Home>2015-17-Main Body-Debates
index sitemap advanced
Translate || Vine / Schaff || Alts/Vars/Criticism/AramaicAll booksOld Testament onlyNew Testament onlyBooks of LawBooks of HistoryBooks of WisdomMajor ProphetsMinor ProphetsApocryphaThe GospelsPauline EpistlesGeneral EpistlesApocalyptic Books
Bible in Basic EnglishComplete Jewish BibleDouay-RheimsHebrew Names VersionKing James VersionNew American StandardNew International VersionNew King James VersionThe Darby TranslationThe Webster BibleWeymouth New TestamentYoung’s Literal Translation
End Times ChartIntroduction and Key


Church-State Relations and the Book of Revelation
An Introduction to The Parousia: A Careful Look at the New Testament Doctrine of the Lord’s Second Coming
by James Stuart Russell (1878) // Written by Todd Dennis, Curator
Anti-Preterist Writings From Futurists, With Responses
Hyper-Preterist Critical Materials Here

Dr. H. Wayne House
“As a futurist, and a dispensationalist, I find the exegetical arguments for Preterism to be woefully lacking and the historical arguments from Josephus to bolster their arguments disingenuous, but is there support for this type of understanding of the Fall of Jerusalem and the predictions of Christ within the writings of the Church that follows A.D. 70? Did the Church Fathers of the ensuing centuries look back on A.D. 70 as the fulfillment of the Olivet Discourse in part, or whole? When reading the works of the theologians of the first several centuries—the patristic period ranging from the first through the eighth centuries—orthodox and heterodox,[1] none of them seemed to refer to the fall of Jerusalem as a comprehensive fulfillment of the Olivet Discourse nor did they believe that most or all of the second coming was past. Rather, they believed that the statements of Jesus in the little apocalypse (Matt 24; Mark 13) were future from their day. An examination of the writings of the ante-Nicene, Nicene, and post-Nicene Fathers of the Church reveals clearly that they looked for a future coming of Christ, cancelling out any sense a hard Preterism. If any expressed a Preterist perspective regarding the particulars of the Olivet Discourse (namely, the coming of Christ, the Antichrist and destruction of Jerusalem), it would surely only be a soft Preterism. In spite of this caveat, however, I could only find one father who might qualify (Clement of Alexandria).”

“Though he does seem to adopt a Preterist perspective regarding the destruction of Jerusalem, Clement, in Stromata, 3.6. does indicate that he believes in a future second coming of Christ when he is arguing against those who spoke against marriage. In an untranslated Latin portion of Clement in Donaldson’s Ante-Nicene Fathers (Book 3), Clement says that the coming of the Lord will be a time both of humans going about daily business and a time of great distress, quoting from the Olivet Discourse:” (The Understanding of the Church Fathers Regarding the Olivet Discourse and the Fall of Jerusalem)

Debates on Hyper Preterism Here

1880: Nathaniel Starkey & T. May

  • T. May: A Reply to Nathaniel Starkey “Mr. Nathaniel Starkey, in the January Rainbow, wishes a preterist to reply to his note on the 5th chapter of Revelation. Would you kindly allow me a short space?”

