4) You think the Epistles and Revelation are only history books.

5) You think you are from the tribe of Joseph-Us (Revelation 7:8)

6) You think the Destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 was worse than the Holocaust. (Matthew 24:21)

7) You've Never Read or believed Zechariah (Zechariah 12-14)

 

8) You think that the works of Josephus are actually part of scripture.

9) If you agree with, If the plain sense makes sense, seek some other sense, lest you rightly dispense. (2 Timothy 2:15)

 

10) You Think the Left Behind Movie was a prequel to Home Alone

 

Check Out 'You Know You're a Preterist if: Pt. 2

 

BJ Maxwell 06/27/2006

 

To Learn more about Preterism go to:

 

http://www.conservativeonline.org/articles/preterism/fatal_mistakes_of_preterism.htm

 

1)You think that 'Satan must just be bound with a very long chain.'  (Revelation 20:1-3)

The Binding of Satan

Don Preston (the Preterist)

"But those same amillenialist also say that while Jesus came to bind Satan and destroy his works that Satan is not yet bound; he is still the god of this world! Well, Jesus came to destroy the works of Satan. Did he fail? He came to bind Satan. Did he fail? If it is wrong for the dispensationalist to say Jesus came to do something but failed, why is it not equally wrong to say Jesus came to bind Satan but he has not done it yet?!?"

"But if Satan is bound there should be no evil today, right? There is evil today; therefore Satan is not bound. (Sounds like a strange twist on the atheistic argument about God and the existence of evil doesn't it?) This sounds impressive; but it fails to consider several Biblical issues. Satan is bound! Space forbids full examination, but we would like to suggest a few areas in which Satan is quite clearly bound.

"There is no more demon possession. Jesus, God incarnate, came into the world and met Satan "incarnate." Jesus' personal ministry was truly the war of the Gods. Satan in-dwelt individuals and did not want to come out (Matthew 17, Mark 5). But Jesus "by the finger of God" (Luke 11:20) cast him out and spoiled his house."

But Jesus comes in judgment on that apostate city and destroys her. In chapter 20 judgment is set, Satan is cast into the lake of fire; and Jesus takes his glorious bride unto himself! This all happened in 70 AD with the full destruction of the Theocracy of Israel, the persecuting city of Jerusalem, the Old Heavens and Earth. The New Creation is complete--what Satan had succeeded in getting man to forfeit, communion with God and eternal life, is restored. Satan lost - God finished His work."

Don K Preston

http://www.eschatology.org/articles/satan/binding.htm

 

Chapter 20 that Preston refers to says, "1 And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. 2 He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. 3 He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.

Notice that Satan is bound with a chain before he is cast into the abyss so Preston cannot say that Satan is cast into the lake of fire without first admitting that He is bound with a chain first.

Also as Paul/New World Dawning said, this binding is for a thousand years so the Preterist must decide when Satan is going to be unbound.

Preston the Preterist also says that 'God finished his work' which would include everything mentioned in chapter 20 above.

Not to mention all the times Preston says that Satan is bound.

Preston however cannot adequately answer the Satanic activity that is going on today, if Satan is bound.

Which still tells us that you are a Preterist if:

'You think that 'Satan must just be bound with a very long chain.' (Revelation 20:1-3)

BJ Maxwell 06/29/2006

 

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.

There are some good programs available, David Reagan has some good stuff, even non prophetic stuff on his show.

I like John Ankerberg, though I don't like him always plugging people for money.

I would say that some Preterists are irritated by Christian Television because the majority of it doesn't represent what they believe. Christian Television teaches that Christ is coming again and the bible should be taken seriously.

1) The majority of Christian Television looks forward to Christ's return.

This supplies motivation to orthodox Christians because we look forward not backward to the coming of Christ and that is not a motivation Preterists possess.

Plus relegating the majority of scripture to pre AD 70, can be irritating to a Preterist if he sees it being taught as relevant to us today.

"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)

The Preterist doesn't have this hope.

2) Folks on Television like Ankerberg speak out effectively against Preterism.

3) It should irritate the average Preterist to hear someone else speak of what the Preterist has deluded himself to think of as fiction as nonfiction.

So these are good reasons why the average Preterist would be irritated by Christian Television.

But these are not the right reasons to be irritated by Christian Television.

Good reasons would be:

1) They promote the prosperity doctrine.

2) They take money from folks they shouldn't be taking money from.

So both original points of 'You Know You're a Preterist if: make sense:

19) Christian Television rightly irritates you but for all the wrong reasons.

AND

2) You think Christian Television is simply unnecessary. (1 John 3:1,2; 2; Peter 3:11)

Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives 12 as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming. That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the heat. (2 Peter 3)

BJ Maxwell 06/29/2006

3) You and Skeptics actually agree on something but draw entirely different but equally wrong conclusions.

Truth of the matter is that skeptics and Preterists refuse to believe that Jesus will come back again no matter what effort you make to convince them otherwise.

This ignorance ultimately will not effect the Futurist but the unbelieving.

