Refuting Preterism (part 3 of 4)

Part 2: https://universalistheretic.blogspot.com/2022/08/refuting-preterism-part-2.html

    How Many Second Comings?

Partial preterists believe that there must be two second comings of Christ, a past ‘spiritual’ coming ‘in judgment’ and a physical second coming which is still future [1]. This is because both the Olivet discourse and the book of Revelation describe His second coming as occurring immediately after the tribulation, which preterists erroneously believe to have occurred in AD 64 - 70. But did Jesus really come again in AD 70, and is there any scriptural evidence for the assertion that there are two ‘second’ comings?

    One of the most important passages for understanding Jesus’ second coming is Acts 1:9-11, in which the disciples are told for the first time how He would be returning:

And having said these things, they are beholding [as] he was lifted up, and a cloud received him from their eyes. And as they were looking fixedly to the heaven [at] his going, lo, two men stood by them in white clothing, who also said, “Galileans, why do you stand looking to the heaven? This Jesus being taken up from you to the heaven will come thus, in that way you beheld him going to the heaven.”

Prior to this, the disciples would have understood Jesus’ references to the “coming of the Son of Man” in light of the Old Testament prophecy in which “one like a son of man” comes to God on the clouds of heaven to receive His kingdom (Dan. 7:13-14). However, now they are told that this Son of Man’s coming would not only involve His reception of the kingdom, but also His return to earth. His return will happen in the same way that He went up into the heaven: bodily, visibly, and to the Mount of Olives (cf. Zech. 14:4).

“Therefore repent and return toward the erasure of your sins, that seasons of refreshing may come from [the] face of the Lord, and that He may send to you the appointed one, Christ Jesus, whom it is indeed necessary for heaven to receive until [the] times of restoration of all things, of which God spoke through the mouth of His holy prophets from an age.” (Acts 3:19-21)

This is another passage which is important to understanding the second coming of Christ, although it is unfortunately often ignored in the discussion of this topic. According to Peter, Jesus will be received by heaven until the “times of restoration of all things” - that is, these “times” will only occur once Jesus is no longer being received by heaven. Thus, there will be a future time in which Jesus is no longer in heaven, and therefore will again be on earth. (Partial preterists would not dispute this fact.)

When Christ your life may be manifested, then you will also be manifested with him in glory. (Col. 3:4)

...because the Lord himself will come down from heaven in a shout, in a voice of an archangel, and in a trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we, the living, remaining at once with them, will be snatched away in clouds to [the] air, to [the] meeting of the Lord, and so we will always be with the Lord. (1 Thess. 4:16-17) 

For the grace of God has appeared, saving all mankind, training us that, having denied the impiety and the worldly covetings, we may live soundly and righteously and piously in the present age, awaiting the happy hope and appearing of the glory of the great God and our savior Christ Jesus. (Titus 2:13)

...so also the Christ, having been offered once to bear sins of the many, will be seen for a second [time] without sin, to those awaiting him eagerly, for salvation. (Heb. 9:28)

Beloved, we are now children of God, and what we will be has not yet been manifested. We perceive that when he may be manifested, we will be like him, for we will see him just as he is. (1 Jn. 3:2)

It is simply absurd to think, as full preterists do, that these passages refer to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Jesus’ followers were not “manifested with him in glory” in AD 70, nor were all of the dead in Christ raised and the living “snatched away” to always be with Him in the heaven, and He did not appear a second time without sin to bring salvation. Furthermore, it is inconceivable that Paul would have called the Jewish-Roman War and destruction of Jerusalem a “happy hope”, seeing as he so greatly lamented the fact that his fellow Israelites were not part of the elect (Rom. 9:1-5)!

    The problem with full preterism is that their presuppositions about Jesus coming back for the final time in the generation of the disciples require them to see the second coming as one of only judgment, and only judgment for the nation of Israel at that. However, scripture is absolutely clear that the second coming includes not only judgment, but also salvation. Partial preterists do not have this problem, as they separate the second coming of Christ into a past coming of judgment (in AD 70) and a future coming of salvation. (However, as we will see, this is also incompatible with the teachings of scripture.)

Lo, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, and those who pierced him, and all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of him. Yes, verily! (Rev. 1:7)

This passage shows that at Jesus’ second coming, all people will visibly see him. Full preterists dispute this, as do partial preterists based on the connection to Matt. 24:30 which they believe to be describing the Jewish-Roman War, by claiming that to “see him” merely means to perceive his (spiritual) presence, and that “every eye” refers only to the people of Israel. However, even if this is a possible interpretation, it would not be true to the events of AD 70. The Israelites certainly did not perceive that Jesus was coming to them in judgment, for they remained obstinately opposed to the gospel even after that time.

    Furthermore, what preterists miss about this passage is that it is clearly a reference to Zechariah 12:10, which states that “they will look to the one they have pierced, and will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and will grieve for him as one grieves for a firstborn.” This prophecy in Zechariah is not describing a coming in judgment to Jerusalem, but a coming for the salvation of Jerusalem, in which the Messiah will stand on the Mount of Olives and defend the city against the Gentiles which have besieged it, finally re-establishing the Davidic kingdom in Jerusalem (Zech. 14:1-9). Since this certainly did not occur in AD 70, this must be describing Jesus’ future second coming in salvation, not any supposed past coming in judgment.

    Now that we have established which passages are certainly describing Jesus’ future second advent — namely, Acts 1:11; 3:21; Col. 3:4; 1 Thess. 4:16-17; Titus 2:13; Heb. 9:28; 1 Jn. 3:2; and Rev. 1:7 — we can evaluate the partial preterist claim that the Olivet discourse and the book of Revelation describe a separate second coming from this future event. Here are the two passages thought by partial preterists to describe Jesus’ past coming in judgment in AD 70:

“Now immediately after the tribulation of those days, ‘the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light,’ and the stars will fall from the heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. And then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the heaven with power and much glory.” (Matt. 24:29-30)

And I saw the heaven having been opened, and lo, a white horse, and the [one] sitting upon it being called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war. Now his eyes are as a flame of fire, and upon his head many diadems, having a name having been written, which no one knows except himself, and having been clothed in a cloak having been dipped [in] blood. And his name is called, “the Word of God.” And the armies in the heaven were following him upon white horses, having been clothed [in] fine linen, white [and] clean. And out of his mouth goes forth a sharp sword, so that by it he may smite the nations; and he will shepherd them by an iron rod. And he treads the winepress of the wine of the wrath of the anger of God the Almighty. And upon his cloak and upon his thigh he has a name having been written: “King of kings and Lord of lords.” (Rev. 19:11-16)

Like Revelation 1:7, Matthew 24:30 cites Zech. 12:10 when stating that “all the tribes of the earth will mourn” at the time that the Son of Man comes. Since the passage in Zechariah is describing a still-future time in which the Messiah will physically return to the Mount of Olives and save and restore the besieged city of Jerusalem (14:1-9), this passage must also be describing the future, physical second coming of Christ. Furthermore, although preterists associate the “coming on the clouds” with Old Testament parallels which describe the invisible judgments of God (2 Sam. 22:8-10; Isa. 19:1; Nah. 1:2-3), the Son of Man’s coming on the clouds is explicitly associated with the future bodily and visible coming in the New Testament (Acts 1:9-11; 1 Thess. 4:16-17; Rev. 1:7).

