Online Bible and Study Tools
Translate || Vine / Schaff || Alts/Vars/Criticism/Aramaic

 
 


End Times Chart


Introduction and Key

BOOKS:  BIBLICAL STUDIES (1500BC-AD70) / EARLY CHRISTIAN PRETERISM (AD50-1000) / FREE ONLINE BOOKS (AD1000-2008)



Church-State Relations and the Book of Revelation
An Introduction to The Parousia: A Careful Look at the New Testament Doctrine of the Lord's Second Coming
by James Stuart Russell (1878) // Written by
Todd Dennis, Curator
 


 

Critical Article
Critical Articles Main
Study Archive

Click For Site Updates Page

Free Online Books Page

Historical Preterism Main

Modern Preterism Main

Hyper Preterism Main

Preterist Idealism Main

Critical Article Archive Main

Church History's Preteristic Presupposition

Study Archive Main

Dispensationalist dEmEnTiA  Main

Josephus' Wars of the Jews Main

Online Study Bible Main

John Noe's Preterism Refuted

By Joey Faust
http://www.RefugeBaptist.org
From: KA Update #38 (10-30-99)

I have had many recent responses to my articles from furious Preterists. 

(Some have, however, been courteous and brotherly.) Full-Preterists believe that the "last days prophecies" have ALREADY been fulfilled in A.D.70, when Jerusalem was destroyed by Rome. I view this revival of Preterism as a fulfillment of premillennial prophecy itself. The Bible predicted "scoffers" in the last days, who would mock the fulfillment of Bible prophecy in regard to the second coming (2Pet.3:3). The current popularity of (Preterist) books by R.C. Sproul, and others, is now setting the stage for this prophecy in 2 Pet.3:3. I do find it amazing. We have Israel back again as a nation. (I know some Preterists continue to deny that they are "real" Jews. But ask a modern Muslim what he thinks about that.

All his animosity isn't for nothing!) We also have weather changes and increases in earthquakes. We have a revival of Rome uniting all religions. All we need is the "scoffers" to show up to a degree to justify the Holy Spirit mentioning it as a sign in the Bible. And now we have it. Just when the stage is almost perfectly in place for the Tribulation to begin (the time when one would least expect a revival of Preterism!), here it comes. The Bible is amazing.

One Preterist brother (Ron W.) was kind enough to mail me a book supporting his view. It is called, "Beyond The End Times" (1999) by John Noe. Since most of the objections I have received in regard to my articles are also found in this book, I will respond to this book and therefore answer those who have written me all at once. If I leave out an argument, or if there is need for further objections, I am of course willing to resume Biblical debate individually at the conclusion of this series of articles.

Noe's book contains 14 chapters (plus Appendixes). This week, I will answer the various arguments found in his first two chapters. (All sentences in quotations are from John Noe's book):

"Full Preterists believe the appointed time of the end came long ago." (p.1)

The whole problem with Preterists is their failure to grasp the Biblical teaching in regard to DOUBLE APPLICATION. Many Bible prophecies have historic, as well as future fulfillments. Thus, any argument in regard to past, partial fulfillments is beside the point. I have written a lengthy article that proves double application from the Scriptures. It also reveals how widespread the view has been throughout Christian history. I go further and show how the principle of double application can change how we view other prophecies in the Book of Daniel once the principle is properly and fully extended. (You can read this article on-line at: http://www.rkjbc.org/kalerts/kamail.htm )

What a premillennialist (armed with the Biblical principle of double application) calls only a "partial" fulfillment in history past, the Preterist calls a "full" and complete fulfillment. The premillennialist awaits the "full" fulfillment in the future. The Preterist sees nothing left for the future in the prophecy. But how does the Preterist account for the missing details that were not fulfilled in history past? He simply maintains that the details were never meant to be fulfilled LITERALLY. Thus, the Preterist must take some details literally and others figuratively. The problem is that many of these details are in the SAME Bible verse. For example notice Luke 21:25:

Lu 21:25 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;

The Preterist would take "distress of nations" literally; but he must take "signs in the sun" figuratively. Examples such as this abound. But more on this later.

"Farmers have learned to count on the future. Not so for masses of people in our world today. They have been programmed, by church people and nonchurch people alike, not to count on the future. Chalk it up to 'millennial madness'..." (p.3)

This is a straw man. The argument would hold some weight if premillennialists were found teaching that very soon all humanity will be destroyed and the Earth will evaporate and everything will fade away into nothingness. Yet, this is NOT what premillennialists teach. We teach that Christians will be resurrected; and many people will enter Christ's glorious, future Kingdom ON EARTH to reign for 1000 years. Does this therefore teach that Christians should not "count on the future"? No! In fact, it gives us confidence of a future. The future does not depend on man. The future is in God's hands and it is on His timetable. If man blows up the world, God will restore it and usher in His Kingdom.

"Televangelist Pat Robertson, during a week-long fundraiser on CBN's The 700 Club...pleaded with viewers...'We are possibly talking about the final age of humankind, right now. Let's work together while we have a chance. Please call and make a pledge." (p.7)

Excitement about Bible prophecy has stirred the godly motives and actions of Christians for 2000 years. Oswald J. Smith, in his early days, is said to have raised more money for missions than anyone in history. Even Noe calls him, "one of the leading missionary statesmen of his day." (p.27) Smith was influenced by great premillennialists such as D.M. Panton, who taught that Christians need to be ready if they will reign with Christ when He comes. Therefore, compelling Christians to give and live holy by stirring them to look at what the Bible teaches about the end times can accomplish much.

It is proper and Biblical. On the other hand, I would not compare Oswald J. Smith in his early days to Pat Robertson. One must be careful of Christian leaders. One must demand financial statements, and make sure one's money is going to a worthy cause that Christ would approve of. The fact that many use Bible prophecy as a gimmick to make money does not mean that Bible prophecy itself is at fault. That is the modern "gun control" argument (i.e., "take away the guns and criminals will not kill.") No, it would not be wise to reject end time Bible prophecy, simply because some people use it in an evil manner. End time Bible prophecy is the very thing that predicts and warns us that people will use the Scriptures to "make merchandise" (2Pet.2:3, 2Tim.3:1,6,13).

"If the 'end of the world' was an established fact, it would be tragic for most if not all people alive at the time. But, as we shall see in this book, it's not the truth...the message that there really is no future, at least here on this earth, is the one being presented by many influential groups and people." (pp.14, 23)

Often, Noe defines the "end of the world" in a way that no Biblical premillennialist would ever define it. Again, this creates a straw man. Premillennialists, by definition, believe that Christ is soon coming to THIS EARTH to set up His wonderful Kingdom and reign:

Re 5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

Mt 5:5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.

Mt 6:10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.

Therefore, the "world", as it refers to this physical earth, will be restored and regenerated from a state of calamity and tribulation (like never before in history) at the Second Coming. It will not therefore end in the sense of "never existing anymore". The word "world", in English, often means:

"Any state or sphere of existence; any wide scene of life or action; as, the world to come." (Webster's New Twentieth Century Dictionary, 1956)

Therefore, Biblical premillennialists believe that this world (i.e. age, state of things) will end; yet only in the sense that it will pass into the "world to come", which is a better "time":

Mr 10:30 But he shall receive an hundredfold now in THIS TIME, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the WORLD TO COME eternal life.

Thus, premillennialists see a better "time" coming on a renewed, and better earth (which is simply this same earth with the curse restrained). Biblical premillennilaists should not therefore be lumped together with doom and gloom environmentalists, "The Celestine Prophecy", Nostradamus or any other devil-inspired writer without the true, Biblical hope.

"...as quoted in 'The Last Times', by Joseph A. Seiss..." (p.26)

Noe gives a small list of Christian writers that he quotes out of 'The Last Times" by Seiss. "The Last Times" is one of the greatest premillennial works ever written. It alone refutes Noe's whole book. It is ironic that Noe gleaned most of his quotes from Christian leaders (who thought the world was soon the end) from Seiss's book. Noe's implied point is that "there is a lesson to be learned here". (p.24) Yet, Joseph Seiss (one of the most influential premillennial writers of all time) did not believe the world would end in his day. He was watching and ready; nevertheless, he wrote:

"In what year of the world's age we are living, it is not possible at this day accurately to ascertain. According to the common reckoning, it will yet be about one hundred and thirty-five years to the end of the six thousand."

He preached those words in 1865. Seiss and many other popular premillennialists suggested the year 2000 (or thereabouts) for the end of this age. This certainly does away with the implied argument that "all prophecy writers thought the world would end in their day". Some of the most influential and well-known premillennialists looked onward to our day (though they were watching and ready in their own day).

I have shown in many articles that the world will not end in the year 2000. The pre-trib, first-fruits rapture may happen. It might happen today! Yet, the world will not end in 2000. I certainly believe the Tribulation Period is very near.

"The cumulative effect of end-of-the-world beliefs...creates an 'abandon-the-farm' attitude and takes the significance out of human action." (p.31).

This might be true in regard to unsaved "gloom and doomers", but this is certainly not true in regard to premillennial CHRISTIANS throughout history! Think of the premillennialism of men such as the Wesleys (I know Charles Wesley was premillennial; for one, I possess his Joseph Mede commentary with his writing in it), John Fletcher, A.N. Groves, R.C. Chapman, John Wilkinson, Hudson Taylor, Horatius & Andrew Bonar, Oswald J. Smith, Spurgeon, Cumming, George Mueller, Duff, McCheyne, Phoebe Palmer, Moody, Talmage, Duffield, Toplady, Thomas Chalmers, etc. etc. This is to simply name a FEW popular leaders (out of multitudes) who were well-known for evangelism, missionary zeal, holiness and preaching. I chose these premillennialists because they put an end to the argument that "premillennial thought" causes a stagnation in holiness or zeal! There are hundreds of other holy men and women that could be listed to disprove that argument.

"In reality, this fear approach has had more of an opposite effect, fostering complacency, ineptness, and laziness...Another pastor commented, 'Any religion that uses fear is questionable. Fear is the devil's tool...Prior to the 20th century, the Church as culturally relevant, involved, and positive. Not so anymore."

The above statements are amazing in light of the fact that the majority of Christians who were accomplishing anything in earlier ages were premillennialists who were looking for the Second Coming of Christ and FEARING God! It is not the prevalence of premillennialism that has caused complacency; it is the lack of the fear of God in the lives of Christians. Show me a holy Christian in past ages who "accomplished something" and I will show you in his writings where he FEARED God. The problem with the last days is a lack of fear. And, when premillennialsm is denied, the whole foundation for Christian responsibility and accountability is undercut:

Jude 1:12 These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves WITHOUT FEAR: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;

Ro 3:17 And the way of peace have they not known: 18 There is NO FEAR OF GOD before their eyes.

