|
"For example, Billy Graham and Barbara Streisand -- two people on different
ends of the spiritual spectrum"
|
Gary DeMar
President and general director of American Vision and the author of
numerous books on biblical worldview issues. The staff of American
Vision conducts seminars on worldview issues. For more information
concerning lectures, debates, radio interviews and seminars, please
contact American Vision
American Vision
-
The Gary Demar Show (MP3:
The Apocalypse Code Interview With Hank Hanegraaff) |
 "End Times Fiction"
| "Last Days Madness: Obsession
of the Modern Church" | "America's Christian History: The Untold
Story" and God and Government (Vol. 1, 2 and 3), and more. |
“It is unbiblical to
use the term ‘Antichrist’ for a present-day or future political ruler.
The proper context is theological and pre-A. D. 70”
(Last Days Madness,
p.204).
Biblical Minimalism and "The History of Preterism"
|
The Early Church and the End of the World
|
Time's Puff
Piece: The Devil is in the Details
|
The People of
God, the Land of Israel, and the Impartiality of the Gospel
| Will
the Real Anti-Prophets Please Stand Up? |
Zechariah
14 and the Coming of Christ |
Defending
the Indefensible |
No
Fear of the Text |
Dispensationalism
: Being Left Behind |
The Passing Away of
Heaven and Earth |
Who or
what is the Antichrist |
Rapture Fever: Why Dispensationalism is Paralyzed
|
Identifying Antichrist
|
On Thin
Ice |
Using the Bible to
Interpret the Bible |
DeMar Articles
|
Visit the Moody Bible Institute Website
| Visit the American Vision
Website |
Hal Lindsey is Making Predictions -- Again |
Hal Lindsey Redux
|
Eschatology Articles
A Review of "Understanding End Times Prophecy"
(7/2008) "Benware and other dispensationalists claim that the only
way Revelation can be interpreted is literally. Let’s put their
standard to the test. “The third angel sounded, and a great star
fell from heaven, burning like a torch, and it fell on a third of
the rivers and on the springs of waters” (Rev. 8:10). If one star
hits the earth, the earth will be vaporized in an instant. In fact,
if a star gets even close to the earth, the earth is going to burn
up before it hits. Then there’s Revelation 8:12: “Then the fourth
angel sounded, and a third of the sun and a third of the moon and a
third of the stars were smitten, so that a third of them might be
darkened and the day might not shine for a third of it, and the
night in the same way.” How can a “third of the sun” be smitten
without catastrophic results on the whole earth and not just a third
of it? All of this language is drawn from the Old Testament and only
has meaning as it is interpreted in light of its Old Testament
context—the judgment and destruction of nations (Isa. 14:12; Jer.
9:12–16). To ignore how a passage is used in the Old Testament is
like trying to interpret Egyptian hieroglyphics without the Rosetta
Stone."
-
Tommy Ice:
Ezekiel 38 &
39 "As I have thought more critically about literal interpretation
and this passage while doing this series, I have come to disagree
with a statement made by Mark Hitchcock and I where we said:
"Ezekiel spoke in language that the people of his day could understand.
If he had spoken of MIG-29s, laser-fired missiles, tanks, and assault
rifles, this text would have been nonsensical to everyone until the
twentieth century."[10] Instead, I have come to agree with DeMar
who says: "A lot has to be read into the Bible in order to make
Ezekiel 38 and 39 fit modern-day military realities that include jet
planes, 'missiles,' and 'atomic and explosive' weaponry."[11] Even
though I think DeMar is right on this one point, it does not mean that
his conclusion is correct."
-
Critical: Audio
Files - Gary DeMar (Preterist) vs.
Thomas Ice (Futurist) :
The Great Tribulation: Past or Future
Debate held May 26, 2006 at a World View Conference in Toccoa, GA.
MP3 1 - (55:37) |
MP3 2 - (55:48)
-
The Global Proclamation of the Gospel -
Thomas Ice "The preterist arguments
for a first-century fulfillment of
Matthew 24:14 are much less
than compelling. Their insistence that oikoumene in
Matthew 24:14 must refer to the
ancient Roman Empire has no traction." |
The
Gospel Preached to All the World |
Two |
Three |
Four
-
"Shreds of Preterism" Among First Century Writers "Much of
the debate over preterism comes down to when the document was
written. This is especially true for the book of
Revelation. If a document was written prior to the
destruction of Jerusalem which occurred in A.D. 70, then any
statement about future prophetic events could be a reference
to that event."
-
Tommy Ice
and Dispensationalism under the Microscope -- Again "The
difference is, preterism is right and dispensationalism is
wrong, and because it’s wrong, it’s dangerous to Jews and the
rest of us and those people who are reading the Left Behind
series as if the prophetic content is actually taught in the
Bible. As I’ve demonstrated in End
Times Fiction, it’s not."
-
Thomas Ice and
the Time Texts - "By never raising the issue of how
the second person plural ("you") is used throughout Matthew 10, he is
counting on his loyal readers not to notice. And who would think to go
to Mark's account of the Transfiguration to see that the "disciples" is
a larger group than Peter, James, and John? Of course, we all know the
answer to this question: Preterists would."
-
Bible
Minimalism and "The History of Preterism" - "Ice and LaHaye get off on the wrong foot in their
analysis of preterism. The historical argument is a death blow, or to
use Mark Hitchcock's metaphor from his chapter on the dating of
Revelation, "A Stake in the Heart" to their brand of futurism. The
earliest historical sources, the Didache, the testimony of James, the
brother of Jesus, and 1 Clement demonstrate that preterism's history is
a first-century history."
-
7/9/7:
Norman Geisler, "You," &
"Zechariah the Son of Berechiah"
"Geisler’s argument on the second person plural does not stand
up to exegetical scrutiny. By not dealing with the above
arguments, he shows that he is not a trustworthy critic of the
preterist interpretation of prophecy."
"Why are Jews
wanting to rebuild the temple.? For the same reason that the temple was
maintained prior to its destruction in AD 70 - they do not believe that
Jesus is the promised Messiah. If the Jews once again build a temple and
begin to offer sacrifices,
this will only solidify their rejection of the need for the atoning blood
of Jesus. It was this rejection that led to the destruction of the
temple that was standing in Jesus' day.”
