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.
______________________________
[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.
No comments:
Post a Comment