A Christian should not fear losing his or her salvation. Yet, there is still MUCH to fear. Noe blames Hal Lindsey's premillennialism for a moral decline in the 20th century. (pp.38,39) Yet, it is not premillennialism that caused the decline. The differences between Hal Lindsey's brand of premillennialism and earlier brands, is that earlier premillennialists taught the FEAR OF GOD. They viewed either the rapture, the Millennial Kingdom (or both) as rewards for holy living (e.g. Pember, Govett, Seiss, J.R. Graves, I. Haldeman, Roadhouse, Oswald J. Smith, Hudson Taylor, R.C. Chapman, A.N. Groves, G.N.H. Peters, D.M. Panton, John Wilkinson, Samuel Wilkinson, Watchman Nee, J. Penn-Lewis, etc. etc.) Thus, these earlier saints "moved with fear". They got so many people saved that people still look at their days as "the good old days".

This revival of Preterism will only stifle what little life is left among Christians. It will take away the only thing that is making many pay attention. Preterism will immerse multitudes into the world. The result will be doctrinal compromise for the purpose of social change (see the news article about the Vatican at the start of this Update.)

Part Two

JOHN NOE'S PRETERISM REFUTED (Pt.02)

A Brief Glossary of Terms:
*Millennial Kingdom: The future 1000 year reign of Christ on earth.

*Premillennialism: The belief that Jesus returns to earth BEFORE the Millennial Kingdom arrives.

*Preterism: The belief that most of the prophecies in the Bible have already been fulfilled in the past (usually in 70 A.D.).

Noe's book, "Beyond The End Times" (1999) contains 14 chapters (plus Appendixes). This week, I will answer the various arguments found in chapter 3:

Noe: "Why the World Will Never Ever End" (p.41)

Noe gives the above phrase as the title of his third chapter. He appears throughout this chapter to, again, define the word "world" as "planet Earth," or the "entire human race." This is significant since practically none of the Premillennialists his book is written to oppose believe that planet Earth or the entire human race will end! We do believe that this age will end. We believe there will be a Tribulation Period which will usher in the Millennial Kingdom. During the Millennial Age, Christ will reign on
EARTH. It will be regenerated and glorious. After the Millennial Age, Satan will be released for a short period; then will come the final New Earth of Eternity (Rev.21:1). New Jerusalem will come down out of Heaven, to earth, as the capital city (Rev.21:10), and all of redeemed humanity will dwell with God forever.

Noe: "Many Bible teachers qualify the end by telling us that the world and human history will certainly end in its present form or as we know it. What do these qualifying phrases mean? They don't know. Nobody knows...The fact is, the world is always changing or coming to an end in its present form." (p.42)

Of course Bible teachers "qualify the end"! We are commanded in Scripture to rightly "divide" the Word (2 Tim.2:15). Noe is wrong when he says that no one knows what these qualifying phrases mean. The qualifying phrase, "in its present form" means that in this present age, Christ is not BODILY present. Yet, He will return:

Acts 1:11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

Secondly, in this present time, God's will is NOT being carried out exactly as it is in Heaven. Yet, it will be when His Kingdom arrives at the end of this world:

Matthew 6:10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.

Thirdly, the curse on nature is not presently restrained as it will one day be at Christ's Second Coming:

Romans 8:19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.

Isaiah 11:6 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.

There are many other differences that could be cited. What does Noe mean when he claims that nobody knows what the qualifying phrases mean? The fact that there are certain changes already in the world has nothing at all to do with the significant, Biblical changes mentioned above.

Noe: "What does the Bible say about the world ending as we know it or in its present form? Again, nothing! What did Jesus say about it? Nothing!"(p.42)

To the contrary, Jesus said much about the "end of the world"! And in the context of His words, we see that He did not define "world" as "planet earth" or "the entire human race." For example:

Matthew 13:39 The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the END OF THE WORLD; and the reapers are the angels.
41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Matthew 24:3 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?
6 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 .
14 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.
27 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.

This present world will end. It is not therefore, the "world to come" of the Millennium:

Luke 18:30 Who shall not receive manifold more in THIS PRESENT TIME, and in the WORLD TO COME life everlasting.

Luke 20:34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of THIS WORLD marry, and are given in marriage:
35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain THAT WORLD, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:

Jesus therefore, clearly reveals that the present world will end.

Noe: "Moreover, relying on who says what will not settle this matter. Only specific statements from Scripture will do...And the fact is that there is no clear statement that teaches the end of the world, and end of time, or an end of human history. None!" (p.43)

In a footnote, Noe carefully backtracks a bit. He confesses that the KJV uses the word "world" in Mt.13. Yet, Noe likes the word "age" (at least in the Gospels). What are we therefore to conclude? Simply that Noe cannot give up his straw man every time he goes to form his argument. Notice how he uses the qualifiers "end of time" and "end of human history." What does the first phrase "the end of the world" refer to? We showed last week that a good English dictionary will reveal that the word "world" in ENGLISH can
mean "age" or "state of existence." It is defined this way in the context of such verses as Luke 18:30. The word "world" gives us the full idea of "age," as well as the state of the earth. Since the "state" of man's
existence will be changed significantly in the Millennial Kingdom, it is called a new "world." The Scriptures I already listed offer plain, "clear statements" concerning the end of this world. They are indeed qualified by other Scriptures (as well as by the context in which they are found), but they are not pulverized or distorted into figurative absurdity. The clear statements ARE in the Bible. The Preterist simply denies them.

Noe: "Likewise, not one iota of evidence exists that 1st-century Jews, the early Christians, or any New Testament writer...anticipated an end to the human race or the demise of planet Earth." (p.43)

Did you see how he smoothly left out "end of the world" this time? Again, Premillennialists do not believe that the planet or the entire human race will evaporate. But Preterists must pretend we do to form their arguments. This type of argumentation continues throughout Noe's chapter and book.

Noe: "The Bible says that the world had a beginning, but is without end...Ephesians 3:9,21 KJV...It means exactly what it says: The world (or age) is not going to end!...The world and the present new-covenant age simply do not have an end." (pp.43,44)

Noe appears to suddenly like the KJV. Eph.3:21 (the verse he quotes) reads:

Ephesians 3:21 Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.

This verse mentions multiple "ages." And what would Noe do with the following verse from Ephesians?:

Ephesians 1:21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in THIS WORLD, but also in THAT which is to come:

Ephesians 1:21 shows that "this" world will indeed end. Noe is therefore refuted by the very Epistle he has sought to argue from. But what about Ephesians 3:21? How can the world end (Eph.1:21, etc.) and yet NOT end? First, there WILL be a final world (i.e. sphere of existence, age) in the future that will not end (Rev.21) . Secondly, planet Earth itself will not end in an absolute and final sense.

Ephesians 3:21 simply reveals that once "this" world (as well as the "Millennial" world) ends, there will be a final world that will last for all eternity. It is the New Earth of Revelation 21. Throughout all of this final eternity, Christ Jesus will be glorified.

Furthermore, the Bible teaches that something can "perish" is one sense, but not necessarily perish in another final, absolute sense:

Luke 21:16 And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death.
18 But there shall not an hair of your head perish.

Here we see that there can be death without "perishing". How can this be? It is simple. When someone or something resurrects and is renewed or regenerated, whatever destruction, death or "end" it has previously undergone is thereby disqualified. This is how planet Earth abides forever (in an absolute sense), yet will also "pass away", as it will be recreated in different forms, (e.g. first the Millennial Earth; then the final Earth of Eternity). The world (defined as the planet) will indeed come to an end in a relative sense (2Pet.3:12,13); but it will never end in a final sense. It will be resurrected and renewed (Rev.21:1, Isa.66:22).

Therefore, the phrase "world without end" (Eph.3:21) proves nothing, whether the word "world" is defined as "age" or "planet." There WILL be a final age that does not end; and the physical planet itself never passes away "absolutely," since it will be recreated again. But this present form of the Earth, as well as this present age of man's rebellion, will pass away when Christ brings in His Millennial Kingdom. Thus, in these senses (and in these senses only) the Bible does teach a future end of the world.

Noe: "The popular stream of endsayers has assumed that the Bible's apocalyptic language must be interpreted literally and physically...The problem with this line of thought is that no biblical grounds exist for this assumption...It ignores the biblical precedent and pattern of fulfillment." (p.51)

Let us deal with the first argument in the above quote. To start with, Preterists are themselves assuming that what they call "apocalyptic language" will NOT be fulfilled literally and physically. God's Word scolds those who "assume" He is just speaking in parabolic or figurative
language:

Ezekiel 20:47 And say to the forest of the south, Hear the word of the LORD; Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will kindle a fire in thee, and it shall devour every green tree in thee, and every dry tree: the flaming flame shall not be quenched, and all faces from the south to the north shall be burned therein.
48 And all flesh shall see that I the LORD have kindled it: it shall not be quenched.
49 Then said I, Ah Lord GOD! they say of me, Doth he not speak parables?

Furthermore, there IS Biblical ground for interpreting God's warnings literally and physically. For one example among many which could be given, notice the following language:

Psalms 105:27 They shewed his SIGNS among them, and wonders in the land of Ham.
28 He sent darkness, and made it DARK; and they rebelled not against his word.
29 He turned their waters into BLOOD, and slew their fish.
30 Their land brought forth FROGS in abundance, in the chambers of their kings.
31 He spake, and there came divers sorts of FLIES, and LICE in all their coasts.
32 He gave them HAIL for rain, and FLAMING FIRE in their land.
33 He smote their vines also and their fig trees; and brake the trees of their coasts.
34 He spake, and the LOCUSTS came, and caterpillers, and that without number,
35 And did eat up all the herbs in their land, and devoured the fruit of their ground.
36 He smote also all the firstborn in their land, the chief of all their strength.
39 He spread a CLOUD for a covering; and FIRE to give light in the night.
40 The people asked, and he brought QUAILS, and satisfied them with the BREAD of heaven.
41 He opened the rock, and the WATERS gushed out; they ran in the dry places like a river.

This language, found in the Psalms, would be immediately interpreted by the Preterists as "figurative" (if it was prophecy). Yet, the Biblical history itself refutes such an interpretation. Preterists are therefore forced by history to read these judgments as literal and physical.

God warned Pharaoh beforehand. Stubborn Pharaoh soon learned to interpret God's warnings literally and physically:

Exodus 7:3 And I will harden Pharaoh's heart, and multiply my SIGNS and my wonders in the land of Egypt.
17 Thus saith the LORD, In this thou shalt know that I am the LORD: behold, I will smite with the rod that is in mine hand upon the WATERS which are in the river, and they shall be turned to BLOOD.
18 And the fish that is in the river shall die, and the river shall stink; and the Egyptians shall lothe to drink of the water of the river.
20 And Moses and Aaron did so, as the LORD commanded; and he lifted up the rod, and smote the waters that were in the river, in the sight of Pharaoh, and in the sight of his servants; and all the waters that were in the river were turned to blood.