(On
Matthew 16:27-28)
"If we maintain that the event Jesus is describing is still in
our future, then how should we interpret His statement that some of those
with whom He was speaking would still be alive when He did in fact 'come
in the glory of His Father with His angels'?" (Last Days Madness,
p. 43)
(On
Matthew
24:13)
"Even for those
who interpret the 'end' in Matthew 24:13 to be some future 'end,'
that future 'end' is not the end" (Last Days Madness,
GA: American Vision, p. 63)
(On
Matthew 24:14)
"These commentators understood
that all the events prior to
Matthew 24:34 referred to events
leading up to and including the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D.70."
(Is Jesus Coming Soon? Powder Springs, GA: American Vision,
1999, p. 17)
"Beginning with the book of Acts, we see that
famines were prevalent in the period prior to Jerusalem's
destruction in A.D.70.. Contemporary secular historians such as
Tacitus, Suetonius, and Josephus mention other famines during the
period prior to A.D.70." (Last Days Madness: Obsession of the
Modern Church, 4th ed., Atlanta, GA: American Vision,
p.79)
"In an article published in the November 2002 issue of
Midnight
Call magazine, Thomas Ice presents the dispensational case
that Matthew 24:14 was not fulfilled prior to the destruction of Jerusalem
in A.D. 70. Tommy should be commended for finally doing what preterists have
been asking dispensationalists to do for quite some time--deal with
preterist arguments by actually interacting with preterist published works
and by comparing Scripture with Scripture. I would be willing to wager that
Ice's analysis of Matthew 24:14 is the first time any dispensationalist has
attempted to reconcile this passage with global-language passages which
indicate that the gospel had been preached to the "whole world"
before Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D. 70 (Col. 1:6, 23; Rom. 1:8;
16:25–26)."
"The history of biblical interpretation is against Ice's view. Is it
any wonder that he fails to inform his readers that a majority of
commentators stand against the dispensational interpretation of Matthew
24? If the grammatical-historical approach of interpretation is followed,
there can be no other conclusion than that the gospel had been preached to
the world of Jesus’ day before that generation passed away. For a point by
point study of the arguments raised by Ice and a comprehensive study of
how oikoumene is used in the New Testament, go to parts 2 and 3."
"The events of Matthew
24 are to take place before "this generation" passes away (v. 34). Jesus
always uses "this generation" in reference to His contemporaries (Matt.
11:16; 12:41, 42; 23:36; Mark 8:12; 13:30; Luke 7:31; 11:29, 30, 31, 32,
50, 51; 17:25; 21:32). "This generation" is never used to describe a
future generation.
"The English translation "whole world" in 24:14 is based on the
Greek word oikoumene which is best translated "inhabited earth"
rather than the more global word (from our perspective) "world" (kosmos).
This means that the gospel had to go no further than the census decreed by
Caesar Augustus. Most modern translations (e.g., NASV and NIV) translate
oikoumene in Luke 2:1 as "the inhabited earth."
" The use of "all the nations" is not always a reference to
every nation on earth. In many cases it refers only to those known nations
in which one could travel (Matt. 24:9; Acts 2:5).
"The end" to which Jesus refers to in 24:14 is the same end
described in 24:3 and 6--the "end of the age": the end of the old covenant
(Heb. 1:1–2)." (The Gospel
Preached to All the World)
Footnote 1 - "For example, Arno C. Gaebelein's rambling and
rabidly dispensational commentary, first published in 1910, dismisses
without argument any view that is not dispensational; Ed Glasscock’s
commentary in the Moody Gospel Commentary series (1997) assumes a futurist
view of Matthew 24:14 with no mention of oikoumene or
any consideration of how the New Testament uses oikoumene in other
contexts; Leon Morris’s The Gospel According to Matthew (Eerdmans,
1992) does not discuss oikoumene; Craig S. Keener’s massive Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew
(Eerdmans, 1999) and his abridged
commentary for InterVarsity Press (1997) assume a futurist view with no
discussion of oikoumene except in a footnote; in more than two
pages of commentary on Matthew 24, William Hendriksen makes no mention
that oikoumene is used (Baker 1973); dispensationalist Stanley D.
Toussaint avoids any discussion of oikoumene in his Behold the
King: A Study of Matthew (Multnomah, 1980) and in his unpublished
paper "A Critique of the Preterist View of the Olivet Discourse" (no
date); John F. Walvoord’s Matthew: Thy Kingdom Come (Moody, 1974),
says nothing about oikoumene and its possible relation to an A.D.
70 fulfillment, and there is no discussion of verse 14 in his The
Prophecy Knowledge Handbook which claims to include "all the
prophecies of Scriptures" (Victor, 1990); while Lutheran scholar R.C.H.
Lenski does mention that oikoumene is used, there is no discussion
of its possible significance (Augusburg, 1943); the dispensational Liberty Bible Commentary
(1982) defaults to an end-time, pre-tribulational
reading of the text; the same is true for Louis Barbieri's exposition of
Matthew in the Bible Knowledge Commentary (Victor, 1983); J. Barton
Payne's only comment on Matthew 24:14 in his 754-page Encyclopedia of
Biblical Prophecy is that it refers to "universal gospel preaching"
(Harper & Row, 1973)." (The Gospel
Preached to All the World)
(On
Matthew 24:27)
"Is the "coming of the Son of Man" in
Matthew 24:37 different in time and kind from the "coming of the Son of
Man" in verses 27 and 30? There is no indication that Jesus is
describing two comings separated by an indeterminate period of time.