It has been the effect of Preterists to undermine the evangelistic efforts of Christians who 'have this future hope in them.' (1 John 3:2,3)

This is why Futurists cannot join with Preterists to reach the lost.

This is willing ignorance, which only proves that you don't have to be anything more than a rectum to stop the process.

Paul said that the arrogant ones were those that were ignorant of the mysteries not the ones that knew them and the mysteries partly had to do with the delay of Christ's coming.

There are many people out there that pat themselves on the back for being a butt, and slow down or stop Christian's efforts, but it doesn't take any talent at all to do this.

I have been in numerous groups where the Preterists accomplished nothing more than neutralize the efforts of the Christians.

When the Preterist agrees with the Skeptic and says, yes, you are right Jesus should have fulfilled all the prophecies he just did it invisibly and when no one was looking he or she is only making the skeptic wonder what parts of scripture can be taken seriously. To then offer the skeptic an explanation that the Preterist thinks he can live with has no fruit.

The Preterist has yielded to the scoffers pressure and declared that Christ must have already shown up, only in a gnostic kind of way.

Docetism (a branch of Gnosticism) teaches that Christ didn't come in the flesh, Preterists declare he didn't come in the flesh the second time.

Peter comments on Pauls special wisdom as explaining why God was taking so long by saying, 'our Lord's patience means salvation'

So whether you think forty years or two thousand years are too long for Christ to come again, Peter and Paul were explaining the delay even before AD 70 came around.

So Paul did have a special 'gnosis' knowledge of the mysteries.

One of them being the partial blindness of Israel and the delay of that program, while the 'fulness of the Gentiles' are come in.

'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. 26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. 27 And this is my covenant with them when I take away their sins." 28 As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, 29 for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable.' (Romans 11)

1) This demonstrates that Paul has a special knowledge of what is going on

2) It is a mystery

3) In fact the conceited ones would be those that are willingly ignorant of this not those that are aware of this.

Which dispels the myth that those that hold to this thinking are arrogant because of their 'gnosis' and 'confidence' in this.

Check out: https://cuf5.tripod.com/id110.html

4) This Mystery involved the blindness of Israel and the coming in of the Gentiles i.e. Body of Christ.

5) This also says that 'God's gifts and his call are irrevocable.',

which means that God is not finished with the nation of Israel, no matter what the Replacement Theologians and the Preterists say.

6) He also says, 'I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers ', which means if you are a Christian, then you have no excuse in being ignorant of this mystery explained by Paul. One cannot just claim that he or she just has a different way of interpreting scripture.

These are things the Preterist willingly refuses to believe and instead supports the skeptic.

Mal Couch in his article essentially states that the theology of Preterism is actually reactionary and an effort to placate the Skeptics who have said, 'Where is this 'coming' he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation." (2 Peter 3)

Notice that Peter:

1) Calls these scoffers evil not misinformed

2) He doesn't say placate them with Preterist theology.

In fact he says, "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. (Ibid)

The Fatal Mistakes of Preterism:

http://www.conservativeonline.org/articles/preterism/fatal_mistakes_of_preterism.htm

No one has yanked any 1st century meaning from the original audience. In fact it can be shown that Luke 21:20-24 actually applied to that first generation.

This all only confirms that 'You know You're a Preterist if:

3) You and Skeptics actually agree on something but draw entirely different but equally wrong conclusions. (2 Peter 3:3,4)

BJ Maxwell 06/30/2006

4) You think the Epistles and Revelation are only history books.

Scripture is alway relevant directly or indirectly, unless you are a Preterist and Luke 21:20-24 actually refers only to Israel and Jerusalem back then.

5) You think you are from the tribe of Joseph-Us

(Revelation 7:8)

Don Preston the Preterist says: "Terrorism is a direct outcome of Israel's belief that they exclusively own the land. Palestinians believe that Allah gave the same land to Mohammed. Let me emphasize that the terrorists are the extremists on both sides. Sharon used to blow up hotels full of innocent palestinians, and justified it as fighting terrorism. The evangelicals say the land belongs to Israel, so they justify Israel as having the right to defend that land at any cost. Clearly, the huge majority of American evangelicals do not believe in terrorism. Nonetheless, the fundamental belief that the respective sides,whether Islamic or Jewish, own the land, no matter what, serves as a philosophical justification for their violent activities."

http://planetpreterist.com/news-360.html

Though one can agree that all innocent life ought to be preserved, Prestons' view that Israel is wrong in believing that God will give the Land to the Jews is clearly wrong. (Ezekiel 36)

Your view on this will affect your side on the fight against Terrorism.

I have heard that Sharon used to do these kind of things but that just may be propaganda from Preterists and Palestinians.

Collateral damage is very unfortunate, but we (U.S.) are learning how hard it is to get to cowardly Terrorists that hide behind women and children.

The view that Israel is as guilty as the Palestinians in thinking that God has promised them the land comes from a Preterist standpoint that God is finished with Israel as a nation.

This is also why I hope we never get a Preterist President.

Which also means that rather than postponing the program for Israel, Preston and Preterism have to do away with national Israel altogether.