We know the rest of the history. God kept warning Pharaoh about the future, and Pharaoh kept refusing to believe God. Each warning was fulfilled to the letter, physically and literally. The final, future Antichrist will receive the same treatment that Pharaoh received. It will be literal and physical (only worse!). Therefore, we DO have a Biblical precedent for assuming that God's (so-called) "apocalyptic language" will be fulfilled literally and physically.

Noe goes on to list certain OT passages that contain "apocalyptic language." For example, he quotes Isaiah 13:

Isaiah 13:10 For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.

He then states, "The prophet was not speaking of the end of the world, the final judgment, or a solar or lunar eclipse. He was giving a figurative prediction of the literal destruction of Babylon by the Medes in 539 B.C." (p.52) The problem here is that Noe assumes that the prophecy is ONLY
dealing with history past. He appears to be totally unaware of the fact that prophecy can have more than ONE application or fulfillment. Whatever details (e.g. the sun being darkened, etc.) are not fulfilled in history,
will be fulfilled the second time around, in the future.

Jesus clearly taught this very principle. There is a prophecy in Malachi that predicts that Elijah will be sent again to Israel:

Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:

This prophecy was indeed figuratively fulfilled in John the Baptist:

Matthew 17:10 And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elias must first come?
11 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
12 But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them.
13 Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

Notice, that although John was "a" partial, figurative fulfillment of Malachi in history, Jesus clearly stated (after John the Baptist was dead) that Elijah "truly shall first come" (Matthew 17:11). Thus, Jesus reveals that a prophecy can contain a literal, future fulfillment, as well as a partial, past, (and often figurative) fulfillment.

The Preterist's arguments are therefore refuted by Jesus Himself. 70 A.D. was only a partial, temporary fulfillment of Matthew 24, Luke 21 and Mark 13. The literal warnings (earthquakes, distress of nations, terrible cyclones, etc.) will come to pass as written, as surely, and as literally, as the plagues of Egypt came to pass. We see the foundation being laid in the world already (e.g. India, etc.). Such things as the modern restoration of the nation of Israel should smite the Preterist and buffet him into submission. Yet, such amazing preparations for the coming Tribulation Period are denied as stubbornly as Pharaoh himself denied every sign and warning given to him.

Dear Preterist! Repent now, that you may be accounted worthy to escape the very Tribulation judgments you refuse to admit will come to pass:

Revelation 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

Luke 21:36 Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

Do not scoff at the Lord's promises!

From: KA Update #39 Pt.2 (11-6-99)

JOHN NOE'S PRETERISM REFUTED (Pt.03)

A Brief Glossary of Terms:

*Millennial Kingdom: The future 1000 year reign of Christ on earth.

*Premillennialism: The belief that Jesus returns to earth BEFORE the Millennial Kingdom arrives.

*Preterism: The belief that most of the prophecies in the Bible have already been fulfilled in the past (usually in 70 A.D.).

Noe's book, "Beyond The End Times" (1999) contains 14 chapters (plus Appendixes). This week, I will answer the various arguments found in chapters 4-5:

Noe: "There is a Latin saying worth noting... 'Nothing can destroy the world but God Himself,' and He has promised not to!" (p.65)

This is the conclusion of Noe's 4th chapter. He says this right after quoting in detail a scene from the movie "Jurassic Park." [A few pages later (p.68) he even quotes Voltaire in a favorable light.] "Jurassic Park" is filled with gore and savage butchery. It was designed by the world to satisfy a growing lust among movie-goers for high-tech blood and violence. Premillennialists maintain that Preterism easily leads to "worldliness." As they continually attempt to defend this "world" from the attacks of their opponents, they apparently grow quite fond of it! Preterists maintain that millennialism leads to apathy and laziness. I proved from history that it does not. I wonder if the Preterist can consistently prove that Preterism does not influence Christians to become "friends of the world"?:

James 4:4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

1 John 2:15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

I believe it can be proven that Preterism tempts Christians to ignore these Biblical commands concerning separation (see also 2 Cor.6).

Did God promise to never destroy the world? Again, this depends upon how one defines the word "world." God has certainly promised that He will one day destroy this planet, temporarily. He will then renew it for the Kingdom
Age. After the Millennium, He will again destroy the earth only to renew it once again in a final, absolute sense (Rev.21:1). Noe spends much time attempting to make a case from God's promise to Noah:

Genesis 9:11 And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.

Noe attempts to discredit the view that holds the phrase "by the waters of a flood" as a qualification. But how can it be taken any other way? Why would God even mention the flood in this promise if it is not a
qualification? Noe's argument against this is simply emotional in nature. He offers nothing more than his own opinion of what would be fair or unfair for God to promise. However, we have Scripture to reveal that God WILL once again bring world-wide calamity and destruction to this earth. Yet, it will not come by water. Next time, it will be by FIRE:

2 Peter 3:10 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.
11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12 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?
13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

Noe will later do his best to argue that the words "earth," "elements," "works" and "heat" in the above verses do not mean what you think they mean! He will do this after spending much time in Daniel 9 claiming that Bible words should not be manipulated. He tells us on page 76: "God doesn't play word games...". Such inconsistency has always been the weakness of the Preterist system. It starts out with an assumption; it then interprets each Bible passage, either literally or figuratively, depending upon which best suits this underlying assumption.

The same Epistle will once again refute the Preterist. Notice the words of the Holy Ghost:

2 Peter 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 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.
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 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.

The Bible here predicts the revival of Preterism in the last days. It then tells us in verse 6 that the old world perished. The very next verse then predicts the future (temporary) destruction of this earth. How then can the Preterist maintain that the "earth burning up" really means that the "elementary principles of Judaism" were to pass away?!? (p.246) It is the LITERAL creation that is referred to in verses 4-6! It should therefore be obvious to anyone (who does not have a prior assumption through which all Scripture must be strained) that the physical, literal creation is also meant in verse 7. God will purify the earth as He brings judgment upon it. This will take place right before the Millennium, and then once again, soon
after it (Rev.21:1). When God promised to bring judgment by water, it happened literally. What folly it is to conclude that when God later promises to bring a judgment by fire (and then reminds us of His earlier judgment by literal water, right in the same context!), He is only speaking "parabolically." I remind the Preterist, once again, that he is not in good company:

Ezekiel 20:47 And say to the forest of the south, Hear the word of the LORD; Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will kindle a fire in thee, and it shall devour every green tree in thee, and every dry tree: the flaming flame shall not be quenched, and all faces from the south to the north shall be burned therein.
48 And all flesh shall see that I the LORD have kindled it: it shall not be quenched.
49 Then said I, Ah Lord GOD! they say of me, Doth he not speak PARABLES?


From: KA Update #40 Pt.2 (11-13-99)

JOHN NOE'S PRETERISM REFUTED (Pt.04)

Note: I have been responding to a recent book by John Noe. He is a FULL Preterist. Preterists believe that the prophecies concerning such things as the Second Coming of Christ, the New Heaven and Earth, the New Jerusalem, etc. have ALREADY been fulfilled in A.D. 70. As incredible as it may seem, such ideas appear to be growing in popularity. I believe that this doctrine (or varying degrees of it) will abound after the year 2000, when the "scoffers" will come streaming out of the woodwork. Not all Preterists are as radical as Noe. There is much debate among Preterists in regard to which prophecies should be "stuck" back in A.D. 70.

Noe's book, "Beyond The End Times" (1999) contains 14 chapters (plus Appendixes). This week, I will answer the various arguments found in chapter 6:

Noe: "No question about it, the 1st-century followers of Christ lived in expectation of something big about to happen, very soon. For them it was the 'last hour.' But the last hour of what? Was the big event the proverbial end of the world? The end of time? Or, the conclusion of human
history? Obviously it was not. So it had to be something else." (p.72)

Again, the debate concerns the literal Second Coming of Christ to establish the Millennial Kingdom on this earth. Yet, Noe is hung up on such things as "the end of time". Perhaps he should have written two separate books, for he seems to have two different debates going. There is a big difference between a Premillennial Christian, and an unsaved "doom and gloomer" who simply expects a nuclear destruction of humanity. In this chapter, Noe refers to the alarming words found in such Bible verses as the following:

1 John 2:18 Little children, IT IS THE LAST TIME: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

1 Corinthians 7:29 But this I say, brethren, the TIME IS SHORT: it remaineth, that both they that have wives be as though they had none;

1 Peter 4:7 But THE END OF ALL THINGS IS AT HAND: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.

Preterists such as Noe believe that the Biblical writers were only predicting the events of A.D. 70 by these alarming words. Noe goes on to point out that many critics of the Bible use such verses to attempt to disprove the Bible's infallibility. He argues that the Preterist system
sufficiently answers these critics by stating that "the end" in sight had to do with the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the Jewish Temple system. However, I believe it is "throwing out the baby with the bath-water" when one has to do away with such crucial things as the Second Coming, the New Heaven and Earth, etc. just to "answer" a destructive critic! It seems that Noe would have us simply "decapitate" any prophecies that give him an intellectual headache. For this is what he does when he seeks to "spiritualize" the various events of the last days in order to make them "fit" in A.D. 70.

What is the answer to the verses he cites? Did the early apostles think that A.D. 70 would fulfill their various prophecies concerning the "last time"?

First of all, it has already been noted that Preterists do not understand the principle of double-application in regard to the Bible's prophecies. Even if the Preterist could prove that the NT writers had A.D. 70 "partially" in mind when they referred to the soon "end" of all things (as in the Olivet Discourse of Mt.24, etc.), it would not rule out a "complete" fulfillment of their words in the future, at Christ's literal Second Coming. Any proof or suggestion of a partial, past (even figurative) fulfillment does not, in any way, overthrow a literal, complete fulfillment in the future.

Nevertheless, I do not think it is necessary to see in the words of the NT writers (at least in regard to such verses as 1Pet.4:7, 1Cor.7:29, etc.) a double fulfillment. Their words may simply be understood in relation to perspective. The exact timing specified by such phrases as "at hand" depend upon the context of the time-frame.

When John the Baptist and Jesus Christ came, a new age began. (The new era did NOT begin in A.D. 70). 4000 years (from Adam) had already been fulfilled. In God's time, this meant that FOUR days had past:

2 Peter 3:8 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.

We are told that the Lord will bring in the Kingdom at His Second Coming and that it will last a thousand years (one "day"):

Revelation 20:6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall REIGN WITH HIM a THOUSAND YEARS.

Therefore, FOUR days were past when Christ came the first time. How long would it be until the Millennial Kingdom? The Bible appears to answer this question by calling the Millennial Kingdom the "seventh day" rest in Hebrews:

Hebrews 2:5 For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the WORLD TO COME, whereof WE SPEAK.

Hebrews 4:1 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into HIS REST, any of you should seem to come short of it.
4 For he spake in a certain place of the SEVENTH DAY on this wise, And God did REST the seventh day from all his works.
11 Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.