What would have led the disciples to conclude that Jesus was describing a
coming different from the one He described moments before when He uses
identical language to describe both of them?" (Last Days Madness,
4th rev., pp. 199-200)
(On Matthew 24:35 ;
New
Heavens and Earth)
"Jesus does not change subjects when He assures the disciples that
"heaven and earth will pass away." Rather, He merely affirms His
prior predictions, which are recorded in Matthew 24:2931. Verse 36 is a
summary and confirmation statement of these verses.(6) Keep in mind that
the central focus of the Olivet Discourse is the desolation of the
"house" and "world" of apostate Israel (23:36). The
old world of Judaism, represented by the earthly temple, is taken apart
stone by stone (24:2). James Jordan writes, "each time God brought
judgment on His people during the Old Covenant, there was a sense in which
an old heavens and earth was replaced with a new one: New rulers were set
up, a new symbolic world model was built (Tabernacle, Temple), and so
forth."(7) The New Covenant replaces the Old Covenant with new
leaders, a new priesthood, new sacraments, a new sacrifice, a new
tabernacle (John 1:14), and a new temple (John 2:19; 1 Corinthians 3:16;
Ephesians 2:21). In essence, a new heaven and earth."
(On Matthew 24:1-3)
"The temple that Jesus said would be destroyed is the same
temple with the same stones that was pointed out to Jesus by His
disciples. No future temple is in view. Jesus gives no
indication that He has a future temple in mind. But what if the Jews
rebuild the temple? Such a temple will have nothing to do with the
fulfillment on any part of this prophecy." [Last Days Madness: The Folly of Trying to
Predict When Christ Will Return (Atlanta: American Vision, 1977), 29.]
"Not one verse in the New Testament mentions the
need for a rebuilt temple. In fact, just the opposite is
stated. The temple of God in the New Testament is quite obviously
the church of Christ with Jesus as the 'cornerstone' (1 Peter 2:7) [Last Days Madness: The Folly of Trying to
Predict When Christ Will Return (Atlanta: American Vision), 59.]
(On
Great Tribulation,
Matthew
24:16)
"Any tribulation the
Jews experience in other countries is not in view here. The
death of six million Jews at the hands of the Nazis did not take
place in the land of Israel. The great tribulation is a
description of what happened to Jews living in Israel in the first
century. Over one million Jews died at the hands of the
Romans. Nothing will ever compare to it because of Israel's
special covenantal status. Her sin was great, therefore
her judgment was great." (Last Days Madness, p. 129, n
22.)
"The tribulation period cannot be global because all
one has to do to escape is flee to the mountains. Notice that
Jesus says "let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains"
(Matt 24:16). Judea is not the world; it's not even the nation
of Israel!" (ibid., p. 121)
(On
Matthew
24:29-31 ;
New Heavens
and Earth)
"The darkening of the sun and moon and the falling of the stars, coupled
with the shaking of the heavens (24:29), are more descriptive ways of
saying that "heaven and earth will pass away" (24:35). In other
contexts, when stars fall, they fall to the earth, a sure sign of temporal
judgment (Isaiah 14:12; Daniel 8:10; Revelation 6:13; 9:1; 12:4). So then,
the "passing away of heaven and earth" is the passing away of
the old covenant world of Judaism led and upheld by those who
"crucified the Lord of glory" (1 Corinthians 2:8). (Taken from:
The
Passing Away of Heaven and Earth)
"The Old Testament is filled with solar, lunar, and
stellar language depicting great political upheaval. The rise of
kingdoms is compared to the brightness of the sun, moon, and stars.
The brightness of these heavenly bodies means that a nation is in
ascendancy. When a nation is described as falling - coming under the
judgment of God - it is compared to the sun and moon going dark and stars
falling from the sky." [Last Days Madness: The Folly of Trying to
Predict When Christ Will Return (Atlanta: American Vision, 1996),96.]
(On
Matthew
24:34)
". . . notice how many times Jesus uses the word you
(second person plural) in Matthew 24 and in the parallel passages in Mark
13 and Luke 21 . . . . Now, if you heard Jesus say that all these things
would happen to "this generation" and in every other instance of
its use "this generation" meant the present generation, and you
also heard Him speak of when "you" see these things, what would
you have concluded?" (No cite)
"It is quite obvious that the disciples connected Jesus'
"coming" with the "end of the age." The "coming" of Matthew 24:3 refers
to the coming of Jesus in judgment upon Jerusalem in A.D. 70. James, as
well as other New Testament writers, is clear about the nearness of
Jesus' coming: "the coming of the Lord is at hand" (James 5:8), at hand
for those who first read the epistle." (The
Passing Away of Heaven and Earth)
(On
Hebrews 9:26;
Forty
Years and That Generation)
"But now once at the consummation of the ages He has been manifested
to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself" (Hebrews 9:26). Jesus
was manifested, not at the beginning, but "at the consummation of the
ages." The period between A.D. 30 and 70 is, as the apostle Peter
describes it, "these last times" (1 Peter 1:20). As time drew
near for Jerusalem's destruction, Peter could say that "the end of
all things was at hand" (4:7).
(On
James 5:8)
"Consider James 5:89, a passage that MacArthur uses to support his
contention that Jesus could come "at any moment," even though 2000 years
have passed.6 "You too be patient; strengthen your hearts,
for the coming of the Lord is at hand" (v. 8). "At hand," or "near,"
cannot be made to mean "any moment." "At hand" is defined for us by the
Bible in the next verse: "Behold, the Judge is standing right at the
door" (v. 9). "At hand" = "right at the door." How far from the door is
Jesus in Revelation 3:20? Being "right at the door" means being close
enough to knock. MacArthur is either oblivious to the debate surrounding
this issue or he tactically decided to steer his readers around the
topic so as not to raise a very big red flag." (Defending
the Indefensible)
(On
I Peter 4:7)
"If Peter had meant that the physical
earth would be literally destroyed in the near future, he was simply
wrong. Some people would take another view of this verse and say that the
"at hand" does not mean "in the near future." If that
is the case, there is little meaning in Peter's words at all. Peter
deliberately put a time indicator in his prophecy. Peter meant that all
old things, all the things of the old covenant, would pass away in the
destruction of Jerusalem." (The Reduction of Christianity, p. 160)
(On
the Significance
of A.D.70)
"All the signs listed in Matthew 24 have reference to the
destruction of Jerusalem in A.D.70." (ibid., p. 124)
(On
J.S. Russell's
Book,
The Parousia)
"How many times have you struggled with the interpretation of certain
Biblical texts related to the time of Jesus' return because they did not
fit with a preconceived system of eschatology? Russell's Parousia takes
the Bible seriously when it tells us of the nearness of Christ's return.
