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


End Times Chart

Introduction and Key


David S. Clark - The Message From Patmos: A Postmillennial Commentary on the Book of Revelation (1921) "This early twentieth-century Postmillennial commentary on the Book of Revelation, written by the father of theologian Gordon Clark, offers an easy-to-read alternative to the popular Pre-millennial/Dispensational views of the best-selling Scofield Reference Bible and a multitude of other dissertations on end-time prophecy that litter the shelves of Christian bookstores. "

Historical Preterism
Historical Preterism 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

(Minor Fulfillment of Matt. 24/25 or Revelation in Past)

Joseph Addison
Oswald T. Allis
Thomas Aquinas
Karl Auberlen
Albert Barnes
Karl Barth
G.K. Beale
John Bengel
Wilhelm Bousset
John A. Broadus

David Brown
"Haddington Brown"
F.F. Bruce

Augustin Calmut
John Calvin
B.H. Carroll
Johannes Cocceius
Vern Crisler
Thomas Dekker
Wilhelm De Wette
Philip Doddridge
Isaak Dorner
Dutch Annotators
Alfred Edersheim
Jonathan Edwards

E.B. Elliott
Heinrich Ewald
Patrick Fairbairn
Js. Farquharson
A.R. Fausset
Robert Fleming
Hermann Gebhardt
Geneva Bible
Charles Homer Giblin
John Gill
William Gilpin
W.B. Godbey
Ezra Gould
Hank Hanegraaff
Matthew Henry
G.A. Henty
George Holford
Johann von Hug
William Hurte
J, F, and Brown
B.W. Johnson
John Jortin
Benjamin Keach
K.F. Keil
Henry Kett
Richard Knatchbull
Johann Lange

Cornelius Lapide
Nathaniel Lardner
Jean Le Clerc
Peter Leithart
Jack P. Lewis
Abiel Livermore
John Locke
Martin Luther

James MacDonald
James MacKnight
Dave MacPherson
Keith Mathison
Philip Mauro
Thomas Manton
Heinrich Meyer
J.D. Michaelis
Johann Neander
Sir Isaac Newton
Thomas Newton
Stafford North
Dr. John Owen
 Blaise Pascal
William W. Patton
Arthur Pink

Thomas Pyle
Maurus Rabanus
St. Remigius

Anne Rice
Kim Riddlebarger
J.C. Robertson
Edward Robinson
Andrew Sandlin
Johann Schabalie
Philip Schaff
Thomas Scott
C.J. Seraiah
Daniel Smith
Dr. John Smith
C.H. Spurgeon

Rudolph E. Stier
A.H. Strong
St. Symeon
Friedrich Tholuck
George Townsend
James Ussher
Wm. Warburton
Benjamin Warfield

Noah Webster
John Wesley
B.F. Westcott
William Whiston
Herman Witsius
N.T. Wright

John Wycliffe
Richard Wynne
C.F.J. Zullig

Correspondence on "Full" Preterism

By Andrew Sandlin
Jan. 7, 2001

Dr. Sandlin,

I've often read Chalcedon articles during the past 10 years or so. The Lord brought me out of the Arminian, pre-trib, Dallas Seminary tradition into 5-point Calvinism and a still developing view of the covenants and eschatology. I'm grateful for how the Lord has used your magazine and website to help me on this ongoing journey.

Regarding your article, Those Long-Lived "Last Days," I'm finding Full Preterism to be a much more satisfying view Biblically than your conclusions, though I think that a positive and triumphant view of Christ's kingdom is right on target and fits in well with Preterism. I know Preterism does not fit the creeds of the early fathers but they were not infallible, the Scriptures are. It is hard to see how one can deny that the inspired New Testament writers clearly taught the imminent return of Christ. And if they taught an imminent return, one cannot honestly conclude that "soon" meant 2,000 years and more. It seems that all views, except Preterism, do not deal with the eschatological language of the writers of the New Testament in a straightforward, simple and honest way (especially passages like Matt. 23-25). There seems to be a real tendency to take figurative, apocalyptic language found in these NT passages and make them literal, when so many of the phrases and figures are similar if not exactly the same as ones found in the OT. I'm not completely convinced of Full Preterism but I'm studying...