Hebrews 12:28 Wherefore we receiving a KINGDOM which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear:

Since the Millennial Kingdom is the "7th" day, it makes sense that the interval between Christ's first coming and His second, will be only TWO days (i.e. 2000 years). This gives 4 days before His first coming, and 2 days before His second coming. That would make the Millennium the 7th day. [The 2000 years might be calculated from the start of John the Baptist's ministry. It appears impossible to get the timing "exact."]

Putting all this together, we see that there were FOUR whole "days" (from God's perspective) from Adam to Christ. This means the LONGEST part of the period from Adam until the Millennial Kingdom had ALREADY PAST. All that was left was the SHORTEST part (from Christ's first coming until His second coming) when the Lord began His ministry.

Notice that Christ assures us that a new era began at His first coming:

Matthew 11:13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.

Luke 16:16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.

John, under the Holy Spirit's inspiration, announced that the LONGEST part of the period was past. From God's perspective, there were only two "days" left. A prophetic marker in time had been crossed. This called for urgency and alarm:

Matthew 3:1 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea,
2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is AT HAND.

The "Kingdom of heaven" is the Millennial Kingdom that the O.T. had promised that "Heaven" would one day set up on this earth (Dan.7). It was "preached" at the time of John. This means that EMPHASIS was placed upon it. Why? Because God's "week" was largely ended! The Kingdom is one of the most important subjects in Scripture:

Matthew 6:33 But seek ye FIRST the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

I believe that this is the answer to the urgency in the Biblical writers:

Philippiansp 4:5 Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is AT HAND.

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

Revelation 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the TIME IS AT HAND.

In what way was the Lord's coming (and His Kingdom) "at hand"? From the Holy Spirit's (i.e. God's) perspective, four "days" were already past. That left only two "days". God is "winking" no longer (Acts 17:30). It was time to get ready for the Kingdom.

Did the inspired writers know that from MAN'S PERSPECTIVE, the end was NOT at hand? There is some evidence that this is true. Christ gave specific signs for when the Kingdom would be "nigh at hand" from man's perspective:

Luke 21:31 So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.

The following verses also reveal that the inspired writers of the Bible were not limited to only one perspective in regard to time. They hint toward a longer period (from man's perspective, not God's) between Christ's first and second comings:

Matthew 25:19 After a LONG TIME the lord of those servants COMETH, and reckoneth with them.

Acts 20:29 For I know this, that AFTER MY DEPARTING shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.
30 Also of your own selves SHALL MEN ARISE, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the LATTER TIMES some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

John 21:18 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but WHEN THOU SHALT BE OLD, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.

2 Peter 1:14 Knowing that shortly I must put off this my tabernacle, even as our Lord Jesus Christ hath shewed me.
15 Moreover I will endeavour that ye may be able AFTER MY DECEASE to have these things always in remembrance.

2 Thessalonians 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

Christ Himself stated that even the last generation will have a period of time from the beginning of signs, until the final end:

Matthew 24:6 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.

Luke 21:9 But when ye shall hear of wars and commotions, be not terrified: for these things must FIRST come to pass; but the end is NOT BY AND BY.

The "end" is of course the final day of the Lord (and not the pre-trib rapture). Yet, it certainly shows that we cannot simply assign only one meaning or perspective to phrases such as "at hand." The end was already "at hand" 2000 years ago. Yet, from another perspective, it was not.

What would be the reason to even call attention to the fact that from GOD'S PERSPECTIVE the time was short, if from man's perspective, much time must still pass before Christ's coming? The answer is simple. The closer one is to the "end of all things," the more responsibility one has. The reason John and Jesus preached with urgency, "repent for the Kingdom of heaven is at hand" is because everyone living at that time was in more trouble than those in earlier generations! As the Kingdom draws near, the WARNINGS INCREASE. Sin is certainly sin; but light increases culpability:

Luke 11:31 The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with the men of this generation, and condemn them: for she came from the utmost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.

Luke 12:48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they
will ask the more.

Hebrews 10:25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and SO MUCH THE MORE, as ye see the day approaching.

1 Corinthians 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ENDS OF THE WORLD ARE COME.

The King certainly came to redeem mankind. But He also came Personally to announce that time was running out! God's time of patience was soon to end. The "week" was almost up. Unbelievers must get saved (the first step to inheriting the Kingdom), and believers must continue in the things they have learned.

It doesn't matter in what age one lives, every Christian will stand (by resurrection or rapture) at the Judgment Seat of Christ to be judged (2Cor.5:9-11). The inspired apostles were constantly conscious of the fact that they were living in the last, and final age of history before Christ's Kingdom. They understood the great responsibility that this final age (which includes the Tribulation period) brought with it (Heb. 2:1-3, 2Pet.3:14).

I believe in a pretrib rapture and I believe that the rapture is now imminent. However, I believe Christians in the 1st-century were exhorted to pray, fear, and walk in holiness in light of the fact that they were presently IN the "last days" from a larger perspective:

Hebrews 1:2 Hath in these LAST DAYS spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

The "last days" mentioned above are different in perspective than the following "last days":

2 Timothy 3:1 This know also, that in the LAST DAYS perilous times shall come.

The prophecies concerning these FUTURE last days did not in any way lessen the need for 1st-century Christians to fear and hope in regard to the coming of Christ. They were living in a time that had more light than any other time in history. It would not matter if they died before the future "last days" have run their course. Resurrection brings the coming of Christ (and therefore the Judgment Seat) to EVERY Christian, no matter when he or she lived in relation to it. God does not misplace anyone in death (2Pet.2:9). It is the responsibility of every Christian, in every age, to watch unto holiness.

The evil servant is the one who uses this extra time for sin and sloth (Mt.24:28,29). It would not be proper for any Christian to automatically presume to know that he would not see the Lord's coming in his lifetime. Prophecy can at times be very complicated. No one has it ALL straightened out. Add to this the fact that the exact length of the Tribulation age is not given [the 3.5 year periods are never said to be the whole Tribulation age, but only significant portions of it.] This and many other factors should certainly keep any Christian watching for the rapture at any moment. Plus, as already noted, the Christian that decided to spiritually sleep (instead of watch in holiness) in A.D. 1500, will still be resurrected to shame at Christ's second coming. Therefore, watching in holiness and readiness is for all Christians, in all ages.

A full discussion of how imminency related to Christians in the 1st-century is beyond the scope of this article. I believe in a pre-trib rapture. However, I also believe that the best way to answer the Preterist is to show that phrases such as "at hand" do not mean "MAY or MIGHT be at hand." The Preterist claims A.D. 70 was "at hand". I claim that the Second Coming of Christ was "at hand" from GOD'S perspective. (Yet every man should live as if he knows the day is at hand from man's perspective! This is called
seeking the Kingdom of God first.)

Noe: "The popular method of interpreting qualifies or changes the meanings of these words to remove their imminency from the time period in which they were penned...They cannot be dragged out over thousands of years...Let's consider the possibility that they meant exactly what they said for that particular time..." (pp.72, 73).

Here Noe seeks to argue against looking at phrases such as "at hand" according to varying time frames. Yet, he does not argue at all. He gives no reason why we should not assume different time frames. I find it incredible that Noe suddenly desires to take words "exactly" for what they say. This is the very thing he has been telling us NOT to do for 6 chapters! To Noe, "heaven" does not mean heaven, and "earth" does not mean earth. In fact, Noe practically believes that nothing that has to do with Bible prophecy means what it "says."

I contend that "at hand" means "at hand." But the exact time meant by such phrases depends upon the context.

The Preterist runs into a problem in the Book of Revelation, since John is found still telling us the time is "at hand" (after A.D. 70):

Revelation 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is AT HAND.

The Preterist is forced to hold that the Book of Revelation was written before A.D. 70 (i.e. the Roman Catholic position). Yet, John is said to be banished for his Christian faith:

Revelation 1:9 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.

There is nothing in history that suggests Nero (54-68 AD) employed such means of persecution. However, there is record that Domitian (81-96) did. (Dio Cassius, B. 67, "Dom tilla"; see Lange's Commentary on the Book of Revelation). One doubts that Nero would have allowed simple "banishment" for John. Furthermore, Irenaeus states that the Book of Revelation was indeed written in the reign of Domitian.

Notice one last Bible passage. Phrases such as "at hand" are also scattered throughout the O.T. They confirm the point of this article:

Deuteronomy 32:20 And he said, I will hide my face from them, I will see what their END shall be: for they are a very froward generation, children in whom is no faith.
29 O that they were wise, that they understood this, that they would consider their LATTER END!
35 To me belongeth vengeance, and recompence; their foot shall slide in due time: for the day of their calamity is AT HAND, and the things that shall come upon them MAKE HASTE.

I wonder how the Preterist would interpret the "at hand" in the prophecy above?

From: KA Update #41p2 (11-20-99)

JOHN NOE'S PRETERISM REFUTED (Pt.05)

Noe's book, "Beyond The End Times" (1999) contains 14 chapters (plus Appendixes). This week, I will answer the various arguments found in chapters 6 - 8:

Noe: "Foundational to both Judaic and Christian thought in that century was the division of time between two consecutive periods - 'this present age,' and 'the age to come.' Back then, they were living in 'this present age,' the age of Moses, the Old Covenant age of the Temple system. 'The age to come' was being anticipated." (p.73)

The Preterist system is weak to the point of absurdity here. It believes the New Covenant age did not begin until after A.D. 70. It then defines this New Covenant age as "the world to come." Thus, one is forced to see
much of the NT as the O.T. law of Moses; then one must take all the promises in relation to the "world to come" and explain them away so they will fit in A.D. 70.

The Preterist is wrong. The New Covenant age had already technically ended when Christ began His ministry. Christ Himself said so:

Luke 16:16 The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.

In the O.T., Moses FIRST read the law of the Old Covenant, THEN he sealed it in blood:

Hebrews 9:19 For when Moses HAD SPOKEN every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,
20 Saying, This is the BLOOD of the TESTAMENT which God hath enjoined unto you.

Jesus Christ did the same thing in regard to the New Covenant. He FIRST spoke the New law (with its various changes), and THEN sealed it with HIS OWN BLOOD:

Hebrews 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

This is easily proven. The Mosaic law allowed divorce for any cause (De.24:1); but Jesus changed this precept:

Matthew 19:8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
9 And I SAY UNTO YOU, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Jesus later commands His disciples to preach His words to the GENTILES and then promises to be with them until the end of the world! Surely then, His words were not the law of Moses:

Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

The Preterist must logically teach that the New Covenant did not begin till after A.D. 70. Yet, this is erroneous, as the previous Scriptures reveal.