    Also, in Rev. 19:15, we are told that Jesus has a sword with which to smite the nations, or Gentiles, which does not match up with the events of AD 70 in which only Jerusalem was destroyed (there was no judgment of the Gentiles who besieged it in the first place, as is indicated by this passage and Zechariah 14). Thus, there is no reason, exegetically, to see two separate ‘second’ comings in the New Testament. The events associated with the Olivet discourse and Revelation 19 are the same as the events associated with the bodily second coming in other passages.

    Furthermore, there is actually scriptural proof that the second coming described in the Olivet discourse and the book of Revelation is the same as the future, physical second coming. This may be found in Matthew 19:28:

Now Jesus said to them, “Verily I say to you, that you who followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of Man may sit upon [the] throne of his glory, you also will sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”

The connection between this passage and the others above is not immediately obvious. However, if we look closely at Jesus’ statement here, we see that He is describing three simultaneous events: (1) the regeneration, (2) the Son of Man sitting upon the throne of His glory, and (3) the disciples sitting on twelve thrones and judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

    According to Acts 3:21, this “regeneration” or “restoration” will begin when Jesus is no longer being received by heaven — that is, it is equivalent with the bodily second coming when Jesus leaves heaven (see above). Furthermore, based on Matthew 25:31 (a part of the extended Olivet discourse), the Son of Man sitting upon the throne of His glory is equivalent to the second coming described in the Olivet discourse. And finally, based on Revelation 20:4 and its extended context, the disciples will sit on thrones and judgment will be given to them immediately after the second coming described in Revelation 19. Thus, the following logical argument presents itself:

Premise 1. The “regeneration” is simultaneous with the “Son of Man sitting upon the throne of His glory” and the disciples “sitting upon twelve thrones and judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Matt. 19:28).

Premise 2. The “regeneration” is equivalent to the bodily return of Christ from the heaven (Acts 3:21).

Premise 3. The Son of Man sitting upon the throne of His glory is equivalent to the second coming described in the Olivet discourse (Matt. 25:31)

Premise 4. The disciples will sit upon twelve thrones and judgment will be given to them immediately after the second coming described in the book of Revelation (Rev. 20:4).

Conclusion. The bodily return of Christ from the heaven is simultaneous with the second comings described in the Olivet discourse and the book of Revelation.

Because Matthew 19:28 links the bodily second coming of Jesus with the second coming of the Olivet discourse and the book of Revelation, there is no possibility that these might be different events separated by thousands of years, as partial preterists believe. Thus, this is yet another reason why partial preterism is scripturally impossible.

Part 4: https://universalistheretic.blogspot.com/2022/09/refuting-preterism-part-4.html

______________________________

[1] Full preterists, hyper-preterists, or consistent preterists as they are sometimes called, believe that there is only one second coming and that it occurred in AD 70. It should be fairly obvious, however, that no bodily resurrection has occurred yet and we are not currently living in a restored Davidic kingdom centered in Israel.

Refuting Preterism (part 2 of 4)

Part 1: https://universalistheretic.blogspot.com/2022/08/refuting-preterism.html

     Did the Events of AD 70 “Perfectly Match” Prophecy?

The final argument put forth in favor of preterism is that the events surrounding the Jewish-Roman War from AD 66 - 70 perfectly fulfilled the prophecies about the “tribulation”, namely, the Olivet discourse and the book of Revelation. But is this true? Let’s start by examining whether the events of the Olivet discourse and their supposed fulfillment in the Jewish-Roman War actually match up:

1. Jesus prophesied that every stone in the temple complex which stood in His day would be thrown down. This was literally fulfilled in AD 70.
   
   
2. Jesus prophesied that, prior to the end, many would come in His name, claiming to be the Christ (Matt. 24:5). Though there were many false prophets, no Messianic claimants are explicitly documented in the first century (apart from Jesus Himself), and certainly not claimants who came in the name of Jesus.
   
   
3. Jesus prophesied that there would be “wars and rumors of wars” prior to the end (Matt. 24:6), and yet prior to the Jewish-Roman War, the Roman empire was governed by the Pax Romana. Furthermore, there was not more than one nation or kingdom within the empire such that “nation” could “rise against nation” or “kingdom against kingdom” (v. 7).
   
   
4. Jesus prophesied that there would be pestilences and famines in various places prior to the end (Matt. 24:7). This did indeed occur prior to the Jewish-Roman War (cf. Acts 11:28). However, it is important to note that famines are fairly commonplace occurrences, both in the ancient and modern worlds.
   
   
5. Jesus prophesied that there would be earthquakes accompanied by signs and sights from heaven prior to the end (Lk. 21:11). This simply did not occur prior to the Jewish-Roman War.
   
   
6. Jesus prophesied that “this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole inhabited world, and then the end will arrive” (Matt. 24:14). According to Paul, this did indeed happen when the gospel was preached throughout the Roman empire (Rom. 10:18 cf. Col. 1:23). However, it will happen again in the future by miraculous means (Rev. 14:6).
   
   
7. Jesus prophesied that when Jerusalem would be surrounded by armies, and the abomination of desolation would appear in the holy place of the temple, those in Jerusalem should flee (Matt. 24:15-20; Lk. 21:20-23). However, if this was fulfilled in the Jewish-Roman War, it would be terrible advice. By the time the Roman armies entered the temple in AD 70, it was far too late to flee; the war was already over.
   
   
8. Jesus prophesied that “then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, nor shall ever be in any way” (Matt. 24:21). Clearly, this did not occur in the first century, unless one is willing to say that the Jewish-Roman War surpassed the Holocaust and other modern atrocities in magnitude. Furthermore, this tribulation is said to begin after the abomination appears in the temple, though the Jewish-Roman War was ended by the armies entering the temple.
   
   
9. Jesus prophesied that “if those days had not been cut short, not any flesh would have been saved, yet because of the elect those days will be cut short” (Matt. 24:22). Again, this was obviously not fulfilled in the Jewish-Roman War - the Roman armies were not in danger of killing “all flesh”, nor did they come even close. This statement indicates catastrophe of the highest magnitude such as never occurred in history.
   
   
10. Jesus prophesied that false Christs and false prophets would arise during the great tribulation (Matt. 24:23-25). Again, not even a single Messianic claimant (apart from Jesus) is recorded as having lived during the first century, let alone during the Jewish-Roman War.
    
