What is preterism and why do they spend so much time attacking dispensationalism?
I have been meaning to put together something like this for some time. I’d never heard of the term preterism until I came across popular exponents of the system such as Gary DeMar and Kenneth Gentry. What is preterism? According to Dr Thomas Ice:
It is important to realize that there are three kinds of preterism that I have labeled as (1) mild; (2) moderate; and (3) extreme. Mild preterism holds that the Tribulation was fulfilled within the first three hundred years of Christianity as God judged two enemies: the Jews in A.D. 70 and Rome by A.D. 313; but adherents still look for a future Second Coming. Moderate preterism, which is the position of Dr. Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., sees the Tribulation and the bulk of Bible prophecy as fulfilled in events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in A.D. 70; but they still hold to a future Second Coming, a physical resurrection of the dead, an end to temporal history, and the establishing of the consummate new heaven and new earth. Extreme or consistent (as they like to call themselves) preterism believes that the Second Coming, and thus the resurrection of believers, is all past. For all practical purposes all Bible prophecy has been fulfilled, and we are beyond the millennium and even now in the new heaven and new earth. They believe that if there is an end of current history it is not recorded in the Bible. ~ The Great Tribulation: Past or Future? (See Jesus: a Preterist or a Futurist?)
A shorter definition of preterism from an official preterist website:
“Preterist” means past in fulfillment, and “Futurist” means future in fulfillment. Preterist basically means the opposite of Futurist. Futurists believe most end-time prophecies (especially the big three events — the Second Coming, Resurrection, and Judgment) are yet to be fulfilled. Preterists believe that most or all of Bible Prophecy (especially the big three events) has already been fulfilled in Christ and the on-going expansion of His Eternal Kingdom. Many Futurists do not really believe that Christ has been successful in fully establishing His Kingdom. They think it was indefinitely postponed when the Jews rejected and crucified Jesus. (Emphases mine)
If you visit their webpage, you’ll wade through some introductory polemics against Futurism. For example:
Is the End of the World near? Are we living in the Last Days? Is Christ’s return at hand? For 150 years here in America we have constantly been told that we are living on the threshold of the End of the World and Christ’s Return. Prediction after prediction has failed to materialize, and false hope after false hope has been foisted upon the Christian community.
Failed speculative predictions have no bearing on whether a system is flawed. People are flawed. Note amillennialist Harold Camping’s Second Advent proclamations. Do Camping’s misadventures disprove amillennialism? We remind preterists that Peter predicted scoffers in the last days (2 Peter 3:3-4).
Dispensationalists recognize both a spiritual and future physical aspect of God’s Kingdom. Interestingly, most preterists today are postmillennial. Postmillennialism teaches that the church will usher God’s Kingdom (earthly and spiritual) into this world. In the 1900 years of the church, can we say that either of these has been realized? More importantly, aside from the few proof texts, where does Scripture enthrone the church in a kingdom conquering role prior to Christ’s third (?) return?
One diversionary tactic often used by preterists is to identify where dispensationalists may inconsistently take a verse non-literally. Certainly, some passages are figurative. However, that shouldn’t give license to consistently reshape prophetic texts into more desirable theological models.
The dispensational approach to prophecy is to ascertain what God meant to convey. These passages (regardless of genre) communicate a comprehensible rather than esoteric message to its audience. God said He would send a flood, and He did – literally. God promised to send a redeemer and He did – literally. God made a multitude of face-value promises to national Israel (Jer 31:31-37; Amos 9:14-15 etc). The Old Testament is “literally” riddled with them. There isn’t sufficient reason to treat these differently to any other OT statements. We don’t need to change their content or the identity of the recipient (Israel to church), unless we’re defending a theology.
Prophetic texts don’t generally suit the preterist system. Hence people like Gary DeMar find ways to change the intent of passages like Zechariah 14:4. Preterists note instances where symbolism is obvious (e.g., Daniel’s lion with eagle’s wings), and offer them as reasons to allegorize passages where an allegorical interpretation isn’t necessary. You might say that DeMar indulges in his own “End Times Fiction.” (see link below)
The context of Zechariah 8 is Israel. What do we do with Zech 8:23? Has it ever been fulfilled? We might allegorize it by superimposing “church” onto “Jew.” What does allegorizing one verse do to the rest of the story in these chapters? Can we meanignfully change each verse in Zech 14, just because we don’t like v 4, without dishonoring the intent of the entire chapter? If these passages weren’t intended to really conjey what they say, couldn’t God have inspired them differently? Given that God is omniscient (Isaiah 46:10) and knew Israel would reject the Messiah, why would He have promised its future redemtion if it wasn’t going to happen as stated (Isaiah 51:22-23 etc)?
