Response to 50 Questions Posed to Literalists by a Preterist
1. Matthew 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Has heaven and earth passed? Has all been fulfilled in the Law? If not, is the Law still in force? (I hope you won’t look at this and think it means one physical jot or tittle won’t fade or be ripped up until the end of time. That won’t happen to the New Testament either, or to many other writings.)
Heaven and earth obviously have not passed. I still walk on the earth and look up at the heavens. Yes, the Law is still in force for physical Jews. The Law is the means by which Jews become sinners in the same way that you and I became sinners under the law of the Gentiles. When we became Christians, our citizenship was established in heaven, and we came under a new law, the law of Christ. He is now our Lord and Lawgiver, and Christians are no longer under their original law, whether it was the Law or law of Gentiles.
Question for preterists: Have heaven and earth passed?
Is righteousness now the complete order of the day? (II Pet 3:13)
2. What is the first resurrection? Has it happened yet? Is it happening now? Is it literal coming out of graves? Is it reigning on the earth? Do people come out of the graves and reign on the earth while others are living on the earth?
The first resurrection is recorded in Mt 27:52-53 and was the “many bodies of the saints which slept arose, and came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many”. The ones that arose were the 144,000 of Rev 7 and 14. It was a literal resurrection. These 144,000 went to heaven with Christ, “When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men” (Eph 4:8). The reign of Rev 20:4 was Christ reigning in heaven in a limited millennial reign through the church. This 1000 year reign was typical of the one yet to come on earth when He returns.
Question for preterists: what is the first resurrection?
3. Daniel 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.
2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.
Has this happened? If not is the Law still in force? If so, when did it happen? Is this literal coming out of the graves? If so, how can you tell?
No, the end of the world and its resurrection has not happened. Yes, the Law is still in effect for Israel, the only ones to whom it ever applied. The Law came into effect on Mt Sinai. Daniel speaks of a literal resurrection. I can tell that Daniel speaks of a resurrection because Daniel’s words say that the people that sleep (the dead–I Ki 2:10, I Ki 11:21, Lk 8:52) awake (Jn 11:11). The words say that people will rise from the dead. Yes, “sleep” and “awake” are euphemisms for “dead” and “resurrected” and the Bible explains these euphemisms (I Ki 2:10, Jn 11:11), but you are not content with euphemisms. You want to make these words into symbols and make them mean something entirely different. These words can mean nothing else than the bodily resurrection. Why would you think it would be other than the resurrection from the dead since that is a firm promise (“But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you–Ro 8:11 NKJV)”, and how would you KNOW (not suppose) what He meant if he WAS using a figure of speech?
4. Ezekiel 37:12 Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel.
Has this happened? If so, was it literal coming out of the ground? If not, why do you think anyone will ever come up out of the ground?
No, Ezekiel 37:12 has not yet happened. When it does, it will be a literal resurrection, a literal body coming out of the ground. A resurrection is defined to be the reuniting of body and spirit and the reconstruction and reanimation of the body as Ezek 37 describes. This is the central hope of Christianity. If you give this up, you give up Christianity. If you do not believe in the resurrection, you may as well give up Christianity and do whatever you want, because the resurrection is the keystone of Christianity. To deny our own resurrection is to deny the resurrection of Christ. To deny the resurrection of Christ is to deny Christianity. It is worthless without that central fact.
Have preterists given up on the literal, bodily resurrection of Christ (hint: yes)? Jesus is the FIRSTFRUITS of them that slept (I Cor 15:20). His resurrection is compared to a begettal (Acts 13:33). It is also the unshakable attestation of the fact that He is the Son of God (Rom 1:4). He is the FIRSTBORN among MANY BRETHREN (Ro 8:29), but you deny that His brethren will rise like He did. You are destroying the basis for belief in Christianity, and hence Christianity itself, by denying the resurrection (I Cor 15:12-19). By teaching this doctrine you make yourself an enemy of truth.
5. 1 Corinthians 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
Does the phrase “resurrection of the dead” conjure up graves opening more so than “I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves”?
Ezekiel and Paul both spoke of the same thing–the bodily resurrection of the dead. Do you believe what Martha believed that Lazarus would bodily rise again at the last day? (Jn 11:24). Do you believe that Jesus bodily raised Lazarus from the dead? (Jn 11:43-44). If Jesus could do it to Lazarus, why can’t He do it to you and me? Didn’t He make man from dirt (Gen 2:7) to start with, or has that now also become a figure of speech?
The verse you cite, I Cor 15:21, talks about death. Is that real, Tina, or is death a figure of speech as well? You do believe in literal death, don’t you? Adam (man) introduced death to the world (Gen 3:19). Do you believe that, or is that a figure of speech? Paul says (I Cor 15:21) that just as surely as Adam brought real death, even so Jesus will just as surely bring reanimation to those dead bodies. You deny what I Cor 15:21 teaches.
6. Revelation 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
Who are the “rest of the dead”?
“The rest of the dead” are all the dead that did not rise with Jesus and the 144,000.
Matthew 27:52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
The 144,000 that rose with Jesus were the first resurrection. They, like Him (I Co 15:20), were “the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb” Revelation 14:4
Question for preterists: Who are “the rest of the dead”? Where can you read it?
7. Revelation 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.
If this doesn’t happen until the end of time when Jesus comes and the world burns up, who are the Spirit and bride asking to come?
Rev 22:5 marks the end of John’s description of the events under Christ’s power of the 7th seal (Rev 8-22:5). Rev 22:6 begins the epilog/conclusion of Revelation. John reverts from describing prophetic events to come back to a “now-time” exhortation to the people who would read the book. Christ exhorts those that hear the words of the book and what he has said that they should repent and serve God. Through John, Jesus calls on all to repent while there is yet time. Anyone that chooses to do so can still repent and obtain the right to the water of life. Jesus’ invitation is still open today. It will be open until He comes and destroys the earth unless you take the mark of the beast. Then you are eternally lost.
Are they calling people from hell?
No, Jesus and John are not calling people either from Hades-hell or Gehenna-hell, but they are calling people in the flesh on the earth. This is really an absurd question. Do you believe that the Bible understood literally forces one, if he is consistent, to believe that the Spirit and the bride are calling people from Gehenna? John has made a simple context switch in v6. You are really straining here. It appears you are trying to show that understood literally that the Bible is absurd. What you are showing is that your position is absurd. Your question would only be meaningful if there was no context shift in the scripture, but there obviously is, and you willfully ignore it (Rev 22:6). You think it is absurd to read “the things which must shortly be done” (Rev 22:6) and take that to be 2000 years, when I have shown you over and over in previous posts that the Bible uses these relative time terms in numerous places to indicate periods of time that are long relative to a man’s life time. You had rather abandon the use of language and the meaning of words and flee to fantasy rather than accept this clear teaching. You will not consider this clear explanation even though to reject this obvious answer drives you into preterism and the abandonment of Christianity!
Question for preterists: Who are the Spirit and the church asking to come? Are they calling people from hell?
8. Isaiah 25:8 He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people shall he take away from off all the earth: for the LORD hath spoken it.
Has this happened? Is death swallowed in victory? Has God wiped away the tears from off all faces? If not, is the Law of Moses still in force? If so, then have the following also happened?
It is bizarre that you are asking me if death has been swallowed up in victory when you don’t believe it ever will! You do not believe in a bodily resurrection from the dead, and that is the meaning of death being swallowed up in victory (I Co 15:51-55). No, of course there has not been a general resurrection from the dead. It is also bizarre to believe that God has wiped tears from all faces when you can see people crying every day. Why would you ever believe such a thing had happened? It certainly has not. Yes, the LOM is still in force for the Jews, the only ones to whom it has ever applied. Can it save them? No, it can only make them sinners. That is why they need Christ.
The last enemy that will be destroyed is death. Death will not be destroyed until He comes again. Preterists believe death was destroyed at the DOJ, which is absurd (I Cor 15:26).
Revelation 21:4 And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.
