BOOKS: BIBLICAL STUDIES (1500BC-AD70) / EARLY CHRISTIAN PRETERISM (AD50-1000) / FREE ONLINE BOOKS (AD1000-2008)
AD70 Dispensationalism: According to
that view, AD70 was the end of 'this age' and the start of the 'age to come'.
Those who lived before AD70 could only 'see in part' and such, lacking
the resurrection and redemptive blessings which supposedly came only
Herod's Temple in Jerusalem
fell. Accordingly, AD70 was not only the end of Old
Testament Judaism, but it was also the end of the revelation of
Christianity as seen in the New Testament.
AD70 Dispensationalism: According to that view, AD70 was the end of 'this age' and the start of the 'age to come'. Those who lived before AD70 could only 'see in part' and such, lacking the resurrection and redemptive blessings which supposedly came only when Herod's Temple in Jerusalem fell. Accordingly, AD70 was not only the end of Old Testament Judaism, but it was also the end of the revelation of Christianity as seen in the New Testament.
material is being archived for balanced representation of all preterist views,
but is classified under the theological term hyper (as in beyond
the acceptable range of tolerable doctrines) at this website. The
classification of all full preterism as Hyper Preterism (HyP) is built
upon well over a decade of intense research at PreteristArchive.com, and
the convictions of
the website curator (a
former full preterist pastor). The HyP
theology of final resurrection and consummation in the fall of Jerusalem, with its dispensational line in AD70
(end of old age, start of new age), has never been known among authors
through nearly 20 centuries of Christianity leading up
to 1845, when the earliest known full preterist book was written.
Even though there may be many secondary points of agreement between
Historical/Modern Preterism and Hyper Preterism, their premises are undeniably and
THE FOLLOWING MATERIAL HAS BEEN CLASSIFIED AS "HYPER PRETERIST"
"Full preterist" material is being archived for balanced representation of all preterist views, but is classified under the theological term hyper (as in beyond the acceptable range of tolerable doctrines) at this website. The classification of all full preterism as Hyper Preterism (HyP) is built upon well over a decade of intense research at PreteristArchive.com, and the convictions of the website curator (a former full preterist pastor). The HyP theology of final resurrection and consummation in the fall of Jerusalem, with its dispensational line in AD70 (end of old age, start of new age), has never been known among authors through nearly 20 centuries of Christianity leading up to 1845, when the earliest known full preterist book was written. Even though there may be many secondary points of agreement between Historical/Modern Preterism and Hyper Preterism, their premises are undeniably and fundamentally different.
WARNING: THE FOLLOWING MATERIAL HAS BEEN CLASSIFIED AS "HYPER PRETERIST"
SOME DISTINCTIVE DOCTRINES OF SYSTEMATIZED HYPER PRETERISM
It is important to keep in mind that many ideas and doctrines full preterism appeals to - such as the complete end of the Old Covenant world in AD70 - are by no means distinctive to that view. Many non HyPs believe this as well, so one need not embrace the Hyper Preterist system in order to endorse this view. Following are exceptional doctrines which, so far as I've seen, are only taught by adherents of Hyper Preterism.:
DISTINCTIVE DOCTRINES TAUGHT BY STANDARD FULL PRETERISM
DISTINCTIVE DOCTRINES TAUGHT BY VARIOUS FORMS
The Resurrection from the Dead
By David Curtis
We are going to spend our time this morning studying what the Bible teaches about the resurrection. Paul said in Philippians 3 that he had forsaken his own righteousness and trusted only and completely in Christ "in order that" he might attain the resurrection from the dead.
Philippians 3:11 (NASB) in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.
What exactly did Paul mean by this? What is the resurrection? We will attempt to answer these questions this morning.
Let's begin by reviewing the context of this verse. The theme of Philippians 3:4-11 is justification by faith alone. The key verse in this section is:
Philippians 3:9 (NKJV) and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith;
Paul sees only two kinds of righteousness: 1. Self-righteousness which leads to damnation. 2. God's righteousness given through faith which equals salvation. This is the righteousness that Paul wanted to have, that which comes by faith in Christ. This is speaking of justification by faith alone.