Tommy Ice & Gary DeMar
Ice/DeMar Debate Reviewed on LeftBehind.com

  1. Zechariah 12-14
  • 2000: Tommy IcePreterism and Zechariah 12-14
    • 2001: Gary DeMarZechariah 14 and the Coming of Christ – “describes events leading up to and including the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.”
    • 2003: Gary DeMarThomas Ice and the Time Texts “By never raising the issue of how the second person plural (“you”) is used throughout Matthew 10, he is counting on his loyal readers not to notice. And who would think to go to Mark’s account of the Transfiguration to see that the “disciples” is a larger group than Peter, James, and John? Of course, we all know the answer to this question: Preterists would.”
    • 2003: Gary DeMarBible Minimalism and “The History of Preterism “Ice and LaHaye get off on the wrong foot in their analysis of preterism. The historical argument is a death blow, or to use Mark Hitchcock’s metaphor from his chapter on the dating of Revelation, “A Stake in the Heart” to their brand of futurism. The earliest historical sources, the Didache, the testimony of James, the brother of Jesus, and 1 Clement demonstrate that preterism’s history is a first-century history.”
  1. Matthew 24:14Gospel Preached to World
  • 2002: Tommy IceThe Global Proclamation of the Gospel – “The preterist arguments for a first-century fulfillment of Matthew 24:14 are much less than compelling. Their insistence that oikoumene in Matthew 24:14 must refer to the ancient Roman Empire has no traction.”
    • 2003: Gary DeMarThe Gospel Preached to All the World  “In an article published in the November 2002 issue of Midnight Call magazine, Thomas Ice presents the dispensational case that Matthew 24:14 was not fulfilled prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. Tommy should be commended for finally doing what preterists have been asking dispensationalists to do for quite some time–deal with preterist arguments by actually interacting with preterist published works and by comparing Scripture with Scripture. I would be willing to wager that Ice’s analysis of Matthew 24:14 is the first time any dispensationalist has attempted to reconcile this passage with global-language passages which indicate that the gospel had been preached to the “whole world” before Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D. 70 (Col. 1:623Rom. 1:816:25–26).”  “Few modern commentaries deal with Matthew 24:14 exegetically. It’s as if Greek never existed. Fewer still even acknowledge that for centuries the view of nearly every pre-twentith-century commentator applied the events of Matthew 24 to the time leading up to and including the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.  Contrary to how modern commentaries handle Matthew 24:14 and its significance in determining the timing of prophetic events, older commentaries offer detailed discussions of the passage and show how it found proximate fulfillment in the first century prior to Jerusalem’s destruction. What follows is merely a sample of how standard older commentaries, many still in print and used widely, interpreted Matthew 24:14.”
  • Tommy Ice: Ezekiel 38 & 39 “As I have thought more critically about literal interpretation and this passage while doing this series, I have come to disagree with a statement made by Mark Hitchcock and I where we said: “Ezekiel spoke in language that the people of his day could understand. If he had spoken of MIG-29s, laser-fired missiles, tanks, and assault rifles, this text would have been nonsensical to everyone until the twentieth century.”[10] Instead, I have come to agree with DeMar who says: “A lot has to be read into the Bible in order to make Ezekiel 38 and 39 fit modern-day military realities that include jet planes, ‘missiles,’ and ‘atomic and explosive’ weaponry.”[11] Even though I think DeMar is right on this one point, it does not mean that his conclusion is correct.”

John Loftus & Paul Manata

  • 2006: John Loftus: Debunking Christianity: Preterism is an Admission that Jesus Failed to Return – “what difference did it make to the world in general that Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD? Presumably God never had to ask anyone for permission to reign over his world. So what difference did the destruction of Jerusalem make in the lives of anyone at all with regard to the reign of God-in-Jesus? ”
    • 2006: Paul ManataNo Fair, You’re Cheating “What’s he talking about? What was the “return” that the early church expected? A bodily one? The one where Jesus comes to judge the living and the dead, etc? Well, “partial-preterism” doesn’t think that this “return” has happened. So it looks like Loftus doesn’t understand either partial-preterism or early church history. Which is it partner?”

Larry Spargimino & Gary DeMar

  • 2001: Larry Spargimino: Preterism and the Eclipse of Pre-millennialism “Dispensational pre-millennialists have a deep-seated distrust of the world system. We believe that this distrust is what is taught in Scripture.”
    • 2002: Gary DeMarWill the Real Anti-Prophets Please Stand Up? “If modern-day preterists are “anti-prophets,” then we are in good historical company. A survey of the most widely read and respected commentaries over the past four-and-a-half centuries will show that preterism, not the strained futurism of dispensational premillennialism, was the predominate prophetic system held by Bible believing Christians. “

Time Magazine & Gary DeMar

  • 2002: Time Magazine: Cover Story: Apocalypse Now “Some of that interest is fueled by faith, some by fear, some by imagination, but all three are fed by the Left Behind series. The books offer readers a vivid, violent and utterly detailed description of just what happens to those who are left behind on earth to fight the Antichrist after Jesus raptures, or lifts, the faithful up to heaven. At the start of Book 1, on a 747 bound for Heathrow from Chicago, the flight attendants suddenly find about half the seats empty, except for the clothes and wedding rings and dental fillings of the believers who have suddenly been swept up to heaven.”
    • 2002: Gary DeMar: Time’s Puff Piece: The Devil is in the Details “Bantam is the U.S. subsidiary of Bertelsmann, the third largest media company in the world, with majority ownership of barnesandnoble.com, AOL online services in Europe, France, and German. What’s good for Tim LaHaye is good for AOL, which is good for AOL TimeWarner, which is good for Time magazine and vice versa”