Is there something about this passage that makes it somehow different from the Isaiah passage so that the Isaiah passage just has to be fulfilled in some sense but the Revelation one has to be fulfilled in every sense?
I believe Isa 25:8 is future (I Cor 15:51-55), just like Rev 21:4. Rev 21:4 is a reiteration of God’s promise in Isa 25:8.
Question for preterists: Do you actually believe that God has wiped away all tears or is that also a figure of speech? I believe there will be literal eternity of non-sorrowing, but it is yet future.
9. Matthew 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works. 16:28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
2 Timothy 4:1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;
Are these verses talking about the same coming/appearing and the same kingdom? If so, has this happened? If not are these people still alive? And if not, how can you tell the difference?
The Bible clearly teaches that Enoch and Elijah did not die (Gen 5:24, II Ki 2:11), and Malachi even specifically says that Elijah will return (Mal 4:5–John the Baptist was merely a type). Enoch and Elijah are still literally alive, and they will return at the end of this age (Rev 11:3). Jesus left open the possibility that John also would live until Jesus returns (Jn 21:22). John disappeared from Ephesus in AD 101. He was presumed dead, but his body was never found. If he was taken like Enoch and Elijah, as Jesus intimated (Jn 21:22), then he can still be living and return. If we can show that John will indeed be present at the end of the world, then Jesus’ statement here will literally come true.
Hebrews refers to the Ascension of Isaiah (“sawn asunder”–He 11:37 from Asc Isa 5:1), and thereby gives it credibility as a truthful work. Here’s what the Ascension of Isaiah says “of the Twelve”.
AND now Hezekiah and Josab my son, these are the days of the completion of the world.
2. After it is consummated, Beliar the great ruler, the king of this world, will descend, who hath ruled it since it came into being; yea, he will descent from his firmament in the likeness of a man, a lawless king, the slayer of his mother: who himself (even) this king.
3. Will persecute the plant which the Twelve Apostles of the Beloved have planted. Of the Twelve one will be delivered into his hands.
John is the one “of the twelve” of whom this prophecy speaks. John will be alive and on earth when Belial arises. Paul uses “Belial” as the Man of Sin/Antichrist in II Cor 6:15 and “Belial” is frequently used of the Antichrist in the Jewish non-canonical writings (Jubilees XII, Sib Orc). The Antichrist does not arise until the last 3.5 years of the earth (Rev 19:19, 13:5). Jesus implied that John could live until Jesus comes (Jn 21:23). The Antichrist takes Jerusalem (Rev 11:7-11, Zech 14:1-4) 3.5 days before the end of the world (Rev 11:7, 11). If John is to be in Jerusalem when the Antichrist takes it, it would fulfill the prophecy that John “must prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings” (Rev 10:11), for the Antichrist leads armies gathered from the kings of the earth (Rev 19:19).
The following scenario is possible, was implied by Christ (Jn 21:22), is testified to in the ancient literature (Asc Isa 4:1-3), is required by prophecy (Rev 10:11), and literally fulfills Jesus’ statement in Mt 16. John returns to the earth along with Enoch and Elijah. He ministers in Jerusalem during at least the last week of the earth and is there when the Antichrist takes Jerusalem. He is captured by the Antichrist and brought before him and his kings to make his defense (Asc Isa 4:3) as Revelation requires (Rev 10:11). John is alive when Jesus returns, and the Antichrist probably then promptly kills John so that all of the Twelve die a martyr’s death for their testimony that Jesus rose from the dead, the very thing you are denying. From this scenario, we see Jesus’ statement is literally true: John’s generation lived to see Jesus return in the glory of the Father with His angels because John still lives when this happens.
I believe that Matthew and Paul were speaking of the same events; the Second Coming and the resurrection of the dead.
Question for preterists: To what do you think they referred?
10. John 21:22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.
Why would Jesus even suggest that someone could live until He came if that were impossible?
Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible. (Mt 22:29, Mk 10:27).
Question for preterists: Why do you think such a thing is impossible when Enoch and Elijah are still alive?
He knew the end wouldn’t come until there was a falling away. Did He not know when the falling away would be?
Do you really believe that while living apostles were present preaching the gospel (Acts 21:20) and working miracles in sight of everybody (Acts 4:16) and striking dead the disobedient (Acts 5:10), that there was such a falling away till it would be a wonder that Christ would find any faith on the earth (Lk 18:8)? Can you find any evidence that such a thing ever happened? There were false teachers, but the church became a mighty mountain that filled the whole earth (Dan 2:35). Such a claim that true Christianity almost disappeared by AD 70 is ludicrous in view of the historical record.
Of course Christ knew when the falling away would be. Do preterists?
Question for preterists: Are you are a part of the falling away? You are denying His coming (II Pet 3:4).
11. Revelation 2:25 But that which ye have already hold fast till I come.
Why would God inspire this if it were an impossibility for these people to do anything at all till Jesus came since Jesus wasn’t going to come to them? Why didn’t He say they should hold it fast till they died? Whether Jesus knew the hour or day or not, this was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Was He also unaware? If so, how can we trust anything in the Bible?
Jesus is going to literally come to the saints at Thyatira. Jesus did not say “hold fast until you die” because His letter was not just to Thyatira. Every one of the 7 letters ends with the admonition to “he that hath an ear to hear, let him hear”. That is everyone. Everyone is to listen to what Christ says to each of the seven churches. The letter to Thyatira applies not only to the day of John but to all that will listen between then and the time of His coming. He is going to return to earth, these people will bodily rise from the dead (I Th 4:16), they will rise to meet Christ in the air (I Th 4:17), and they will ride with Jesus to attack the armies of the Devil (Rev 19:14, Jer 49:22, Micah 2:12). If these people were faithful till death (Rev 2:10b), at their resurrection Christ will give them a literal rod of iron (Rev 2:27) with which they will kill the nations that remain alive at His coming, just like King Saul killed the Amalekites (I Sa 15:18).
How can YOU trust anything in the Bible when you make most of it into nonsense by denying the resurrection of the dead? You have to turn the Bible into mush by invoking the “it is figurative” hermeneutic in order to create an Alice in Wonderland situation where nothing is as it seems. I believe the Bible is literally true. Where the Bible actually uses symbols, they are explained, and the symbols resolve to literal things and events (Rev 1:17). If, like you, I believed every other word was a symbol such that “gold” was not “gold” and “precious stones” were not “precious stones” and the like, then, yes, I would be wondering how we can trust anything in the Bible. You actually don’t trust it. You rewrite it to make it believable to yourself and thereby deny the very thing it was designed to show–eternal salvation through the resurrection of the dead.
12. Romans 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
What kind of planting had been done to these people? Had they been buried in the ground or buried in water? Was this a physical planting of dead bodies or a planting of the spiritually dead? If it was physical planting of dead bodies, had these people died and been resurrected already? If it was a planting of spiritually dead people, was the resurrection also a spiritual resurrection? Or was the planting spiritual but the resurrection physical?
What is the relevance of this question? Because there are other types of resurrections, does that make a literal bodily resurrection impossible? I don’t get your argument. The Bible says that baptized people are raised to walk in newness of life (a kind of resurrection), but the truthfulness of this statement does not in any way preclude a bodily resurrection. Baptism is a type of the literal bodily resurrection experienced by Jesus and by us, if we are faithful. If the dead do not literally rise, baptism is not actually typical of Christ’s resurrection from the dead.
13. If God had wanted the people to whom Revelation was written to know that the things contained in it would happen shortly and that they were at hand, what words would He have used to convey that thought?
If you were giving a revelation that showed the future state of man, and you wanted to encourage people of every age to hold fast until then and not give men that lived early in the scheme of things a license to sin by definitely placing the resurrection thousands of years away, what would you have said? Because of the way that He said it, there was always the uncertainty as to exactly when Jesus was coming, and it was purposely designed in that way to keep people watchful. Jesus knew that at the end of days when the falling away came that people would seize upon the “shortly”, “soon”, “quickly” words to cast doubt on Jesus coming (II Pet 3:4), just as you are doing. By our day it has become obvious that Jesus was either a liar or He was He was speaking from His perspective in eternity. The early Christians knew that He was speaking from His perspective, and Peter even spells it out (II Pet 3:8) as did Barnabas (Bar 15:4). You try to defend Christ from the charge of “liar”, but the path you have chosen denies Christianity (I Cor 15:13).