One of preterism’s proof texts is Matt 24:34. They cite atheist Bertrand Russell and C. S. Lewis’s negative comments on this verse. Matt 24:34 doesn’t need a preterist defense. There are a number of cogent Futurist responses to the alleged dilemma of unfulfilled prophecy. Preterism rejects these answers because they need the problem to exist. You can read just one response to the “this generation” issue HERE
They “defend” Scripture by asserting that these prophecies took place during the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. No one during that time noticed the “big three events” mentioned above. If Christ’s Second Coming occurred then, it was a “secret coming.” Nobody noticed (Acts 1:11?). There was no Resurrection. Regeneration occurred well before then. Even the “judgment” was limited to the city and Jews living around it.
Another preterist teaching is that the Great Tribulation (Matt 24:21-22) was fulfilled in 70 AD. How can one really say that this the worst event – so bad that unless it was stopped no flesh (Jewish or otherwise) would be saved? The Jews were dispersed well before 70 AD. How can the destruction of Jerusalem be the same as vv 21-22?
This is what Grant Osborne writes in The Hermeneutical Spiral:
We should not look for the meaning of “666” (Rev 13:18) in things like the credit-card system or names of individuals in our current time but rather in the context of the first century (see Mounce 1977:263-65). At the same time the purpose of esoteric symbols in apocalyptic is to turn readers from the actual event to its theological meaning. In other words, readers are expected to see the hand of God in the future but are not to know the exact sequence of events – that is, they are not given a description of what will actually happen. In short, we have no blueprint in Scripture for current events, but rather theological signs which tell us in general that God is going to draw history to a close. Symbols are literal in that they point to future events but not so literal that they tell us exactly how God is going to accomplish his purposes. (p 228)
While I admit Revelation isn’t an easy book, it was given for the benefit of simple folk like me (Rev 1:1). We may not understand all its points, and some eschatological details aren’t included. Popular non-academic writers like Lindsey or LaHaye are often ridiculed for their “literalness.” But are they closer to the Big Picture than someone who takes a long walk off the Canvas. For example, why re-interpret the Two Witnesses (obviously two men) into two institutions just because there’s a multi-headed dragon (obviously a symbolic aid)?
There are dangers in speculating about credit card systems and the Antichrist. However, the text is specific regarding where the mark is placed, its origin and reason. Whether it’s “666” or “616” one has to apply it to all eras after John wrote the book. Must we also allegorize the Eternal State from a first century perspective?
Did Nero fit the bill? What is the genre of Revelation – apocalyptic or prophetic?
Finally, preterists assume an early date for Revelation. A late date is problematic for first century allegorical speculations. Would they reset their 70 AD speculations if incontrovertible evidence came to light proving a late date?
Here’s a longish list of resources responding to preterism:
Ryan Habbena: Cracking the “Code” of Preterism
Phillip Johnson’s rebuttal to DeMar’s rebuttal of John MacArthur Controverting the Incontrovertible
Mark Hitchcock: Dissertation on the Domitianic Date of Revelation
Thomas Ice: Preterism and Zechariah 12-14
Thomas Ice: Has Bible Prophecy Already Been Fulfilled?
Andy Woods: Futurist Response to the Preterist Interpretation of Babylon in Revelation 17–18
H. Wayne House: An Evaluation of the Preterist View on Jerusalem in Prophecy
Always Be Ready: Preterism Examined & Refuted
Donald E. Green: A Critique of Preterism
From Middletown Bible Church:
Preterism Answered by the Scriptures
The Destruction of Jerusalem Contrasted to 70 AD
Consistent (as opposed to part-time) Literal Interpretation
Last and not least, I recommend Tony Garland’s: A Testimony Of Jesus Christ
I like the Expanded Contents
Addendum:
This article was first published in 2016. Since then Brock David Hollett, a former preterist, has written a book called Debunking Preterism: How Over-Realized Eschatology Misses the “Not Yet” of Bible Prophecy. Joel Richardson has interviewed Hollett on his YouTube channel. You may watch these interviews HERE, HERE and HERE.
Sharing is caring!