Dr. Israel P. Warren & Rev.  Josiah Litch

  • 1879: Dr. Israel P. Warren: The Parousia, A Critical Study of the Scripture Doctrines of Christ’s Second Coming, His Reign as King ; The Resurrection of the Dead ; and the General Judgment “Of the doctrine thus presented, I desire to remark in review: 1. That it is to be regarded neither as a praeterist nor a futurist view ; rather does it include both.   If it be affirmed that the Parousia began at the ascension, it is not meant that it is not also a fact of all time coming ages.   I ask especially that I may not be represented as saying that the resurrection is “past already,” or that the day of judgment occurred at the destruction of Jerusalem.  The Parousia, including under it Christ’s reign as King, Life-giver, and Judge, is not an event, but a dispensation.. The past, present, and future meet in one grand whole.”
    • 1880: Rev.  Josiah Litch: Christ Yet to Come: A Review of I.P. Warren’s Parousia “He speaks of the fact that the Parousia was ‘near’.’ If, as the Doctor so strenuously contends, parousia signifies “presence,” not “coming” what does he mean by “was near” ? Was there an interval of some forty years after Christ left his disciples on the mountain in Galilee, saying, “Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world,” to the time of Jerusalem’s overthrow, when Christ’s presence was not with them ? I press this point and urge an answer. Was there forty years, more or less, when they had to work without his omnipresence ? If there was not, and the time of his presence was still future when Paul wrote, where had been his omnipresence ? Either Dr. Warren or his reviewer is confused in his mode of apprehending and expressing this great theme. Does not the word near imply not yet here but coming : and if parousia is near, is it not coming ? How is this ?”


Tommy Ice Hank Hanegraaff

  • 2007Tommy IceHank Hanegraaff Calls Tim LaHaye a Racist and a Blasphemer “Hanegraaff’s proposed interpretative approaches, if implemented, would send the church back to the Dark Ages hermeneutically. The great majority of the book is a rant against dispensationalism in general and Tim LaHaye in particular. There is precious little actual exegesis, if any at all, to support his preterist-idealist eschatology, however, there are great quantities of some of the most vicious invective against LaHaye and many other Bible prophecy teachers that I have ever read in print.”
  • Hanegraaff and Schmidt vs Tommy Ice on interpretation of Revelation on MSNBC’s ‘Scarborough Country’ FREDERICK SCHMIDT, SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY: What this kind of reading of scripture really represents is a sectarian and fairly narrow approach to the Book of Revelation in particular.  And what it invites the reader to suppose is that someone in the 1st century wrote a book that was unintelligible to the people of the 1st century, but would be intelligible to people of the 20th century, which is just not a plausible reading of the book.  SCARBOROUGH:  Thomas Ice, do you agree? THOMAS ICE, AUTHOR, “CHARTING THE END TIMES”:  No, I don‘t. .. HANEGRAAFF: So, Jesus uses the language of the Old Testament prophets and now applies it to a near future event, which is the fall of Jerusalem.  So, he uses final eschaton language and applies it to a near future event.  In fact, if you read the Book of Revelation, it‘s the revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show him, his servants, the things that must soon take place.  Soon means soon.  Soon does not mean far.

Tim LaHaye Hank Hanegraaff
Eschatology Erupts! Preterism vs. Premillennialism

Hank Hanegraaff“I am reading the Bible, specifically Revelation — it was written for first-century Christians. I am not relying on some wooden, literal interpretation that is unsupportable.”

Dr. Tim LaHaye: “I don’t know what science fiction he is reading. “We believe the Rapture is going to come, not his nonsense that Christ came back in 68 A.D.”

  • 2004: Ira Hadnot: An Apocalyptic Showdown – Lexington Herald-Ledger “What if the Rapture has already happened? What if the Book of Revelation’s prophecies have been fulfilled?”
  • 2004: Ira Hadnot: New Take on Rapture Puts Authors in Apocalyptic Feud
  • Time Magazine“Is it the End of the World as this Author Knows it?” “The Last Disciple.. has sold 50,000 copies in six weeks (vs. 85,000 for Left Behind in its first year). But LaHaye says he isn’t worried. He plans to deliver the four books he owes Tyndale and let readers decide how this story ends. The End: Best-selling books don’t see it alike – “It’s about much more than selling books, scholars say. The high-stakes publishing battle between the two men comes on the heels of the millennial fervor surrounding the year 2000, and feeds a stream of fear rippling just below the surface of public consciousness. ”  “To Hanegraaff, Revelation was written before the destruction of the Jerusalem temple to encourage persecuted Christians. He says the “end-time model presented in Left Behind is hermeneutically false in that it attributes powers to the beast that belong only to God, but it is historically false because it places the beast in the 21st century.”
  • Zola Levitt – “Tyndale House Publishers, originally the purveyors of The Living Bible and other very doctrinally accurate works of Christian literature, are now going to publish a book on the preterist viewpoint.  This strange rendition of Bible prophecy claims that it all happened back in the first century.   As to where we are now on the prophetic calendar, it’s anybody’s guess.   If this is the Kingdom, we must be very disappointed.” (Dateline Jerusalem p. 162)
  • 2004: Hank Hanegraaff Gave Tim LaHaye the People’s Elbow! “This story is too good to pass up. LaHaye, alleged author of the Left Behind Series, and Hank Hanegraaff, the man who refers to himself as the Bible Answer Man and lives in a palace near San Diego where he suffers for Jesus, are having a feud about the End Times. Sort of.”
  • 2004: Eschatology Erupts: LaHaye vs. Hanegraaff, Preterism vs. Premillennialism “Of course the other thing that occurs to me is that LaHaye feels that because his book series was and is the money making machine, that Tyndale then needs to run any new authors and their ideas past him first. Sort of arrogant, but hey, he’s human too.”
  • 2004: The Bible Answer Man is Right! Crimson Catholic: “Correct me if I’m wrong but a partial preterist interpretation, which Hank is advocating, does not teach that Jesus returned in 68 A.D, that’s full preterism, right? Partial preterist’s just don’t believe in a rapture, I think.”