Those who claim to interpret the Bible literally, trip over the obvious
meaning of these time texts by making Scripture mean the opposite of what
it unequivocally declares. Reading Russell is a breath of fresh air in a
room filled with smoke and mirror hermeneutics." - (Gary DeMar -
Author of Last Days Madness)
(On
Parousia/Second Coming)
"The word translated as 'coming' in verse 1 is the Greek word
parousia, best translated as 'presence' in other contexts (2 Cor.
10:10; Phil 2:12)" (Last Days Madness, 4th
rev. ed.; Atlanta, GA: American Vision, 1999, p. 274)
"Jesus would be coming "just as the lightening comes from the east,"
that is, quickly and without warning. In the Bible, lightening
often signifies the presence of the Lord and His coming in judgment
(Ex. 19:16; 20:18; Job 36:30; Ezek. 21:15,28; Zech 9:14). God
was not physically present during any of these Old Testament
comings, but His presence was obvious, as the reaction of the people
will testify: "And when the people saw it, they trembled and
stood at a distance (Ex. 20:18)." (ibid., pp. 123,124)
(On the Battle of Armageddon)
"A study of the context of
Rome's battle with Israel indicates that the plain of Megiddo was in view
as was the city of Jerusalem. This only reinforces an A.D.70
fulfillment.. So then, whether we understand this battle to be a symbolic
was with Israel, using the Megiddo imagery to show God's covenantal
judgment, or to be another literal Megiddo battle, the was is over." (Last
Days Madness., 319)
(On
Gog and Magog)
"Edwin M. Yamauchi, noted Christian historian and
archeologist, writes that rosh "can have nothing to do with modern
'Russia,'" and "all informed references and studies acknowledge that the
association with Moscow and Tobolsk is untenable." (Last Days
Madness Obsession of the Modern Church, Atlanta, GA: American Vision,
1996, p. 363)
"Ernst Wilhelm Hengstenberg writes that 'the poor Russians
have been here very unjustly arranged among the enemies of God's people.
Rosh, as the name of a people, not not occur in all the Old Testament." (ibid.,
p. 364)
(On
the
Early
Date of Revelation)
"The Book of Revelation was
written before AD 70. Its purpose was to describe events leading up to and
including the destruction of Jerusalem…. The prophecy is describing
events that refer to the first-century church" (Last Days
Madness, pp. 182, 183).
(On
the
Seventy
Weeks)
"Dispensationalists
need a gap between the feet and the toes of Nebuchadnezzar's
statue.." (Last Days Madness, p. 172)
(On
the
Antichrist)
“It is unbiblical to use the term ‘Antichrist’ for a
present-day or future political ruler. The proper context is theological
and pre-A. D. 70” (Last Days Madness, p.204).
(On
The Rapture)
"The idea of a pre-tribulational rapture must be
assumed by the
reader and imposed on the text. Sound biblical interpretation,
however, requires textual proof before a doctrine can be formulated.. No
mention is made of the church being raptured either before or after a
tribulation period. Nothing in the text even
points to a tribulation period." (Last Days Madness, p.
221).
"Like the dispensational hermeneutical methodology in general, the
pretribulational rapture is a gigantic hoax.
Because the pretribulational rapture is a pillar of the
dispensational system, we should expect to find proof of its existence
in clear texts. Even one text would suffice. There is not a single
passage that clearly and dogmatically supports a pretribulational
rapture." (ibid, p. 221)
"Readers of Left Behind
should be aware that the pretrib
Rapture is the keystone to the entire multi-volume series. If
there is no pretrib Rapture, then no one is left behind." (End Times
Fiction, p. 19)
(On
Hermeneutical Principles)
"Reading modern-day concepts, whether scientific, geographical, or
academic,2 back into the Bible
can cause insurmountable interpretive problems. For example, how many
times have you heard a minister claim that the gospel is like
"dynamite"? The comparison is made because the Greek word dunamis,
translated "power" (Rom. 1:16), is the same word Alfred Nobel chose in
1866 to name his explosive concoction. Since "power" and "dynamite"
share the same Greek word (dunamis), the New Testament use of
"power" must share the characteristics of dynamite. D.A. Carson
describes this as "an appeal to a kind of reverse etymology,"3 reading modern definitions of words back into ancient writings.
The effects of dynamite were unknown by the New Testament writers. Paul
was not thinking of exploding sticks of dynamite when he used dunamis
to describe the power of the gospel any more than he was thinking about
the power expended when the Space Shuttle takes off from Cape Canaveral.
Our understanding of the biblical use of dunamis has to be
understood in terms of how it was understood in Paul's day. "[Gordon]
Fee and [Douglas] Stuart rightly emphasize that ‘the true meaning of the
biblical text for us is what God originally intended it to mean when it
was first spoken.’4 We must
first determine what a text meant ‘in their town’ before we can
determine what it means and how we should apply that meaning to our own
time and culture. - 3. See D.A. Carson, Exegetical Fallacies, 2nd
ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1996), 34. 4. Gordon D. Fee and
Douglas Stuart, How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth: A Guide to
Understanding the Bible, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan,
1993), 26."