Then it logically follows that Preterism must find Israels' replacement.

Preston also believes that the answer to terrorism is to show that both Arabs and Jews have already had God's promises fulfilled for them.

"Both arabs and jews believe the land belongs to them. If we can prove to both groups that biblical promises concerning the land were fulfilled, we could negotiate a peace that is based on compassion and understanding." (Ibid)

This is ludicrous in light of what God promised to them in Ezekiel 36.

Thinking that the church replaces Israel requires that the Preterist also determine which tribe he is from. (Rev. 7)

What about the 'tribe of Joseph-Us'?

Christians being from the tribes is not a dispie concept. We rightly know the tribes are the literal and physical tribes of Israel not Gentile Christians.

I will show that anyone who believes in the delay of Romans 11:24-27 shouldn't believe that we have replaced the Jews.

Preston the Preterist also believes there was no delay, 'Jesus kept his word, and there was no delay!'

http://planetpreterist.com/news-360.html

If you look at the free chart at the following link you will see that the Body of Christ where 'There is neither Jew, nor Greek...', spiritually speaking, is in the right column while Israel is in the left. We don't confuse the two and the wild olive tree is something bigger than both of them.

Even our union with them in the Wild Olive Tree is not a pantheistic Oneness.

http://geocities.com/protestantscot/ttd/chapter2.html

In the body of Christ and spiritually we are the same in Christ, but this doesn't diminish the physical and geographical details that make us different.

There is still a True Israel in the Middle East that will see the fulfillment of all prophecies related to it, because God is faithful not them. (Ezekiel 36:22ff; Romans 11:25-27)

In the end they will be Jewish through and through.

Though my wife and I are One/United, there are obviously differences in our physical, mental and emotional makeup.

Anyone married knows this and anyone formerly married would have done better to have known this.

Some misunderstand the concept of oneness. Oneness is not a Hindu Oneness where I am the Walrus, but a Biblical Oneness/Union that while we are one, there are distinctions as well.

If this wasn't the case then I could claim my oneness with God Almighty makes me God Almighty.

Understanding biblical teachings like the Triunity of God requires that one understands Biblical Oneness between the three persons in the One God.

So it is justifiable to question a persons' Eschatology especially when their Theology is off as well.

Also one needs to understand personhood which also shows the distinction of members of the Body of Christ, the persons of the Triunity and also explains the union of God and Man in Christ Jesus.

Its all right to take the oneness literally, but in this case that would be the spiritual interpretation.

Now saying, 'You think you are from the tribe of Joseph-Us (Revelation 7:8) ' was meant as funny wordplay..Tribe of 'Joseph' (Revelation 7:8) + Us = Josephus, which is their main guy when proving their AD 70 assumption, though this guy didn't see Christ either. (Matthew 24:30; Revelation 1:7,8)

Now it's unfortunate that you cannot get some Preterists to laugh at this list, even after explaining the jokes, but maybe their ability to at least chuckle got 'laughed behind' in AD 70 as well.

Their ability to get angry is still intact, which tells me that maybe they were expecting more from the New Heavens and New Earth.

BJ Maxwell 07/02/2006

6) You think the Destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 was worse than the Holocaust. (Matthew 24:21)

"For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now--and never to be equaled again. 22 If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened." (Matthew 24)

Now to think that the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., exceeds anything in the past or in the future, in regards to distress and suffering would require someone totally out of touch with reality and the historical accounts of such events as the Holocaust. Even the Holocaust will be exceeded in distress and suffering for Israel in the future.

To warn Israel of their future suffering and how they can avoid it, is the most loving thing we can do for them.

Preterism is a perfect example of a religious belief that has blinded its adherents to what every reasonable person already knows.

Preterists act like they have some kind of secret guide that only they possess that takes scriptures that speak plainly and reinterprets/spiritualizes them.

This is similar to how the cults operate.

One difference is that the cults are consistently wrong in many of the essentials while the Preterist is consistently wrong in eschatological issues but inconsistent in how he or she interprets the bible.

For example the Preterist wants us to believe that in Revelation when it speaks of 'every eye' seeing him that we should not take that literally but the very next verse speaking of the deity of Christ should be taken literally.

"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)

So in regards to point number six, Preterists advise us to look at things spiritually.

So that must mean that every eye means either 'no eye' or it means 'every spiritual eye' or they redefine Christ.

If it means no eye or every spiritual eye then we would not be able to reconcile that with the passages in Zechariah and Revelation One which say, that the ones that pierced Him will also look upon him.

Now certainly if the ones that crucified Jesus can see him with their eyes then why didn't everyone else present, if 70 Ad was the whole story?

The Preterist creates a mess out of the scriptures and this is why it is so hard to pin them down on things. The biggest argument I have heard is, 'You Just Don't Understand Me'

Just like a cultist they are redefining words and terms.

For this reason I will be developing a chart called: Preterist Instant Redefinition Chart.

James Sire wrote a book called Scripture Twisting. I used to have the book but cannot find it.