Norman L. Geisler, Steve Gregg Hank Hanegraaff

  • 2007: A Friendly Response to Hank Hanegraaff’s Book, The Last Disciple “Of course even partial preterists are “futurists” regarding the Second Coming and Resurrection. But they reject the futurist understanding of the bulk of Book of Revelation. “
  • 2007: A Response to Steve Gregg’s Defense of Hanegraaff “In brief, Gregg’s attempt to rescue the partial preterist position he shares with Hank Hanegraaff is a failure. It rests upon a methodologically unorthodox way of interpreting Scripture. If this same method were used on the Gospel narratives of the resurrection of Christ, the preterist would also be theologically unorthodox. Thus, while partial preterism itself is not heretical, its hermeneutic is unorthodox, and if applied consistently, would lead to heresy, as indeed it does in full preterism.”


“John was not writing about the future,” Mr. Hanegraaff said. “He was writing about the times he was living in, using symbolism from the Old Testament prophets to describe conditions in the first century. All the major elements of the Book of Revelation – Tribulation, Armageddon, Rapture – took place at that time.”

Hank: “First of all, this is not a man, it’s a woman. And her name is Ira. And she wrote this article. And after she had written the article I saw the quote that had been attributed to me. So I gave her a call and she’s no longer with the Dallas Morning News. What she explained to me is. The editor that took the story over after she had initially written it, but not finished it, confabulated some of my statements. And I clarified with her, “Have I ever said anything like that to you?” She said “No.” And I said, “You’re absolutely certain?” And I also asked her about some of the other quotes that were made with regards to Dr. LaHaye saying that I believe that Christ came back in AD68 and she did clarify that and say “Yes, that is precisely what he said. I have that in my notes.” But she also made it very clear that I did not make this statement. Nor would I make this statement. Anybody that’s listened to me for any period of time knows that I would not make that statement.”

William B. Chalfant & Alan Nairne

Critiques of Hyper Preterism Here
American Presbyterian Church

  • 2012: The Second Coming and Preterism “The official website of the American Presbyterian Church on the subject of Preterism – “We cannot interpret these chapters of the taking of Jerusalem by Antiochus Epiphanes in 168 B. C. or by the Romans in 70 A. D. In these calamitous events God did not in the person of the Messiah visibly appear (Matt 24:30 see the Son of man) on the Mount of Olives with His angelic hosts as the Deliverer of His people and the destroyer of many nations which were gathered against them; nor was the spirit of grace and supplication then or ever yet poured out upon the Jewish nation, so that they might look upon and recognize Him whom they have pierced; nor has the Lord, as the son of David, from any of those past events onward, become King over the whole earth; not to mention many other great and solemn events which are predicted in these chapters. The former had no beginning; the latter has. These events cannot be allegorized or explained away.”

Robert Angle

  • 2012: The Temple that the Apostle John Mentions in Revelation Leaves Preterists Grasping At Straws “While I am completely open to an early date for the writing of Revelation and find the controversy surrounding the date of it’s authorship very intriguing, I ultimately think it does not matter at all. More importantly, the preterist position often mentioned concerning a “temple” being mentioned by John in his Revelation doesn’t hold much water, and in fact demonstrates that they are grasping at straws.”

Jonathan H. Barlow

  • 2000: A Response to the Preterist Interpretation of the Olivet Discourse “There are really only two dominant arguments against the literary interpretation of Matthew 24. These arguments are not only advanced by preterists, but it also by some partial preterists (those who do not adopt the entire theological program and realized eschatology of the Full Preterists). R.C. Sproul advances this first argument, for instance, in his recent popular book on the subject.”

Irvin Baxter Jr.

  • 2005: Climbing the unstable doctrine of Preterism: Examining a False Teaching – (From Indiana Bible College’s Perspectives Magazine – Perspectives Magazine) “The teaching of preterism destroys this stated plan of God for the times in which we now live by teaching that the Bible’s prophecies have nothing to do with us today. Consequently, preterism runs counter to God’s expressed intention for endtime revival. Therefore, it should not be believed or taught.”
  • 2003: Historicism vs. Futurism “The other position is called Preterist or Historicist. Those holding this position contend that the prophecies of the Bible are largely, if not entirely, fulfilled and past. The Futurist position has been the view held by the majority of Christians for at least the last century. However, the Historicist position seems to be reasserting itself of late. “

Given O. Blakely

  • 2003: Preterist Prattle “If Preterism is true, which it emphatically is not, the saints of God would have ceased waiting for God’s Son from heaven after A.D. 70. Such a postulate, whether expressly stated or implied, is nothing more than a confused set of tattdemalions(!) – that is, it is an attempt to dress a feeble and ugly theology in the refined garments of intellectualism… I suppose it is possible to affirm this unveiling, or full disclosure, took place in A.D. 70, when Jerusalem was destroyed. But we will not believe such an assertion, and are offended by the carnal boldness of those who take it upon themselves to suggest such a thing.”

