(Revelation 1:7;Matthew 24:27,30; Zechariah 12:10ff)
BJ Maxwell 06/27/2006
Though I liked the First Left Behind Movie, mostly the soundtrack, it did leave a lot
to be desired.
Being left behind comes from Matthew 24 and rather than being a picture of the
rapture is a picture of the judgment.
It is compared to the flood where the ones 'taken' were the wicked ones, so being left
behind during this period (Jacob's Trouble-Jeremiah 30:7) is to be desired.
"As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son
of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were
eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them
all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 40 Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left. 41 Two women will be grinding with a hand mill; one will be taken and the other left.
42 "Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day
your Lord will come." (Matt. 24)
The Ones taken are the ones being judged and the ones 'Left Behind' are the ones spared.
But being of the Pretrib persuasion I know that the ones left behind during this period
(Matthew 24) will be the ones that were left behind earlier (1 Thessalonians 4:16,17) at the rapture but came to the knowledge
of Christ since then.
But rather than this being an argument for the timing of the rapture in regards to
the Tribulation I want to show how this is a minor point in relation to what Preterism teaches.
The following points are expounded on in the messages in the parantheses, that I have
already written or will be writing.
1) Preterism Leads to Liberalism-(#6- You think the Destruction of Jerusalem in AD
70 was worse than the Holocaust.-Matthew 24:21)
2) Preterism excuses Terrorists-(#5- You think you are from the tribe of Joseph-Us
3) Preterism supports Evolution-(#9 For the Preterist it is: If the plain sense makes
sense, seek some other sense, lest you rightly dispense. -2 Timothy 2:15)
4) Preterism takes plain sense scriptures and makes nonsense out of them. -(#23- You
actually need a reference chart to find out what each thing mentioned in scripture really means.)
5) Preterists counter the missionary activity of Futurists-(#4 -You and Skeptics actually
agree on something but draw entirely different but equally wrong conclusions. -2 Peter 3:3,4)
6) Preterism sets up people for the mark in the end. -(#20-You thought the microchip
in your right hand was actually for your shopping convenience. -Revelation 13:8)
7) Preterism takes away Christians' hope-1 John 3:2,3-(#2- You think Christian Television
is simply unnecessary. -1 John 3:1,2; 2 Peter 3:11)
-(#19- Christian Television rightly irritates you but for all the wrong reasons.)
8) Preterism relies on extrabiblical sources and the criticisms of skeptics-(#8-You
think Josephus is part of scripture)
9) Preterism ignores the reality of Satan today. -(#1-You think that 'Satan must just
be bound with a very long chain.'-Revelation 20:1-3)
10) Preterism has made most of the NT irrelevant for Christians today, including the
Lord's Supper-(#4- You think the Epistles and Revelation are only history books.
11) Preterism is more of an obstacle (counter reformation) to Christianity than a help-(#15-
You thought the Catholic/PEterist Luis de Alcasar was making an argument for PREterism.)
12) Some of Preterisms methods of interpretation are cultish-(#6- You think the Destruction
of Jerusalem in AD 70 was worse than the Holocaust. Matthew 24:21)
13) Preterism is faithless-(#7- You've Never Read or believed Zechariah -Zechariah
-(#9-If the plain sense makes sense, seek some other sense, lest you rightly dispense.-2
The argument that the pretribber is an escapist won't work because the only way
we are going to escape is the same way Noah and Lot escaped and that was with God's help and if He doesn't help us then we
I'm sure that if Noah and Lot were as tough as the ones today think they are then they
might have tried to weather the judgment with the rest too.
Whether in the tribulation or out of it, no mark is going on or in my right hand or
The Preterist has already explained that away as a past event or figurative.
Still, You Know You're a Preterist if: You Think the Left Behind Movie was the prequel
to Home Alone.
Which would probably tell us just how much the Preterist cares to know about the Rapture.
BJ Maxwell 07/06/2006
Guilt by association is not fallacious, when the folks that a person hangs out with
share their views.
The same goes for the Preterists' association with Skeptics.
Being accused of escapism is nothing new for a Dispie but when Preterists are
doing the accusing, this makes it worth commenting on.
"By faith Noah, when warned about things not yet seen, in holy fear built an ark to save his family. By his faith he condemned
the world and became heir of the righteousness that comes by faith." (Hebrews 11)
Hmm, Noah had a holy fear of the judgment to come.
The Difference between the Preterist and Christians (pre, mid, post and pan) is that
Christians believe in a literal, global and future judgment, the Preterist doesn't.
