 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|  Website Color Key |
Matthew 26:64 is NOT a "Preterist Time Indicator" Pointing to AD70 "In short, the usage of "Apo Arti" in Matthew 26:64 [Apo ("from" - Strongs 575) and Arti ("now on" - Strong's 737)] is highly suggestive of the themes that have been previously offered at this blog ; that is, a series of revelatory recognitions of the power and glory of Jesus Christ's dominance by friend and foe alike. Though the typically pret-friendly Weymouth translation would like to make Jesus say "later on, you will see.." this is not really honest. I would rather say that it was simply a mistake, but I find it impossible to believe that neither Richard Francis Weymouth ("If this belief ever obtains general acceptance the earlier date of the Apocalypse will also be regarded as fully established. For it will then be seen that the book describes beforehand events which took place in 70 A.D.") nor Earnest Hampden-Cook (co-editor and author of "The Christ Has Come") were aware of how important (ironically) a futurist spin on this passage is to uphold their Preterist assumptions. However, not only is there no sense of futurity in this very emphatic Greek phrase, but rather we see quite the opposite.
|
This page is being constructed as a "catch all" location for many of the unbiblical statements coming from full preterist writings. That view is being singled out because, for the most part, those authors are absolutely convinced of "the gospel truth of Covenant Eschatology" (Preston), and as a result of such confidence persuade many less studied people into joining their camp. It is a common characteristic of all fringe sects to insist that the Bible clearly teaches their position. Never mind that there are numerous leading assumptions and following deductions which must be read into the text, etc. Comments will include those which speak of the "certainty" of their opinions, as well as how "the Bible clearly teaches," etc. Along these lines, I will also archive comments which speak as "we Preterists" or "as Preterists, we," in order to show the assumptions which are commonly thrown around as fact. The certainty of their opinion is often laid out in terms that declare that if they are mistaken, then it is the Bible's fault, or Jesus was a liar, etc. Here is an example from a Pret-Universalist: Thomas Whittemore "If Universalism be not true, it appears to us, that the word of God must be false." (Plain Guide, p. 272) |  Just Look... The Bible Clearly Teaches It! |
"As Preterists, we.." "I am just asking why, as Preterists, we are applying that scripture to us now? "
"We, as Preterists" - If we as preterists say the last day has happened, then logically THE Resurrection has happened – whatever it was."
(Full)
"Preterism
is an interpretive system that is locked on the events of 66-70 A.D."
Sam Frost (FP), Observations
If Full Preterism isn't True...
JESUS IS A LIAR
Richard Anthony
"What is at stake here is the inspiration of Scripture. If Jesus
was mistaken, or if he lied to us, then what good is the rest of the scripture?"
(Scriptures Say When Jesus Would Come!)
What that means is that when he told the first century believers that he was coming back soon, he really didn't mean it; he was giving them false information to keep them looking for Him. Can you live with that? If that was the case, what else did he tell them that wasn't true? Do we have a God who intentionally deceives men? Isn't it much easier to simply believe what Jesus said and believe that he came back in the first century, just like everyone said he would? (Scriptures Say When Jesus Would Come!)
Ken Davies
"If the second coming wasn't in AD70, then Jesus is a liar."
(Beyond the End Times)
Don Hochner
"Matt. 24:27, 37, 39 - Jesus repeatedly said, "So shall the coming
(parousia) of the Son of Man be." The same theme is in this context. I want to
point out that some Futurists believe the "double fulfillment" or
"type/anti-type fulfillment" theory, a method of interpretation. In other words,
the theory says that prophecy may be fulfilled in 70 AD as typical form but will
be completely fulfilled, coinciding with the "final" coming of Christ in the
future. This kind of approach is a questionable hermeneutic. They must prove
that Jesus and the NT writers clearly distinguished between two different
comings of Christ. How would the first century Christians living before 70 AD
have been able to distinguish between two different comings? I have not seen
anyone get around with this problem. They expected all this to occur in their
lifetime. Either we have to say it is all future (and make Jesus a liar for
saying any of it would occur in that generation), or make it all fulfilled at 70
AD (and preserve Jesus' integrity). " (Parousia : Coming)
Jesse Mills
"Jesus made it very clear when His return and the kingdom were to come. It would
be during the lifetime of at least "some of those" He spoke to: "Some of you
standing here shall not taste of death until you see the Son of Man coming In
His kingdom" (Matt. 16:28. cf. Matt. 10:23 and 24:34). If these things
were not fulfilled in the first century as Jesus promised. His integrity is
under serious question." (Waiting for the End)
Don Preston -
"I find it impossible to escape
the conclusion that either the Great Trumpet of the Lord sounded in
that first century generation or Jesus' promise failed and man still
has no escape from sin, from separation from God.. Thank God for the
sounding of the Great Trumpet!" (With The Sounding of the Trumpet)
Ed Stevens
"If Jesus and the apostles taught imminency (as in fact they
did), then a non-fulfillment destroys the inspiration and integrity of Christ
and the apostles."
THE BIBLE IS WRONG
Richard Anthony
"There are those opponents who say that if you believe that Jesus
came back in the first century then you don't need to read your Bible any
more. I don't understand that argument, but if Jesus didn't come back in the
first century when he said that he would, then you might as well throw your
Bible out, because if it isn't inspired it isn't any good. I believe that
the scripture is the inspired Word of God and therefore without errors. "
(Scriptures Say When Jesus Would Come!)