(The Gospel
Preached to All the World in
Part
Two)
(On
Aion
/ World)
"Notice that the disciples did not ask about the
dissolution of the physical heaven and earth or the judgment of the
"world" (kosmos). After hearing Jesus pronounce judgment on
the temple and city of Jerusalem (Matthew 23:3739), His disciples
ask about the end of the "age" (aion). When did the "end"
occur? The only proximate eschatological event that fits the "end of
the age" framework is the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. The
disciples knew that the fall of the temple and the destruction of
the city meant the end of the Old Covenant order and the
inauguration of a new order. As Jews who were familiar with Old
Testament imagery, the disciples recognized the meaning of this
restructuring language. Jesus nowhere corrects or modifies the
multi-faceted question of the disciples.. The "age to come,"
therefore, is simply a designation for the Christian era, an era
that was long ago prophesied by the prophets. Abraham, for example,
"rejoiced in order to see [Jesus'] day; and he saw it, and was glad"
(John 8:56). The old covenant with its attendant animal sacrifices
and earthly priesthood passed away when God's lamb, Jesus Christ,
took away the sins of the world." (The
Passing Away of Heaven and Earth)
"The Early Church and the "End of the World"
|
"Since the futurist perspective
has been promoted as an early church reality by so many for so
long, few people today actually question it. The Early
Church and the "End of the World" is the first book to
question the prevailing futurist view by a careful study of the
historical record. It will show that some of the earliest
writers, most likely writing before the destruction of Jerusalem
in A.D. 70, were referring to the judgment coming of Jesus, an
event that the gospel writers tell us was to take place before
that first-century generation passed away (Matt. 24:34). Adding
to the confirmation of this view are the writings of the
church’s first historian,
Eusebius Pampilus
of Caesarea (c. 260–341), whose Ecclesiastical
History is a window on the first few centuries of the
church. " ($6.95) |
Book Review |
 |
The claim has
been made by a number of prophecy writers that the early church was
predominately premillennial on millennial issues and exclusively
futuristic on almost everything else. This means that early Christian
writers who commented on prophetic passages like the Olivet Discourse
(Matt. 24, Mark 13, Luke 21) believed and wrote that the biblical
authors were always referring to events in the distant future just
before the return of Christ. While these claims have been made with
certainty, there has always been a lack of clear historical
documentation to back them up. Sometimes the historical record has been
stretched and exaggerated to fit an already developed theory. But since
the futurist perspective has been promoted as an early church reality by
so many for so long, few people today actually question it. The
Early Church and the "End of the World" is the first book to
question the prevailing futurist view by a careful study of the
historical record.
The Early Church and the "End of the World" asks this fundamental
question: What did the earliest of the early Christian writers actually
believe about prophetic events? We can only answer this question by
actually studying what they wrote. Unfortunately, we do not have a
complete record of the period. To make our historical investigation even
more difficult, there are translation issues. Many of the works of those
who wrote soon after the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 and beyond
remain untranslated.
This
booklet seeks to remedy some of these problems. Thomas Ice, in his
chapter on the history of preterism in The End Times Controversy,
makes some bold historical claims that cannot be supported when the
historical record is actually analyzed. The early church was not
monolithic in its views of Bible prophecy. There was no unanimous
acceptance of either premillennialism or a distant futurism.
The Early Church and the "End of the World" will show that some of
the earliest writers, most likely writing before the destruction of
Jerusalem in A.D. 70, were referring to the judgment coming of Jesus, an
event that the gospel writers tell us was to take place before that
first-century generation passed away (Matt. 24:34). Adding to the
confirmation of this view are the writings of the church’s first
historian, Eusebius Pampilus of Caesarea (c. 260–341), whose
Ecclesiastical History is a window on the first few centuries
of the church.
In addition,
Francis X. Gumerlock has undertaken the task of translating a number
of ancient and medieval commentators who have written on Matthew 24.
He shows that many early and medieval writers believed that these
prophecies had already been fulfilled before the “end” of
Jerusalem, that is, before its destruction by the Romans in A.D. 70.
(Booklet, 83 pages with extensive footnotes)
WHAT OTHERS HAVE SAID
-
The Ascension of
our Hope - "Pastor
Dean Turbeville -
The
scholar Gary Demar has written a book which does nothing but
chronicle all the occasions in the last 2000 years when
Christian preachers and teachers have predicted that the end
of the world was at hand. It’s quite a thick book. Even Martin
Luther believed that he must be living in the End-Times.
"When Jerusalem burned, and the temple was
destroyed, it was infinitely more than the mere destruction of
one city: it was the close of a spiritual age,
and the opening of another one, the age of the New Covenant in
Christ"
Barbara Rossing
Another
interpretation of this passage is in regards to the word “meet.” The
following is Rossing’s deconstruction of the interpretation: “the word
for ‘meeting’ in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 is from the Greek word ‘apantesis,’
which is used to describe a delegation going out to meet an important
dignitary to escort them back. It doesn’t mean going out to meet the
dignitary and them leaving with them.” Rossing references a
conservative, evangelical critic by the name of Gary Demar. In his book,
“End Times Fiction: A Biblical Consideration of the Left Behind
Theology,” he says the dispensationalist script is unsupported because
there is no evidence of it in the Bible. " (Uses and
Abuses of Bible Prophecy (Rossing Influenced by DeMar)
What do YOU think ?
Send an email with your comments to
todd @ preteristarchive.com
Be sure to include the article name.
They will be posted shortly
upon receipt
Date:
11 Sep 2003
Time:
15:39:53
Comments
I have a question for you Mr. DeMar. I have read
alot of your material, and it is quite convincing, but I have a problem and I wanted to ask you or any other partial preterist who cares to step up to the plate and help me out. I am trying to understand the "this age" as your Jewish Age, and what is referred to as "the age to come" the Age we are supposedly in now. Jesus described the "age" to come, and it sure doesn't seem like it because evil is still here, and people are still
getting married, etc. Also Jesus said that His coming would be visible as the lightning. Would it be more appropriate look at the questions that the apostles asked and then look at how Jesus answered them. I have just read a new book in my study of eschatology called "A Case for Amillenialism" by Kim Riddlebarger, and I must say he does bring up some good arguments against partial preterism. Any clarification would be helpful. My e-mail is scottpiland@hotmail.com.
In Christ
Date:
06 Nov 2003
Time:
23:21:34
Comments
PERSONAL & CONFIDENTIAL
Dear Mr. DeMar:
I have a legal case that has interested the NLRB. Having done research to learn about the NLRB, I followed Mr. Brame’s treatment during his attempted appointment to the NLRB Board closely. It is frightening when an individual’s personal views affect their professional opportunities.
I am approaching you for advice as much as direction. The legal case I have initiated has caught the attention and interested the NLRB due to the following:
¨ I worked in NYC for a major, well-known jewelry retail establishment.
¨ As a result of my discussions with my peers, it became evident that there was a substantial disparity in the wages among us, (despite the fact that we all performed the same tasks and had the exact same responsibilities, titles and terms of employment.)
¨ The management of this establishment instructed me in writing not to discuss my compensation with other employees.
¨ I discussed my salary with other employees.
¨ When I suggested to my peers that we approach management and request as a cohesive unit that the company equilibrate our wages, I was terminated.