I'm sure that some of the ones that Noah was trying to save were accusing him of Escapism.
'Oh, Come on Noah!, God coming and flooding the earth (local judgment according to
the Preterist) Do You think a Loving God would do that?
Certainly, if it happens , I'm tough enough to tread water until its over, ha ha ha!
And how many years have you been building that Ark and still nothing?
God must have already come and we just didn't see it, or it could have been when that
little river down by Josephus' place overflowed, Yeah!, that must have been God's flood.
C'mon Noah, ever since the beginning, everything continues as it always has!
Then the flood came and took all those scoffers away. (Matthew 24:39)
It is interesting that the Preterist has explained away the universal flood
as he has the universal judgment by fire.
A Preterist, in order to be consistent (though consistently wrong), believes
that both judgments by water and by fire must be local not universal.
"I was first and still am and old-earth creationist and local-flood adherrent. It was
belief in a local flood that brought me to preterism. Tim went the other way.
What Nate calls an irresponsible hermeneutic is what brought me to preterism. The language
in the flood account seemed global until I compared it to how the same language was used elsewhere in Genesis.
After careful comparison, I realized it was local.
A few years later, my local understanding of the flood made a local understanding
of the end-of-the-age natural." -Preterist
Because the Preterist has made scripture figurative regarding the End, to be consistent
(though consistently wrong) He must now make the Beginning figurative as well.
The typical Preterist doesn't believe that God created the Earth in Six Literal Days.
The Preterist joins and in fact helps the Evolutionist with his arguments that the earth is millions of Years old.
Yes, Preterists are guilty by their associations.
"Bernard Ramm puts it this way:
'Genuine relevant thinking cannot be accomplished in the realm of Bible-and-Science
until the nature of Biblical language has been deeply probed. Few books on Bible-and-Science treat this point. In those books
that do touch on this subject the treatment is usually singularly superficial.'
I am convinced this is precisely the point where covenant thinking and ultimately preterism
offer a tremendous gift in God’s Providence to the progress of the Genesis origins discussion in the modern Church.
...But geological science, like heliocentrism, threatens the Biblical Faith only if we read the language of Genesis
in a scientific-literal way."
This Preterist quotes an atheist (Bernard Ramm) and then joins evolutionists in declaring
the Six Days of Creation figurative. He continues to quote this atheist regarding whether we should take the Bible literally
or not, then argues against a universal flood.
Now if you didn't already get the preposterous but revealing nature of this Preterists
statement and associations, let me summarize.
This Preterist is quoting an atheist to argue for Christians to not take the Bible
Guilt by association and agreement.
You see the Evolutionist needs millions of Years not six literal days to allow the
evolutionary process to create what we have today, without God.
Why would any real Christian want to join him on this?
God tells the Israelites, "Six days you shall labor and do all your work,
10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God.
On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your
animals, nor the alien within your gates. 11 For in six days
the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore
the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy." (Exodus 20)
Now if God wants the Israelites to observe a literal six day work week and rest
on a literal seventh day because/For that is How long He took to create the world, and then rest, then the days
of Creation have to be literal as well.
Would it make sense to say, 'I took six figurative days to create the earth and that
is why I want you to literally work six literal days and rest on a literal seventh day.'
He would be in effect be saying to His children, 'Do as I say, not as I Do.'
Today, we have scoffers and some of them are called Preterists.
'Oh, Come on Dispie!, God coming and judging the earth (local judgment according to
the Preterist) Do You think a Loving God would do that?
Certainly, if it happens , I'm tough enough to endure until its over, ha ha ha!
And how many years have you been making this claim and still nothing?
He must have already come and we didn't see it, or it could have been when that little
town called Jerusalem got ransaked in AD 70.
Yeah!, that must have been God's complete judgment.
C'mon BJ, ever since the beginning everything continues as it always has!
Then the fire came and took all those scoffers away, While the Ark/Christ took the
Christians Away. (Matthew 24:39)
"First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will
come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4
They will say, "Where is this 'coming' he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the
beginning of creation." 5 But they deliberately
forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed
and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6
By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 7 By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire,
being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.
8 But do not forget this one thing,
dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.
9 The Lord is not slow in keeping
his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come
to repentance. 10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief.
The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it
will be laid bare.
11 Since everything will be destroyed
in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives" (2 Peter 3)
The coming global and literal judgment ought to spur us on to Holy Living. If we have
explained it away then we have subverted God's word and taken away one of the incentives for Holy Living.
"Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been
made known. But we know that when he appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. 3 Everyone who has this hope in him purifies himself, just as he is pure." (1 John 3:2,3)
The following story doesn't mean there are only nine people in
people lifted up their eyes in hell.
The first person said, What is this!, Doesn't the Bible say, Repent and be Baptists?
second person shouted, No the Bible says, 'All have sinned and
fallen short of the assemblies of God'
"This is not literal"
The next person said, "Relax, this already happened in 70 A.D."
Still another gnashed
his teeth then said, This sure doesn't feel
like a 'cutting off'
Another screamed, 'Someone is praying me out of
While another complained, Where are the virgins that were promised to me?
Still another closed his eyes
and said, 'This aint literal man!'
The last person said, I dunno why I am here I was just following
BJ Maxwell 07/07/2006
Gee, I just dunno how God the Son could possibly get our attention when He comes.
He pretty much showed us the best and worst in AD 70 and all the rest would be anticlimactic and uneventful, incapable of getting the worlds attention.
I suppose that if He comes and splits the Mount of Olives, Causes an earthquake
that may level the Dome of the Rock, destroys those that fight against Israel, flashes as lightning flashes from east to west,
Judges the world, Builds New Jerusalem, Raises the Dead and
If that doesn't get everyones attention then maybe He will just have to admit that
destroying the City of Jerusalem in AD 70 was the best He could do. (Luke 21:20-24)
Now how can He show himself to every inhabitant of Planet Earth simultaneously.
If we can be notified of impending Tornadoes, Hurricanes etc. I'm sure we will be able
to see Him.
"The United Kingdom-based Daystar International Ministries installed MessiahCAM, a
web-linked camera aimed at Ascension Chapel on the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem, to record the return of Jesus Christ. 'Enjoy
the view and meditate on it...in anticipation of the soon coming of the Lord,' visitors to the site are told."
Webcam of the Mount of Olives, sometimes works sometimes doesn't. I'm sure God can
ensure that it will be properly working at the right time, if that is how He plans on communicating His coming.
Here is a view of Jerusalem and I believe the Dome of the Rock from the Mount of Olives.
I'm sure that it is plausible that the splitting of the Mount of Olives when Christ
touches down could cause an earthquake that will level the Dome of the Rock or that could come when the two witnesses are
resurrected then raptured.
Jerusalem is the city of Three World Religions.
If You don't think that splitting the Mount of Olives and Levelling the Dome of the
Rock won't get immediate attention then I cannot help you.
Here is a picture of the Western Wall with the Dome of the Rock/Islam Behind it.
If you cannot see this picture, here is a webcam of the Western Wall
Interesting that the two witnesses might have their own webcam:
7 Now when they (the two witnesses) have finished
their testimony, the beast that comes up from the Abyss will attack them, and overpower and kill them. 8 Their
bodies will lie in the street of the great city, which is figuratively called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was
crucified. 9 For three and a half days men from every people, tribe, language and
nation will gaze on their bodies and refuse them burial. 10 The inhabitants of the earth
will gloat over them and will celebrate by sending each other gifts, because these two prophets had tormented those who
live on the earth. 11 But after the three and a half days a breath of life from God entered them, and
they stood on their feet, and terror struck those who saw them. 12 Then they heard a loud voice from
heaven saying to them, "Come up here." And they went up to heaven in a
cloud, while their enemies looked on. 13 At that very hour there was a severe earthquake and a tenth
of the city collapsed. Seven thousand people were killed in the earthquake, and the survivors were terrified and gave glory
to the God of heaven. (Revelation 11)
Watch the two Webcams mentioned above because both will be affected when Christ comes
Possibly when He splits the Mount of Olives at His coming, it could cause an earthquake
at the Dome of the Rock.
So the Preterist won't feel left out, the following picture is of a Walmart:
If you cannot see this picture go to:
You can find all kinds of information about Walmart Here.
This is just one of the perks of the Preterist New Heavens and Earth.
A Still picture will do because its exterior pretty much remains the same.
But of course I don't think that 'every eye' seeing him, as he promised, is too
great a task for him, even if He chose to do it some other way. (Revelation 1:7,8)
I'm sure that when Christ does actually come back, the Preterist will actually dismiss
it as an elaborate Hollywood Publicity Stunt, trick photography or something, even if that Preterist delusion only lasts
for a few moments.
BJ Maxwell 07/08/2006
Certainly, the Bible doesn't support the Preterist view, unless you make interpretation
a mostly figurative exercise.
Now nothing is wrong with reading commentaries on a subject and to examine
how particular authors view scriptural events.