    
11. Jesus prophesied that the coming of the Son of Man following the tribulation would occur in such a way that no one could say that He appeared in secret, but would instead be as visible as the lightning flashing from east to west (Matt. 24:26-28). It should be obvious that, as even the vast majority of preterists acknowledge, there was no visible coming of Jesus in AD 70. Instead, the supposed coming of Jesus ‘in judgment’ went undiscovered until the first preterist exposition of prophecy was published in the seventeenth century.
    
    
12. Jesus prophesied that, immediately after the great tribulation, signs would appear in heaven including a complete darkening of the sun, moon, and stars (Matt. 24:29; Lk. 21:25-26). Preterists allegorize this by saying that it refers to the failing of national powers, symbolized by the sun, moon, and stars. This is a potentially legitimate interpretation. However, I am inclined to see these signs as literal, since the sun was also literally darkened at Christ’s death (Matt. 27:45) — exegetically, there is little reason to take the signs preceding His second coming as any less literal than the signs which followed His first coming.
    
    
13. Jesus prophesied that the Son of Man would be seen coming on the clouds after the signs in the heavens (Matt. 24:30; Lk. 21:27). Preterists interpret this in light of similar figurative imagery associated with judgment in the Old Testament (cf. Isa. 19:1-2). However, this same “coming on the clouds” is associated with Jesus’ bodily return in Acts 1:9-11. Suffice it to say that this did not occur in AD 70.
    
    
14. Jesus prophesied that, following the coming of the Son of Man, the elect would be gathered from around the entire earth (Matt. 24:31). In context, this refers to the people of Israel who had previously been scattered across the earth (Lk. 21:24 cf. Deut. 30:2-5; Isa. 11:11-12; Zech. 10:8-10). However, even if (as non-dispensationalists believe) this refers to the ‘Church’, no comparable event occurred in AD 70.

As you can see, of the fourteen predictions which Jesus made in the Olivet discourse, only one of them was certainly fulfilled in AD 70, and that was the specific prediction that the temple complex of Jesus’ day would be torn down. Everything following this prediction is related to the future “sign of Jesus’ coming and end of the age” (Matt. 24:3). Although preterists claim that the Olivet discourse was perfectly fulfilled in the events of the Jewish-Roman War, there are far more differences than there are similarities between these two accounts, when even one major difference would be enough to invalidate this interpretive framework.

    The fact that the Olivet discourse does not match up with the events of the Jewish-Roman War should be enough to show that the preterist interpretation is incorrect. However, preterists also make specific and testable claims about the prophecies of the book of Revelation occurring in the first century. The two main pillars of preterist interpretation of Revelation are that (1) the “beast out of the sea” of Revelation 13 is the Roman emperor Nero, and the 1260 days, 42 months, and 3.5 years for which he afflicts the church refers to the Neronian persecution of AD 64 - 68; and (2) the city of Babylon in Revelation 16 - 18 is an allegorical reference to Jerusalem.

    The first claim, that Nero is the “beast out of the sea”, is based on the fact that the gematria of his name, Kaiser Neron, adds up to 666 when transliterated from Greek to Hebrew (cf. Rev. 13:18). This interpretation is fraught with problems. First, the name Kaiser Neron is cherry-picked out of many other titles and names used by Nero, and even other forms of the same title and name which add or remove certain letters. Second, this calculation only works if the name is transliterated to Hebrew, and yet John was writing to a largely Hellenic, Greek-speaking audience in Asia Minor (Rev. 1:11). Every time John uses a Hebrew word, he clarifies its meaning (Rev. 9:11; 16:16), and yet no such thing occurs in his description of the “beast”.

    Third, and most importantly, no ancient Christians made this same connection. The earliest Christian commentary on the beast comes from Irenaeus of Lyons, who identifies the number 666 with a then-future individual (Adv. Haer. 5.30.2). Although I do not believe that the early ‘Church fathers’ are particularly reliable sources of exegesis - they are just as susceptible to bad theology as we are, and perhaps even more so due to their non-Hebraic, Greek philosophical background - the preterist claim is that prophecy was fulfilled in their lifetimes, which they should have been able to recognize taking place. Ultimately, the identification of 666 with Nero amounts to nothing more than preterists’ wishful thinking.

    The claim that Nero’s persecution of Christians lasted for 3.5 years, 42 months, and 1260 days (cf. Rev. 12:6, 14; 13:5) is technically possible. However, the fact is that we simply don’t know how long the Neronic persecution lasted. The Roman historian Tacitus tells us that it began when the Christians were blamed for the Great Fire of Rome which ended in July 27 AD 64 (Annals 15.44), and it ended no later than Nero’s death in June 9 AD 68, meaning that it could have lasted for any amount of time up to 46 months and 13 days. To claim that this must match up with the 42-month persecution by the “beast” is simply an anti-intellectual “prophecy of the gaps” argument.

    Furthermore, if the persecution by the “beast” is actually the Neronic persecution, this would hold very little significance for the churches in Asia Minor to which John was writing (Rev. 1:11), since the persecution was localized to the city of Rome itself. In fact, recently some historians have begun to doubt whether this persecution ever even occurred, because the only primary source for this event is a single passage in Tacitus of questionable authenticity [1]. But even if Nero did persecute Christians for 42 months, none of the other aspects of the “beast” match up with his reign: he did not send a large army after Israelites hiding in a wilderness (Rev. 12:14-16), did not receive or require divine worship (Rev. 13:8), did not collaborate with a miracle-working false prophet (Rev. 13:14-16), and did not cause all people to take a mark on their forehead or hand in order to participate in the economy (Rev. 13:16-18).

    The second pillar of preterist interpretation of Revelation is the belief that Babylon of Revelation 16 - 18 is an esoteric reference to Jerusalem. This is necessary for preterism because Jerusalem was the only city of any significance which was destroyed in AD 70. Preterists cite two main exegetical reasons for believing this. First, because Babylon is called the “great city” (Rev. 18:9, 16, 19), and “the great city” is Jerusalem (Rev. 11:8), Babylon must be Jerusalem. Second, because Babylon is said to be guilty of “the blood of the prophets” (Rev. 18:24), and yet Jerusalem is guilty of “the blood of the prophets” (Matt. 23:34-35, 37), Babylon must be Jerusalem.

    However, these arguments fail to take into account that these attributes may be simultaneously true of multiple cities. For example, although it is true that both Jerusalem and Babylon are called the “great city” in Revelation, there are many cities which are called the “great city” in scripture, including Gibeon (Josh. 10:2), Nineveh (Jon. 1:2; 3:2-3; 4:11), Jerusalem (Neh. 7:3-4; Jer. 22:8; Lam. 1:1), and literal Babylon (Dan. 4:30). Of course, not all of these are identical. And even though both Jerusalem and Babylon are said to have killed the prophets, this is also true of literal Babylon (e.g., Dan. 6:16). Thus, these are fairly weak exegetical arguments for seeing Revelation’s Babylon as one and the same as Jerusalem. Instead, there are many reasons why Revelation’s Babylon should not be seen as Jerusalem:

1. John writes that Jerusalem is “spiritually called Sodom and Egypt” in Rev. 11:8, and yet no such language is used of Babylon, giving no indication that Babylon is to be seen as spiritual, rather than literal, Babylon.
   