Fortunately, the points of Scripture Twisting are on the Internet. The points I believe apply to Preterism are: 17. ESOTERIC INTERPRETATION: Under the assumption that the Bible contains hidden, esoteric, meaning which is open only to those who are initiated into its secrets, the interpreter declares the significance of biblical passages without giving much, if any, explanation for his or her interpretation. Example: Mary Baker Eddy gives the meaning of the first phrase in the Lord's Prayer, "Our Father which art in heaven," as "Our Father-Mother God, all harmonious."

This is confirmed by Mal Couch who quotes Bernard Ramm in Protestant Biblical Interpretation:

"Allegorical interpretation believes that beneath the letter (rhete) or the obvious (phanera) is the real meaning (hyponoia) of the passage. Allegory is defined by some as an extended metaphor. If we presume that the document has a secret meaning (hyponoia) and there are no cues concerning the hidden meaning interpretation is difficult. … We are on very uncertain grounds. (p. 24)...

Ramm continues and quotes K. Fullerton who writes,

When the historical sense of a passage is once abandoned there is wanting any sound regulative principle to govern exegesis. … The mystical [allegorical] method of exegesis, is an unscientific and arbitrary method, reduces the Bible to obscure enigmas, undermines the authority of all interpretation. (p. 31)"

http://www.conservativeonline.org/articles/preterism/fatal_mistakes_of_preterism.htm

Preterism appears to have its own secret way of finding the real meaning of scripture, similar to the Gnostics.

Another Point James Sire of Scripture Twisting makes is: 20. WORLD-VIEW CONFUSION: Scriptural statements, stories, commands or symbols which have a particular meaning or set of meanings when taken within the intellectual and broadly cultural framework of the Bible itself are lifted out of that context, placed within the frame of reference of another system and thus given a meaning that markedly differs from their intended meaning.

Example: The Maharishi Mahesh Yogi interprets "Be still, and know that I am God" as meaning that each person should meditate and come to the realization that he is essentially Godhood itself."

Though not exactly a cult, Preterism uses a few cultic methods of interpretation.

They are the new Gnostics that rather than making Christs' coming an esoteric event they have made his coming to Israel an invisible and esoteric event, and the whole story, all to justify their AD 70 assumption.

Every Eye Shall See Him:

"This is precisely the thought Jesus was conveying to Caiaphas when he told him he would see him coming in the clouds. When Jesus said he was going to come in the clouds this was a claim to the Messianic office and divine nature; Caiaphas responded, "He has spoken blasphemy!" Caiaphas was not responding to a claim that Jesus would literally return on a physical cloud. He was responding to the IDENTITY which Jesus was claiming by associating himself as the one to come in the clouds of heaven!" Preston the Preterist

http://www.preteristarchive.com/Preterism/preston-don_p_16.html

So what is a heavenly cloud?

Preston earlier in the article suggests that they could be Chariots.

Josephus might have even stated that he saw Chariots in 70 AD.

"Besides these [signs], a few days after that feast, on the one- and-twentieth day of the month Artemisius, [Jyar,] a certain prodigious and incredible phenomenon appeared; I suppose the account of it would seem to be a fable, were it not related by those that saw it, and were not the events that followed it of so considerable a nature as to deserve such signals; for, before sun-setting, chariots and troops of soldiers in their armour were seen running about among the clouds, and surrounding of cities. Moreover, at that feast which we call Pentecost, as the priests were going by night into the inner [court of the] temple, as their custom was, to perform their sacred ministrations, they said that, in the first place, they felt a quaking, and heard a great noise, and after that they heard a sound as of a great multitude, saying, "Let us remove hence" (Wars, VI-V-3 ../JewishWars/jo-6-5-3.html)."

Josephus obviously saw something but could not define it as Christ.

Why didn't anyone see Christ?

Why didn't Christ just say, Every Eye shall see my Chariots in the clouds, if this was the whole story?

Why did Christ give so many details if, just invisibly judging Israel would do?

This is where only a Dispensationalist could properly answer this question.

The judgment of Luke 21:20-24 describes the judgment of Israel beginning in 70 AD.

However the rest of Luke 21, Matthew 24, Mark 13; Zechariah 14 and Revelation 1:7 leave no doubt that there is more to come.

The judgment of Israel in 70 AD was the delay not the end of the program for Israel.

Notice the word 'Until'

Notice the similarities in the passages:

"Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. 22 For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. 23 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! There will be great distress in the land and wrath against this people. 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)

Now since this section of scripture says, 'in fulfillment of all that has been written' AND 'Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles Until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled, which is still happening, then we must conclude that the Judgment on Israel began in 70 AD and kept on going, thus including the Holocaust.

However, the Preterist thinks that it was all fulfilled in 70 AD so he cannot include the Holocaust but must declare 70 Ad by itself more horrendous than the Holocaust....'great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now--and never to be equaled again.' (Matthew 24)

And

"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. 26 And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. 27 And this is my covenant with them when I take away their sins." (Romans 11)

Here Paul just defined the conceited ones as those ignorant of this mystery, which is a temporary hardening of Israel UNTIL the full number of the Gentiles are come in.