Brother Sal

  • 2003: Brother Sal on Preterism “I have never written a piece on Preterism, because what I teach is at the other end of the spectrum, and I don’t think about it much. But over the last couple of weeks, I have received and extraordinary amount of mail with questions concerning it, so I began to think about it, and selected the following letter to answer in this forum to pass along my thoughts”

Philip Brown

  • 2001: This Generation Shall Not Pass “Some Christians have entered God’s Rest.  But the Church as a whole, Israel, has not yet entered God’s Rest.  At the rapture, the Church as a whole will enter God’s Rest.  I believe the Rapture will be 40 years from 1967, in 2007.”

Anthony Buzzard

  • The Markan Apocalypse “It must follow that a destruction of Jerusalem not followed immediately by the parousia does not match the outline of events given by Christ. We may expect, therefore, a final crisis in Israel just before the arrival of Jesus in glory..”
  • 2002: This Generation “It defies common sense to believe that Jesus set an almost exact date of 40 years in Matthew 24:34, when soon after he denied that any knowledge of times and seasons is available to us (Acts 1:7) in regard to the coming of the future Kingdom (Acts 1:6).”

Dr. Ronald Cooke

  • 2001: The Unmitigated Twaddle of Romanist-Jesuit Preterism “I try not to cloud my readers’ minds with the twaddle that seems to be everywhere today especially in the halls of academia. The subject of ‘Preterism’ seems to be enjoying a revival of some sort today.”

Charles Cooper

  • 2002: That Other Gospel “On one end of the spectrum, there are those who do not believe that Jesus said one single word of Matthew 24:1-31 and that none of what is indicated has, is, or will ever happen. On the opposite end of the spectrum are those who not only believe that Jesus said it, but that every single word indicated in Matthew 24:1-31 will be fulfilled in the fullest sense possible. It is baffling that such wide and diverse opinions about this precious passage of Scripture permeate the Body of Christ.”

Dr. Mal Couch

  • Romans 9:25-33 “How can the covenant allegorists and preterist guys be so foolish as to deny the obvious! It is clear that one of the key components of the Abrahamic covenant is the promise of the “Land of Israel” in perpetuity!”

Stan Cox

  • 2010: A Refutation of the AD70 Doctrine, in three parts “The doctrine is not popular.  It has very few disciples.  However, those who believe this doctrine are often vocal, enthused and insistent.  In congregations of God’s people where it has gained a foothold, it has led to division and ruin.  It is worthy of our examination and refutation.”

Christian Debater

  • 2003: Why Partial Preterism is Wrong – “..an extremely strange view that everything in the entire Book of Revelation was fulfilled prior to 70 A.D., including a symbolic rapture of the saints, the Antichrist, Babylon in Revelation etc. This is so far from the truth that very few believe it.”

Bob DeWaay

  • 2007: “This Generation” and its Preterist Exegetical Misuse “The term genea is used most often in the New Testament in a pejorative sense. In those cases when “generation” is used pejoratively (often with modifiers like “evil, unbelieving, perverse,” etc.) it functions as a qualitative statement about a group of people. Though often, but not always, addressed to people then living, the key idea is the spiritual condition of the people, not the number of their years or the time of their living. The meaning in these cases is “an ethnic group exhibiting cultural similarities—‘people of the same kind.’”3 When used this way in the New Testament, the similarities are always bad characteristics. There are some cases where the ideas of “people of the same time” and “people of the same kind” are combined.”

Lambert Dolphin

  • 2000: Preterism and the Confused Sea of Modern Eschatology “Preterist theology states that the prophetic statements referring to the endtimes as presented in Revelation were fulfilled in the first century of Christendom. Preterists feel this wrapped up God’s plan for Israel and that the church has now inherited all that God promised Israel.”

Daymond Duck

  • 2010: Why Preterism is a false doctrine “Those who believe all prophecy has been fulfilled are called Preterists.  Not all Preterists agree with each other. There are partial Preterists and full Preterists.  The partial Preterists are divided into historicists and futurists.  Some of the partial Preterists believe the full Preterists are pagans, etc.”