   
2. “Babylon” is itself an explanation of a symbol, namely the “prostitute who sits on many waters” (Rev. 17:1-2, 5). To take this as anything less than literal Babylon would require seeing the interpretation of the symbolic vision as, itself, symbolic, something which is without precedent in scripture.
   
   
3. Babylon is said to sit upon seven mountains (Rev. 17:9), which is a fairly blatant reference to the seven hills of Rome. Jerusalem never had such a relationship with Rome, especially not during the first century, when there was great hostility between the two cities.
   
   
4. John writes that Babylon is ruler of the “kings of the earth” and an important center of commercial trade (Rev. 17:2; 18:3, 9-19). No such thing was true of Jerusalem in the first century.
   
   
5. Even as late as Revelation 16:19, the “great city” of Jerusalem is explicitly distinguished from Babylon. Preterists also understand the “great city” of this verse to be a reference to Jerusalem and yet fail to notice that God’s judgment on the great city is distinct from God’s judgment on Babylon.
   
   
6. Six times, it is said that Babylon “may in no way be found anymore” following its destruction (Rev. 18:21-23). This is not true of Jerusalem which remained under Jewish control for quite some time after AD 70. Even after the Jews were finally expelled in AD 135, it has always remained inhabited from that time until now.

As you can see, although the preterist arguments for Babylon being Jerusalem are superficially convincing, the description of Revelation’s Babylon does not match up in any way with first century Jerusalem. There is no exegetical reason to take these two cities as the same unless one already holds to a preconceived interpretive framework which requires one to make such an identification. But if Revelation’s Babylon refers to literal Babylon, or even if it refers to Rome as some interpreters suggest, this provides an even worse fit with the events of AD 70.

    Finally, the last preterist argument from the book of Revelation is that the specific judgments prophesied in that book came upon Judea and Jerusalem during the Jewish-Roman War. They claim to find support for this position in the accounts of ancient historians Josephus and Tacitus. These supposed ‘fulfillments’ fall into three separate categories:

1. Allegorizing the prophecies. For example, the second and third ‘trumpet’ and ‘bowl’ judgments (Rev. 8:8-11; 16:3-7) prophesy a great mountain falling into the seas, turning the entire sea blood-red and making the water poisonous to drink. Preterists often allegorize this prophecy to fit one battle of the Jewish-Roman War in which 6500 Jews were killed and their bodies cast into the Galilee (Wars 3.10.9). Yet this does not fit the prophesied events even a little bit, nor does the scale of the killings match the prophecy.
   
   
2. Citing ancient historians out of context. For example, the seventh ‘bowl’ judgment describes hailstones the weight of a talent coming down on the earth and killing many men. Preterists claim that this was perfectly fulfilled when the Romans cast talent-stones which had been painted white into the city of Jerusalem (Wars 5.6.3). However, Josephus immediately goes on to write that these stones failed to kill many men, and were then painted black in order to be more effective. This doesn’t fit the events of the prophecy at all when read in context.
   
   
3. Ignoring hyperbole in ancient accounts. For example, preterists often unironically cite Josephus’ and Tacitus’ descriptions of lightning flashes from the temple and armies fighting on the clouds as literal fulfillments of fantastic prophecies (Wars 6.5.3, Histories 5.13). However, this was simply a common way for ancient historians to hyperbolically describe major events in their day, since they saw wars and battles as manifestations of divine anger. Tacitus also describes the entire period from AD 69 - 96 as a period of “prodigies in the heavens and upon the earth” during which the gods were punishing Rome (Histories 1.3.3)

Overall, the supposed fulfillments of the judgments of Revelation during the Jewish-Roman War only match if the prophecies are allegorized to an absurd extent and/or the remarks of ancient historians are misconstrued and taken out of context. This really can’t be used as evidence for preterism over against futurism, especially in light of the many other specific prophecies which did not even come close to fulfillment during the first century.

    In summary, I think it is fairly clear that the prophecies of the Olivet discourse and the book of Revelation were not in any way fulfilled during the first century, with the exception of Jesus’ prediction that the temple complex of His day would be thrown down (Matt. 24:2). Futurists are often accused of “newspaper exegesis”, erroneously reading prophecy into current-day events, and I agree that that’s a practice which should be stopped. However, preterists are guilty of the exact same thing to an even greater degree when they try to force the prophecies of the “great tribulation” to fit the events of the Jewish-Roman War. No such fulfillment is to be found, because these prophecies simply do not describe that time period.

Part 3: https://universalistheretic.blogspot.com/2022/08/refuting-preterism-part-3.html

______________________________

[1] See Brent Shaw, “The Myth of the Neronian Persecution.”

Refuting Preterism (part 1 of 4)

    In my most recent series of articles on this blog, I have been following Paul’s exhortation, “Do not reject prophecies, yet test all things; hold fast to the good, hold back from every appearance which is evil” (1 Thess. 5:20-22), by examining specific debates within the study of scriptural eschatology. First, we looked at the question of whether Jesus will establish an earthly kingdom in Israel following His second coming, and concluded that the clear testimony of scripture is that He will. In this article, we will take a look at the debate between futurism and preterism.

    Preterism is the belief that all prophecies associated with the time period which Jesus called “the tribulation” (Matt. 24:9, 21) were fulfilled during the First Jewish-Roman War of AD 66 - 70 and subsequent destruction of Jerusalem. This means that the prophecy of Daniel’s seventieth week (Dan. 9:24-27), the Olivet Discourse (Matt. 24:3-25:46; Mk. 13:3-37; Lk. 21:7-36), and the book of Revelation (up to chap. 20) all have been fulfilled already. Because these prophecies also describe the second coming of Christ as occurring “immediately after the tribulation of those days” (Matt. 24:29-30), partial preterists are also forced to believe that there are two ‘second comings’ of Christ, one which was fulfilled in AD 70 (a ‘spiritual’ coming ‘in judgment’) and one which is yet future [1].

    Did the Apostles See the End in Their Lifetime?

Virtually the entire argument for preterism rests on several prooftexts from the synoptic gospels, in which they claim that Jesus made the prediction that His second coming and the establishment of the kingdom of God would occur in the lifetime of His disciples. Because of this, anyone who believes that His second coming (or at least a ‘spiritual’ coming ‘in judgment’) did not occur in AD 70, and is still future, must also believe that Jesus’ prediction was false - or so they say. But did Jesus ever actually make this claim? Let’s take a look at the passages where preterists believe that Jesus made this claim.

