come quickly."

Preterists claim both of these mean that after Revelation was written, Jesus had come when they believe he said he would, at the destruction of Jerusalem, but as we have read won't take place until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

But we already have seen that "at hand" means "nearby and readily available," not "soon." What about "quickly?"
"Quickly" is a word translated elsewhere in various forms as "soon" seven times, but as "quickly" most often. Is there a difference?
"Joe ran more quickly than Jason, and finished ahead of him, even though Jason began running sooner.

So tell me if there is a difference. Once again, as with "at hand," the emphasis and the urgency lies on how rapidly the day will come when it comes, rather than on how soon from at any point it will take place.

The disciples were urged to wait patiently, to not believe it when in the near future (to them) there arose those saying "Christ is here" or "there, for certain things of a noticeable and global were to occur. Everyone who told us to look for him also warned us to have patience, even Christ who warned, "heaven and earth will pass away, but not one of my words…"

In fact, preterism claims that the resurrection is past, along with the day of Christ, the Judgments spoken of in Revelation, all of it. We are in no-man's land that even preterists say a very few Scriptures can really be said top more than allude to. But Jesus warned of those claiming Jesus had returned to the secret chambers.

Peter, in one of the last possible opportunities to affect the Church, warned of scoffers that would doubt the literal second coming, who would reject the promise of a new heaven and earth as preterists have done.

The preterists rail against those who patiently wait for the second coming, but do Scriptures warn us against missing the second coming? No. Every one that gets into any detail describes it as a global event.

Rather, Jesus warned against those saying he had come before he had, and said that when it took place, it would be noticeable from the east to the west, which as we know, never really meet…a global event.

Are there any Scriptures which warn us of missing his return? Missing out on the blessings, being told he doesn't know us, yes. But not knowing it happened? No. But we've seen Jesus and Peter warning against preterist beliefs. Is there more?

1 Timothy 2:10-18: "Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory."

It is not enough that the elect obtain salvation; Paul says they should also have it with eternal glory.
"It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him:"

See? Tell me this does not pertain to the resurrection and to a Christian minister's place in it.
"If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us:
"If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.
"Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers.
"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

Set in the context of the faithful saying, of eternal glory, is the jewel that there is only one proper way Scripture is to be divided, and that is as the word of truth, understanding it for how God designed it to be understood.
"But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.
"And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
"Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some."

When it comes to understand our living in Christ, we are not warned against holding on to the hope after Christ's second coming. We are warned against the profane and vain babblings of such as Hymeneaeus and Phyletus. How did they err concerning the truth? They said the resurrection was past.

Ladies and gentlemen, when Christ gathers his Church and returns, it will be a global event. We will not miss it. We will rise in the air, we will then come back with him in the clouds.

It is not having hope in Christ's return that Paul and Peter and Jesus warned against. It was saying he had returned before he had.