So the Preterist is conceited.

The Dispie can see the Judgment of Israel (continuing on through the Holocaust, creation of a nation (1948-Parable of the Fig Tree) to whatever horrendous thing happens to them in the future) in contrast to the persecution that will come on the whole world. (Revelation 3:10)

This is why Dispies like Charts.

The Preterist is either or, AD 70 or the Holocaust. He chooses AD 70.

David Reagan 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. Looking to the Future

But we must also keep in mind that the Futurist view is correct when it says that the ultimate fulfillment of the book's prophecies is yet future."

http://lamblion.com/articles/prophecy/viewpoints/Views-06.php

So actually the egomaniacs are the Preterists that say its their view only or no view.

This is what is so arrogant about Preterists.

The Dispie can see that Ad 70 was only the beginning of sorrows for Israel, Until the fulness of the Gentiles are come in, which is still future. Then sometime in the future, judgment will come upon the whole world. (Revelation 3:10; Matthew 24)

So according to the Preterist, 'distress unequalled' is supposed to be more appropriately connected spiritually to 70 AD somehow but not to the Holocaust that by far surpassed it in suffering.

It reminds me of former President Clinton who would defend himself by saying, "It depends on what your definition of 'is', is."

The Preterist says, "It depends on what your definition of 'Israel' is." and this is only the beginning of their redefinition of terms and plain sense scripture.

BJ Maxwell 07/03/2006

 

7) You've Never Read or believed Zechariah (Zechariah 12-14)

Now if Preterists take things I say about Preterism personally then that is their personal problem not mine.

I prefer quoting from folks that have actually written pieces on Preterism and cannot weasel out with such arguments as, 'You Just Don't Understand Me'

And Yes, I do believe it is just a matter of faith or no faith, and not a matter of interpretation.

Preterists don't believe the plain sense of scripture, they believe the Preterist sense, which means that they must redefine everything eschatological that scripture says.

Dispensationalism is the most effective argument against Preterism.

 You've Never Read or believed Zechariah (Zechariah 12-14)

Now Zechariah is so filled with the geographical and physical details of Jesus' Second Coming that it is completely preposterous for a Preterist to explain all that away with the figurative approach.

I want you to look at just Zechariah Fourteen and all its details and ask yourself how anyone could take this figuratively, seeing all the many details God gave us.

The Devil is not in the Details, he ignores the details.

I will also be giving the Preterist instant redefinition in my chart eventually but that will come later.

The Lord gives details of His coming which include:

Who He will fight, How He is going to fight, How He will land on the Mount of Olives, How the Mount of Olives will split, What will be created from this split, Which Direction the Mountain will Move, Which way the Jews should run, Then the Lord God will come with his saints (Me and others), He describes what kind of day it will be, What direction water will flow out of Jerusalem, Who will be King, Exactly what the land will be like, Jerusalem will be inhabited never to be destroyed again-which only can be future, Exactly what the plague will do to those that fought against Israel, How panic will strike them as well, How great wealth will be collected.

Now How anyone can make all this figurative is beyond my comprehension.

God doesn't give details except for a reason.

Dimensions of the Temple, The Ark, anything else for that matter is for a reason, not to be explained away by unbelieving Preterists and skeptics.

This is how 'You Know You're a Preterist if:'

7) You've Never Read or believed Zechariah (Zechariah 12-14)

And the scripture below doesn't even include the whole chapter or chapters twelve and thirteen of Zechariah.

Here it is:

3 Then the Lord will go out and fight against those nations, as he fights in the day of battle.

4 On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half of the mountain moving north and half moving south.

5 You will flee by my mountain valley, for it will extend to Azel. You will flee as you fled from the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. Then the Lord my God will come, and all the holy ones with him.

6 On that day there will be no light, no cold or frost.

7 It will be a unique day, without daytime or nighttime--a day known to the Lord. When evening comes, there will be light.

8 On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half to the eastern sea and half to the western sea, in summer and in winter.

9 The Lord will be king over the whole earth. On that day there will be one Lord, and his name the only name.

10 The whole land, from Geba to Rimmon, south of Jerusalem, will become like the Arabah. But Jerusalem will be raised up and remain in its place, from the Benjamin Gate to the site of the First Gate, to the Corner Gate, and from the Tower of Hananel to the royal winepresses.

11 It will be inhabited; never again will it be destroyed. Jerusalem will be secure.

12 This is the plague with which the Lord will strike all the nations that fought against Jerusalem: Their flesh will rot while they are still standing on their feet, their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongues will rot in their mouths.

13 On that day men will be stricken by the Lord with great panic. Each man will seize the hand of another, and they will attack each other.

14 Judah too will fight at Jerusalem. The wealth of all the surrounding nations will be collected--great quantities of gold and silver and clothing.

15 A similar plague will strike the horses and mules, the camels and donkeys, and all the animals in those camps. (Zechariah 14)

I didn't even look at eight verses from this chapter due to lack of space.

11 "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."