But the whole error of Preterism seems to be based on:
1) The Time Statements of Jesus, but not the statements made concerning the
delay. (Romans 11:24-27; 2 Peter 3; Matthew 24:48)
2) Figurative translation which modifies the plain sense of scripture to fit
the Preterist assumptions.
3) Also the idea that it is their way or the highway.
If they can show that something happened in 70 AD then most everything happened
in 70 AD.
David Reagan (not a Preterist) says, "I think that's the way these schools
of interpretation relate to each other. Each one of the four contains an element of truth. The problem
comes when you accept only one and reject all the others. We must
never forget that the book of Revelation contained a very relevant message to First Century Christians. It assured them of
their ultimate victory over the Roman Empire. We must also remember that the book has been given relevant application to the
struggles of the Church throughout history."
I emphasize this because I have heard Preterists act like they are the open
minded enlightened folks when nothing could be further from the truth.
Preterism seems to be a relatively new idea and that wouldn't be so bad if
one could show that the time calls for their understanding of scripture.
Regarding Dispensationalism and the belief that Israel has been temporarily
blinded, while the fulness of the Gentiles are come in (Luke 21:20-24; Romans 11:24-27) could be experiencing more exposure
and revelation because the time of the Gentiles may be near and it has become imperative that folks understand that the Nation
of Israel is and will be experiencing a continuation and conclusion of what God has promised them, soon.
In regards to Dispensationalism just like Preterism there are differing degrees.
I began my dispensational journey by reading Cornelius Stam who wrote 'Things
That Differ' over twenty five years ago.
This book is online at:
A Bible College Student invited me over to his house where he and his friend
talked to me about Dispensationalism.
After they thoroughly confused me they gave me the book by Stam.
I read it several times, then put it down for about fifteen years and then
examined scriptures to see if what the author said was true.
I came to accept much of what he said, but rejected some things as well.
My conclusions led me to believe in the distinction between Prophecy/Israel
and the Body of Christ and the Mysteries.
I never accepted Dispensationalism as an overall system but as a hermeneutic
that can help me understand scripture.
I don't make a complete distinction between one dispensation and another and
see this present dispensation as inclusive (Acts 20:25-28) not completely exclusive of the previous dispensation.
I believe in Christian circles Water Baptism and the Spiritual Gifts are still
So I give much credit to Stam for his understanding of the Dispensations, I
differ with him in some areas.
Everyone should honestly put aside their commentaries for a while and look
at the whole of scripture to see if all the scriptures support what men are saying.
Preterists ought to do the same.
If they don't then they run the risk of falling under the condemnation of the
"What I mean is this: One of you says, "I follow Paul"; another, "I follow
Apollos"; another, "I follow Cephas"; still another, "I follow Christ." 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized into the name of Paul?
14 I am thankful
that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 so no one can say that you were baptized into my name. 16 (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don't remember if I baptized anyone else.)
17 For Christ did
not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel--not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its
power. 18 For the message of the cross is foolishness
to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent
I will frustrate." (1 Corinthians 1)
Here Paul is warning against following him or Peter or anyone other than Christ.
He even avoided baptizing so that they wouldn't follow him.
What, one may ask is wrong with following any of these men of God?
Well if it isn't obvious:
1) They are not Christ, only followers of him, even though Paul did say 'be
imitators of me as I am of Christ'
2) Anytime one follows the words of one of these without including the words
of the rest of God's men, then they run the risk of seeing one side without the other.
This is why denominations such as 'Methodist', 'Lutheran', are actually following
particular men of God, and just because some of these denominations don't name their clique after a man of God doesn't mean
that they aren't following one.
Cliques and Group Think are the result of such actions and Paul condemns it.
"We need strong leaders in churches and throughout the brotherhood who take
a firm stand and boldly challenge all (not just the party's declared object of attack) false doctrine. I also know
that one can be used as a party leader without their endorsement (I Cor. 1, 3). Friendships, family, and school affiliation
must not be allowed to dictate our stands, beliefs, and loyalties. Schools, magazines, and influential brethren must constantly
guard against becoming a party source. Brethren need to become more independent of style and position deciding influences
among us. We must look to Jesus, not a party or any man (Jn. 8: 24, Heb. 12: 2). There also desperately needs to be more plain
teaching on the subject of the party spirit, identifying, exposing, and challenging it."
Irving Janis formulated eight guidelines to determine whether a particular
group of folks are falling into the trap of Group Think.