In verse 8, Paul tells us he is no longer trusting in his own righteousness in order that he may gain Christ. Then in verses 9-11, he tells us what it means to gain Christ. In verse 9, he tells us that to gain Christ means to receive His righteousness. Then he goes on in verses 10-11 to explain further what it means to gain Christ.
I see all of the things he mentions in verse 10 to be results of justification. Paul "suffered the loss of all things, and counted them as dung" in order that he may "gain Christ." And gaining Christ means: "Receiving his righteousness, knowing him, knowing the power of his resurrection, knowing the fellowship of his suffering, and being make like him in our death to sin."
Philippians 3:11 (NASB) in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.
Paul "suffered the loss of all things and counted them as dung in order that he may attain to the resurrection from the dead. The Greek word that Paul uses here for "resurrection" is exanastasi. This Greek word is only used here in all the New Testament. It is the word anastasis, which means: "resurrection." with the preposition ek in front of it which is the equivalent of "out". This is literally, "the out resurrection out from the corpses."
This verse is speaking of the resurrection of the righteous. The resurrection of the righteous will take them out of the total number of those dead.
Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament says, "Apparently Paul is thinking here only of the resurrection of believers out from the dead, and so double ex (ten exanastasin ten ek nekron). Paul is not denying a general resurrection by this language, but emphasizing that of believers."
What exactly did Paul mean by "the resurrection"? The traditional view that is held by most of the church is this: When a believer dies, their body goes into the grave and their spirit goes to heaven to be with the Lord. They are in a disembodied state awaiting the resurrection at the end of time. Then at the end of time the Lord returns, resurrects all the decayed bodies of the dead saints, puts them back together, then changes the physically resurrected bodies into spiritual immortal bodies like Christ's. Does that sound like what you have been taught?
Have you ever thought about how the Lord will put all those decayed bodies back together. Will He re-gather and reassemble all the scattered atoms and molecules which composed individual bodies at the time of death? This problem is addressed by M.C. Tenney in his book, The Reality of the Resurrection:
This problem of joint ownership of atoms and molecules is a big problem. After death, various body particles returned to dust, reentered the food chain, got assimilated into plants, eaten by animals, and digested into countless other human bodies. At the resurrection, who gets which atoms and molecules back? As you can see, it can get quite complicated. Another thing that bothered me was why does God raise our dead decayed bodies, put them all back together just to change them into immortal spiritual bodies?
That is basically what the church teaches abut the resurrection, but is it what the Bible teaches? Paul clearly taught that the resurrection was the hope of Israel.
It is clear from this last verse that Paul sees the resurrection of the dead as that which fulfills "the hope of the promise made by God unto our fathers."
The word "resurrection" does not appear in the Old Testament, but the concept does.
Here we see a resurrection at the end of the age.
It is interesting to note that the Bible never uses the terms "resurrected body," "resurrection of the body," or "physical resurrection." Does that surprise you? The church uses those term quite often, but the Bible never does. The phrases that the Bible does use are "the resurrection of the dead" and "the resurrection from the dead."
So, in order to understand "resurrection" we must understand death. Resurrection is "resurrection from the dead." To understand death we need to go back to the book of beginnings, Genesis. In the book of Genesis we see God creating man:
After creating man, God placed him in the garden of Eden and gave him a command.
God warned Adam, regarding the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, "the day that you eat of it you shall surely die." Adam disobeyed God and ate of the tree:
Did Adam die that day? Not physically! Adam lived at least 800 years beyond the day he ate the fruit. But, God said he would die the day he ate and we know that God cannot lie. Adam did not die physically that day, but he did die spiritually. He died spiritually the moment he disobeyed. Spiritual death is separation from God.
Because of his sin, man was separated from God. He was dead in trespasses and sins. The focus of God's plan of redemption is to restore through Jesus Christ what man had lost in Adam.