¨ I have sought legal advice.
¨ Surprisingly, the NLRB representative agreed to present our case before the NLRB board.
However, there is a specific reason that caused me to discuss my salary with other employees. I was hired simultaneously with another man. It was a period during which we were both temporary employees. We had identical experience professionally. We were both offered permanent employment at the same time by this company. He was offered 30% more salary. I questioned the management as to why there was a disparity in our compensation. Naturally they could provide no reason and I was instructed not to discuss compensation with other employees.
The reason I was offered less than my associate is because he is a very handsome gay man and our manager was (is) gay and very attracted to my former associate. My former company is known for being heavily represented by this sexual persuasion.
The homosexual discrimination aspect is not information that can ever be revealed or broached during or in any legal proceedings. My lawyer does not have significant experience before the NLRB. I am endeavoring to discuss, in confidence, my situation with legal experts versed in NLRB litigation and/or labor law. Can you advise me?
Regards, MT Finley
Date:
06 Nov 2003
Time:
23:22:39
Comments
PERSONAL & CONFIDENTIAL
Dear Mr. DeMar:
I have a legal case that has interested the NLRB. Having done research to learn about the NLRB, I followed Mr. Brame’s treatment during his attempted appointment to the NLRB Board closely. It is frightening when an individual’s personal views affect their professional opportunities.
I am approaching you for advice as much as direction. The legal case I have initiated has caught the attention and interested the NLRB due to the following:
¨ I worked in NYC for a major, well-known jewelry retail establishment.
¨ As a result of my discussions with my peers, it became evident that there was a substantial disparity in the wages among us, (despite the fact that we all performed the same tasks and had the exact same responsibilities, titles and terms of employment.)
¨ The management of this establishment instructed me in writing not to discuss my compensation with other employees.
¨ I discussed my salary with other employees.
¨ When I suggested to my peers that we approach management and request as a cohesive unit that the company equilibrate our wages, I was terminated.
¨ I have sought legal advice.
¨ Surprisingly, the NLRB representative agreed to present our case before the NLRB board.
However, there is a specific reason that caused me to discuss my salary with other employees. I was hired simultaneously with another man. It was a period during which we were both temporary employees. We had identical experience professionally. We were both offered permanent employment at the same time by this company. He was offered 30% more salary. I questioned the management as to why there was a disparity in our compensation. Naturally they could provide no reason and I was instructed not to discuss compensation with other employees.
The reason I was offered less than my associate is because he is a very handsome gay man and our manager was (is) gay and very attracted to my former associate. My former company is known for being heavily represented by this sexual persuasion.
The homosexual discrimination aspect is not information that can ever be revealed or broached during or in any legal proceedings. My lawyer does not have significant experience before the NLRB. I am endeavoring to discuss, in confidence, my situation with legal experts versed in NLRB litigation and/or labor law. Can you advise me?
Regards, MTF
Date:
11 Nov 2003
Time:
05:44:11
Comments
Thank you Mr DeMar. Once upon a time I was trapped in the spiritual bondage of Dispensationalism. I was increasingly at odds with my faith because my mind could no longer believe what was being passed as "sound doctrine." Since I thought that Dispensationalism was part of the core of what Christianity taught, for a time I was in outright apostacy. After reading some of your books and books by others (including Bishop Spong, Thomas Cahill, etc.) I realized that it wasn't Christianity that I was disillusioned with, but what I now recognize as a pernicious heresy - Dispensationalism.
Date:
24 Apr 2004
Time:
17:36:07
Comments
Someone on here is asking Gary how he handles "this age" (as the Jewish age per DeMar) and "the age to come" - and what he [DeMar] believes it is. Man please someone share with me what his answer is. Gary have you ever answered this? Please ref. me to an article or email or something. Questioner did you get a response?
In Christ,
Mike Sullivan
Date:
28 May 2004
Time:
23:12:14
Comments
dear sir
In light of your belief pride is a very difficult
problem to over come in desputing who is right and
who wrong.My statement to you is be not many teaches
or be careful what you teach.Mt 24v21 tribulation
such as was not since the beginining of the world to this "TIME"no nor "EVER" shall be.To believe what teach makes GODS WORD A LIE CLEARLY TRIBULATION HAS HAD FAR WORSE TIMES SINCE AD70
Date:
09 Aug 2004
Time:
16:12:47
Comments
Gary--Here's something I've always wondered about, but I have not found it addressed yet by a preterist. I'm assuming it has been, but I just haven't come across it yet. What is the preterist interpretation of the little horn in Daniel 7:8, 11, 20 and 24. I agree that the passages (Daniel 7-0), as a whole, seem to fit best in the past, within the preterist model. However, I am really perplexed about this "little horn." In your opinion, what is it/he/etc.? I would be grateful if you would give me your perspecitve on this issue. Thanks. --Phil PDL2school@yahoo.com
Date:
02 Sep 2004
Time:
05:55:45
Comments
Gary, you mean to tell me that Daniel 11:40-45
in reference to end of age happened in AD 70.?
Also that Romans 11 pertains to events around Ad 70?
Israel went into global dispersion...(predicted and fulfilled)
Israel and Jerusalem restored 1948 &1967 (predicted & fulfilled)
I f you want to get the truth from scripture you cannot get it from Scholarly research, only by the Holy Spirit, The Bible promotes this method,and experience verefies it.
Date:
06 Dec 2004
Time:
10:03:53
Comments
To Mr. Demar:
I am amazed that any reputable Christian book publisher would ever print your book: "Myths, Lies, & Half-Truths." I could not even undertake to read it because the basic premise is based on a personal vanity uncharacteristic of any true Christian. That premise? That you and you alone have uncovered some biblical truths hidden from the rest of the Church since the days of Christ's earthly ministry. Can you not see the vanity, the massive ego involved here? Cannot you not discern that this very premise has been used by every false prophet since the dawn of time? There are other statements, which were supposedly taken from your book, which are blatantly false and a clear contradiction of historic Christianity and Holy Scripture.