The Preterist also attempts to define the "world to come" as simply the New Covenant age. In other words, it began when the Law of Moses passes away. Yet, notice what Jesus states about the "world to come," and let every reader ask himself if these things can possibly refer to A.D. 70:

Luke 18:29 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake,
30 Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the WORLD TO COME life everlasting.

The "world to come" is the Millennium which will not come until Christ literally returns to resurrect His saints and judge them according to their deeds:

Luke 20:34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage:
35 But they which SHALL be accounted worthy to obtain THAT WORLD, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.

Full Preterists such as Noe would say that the above passage in Luke was fulfilled in A.D. 70! Thus, the "resurrection" is only figurative. Noe states: "Jesus reinforced this Jewish differentiation of time (Mt.12:32;
Lk.20:35)..." Notice he lists Luke 20 as a reference.

In order to save the Christian from all of those terrible "double applications" and other (so-called) "gimmicks," the Preterist simply explains away the New Heaven and the New Earth and the resurrection from the dead! What a fix! Paul had much to say about such an interpretation:

2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.
17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the RESURRECTION IS PAST ALREADY and overthrow the faith of some.

Paul appears to say that Preterism will continue to spread in popularity and will lead to much sin as it turns people to this world.

Noe: "Again, the determination was done during the 70 weeks, but their fulfillments were not a chronological part of the 70 weeks' time frame." (p.95)

Noe continues in chapter 6 and 7 with his interpretation of Daniel's 70 weeks. In order to explain the extra 40 years or so between the Cross and A.D. 70, Noe tries to say the events were "determined" within the 70 weeks, but do not all come to pass within the 70.

Noe: "God is not ambiguous, He doesn't play word games with any of His Word, and certainly not with his time statements." (p.100)

Noe, of course, writes this after presenting his ambiguous "determined" theory, explaining away the "world to come," the resurrection of the dead, and anything else a believer may be looking forward to!

Noe: "Daniel records that during - not after - the time of the fourth beast/kingdom (the old Roman Empire) one like the Son of Man (the Messiah) was to come on the clouds and establish his everlasting kingdom." (p.101)

(My latest newsletter reveals how these prophecies in Daniel have a double application.)

The Kingdom did come "partially" when the King walked the earth in the days of the 4th kingdom:

Luke 11:20 But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you.

(The Preterist even has a problem here, since he must place the kingdom 40 years later.) However, Daniel's prophecies will also come to pass exactly as written in the future Tribulation period. The Messiah will come again, and this time He will fulfill the Kingdom prophecies in all their fullness. Yet, Noe's system would call such a "double application" a gimmick. Yet, for his system to even come close to making any sense, Noe must teach that the prophecies concerning the coming of the Son of Man in the clouds have absolutely NOTHING to do with any literal coming of the Messiah! He does this, right after telling us that God does not play word games. He tell us this right after he has explained in detail how the Messiah LITERALLY fulfilled the O.T. prophecies in regard to His FIRST coming. Why then should we not expect the Messiah to fulfill the prophecies literally in regard to His SECOND coming? I'll take the Biblical principle of "double application" over the Preterist's "word games" any day!

From: KA Update #42p2 (11-29-99)

JOHN NOE'S PRETERISM REFUTED (Pt.06)

Noe's book, "Beyond The End Times" (1999) contains 14 chapters (plus Appendixes). This week, I will answer the various arguments found in chapter 9:

Noe: "His disciples asked, 'When will this happen? (Mt.24:3) and He answered, 'I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened' (Mt.24:34). Not only was something significant about to happen, it was to happen in their
lifetime...Today, millions of Bible readers and scholars continue to be baffled and confused by Jesus' allegedly cryptic words and His emphasis that those who were there with Him at the time would witness 'all' these climactic end-time events." (pp.11, 113)

We have now arrived at the only spot where the Preterists appear to even have an argument. When Preterists claim that all of the prophetic descriptions having to do with nature and the Second Coming of Christ have nothing at all to do with nature or the Second Coming, the majority of
Christians stand amazed that people could really believe such things! However, no error is without "some" type of apparent "proof-texts." To win converts to their erroneous view, the Preterists simply point to these few Scriptures and then recklessly run with the ball. Notice the following passage:

Matthew 24:1 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple.
2 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.
29 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:
30 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.
34 Verily I say unto you, THIS GENERATION shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

The Preterist reminds us that the Jewish Temple was destroyed in A.D. 70, before the generation that Jesus was speaking to fully passed away. Since verse 34 refers to "all these things," the Preterist maintains that the events of verses 29 and 30 (etc.) were also fulfilled in A.D. 70. To make these things "fit," the Preterist must pretend that the judgments upon creation, and the references to Christ's Second Coming, are all just examples of figurative, prophetic language. People who are afraid that such prophesied events might mess up their earthly plans find much consolation in sweeping them all under the 1st century "rug" by means of the Preterist system. Spurgeon once put it well:

"No preaching will of itself avail to make ungodly men expect the coming of Christ, however clear, bold, consistent, and long continued it may be. The world is mad upon its idols; its ears are too dull to hear the truth."

What do we say to the Preterist when he points to Christ's prophecy in Mt.24:34? Did not Christ plainly say that the generation He was speaking to would not pass away until everything He had prophesied came to pass? Doesn't this mean that all of the events spoken of in Mt.24 must have been fulfilled before or in A.D. 70? No, this cannot be. The Preterist must pervert the Bible and its clear language in order to logically maintain this view. Let us therefore note some better interpretations, some weak, some strong, but ALL better than the Preterist idea!

Many Christians throughout history have tried to understand what Jesus meant by "this generation" in Mt.24. Some have maintained that it refers to Israel, without a reference to time. They would see in the passage a prophecy that the Jews would be preserved as a people until the second coming of Christ. Joseph Mede, Joseph Seiss, Auberlen, Stier, etc. were of this opinion. The word "generation" is indeed sometimes used in this manner. However, it does not seem to fit the general context of Mt.24.

Others (Luther, Brookes, D.T. Taylor, Oosterzee, etc.) have instead taught that the second part of the verse means "begin to be fulfilled":

Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. [i.e. that is, "begin" to be fulfilled].

These teachers would say that the generation present at the time Christ was speaking "began" to see the fulfillments, but that much still remains for later generations. I must also reject this view because it alters the words of the Bible.

There are some additional ways to understand Mt.24:34 which seem to me far more plausible. One popular view is to interpret the "this" to mean the generation which is to see the particular events Christ is describing. Hal Lindsey claimed that "this generation" began in 1948 when Israel was restored. (If I was to hold this view, I would see the whole prophecy in Mt.24 as a description of the "tribulation" age since Christ said that it was possible to escape "all" the things He was predicting - LK.21:36.) This view is far more reasonable than the previous views.

It is indeed a stretch to make "this" mean "that." There is therefore a better view. The principle of double application makes this stretch unnecessary. Christ would indeed be referring to the destruction of the very temple they were looking at. He would indeed mean that that very
generation would see such destruction. Yet, He would ALSO be referring to a rebuilt temple that would later be destroyed almost the same way! The Bible is filled with such double prophecies. When the Jews were taken captive
into all nations in A.D. 70, it was only a partial type of the later nation of Israel that would be taken captive during the future Trib age when another temple will be rebuilt (perhaps more than once) and destroyed again. The fact that Israel is now a nation again, means that the stage is being set to begin Mt.24 again; this time with ALL the prophesied details fulfilled literally! Double prophecies read as if they are only one event. Thus, "this generation" would refer to both the former and the latter
fulfillments. With the principle of double application (seen all throughout Scripture), the Scriptures can be left alone in their plain, contextual meanings without alteration.

Although I hold the double application view, there is also one final possibility that should be mentioned. Perhaps it is true along with the double application view. It is possible that many in the very generation that Christ was speaking to could rise again. Although this is hard to believe, I would take this view over the Preterist scheme any day. We already know that Moses and Elijah will come back in the flesh in that same future Trib age to die again (Rev.11). And many plain, physical resurrections (not unto glory) are seen throughout the Bible (Mt.27:53, Acts 9:40, etc.). Jesus warned of the future Trib, yet He also revealed that it was possible to miss it by good behavior:

Luke 21:36 Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

To our day, this "escape" is by a pre-trib rapture (like Enoch's translation). However, the generation of the disciples would "escape" by being accounted worthy not to have to be resurrected into the Trib like the rest of that evil generation (Rev.22:18). Notice some other Scriptures that would seem to harmonize with this view:

Matthew 26:63 But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.
64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I SAY UNTO YOU, Hereafter shall YE SEE THE SON OF MAN sitting on the right hand of power, and COMING in the clouds of heaven.

Revelation 1:7 Behold, he COMETH with clouds; and every eye shall SEE HIM, and THEY ALSO WHICH PIERCED HIM: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

But isn't it appointed for man "once to die"? Indeed that is the common arrangement. However, Lazarus, Tabitha, Moses, Elijah, etc. are exceptions to this common set up.

But did not Christ say that the generation would not "pass away"? If some would rise again, would not their first physical death constitute a "passing away"? Not necessarily. Christ often speaks with future
resurrections in mind:

Luke 21:16 And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death.
18 But there shall not an hair of your head perish.

Christ said they would die in verse 16. Yet, He said they would not lose a hair! In the same way, the EVIL generation would not "pass away" (i.e. perish) until all the events Christ predicted came to pass. Thus, they will be resurrected again to experience the worst judgments ever to try the world. The disciples were to pray to escape these plagues:

Revelation 3:10 Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.

There are many other Scriptures that harmonize with this "resurrection" idea. However, it also leaves many unanswered questions. I have not developed it. I simply throw it out as a possible interpretation of the
words in Matthew 24. If the Preterist wants it "literal and plain," then there you have it. Of course the Preterist only likes it "literal and plain" as long as it suits his view. Earthquakes, clouds, resurrections, etc. must all be interpreted as "figurative language" when he can't make them fit.

Regardless of what basis the above view has in truth, the double application view is the strongest answer to the Preterist. Matthew 24 is plainly a double application, just like Mal.4:5, Acts 2:16, etc. Although we may not have all the answers for every verse, and although there sometimes appear to be more than one option available for us, we do have enough light to know that the Preterist is wrong when he tries to tell us that Jesus has ALREADY come the second time! Let the Christian choose whichever view he thinks makes the most sense. But let us unite in raising our voices in protest against PRETERISM!:

2 Timothy 2:18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.

From: KA Update #44p.2 (12-11-99)

JOHN NOE'S PRETERISM REFUTED (Pt.07)

Noe's book, "Beyond The End Times" (1999) contains 14 chapters (plus Appendixes). This week, I will answer the various arguments found in chapter 10:

Noe: "Every New Testament reference to the 'last days'...without exception, they literally refer to that 1st-century time frame in which these writers were living...Hebrews 1:1-2 clearly affixes Jesus' earthly ministry to the period termed the 'last days'..." (p.131)

Noe fails to comment on one problem with this view. In Hebrews, Paul says that the last days have been since the ministry of Jesus:

Hebrews 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath IN THESE LAST DAYS spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

Yet, he always spoke of ANOTHER "last days" that is based upon another perspective:

2 Timothy 3:1 This know also, that in the LAST DAYS perilous times shall come.

Obviously, this whole New Testament age is referred to as the "last days." Yet, there will be some "last days" of these "last days." This is simple. When Christ came, 4000 years had ended. He ushered in a new age called the "last days." This last (2000 years period?) is the last age before the Millennial Kingdom. In the days of the Apostles, they were in the "early days" of the last age. We are now in the "last days" of this last age:

Matthew 11:13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.