Les Feldick

  • 2001: Don’t Believe it! “They claim to be letter perfect in their interpretation of Matthew 23:34, and then proceed to expel or twist all the prophetic things that are still awaiting a future fulfillment. If all future events were fulfilled by titus in 70 AD, then what do they do with the following scriptures? Did any of these things take place before, and up to, 70 AD? An ounce of common sense says, “No.”

Robert Fleming

Ron Graham

  • Was the Jewish “World” Destroyed in AD70? – “The idea that the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in AD70 could be the prophesied end of the world, does not stand up to examination. The Jewish “world” is based in its blood, its scriptures, and its synagogue. None of these was destroyed or abolished in AD70. To make prophecies in the Bible about the second coming of Christ, and the end of the world, refer to events of AD70 misrepresents these prophecies, because nothing was destroyed that had not been destroyed in times past, and nothing was destroyed that was essential to the Jewish world’s continuance into the future.”

Great Joy in Great Tribulation

  • Study on Preterism “ONE THING THAT SEEMED UNIMAGINABLE IN 1995 IS THAT PEOPLE WOULD BE EMBRACING THE PRETERIST VIEW OF THE BOOK OF REVELATION. PRETERISM is also a form of rebellion against the Word of God. Blessings follow obedience to the Word of God and there will be a price to pay for rebellion. So how do we help the PRETERIST brethren from their new strong delusion? Simply do like Jesus did and ask them some simple questions, like – When did Jesus split the Mount of Olives in two? You see, IF has all happened, they should be able to tell you when Jesus touched down and split the Mount of Olives in two at His return. I am sure you will be able to think of many such simple questions.”

Gunter Creek Prophetic Ministry

  • 2004: On Earth As It Is In Heaven “We have false doctrines which they say, God did away with Israel, some called Preterist and replacement theology, this is not true, Romans 11 is still in your Bible, and the prophecies were not fulfilled in 70 A.D. I don’t ever recall the apostles judging the twelve tribes, as in Mathew 29:18 and I still pray “thy Kingdom come.”

Marshall Hall

  • Preterit View: Straining at a Gnat and Swallowing a Camel – “Dr. Gentry put it this way: “…the matter of Revelation’s date of composition is CRUCIAL to the correct [preterit] understanding of the book…the matter of dating is ALL-IMPORTANT to the identity of the Beast [of Revelation].” (The Beast of Revelation, pp.6,7.) The bottom line here is that Preterists themselves understand that their model cannot even exist without a composition date for the Revelation somewhere between late 64 and early 68 AD. That is the only way their model can try to cast the Emperor Nero or anyone else in the role of the Beast….This admission by itself is enough to run up the odds against this eschatological hypothesis to about 1000 to 1.”

Steve Hays

  • 2012: “Evangelical” preterism “Gentry says the futurist interpretation renders the prophecies of Revelation irrelevant to the 1C generation of readers. But by parity of argument, the preterist interpretation renders the prophecies irrelevant to later generations. If what was future to them (the original audience) is past to us, then they are anticlimactic to us. That’s passé. Not something we look forward to. Not something that changes our current situation.”

Ed Hindson

  • 2005: The New Last Days Scoffers “Well, it may surprise you to know that Preterism is experiencing a new wave of interest these days thanks to the encouragement of popular radio personalities like R.C. Sproul and Hank Hanegraaff.  Sproul openly admits he is a “partial preterist” and Hanegraaff claims he is seriously considering it.   While most preterists would insist they are defending the power of Christ, they are actually denying it.  They are trying to “bring in the Kingdom” without the King.  And might I add, they are fighting a losing battle! “

David Hocking

  • 2005: What is Preterism? “Preterists believe that the promise of our Lord’s Second Coming began to be fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Some believe that the prophecies mentioned above were fulfilled in the Second Century AD at the time of the Second Jewish Revolt against the Roman Empire at the time of Emperor Hadrian. Some preterists hold that the prophecies were fulfilled during the first three centuries AD as God wages war on the enemies of the Church (which they argue include Israel and Rome!) resulting in the “Christianization” of the Roman Empire under Constantine.”

Dave Hunt

  • 2007: Do Preterists Believe in the Rapture? “they put out a statement a few years ago that all the promises to Israel were fulfilled in the time of Joshua. Now Joshua lived 110 years, these are everlasting promises, this is an everlasting covenant, everlasting possession of this land. And we would only have to go to, I mean, there are hundreds of prophecies promising Israel be restored. ” // On Hyper Preterism: “They claim that Jesus Christ returned in fulfillment of His promise to come back to take us to heaven, He returned in the person of the Roman armies to destroy Jerusalem and to excommunicate Israel, and Israel is finished. Now if that is not wicked, and if that is not twisting the scriptures I don’t know what is.”