I regret to say this because I haven't read your book, nor do I intend to do so; but you appear to place yourself upon very dangerous ground that, you above all men throughout the Christian era have been given special light to see Divine Truth and the rest of the professing, albeit woefully ignorant ministers of the Gospel, some of them acknowledged giants of the faith, fell far short of your lofty position as special prophet of God. Among many others - Joseph Smith and Jim Jones shared that selfsame throne of a special prophet, specially anointed to wake up the ignorant, fallen Body of Christ on earth.
I pray the Lord will open your eyes before it's too late!
Rev. David R. Miser
707-427-8283
Fairfield, CA
miserd@comcast.net
Date:
05 Jan 2005
Time:
13:46:59
Comments
Did you know that bible israel is not today israel because God promise was from the euphrates to the nile river which include all of: Syria , Lebanon , Jordan , Palastine and two thirds of Iraq and part of Egypt where the nile river is . If you don't believe me go to zionism data-page , it will have the greater israel map before 1948. All I wrote is a fact of logic which the dispensationalist don't have.
Date: 03 Sep 2005
Time: 11:44:46
Comments:
The issue avoided by preterism is thatGod makes the stone of Danielwhich
crushes the nations. It is a stone formed without hands. When you
confuse Christ's agenda for the Church with God's plan for Israel, you
are distracted from Christ's great commission. He will bring in his
kingdom regardless of world conditions.
It is easy to be involved in name calling. But to read the Book of
Revelation through the glasses of Matt. 24 does not do justice to the
text. All the name calling in world cannot displace the horrors
described there. To say that they are past history is to deny the
severity described there. Has history discribed half of the population
of the earth destroyed in a short period. Yet this is what Revelation
predicts. We do not base our interpretation on a magisterium of the
church fathers. We must allow the Scriptures to interpret themselves.
Jesus never claimed infallibility for those that follow. Some of the
wolves of whom he warned were in fact those how turned from the literal,
normal interpretaion to the non-literal allegorical approach. It is so
easy to become followers of men even the Church Fathers. We must prove
all things and be taught of the Spirit of God as the Bereans did and
were commended.
Much of the name calling must stop. Instead prove all things and reason
from the scriptures. Otherwise there is little here which glorifies the
Lord Jesus Christ!
Date: 03 Sep 2005
Time: 11:44:46
Comments:
The issue avoided by preterism is thatGod makes the stone of Danielwhich
crushes the nations. It is a stone formed without hands. When you
confuse Christ's agenda for the Church with God's plan for Israel, you
are distracted from Christ's great commission. He will bring in his
kingdom regardless of world conditions.
It is easy to be involved in name calling. But to read the Book of
Revelation through the glasses of Matt. 24 does not do justice to the
text. All the name calling in world cannot displace the horrors
described there. To say that they are past history is to deny the
severity described there. Has history discribed half of the population
of the earth destroyed in a short period. Yet this is what Revelation
predicts. We do not base our interpretation on a magisterium of the
church fathers. We must allow the Scriptures to interpret themselves.
Jesus never claimed infallibility for those that follow. Some of the
wolves of whom he warned were in fact those how turned from the literal,
normal interpretaion to the non-literal allegorical approach. It is so
easy to become followers of men even the Church Fathers. We must prove
all things and be taught of the Spirit of God as the Bereans did and
were commended.
Much of the name calling must stop. Instead prove all things and reason
from the scriptures. Otherwise there is little here which glorifies the
Lord Jesus Christ!
Date: 24 Oct 2005
Time: 07:19:15
Comments:
Hello, I was wondering if anyone there would have any information on the
following topic. ONCE I HEARD A STORY on how our constituion was created
and part of the story was none of them could agree on what to put in it
ect they just could not agree lots of tempers flying ect.. Then the
group of men decided to close themselves off from others and do like a
prayer retreat and through that - because of that praying is how they
came to agree and then wrote the constitution. Anyone know that story or
where i could find it. I am desprate for this information. Please.
Date: 02 Jan 2006
Time: 13:36:48
Comments:
I believe Mr.DeMar's belief on christianity makes perfect sense. I want
to tell all these fundamental dispensationalist christian , did you know
alot of the israelis left the israeli state because they see its caused
alot of bloodshed. Not all of the Jews support the israeli state -----
especially the Orthodox Jews. "Jews against zionism" ----- this evidence
proves that dispensationalism is false.
Date: 02 Jan 2006
Time: 13:51:58
Comments:
Mr.Demar here is a speech from a Rabbi who opposes the israeli state ,
this could help your position on refuting dispensationalism.
Speech by Rabbi Yisroel P. Feldman of Neturei Karta Int.at the rally
hosted by the New England Committee to Defend Palestine, to protest the
"Boston Celebrates Israel Festival" in Boston, Mass. on Sunday, June 15,
2003
With God’s help may the words that we speak here today sanctify God’s
name and may it bring peace and brotherhood amongst His creations.
A – salaam aleikum
We have come to Boston today to protest the celebration of the founding
of the blasphemous and heretical Zionist state taking place here. We
represent Torah true Jews who remain loyal to authentic Judaism, who
know that the root cause of the conflict and instability plaguing the
Middle East, and hence the entire world, is the heresy against G d
called Zionism, and the heinous crimes committed in the name of its
illegitimate “State of Israel”.
Zionism! An ideology that is antithetical to Judaism, one fomented by
unabashed atheists, heretics and even some ostensibly “religious”
collaborators who have sold their souls to the irreligious Zionists for
money and power.
The founding of the Zionist state is in direct contradiction to the
teachings of the Torah, which forbids the establishment of a Jewish
state and commands Jews to remain in exile until they are released
therefrom by G-d himself, without any human intervention, at which time
all nations of the world will live together in peace, and serve their
Creator in unity.
Two thousand years ago, at the time of the Temple’s destruction, the
Jewish people were forbidden by the Creator (Tractate Ketuboth 111a)
To go up en masse to the Holy Land
To rebel against the nations
To in any way attempt to end the exile
Jews faithful to the Torah are enjoined by the Torah to conduct
themselves as loyal, upright and grateful citizens in their host
countries throughout the world.
The Torah commands us to emulate G-d and to be compassionate. We are
forbidden to unlawfully expropriate land, to subjugate or to oppress
another people. Therefore we protest and mourn the murder, deportation,
subjugation, and oppression of the Palestinian people by the Zionist
hooligans who invaded their homeland, in violation of the Torah, and
have caused so much needless suffering. The list of their crimes is
endless.