Illusion of invulnerability
Unquestioned belief in the inherent morality
of the group
Collective rationalization of group's decisions
Shared stereotypes of outgroup, particularly opponents
Self-censorship; members withhold criticisms
Illusion of unanimity
Direct pressure on dissenters to conform
"Mind Guards" protect the group from negative information
If you followed only the words of Peter (Catholicism-Peterism), you wouldn't
see the riches of the knowledge that Paul was given concerning the mysteries. (1 Timothy 3:16; Colossians 1:26,27; Romans
11:24-27; Revelation 10 )
Catholics Rob Paul to Pay Peter.
Paul (not the twelfth or thirteenth apostle) did claim that he had the 'whole
counsel of God' ,which included the 'Kingdom' which was Christ and Peter taught.
Many Dispies reject this fact.
"Now I know that none of you among whom I have gone about preaching
the kingdom will ever see me again. 26 Therefore, I declare
to you today that I am innocent of the blood of all men. 27 For I have not hesitated to proclaim to you the whole will of God. 28 Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit
has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood." (Acts 20)
His good news was for all and was 'the grace of God' and primarily concerned
an organism (Body of Christ). (Romans 16:25)
If one only followed the words of PReter, I mean PReterism this would be in
effect cookie cutter eschatology that refuses to deal with the leftover dough/scripture that would reveal the shortcomings
of this system of thought.
This is why I rejected Dispensationalism as an overall system of thought where
all bases were already covered by the commentators, but instead use the mysteries taught in scripture as a guideline,
along with other rules such as, 'The Bible interprets itself', 'If the plain
sense makes sense, seek no other sense to replace it, lest you end up with nonsense".
Now one area where I modified a rule is regarding the plain sense. Dispies
don't include 'to replace it' in their formula, while I do, because it is all right to see a spiritual or allegorical
interpretation to a passage just as long as it doesn't 'replace' or contradict the 'plain sense', literal interpretation.
I have included that addition for quite a while now.
Paul/New World Dawning recently brought to my attention something called 'P'shat'
which is very similar to the plain sense rule, but also includes the possibility of more than one interpretation to a passage.
This confirmed my addition to the Plain Sense Rule.
Check out my message about that at:
The Preterist has determined that, If the plain sense makes sense, seek ANOTHER
sense, lest you rightly dispense.
When David Reagan says:
comes when you accept only one and reject all the others."
He is warning all schools of thought to avoid arrogant Group Think that assumes
your view is the whole picture.
I believe that Luke 21:20-24 was fulfilled in 70 Ad and was a continuing thing
clear up to the Holocaust and continuing on to the Fulness of the Gentiles.
One of the many differences between the Preterist and I is that I know that
it all didn't end there and I don't need this extrabilical event to believe what I do.
Does this mean that Israel won't experience the same kind of things in the
future as well. Of Course Not!!
I will be putting all these messages under my 'You Know You're a Preterist
if:' Points at my site.
All one has to do is to click a particular point and it will take you further
down to the message that defends the point.
When it is completed I will provide the Link.
BJ Maxwell 07/09/2006
If the Preterist prefers that i say 'Millenium' rather than 'New Heavens
and Earth' I can oblige them.
The fact of the matter is that God doesn't guide those that think that their intelligence
or Reading comprehension gains them a better understanding of bible truth.
There is a difference between one intellectual capacity and their spiritual receptivity.
This is why Retarded people can understand God's truth if their willing.
Faith cometh by 'hearing', the word of God.
They are not condemned if they cannot read it from a faulty Preterist angle.
God guides those that have the Holy Spirit not Sproul guiding them.
But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach
you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. (John 14:26)
But of course if one refuses to recognize that the Holy Spirit is a person, they might
have to deal with that first.
In John chapter One it says, 'in the beginning was the word (logos) and the word
was with God, and the Word was God....to as many as received Him to them gave He the authority to become Sons of God...and
the word became flesh and dwelt among us... (John 1)
The Greek Word for 'word' here is logos and we get the english word, 'logic' from it.
Does this completely explain Him?
No, but it shows that He who was with God and was God, is the starting point for
any true reason and logic.
One can think everyone else has the problem but their logic is flawed if they
have made some wrong first assumptions.
One can be utterly brilliant in their logic, but if it is based on faulty first
assumptions, their brilliant logic will only lead to wrong conclusions.
This is why we have brilliant Theologians on all sides of every religious question.
John One says that the 'darkness comprehended him not' which is the KJV. Other translations
say 'overcame it not' So which is it?
It is both. The Darkness overcame and understood Him not.