14. Matthew 23:34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
Revelation 6:9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held:
10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?
11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.
Revelation 16:6 For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy.
Revelation 17:6 And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.
Revelation 18:24 And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.
Since Jerusalem was to pay for all the righteous blood shed on the earth and these martyrs were crying out for vengeance in the early part of Revelation and the woman in Revelation was later being avenged for this blood, is it possible that the woman is someone other than Jerusalem? Should we let the Bible interpret itself on this one or just guess that it sounds like Rome to us?
You begin this question with a false premise. Rev 17:6 and 18:24 refer to Rome, the city of seven mountains that then ruled over the kings of the earth (Rev 17:9, 18). To say that Jerusalem in AD 67 ruled over the kings of the earth is an absurdity driven by the desperation to keep some semblance of all prophecy being fulfilled by AD 70. There is no doubt that Jerusalem killed many prophets and righteous men, but John’s accusation includes much more than that. Besides the prophets and saints that Jerusalem killed, Rome killed these and more. Rome held spectacles that killed “all that were slain upon the earth”, as Revelation requires (Rev 18:24). People from all over and in large quantities died in the arena in Rome for hundreds of years. That was not the case in Jerusalem, but Revelation requires it to be true of the city of which it speaks. Furthermore, the kings of the earth did NOT commit fornication with Jerusalem. For many hundreds of years before John Jerusalem had been a rather unimportant place on the side of the mountain range in Judea. Yes, Israel had committed fornication with the idols of the nations, but the nations had little recourse to her. She was not the mistress of the kings of the earth, but Rome was. Rome went whoring after other gods with the kings of the earth for hundreds of years, both before and after Christianity. The kings of the earth even worshipped Rome’s emperor gods.
We should let the Bible interpret itself, but we should deal honestly with it. The view that you take requires the invention of fantasy and the wresting of scripture to make it even remotely plausible.
15. What language in Matthew 24 or 25 tells us that Jesus is discussing two different comings?
The apostles asked Jesus two questions:
1) When will these things be–the destruction of Jerusalem
2) What will be the sign of thy coming and of the end of the world–the Second Coming
Jesus answered these two questions in Mt 24. Since there are two questions, we would expect two answers and therefore a transition from one to the other. The language in v13 indicates a transition, “But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved”. “The end” sounds like a good place to transition. Then in v14 Jesus begins to discuss the end of the world when the Abomination of Desolation comes to Israel. You don’t entertain the possibility of transition, so you don’t find one. You even believe Mt 25 and the judgment scene where all the nations are gathered before Christ and He separates one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats refers to the DOJ!
How is it possible that Jesus had “all the nations” before Him at the DOJ and separated them one from another, pronounced sentence upon them and sent the wicked to hell? He says to the wicked, “Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels” (Mt 25:41), but you say this is all a figure of speech and not real and you spin it into something else completely unrelated. Your approach is not valid exegesis.
16. Revelation 14:13 And I heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them. 14 And I looked, and behold a white cloud, and upon the cloud one sat like unto the Son of man, having on his head a golden crown, and in his hand a sharp sickle. 15 And another angel came out of the temple, crying with a loud voice to him that sat on the cloud, Thrust in thy sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe.
Why would the dead be blessed from this time on? And why would people be living and dying anyway when the end of time has come? This is the reaping of the harvest, so who is going to be dying from henceforth–after the harvest?
It is a common practice in the prophets to speak of some present event and then transition to some future event, or even to transition from one vision to another. The book of Daniel chapters 7-12 is a series of visions. The text transitions from one vision to another numerous times, and the visions themselves transition from one time to another in the context of the vision. You have to read the text to find out the time under consideration (e.g. “in the days of these kings” Dan 2:44). Like Daniel, Revelation is a series of visions, and you have to look for the transition phrases like “and I saw” and “there appeared another wonder in heaven”, etc. to notice a change the time reference.
Rev 14:13 announces a change in context with the transition words, “And I heard”. Those words give a change of context and allow us to place this verse in a time reference that harmonizes with the words “blessed are the dead that die henceforth”. Obviously, if we place the context at the end of the world, your argument is correct, but the verse is introduced by a context change, and the next verse changes the context once again with the words “and I looked”. Rev 14:13 is an interlude between two visions that gives hope to the saints of all the ages. As you preterists are fond of pointing out, if Revelation is a vision of the future far distant from the first century, what is the relevance of Revelation to these people? Verse 13 is one of the things that is relevant, even though much of the book pertains to a day nearly 2000 years in the future from John’s vision. In John’s day it was a blessed thing for Christians to die, and it still is. It has been a blessing ever since the ascension of Christ. Instead of going to Hades at death to sit the Devil’s dark prison (I Pet 3:19, Ps 107:10, Isa 42:7), Christians now go to be with God (I think you still at least believe this). The blessing of going to heaven at death rather than going to dark Hades is the encouraging point that the angel makes in the midst of all this doom and gloom in Revelation. The next verse (Rev 14:14) begins yet another vision (“And I saw”), one of the harvest at the end of the world with the trampling out of the grapes of wrath.
In the vein of what is the use of Revelation to those of John’s day if it spoke of the end of the world 2000 years away, I want to make some observations regarding Revelation’s relevancy to men of all ages. People that lived in John’s day needed to know God’s plan just as much as we do. Though they lived at a time far distant from the end in terms of a man’s lifetime, they needed to know that God would not forget them even though they would be dead when Jesus returned (II Thes 2:2 KJV, I Cor 15:17-18). If early Christians did not realize that Christ would not come in their lifetime, it could shake the faith of some who came to the end of life expecting Christ would have come already. The angel here disabuses men of the notion that Christ would come in the lifetime of many of the readers of the book, but pronounces a blessing upon those that die faithful.
17. Romans 16:5 Likewise greet the church that is in their house. Salute my wellbeloved Epaenetus, who is the firstfruits of Achaia unto Christ.
1 Corinthians 16:15 I beseech you, brethren, (ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the firstfruits of Achaia, and that they have addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints,)
James 1:18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.
Revelation 14:1 And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father’s name written in their foreheads.
2 And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps:
3 And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth.
4 These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.
Are the firstfruits in Revelation the same people as the firstfruits in the other books? If not, why not?
No, they are not all the same firstfruits, because the context will not permit it. “Firstfruits” is used in the sense of the first of a harvest, many of which similar fruits will follow. When Paul speaks of the “firstfruits of Achaia” he refers to the first converts there. Many more followed. When James speaks of “firstfruits”, he speaks of all of the sons of God. All of God’s sons will rise from the dead at the beginning of the new earth (I Th 4:16). They will be God’s firstfruits in the context of all that will ever come to live on the new earth, for countless billions will be born in the new earth after these firstfruits at its beginning (Isa 9:7). In Rev 14:1 the firstfruits are the first of the dead saints that have then been resurrected, many more of which will follow at the general resurrection at the end of the age.
If the DOJ provided the firstfruits, who are the fruits that should follow? Why were there no fruits before that?
18. Revelation 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,
3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.
At some point, the devil is bound and certain people are resurrected. They live 1,000 years and reign with Christ during that time. They are RESURRECTED. That means, if tradition is correct, that the graves opened and their bodies came out. And they went to heaven to live with God while the rest of us are still living. When was that?
The way I read Rev 20:4-5 those involved in the first resurrection rose from the dead before the millennium. I believe the first resurrection is the one recorded in Mt 27:52. That happened before the millennium in Rev 20:4, and fits the requirement that the first resurrection precedes the millennium. The resurrection of the saints in Mt 27:52 was just as real as Jesus’ resurrection, that is, these folks had literal bodies that came forth out of the graves. The time that these resurrected ones went to heaven was when Jesus ascended back up on high (Eph 4:8). They began to reign through the church on earth around AD 345 and reigned unto 1345 when the millennium ended.