1 Corinthians 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

A "day" with the Lord is as a thousand years (2Pet.3:8). Christ came at the start of the last and final "days" of history before the Millennium. Yet, there is no way one can say that the "last days" of 2Tim.3, etc. have only to do with A.D. 70. We can see in our day the fulfillment of these prophecies concerning the last days. The more Preterists publish and preach their views, the more they prove that we are now in the last days of the last days (before the Tribulation period):

2 Peter 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the LAST DAYS scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 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.

Noe spends a lot of time in this chapter quoting Josephus, Eusebius, etc. in an attempt to show that prophecy was "fulfilled" in the 1st-century. Yet, as we have shown, partial, secondary fulfillments do not overthrow final, literal, complete fulfillments in the future. The Bible itself, in the manner in which it interprets O.T. prophecy, reveals to us how to interpret other prophecies. Double-application dismantles Preterism.

Noe: "But Babylon is a sign and a symbol in a book filled with signs and symbols. It points to the 1st-century city of Jerusalem. How do we know this is a correct interpretation?...compare the 'O great city' of Revelation 18:10, 16, 19 with the one in Rev.11:8." (p.145)

This idea is growing in popularity (even among premillennialists). It completely ignores Rev.17:

Revelation 17:9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.
10 And THERE are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.

Here we are told by the Bible itself what the figurative "heads" represent. They are literal "mountains." This refers to the city of Rome. It is the height of folly to take a symbol that has been literally defined by the
Bible, and then make that literal definition a symbol itself! (Note: New translations based on Catholic manuscripts attempt to make the "mountains" into "kings" by adding "and THEY are" instead "and THERE are" in Rev.17:10).

Jerusalem is not known around the world as the "city on seven mountains." Yet, Rome is known as such. Furthermore, Jerusalem was not reigning over the kings of the earth when John wrote, and it has never reigned over them in over 19 centuries since the time of Christ:

Revelation 17:18 And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

But isn't the city called "great" in Rev.17:18, etc.? And isn't Jerusalem called "great" in Rev.11?

Revelation 11:8 And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the GREAT city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.

Doesn't this prove that Jerusalem is the "great city" that is later called "Babylon"? Preterists fail to read the additional descriptions of each city that is alled "great." One is a great city "which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified." The other is the "great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth." There are TWO cities called "great" in the Book of Revelation. Why should this appear strange? There are TWO white horse riders (Rev.6, Rev.19). There are two
women that are not the same (Rev.12, Rev.17). There are TWO creatures with horns and heads (Rev,12, Rev.13). One is Satan, the other is the Antichrist. They look almost the same. Yet, Satan has "crowns" on his "heads" (Rev.12:3), the Beast has "crowns" on his "horns" (Rev.13:1). It therefore makes no sense to try to connect two totally different cities, simply because they are both called "great."

Noe: "Likewise, a return to the old Judaic law system is not going to happen unless God is schizophrenic." (p.146)

Noe sets up a straw man by using teh ohrase "old Judaic system." In the future Millennium, there will be a new temple and their will be priests and sacrifices, etc. These will be SIMILAR to those in the OT, but not the SAME. Noe mocks believers for saying that the Jews will rebuild their temple in the Tribulation period, and that then there will be another literal, temple in the Millennium. Yet, the Preterist's arguments are getting smaller! They used to mock a literal return of the Jews to their land to establish a literal Jewish nation. Yet, after 1900 years of dispersion, they are back! They will soon have another temple. Noe misunderstands the Scriptures. The coming Millennium is not a return to the O.T. system of Moses. It is the establishment of a new system under Christ of which the O.T. was only a SHADOW. The Millennium will not be a return to "shadows." It will be the literal FULFILLMENT of the Mosaic shadows! Paul makes this clear:

Colossians 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17 Which ARE A SHADOW OF THINGS TO COME; but the body is of Christ.

In the Millennial Kingdom, there will be "new moons," "sabbaths" and "meat and drink offerings," etc. (Isa.66:23, etc.) Although we can spiritualize these things now in this present age (Heb.13:15, etc.), they will be literally manifested in the Millennium. The O.T. was a shadow of the realities of the coming Millennium. Paul argues that it is wrong for NT believers to be under a system of shadows that point to natural Israel in the world to come.

There are indeed some OT shadows that are fulfilled in the NT age with Christ in the Heavenlies. Yet, even these are also literal. There is a literal "tabernacle" in the Heavens (Heb.8-10) of which the one in the O.T. was only a figure. Yet, there will also be a Millennial fulfillment of these O.T. shadows. And these fulfillments go beyond "devotional truths." They will be concrete, tangible realities.

We know these prophecies concerning the Millennial temple will be literally fulfilled because all of the other prophecies relating to Christ's first coming, were also literally fulfilled.

Noe continues in this chapter by trying to solve the problem of how to make the Jewish persecution of A.D. 70 greater than the Jewish persecution under Hitler:

Matthew 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor EVER SHALL BE.

He doesn't do a very good job in getting out of that dilemma.

From: KA Update #45p.2

JOHN NOE'S PRETERISM REFUTED (Pt.08)

Noe's book, "Beyond The End Times" (1999) contains 14 chapters (plus Appendixes). This week, I will answer the various arguments found in chapter 11:

Noe: "If Jesus meant what He said, and said what he meant, and was an infallible Prophet, all the components of his prophecy must stand or fall together. These certainly include his coming on the clouds with power and glory...If Jesus did not return when He said He would, we have a dilemma of huge proportions." (p.164).

Noe is teaching that Jesus fulfilled His "coming" in Mt.24:27 in the 1st-century. The problem is that Noe wishes to take some things in a plain, grammatical sense (i.e. that generation would not pass away before all of Christís predictions would take place, etc.), yet at the same time, he turns Christ's second coming in the clouds into something mystical and nonsensical. Noe's problem is that he does not notice how the Bible interprets its own prophecies. Jesus demonstrated double-prophecy in
relation to Elijah and John the Baptist. In double fulfillment passages, every fact does not relate to each fulfillment. In other words, MANY things that will take place in the end times were indeed foreshadowed in the 1st-century. Nevertheless, that doesn't mean that EVERY detail was foreshadowed at that time. Jesus did NOT come again in the clouds in the 1st-century.

Notice the following Bible passage:

2 Samuel 7:12 And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.
13 He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.
14 I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:

This passage speaks of Solomon. Yet, it also speaks of Jesus Christ. It is Christ's Kingdom that will be established forever from the throne of David (first during the Millennial Kingdom and then throughout eternity on earth.) Verse 14 is quoted in Hebrews in reference to Christ:

Hebrews 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

But as we go back and examine 2 Sam.7, we see that this "son" is warned that if he commits iniquity, he will be chastised (v.14). Yet, Jesus Christ was 100% sinless (Heb.4:15, 2Pet.3:14). He could not commit iniquity. Thus, part of the prophecy related to Christ and some aspects related to Solomon.

In Isa.7:14-16 and Isa.8:3,4 we can see this principle demonstrated again. The child born in the days of Ahaz was not named Immanuel (i.e. God with us). Neither was he born of a literal virgin (Mt.1:23). Therefore, in Isa.7 we have a prophecy that is framed exactly like Mt.24. We do have a foreshadowing in the days of Ahaz. Yet, the full, literal fulfillment related to the future, to Mary and Jesus. For the Preterist to argue that Christ came in the clouds in the 1st-century, he might as well also argue that the prophecy of the virgin birth was fully exhausted in the days of Ahaz!

Matthew 24 is a last days prophecy, yet to be fulfilled. The fact that there was a foreshadowing or "secondary fulfillment" in the 1st-century does not in any way argue against the future plenary fulfillment. In fact, it is actually an argument for it! It shows that God is able to move in history as He pleases. It is a firstfruits demonstration of what will surely occur in the near future.

From: KA Update #48

JOHN NOE'S PRETERISM REFUTED (Pt.09)

Noe's book, "Beyond The End Times" (1999) contains 14 chapters (plus Appendixes). This week, I will answer the various arguments found in chapter 12:

Noe: "Why not just take Jesus' time-restricted words at face value, literally and naturally?...If you had heard Jesus' teachings first-hand, how would you have understood his words?" (pp.174, 176)

Noe is repeating his same arguments over and over again as we near the end of his book. I take Christ's words very literal in regard to His second coming. I simply allow for a double-application since this is seen throughout Scripture in regard to other prophecies. Christ will literally return as He stated. All the facts of His prophecy in Matthew 24 will apply in the future Tribulation time period. Yet, some of those facts had a temporary, partial fulfillment in A.D. 70. Now we would like to ask Noe and all the other Preterists why they do not take the OTHER judgments mentioned in Matthew 24 "literally and NATURALLY"? Noe goes to great trouble to attempt to prove that we are to take words and phrases such as "earth" and "heaven," etc. in a "mystical" sense! Let us turn Noeís question back from whence it came:

Matthew 24:29 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:
31 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.

Let him and every other Preterist tell us how the early Christians took words such as SUN and DARKENED and MOON and STARS and HEAVEN and ANGELS?

"The good news is that we can trust God's time and imminency statements...When God meant a long time, He used words that meant just that." (p.178).

Then why did the Holy Ghost through Peter take the time to tell us that God has His own perspective of time? He told us this, right in the context of 1st-century expectation:

2 Peter 3:8 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.
9 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.

Noe mocks this apparent delay as slackness! Yet, it is actually mercy. Let us not lose sight of the Lord's future coming through the deceptions of the Preterists. They overthrow the faith of some:

2 Timothy 2:16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.
17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.

From: KA Update #49p.2

JOHN NOE'S PRETERISM REFUTED (Pt.10)

Noe's book, "Beyond The End Times" (1999) contains 14 chapters. This week, I will continue to answer the various arguments found in chapter 12:

Noe: "Christ's 'coming on the clouds' is a common metaphor borrowed from Old Testament portrayals of God descending from heaven and coming in power and glory to execute judgment on a people or nation...Because of this background, Jesus' disciples would have understood what He was talking about in his Olivet Discourse (Mt.24:30)...in all these real biblical comings of God in the Old Testament, God was never physically visible; He was unseen by human eyes!" (pp.183, 184)

Noe attempts to argue that Jesus completely fulfilled the "coming" in Matthew 24:30 in A.D. 70:

Matthew 24:30 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.