“Now brother will hand over brother to death, and father, child. And children will raise up against parents and will put them to death. And you will be being hated by all because of my name; yet the [one] having endured to [the] end, this [one] will be saved. Now when they may pursue you in one city, flee to the other. For verily I say to you, you may in no way finish the cities of Israel until the Son of Man may be coming.” (Matt. 10:21-23)

Preterists often selectively quote the last section of this passage as stating that “you may in no way finish the cities of Israel until the Son of Man may be coming”, and claim that this demonstrates that all the cities of Israel would not be evangelized by the time of Jesus’ second coming. Because Paul said that the gospel has been preached to all of creation, including all of Israel (Rom. 10:18; Col. 1:23), they say that Jesus must have already come again in some form [2]. Surely this is a slam-dunk argument for preterism?

    However, if we read this statement in context, we see that Jesus was talking about persecution, not evangelism. These were words of comfort: Jesus was saying that, although His disciples would experience persecution, they would not run out of cities to flee to before He returned to rescue them. This very clearly is not establishing a time frame for Jesus’ second coming, but is instead meant to console those who are experiencing persecution by telling them that they will always have places of refuge to flee to. The book of Revelation confirms this by stating that Israel will be given refuge in the wilderness during her future time of tribulation (Rev. 12:6, 14-16). Thus, it cannot be used as evidence for the preterist belief that Jesus came ‘in judgment’ in AD 70.

    Another preterist argument based on this passage is that because Jesus was speaking to the disciples alone, and spoke in the second person as though they would still be alive at His second coming, it must have occurred during their lifetime. However, this is merely an assumption, and an invalid one at that. Throughout scripture, prophecies are often made in the second person, even when their fulfillment comes hundreds or thousands of years later. For example, Moses said to the Israelites, “Yahweh your God will raise up for you a prophet from your midst, from your brothers” (Deut. 18:15), even though this prophecy was fulfilled over a thousand years later at the first coming of Christ (Acts 3:20-22). Thus, there is no reason to believe that this prophecy of Christ’s second coming would be fulfilled during the lifetime of His hearers, unless one already assumes that it happened at that time.

And he was saying to them, “Verily I say to you, there are some of the [ones] standing here who may in no way taste of death until they may see the kingdom of God having come in power.” (Mk. 9:1 cf. Matt. 16:28; Lk. 9:27)

Preterists believe that this verse shows that the coming of the Son of Man and the kingdom of God must have occurred in the lifetime of some of Jesus’ disciples. At first glance, this does seem to be the plain meaning of what Jesus said here. However, this is another instance of preterists taking verses out of context as evidence of their view. In each of the synoptic gospels, this statement is placed immediately before the account of Jesus’ transfiguration:

“Verily I say to you that there are some of the [ones] standing here who may in no way taste of death until they may see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.” And after six days, Jesus takes Peter and James and his brother John and leads them up to a high mountain by themselves. And he was transformed in front of them, and his face shone as the sun, and his clothes became white as the light. (Matt. 16:28-17:2)

And he was saying to them, “Verily I say to you, there are some of the [ones] standing here who may in no way taste of death until they may see the kingdom of God having come in power.” And after six days, Jesus takes Peter and James and John and leads them up to a high mountain by themselves, alone. And he was transformed in front of them. (Mk. 9:1-2)

“Now I say to you truly, there are some of the [ones] standing here who may in no way taste of death until they may see the kingdom of God.” Now it came about about eight days after these words, and having taken Peter and John and James, he went up to the mountain to pray. And it came about in his praying, the appearance of his face [became] another, and his raiment gleaming white. (Lk. 9:27-29)

It is surely significant that the authors of these gospel accounts, with their different ordering of events, all placed the account of the Transfiguration immediately after Jesus’ statement. During the Transfiguration, not only did the three disciples on the mountain see Jesus’ appearance change, but they also saw Elijah and Moses bodily appear, even though both of these men were dead at that time. We can thus conclude that the disciples were, in fact, seeing a vision of the kingdom of God as it would appear after the resurrection of the Israelite saints (including Elijah and Moses). This is confirmed a few verses later when Jesus calls their experience a “vision” (Matt. 17:9) [3].

    Preterists often ridicule this interpretation as unrealistic. As one preterist put it, “turning “coming in his kingdom” into “his clothes turning white” saves the passage only by making the author seem at best obscurantist and at worst dishonest.” However, this objection completely ignores the fact that Peter, one of the witnesses of the Transfiguration, provides this exact interpretation of it:

For we were not following devised myths [when] we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but became spectators of his splendor. For having taken honor and glory from Father God, a voice was brought to him, such as by the magnificent glory, “This is My Son, My beloved, in whom I am pleased.” And we, being in the holy mountain, heard this voice out of heaven, having been brought with him. Also we have more firmly the prophetic word... (2 Pet. 1:16-19)

In this passage, Peter provides two reasons to believe in the future second “coming in power” of Christ: (1) his own eyewitness of the Transfiguration, and (2) the prophetic word. This demonstrates that the Transfiguration was indeed a prophetic vision of “the Son of Man coming in His kingdom” (Matt. 16:28). Thus, the preterist claim that Matthew 16:28 proves that the disciples must have literally seen the second coming of Christ (in some form) during their lifetime not only ignores the immediate context, but also ignores the inspired commentary of Peter which explicitly relates this statement to the Transfiguration.

“Now learn the parable of the fig tree: when already its branch may become tender and it puts out the leaves, you know that the summer [is] near. In this way you also, when you see all these [things], know that he is near, at [the] doors. Verily I say to you that this generation may in no way pass away until all these [things] may come about.” (Matt. 24:32-34 cf. Mk. 13:28-30; Lk. 21:29-32)

Like the others, this passage only works as a preterist prooftext if the last verse is taken out of context as saying that “this generation may in no way pass away until all these things may come about”. However, the context clearly establishes “this generation” as the generation which will “see all these things”. The point is not that the tribulation which Jesus spoke of in the Olivet discourse will occur in the near future, but that when it occurs, it will be short - no longer than a generation. This certainly refutes idealism and historicism (interpretive frameworks which see the events of the Olivet discourse as stretching throughout ‘Church history’), but it is not definite proof of either preterism or futurism.

    The “Time Texts” of Revelation

As we have seen, the preterist ‘prooftexts’ of the synoptic gospels must all be taken out of context in order to be used as evidence for preterism. When read in context, none of them actually show that the second coming of Christ or the coming of the kingdom of God had to occur in the lifetime of the disciples. However, there is another set of passages which are believed by preterists to show that the tribulation, and the ‘spiritual’ coming of Christ ‘in judgment’, occurred in the first century. These are called the “time texts” of the book of Revelation.

