IEP - Full Preterism

The concept of full preterism, which has some notable distinctions from hyper-preterism, transmillennialism, or whatever it's being called this month, is preterism taken beyond what is logical with regard to Biblical interpretation. Proponents of this belief have attached themselves to certain conclusions and interpret everything in light of those conclusions rather than letting the Bible interpret itself. In so doing, they have made their conclusions the standard and not the Bible.
Full preterism teaches a number of things that are correct. There is quite a bit that they have in common with Biblical preterism. However, there are a number of key issues that are different.
# Full Preterism teaches that all Biblical prophecy was fulfilled by or in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. This includes Final Judgment and the Resurrection.
# Full Preterism teaches that the Resurrection was not a physical resurrection.
# Full Preterism teaches that Genesis 1-11 was allegory and not literal, and does this with a number of other passages that are correctly interpreted literally.
At the initial writing of this article, I do not intend to bog myself down in the more difficult topics. My intent here initially is to show Full Preterism to be wrong with three simple arguments reasoning from scripture.
== All Prophecy Was Not Fulfilled by AD 70 ==
The first way to show that Full Preterism is false is to show even one prophecy that was not fulfilled by AD 70. This can be done in two places: Daniel 9 and 1 John 2. If even one prophecy was not fulfilled by AD 70, then one of the primary, if not the primary, conclusion of Full Preterism is wrong and all things based on that conclusion are wrong.
=== Daniel 9 ===
"And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate." ~Daniel 9:26-27
Daniel 9 is a prophecy about the end of Judaism, the Jewish state, or sometimes called the Jewish economy (which in this context means a lot more than just money). Note that in the KJV the translators use the flimsy translation "weeks" instead of "sevens". Each week represents seven years. This prophecy is explicitly about the destruction of the city of Jerusalem and the temple (sanctuary). The end is with a flood (an army). There is no disagreement here so far between Biblical preterism and Full Preterism.
Where it gets difficult for the FPs is where they end (AD 70) and where Daniel's prophecy ends, which is later.
In verse 26, Daniel writes that "unto the end of the war desolations are determined". Now, the cheap way out of this would be to refer to history, to external evidences, which all place the end of the war in AD 73 with the fall of Masada. Those who have read through my articles or who know me, know that I don't like this method, so I will stick with internal evidence.
In verse 27, Daniel writes that "he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week". He refers back to this prince of verse 26 and I have no intention of getting into details of who this is because that is beyond the point of this article. However, this seven year period is the last seven years of Judaism as it pertains to things Biblical. It is their end, the end Daniel asked about before he received this prophecy from God.
Here is the proof then as we continue in the verse. "and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease". This was the destruction of the temple in AD 70. It took place in the middle of the week. That which is in Revelation called time, times, and half a time, 42 months, 1260 days. Why is this significant? Because the prophecy is for 70 weeks, not 67.5 weeks. The prophecy doesn't get finished for another 3.5 years. The verse even continues on after the middle of the week: "and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate."
That's it. That's all I needed to prove that FP is false. The rest starts to crumble around that. However, there is another that goes with it.
=== 1 John 2 ===
Another passage that has an even more powerful and direct impact on this idea that not all prophecy was fulfilled in AD 70, but even talks about a future return of Christ is 1 John 2. First, it is easy to see that this letter is written after the events of Revelation have already ended.
8 Again, a new commandment I write unto you, which thing is true in him and in you: because the darkness is past, and the true light now shineth.
13 I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one. I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father. 14 I have written unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one.
This passage explicitly states that the darkness is past and the true light now shines. This is in contrast to a number of passages throughout the NT written pre-AD 70 that refer to the ignorance of the Jewish people who tried to remain under the Law of Moses and the authority of Jesus Christ. Egs. Matt. 4:16; John 1:5; 8:12; Romans 13:12; 1 Cor. 4:5; 2 Cor. 6:14; Eph. 6:12; 1 Thess. 5:4-5; Rev. 22:5. 1 John is actually declaring that Rev. 22:5 has already happened.
That alone is sufficient to make the point because the letter itself is inspired word, a function of the miraculous and a prophecy by its very nature. As a prophecy written after and about events after the events of Revelation, it demands the conclusion that not all Bible prophecy culminated in and was done by AD 70.
Some may argue that this is another of those passages that is written before an event, but as if the event has already happened because it is 100% guaranteed. However, those passages provide some kind of contextual clue that makes that the required understanding. This passage has no such indicator. Such a chronology has to be imbued into the text.
17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.
The kosmos passing away is a direct reference to the idea of entropy. Many of the FP group reject the concept of entropy because it means the universe will have an end. From there they begin to reject quite a bit of scripture because of the implications their conclusions require. A literal understanding of Genesis 1-11; an acceptance of macroevolution; and so on all fall in line after that.
If this is post AD-70 as has already been demonstrated, then the kosmos passing away is not figurative about systems of authority but literal. This is another yet-future prophecy that has not been fulfilled even by today.
28 And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.
Again, after showing that this passage is post AD-70, we must conclude that this looking forward to the coming of Jesus is still future, even for us in the 21st century. Another prophecy of the NT not yet fulfilled.
Some might argue that this is the contextual clue that renders the earlier verses furture-looking rather than actually in the future. They say that the coming of Christ must be the coming in AD-70 so that makes this written pre-AD-70. Except that this is simply begging the question. They have to assume that this is the type of coming they conclude in order to conclude that this whole passage is about that time period. They have to assume the very thing they must show to make their doctrine fit.
No, the simplest explanation, the easiest way to understand this passage without wresting it is the straightforward reading. It's not an apocalyptic text, though it lightly draws on those metaphors to speak of the conclusion of those events.
== The Resurrection That Wasn't ==
If we understand the Biblical definition of resurrection. The overall concept, whether used literally or metaphorically, then there is an issue with the Full Preterist position that The Resurrection (or any literal resurrection) took place in AD 70 when Jerusalem was destroyed.
The Full Preterist doctrine teaches that in AD 70 when Jerusalem was sacked and the Temple destroyed, Hades was emptied of all its inhabitants and particularly the faithful in Hades (Abraham, Noah, Moses, and dead Christian martyrs) all went to Heaven.
There is a host of issues I have with this, but in this article, I want to address only one. This isn't a resurrection. Grant for a moment that this event literally happened, that Hades was emptied of all the souls in it and the faithful went to Heaven. That's not a resurrection.
The faithful are not spiritually dead anymore. They have been reconciled to God at the cross by the blood of Jesus. Particularly Christians are spiritually alive through immersion into Christ (Romans 6). That's why they get to go to Heaven. So it isn't their spirits being brought back to life. If they aren't being brought back to life spiritually, then it's not spiritual resurrection.
It is understood that these people are physically dead at the time that their spirits are in Hades. Yet in the FP paradigm, their bodies don't come back to life at all. They skip that altogether and are just translated into Heaven as a spirit being. If that which is dead does not come back to life, it's not resurrection. Resurrection is a change of state from death to life, not a change in location. What they are talking about is Ascension.
The idea that some unseen spirit-only event in AD 70 was The Resurrection as described in 1 Cor. 15 and 1 Thess. 4 just doesn't fit when the definitions are properly understood.
For a fuller discussion of the concept of resurrection, see the article Resurrection Defined.
== Point 3 coming soon... ==