William Bell
"Those persecuted (the living) would know by reading the gospel
of Matthew and by the fulfillment (actual occurrence of the event) in A.D.
70, that God had avenged or vindicated them. By the way, all saints were
told to flee from the city before it fell to the Romans in 70 A.D., (Matthew
24:15-20; Revelation 18:4). Not a single Christian was in the local city but
all Christians living throughout the world were vindicated at it’s fall. Is
the vindication of the righteous a local event? To limit this vindication
locally would impugn the Scriptures. It would make Jesus a liar, for he
testified that all would be vindicated when the city fell." (A Local Event?)
David Curtis
"God can tell time; God can read a calendar. When God says something is at hand
it is near. For man to argue otherwise is to reject the inspiration of the
scriptures; it is to impugn the faithfulness of God; it is to impugn the ability
of God to communicate; it is to do the very thing Israel of old did and for
which they were condemned! This is a very serious matter indeed!" (Inspiration
and the Second Coming)
Ed Stevens
"If the imminency statements cannot be trusted, nothing else in the NT can
be trusted. " (Stevens' Response to Gentry: Conclusion )
GOD IS UNFAITHFUL
David Curtis
"God can tell time; God can read a calendar. When God says something is at hand
it is near. For man to argue otherwise is to reject the inspiration of the
scriptures; it is to impugn the faithfulness of God; it is to impugn the ability
of God to communicate; it is to do the very thing Israel of old did and for
which they were condemned! This is a very serious matter indeed!" (Inspiration
and the Second Coming)
CHRISTIANITY IS FALSE
Ward Fenley
"If Jesus did not return, Christianity is a hoax and every liberal anti-Christian professor whoever darkened the doors of a Cathedral is correct. I would rather say that I don't know how it all worked out than deny the absolutely clear statements of Jesus Christ and the apostles that His return would take place within their lifetime."
(Why I Became a Preterist)
Vastly Overreaching Conclusion Built Upon
Many Vastly Underproven Propositions
Seeking Author
"If you believe the scriptures, there was a resurrection
of many of the saints of old whose graves burst open when Jesus was
crucified and they came out of their graves after the resurrection of Jesus
and were seen of many in the city. Jesus is the resurrection and the life.
But the above scripture was written after His resurrection, but before A.D.
70. A resurrection around A. D. 70 makes perfectly good sense. This was the
end of the Old Covenant and the fulfillment of the promises made to the
saints of old as well as the disciples and apostles. All of the apostles
except John were dead by A. D. 70." (Seeking
Cite)
William Urmy
"In verses 30 and 31 of the twenty-fourth chapter of Matthew it is said, "And
they shall see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and
great glory. And he shall send forth his angels with a great sound of a
trumpet," etc. Now, it cannot be reasonably doubted that these comings are the
same, for they are both comings in glory and with the angels, yet in the
thirty-fourth verse of the same chapter our Lord solemnly declares: "Verily I
say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all these things be
accomplished." As, therefore, his coming in power and glory was one of "these
things," we are forced to the conclusion that he did come in glory within about
forty years after the utterance of the sermon on the Mount of Olives, that that
coming was a coming to judgment, and that therefore the judgment day came long
centuries ago. " (Christ Came Again, p. 313)
David Green "To say then that the universal Church has preached a false gospel
throughout history is to refute God’s covenant, and the power of His Gospel, and
the authority of His Church. It is, in essence, to call God a liar. "
Don Preston "I find it impossible to escape the conclusion that either the Great
Trumpet of the Lord sounded in that first century generation or Jesus' promise
failed and man still has no escape from sin, from separation from God."
Don Preston "Only if God keeps His promises is He a God to be loved, believed,
and obeyed. If the God of the Bible is no better at keeping His promises than
the repeated failed prognostications of the men mentioned above, then He is not
a God worth serving. And, if Christ's apostles, supposedly inspired by the
Spirit of Christ, failed in their predictions, then they are false prophets as
well."
Don Preston "When men say something will happen soon, do they mean it may not
happen for centuries, even millenniums? When men DO say something is imminent
and the event does not happen shortly we say the man who made the promise was
mistaken, a liar, a failure or a charlatan!"
Don Preston "The preterist paradigm is the only view of eschatology that affirms
that Jesus kept his word on time. "
Don Preston "If Jesus did not do what he said he was going to do, when he said
he would do it, then we cannot believe him, he said not to believe
him!"
David Curtis "This seems like the simple and clear answer that holds to the
inspiration of Scripture. Jesus did what he said he would do."
David Curtis "I submit to you that either Scripture is wrong about the
TIME of the second coming and thus not inerrant or our paradigms are
wrong about the NATURE of the second coming. Which one of those
are you more comfortable with, an incorrect paradigm or an uninspired
Scripture?"
Anthony Buzzard "It defies common sense to believe that Jesus did not do what He
said He would do when He said He would do it. "
Harold Watkins "If He failed to do what He said He would do, as the argument
goes, then His divinity is surely questionable."
Virgil Vaduva "No, there is no “niggling problem” that I am aware of. If there
is a problem, it is in the hearts of those blinded by tradition, ignorance and
arrogance. The same people who call themselves followers of Christ, waste no
time in rejecting Christ’s words, making Him a liar. The same people reject the
testimony of the disciples, and their inspired written accounts."
Virgil Vaduva "The decision about Jesus is the same, whether we are talking
about His claims to deity, or His claims about the Second Coming. He was either
a Liar, Lunatic, or Lord."