Noe does this after spending half the book trying to teach that Biblical time statements are to be taken "literally." Yet, the debate has nothing to do with whether or not such time statements are literal or figurative. Of course they are literal. The debate concerns what perspective we are to take them in, and whether or not the Bible teaches the prophetic principle double-fulfillment. Even so, it is absurd for Noe to reverse gears and now try to argue that Christ's coming is "figurative"!

Noe appears to have been reading Charles Taze Russell, the founder of the J.W.'s! Russell taught that the Lord's Second Coming would be "spiritual," and not bodily. He therefore taught that the Lord had already come in 1874, but no one saw Him!:

"...it is the Lord's plan that his spiritual kingdom shall communicate, operate and manifest its presence and power through human, earthly agencies...The next chapter will present Bible evidence that 1874 A.D. was the exact date...of our Lord's return." (Russell, "The Time Is At Hand," 1889; pp.120, 170,171)

Noe simply teaches the same thing as Russell in regard to the Lord's coming. They simply disagree on the date! Noe says A.D. 70, Russell says 1874. If Christ's coming in Matthew 24:30 is not literal and bodily, anyone can prove ANY date for it they choose. First let us establish that Christ second coming will be literal and bodily:

Acts 1:9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and A CLOUD received him out of their sight.
10 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel;
11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall SO COME IN LIKE MANNER as ye have seen him go into heaven.

In the above passage the Bible tells us that Jesus will come the same way He ascended. Notice another:

Zechariah 14:4 And HIS FEET SHALL STAND in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.

And another:

Matthew 23:39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not SEE me HENCEFORTH, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that COMETH in the name of the Lord.

G.N.H. Peters writes:

"This unequivocally teaches that the people saw Him there; that for a time He would be invisible to the nation, but that they should again see Him; and that this seeing would be at the time when He would restore the house from its desolation." ("Theocratic Kingdom," Vol.2, p.178)

Noe continually maintains that those listening to Jesus "understood" that He was speaking only figuratively concerning His coming. Yet, if this is so, why do we find the early Christians plainly believing in a literal coming? G.N.H. Peters dealt with some non-literalists in his day. He writes:

"...Dr. Alger (Crit.His. Doc. Fut. Life, p.39) declares that he fully believes - as the evidence is abundant - that the Evangelists and early Christians understood Christ to teach a literal personal Advent, but he doubts whether Christ really meant this to be taught."
("Theocratic Kingdom," Vol.2, p.164)

Furthermore, Christ must come literally to this earth in order to fulfill the prophecies concerning David son, who will sit on David's throne (2Sam.7:12,13, Lk.1:32).

If Christ does not come literally and bodily in regard to the second coming, then why did He come literally and bodily in regard to His first? As far as Noe's O.T. references, who said they are to be taken figuratively?

Isaiah 19:1 The burden of Egypt. Behold, the LORD rideth upon a swift cloud, and shall come into Egypt: and the idols of Egypt shall be moved at his presence, and the heart of Egypt shall melt in the midst of it.

The rest of this chapter (vs.19-25) is obviously fulfilled at the Second Advent or in the future Millennium. Thus, the prophecy has a historic fulfillment and a full, literal fulfillment to come.

Noe then lists Jeremiah 4:13 as an example of the Lord coming in past judgment (p.183):

Jeremiah 4:13 Behold, he shall come up as clouds, and his chariots shall be as a whirlwind: his horses are swifter than eagles. Woe unto us! for we are spoiled.

Yet, the "he" in this verse is the Gentile king who comes to destroy (v.7). It isn't even a reference to the Lord. Clouds are plainly used figuratively because the verse says "as clouds" not IN clouds.

Noe makes reference to Dan.7:

Daniel 7:13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

Yet, again, there is nothing figurative about this verse. It is the very explanation of the figurative vision. Noe argues in circles. He first assumes that these O.T. references are figurative, then attempts to argue from there that the NT references are figurative as well.


From: KA Update #50p.2 (1-29-00)

JOHN NOE'S PRETERISM REFUTED (Pt.11)

Noe's book, "Beyond The End Times" (1999) contains 14 chapters. This week, I will continue to answer the various arguments found in chapter 12:

Noe: "We have 1st-century 'proof' that the New Testament Christians understood the use of apocalyptic language. The Thessalonians could only have believed that 'the day of the Lord' had already come if they had understood the language in a figurative way (2Th.2:1-2). Had they been taught the traditional 20th-century concept you and I have been taught - featuring a visible cosmic cataclysm - no one could have confused them that the Day had already happened. The physical earth and heavens were unchanged during their time of confusion." (p.186)

In response to this "proof," let us quote the passage:

2 Thessalonians 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3 Let no man DECEIVE you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

Noe does not reference verse 3. It is verse 3 that shows that it was possible for the Thessalonians to be DECEIVED about Christ's coming. Some premillennialists take the "day of Christ" in verse 2 to be a reference to the pre-trib rapture. Although I believe in a pre-trib rapture, I do not think it is necessary to see the day of Christ as different from the day of the Lord. There will indeed be a pre-trib rapture before Christ's Second Coming in flaming fire. Yet, Preterism does not just deny a pre-trib rapture. It claims the whole, final coming of Christ in vengeance has already occurred! If the Thessalonians had fallen for this it would be proper to tell them that the coming of Christ to destroy Antichrist cannot occur until the Antichrist arrives and deceives the world. Paul has already explained the Day of the Lord in the previous chapter:

2 Thessalonians 1:7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;
10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.

These are not events that occurred in A.D. 70!

Noe uses this supposed "confusion" of the Thessalonians to show that they did not think the Lord's coming was a literal coming with natural disturbances. Yet, is it really a good argument to use people who are supposedly deceived in order to prove a point?

On the other hand, there is nothing in 2 Thessalonians chapter 2 that states that the Thessalonians HAVE BEEN deceived. It is an apostolic warning against any future deceptions that might arise. Paul was exhorting them to CONTINUE to stand fast in the truth:

2 Thessalonians 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Therefore, in reality, the warnings in 2 Thessalonians are written to prepare Christians for when people like Noe arise in their midst to tell them that the Day of the Lord has already occurred! Paul argues that such is impossible since the final Tribulation period has not yet occurred. Therefore, we apply Paul's arguments directly to Preterism and conclude that Paul wrote 2 Thess. 2 to arm Christians against those who would arise and teach them that the Day of the Lord occurred in A.D. 70.

And what would Noe do with the "gathering" mentioned in 2 Thess. 2:1? I suppose he must teach that the "gathering" is some kind of mystical gathering that occurred in A.D. 70.

From: KA Update #51p.2 (2-5-00)

JOHN NOE'S PRETERISM REFUTED (Pt.12)

Noe's book, "Beyond The End Times" (1999) contains 14 chapters. This week, I will continue to answer the various arguments found in chapter 12:

Noe: "...neither was Jesus' atonement work finished at the cross, or even when He entered into the true Holy of Holies...He also needed to fulfill the final, inseparable, and essential act of atonement: to appear 'a second
time' to show that his sacrifice had been accepted...Jesus appearing 'a second time' is essential for complete salvation...The next question is, how did He appear? He appeared by 'coming on the clouds' in A.D. 70." (pp.192, 193, 194)

Now we are moving way beyond eschatological heresy. Noe, without any disclaimers, is now found teaching that the Atonement was not finished at the Cross (Jn.19:30)! Yet, Paul wrote the Epistle to the Romans before A.D. 70, and in it he states that he had ALREADY received the atonement:

Romans 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
11 And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.

Noe fails to distinguish between two different applications of Christ's Blood. The present application of Christ's Blood in the Heavenly Holy Place (Heb.9:24,25) is for those already redeemed in eternity. It is not for the purpose of positional sanctification. Christ is presently interceding for believers in Heaven for the purpose of practical sanctification. Christ died on the Cross ONCE and offered His Blood. That Blood saves all who believe upon Him. It also makes every believer practically HOLY who applies
its power by faith:

Hebrews 13:20 Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant,
21 Make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

Hebrews is primarily about this second application of Christ's Blood. The New Covenant (as prophesied in the O.T.) was to do two things:

1. Forgive sins
2. Cause God's people to walk in His commandments

Israel will later experience the prophecies of the New Covenant literally. Yet, under the principle of double-application, the NT also applies it to both Jew and Gentile in this age. Every believer has the first application of the Covenant. Every believer SHOULD have the second. Those believers who, by the blood of the everlasting Covenant, fight and race for the prize, will be crowned with "salvation" into reward and glory. Those who do not run by the power of the Blood will be found in shame at the Lord's coming. Noe (like a good Reformed teacher) has not "rightly divided" between positional justification and practical sanctification. In other words, he appears to have no distinction between the Great White Throne and the Judgment Seat of Christ for believers (2Cor.5:9-11).

We therefore look for Jesus to come the "second time" to judge His saints and reign on the earth with a rod of iron. Jesus did not come "mystically" on the clouds in A.D. 70.

Furthermore, Peter spoke of the "last days" as future in 2 Pet.3:3, (thus, according to Noe's system, this must be long before A.D. 70). Yet, in the same Epistle, Peter claims that the Atonement has been already been fully
accomplished for believers:

2 Peters 1:3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:

It is true that we await the renewing of our bodies in Millennial glory at Christ's second coming; nevertheless, our sins have already been paid for eternally and positionally. Noe appears to confuse a typical judgment in A.D. 70 with the Resurrection, or worse, the Cross of Calvary itself!


From: KA Update #53p.2 (2-19-00)

JOHN NOE'S PRETERISM REFUTED (Pt.13)

Noe's book, "Beyond The End Times" (1999) contains 14 chapters. This week, I will answer the various arguments found in chapter 13:

Noe: "But do you know what the Bible actually says about a 'second coming?' Nothing! Do you know what the historic creeds of the Church say about it? Again, nothing!" (p.204)

Noe goes on to make a mention of Hebrews 9:

Hebrews 9:28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the SECOND time without sin unto salvation.

He tries to apply it to A.D. 70, but I cannot make out how he is even trying to make it fit. Noe never answers whether or not this second appearance is BODILY. If the first time was a Bodily and literal appearance, then it is logical to conclude that the second time will be so as well. Notice another passage:

Matthew 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, TILL ye shall say, Blessed is he that COMETH in the name of the Lord.

There we have it. Jerusalem saw the Lord, and will see Him again a SECOND time (i.e. "till").

Noe: "No longer do we need to take communion in a somber, memorialized fashion, 'in remembrance of' Him who had departed (Jn.14;1-3). We take it 'anew' with Him in celebration." (p.217)

Thus, according to Noe, Christ's words about drinking of the pure fruit of the vine with His disciples does not mean DRINKING at all:

Mark 14:25 Verily I say unto you, I will drink NO MORE of the fruit of the vine, UNTIL that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God.