The cause of the past, current and, G-d forbid, future suffering is the
aforementioned rebellion against G-d. The tragic and seemingly
intractable conflict in the Middle East is directly attributable to the
wicked actions of the Zionist regime against the indigenous population
of Palestine, against whom the Zionists have been waging war for more
than a century. Thus, the only solution to bring about peace and harmony
is not more war and strife, but rather regime change in historic
Palestine! The Torah’s solution to this dilemma would be for the world
community to actively work towards the dismantling of the illicit
Zionist regime and the restoration of full Palestinian sovereignty over
the whole of Palestine. We firmly believe that such a solution would not
result in Jews being slaughtered indiscriminately by the Palestinians.
In fact, the very existence of the Zionist state endangers Jewish lives
because it constitutes an open rebellion against G-d. Only when the
Palestinian people
It is a hollow mockery and a desecration of everything sacred to Judaism
that the Zionist heretics base their specious claims to the Holy Land on
the Bible, justifying their mass invasion, colonization, expropriation
and displacement of the native inhabitants of Palestine, who, according
to the Torah, are entitled to sovereignty over the whole of their native
homeland.
By establishing the “state of Israel”, the Zionists have openly rebelled
against the will of G-d’s and the laws of the Torah and thereby have
caused immense pain and immeasurable suffering to both Jews and
non-Jews. At occasions like this where people celebrate the
establishment of the state of “Israel”, Torah true Jews lament the
invidious attempts by the Zionists to transform Judaism from a religion
into a secular, hypernationalistic and fundamentally racist creed and
their sinister efforts to uproot the Torah’s teachings from the Jewish
people.
We mourn the pernicious effects Zionism has had on the Jewish people and
the Holy Land, including the ongoing desecration of the Sabbath, the
introduction of immodest dress, and immoral media into Jewish society,
and a litany of violations against many of the laws of our faith, not
the least of which is the commandment to be compassionate toward our
fellow man.
The United Nations acquiesced to the establishment of the Zionist state
in the aftermath of World War II with good intentions of providing
assistance and shelter to persecuted Jews. Yet Zionism and Israel have
been a curse and source of suffering for the Jewish people ever since!
Where else have so many Jews died since World War II if not in the
Zionist state? All because of the craven ambition of the Zionists for
power in their brazen defiance of the teachings and values of Judaism!
Anyone with even the slightest knowledge of history and current events
knows that the Zionist state has been one of the greatest tragedies for
the Jewish people, creating conflict with Muslims and Arabs, with whom
Jews have lived in peace and harmony for many centuries throughout the
world from Morocco to Iraq, from Casablanca to Baghdad!
Judaism is not Zionism! Judaism is the faith of the Jewish people in G-d
and His Torah. Zionism is the racist anti-Jewish ideology of a band of
gangsters who managed to deceive so many Jews into thinking that only
they can protect Jews from external threats to their existence. These
criminals are known to have actively encouraged anti-Jewish feeling
throughout the world in order to compel Jews to immigrate to the Zionist
state as a safe haven. Need we remind ourselves of what the Zionists did
to fool Jews in Yemen, Iraq and Egypt into moving to their state by
planting bombs in synagogues, assassinating innocent Jews and beguiling
G-d-fearing Jews with their false proclamations that the Messianic era
had arrived and that the promised ingathering of the exiles had begun?
Anti-Jewish prejudice is the lifeblood of Zionism! Without it, Zionism
could not survive! Zionism seeks to label anyone opposing its policies
as “anti-Semitic,” which is utterly false, both logically and factually!
We implore the Jewish people to return to G-d and His Torah, to totally
disavow the blatant heresy of Zionism and its so-called “State of
Israel”. Repent and return! G-d and his Torah are waiting for you. Only
in this manner will G-d stop punishing us. Only with the Jewish people's
collective rejection of Zionism will the tragic reports of carnage and
terror in the Holy Land cease.
We beseech the Muslim community not to make the tragic mistake of
equating Judaism with Zionism. You must know that they are in fact two
extreme opposites. Do not accuse the Jewish people of being Zionists. Do
not accuse the Jewish people of being your enemies. The fact is that the
Jewish people commiserate with your suffering. The Jewish people truly
feel your pain. We are totally embarrassed, horrified, and pained by the
actions of our wayward brothers. Let us recall our past friendship and
let us work to restore it.
We plead with the honorable leaders of the great powers to carefully
consider the underlying reasons for the anger and conflict in the Holy
Land! It is of the utmost urgency that leaders realize and acknowledge
that the true source of this is the injustice committed the creation of
a Zionists State!
We who are loyal to our Torah and the teachings of our authentic rabbis
throughout history pray and yearn for the speedy and peaceful
dismantling of this Zionist State of “Israel”. We anxiously await the
day of messianic redemption when the entire world will serve G-d in
brotherhood and harmony.
As the prophet Isaiah says (11:9):
“For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the L-rd, as waters
cover the sea.”
And as the Psalmist declares that one day all nations will unite in the
service of G-d (Psalms 102:23):
“…when the people are gathered together, and the kingdoms, to serve the
L-rd.”
And finally, as Jews each year on Rosh HaShannah express their desire
for mankind to recognize the Creator and to worship Him in brotherhood
and unity
“…and they will be joined in one united group to do Your will
wholeheartedly.” Amen.
Date: 27 Dec 2006
Time: 16:09:19
Comments:
Dear Gary,
I just finished reading your article, The Abrahamic Covenant: postponed
or Fulfilled? I truly enjoyed it. But I would like to make an addition
to the term "everlasting or eternal" if I could.
The dispensationlist argues that the land would be an inheritance to the
Jews "forever." How is it possible to be an owner of the land forever if
(according to dispensatonalists) after the millenium the earth and the
heavens are burned up and a new heavens and earth are made? That is only
for 1000 years if in fact that is to happen. You're right, literal
interpretation takes on a whole new meaning when applied to the
viewpoint of the dispensationlist. Keep up the fine Bible studies you
are putting together for the church.
Thanks
Steve
|