Because of Adam's sin, we are all born dead, separated from God. But through Jesus Christ came the resurrection from the dead. Jesus Christ came to destroy the works of the devil:
What were the works of the devil? They were to separate man from God. Jesus Christ came to redeem man from death, to resurrect man back into the presence of God. The Bible is God's book, about His plan to restore the spiritual union of His creation. Resurrection is not about bringing physical bodies out of the graves, it is about restoring man into the presence of God.
Prior to Jesus' messianic work, no one went to Heaven:
If prior to Jesus' messianic work, no one went to Heaven-- where did people go when they died? They went to a holding place of the dead and waited for the atoning work of Christ and the resurrection from the dead.
In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word for where they were prior to the resurrection is Sheol. In the New Testament the Greek word is Hades. What this place amounted to was a waiting area for disembodied spirits.
The Old Testament uses the word "Sheol" to refer to a place in the depths of the earth. The expressions, "go down" or "brought down" are used twenty times in connection with Sheol. The "depths of Sheol" are mentioned six times (Deut. 32:22; Ps. 86:13; Prov. 9:18; 15:24; Isa. 7:11; 14:15). Four times Sheol is described as the farthest point from heaven (Job 11:8; Ps. 139:8; Isa. 7:11; Amos 9:2). Often Sheol is parallel with the "pit" (Job 17:13-14; 33:18; Ps. 30:3; 88:3-4; Prov. 1:12; Isa. 14:15; 38:18; Ezek. 31:14-17). Nine times it is parallel with death (2 Sam. 22:6; Ps. 18:4-5; 49:14; 89:48; 116:3; Prov. 5:5; Isa. 28:15,18; Hos. 13:14; Hab. 2:5). Sheol is described in terms of overwhelming floods, water, or waves (Jonah 2:2-6). Sometimes, Sheol is pictured as a hunter setting snares for its victim, binding them with cords, snatching them from the land of the living (2 Sam 22:6; Job 24:19; Ps. 116:3). Sheol is a prison with bars, a place of no return (Job 7:9; 10:21; 16:22; 21:13; Ps. 49:14; Isa. 38:10). People could go to Sheol alive (Num. 16:30,33; Ps. 55:15; Prov. 1:12).
In Jewish tradition, it was also known as "Abraham's bosom" since at death, the faithful Israelite was said to be "gathered unto his fathers." Whatever it was called, it was not Heaven.
David was dead, but he did not go to Heaven. But he had a promise that he someday would. God had promised to redeem His people from the grave:
This verse expresses hope that God will provide salvation beyond the grave, one of the few Old Testament references to life after death. This verse anticipates the clear New Testament teaching of life after death, and eternal life, and salvation from God.
The earliest Christians saw this as a reference to Christ's resurrection. What the psalmist saw as God's providential care in present danger, Jesus knew was God's ultimate caring and power to bring life from death.
All people were believed to go to Sheol when they die:
To be taken out of Sheol and brought into the presence of the Lord is what the Bible calls resurrection. Daniel spoke of this in:
According to the Bible, when was the resurrection to take place? The Scriptures testify that the time of the resurrection was to be at the end of the Old Covenant age. We know this to have happened in AD 70 with the destruction of the Jewish Temple. The disciples knew that the fall of the temple and the destruction of the city meant the end of the Old Covenant age and the inauguration of a new age.
Daniel says that this resurrection will come after a time of great trouble for the Jewish nation. That sounds just like:
Here, Jesus is speaking of the destruction of Jerusalem.
Notice also verse 3:
Now compare that with:
Both Daniel 12 and Matthew 13 are speaking about the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. The resurrection is an event that was to happened in AD 70.
Verses 4 and 8 of Daniel 12 identify this time as "the time of the end."
In response to Daniel's question at the end of verse 6, "How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?" the angel answers in:
This again speaks of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. In verse 12, Daniel connects the resurrection to the abomination that makes desolate.
Jesus referred to this in Matthew 24:15, in discussing the fall of Jerusalem.
The last verse in Daniel 12, records a promise given to Daniel about his own personal resurrection.
The statements of verses 1, 7, 11, and 12 tie the resurrection to the time immediately following the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.