Tommy Ice

  • 1999: The Destructive View of Preterism “You might be interested to know that in 1843, when the journal Bibliotheca Sacra was first started, it taught Preterism. You can go back and look at the early articles – Scholars such as Moses Stewart and James Robinson wrote for the journal in those early years. It was not until 1934, when Dallas Seminary took control of Bib Sac, that it became a futurist organ.”
  • 2002: The Global Proclamation of the Gospel – “The preterist arguments for a first-century fulfillment of Matthew 24:14 are much less than compelling. Their insistence that oikoumene in Matthew 24:14 must refer to the ancient Roman Empire has no traction.”
  • 1999: Has Bible Prophecy Already Been Fulfilled?

In Depth Bible Studies

  • 2006: Preterism – Christian Bible Studies “By theorizing that Nero is the antichrist, Preterists open the door for validating their theory by comparing the historical and Biblical records, records which cannot be reconciled and so disprove Preterist doctrine.. Preterists ignore a clear, unbroken chain of Futurism handed down from the apostles through 70 AD on into the 3rd century.. Preterists ignore New Testament scripture from both the Gospels and the epistles, which demonstrate that both Jesus and the apostles understood there would be a long delay before his second coming.”

Grant Jeffrey

  • 2001: “Triumphant Return” “4. Arguments and Evidence against Preterism – A powerful new attack upon this fundamental biblical doctrine is beginning to infiltrate the minds and spirits of many Christians in our day precisely as the New Testament warns us. The apostle Peter prophesied that in the last days an attack would arise within the Church against the Second Coming. Peter warned that many would say, “Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation” (2 Peter 3:4). Those who believe literally the prophecies of the Word of God are now engaged in an unprecedented battle for the truth of Christ’s second coming.”
  • 2001: Grant Jeffrey – Triumfant (sic)  Return Page

Eld. Laurence Justice

  • 1999: Preposterous Preterism “Partial preterists believe that only some of the prophecy in scripture has already been fulfilled. This matter becomes confusing when we realize that there are partial preterists among premillennials and among amillennials and among post millennials. Hal Lindsay and Jack Van Impe who call themselves premillennials make good money mixing preterism and futurism in their books on prophecy.”

Bill Kalivas

  • 1999: Six Points Refuting the Early Writing of Revelation “Historicism is a satisfying and godly view of Revelation. It allows for God’s hand to be seen in our past, present and future. Events which have been considered political in nature are shown to be fulfillment of His recorded word. No other interpretation offers this. Praeterism, placing Revelation behind us and Futurism, placing Revelation before us, put these revealing prophecies out of our present lives.”

Lawrence Keille

  • Fallacies of Preterism “Preterism is an expedient designed to shield Rome ; Preterism violates the principle of consistent symbolism. ;  Preterism glorifies the Papacy by ignoring the actualities.; Preterism denies the elemental principle of Bible prophecy. Preterism, like futurism, leaves an explained gap.; Preterism offers no adequate fulfillments.; Preterism cannot be correct if Futurism is correct.”

William R. Kimball

  • Great Tribulation: future or fulfilled? “William R. Kimball, president of “Disciples Indeed” Bible School in South Lake Tahoe, California, has written a book entitled What the Bible Says About the Great Tribulation (Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing Company, 1983, paper, 291 pages). The book is primarily a study on Matthew chapter 24 and the author seeks to prove that the great tribulation (mentioned in Matthew 24:2 1) is not a future time of trouble but was fulfilled in history. He believes its historical fulfillment took place at the time of the Jewish war, around the year 70 A.D.”

Jack Kinsella

  • 2002: What is Preterism?  Prophecy or History? “The nation of Israel will exist – must exist, according to Bible prophecy to move forward. The preterist ends Israel’s story in AD 70 – Bible prophecy says Israel must be reborn ‘all at once’ in the last days. And it was. Not as Judah. Not as Zion. But as ‘Israel’. The name God said would be assigned to the Holy Land in the last days. The preterist view that God abandoned His covenant with Abraham and passed its provisions along to the Church makes God a liar.”

Seymour Kreevich

  • 2011: Preterism is a form of mental illness  “Of course, when Christianity itself inculcates delusional thinking in a fundamental way, we should not be surprised when a faction within Christianity, a small and justly derided one, concocts their own new wrinkle to the entire delusional tableau.”

Alan Kurschner

  • 2012: A Response to the Preterist Interpretation of “This Generation” in Matthew 24:34 “A common interpretation is that Jesus intends “this generation” to refer to a future generation that will experience all these events, which does not then require it to be the generation of his first disciples. Jesus, it is argued, leaves open the particular generation. It is further argued in this interpretation that Jesus coming on the clouds is a reference to his second coming (which I believe is correct), therefore, this event and those surrounding it such as the great tribulation must be in the future.