12 Then they returned to Jerusalem from the hill called the Mount of Olives, a Sabbath day's walk from the city. (Acts 1)

BJ Maxwell 07/04/2006

8)You think that the works of Josephus are actually part of scripture

Most Preterists understand and believe in the Triunity of God, so I will be quoting them when getting a correct view of Preterism.

Those Preterists that don't believe in the Trinity or the deity of Christ should get their Theology right before they attempt eschatology.

In regards to the Preterist dependence on Josephus, the Wikipedia states:

"Partial Preterism relies heavily on the account of Flavius Josephus in describing the destruction of Jerusalem as a first hand account of the recorded fulfillment of the Book of Revelation."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial_Preterism

If Partial Preterism relies heavily on Josephus then certainly Full Preterism does.

And Remember this is the Wikipedia, not a Futurist viewpoint.

"A good example of an over-dependence on one source is the current rage over Flavius Josephus' works. Preterists of all flavors have used his works as an external proof of their belief that many or all the New Testament prophecies were fulfilled around the events of AD 70. While Josephus is a decent historian by 1st century standards, he is just one man. As his works are forced to bear the incredible weight that some Preterists have put on his testimony of the events of AD 70, the faults and cracks in his work are quickly revealed. It only highlights the importance of having multiple sources, multiple perspectives, as we try to understand and verify the events of the past."

http://highlands.gospelcom.net/ETC/Volume_Three/Issue_Five/Practicum.php

In fact, relying on Josephus at all to understand scripture would be using the fallible to interpret the infallible and most folks will admit that Josephus was fallible and egotistical.

I talk about the dangers of doing that at my site at:

https://cuf5.tripod.com/id89.html

To confirm what I said about the over reliance on Josephus, I got a response from a Todd Dennis, who must be at least reading the subject box of my messages and who said,

"Just to let you know... The 6th Book of Josephus was bound with the Bible by Ambrose (called the Ambrosian Manuscript) along with two other works that looked back to the fall of Jerusalem - 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch. "

This I confirmed in a Google search which says: "A Syriac translation of book vi. of the 'Jewish War' is contained in the Peshitta manuscript of the Ambrosianus in Milan, in which it is called 'The Fifth Book of Maccabees.' The beginning of it was published by Ceriani in 1871; the complete text-a photographic reproduction of the manuscript-was issued by him at Milan in 1876-83, and was republished with German translation by H. Kottek, Berlin, 1886 (see R. Gottheil in "Hebraica," iii. 3, 136, New Haven, 1887)."

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=543&letter=J

This enlightening bit of information confirms that some people out there actually included Josephus with scripture at one point.

Concerning the Josephus account of 70 AD, Joe was probably correct in most of his details and I would agree that this might have been the seal on the delay of the program for Israel. Still, it is also true that Paul the apostle had already declared the Delay a reality in Romans. (Romans 11:24-27; Luke 21:20-24; Acts 13:46ff), so the Josephus account is not necessary for the Futurist to believe what he believes, though it certainly sends the Jews a message.

And today we can see that the Jewish Program is no longer in effect.

"To go outside of the Bible and rely on historians, scientists and archaeologists to tell us what it was like at the time of the Bible's writing is ludicrous. There is no guarantee that they completely know what they are talking about or that they record history properly. So in effect we are using the uninspired and errant to interpret the inspired and inerrant Word of God. This is just plain foolish!"

Anytime one goes outside scripture to clarify or explain it they are on thin ice.

Another extrabiblical source Preterists use:

"There are thousands, perhaps millions, of people who, after reading the Bible, have come to the same conclusion to which one of the most famous atheists, Bertrand Russell, came . He felt Jesus couldn't be Who He said He was because the things He and His apostles said would happen in their time, didn't happen. Below are listed a few of the many passages they would point to and say these things were not fulfilled according to the plain reading of the English text. This list comes from a little booklet entitled, 'Can God Tell Time,' by Don Preston."

http://www.tentmaker.org/Dew/Dew6/D6-TheComingOfChristIn70AD.html

The above author has used the arguments of atheists and agnostics to create something that they think the skeptics can live with, as if this is all they would need to come to faith.

He is going outside of scripture and letting the fallible and unbelieving determine his eschatology.

Thank God Jesus didn't first take a poll before he knew what he should believe and preach.

"The evangelical world cannot afford to turn a deaf ear to the railing voices of skepticism that gut Scripture of its divine authority, that assault the credibility of the apostolic witness and even of Christ himself. We must take seriously the skeptic’s critique of the time-frame references of New Testament prophecy, and we must answer them convincingly." -- The Last Days According to Jesus, p-203....The ONLY SOLUTION to the dilemma of "nonoccurrence" is OCCURRENCE! It’s the only biblically CONSISTENT SOLUTION that can stop the liberal/skeptic assault dead in its tracks. It’s also the simplest solution."

http://prophecyrefi.org/solution_02.htm

So this Preterist author's suggestion is to give in to the skeptics and declare that Christ actually did come though we didn't see it as he said we would. (Revelation 1:7,8)

Now of course I have already said that Israel was judged by Christ in 70 AD and the program for Israel was delayed while the 'fulness of the Gentiles are come in' (Romans 11:24-27; Luke 21:20-24)

Only a dispensationalist who knows that there were two programs spoken of in the NT, one for Israel, the other for the Body of Christ can adequately answer the Preterist argument.