One that will not believe who Christ is and the Nature of the Triune God cannot presume
to know the lesser things.
One has to be willing before they are able, when it comes to spiritual things.
"Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not
have crucified the Lord of glory." (1 Corinthians 2)
This is why Paul, though a brilliant man, knew how truth comes.
"And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom,
declaring unto you the testimony of God. 2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.
3 And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling. 4 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing
words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: 5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom
of men, but in the power of God.
6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world,
nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: 7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden
wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: 8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had
they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard,
neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. 10 But God hath
revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. 11 For what man
knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit
of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things
that are freely given to us of God. 13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which
the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of
the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. 16 For who hath known the mind of the
Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ." (1 Corinthians 2)
Paul says that he speaks 'the wisdom of God in a mystery'
The Preterist rejects the Mysteries. (Romans 11:24-27)
So does Preterism make some faulty first assumptions?
I think so.
They have assumed that some prophecies fulfilled means all prophecies fulfilled.
They have assumed that 70 Ad was when all the prophecies were fulfilled, though there
is no evidence whatsoever for that assumption.
They have assumed that when the bible says, 'This same
Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven." (Acts
1:11), it can really mean, 'in a different manner '.
All their brilliant logic after these faulty first assumptions will not matter and
will in fact lead them down the wrong path.
BJ Maxwell 07/10/2006
Futurist Christians of all eschatological stripes take Christ's words seriously
including the words of his apostles.
25 I do not
want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening
in part until the full number
of the Gentiles has come in. (Romans 11)
24 They will
fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are
fulfilled. (Luke 21)
What part of 'Until the time of the Gentiles are fulfilled' does the Preterist
not take seriously?
Both verses plainly involve a time element.
I believe that this could have begun in AD 70 but 'Until' means a time period
beginning with, 'a hardening in part' and 'will be trampled on' . If this time period began in 70 AD we have to conclude that
it ends sometime after 70 Ad, so for this passage 70 AD is only the beginning.
The Full Preterist makes no provision for 70 Ad only being the beginning, which
would have to include the Holocaust because for all the prophecies to be fulfilled we would have to include, 'For then there
will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now--and never to be equaled again.' (Matthew
24:21) , which certainly couldn't be restricted to 70 AD.
Futurists do take the time elements of scripture seriously. They also take
Christ seriously in everything else he says unless they are Liberals, and if they are liberals they are not Christians.
Liberalism is more a byproduct of Preterism than it is of futurism.
"I do not believe you fight liberalism with liberalism. Dr. Sproul believes
that he is defending the integrity of Scripture by adopting the preterist interpretation. However, in reality, I believe that
he is adopting a naturalistic interpretation that too many liberals feel at home with. While Dr. Sproul sees Matthew 24 as
a prophecy that was fulfilled in the first century, liberal preterists joins him in giving a naturalistic explanation even
though from a different framework. But they both deny that our Lord prophesied a supernatural, bodily, visible return of
Christ in fulfillment of Matthew 24."
"On the other hand, Dr. Sproul and other preterists would not have a supposed
problem that they and liberals seem to think they have if they adopted the approach of dispensationalism which distinguishes
between the rapture that could take place without warning at any moment and the second coming which will be preceded by the
signs of Matthew 24. True, many of the post-Apostolic fathers believed that Jesus would come back soon, but the New Testament
teaches that Christ's coming in the clouds to rapture His church is imminent (1 Cor. 1:7; Phil. 3:20; 1 Thess. 1:10; Titus
2:13; Heb. 9:28; 1 Pet. 1:13; Jude 21; cf. Matt. 24:45-47; Mk. 13:33-37; Lk. 12:35-40), an event that could have taken place
at any time during the last 2,000 years. Thus, Scripture does not need to be rescued from the higher critics by adopting
the preterist interpretation."
This is why Dispensationalism is the best but certainly not the only view that
is capable of refuting Preterism.
Still, I am not saying that Preterists should have taught the rapture rather
than the second coming in 70 AD or that the rapture occurs before the Tribulation begins but simply a difference between the
rapture and the second coming. I think both pre and posttribbers can agree that these are not the same event.
Simply said, Israel's rejection of Messiah is part of the reason for the two
comings of Christ-separated by the delay (Romans 11:24-27) and the two aspects to the Second Coming of Christ-separated
by a delay. The Length of the delay between the two aspects are partly dependent on Israel's response, though God in his
foreknowledge knows just how they will respond.