    Throughout the book of Revelation, it is said that the events described will happen ταχος/ταχυ, or “soon” (Rev. 1:1; 2:16; 3:11; 11:14; 22:6-7, 12, 20) and that the time is εγγυς, or “near” (Rev. 1:3; 22:10). However, these words do not always indicate temporal nearness; they can also be used in an adverbial sense, to describe events which will occur quickly. See the following examples from the Septuagint and the New Testament:

My righteousness draws near [εγγιζει] quickly [ταχυ] (Isa. 51:5 LXX)

In the larger context, this is referring to the righteousness which would be procured by the death of God’s servant, the Messiah. However, the death of the Messiah did not occur until some seven hundred years after this was written, a fact which preterists would, of course, not contest.

The day of the Lord is near [εγγυς] (Zeph. 1:7 LXX)

For near [εγγυς] is the great day of the Lord, it is near [εγγυς] and exceedingly soon [ταχεια] (Zeph. 1:14 LXX)

Zephaniah describes the day of the Lord as “near” (εγγυς) three times, and “soon” (ταχυς) one time, even though the day of the Lord had not yet come nearly seven hundred years later when the New Testament was written. Even preterists would not deny this fact, as they believe that the day of the Lord occurred in AD 70.

“Hasten and go quickly [εν ταχει] out of Jerusalem, because they will not receive your testimony about me.” (Acts 22:18)

In this case, ταχος is clearly being used in an adverbial sense, as it is paralleled with “hasten”. For other adverbial uses of ταχος in the New Testament, see Matthew 5:25; 28:7-8; Luke 15:22; 18:8; John 11:29; Acts 12:7; and James 1:19.

    In summary, the Greek words ταχος and εγγυς are occasionally used in the Septuagint and New Testament - especially in a prophetic context - in an adverbial sense to describe things which occur quickly, and which are imminent, respectively. These words are used in prophecies which are known to have only been fulfilled hundreds or thousands of years after the prophecy was written (esp. Zeph. 1). Therefore, the use of these terms in the book of Revelation to describe the events described within does not, necessarily, support preterism; it is also compatible with futurism.

Part 2: https://universalistheretic.blogspot.com/2022/08/refuting-preterism-part-2.html

______________________________

[1] Full preterists believe that the bodily second coming of Christ also occurred in AD 70, but this is so far off base from reality that we won’t deal with that view in this post.

[2] Notwithstanding the fact that even this does not fit with the preterist timeline. Their interpretation of Matt. 10:23 would indicate that Jesus came before Israel was fully evangelized, which means that He must have come prior to when Paul wrote Romans 10:18, even though they believe that He came in judgment in AD 70 (years after Romans was written).

[3] The word “vision”, or οραμα in Greek, almost always refers to an illusory experience when used in the New Testament (with the possible sole exception of Acts 7:31). What is “real” or “true” (αληθης) is contrasted with what is a “vision” or “illusory” (οραμα) in Acts 12:9.

The Kingdom of God (part 2 of 2)

Part 1: https://universalistheretic.blogspot.com/2022/07/the-kingdom-of-god.html

     “The Kingdom of God is Near”

In my most recent post, we saw that the “kingdom of God” refers to the Davidic kingdom (1 Chron. 17:14; 28:5; 29:23; 2 Chron. 13:8), which was promised to be returned to Israel by the prophets of the Old Testament, centered in literal Jerusalem on Mount Zion - for example, see Isa. 2:2-4; 24:23; 27:12-13; 66:18-20; Jer. 23:5-6; 31:23-25; 33:14-16; Ezek. 40-48; Joel 3:17-21; Amos 9:11-15; Obad. 21; Mic. 4:1-8; Hab. 2:14; and Zech. 14:8-9.

    This view of the kingdom is confirmed in the New Testament, where Jesus is said to be the promised descendant of David who would bring about this restoration (Lk. 1:32-33; 1:65-70; 2:34, 38; 24:21). It is said that the kingdom of God will one day be returned to Israel (Matt. 19:28; Acts 1:6-7; 3:21), an event which will be associated with the return of Jesus, resurrection, and judgment (Matt. 7:21-23; 8:11-12; 13:39-42; 25:31-34; Lk. 13:24-28). This kingdom has not yet come (Acts 14:22; 26:6-7), but will become our inheritance in the future at the second coming of Christ (Lk. 21:27-31; 1 Cor. 6:9-11; 15:50-54; 2 Thess. 1:5-10; Heb. 12:28; 2 Pet. 1:11; Rev. 11:15-18).

    However, there are several passages in the New Testament which are thought to demonstrate either that (1) the kingdom of God is a spiritual reality no longer associated with the Davidic kingdom over Israel, or that (2) the kingdom of God has already come in some form. The conflict between these passages and the ones cited above has caused some theologians to adopt a compromise view, called the “already/not yet” view of the kingdom (developed in the twentieth century), which argues that the spiritual kingdom began at Pentecost whereas the physical kingdom will start at the second coming of Jesus.

    However, this view seems to contradict passages like Acts 14:22, which show that even after Pentecost the apostles had not yet entered the kingdom in any way. So then, is this an irreconcilable contradiction? Or is there some other way to interpret the passages that seem to show that the kingdom of God already came in some form? Let’s take a look at some of the most important passages thought to teach this:

Now in those days, John the Baptist is coming, preaching in the wilderness of Judea, and saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of the heavens has been coming near.” (Matt. 3:1-2)

From then Jesus began to preach and to say, “Repent, for the kingdom of the heavens has been coming near.” (Matt. 4:17 cf. 10:7; Lk. 10:9-11)

And after John was handed over, Jesus came to Galilee preaching the gospel of God and saying, “The season has been fulfilled and the kingdom of God has been coming near; repent and believe in the gospel.” (Mk. 1:14-15)

Because these passages state that the kingdom of God “has been coming near”, many theologians argue that this means that the kingdom must have come soon after that time. This interpretation must be wrong, for the simple fact that the kingdom has not come two thousand years later. Israel is not ruled by a descendant of David, and will not be until Jesus returns to sit on David’s throne and rule the house of Israel for the ages (Lk. 1:32-33).

    But if this is the case, how could Jesus have said that “the kingdom of God has been coming near”? Is this a failed prophecy? No, it is not, and the answer to why the kingdom of God did not come at that time may be found in Matt. 23:37-39:

“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the [one] killing the prophets and stoning the [ones] having been sent to her! How often I willed to gather your children, [in] the way a hen is gathering her chicks under the wings, and you did not will [to]! Lo, your house is left to you desolate. For I am saying to you, you may in no way see me until you may say, ‘Praised has been the [one who] is coming in the name of the Lord’!”