When did the beheaded dead live at the DOJ?
Is Satan bound now?
No. The millennium ended in 1345 and Satan was released after that.
How was Satan bound for 1000 years before the DOJ? Is he released now? Everything is supposed to be fulfilled now, but if Satan was released after the millennium, there is supposed to also subsequently be the Battle of Armageddon (Rev 20:7-9). Has that happened?
Have a bunch of graves opened and the bodies are gone?
This question sounds a little mocking to me (cp. II Pet 3:4), but yes, if you believe the Bible, “many bodies” (notice the word BODIES) arose with Christ and came out of the graves after Jesus’ resurrection (Mt 27:52).
If that COULD happen and nobody know it, then why couldn’t it have happened at the DOJ and nobody notice?
Again, the question is prefaced with a false premise. The text says, ” many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and APPEARED UNTO MANY.”
People did notice on the day of Jesus’ resurrection, but there is no similar account at the DOJ.
OR is it perhaps that the resurrection is not what we might think? (Remember, if the first resurrection is not bodily, we shouldn’t expect that the “rest of the dead” will have a bodily resurrection.)
The bodily resurrection of the dead is such an important point, that Paul said, “But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain” (I Cor 15:13-14). The apostles cut no quarter on this question. Just as surely as Christ bodily rose from the dead to forever after reside in the physical fleshly body (Lk 24:39), even so shall we arise in physical fleshly bodies (Rom 8:11). There can be no compromise on this question without denying Christ’s resurrection and His Sonship that was confirmed by that event (Rom 1:4, Acts 13:33).
Question for preterists: Do you believe that Jesus bodily rose from dead never to die again (Jas 2:26, Ro 6:9)?
19. 1 Corinthians 15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
To whom was Paul speaking?
Paul speaks of “we Christians”, the Christians of all the ages who would read his words. Paul wrote I Cor to “all that call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ in every place” (I Cor 1:2). His teaching was obviously not limited to just the Corinthians, otherwise you and I would waste our time reading it, because it would be irrelevant to us. In I Cor 15:51 Paul answers a question that Jesus asked in Lk 18:8 where He asked, “When the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?” Paul by inspiration says, “Yes!” There will be some few remaining. He expands upon the idea of Christians remaining at Christ’s coming in I Th 4:15. Jesus also indicated that some would remain in His remarks about the end (Lk 17:34, Mt 24:41).
Question for preterists: To whom was Paul speaking?
Would they not all sleep?
All the people living at Corinth would sleep, but there will be Christians living at the end that will not die a normal death.
It is astounding to me that you can read this chapter about people rising from the dead in literal bodies and make it out to be something entirely different.
Question for preterists: In view of the fact that Paul sets the context in verses 1-18 to be that of a bodily resurrection, how can you deny that I Cor 15 discusses the bodily resurrection of the dead?
Don’t we have to understand it that way?
Why? The things Paul taught were instruction to all Christians everywhere throughout the age until the coming of Christ (II Tim 2:2). Because there are Christians living at the end of the world and Paul wrote to them too, he includes the terminal condition. There would be those living when Christ comes that will not die.
If he meant some people will be alive, what kind of sense does that make?
Peter says that at the end of the world that worldly people will be trying to live normal lives, just like they were in Noah’s day (Mt 24:38). To these people Jesus’ sudden appearance will be as a thief in the night (I Th 5:2, II Pet 3:10). The good and bad will be mixed together at the end of the world (Mt 13:41). The righteous will be expecting Christ’s return (Lk 12:36), but the bad will be oblivious to it. The imminence of His return will be obvious to all Christians (Mt 24:32) but not preterists that have rejected the plain teachings of Christ’s return.
God destroys the whole world, making everybody die, and THEN comes? How many eyes could see that? Obviously SOME would be alive. But Paul said “we,” and he had an audience who would think he meant them. Why would he do that if it wasn’t so?
Paul’s audience included more than lived in Paul’s day (II Tim 2:2). See comments above.
Why would you think Paul’s statement is not true when he obviously wrote for all Christians for all time?
20. What was the old heaven and earth? What is the new heaven and earth?
The old heavens and earth were the starry heavens and the physical earth that existed in Noah’s day. Peter says this old world “being overflowed with water, perished” (II Pet 3:6). When Noah got off the boat, the same dirt was there, but it was a vastly different world. Even the physical processes were changed, because God set His rainbow in the cloud to commemorate the event of the Flood (Gen 9:13). God gave animals as food for man where they had not been before (Gen 9:3), and God made the beasts of the earth a threat to man’s life (Gen 9:5). The atmosphere was much thinner, and people lived much, much shorter lives. The earth of our day that emerged from the Flood was a much sorrier place than Noah’s world. The fossil record is evidence for that. The heavens probably also dramatically changed during the Flood. Velikovski quotes ancient sources that say that at one time that Jupiter, Venus, Mars, Mercury, and Saturn were all aligned with each other so that from earth they all appeared as concentric rings of planets, e.g. Mars was in the belly of Venus. Obviously, that changed. I don’t know if Velikovski is right, but it shows the possibility that the heavens could have dramatically changed. Also the asteroid belt and comets indicate that some traumatic event transpired in the not too distant past. The ocean artifacts on Mars tell us that something dramatic happened there, so I am willing to take Peter’s word for it that the heavens we have now are not the same as what Noah had (II Pet 3:7).
There will be continuity between the present heavens and earth and the new ones, just like there was continuity between Noah’s earth and the one now. The dirt was the same, but a lot of other stuff changed. It will be that way for us. God will remove the curse so that weeds don’t choke out food. Animals won’t kill each other or kill men. Women won’t bear children in pain. God will water the whole earth so there won’t be deserts. He will remove the overwhelming sea, the mountains, the icecaps, and the deserts so that most of the earth is available as a place for men to live. The earth will be warm, moist, full of life, and extremely productive. It will be a glorious place to live
Question for preterists: I have a reasonable explanation of the new heavens and the new earth. Can you do that without appealing to dramatic figures of speech that have no basis in reality?
21. John 12:31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.
What does “now” mean? Does it mean 2,000 years FROM now?
I take the word “now” to mean “at this time”. When Jesus spoke the words recorded in John 12:31, he was only a few days away from His sacrificial death. His death would enable a dramatic change from the way things had been. Up until the day of Jesus’ death, Satan was justified in presenting accusations before God against men, because there was no final sacrifice for sin (Heb 10:4). Satan had already been cast out of heaven as far as living there, but he was able to enter there to bring just accusations against men. After Jesus’ sacrifice, there was no reason whatsoever for Satan to ever appear in heaven again, so he was permanently and forcibly excluded. Satan’s exclusion from heaven happened at Jesus’ death, not 2000 years from then. At the 2000 year point, Satan will be captured, judged, and cast into the Lake of Fire where the smoke of his torment will ascend forever and ever (Rev 20:10).
Question for preterists: You take “now” to be 40 years. How does that work? You can take “now” not to be a pants-on-fire “now”, but you won’t let me take “shortly” to be two days from God’s perspective. Are the legs of the lame equal here?
22. Hebrews 9:8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:
If the way into the holiest of all was not made manifest while the first tabernacle was standing, would that change when the tabernacle was no longer standing? What does this imply? That Christ’s redemptive work was not finished until the destruction of Jerusalem? That once that was accomplished, people would have a way into the holiest, which would mean heaven? If so, then why do people still have to wait in Hades to go to heaven?
People no longer have to wait to go to heaven. When Christians die in this present time, their spirits go to be with God.
2 Corinthians 5:8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.
9 Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.
Philippians 1:22 But if to live in the flesh, — if this shall bring fruit from my work, then what I shall choose I know not.
23 But I am in a strait betwixt the two, having the desire to depart and be with Christ; for it is very far better:
In contrast to what preterists teach, the Bible sees the situation where naked spirits (II Cor 5:4 “unclothed” in the sense of having no bodies) that now dwell in heaven with God (Rev 6:9) will return with God from heaven when He comes with Christ at the end of the world. (I Th 4:14). There they will rejoin their bodies in a resurrection and will live forever (I Th 4:16).