What Daniel had written was well ingrained into the thinking of the Jews. We see from Jesus' discussion with Martha that Martha had no doubt as to when the resurrection would be.
Jesus taught that the resurrection would happen on the last day:
When is the last day? To the Jews, time was divided into two great periods, the Mosaic Age and the Messianic Age. The Messiah was viewed as one who would bring in a new world. The period of the Messiah was, therefore, correctly characterized by the Synagogue as "the world to come." All through the New Testament, we see two ages in contrast: "This age" and the "age to come."
Jesus came during the last days of the age that was the Old Covenant age, the Jewish age. That age came to an end with the destruction of the temple in AD 70.
Jesus was speaking in the last days. What last days? The last days of the Bible's "this age" -- the Old Covenant age.
When was it that Jesus appeared? He was born, not at the beginning, but at the end of the ages. To suppose that he meant that Jesus' incarnation came near the end of the world, would be to make his statement false. The world has already lasted longer since the incarnation than the whole duration of the Mosaic economy, from the exodus to the destruction of the temple. Jesus was manifest at the end of the Jewish age.
In Jesus' answer to the Sadducees about the woman who had seven husbands, indicates that the resurrection was to occur at the changing of the ages:
The resurrection was not something that was available to them in "this age" (the Old Covenant age) but would be available to them in "that age" (the New Covenant age), implying that the resurrection would occur at the beginning of the New Covenant age.
So, the resurrection was to happen at the end of the Jewish age, the Old Covenant age. We know that this happened in AD 70.
Paul spoke of the nearness of the resurrection in his day:
If the TIME of the resurrection is seen as AD 70, then we know that the NATURE of the resurrection was spiritual, rather than physical. It is a fundamental fact of eschatology that TIME DEFINES NATURE. Since we know that the resurrection is past, we know that it was spiritual and not physical. The resurrection of the dead that took place at the end of the Old Covenant in AD 70 and was not a biological resurrection of dead decayed bodies, but a release from Sheol of all who had been waiting through the centuries to be reunited with God in the heavenly kingdom.
We can see from the teaching of Hymenaeus and Philetus several things about the resurrection beliefs of the early Christians.
They must have believed that the resurrection would be spiritual in nature, and, therefore, not subject to confirmation by any physical evidence. If the early Christians had believed that the resurrection would involve the physical bodies coming out of the graves, as is taught today, Hymenaius and Philitus could never have convinced anyone that the resurrection had already happened.
They also must have believed that life on earth would go on with no material change after the resurrection. They didn't believe that they would be on a renovated planet earth as a consequence of the resurrection. Otherwise, the teaching of Hymenaeus and Philetus would have been impossible. No one would have paid any attention to them.
The reason that their teaching that the resurrection has already happened was overthrowing the faith of some was that it postulated a consummation of the spiritual kingdom, while the earthly temple in Jerusalem still stood. This was a mixture of law and grace. This destroyed the faith of some by making the works of the law a part of the New Covenant.
YES! Absolutely, without a doubt. Since Christ's resurrection was physical, won't ours be? NO! Christ's actual resurrection was His going to Hades and coming back out. When he was resurrected from Hades, He was raised into his original body, which was transformed into His heavenly form. This was done as a SIGN to the apostles that he had done what He had promised. The resurrection of Jesus' body verified for His disciples, the resurrection of His soul. David had prophesied:
Peter preached that David looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of Christ:
These verses speak of both spiritual death (the soul in hades) and physical death (decay of the flesh). Jesus was resurrected from both.
The reason there are differences in the way we are raised and the way in which Christ was raised is because of those Biblically defined differences between Christ's body and ours. Differences such as:
Christ is the only one who is both fully God and fully Man -- God incarnate. (John 1:1-18). Christ is the only one who was virgin born, and, therefore, born without original sin. (Rom. 3:21-26; 5:12-21; 7:4-11; etc.). Christ is the only one who ever lived a sinless life. (Heb. 4:15). Christ is the only one promised that his flesh would not suffer decay. (Acts 2:27,31).