Because the Israelite leaders rejected Jesus, He could not take His rightful place as king of Israel at that time [1]. Therefore, their “house” (the house of David) remained desolate until the time at which they would say, “Praised has been the one who is coming in the name of the Lord”. This interpretation is confirmed by one of Jesus’ parables in the gospel of Luke:

Now [at] their hearing these things, he said a parable, because of his being near Jerusalem and their thinking that the kingdom of God is about to appear instantly. He said, “A certain man of nobility went to a far country, to take for himself a kingdom and to return. Now having called ten of his servants, he gave ten minas to them and said to them, ‘Do business until when I come back.’ But his citizens hated him and sent an embassy after him, saying, ‘We are not willing this [one] to reign over us...’”

And as he came near, having seen the city, he wept over her, saying, “If you, even you, knew the things for peace! Yet now it is hidden from your eyes. For days will come upon you and your enemies will cast a rampart around you, and they will encircle you and press you on all sides, and will raze you and your children in you, and will not leave stone upon stone in you, because you did not know the season of your visitation.” (Lk. 19:11-14, 41-44)

The Jews who had been following Jesus were wrong to think that the kingdom of God would come immediately upon His entry to Jerusalem, not because the kingdom would be a ‘spiritual reality’ in the ‘Church’, but because the leaders of Israel did not, at that time, accept Him as their king. If they had known “the things for peace” and “the season of their visitation”, then the kingdom would have come, but because they did not, the kingdom was “hidden from their eyes”. See also Matt. 21:33-43 for another parable which links the rejection of Jesus to the delay of the kingdom’s coming.

    Therefore, when John the Baptist and Jesus said that “the kingdom of God has been coming near”, what they meant was that from a prophetic standpoint, comparatively little needed to occur before the Davidic kingdom would be restored to Israel. All that needed to happen was for the leaders of Israel to accept Jesus, the son of David, as their king, the anointed one of God. However, because the leaders did not accept Him, the kingdom was delayed and replaced for a time with the “mystery” or “secret” of the body of Christ which had not been revealed to the prophets (Rom. 16:25; Eph. 3:1-3; Col. 1:25-26).

    This is not to say that the body of Christ was a ‘stopgap’ measure that God thought of once Israel had rejected Christ, as premillennialists are sometimes accused of believing. The members of the body of Christ were chosen even before creation (Eph. 1:4; 2 Tim. 1:9), and it was prophesied long before Jesus’ first coming that the Messiah would be rejected and killed by Israel (Ps. 22:6-8; 118:22; Isa. 53; Dan. 9:26-27; Zech. 12:10). Even Jesus taught His disciples that He would be rejected by the Jews of that generation (Mk. 8:31; 9:12; Lk. 17:25; 20:17-18). But what amillennialists miss about this is that the offer to Israel had to be legitimately made before it could be rejected; the kingdom of God needed to “draw near” before it could be postponed.

    “The Kingdom of God is Within You”

Another common objection often leveled against the premillennialist view of the kingdom of God is that Jesus taught that “the kingdom of God is within you”. Because of this, many believe that the kingdom of God is a ‘spiritual reality’ which exists inside of individuals, the members of the ‘Church’. However, this quote is very out-of-context, and we need to look at the full passage to understand what Jesus meant:

Now having been questioned by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God is coming, he answered and said to them, “The kingdom of God is not coming with scrutiny, nor will they say, ‘Lo, here!’ or ‘There!’ For lo, the kingdom of God is within you.”

Now he said to the disciples, “Days will come when you will covet to see one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see [it]. And they will say to you, ‘Lo, here!’ or ‘There!’ Do not go after nor pursue [them]. For just as the lightning lightening out of the [one end] of the heaven to the [other end] of the sky is shining, so also will be the Son of Man in his day. Yet first it is necessary [for] him to suffer much, and to be rejected from this generation.” (Lk. 17:20-25)

First, we have to recognize that Jesus is speaking to the Pharisees at this point. This shows that Jesus cannot be saying that the kingdom of God is a spiritual reality within individuals, because the kingdom of God certainly was not “within” the Pharisees; in fact, Jesus specifically excluded them from the kingdom of God elsewhere (Matt. 21:31-32).

    Furthermore, many people interpret the fact that “the kingdom of God is not coming with scrutiny” as meaning that the kingdom is not visible, and that there are no visible signs that precede its coming. However, if we take this as Jesus’ meaning here, this would produce a contradiction with His words elsewhere, as He goes on to tell them of visible signs which will precede the coming of the kingdom of God (Lk. 21:25-31)! Rather, as Jesus goes on to say, the reason why no one will be able to say “Lo, here” or “there” about the kingdom is because its coming will be as visible as the lightning shining across the heavens - there will be no question about its coming once it occurs. This is actually evidence that the kingdom will be physical and visible, not the other way around.

    But then, what did Jesus mean when He said that “the kingdom of God is within you”? As noted already, it can’t be that He was saying that “the kingdom is inside of you [believers]”, because He was not speaking to believers. Instead, it is likely that Jesus was saying, “the kingdom of God is within you [Israel]”. That is, because the kingdom of God would be coming from within Israel itself, no one would be able to say “Lo, here” or “there” about the coming of the kingdom.

    Another statement of Jesus which is often construed as saying that the kingdom is ‘spiritual’ and not literal or physical is John 18:36:

Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not out of this world. If my kingdom were out of this world, my attendants would struggle so that I may not be handed over to the Jews. Yet now my kingdom is not from here.”

Because Jesus said that His kingdom was not “out of this world”, some interpreters have believed that Jesus’ kingdom will not be a literal, physical kingdom on the earth (contrary to many of His other statements regarding the kingdom). However, Jesus was not saying that His kingdom would not be in the world, meaning that it would not be part of the created order; rather, He was saying that His kingdom would not be “out of” or “from” (εκ) the world.

    Just a few chapters earlier, He said the exact same thing about His disciples (Jn. 15:19; 17:14), but this obviously did not mean that they were not part of the created order. Rather, to not be “out of” (εκ) the world simply means that one’s authority and/or disposition comes from God instead of the world. Thus, Jesus was not saying that His kingdom would not be a physical kingdom on the earth, but that its authority would come from God, and so there was no reason for His disciples to fight for it, because God would cause it to come about at the proper time.

    Various other “kingdom now” passages

Yet from the days of John until now, the kingdom of God has suffered violence, and violent [ones] are seizing it. (Matt. 11:12)

Because some Bible versions translate this verse as saying that “the kingdom of God has violently approached”, this is thought by some to demonstrate that the kingdom of God came at that time. Technically, both translations are possible, depending on whether the verb βιαζομαι is translated in the middle or passive voice. Furthermore, the passive translation (“suffered violence”) is far more likely from the context, as Jesus immediately goes on to state, “violent ones are seizing it”. This supports the ‘kingdom postponement’ view set out above, as the Pharisees and Jewish leaders were violently preventing the kingdom from being established in those days.