I do thank you at Chalcedon for always making me think. I know all of us who love the Lord will be lifelong learners. Keep up the good work.

[name withheld]

Dear Mr. ----:

Thank you for your kind comments about Chalcedon. We do appreciate them.

I don't hold to orthodox eschatology merely because the Christian creeds say so, but chiefly because I believe the creeds summarize what the Bible teaches. As I pointed out in my editorial, I do not believe that the NT writers "clearly taught the imminent return of Christ." I believe they expected that He could come at any time, and that Jesus Himself indicated that He would not return (the second time) for a good, long time. I gave a rationale for why I believe the NT writers had this expectation -- their knowledge of salvation history. They saw Christ's death, resurrection and return in an historical continuum.

In fact, I believe that if you lop off Christ's return -- which I take mainly to mean the very visible, physical return so graphically described in 2 Thes. 1 (for example) -- you have severed an artery of salvation history and leave vulnerable His space-time death and resurrection. In other words, Christ's future physical Advent and His past physical death and resurrection stand and fall together. It seems to me that the return of Christ mentioned in the NT is usually referring to just this epochal, history-ending coming (1 Cor. 15:22-23).

I think the key is in salvation history, not in the exegesis of texts like Mt. 24-25 as such. "Prophecy" is secondary to history in the minds of the NT writers. On this point, could I recommend Oscar Cullmann's classic Salvation History? It offers an entirely different paradigm than the full preterists offer and makes good sense of the message of the NT.

While I disagree with some of their exegesis, I have no big problem with the sort of orthodox (partial) preterism of Adams, DeMar, Gentry and others. They all affirm the future, physical Second Advent.

While I don't see the views of the church as ultimately normative, I think it most unlikely that the almost unanimous testimony of the church for 2000 years could have been mistaken on such a fundamental point. Full preterism is in fact, therefore, non-Christian in that it repudiates cardinal tenets of the orthodox Faith. More egregiously, it misunderstands salvation history.

I don't want to get into a fight about this, and this is not an invitation for a debate; but I do thank you for writing and pray that God will lead you as you stay true to Him and His Word and the Faith once for all delivered to the saints.

Yours and His,

P. Andrew Sandlin

Rev. P. Andrew Sandlin has written hundreds of scholarly and popular articles and several monographs. He holds degrees in English, English literature, history and political science. He is married and has five children and lives in rural northern California.



What do YOU think ?

Submit Your Comments For Posting Here
Comment Box Disabled For Security

Date: 10 Aug 2006
Time: 10:56:39


Back in 1999, C. Jonathin Seraiah wrote a rebuke of ‘pantelism’ (his name for us) called ‘The End of All Things: A Defense of the Future’. Andrew Sandlin slapped his endorsement on the back cover (the largest one) and says,

“In the present work, C. Jonathin Seraiah ferrets out the leading flaws of pantelism (the so-called “consistent preterism) and reinforces the accuracy of the orthodox understanding of eschatology……”

Now page 14:

“This recognition is helpful in distinguishing the prophecies of Christ's coming that were near, in the first century (Matt. 10:23; 16:28; 24:30; 26:64; 1 Thess. 5:2; 2 Thess. 1:7; James 5:7-9; 1 Pet. 4:7; Rev. 1:3, 7; etc.) and thus fulfilled in a.d. 70, from those that were far (John 5:28-29; Acts 1:11; 17:31; 1 Cor. 15:23-24; 1 Thess. 4:16; 1 Jn. 3:2; etc.) and thus not yet fulfilled even in our day. It also helps to distinguish between a spiritual "coming" (invisible for temporal judgment, as in a.d. 70) and a physical coming (visible for eternal judgment).”

Did you catch that?

‘coming that were near, in the first century…..2 Thess. 1:7….and thus fulfilled in a.d. 70……’

Question: Did Andrew Sandlin read this book before recommending it’s ‘accuracy’ against ‘consistent’ preterism? The very text that Sandlin believes, if rejected as being future, will “severe an artery of salvation history and leave vulnerable His space-time death and resurrection” is the very exact same verse Seraiah says was fulfilled in ad70!!

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's Sole Developer and Curator, Todd Dennis  (todd @ Opened in 1996