Only a dispie can be dogmatic about this, all others waver.

Above, the Preterists, including RC Sproul is suggesting that we tailor our eschatology to the skeptics arguments.

The Preterist is letting Josephus, Bertrand Russel-An atheist, Jewish Skeptics, Muslims determine what the scriptures should say, even if they have to make many passages figurative.

In other words, God didn't really mean what He said when He said, 'every eye shall see Him.'

Read the whole article at the link above, don't take my word for it.

The Preterists have created a fanciful story for the skeptics.

The Preterist author above basically said that the answer to Christ not coming is to create a coming for the skeptics.

I have actually seen a Preterist use this approach in a skeptics group, countering what Futurist efforts were made there.

BJ Maxwell 07/05/2006

I got the following message from Todd Dennis compiler of the Preterist Archive website.

This is some really good information he sent me.

I'm not sure whether he thinks that this supports the Preterist cause or not but here it is.

This was in response, to my You Know You're a Preterist if: You consider Josephus a part of scripture.

He says:

"Just to let you know... The 6th Book of Josephus was bound with the Bible by Ambrose (called the Ambrosian Manuscript) along with two other works that looked back to the fall of Jerusalem - 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch. "

This I confirmed in a Google search which says: "A Syriac translation of book vi. of the 'Jewish War' is contained in the Peshitta manuscript of the Ambrosianus in Milan, in which it is called 'The Fifth Book of Maccabees.' The beginning of it was published by Ceriani in 1871; the complete text-a photographic reproduction of the manuscript-was issued by him at Milan in 1876-83, and was republished with German translation by H. Kottek, Berlin, 1886 (see R. Gottheil in "Hebraica," iii. 3, 136, New Haven,

1887)."

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=543&letter=J

I'm not sure whether this means that it was considered a part of scripture or part of the apocryphal books or something else but it seems to verify the overreliance on Josephus by some. I'm also not sure of its connection with Maccabees, which was written much earlier.

This enlightening bit of information confirms that some people out there actually included Josephus with these particular Aramaic manuscripts of the Bible at one point.

I couldn't find much on this but it seems to verify what I said in this message. I would like to find more information on this so that I could come to a more complete conclusion but I have to take what I can get.

Concerning the Josephus account of 70 AD, Joe was probably correct in most of his details and I would agree that Ad 70 might have been the seal on the delay of the program for Israel. It is also true that Paul the apostle had already declared the Delay a reality in Romans. (Romans 11:24-27; Luke 21:20-24; Acts 13:46ff), so the Josephus account is not necessary for the Futurist to believe what he believes, though it certainly sends the Jews a message.

And today we can see that the Jewish Program is no longer in effect.

"To go outside of the Bible and rely on historians, scientists and archaeologists to tell us what it was like at the time of the Bible's writing is ludicrous. There is no guarantee that they completely know what they are talking about or that they record history properly. So in effect we are using the uninspired and errant to interpret the inspired and inerrant Word of God. This is just plain foolish!"

BJ Maxwell 07/06/2006

The Following points apply to more than the Full Preterist.

 

Those that teach Replacement or Placement Theology (Revelation 2:9;3:9), Believe the Millenium or aspects of it are not literal, etc.

 

Anyone who takes the plain sense of scripture and spiritualizes/ allegorizes it needs to read the following.

 

9) For the Preterist it is, If the plain sense makes sense, seek some other sense, lest you rightly dispense (2 Timothy 2:15)

 

 'God means what He says and says what He means'?

 

'If He didn't mean what He said, why didn't He just say what He meant?'

 

The 'scripture interprets scripture' rule is true and good if you actually applied that principle correctly.

 

The Preterist strategy is to take a plain statement in scripture and instead of believing it, find some other scriptural reference that uses the term in a different manner.

 

This is similar to what a Jewish Skeptic would do when I demonstrated that every scripture of Isaiah 53 was fulfilled by Christ.

 

She would go back, chapter by chapter until the story changed to Israel then she would declare that this is what Isaiah 53 was talking about.

 

The problem was that Isaiah 53 was speaking of a righteous servant, so that couldn't be Israel.

 

So she went back until the story changed and then applied that to Isaiah 53. This could be called, 'The Bible interpreting itself' but it was the incorrect application of the principle.

 

Had the Jewish Skeptic gone back even further she would have seen that Israel wasn't righteous so therefore couldn't be the righteous servant of Isaiah 53.

 

ד הוֹי גּוֹי חֹטֵא, עַם כֶּבֶד עָו‍ֹן--זֶרַע מְרֵעִים, בָּנִים מַשְׁחִיתִים; עָזְבוּ אֶת-יְהוָה, נִאֲצוּ אֶת-קְדוֹשׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל--נָזֹרוּ אָחוֹר. 4 Ah sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evil-doers, children that deal corruptly; they have forsaken the LORD, they have contemned the Holy One of Israel, they are turned away (Isaiah 1:4)

 

Faith of a child doesn't respond to God when He says something plainly with, Did you mean that in a literal sense or a figurative sense?