Question for preterists: Do the wicked dead wait in heaven for the judgment?
23. 1 Corinthians 15:36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
Why is something being sown when it hasn’t even died yet? If this is a physical body, how does that make sense?
Paul is drawing a parallel between death/resurrection and planting-a-seed/germination. Paul is teaching living people about death and the resurrection, and he is looking at the situation of death and the resurrection from the perspective of God’s plan. Every man’s body will be “sown” and die. The sowing takes place at death, and death is appointed for every man (Heb 9:27). The people to whom Paul wrote had not been “sown” yet, but people that they knew had been, and they would be, as will everyone else. You really have to work at this chapter to make it not speak of a bodily resurrection.
Question for preterists: What do you suppose the word “body” means? Is that a figure of speech for something else?
24. If the Law was taken away at Christ’s death, what law was in effect from then until the Day of Pentecost?
The Law in effect on Pentecost was the Law of Moses. The Jews did not fall under the Law of Christ (Gal 6:2) until they were translated from the power of darkness into the kingdom of His dear Son (Col 1:13) by baptism (Ro 6:3).
Question for preterists: What law do you think was in effect at between Passover and Pentecost?
25. Isaiah 51:6 Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished.
Has this happened, or is the Law of Moses still in effect?
Again, this question is predicated on a false premise. Isa 51:6 means the heavens will literally vanish away, the earth will grow old, and everyone on the earth will die (Isa 13:12).
Question for preterists: Where is the event described in Isa 51:6 connected with the Law of Moses? How did the heavens vanish like smoke?
26. Isaiah 51:6 Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished.
Isaiah 65:17 For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.
Isaiah 66:22 For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain.
2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
2 Peter 3:13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
Was Peter thinking of the promise in Isaiah when he wrote this? Has Isaiah been fulfilled? If so, has Peter’s comments been fulfilled?
Peter reiterated the promise in Isaiah. Isaiah has not been fulfilled. Peter’s comments have not been fulfilled. These prophecies refer to the end of the world.
27. If the Law hasn’t been completely fulfilled (heaven and earth passed away and judgment come), then it passed away without being fulfilled. If it passed away and is gone, it cannot now be fulfilled because it is GONE. So God said things would happen that now will not happen. That would make God a liar. Is God a liar?
The Law of Moses has not passed away. Your question is based on a false premise. Everything in the OT will be fulfilled including Isa 17:1 (it has not yet happened–the DOJ theory is false based on this one prophecy). Let God be true and every man a liar (Rom 3:4).
28. Luke 21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
27 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.
We know this coming in a cloud is for the destruction of Jerusalem. In what way did their redemption draw nigh at the DOJ?
This question is prefaced by a false premise. Jesus coming in a cloud is not the DOJ. It is His return at the end of the world (Acts 1:11, Rev 1:7). I have no idea how anybody’s redemption drew nigh at the DOJ. Looks to me like the Jews took it on the chin in punishment for rejecting Christ, and the Christians were not even there. Rome won, but I don’t see how they were redeemed by the DOJ. This question does not make any sense from a Bible standpoint.
29. Matthew 16:27 For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
Question for preterists: How did this happen at the DOJ? Nobody saw Jesus and His angels at the DOJ, just like they didn’t see Him return in 1844 (Miller) or 1917 (JWs). This will happen at the end of the world.
28 Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
This says Jesus will come in glory and reward every man according to his works and that some would still be alive when He came. How does that fit with the idea that He still hasn’t come? I hope no one is going to say these two verses are talking about two different comings. And remember, Jesus didn’t come on the Day of Pentecost. The Holy Spirit did. And Jesus didn’t reward anyone on the Day of Pentecost.
I already answered this under #9. Jesus allowed for the possibility that John will live until Jesus comes again. That is how this prophecy will be literally fulfilled. You are right that there was no reward on the Day of Pentecost. Neither was there any reward at the DOJ, except maybe to Rome that spoiled the temple.
30. Hosea 13:14 I will ransom them from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death: O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction: repentance shall be hid from mine eyes.
If the Old Testament has been fulfilled, has this been fulfilled?
The OT has not all been fulfilled (e.g. Isa 17:1). You are the one that maintains that all prophecy was fulfilled at the DOJ, not me. This prophecy will be fulfilled at the Second Coming and the resurrection. Paul quotes this passage from Hosea (Septuagint) in I Cor 15:55 and applies it to the bodily resurrection that Paul claims is yet to happen (Ro 8:11, I Th 4:16, I Co 15:54).
Question for preterists: Do you believe that the Bible truthfully states the case when it claims the bodies of the dead will rise?
31. Luke 20:34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage:
Luke 20:35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
Galatians 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
What are the criteria to take Jesus’ words literally to mean that we won’t marry but to take Paul’s words figuratively or spiritually?
The rules of hermeneutics require that a text MUST be taken literally unless the context indicates that the words are a figure of speech. There are many kinds of figures of speech, but the one that you preterists use almost exclusively is the symbol. A symbol is a object that stands for something so unrelated that you would never guess its meaning unless God told you. Some examples are a candlestick for a church, a star for an angel, a dragon for the Devil, a radiant woman for Israel, etc. You preterists pretend to identify and interpret symbols without justification. You read a passage, determine that it does not fit your preterist view, decide it must be a figure, and then “interpret” it according to whatever seems good to you. The technique is as bogus as a $3 bill. You cannot legitimately interpret a symbol unless God gives the interpretation to you. You can’t just find some verse in the Bible and decide that it must be the meaning of the bogusly proclaimed “symbol”.
In relation to the two verses that you cite, I do not know how Gal 3:28 is supposed to be a figure of speech. Everyone that is a Christian receives the same kind of reward (not the same quantity–Lk 19:17, Mt 6:20). There is nothing figurative about that (Mt 5:5, I Cor 3:21-22).
Question for preterists: No marrying and giving in marriage is literally true. Do you believe this is a figure of speech as well? Why or why not?
And what does it mean to be “accounted worthy” to be a part of the resurrection of the dead? Isn’t the thinking that everybody is resurrected?
Every saint is promised a resurrection (Rom 8:11) as is everyone that has been buried in the earth (Jn 5:28), but Revelation (Rev 20:13) and Enoch indicate (En 22:13) that some will not be raised from the dead but will stand before God as ghosts. This passage may also have reference to those that are raised from the dead only to be then thrown into the Lake of Fire which is the second death.
32. If the Law of Moses ended before the destruction of Jerusalem, then doesn’t that mean that God took the Law away, made it null and void, ended the covenant with the Jews, and THEN came back in and picked up where He left off and destroyed them? Is that legal?
The Law of Moses did not end and has not ended. You are attacking somebody else’s argument here.
Question for preterists: What, if any, covenant ended at the DOJ?
33. 1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
How did we all die in Adam, physically or spiritually? How will we be made alive in Christ, physically or spiritually?
Physically. Because of Adam’s cursed seed, every man dies (“unto dust shalt thou return”–all of Adam, including kids, however remote, born from Adam’s seed. This is why the virgin birth was sooooo important. Jesus was not born under Adam’s curse. He had an unencumbered death that He could offer). Adam passes death on to his kids through procreation. The means of life has become the means of death. In Adam all die physically. In Christ all are made alive physically (Rom 8:11).
Question for preterists: How did all die spiritually in Adam? Isn’t that teaching original sin and inherited sin?
34. 1 Corinthians 15:44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
1 Corinthians 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
How was the BODY of Jesus any different from the body of Adam? Both were flesh and blood. Both could die. Is this really talking about flesh and blood or does “natural body” mean something else? (See 1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man received not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.)
The BODY of Jesus was begotten directly by God and was not subject to Adam’s curse. That is a HUGE difference. It meant that Jesus was not obligated to die by the curse of Adam, and if He could successfully avoid sin, He could offer His unencumbered life as a vicarious (substitutionary) sacrifice for sin. His death was of sufficient merit because He is the Creator (Jn 1:1-3), and the creator is greater than the sum total of that which he creates (Rom 9:20-21).