If words mean anything, we are to conclude that Christ was drinking literally of the fruit of the vine (i.e. grape juice - see Isa.65:8) then, and that He would one day be drinking literally again in the Kingdom. But Noe would have us believe that Christ was referring to a mystical drinking that is taking place right now. This goes way beyond "spiritualizing" the Scriptures! Noe has two events that are linked together by literal TIME STATEMENTS referring to two different things. Thus, the drinking in one event is literal, and the drinking in the future event is mystical. I wonder how Noe would interpret the following passage:

Ezekiel 21:27 I will overturn, overturn, overturn, it: and it shall be NO MORE, UNTIL he come whose right it is; and I will give it him.


From: Ka Update #56p.2 (3-13-00)

JOHN NOE'S PRETERISM REFUTED (Pt.14)

Noe's book, "Beyond The End Times" (1999) contains 14 chapters. This week, I will answer the various arguments found in chapter 13:

Noe: "In every generation except one, the Church has wrongly proclaimed the imminence of our Lord's return. No more. He has returned! Perhaps we should now expand our Easter proclamation to say: He is risen! He is risen, indeed! He has returned! He has returned, indeed! He is here with us! He is here with us, indeed!" (p.219)

This is antinomian mysticism! Where did the Judgment Seat of Christ go in Noe's system?:

1 Corinthians 4:5 Therefore judge nothing before the time, until THE LORD COME, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.

2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

No wonder this Preterism is so popular. If one places the Second Coming back in the 1st-century, then there is no judgment Seat of Christ for the saints to have to worry about. This means there is no responsibility. Preterism therefore fits nicely in an age permeated with a fluffy psycho-babble. This age despises accountability, and the lie of Preterism releases Christians to live for this world, with no fear or hope in the bodily resurrection.

It is true that Christians in the 1700's and the 1800's thought the rapture, the Tribulation or the Second Coming were nigh at hand. And to the degree they properly prepared themselves in holiness, they will be rewarded and praised when they stand before the Lord at the resurrection. They will have lost nothing by being mistaken about His timing. The Lord never said to go sit under a tree and wait for His return (1Sam.14:12). The Bible teaches that we are to watch, pray, witness and abstain from worldliness.

 

What do YOU think ?

Submit Your Comments For Posting Here
Comment Box Disabled For Security


Date:
08 Sep 2001
Time:
12:00:44

Comments

I am wondering why your article is right beside all those preterist writings.....I began reading some of them which included historians from the early centuries and was really tempted to believe it! We are certainly living in times of judgement from God - we have to remain close to Him and crying out for discernment day and night and doing His will if we are to know the truth! Thank you, Dianna


Date:
02 Dec 2001
Time:
10:25:12

Comments

It would be interesting to read the many comments from "furious" Preterists. I would also like to know How many is many. Your allegation that Christians like myself and my family are "scoffers" because we believe that Jesus Christ did come like he said is the usual response we have become accustomed to. Your allegation of us being a part of the end time fulfillment mentioned in Peters epistles is not debate but simply an attack. If we are these scoffers then my confession of faith in My Lord and savior Jesus Christ is not valid, and I'm doomed to destruction like the scoffers mentioned by Peter. Neither one of these possibilities are true and accurate. The so called "end times" interpretations are so numerous, and at times so outlandish and hysterical, that it is amazing that you would condemn with the language of the Bible those who don't agree with you personally. I have many Pre-mill friends and even some missionaries in Thailand I support are Pre-trib and Pre-mill. My parents and my other relatives don't believe like I do concerning the fulfillment of the Kingdom of God but they at least know that I'm a Christian and not a scoffer. Personally I don't like to debate and I refrain from doing it if possible, especially if it means it could cause harm to the babes in Christ who could be harmed by strong words of debate over scripture. I am not writing to engage in any debate with you, but know this, if you say that pre-mill is the correct and truthful interpretation of the end time sriptures you also would be labeled by some as scoffing at quite a number of other Chrstians who haven't come to the same conclusions. A-mills, post-mills, mid-trib, post-trib, historcists, idealists, and of course preterists would be just a few. I don't particularly care to be labeled a preterist, but that's what some call me. I call myself a Christian and servant of my King Jesus. I believe that if we could see each other face to face and talk I'm sure our attitudes would be graceful. Many times it takes looking into the other persons eyes and hearing the tone in their voice to know that brotherhood is there. Take care, your brother in Christ, Kerry.


Date:
27 Aug 2002
Time:
12:09:22
Remote User:

Comments

The coming of Christ, the Word of God, in the clouds was a spiritual process that culminated in the moment of Christ's first-century parousia. It refers to the preaching of the gospel to all nations by the faithful young church -- the NT fulfillment of the faithful OT cloud of witnesses (Heb. 12:1) -- that changed the prevailing culture of the first-century world from pagan to Christian, a change that every eye in the world was able to see (Rev. 1:7).


Date:
27 Aug 2002
Time:
16:34:00
Remote User:

Comments

Very well said!!


Date:
27 Aug 2002
Time:
18:43:38
Remote User:

Comments

One would have to ask(as Gary Demar did in his article that is posted in the update section recently)if Acts 1 is literal and Rev 19 is literal (to Dispensationalists) - Where is the horse and the robe dripped in blood.


Date:
29 Aug 2002
Time:
22:13:20
Remote User:

Comments

To whom it may concern, I agree with most of your premises, however, I believe that the second coming for unbelievers in the first century was the Destruction of Jerusalem: AND the Second Coming for believers was the Father and the Son taking residence in the Believers heart! The Second Coming was twofold in nature, destruction for the enemies of God, and salvation for HIS PEOPLE! TONLOW1@YAHOO.COM


Date:
13 Dec 2003
Time:
13:44:37

Comments

I would like to let everyone know that I Bryan Forgy and Joey Faust are participating in a lengthy written debate on Preterism, we invite all to participate in questions and comments. Here is a portion of the e-mail I have sent to brother Dennis and Vaduva to support and publish the debate.The debate will have four propositions, each with three affirmatives and three negatives each to be no longer than 15 pages in length, in a font no samller than 12. Each proposition will also have a rejoinder at the end for each the affirm and neg, to be no longer than 5 pages in length in a font no smaller than 12. I am asking you to generate intrest in the debate so we can have lots of audience and participation by the audience. The debate will begin in two weeks and I ask you both please to publish it on your sites. I believe this is the first time a debate like this has happened, and I plan to have many others in the future. I also encourage others to begin debates in this fashion because I believe it is going to cause quite a stir in eschatological circles. Here are the four propositions for this debate.. And as it is set up, it has the potential to be a maximum of 400 pages in length. If anyone whishes to contact me concerning the debate my e-mail is bricas1715@yahoo.com. And brother Faustís e-mail is pastor@kingdombaptist.org In Christ, Bryan forgy Resolved:The Grammatico- Historical approach to hermenutics should be used while approaching the interpretation of prophecy, and not the consistant literalism of dispensationalism. Affirm: Bryan Forgy Deny: Joey Faust Resolved: 2 Peter 3 refers to a literal, future burning of the earth. Affirm: Joey Faust Deny: Bryan Forgy Resolved: Matthew chapter 24 teaches that the second eschatological coming of Christ was to happen at the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD. Affirm: Bryan Forgy Deny: Joey Faust Resolved: Revelation 20 teaches a future earthly reign of Christ from Jerusalem that is to last a literal 1000 years. Affirm: Joey Faust Deny: Bryan Forgy


Date: 10 Jul 2007
Time: 14:03:23

Comments0:

"The whole problem with Preterists is their failure to grasp the Biblical teaching in regard to DOUBLE APPLICATION. Many Bible prophecies have historic, as well as future fulfillments."

Faust doesn't seem to give any Biblical appeals to that statement. The traditional hermenuetic is to attribute only ONE central theme in the interpretation of any givin scripture. "Double fulfillment" is self-contradictory; there is only one fulfillment to prophecy: Jesus Christ.

Grace be to you all,
VMK


Date: 10 Jul 2007
Time: 14:07:22

Comments0:

"We teach that Christians will be resurrected; and many people will enter Christ's glorious, future Kingdom ON EARTH to reign for 1000 years."

Faust gives no scriptural appeal to the "earthly" kingdom. It is unclear what will happen after the 1000 years. Will Christ no longer reign?

Grace be to you all,
VMK


Date: 27 Jul 2013
Time: 23:03:32

Your Comments:

I think Joey Faust has convinced me that Noe is more credible. His is very poor reasoning. Truth is a correspondence between statement and fact in the same terms: that is true statements look like the facts. Noe presents simple observable, biblical facts.
However Mr Faust conscripts mental machinery that serves his theory. It consists of things that were never written in the bible: 'its literal' 'it a double application' 'personally' 'physically' 'visibly'. I checked all these (Faust's) statements in Strong's exhaustive concordance. Not a single one of these terms occur! To pass off opinion as bible fact rather highlights a glaring bias toward his own futurist view.

Next J. Faust denies Jerusalem is Revelation's harlot because 'there are two cities are called 'great.' If he bothered to look he'd find both references are to the same 'harlot' city "Sodom...where our Lord was crucified." (Rev 11:8) Did he even look? I did. Blind Freddy could see this must, and could only be Jerusalem.
Noe was right again. I checked Harlot in a concordance. OT Israel /Jerusalem is titled 'Sodom' & 'Harlot'by over eight bible writers!
Faust's theory must contradict eight bible writers and contradict eighteen chapters. Evidence for Israel/Jerusalem as Harlot -Isaiah 1,3 Jeremiah 1-2-3-23, Lamentations 4, Ezekiel called Jerusalem 'harlot'over thirty times in two chapters alone 16 & 23, again Faust must deny Hosea in nearly every chapter 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-9 Jerusalem is harlot, again in Amos 7, again in Micah 1, Jesus and John both call that generation in Jerusalem 'adulterous.' What is the cause of Faust's blindness?
I must prefer Noe's view because it is present, observable, and most often corresponds to scripture
in the same words. If Mr Faust opens his eyes he will read; "Say to Jerusalem...you trusted in your beauty and played the harlot.." Ezek 16:15,16,17, 20,22,25,26,29,30,32,33,36,39,(are you seeing Mr Faust?)40, 46,56 chapter 23:3,4,5,7,8, 11,14,17, 18,29,30,37.44. These are a few that recommend John Noe's view to the candid and unbiased reader.
Morry Lee


 

 

Click For Index Page

Free Online Books Historical Preterism Modern Preterism Study Archive Critical Articles Dispensationalist dEmEnTiA  Main Josephus Church History Hyper Preterism Main

Email PreteristArchive.com's Sole Developer and Curator, Todd Dennis  (todd @ preteristarchive.com) Opened in 1996
http://www.preteristarchive.com