This also shows us the dichotomy between the sovereignty of God and the responsibility
I personally believe that had Israel received Messiah, there would not have
been two comings or two aspects to His coming separated by years and that the Gentiles would have been blessed through Israel's
acceptance of Messiah rather than their rejection of Messiah.
This is why the OT prophecies regarding his comings can be see as one, (Zechariah
9:9,10; Isaiah 9:6,7; Isaiah 61:1,2) and NT prophecies concerning the Rapture and the Second Coming can be seen as one not
but not the same. It is all dependent on Israel's response to their King.
Instead of putting the time delay on the head of unbelieving Israel, the Preterist
seeks to placate the Jewish Skeptics with an eschatology that teaches that Christ came but only when they weren't looking.
As a result the Preterist creates a Jesus that underwhelms and provides liberals
and skeptics with another argument aimed at the Preterist's Jesus' lack of power.
All this could be resolved if the Preterist only took Christ seriously when
He promised something rather than backpedaling and excusing Jesus with impotent and watered down reinterpretations.
The Preterist does not believe in a delay, so must explain away the plain sense
meaning of what Christ and the apostle Paul said.
"But suppose that servant is wicked and says to himself, 'My master
is staying away a long time,' 49 and he then begins to beat
his fellow servants and to eat and drink with drunkards. 50 The master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he is not aware of.
51 He will cut him to pieces and assign him a place with the hypocrites,
where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." (Matthew 24)
BJ Maxwell 07/11/2006
(Revelation 1:7;Matthew 24:27,30; Zechariah 12:10ff)
I guess i just believe that Christ, the apostles and angels meant what they said and
I wouldn't need a Preterist Instant Redefinition Chart to help me know what they really meant.
"Men of Galilee," they said, "why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same
Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven."
If the words 'same' in this passage really means different, then how are we to stop
anyone from claiming that he or she is the second coming of Christ?
Sun Myung Moon claimed this. If 'this same Jesus' is not coming back in the 'same way
you have seen him go' then how can we know that Sun Myung Moon coming from Korea on a boat isn't Him?
To be consistent shouldn't I believe that Christ figuratively left a figurative mountain
called the mount of Olives to return to that same figurative mountain?
And if he figuratively left did He really leave at all?
If you want to say that 'same manner' means 'different manner' then we need to determine
when we are supposed to believe that Christ means what He says.
If Christ didn't literally and physically live here on earth then the Preterist/Gnostic
interpretation of his return would be consistent, but the Preterist wants us to believe that Christ literally and physically
came down, literally and physically lived and died, literally and physically rose from the dead and literally and physically
ascended to heaven from the literal mount of Olives and literal angels said he 'would come in like manner as his disciples
saw him leave' but that really means that He will come figuratively and/or invisibly and that we will not physically raise
from the dead, though scripture says our resurrection will be like his, which was literal and physical. (Luke 24; John 20:27-31;
1 Corinthians 15)
12 But if it is preached that
Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15 More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified
about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19 If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men. (1 Corinthians
Resurrection always includes the physical and our resurrection is tied in with His,
which was demonstrated to be physical.
Some get confused when they hear that we will have spiritual bodies and think this
means a spirit.
The Jehovah's Witnesses do this.
Jesus after the resurrection said, 'A spirit does not have flesh and bone as you see
He said to them, "Why are you troubled, and why do doubts rise in your minds?
39 Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch
me and see; a ghost (spirit) does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have." 40 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. 41 And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, "Do
you have anything here to eat?" 42 They gave him a piece
of broiled fish, 43 and he took it and ate it in their presence.
JW's also argue that 'Flesh and Blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.' so therefore
resurrection has to be of the spirit.
"And just as we have borne the likeness of the earthly man, so shall we bear
the likeness of the man from heaven. 50 I declare to you,
brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable."
(1 Corinthians 15)
What JW's overlook was that Jesus said, 'A Spirit does not have flesh and bone as you
see me have'.
He didn't say He was Flesh and Blood after the resurrection even though we know
that Jesus blood was pure.
For us however, corruption is in the blood not in flesh and bones.
Our bodies of flesh and bone will be glorified as well, meaning that there will be
no dependence on blood not even in the bone marrow.
The Full Preterist believes Jesus rose physically but we won't.
All I can figure is that this is the eeny meeny miny mo method of deciding what should
be literal and what shouldn't be.