You have made too much out of “spiritual” and natural. “Spiritual” means “that which pertains to the inward man”. It does not mean “imaginary” or “intangible”. The natural man is the unregenerate man that lives after the lusts of the flesh. The spiritual man lives his physical life in following the guidance of the Spirit that strengthens us in the inward man of our spirit (Eph 3:16). A natural body is the one we have now that fights against the inward man and makes us sin (Rom 7:18-19, I Jn 2:16). The spiritual body is the new body of the resurrection that instead of fighting the spirit, as the present body does, will support the good desires of the inward man. In the resurrection we are forever rid of “the body of this [present] death” (Ro 7:24) that lusts to sin. The spiritual body will still have desires, but it will not lust to sin.
Question for preterists: What does “natural body” mean to the preterist? Does that agree with Christ’s promise to bring our mortal bodies back to life?
35. 1 Corinthians 15:56 and the sting of the death [is] the sin, and the power of the sin the law; (Young’s Literal)
If the sting of the death is the sin and the strength of the sin is the law, how can sin have any strength once the law is gone? And if sin has no strength, then does the death still hang over us? (Notice that’s THE death.)
Since Jesus is not coming back and there is no bodily resurrection of the dead, what do you think Jesus has done for us?
Because Jesus died, “the wages of sin is death” has been paid. Law is satisfied. Justice is satisfied. God can now extend mercy and grace. We still have law. Grace cannot exist without law, but law can exist without grace. Christ’s death made grace possible, and now we have both law and grace. Law will ALWAYS exist. There will never be a time when there is no law from God. It’s just that now there exists the possibility of forgiveness rather than the separation that comes from sin and death.
You are implying here that the resurrection has already occurred. In a sense, we have experienced that in baptism because we rise to walk in newness of life. However, even Christians still have to die. Forgiveness as a result of baptism and grace gets us a place under the altar (Rev 6:9), but the resurrection gets us our bodies back. Forgiveness has happened. The resurrection has not. They are two different things.
Question for preterists: Does Rom 8:11 promise a re-animation of dead bodies?
36. 1 Corinthians 15:31 I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily.
Was Paul talking about physical death here? Did he die physically every day? Or was he saying he died to his old ways daily or he died to the Law?
Is this statement of Paul truthful: “Why do we also stand in jeopardy every hour?” (1 Corinthians 15:30). If Paul’s statement is truthful (and based on the litany of persecutions he records, I can find no reason to doubt it), then why could he not literally “die daily”? He lived in perils of the following things (II Cor 11:26):
in perils of rivers,
in perils of robbers,
in perils from my countrymen,
in perils from the Gentiles,
in perils in the city,
in perils in the wilderness,
in perils in the sea,
in perils among false brethren;
Were these perils merely figures of speech? Once Paul was stoned. He was presumed dead (Acts 14:19). Was that one of Paul’s “die daily”s? I think “die daily” is Paul’s expression for facing death every day and being willing to physically sacrifice himself every day. I don’t think it had anything to do with dying to his old ways, and it certainly was not dying unto the Law, because Paul kept it at times (Acts 21:20-24).
Paul asked if, as was the case, he fought with the wild beasts AFTER THE MANNER OF MEN [not a figure] at Ephesus, of what use was it if the dead did not rise (I Cor 15:32)? Paul apparently felt that being a ghost forever was not profitable. Neither did the ghosts in heaven (Rev 6:10), but that is what you preterists say is our eternal reward.
Question for preterists: Do you believe that Paul was wrong and that being a ghost forever is profitable?
(See Romans 7:4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. And: Galatians 2:19 For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God.
Notice that the Law is not dead but people are dead to the Law.
The Law still lives. Jesus said it would persist until the end of the world (Mt 5:18). You make the fallacious claim that heaven and earth ended in AD 70. Tell it to Noah.
And, yes, it also says: Romans 7:3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
But they weren’t married to Christ, were they?
I think this is correct (II Cor 11:2). The wedding is at the Second Coming (Mt 25:1-10, Rev 21:2).
No, they were only betrothed. They couldn’t marry Christ until the Law was gone, which happened in AD 70.
You could not prove the Law ended at the DOJ if your life depended on it. If it didn’t end at the cross, it sure didn’t end at the DOJ. The DOJ was FAR less significant than the cross. When God gives a law, it cannot be abrogated until He says so. God gave the law with thunder and fire at Sinai.
Question for preterists: Where did He say He abrogated it at the DOJ? Heaven and earth certainly did not pass away at the DOJ in spite of the preterist fantasies.
37. Daniel 8:17 So he came near where I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end shall be the vision.
Daniel 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.
4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
Daniel 12:6 And one said to the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?
7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.
When was Daniel’s vision about the resurrection to happen?
The ASV reads, “And when they have MADE AN END of breaking in pieces the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished” (Dan 12:7). I believe Dan 12 will not be fulfilled until Zech 14:1-2, Rev 11:7-11, and Rev 20:9 are fulfilled, that is, the last day of this present earth, the day when Jesus physically returns again (Rev 1:7).
Question for preterists: How are many sleeping in the dust of the earth going to awake? Did many sleeping in the dust rise at the DOJ? BCV.
38. Amos 8:2 And he said, Amos, what seest thou? And I said, A basket of summer fruit. Then said the LORD unto me, The end is come upon my people of Israel; I will not again pass by them any more.
Did the end come upon Israel when Christ died on the cross, on the Day of Pentecost when Peter preached, or at the DOJ?
It looks like it was the cross, but I don’t see what you are going to do with this verse unless you mean to use the sun going down at noon and darkening the earth on a clear day. Seems to me Amos is speaking of the crucifixion and the literal darkness that happened then.
Question for preterists: What does the heavens perishing in this passage mean?
Hebrews 1:10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:
11 They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment;
12 And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.
39. Mat 13:39 and the enemy who sowed them is the devil, and the harvest is a full end of the age, and the reapers are messengers.
Mat 13:40 As, then, the darnel is gathered up, and is burned with fire, so shall it be in the full end of this age,
Oops, you missed this one:
41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.
Mat 13:49 so shall it be in the full end of the age, the messengers shall come forth and separate the evil out of the midst of the righteous,
Oops, you missed this one:
50 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
KJV Mt 13:40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
How were the tares gathered out of the kingdom, cast into the furnace of fire, and then burned? How did the righteous shine forth after the DOJ? There was 250 years of persecution after that, and all prophecy is supposed to be finished at the DOJ, right?
Mat 24:3 And when he is sitting on the mount of the Olives, the disciples came near to him by himself, saying, ‘Tell us, when shall these be? and what [is] the sign of thy presence, and of the full end of the age?’
Mat 24:6 and ye shall begin to hear of wars, and reports of wars; see, be not troubled, for it behoveth all [these] to come to pass, but the end is not yet.
In my opinion the description of the DOJ ends with Jesus remarks in Mt 24:11. Here’s my harmony of Jesus remarks on this subject:
Matthew 24:11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many. (cp. Acts 21:38)
Luke 21:20 ¶And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
21 Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.
22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
23 But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.
24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
Matthew 24:12 And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. (cp. II Thes 2:3)
13 But he [shifts from “ye”] that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.
14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
The question was “What will be the sign of thy coming and of the end of the world”
Question for preterists: What does “the end of the world” mean?
Mat 24:13 but he who did endure to the end, he shall be saved;
Mat 24:14 and this good news of the reign shall be proclaimed in all the world, for a testimony to all the nations; and then shall the end arrive.
1Co 1:8 who also shall confirm you unto the end–unblamable in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ;
1Co 15:24 then–the end, when he may deliver up the reign to God, even the Father, when he may have made useless all rule, and all authority and power.
Hbr 9:26 since it had behoved him many times to suffer from the foundation of the world, but now once, at the full end of the ages, for putting away of sin through his sacrifice, he hath been manifested;
1 Peter 4:7 But the end of all things is at hand: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.
Revelation 2:26 And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
How many ends are there?