His human body was not subject to original sin, nor corruptible (i.e. He was "impeccable"), nor did He ever commit sin and become corrupted. Because of this, He could keep His selfsame body, whereas, we cannot.
Unless Jesus' body had been resurrected, His disciples would have had no assurance that His soul had been to Hades and had been resurrected. The physical resurrection of Christ was essential to verify the spiritual, to which it was tied. While the physical resurrection of our bodies would have no point, since we will not continue living on this planet, breathing earth's oxygen, and eating earth's food after we die physically.
Since the resurrection is past, what happens to believers when they die? Their physical body goes back to dust from which it came:
And their spirit is united to their spiritual body and goes to be with the Lord.
We get the same kind of body Christ has, but we do not get it the same way He got His, nor do we get our same physical body back like Christ did. We get a new spiritual body which arises out of the inner man. God gives us a spiritual body!
This affirms two different kinds of bodies. Our natural body dies, and we receive a spiritual body. Paul says, "IT IS RAISED A SPIRITUAL BODY."
Those of us who have trusted Christ in the New Covenant age, have life and do not need to be resurrected.
Jesus is saying, "He who believes in me shall live (spiritually), even if he dies (physically), and everyone who lives (physically), and believes in Me, shall never die (spiritually)."
Two categories of believers are discussed: those who would die before the resurrection and those who would not. For those who died under the Old Covenant, He was the Resurrection, but for those who lived into the days of the New Covenant, He is the Life.
Under the New Covenant, there is no death, spiritually speaking:
Where there is no death, there is no need of a resurrection. We have eternal life and can never die spiritually. Therefore, we don't need a resurrection. At death, we go immediately to heaven in our spiritual body.
The resurrection was a one time event in which the Old Testament saints were brought out of Hades and finally overcame death to be with the Lord. We have put on immortality and will put on our immortal body when we die physically. As believers, we live in the presence of God, and in physical death, we simply drop the flesh and dwell only in the spiritual realm.
Excellent job of lining up prophetic scriptures from the old testament with statements made by Jesus which are understood by all serious scholars to refer to the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD, proving that the resurrection had to have occured at the time of Jerusalem's destruction. Great point about the nature of Hymenaeus and Philetus' teaching, and that such a teaching would not have been believed by anyone if the early church were expecting a literal reviving of dead corpses. I gotta give you credit for taking on the question of the nature of the afterlife too. Many passages we used to think were about the afterlife, we're finding out are actually about new covenant truths. So the nature of the afterlife is a big question, and there's a lot to learn. Maybe a lot that we simply can't learn in this life.
what about abraham, isaac, and jacob.....didn't Jesus said that they were now living in Heaven, so how could they be in Hades?
What about Christs' 1,000yr. Rule upon his return? The inprisonment of Satan during that time, then another Ressurection, and the Lake of Fire as prented in the Book of Revealation?
i Read your comments and i think you have a great support of biblical foundation for this great interpretaion of the second coming. we need also to understand that the first 3 centuries the church believed in the premellinium view like turtillian origin, and others. athanasius creed talk about the resurection bodily from the grave and we will havwe same body as he did. when is the general resurection going to happen. it seems from your views there is none. were are the sheep and the goats judgement and people giving account for what they did in the flesh. when is satan going to be sent to the lake of fire as mentioned in revelation with him the false prophet. all of these are not discussed clearly in the preterist view. I am maybe moderate preterist that is recieving lots of persecution for my views without going into the full preterist views. your answer to me would be appreciated. how about the jerusalem coming from heaven adorned for her husband and the marriage of the lamb the great marriage supper. and the rewards for the faithful believers. please send your answers to Jamalbishara@cox.net. God bless you.
can you explain Matthew 27V:53 please. Was this not a physical resurrection?
I am interested in knowing whether or not the dead will return before the rest of us die.
Date: 12 Oct 2005
Date: 30 Jun 2006
Date: 20 Jul 2006
Date: 23 Jan 2009
Date: 04 Aug 2010
Email PreteristArchive.com's Sole Developer and Curator, Todd Dennis
(todd @ preteristarchive.com)
Opened in 1996