Yet if I am casting out the demons by [the] spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. (Matt. 12:28)

Yet if I am casting out the demons by [the] finger of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. (Lk. 11:20)

Because this passage states that “the kingdom of God has come upon you” when Jesus casts out demons, amillennialists (and some premillennialists) believe that it shows that the kingdom of God has already arrived. However, this would go directly against what Jesus says elsewhere which seems to indicate that the kingdom had not yet come at that time (e.g., Matt. 6:10; 8:11-12; 13:40-42; 19:23-30; 25:34). So how are we to interpret this passage?

    As it turns out, the expression “has come upon you” is used elsewhere to describe things which had not yet come at that time, but were certain to come at some future time. For example, in Dan. 4:24, Daniel tells Nebuchadnezzar that the decree of God “has come upon my lord the king”, and yet the decree did not come to pass until twelve months later (vv. 29-33). Likewise, Paul states of the Jews who killed Jesus that “wrath has come upon them to the end” (1 Thess. 2:16), even though they were at that time still living comfortably in Judea. Thus, we can conclude that Jesus was saying that His casting out demons by the spirit of God was certain proof that He was the promised Messiah and son of David, and in that sense the kingdom had come upon them.

“Now I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my assembly, and [the] gates of the Unseen will not overpower it. I will give the keys of the kingdom of the heavens to you, and whatever you may bind upon the earth will have been bound in the heavens, and whatever you may loose upon the earth will have been loosed in the heavens.” (Matt. 16:18-19)

Some believe that this passage demonstrates the kingdom of the heavens to be one and the same as the “assembly” or “church” (εκκλησια), thus showing that the kingdom is a spiritual reality. However, that’s not at all what Jesus said here; instead, what He said is that Peter (who may or may not be the “rock” on which the assembly was built) will be given the keys of the kingdom. This is likely referring to the same future event following Christ’s second coming in which the twelve disciples, including Peter, will sit on twelve thrones and judge the twelve tribes of Israel in the kingdom (Matt. 19:28; Lk. 22:29-30).

“Verily I say to you that there are some of the [ones] standing here who may in no way taste of death until they may see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.” (Matt. 16:28 cf. Mk. 9:1; Lk. 9:27)

See my forthcoming article on preterism for my interpretation of this verse.

Now this I declare, brothers, that flesh and blood is not able to inherit [the] kingdom of God, nor is the corruption inheriting the incorruption. (1 Cor. 15:50)

This verse states that mortal human beings (“flesh and blood”) cannot inherit the kingdom of God, and so amillennialists argue that this demonstrates that the kingdom cannot be on earth. The problem with this interpretation is that we know from elsewhere in scripture that there will be mortal and corruptible human beings in the kingdom, and even on the New Earth (Isa. 65:17-20; Rev. 22:2, 15). However, whereas Israel will be on the earth in the oncoming ages, the body of Christ will be living and reigning in the heavenly or celestial aspect of the kingdom of God (2 Tim. 4:18 cf. Eph. 2:6-7; Php. 3:19-20).

    Since it is a simple fact that mortal humans cannot live in the heavens (without some sort of space suit), we can conclude that Paul was only referring to the heavenly or celestial aspect of the kingdom in which the body of Christ will be reigning, and not to the earthly aspect of the kingdom which will be inhabited by mortal humans. Therefore, this verse does not prove that the kingdom of God will not exist on the earth; all that it shows is that the kingdom will also exist in the heavens.

...thanking the Father, the [One] having qualified you to [your] part of the inheritance of the saints in the light, who rescued us out of the authority of the darkness and removed [us] to the kingdom of the Son of His love. (Col. 1:12-13)

Because Paul writes that the Father has “removed us to the kingdom of the Son”, some amillennialists have argued that this means that we are already in the kingdom. However, the verb μεθιστημι is in the aorist tense, which can describe either a past event or (proleptically) a future event. Since Paul described this as a future “inheritance” just in the previous verse, we can conclude that this verb should be understood proleptically; we will be removed to the kingdom of the Son at the same time we are rescued out of the darkness, in the day of the Lord (1 Thess. 5:4-5).

...walk worthily of God, the [One] calling you to His own kingdom and glory. (1 Thess. 2:12)

Some argue that this verse demonstrates that we are already in the kingdom of God. However, though God is calling us into His kingdom and glory, we will not receive the glory until Christ is manifested from the heaven (Rom. 8:18-25; Col. 1:27; 3:4), so it is likely that we will neither receive the kingdom until that time. Thus, this is actually evidence for the view that the kingdom of God is entirely future.

Yet now He has promised, saying, “Still once [more] I will shake not only the earth, but also the heaven.” Now this, “yet once [more],” shows the removal of the [things which] are shaken - as created [things] - so that the [things which] are not shaken may remain. Consequently, receiving an unshaken kingdom, we may have grace, through which we may serve God acceptably with reverence and fear. (Heb. 12:26-28)

Amillennialists often selectively quote verse 28 as saying that “we are receiving an unshaken kingdom”, supposedly demonstrating that the kingdom is something which we currently have. However, the context clearly establishes the time frame as the period when the heavens and earth will be removed, namely, the day of the Lord and subsequent establishment of the New Heaven and Earth (2 Pet. 3:10; Rev. 20:11; 21:1). The present participle, “receiving”, should be understood proleptically as referring to this future time [2].

    Conclusion

The kingdom of God has been greatly misinterpreted and misunderstood over the history of Christianity. Although the earliest Christian communities understood this expression to refer to the future Davidic kingdom centered in Jerusalem and ruled by Jesus [3], since then many new and odd interpretations have arisen, including the commonly held belief that the kingdom of God is the ‘Church’. This led to the adoption of amillennialism, the eschatological belief that Jesus’ second coming will not be followed by an earthly kingdom and will instead mark the end of history, which is now the official doctrine of the Catholic and Orthodox Churches (along with several Protestant denominations).

    However, if we allow the Bible to speak for itself on this issue, it can be clearly seen that the kingdom of God is, in fact, the Davidic kingdom over Israel which was established under David and Solomon and removed at the Babylonian captivity of Judah. When Jesus spoke of the “kingdom of God”, this is how His Jewish listeners would have understood Him, and His own words reinforce this belief. According to both the Old and New Testaments, this kingdom will be restored to Israel at the second coming of Jesus, the Messiah and son of David, and will rule over the entire earth for one thousand years.

______________________________

[1] See 1 Sam. 11:12-15; 2 Sam. 5:1-3; and 1 Chron. 29:22-24, which show that a potential monarch (even one previously anointed by God) needed to be recognized by the “elders of Israel” before becoming king of Israel.

[2] The present participle is often used in the same way in modern English, to proleptically describe future events. For example, one might say, “we are going on vacation”, or “I am going to the store”, even before those events take place.

[3] See this article by T.D. Ice for a brief history of premillennialism in the early church, and this article discussing the reasons why this interpretation was ultimately abandoned until relatively recent times.