There are as many ends as there are things (I Pet 4:7). You have to specify which “end” to which you refer. The real issue here is not “end”, but “at hand”. What is “at hand” when all things will end? You say all things ended at the DOJ which is an absolute absurdity. The Bible says that all things end with the coming of Christ (II Pet 3:10-13), but Paul says the coming of Christ is NOT at hand (II Thes 2:2). On the face of it, there is a contradiction between Peter’s “the end of all things is at hand” (I Pet 4:7), and Paul’s claim that the day of Christ is not at hand (II Thes 2:2). The only way these two claims can not be contradictory is to allow for different perspectives of the speaker. Peter speaks from the view of Christ in eternity viewing the Judgment “at hand” (I Pet 4:5-7). Paul speaks from the perspective of men who were troubled about word that Christ was “at hand”, and he shows Christ was not at hand from man’s perspective. Paul says Christ will not come until after a falling away and the rise of the Man of Sin who will work miracles (II Th 2:9). That certainly did not happen in AD 70.
Was the end at hand when Peter wrote?
It was from Christ’s perspective, but not from man’s (II Th 2:2-9).
What about when Daniel wrote?
From God’s perspective, there are only 6 days from creation till the end of the world (Ex 20:11, II Pet 3:8, Barnabas 15:4).
And when John wrote Revelation?
Jesus said in Rev 22:12: “And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.” Preterists believe this verse has been fulfilled. Funny we all missed out on it. Again, the preterist’s spin on this verse is an absurdity. It stems from an unwillingness to acknowledge God’s perspective in His use of relative time terms like “quickly”, “soon”, “at hand”, “shortly”, “nigh”, etc.
Was John to seal up the book like Daniel was or was the time near?
John was not to seal it up.
Question for preterists: Did you pick up your reward in AD 70?
Was it as long from what Daniel spoke to the shattering of the holy people as it has been since John wrote? (See: Revelation 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.)
Dan 12:7b and when they have made an end of breaking in pieces the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished.
The holy people is Israel (Ex 19:6). There is no doubt the power of Israel was shattered (NKJV), scattered (Darby), and broke in pieces (ASV) when Rome destroyed Jerusalem. What Daniel said, though, is “when they have made an END” of the scattering, shattering, and breaking in pieces of Israel. The AD 70 DOJ was not the end of Israel’s scattering, shattering, and breaking. It has continued through almost 2000 years up to this very hour. Do not forget the Holocaust and the numerous wars where the nations have attempted to annihilate Israel. There is yet even another event on the horizon, the day of the Lord, when the final shattering of the power of the holy people happens. Zech 14:1-2 says that the city will be taken, the houses plundered, and the women ravished, but on that day of the Lord shall “the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations” (Zech 14:3). Notice God fights against the nations, not against Israel. Zechariah’s account does not describe the AD 70 DOJ. Zechariah’s description of the capture of Jerusalem by the Beast and his armies is the same as Rev 11:7-13 and 20:9 (“beloved city”). At the end of world when the Beast takes Jerusalem (Dan 12:1-3):
1) there is a time of trouble such as there has not been since Israel came out of Egypt
2) then every one of God’s people that is written in the book will be delivered from the trouble
3) many of them that sleep in the earth will rise from the dead
4) some will go to heaven and some to hell
5) the wise (the righteous Mt 10:16, 25:4) will shine forth as the brightness of the heavens for ever and ever
It would be hard to describe the DOJ as worse than anything that happened in 722 or 586 when people starved (Ezk 4:16-17) and ate their children (Lam 2:20-22) or worse than the days of Ahab where the people perished from lack of rain (I Ki 17:12, 18:1-5), but the situation at the end of the world will be worse than any of these previous experiences.
The dead will rise when the shattering of the holy people is ended. That certainly did not happen in AD 70.
Those risen will be judged. Some will receive everlasting life. Some will receive everlasting contempt. That certainly did not happen in AD 70.
The wise will shine forth as the brightness of the heavens, but that did not happen in AD 70, but God promises that the righteous will shine as the sun in the kingdom of their Father (Mt 13:43). Jesus now shines like the sun (Rev 1:16, Acts 26:13), and we will be like Him (I Jn 3:2), but that certainly was not true of the righteous at the DOJ.
Daniel’s prophecy is not even yet fulfilled, so there is nothing with which we can compare the length of time from Daniel’s statement until the end of breaking in pieces the power of the holy people. Since there is no end yet with which to measure, your question has no answer since its fulfillment lies in the future.
Have many of them that slept in the earth risen from the dead?
Have some of these that awoke gone to heaven and some to hell?
Have the wise (the righteous Mt 10:16, 25:4) shone forth as the brightness of the heavens for ever and ever?
40. 1 Corinthians 15:42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
What kind of honorable, powerful, glorious body are the evil dead going to have when they awake?
One like the honorable, powerful, glorious body that Jesus had, which you could see, hear, touch and examine (Lk 24:39, I Jn 3:2, 1:1) that shone forth as the sun in His Father’s kingdom (Mk 9:3, Rev 1:16, Acts 26:13).
“Spiritual” does not mean “intangible” such as a “ghostly body”, an oxymoron. “Spiritual” means that which supports or pertains to the inward man.
Question for preterists: What is your answer to what kind of body we have when we awake, at least those “all that are written in the book”? Is your name not written in the book? (See Rev 20:15)
41. Romans 7:3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
Romans 7:4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
Revelation 19:7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.
If the Law was dead at the cross, why has the marriage to the Lamb not taken place yet?
It was several months from Rebekah’s (a type of the church) betrothal unto her wedding (Gen 24:4, 62, 67). There was a delay of nearly 40 years from AD 33 to AD 70 in the wedding of Jesus and the church.
Question for preterists: So you believe the church and Christ married at the DOJ? That was “soon”? I thought the Christians were all gone from there? The DOJ was the wedding supper of the Lamb? This is bizarro. What is the difference in the relationship of Christ and the church since AD 70? How do we have access to Christ now that we did not before? I take it the church is no longer a chaste virgin?
How long were they to have to mourn for that old husband (the Law) who wasn’t good to them anyway?
Christians weren’t under the Law from the moment of their baptism (Col 1:13), but the Law still existed and still does (Mt 5:18). Christians just died to it.
42. God made a covenant with Israel. Paul said he was on trial for the hope of Israel regarding the resurrection. If God promised a bodily resurrection to Israel, then doesn’t that have to come to pass before the covenant can end? (See Psalm 49:15 and Job 19:25-27. See also Acts 23:6 and Acts 28:20.)
Moses said that God would make a new covenant with the house of Israel (Jer 31:31). That covenant was Christianity. The covenant of Moses ends for an individual Jew when that individual dies to the Law (Rom 7:4). The covenant did not end for others that did not become Christians, for they did not die to a covenant (husband–Jer 31:32) that still existed. Jesus said the Covenant-Law ensemble would not end until heaven and earth passed away (Mt 5:18). It is when heaven and earth pass away that the dead are raised and Israel’s hope is realized.
Question for preterists: Was Israel’s hope the DOJ?
43. Acts 28:20 For this cause therefore have I called for you, to see you, and to speak with you: because that for the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain.
Acts 23:6 But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.
If God promised Israel a resurrection and He ended that covenant without coming through with that promise, then how did He fulfill His promises to Israel and how could the Law pass when everything wasn’t finished?
When did He ever end Israel’s covenant? I read of no end to it. I read of a new one, but not the end of the old one (Mt 5:18, Rom 3:19–the Law still existed). The Law did not pass in AD 33 nor did it pass in AD 70. How can the Law pass when everything was not finished (the hope of Israel Acts 23:6, animals peaceful, women no longer bring forth in labor pain, Damascus is not destroyed)?
Don’t both the blessings and the curses of a contract or covenant have to be fulfilled before it can end?
The blessings and curses are conditional. They are applied depending on whether the parties carry out the covenant or default. If the parties fulfill the covenant, the curses are never activated.