 

Did you mean a literal fish or did you really mean a serpent?

 

"Which of you, if his son asks for bread, will give him a stone? 10 Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a snake? 11 If you, then, though you are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven give good gifts to those who ask him!" (Matthew 7:10)

 

According to Preterist logic God just might give him a serpent rather than a fish because He doesn't always mean what He says and 'good gift' might really mean bad.

 

So When God said he created the world in six days he might have really meant six million years.

 

This is why Preterists often support Evolutionary Theory that requires that long to have a world without God.

 

Faith doesn't go back until the story changes and it doesn't find an obsure usage for a term in scripture then apply that across the board including the scripture in question.

 

Faith offends the Preterist, especially a Preterist who is unsound Theologically, but it is what God has determined, not me.

 

Faith is essentially, 'If the Plain Sense Makes Sense, Seek No Other Sense to replace it, Lest You end up with Nonsense', or Preterist thinking.

 

I added 'to replace it' because its all right to see a spiritual meaning for a verse as long as you don't dismiss the plain sense.

 

Preterists make it so difficult and then think they are special because their method of interpretation is so odd, and all to cater to the skeptics.

 

Understanding scripture is not difficult to understand, it is difficult for some to believe because it is so simple when one has the Holy Spirit indwelling and guiding them. (John 14:26)

 

If one is willing to believe the plain sense of scripture, they will not go wrong.

 

Using an argument that Bible Believers are so uneducated might work in the world but it doesn't work in the body of Christ and as I have heard somewhere else that if a B.S. degree means what I think it does then a PHD must mean Piled High and Deep.

 

Only the dispie can rightly/interpret scripture because he consistently believes the plain sense of scripture.

 

He doesn't have to allegorize or make scripture figurative to make it fit his theology.

 

"Mountain or mountains often refer to a foundation of men, either in a good or bad sense:"

 

http://www.preteristarchive.com/Preterism/fenley-ward_p_13.html

 

This Preterist gives scriptural examples of the term 'mountain' being used figuratively.

 

"This brings us to the unfaithful mountain of national Israel. In light of the imminent terror that would come upon the Jews, consider this passage in relation to the passage at hand:

Matthew 17:19-21 Then came the disciples to Jesus apart, and said, Why could not we cast him out? {20} And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you. {21} Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting." (Ibid)

He goes on to declare the use of the word 'mountain' here as figurative.

 

Still, we must identify what Christ means by 'This mountain' which isn't just any mountain.

 

I also need to point out that earlier in that same chapter it says, "9 As they were coming down the mountain, Jesus instructed them, "Don't tell anyone what you have seen, until the Son of Man has been raised from the dead." (Matthew 17) , which if the Preterist would be consistent ought to think this a figurative mountain as well.

 

Then the account in Mark drives the sword deeper in the Preterists heart when it says:

 

"In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. 21 Peter remembered and said to Jesus, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!" 22 "Have faith in God," Jesus answered. 23 "I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. 24 Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours." (Mark 11)

 

If this isn't a literal mountain that Christ is talking about then we cannot literally expect God to literally answer us in a literal manner.

 

Only a literal and physical fig tree being cursed and Christ saying you can see similarly literal things happen if you believe.

 

Now the audacity of Preterist logic would be to claim that this mountain is figurative not literal, when my logic would say, 'Seek no other sense to replace it', which could allow for an additional and figurative interpretation but it cannot 'Replace' the obviously literal meaning.

 

It is nothing more than arrogance that leads the Preterist into thinking it is his way or the high way in an either or proposition.

David Reagan says this, "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."

 

This is cookie cutter eschatology that leaves a lot of extra dough/scripture on the outside and unused.

 

It is like saying 'Life is a beach' and for this person it may be, but for those of us that don't live on a beach we see the RRrrrrrrrrrest of the Story.

 

The Preterist author mentioned earlier then uses scripture haphazardly to add weight to what he said.

 

Then that brings us to the account of His coming to the Mount of Olives.

 

"On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half of the mountain moving north and half moving south." (Zechariah 14)

 

This isn't just any mountain or just a figurative mountain/obstacle or kingdom, it is the 'Mount of Olives' and directions are given.

The same place He left and would come back 'in like manner as you saw him leave' (Acts 1:11)

 

So the plain sense makes sense, so don't seek another sense to replace it.

 

The Preterist will twist this scripture to mean something that will fit his or her preconceived notion of Christ's return.

 

Yet He will believe that Christ came the first time just as Zechariah said He would but wont believe Zechariah concerning Christ's second coming.

 

9 Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey. (Zechariah 9)

 

This is just one example of the Full Preterist not taking the scripture literally, but there are many examples of Preterists and others not believing God when He says something.

BJ Maxwell

07/05/2006

12/11/2006

Copyright ©