The Preterist is Presumptuous by supporting his Preconceived Notions of Prophecy with
"Proponents of Full Preterism do not believe in the bodily Resurrection of the dead
and place this event as well as a spiritualised understanding of the second coming in 70 AD whereas proponents of Partial
Preterism do believe in a bodily resurrection of the dead at a future second coming . Preterists also believe the term 'Last
Days ' or 'End Times ' refers not to the last days of planet Earth, or last days of mankind, but to the last days of the Old
Covenant, the Mosaic Covenant which God had exclusively with Israel until year 70 AD. "
It sure looks like Jesus saw things as including the physical, why shouldn't we?
The Full Preterist sounds more like the gnostics regarding the Coming of Jesus, and
the resurrection of the dead.
You Think Christ came back when they weren't looking. (Revelation 1:7; Matthew 24:27,30;
If 'every eye shall see him' doesn't mean every physical eye then what kind of eye
are we talking about?
If it was only every spritual eye then why is the whole world, including unbelievers
going to see him.
It is really hard to comprehend how anyone could believe this nonsense.
7 Look, he is coming with the
clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him; and all the peoples of the earth will mourn
because of him. So shall it be! Amen. 8 "I am the Alpha and
the Omega," says the Lord God, "who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty." (Revelation 1)
The Preterist wants us to believe Christ was literally and physically 'pierced', that
He is literally the 'Lord God', as this passage says but that 'every eye will see him' with a spiritual or figurative
They want us to take scripture literally and physically when they say so and not when
they say not to.
"At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all
the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great
glory. 31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call,
and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other." (Matthew 24)
"If all the language of Scripture pertaining to the Second Coming of Christ is not
to be taken historically and in a normal sense, then why not take the virgin birth of Christ, for example, or other miracles
in a "spiritualized" way, as the Preterists do in reference to prophecy? Preterism opens the door for similar liberal departure.
This is not true of classical premillennialism that argues, from Genesis to Revelation,
the Bible must be understood in its normal meaning and in its plain sense. Premillennialists are thus consistent. But Preterists
must sweep all of the Second Coming passages with a broad broom that forever gets rid of any future, historic, and objective
return of Christ. Once common sense interpretation has been abandoned, there is rarely a turning back."
BJ Maxwell 07/12/2006
"And He causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive
a mark in their right hand or foreheads; and that no man could buy or sell, save he had the mark, or the name of the
beast, or the number of his name... " (Revelation 13:16-18; KJV)
Actually, in Revelation there is a clear difference between the Seals and the Mark
I actually put together a chart which shows the difference.
I'm not trying to prove that the mark is a microchip on or in the hand or forehead,
only that it is physical, literal and in the future.
A microchip could very well be how it is accomplished.
It seems that Walmart is already placing these chips in their products.
"Now America's Super Store WALMART is using a small radio transmitter embedded within
the packaging of products on their store shelves, and they claim it cannot be tracked outside their store. Well I beg to differ
on that Mr. Walton. IBM is currently running TV ads that clearly show that radio tags, or RFID as it is known, can help lost
truckers on the highways, the ad shows a lost pair of truckers hauling products through the desert, they slam on the breaks
because a woman is sitting in a desk in the middle of the road, they ask, WHAT ARE YOU DOIN OUT HERE? She replies, "the packages
in your truck told us you were lost, I am here to get you back on the right path" and the commercial ends. Wal-Mart tells
us the RFID tags in the products can't be tracked outside the store but IBM tells us they can track RFID tagged products in
the middle of the DESERT!?!"
The commercial ends with one guy saying to the other trucker that maybe
you ought to let them drive.
Preterists will be joining all the others in saying that the mark in or on the hand
or forehead is for your shopping convenience because according to the Preterist, the Mark of the Beast mentioned in scripture
was figurative and in the past.
The following is a conversation I had with Cynthia on the subject:
The Preterist feels quite comfortable with believing that the Mark is figurative and
a thing of the past.
This is why the Preterist may even lead the Pack in accepting the Mark of the Beast
and in addition to this may even think this is one of those perks in the New Heavens and Earth along with the New Walmart
that was just built.
Pretty soon these chips could tell people where to go, how to get there and humans
won't even be able to think for themselves.
Have you ever seen people with cell phones and how brain dead and possessed they look
while they are simultaneously doing something else like driving etc.
Don't become like them.
I have shown what Preterists believe by quoting Preterists and from Preterist websites.
Investigate Further Now!
BJ Maxwell 07/22/2006
I will be adding a few more points to my 'You know You're
a Preterist if" list:
21) Your favorite argument is, 'You just don't understand me'
This also is sometimes effectively used at home as well.
22) You cannot determine whether you are a partial Preterist or a partial Futurist.
23) You actually need a reference chart to find out what each thing mentioned in scripture