Question for preterists: What do you think has to be activated before the covenant can end?
44. Isaiah 65:17 For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.
Isaiah 66:22 For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain.
2 Peter 3:13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
Has Isaiah been fulfilled? If not, has the Law passed? If so, what was Peter looking for?
No, Isa 65:17 has not been fulfilled. No, the Law has not passed. Peter was looking for a new heavens and a new earth like Noah was. The dirt will be the same, but the order of things will be new (no tears, no death, animals peaceful, etc.).
Question for preterists: How did Peter get a new heavens and a new earth at the DOJ?
45. Dan 9:24 Seventy weeks are decreed upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy. 25 Know therefore and discern, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the anointed one, the prince, shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: it shall be built again, with street and moat, even in troublous times. 26 And after the threescore and two weeks shall the anointed one be cut off, and shall have nothing: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end hereof shall be with a flood, and even unto the end shall be war; desolations are determined. 27 And he shall make a firm covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease; and upon the wing of abominations [shall come] one that maketh desolate; and even unto the full end, and that determined, shall [wrath] be poured out upon the desolate.
Zec 13:1 In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness. 2 And it shall come to pass in that day, saith Jehovah of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the idols out of the land, and they shall no more be remembered; and also I will cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to pass out of the land.
When did God say prophecy would end?
Prophecy ended after Jesus died (I Cor 13:8). So what? He says that it will begin again (Jn 14:12, II Thes 2:9, I Thes 4:16). What is your point here?
Question for preterists: When did Daniel’s 70th week end? At the DOJ?
46. Ecclesiastes 1:4 One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.
How long will the earth abide?
God said the earth abides for ever.
Question for preterists: How long does the earth abide? 40 years (AD 30-70)?
47. 2 Peter 3:12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
What does the word “elements” mean? (It’s the same word in “beggarly elements” in Galatians 4:9 and “rudiments of the world” in Colossians 2:8.)
II Pet 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
The “elements” in II Pet 3:10, 12 are contrasted with “the earth ALSO and the works that are therein”. Whatever the “elements” are, they are not the earth. Thayer says (G4747) that there are four meanings of “elements”
1) letters of the alphabet, spoken sounds
2) the elements from which all things have come, the material causes of the universe
3) the heavenly bodies
4) principles of any art, science or discipline
Obviously, Peter is not talking about 1) and 4). It is either 2) or 3), and since the earth is made up of and composed of 2), the elements of the periodic table (gold, carbon, etc.), then he means 3) the heavenly bodies, because he contrasts “the elements/the heavenly bodies” with “the earth also”.
The heavens pass away by the stars falling from the sky. God folds up the heavens as a tent. The “elements” that fall from the sky, melt. Meanwhile the earth is also burned.
Did the day of the DOJ come as a thief, did the heavens pass away with a great noise, did the heavenly bodies melt with fervent heat, was the earth and the works therein burned up? Is such a thing not lunacy? You either have to say, No, or redefine every one of these things as a figure of speech! What a mangled doctrine.
48. Why did Peter tell these people to look for this day? Did the Holy Spirit of God think it was coming in their lifetime but He was just wrong? If so, what else might the Spirit have been wrong about?
The relative time stuff we have talked about. Was Peter wrong because the DOJ took four looooong years and Jerusalem did not burn to the ground moments after he wrote his book? Why not?
Question for preterists: Peter said he looked for the day for the new heavens and the new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness. Was there no righteousness in the church before AD 70? Has it been pure righteousness since then?
49. Jude 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, 15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.
16 These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage.
17 But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ;
18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.
19 These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.
20 But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost,
21 Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.
Why was Jude talking about mockers in the last time that had appeared at THAT time if indeed that time was NOT the last time? He tells about these people, who were then present, as being the mockers that were to come in the last time. Why would he do that?
Again you start with a false premise that Jude was talking about results that had obtained in his day (“Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints”). Jude talks about evil men “to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever” (v13). These guys had a reservation in Hell, but they weren’t there yet. In the fantasy world of preterism these things have already happened, but not in reality. Jude reminds us that God had foreseen a time of wrath on evil men even from the time of Enoch. Even Enoch had spoken of the Lord coming to earth with His saints/angels to work vengeance on evil men. Preterists have so fixated on the DOJ and that theory that they are impervious to anything that does not agree with that paradigm. If a text does not agree, they make it a figure of speech, give the figure the meaning of their choice, and, voila!, the problem goes away!
Why was Jude talking about the last time? It IS the last time (Acts 2:16-17)! On the day of Pentecost, Peter said “this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; and it shall come to pass in the last days” (which, by the way, you have to define to be 40 years in Acts 2, but by your definition it has to be 2 years or less in other places, e.g. II Pet 3:3). We are in the last two days of the earth (II Pet 3:8), so it is the last time/days. God has finished the main purpose of the present creation (providing an eternal solution for sin), and He is now awaiting the harvest (Mt 13:30).
Unbelievers point to the relative time terms that God used to encourage believers as cases where God failed/lied, but the unbelievers fail to see how God used the terms. Jude refers to evil people in his own day who would regard Jesus’ promise as rubbish, but the same warning applies to evil men of any day. It is the same thing that Paul did with the man that took his father’s wife in I Cor 5. That was specific to Paul’s day and Corinth, but the principles of purity and obedience apply to Christians of any age. Jude warned about evil men in his own age, but the principle of not scoffing about Christ’s promise is a warning to men of any age, and Enoch is proof of it. Jude even quotes from Enoch who at that time was 1800 years removed from Jude. Enoch warned of the end of the world in 3300 BC, and it still had not happened yet in Jude’s day. Did Enoch lie? Jude did not think so. He used it as an example of God’s promise taking a long time in terms of man’s lifetime to be fulfilled. Enoch even spoke in the present tense (“cometh”), but it has not yet happened (and now it has been 3800 years). You also should take note of Jude’s use of Enoch. Everything that God promises does not immediately happen to the people to whom the revelation was first given. If you applied your “everything must come true close to the time of those that spoke it” idea to Enoch, then the Lord should have come thousands of years before Jude spoke it, and Enoch’s prophecy should have NO relevance to the situation to which Jude applied it. So, don’t use Jude to try to prove your case. It proves just the opposite.
50. I John 2:18 (ESV) Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour.
What was John talking about? If the antichrist had come and it was the last hour, why are we still looking for the last DAY when we know the last HOUR has come and gone?
Israel was always a “lead the fleet” preview of God’s eternal plan (Rom 2:9-10). The DOJ was a type of the end of the world, so the many antichrists had to come before the DOJ to serve as a type for the real deal at the end of the world. Jesus told a parable about the 11th hour (Mt 20:1-16). There was only one more hour to come in the day. It was a parable about the Jew’s envy over the Gentiles being admitted to the blessings of the kingdom on an equal basis even though the 11th hour Gentile laborers had done nothing to deserve a reward during the heat of the day. The event to which that parable pointed happened at the DOJ. In that sense of dealing with Israel it was indeed the 11th hour (Mt 20:6), because the gentiles came into a covenant relationship with God only 33 years before the DOJ ended national Israel. In the bigger scheme of things of which the DOJ is a type, the time is now the “last days” of all the days of the earth (the last 2 out of 6).
Question for preterists: Preterists brought up John’s use of “the last hour”. In whose sense was “hour” true? Was it true in terms of the way men keep time, or was it only true in terms of how God views things? The time from John’s statement till the DOJ was several years (say 4 years from your view [AD 66-70], probably more like AD 85, but you have to place everything before the DOJ). In that case you have 1 hour = 4 years. That is a ratio of 1 hour from God’s perspective = 35064 hours from man’s perspective. Now look at Peter’s 1 day from God’s perspective = 1000 years from man’s perspective (II Pet 3:8), and you have a ratio of 1 day from God’s perspective = 365,250 days from man’s perspective. There is only a factor of 10 difference in the two ratios in John and Peter, but you accept John’s as being necessary and deny the other as a fallacy. You need to rethink your position.