Tim LaHaye

  • Strange Preterist Implications “I believe it is important for lovers of Bible prophecy to be aware of these false views so that they not be caught off guard when they encounter such views. This is why I am informing you about this subject. After this month’s introduction to this strange new fad within the field of Bible Prophecy known as preterism, I will continue a regular article about preterism. I will be dealing with the major arguments of preterism and why they are not biblical. Then I will conclude with a presentation of why prophecy should be interpreted literally and thus understood as future events to our time.”

Last Hour

  • God’s Terrible Warnings Against Preterism “In order to justify the Preterist view, apologists either completely ignore or torture the relevant end-times prophecies, along with the known facts of history.  Preterists can cite no credible early church or historical support for a pre-70 dating for Revelation.  Further destroying their claim, and important church father named Polycarp, a disciple of John, wrote that Revelation was written during the reign of Domition.”

James Lloyd

  • 2002: Preterist Apostasy “They are all in serious error, for preterists are propagating a downright heretical system of prophecy that will lead many to ultimately embrace the Antichrist and his religious agenda.”
  • 2002: Scoffers: Preterists and II Peter 3 “While the preterists love to quote verses that seem to show the New Testament writers taught that they were in the last days at that time, they almost universally avoid verse 3 of chapter 3 in II Peter.   “If you are abiding in preterism, you are enveloped in a profound spiritual darkness that places you in the soul destroying peril of following “another gospel.” If you are abiding in pre-tribulationism, you are in a deadly delusion and walking in such a spiritually wicked false doctrine that your path is directly heading towards the lake of fire”
  • 2002: The Culting of Christianity “Unfortunately, very few have recognized the enormous threat of Preterism and, as such, there are very few titles available exposing the subject. This might surprise the reader, but I would venture to say that for every published book criticizing Preterism, there are 50 promoting it. Thus, like a fireman throwing everything he has against a rapidly spreading blaze, I am even willing to distribute a book written from the erroneous pre-tribulationist Rapture perspective in order to attack this deadly false doctrine.”

Jan Markell

  • 2006: The War Against Bible Prophecy “Recently a Christian publishing house advised me that he had learned that most Christian houses were dropping newly-submitted Bible prophecy books with a few exceptions. LaHaye/Jenkins will likely continue to sell as well as Mark Hitchcock through Multnomah, and sadly, Hannegraff’s false Preterism books..  Eschatology will finally be thrown on the ash heap of history. “
  • 2005: Deception, Discernment, Delusion “The newest “pop theology” on the block is Preterism which teaches that all Bible prophecy is history: It happened in 70 AD with the destruction of Jerusalem.”
  • 2005: Evil in the Name of God “At the root of this is not just anti-Semitism which is the quick blame. It is also the pop theology (though it is not new) that the Church is the new Israel—Replacement Theology. When church leaders and members believe that Israel has no present or future role or prominence, it is much easier to demonize them, call them oppressors, and urge the above action. They have also tossed out eschatology and emphasized false “end-time” theologies such as Preterism—that all prophecy occurred in 70 AD with the destruction of Jerusalem. Without exception, false eschatological teachings disinherit Jews and Israel from the land and covenants made to them and put them on the level of prominence comparable to the Canary Islands.”

Essh Geebor Mawkor

  • 2004: Preterism and a Sledge Hammer “Preterists say that this generation means that the generation he was talking to must see all these signs. Preterist are weak in faith, thus forced like atheists to come to odd conclusions…  Well here is the verse that SLAPS then right UPSIDE their hard heads.”

Seth McBee

  • 2006: Why I Am not a Preterist “Recently at the local church, it was the preterist idea that Hebrews 12:26 (“At that time his voice shook the earth, but now he has promised, “Yet once more I will shake not only the earth but also the heavens.”) is only symbolic, figurative apocalyptic language and is actually talking about what happened in the 1st century, the change of administration at the cross followed by the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.”

Jim McClarty

  • 2010: Jim McClarty Debates Gary DeMar’s Eschatology (Video) “Pastor Jim McClarty of Grace Christian Assembly debated ideas in an interview with Gary DeMar and Jay Rogers (available on YouTube) on Bible prophecy and eschatology. Pastor McClarty makes legitimate arguments against the postmillennial view, and in return, Gary DeMar is equipped to respond to McClarty in this episode of “The Gary DeMar Show.”

J. Parnell McCarter

Middletown Baptist

  • 2003: Preterism and Matthew 16:27-28 “It is typical for those who are preterists to condemn dispensationalists for the way we interpret a handful of verses that they do not think we are taking literally (such as Matthew 16:27-28 and Matthew 24:34, etc.) and yet they seem to ignore hundreds of kingdom prophecies given by the prophets of old and say that they will never find any literal fulfillment. Any prophetic view which seeks to take a few passages literally in such a way that forces hundreds of verses to be understood in a non-literal way is suspect, to say the least.”
  • 2003: AD70 Contrasted ” In Matthew 23:39 the Lord Jesus made it clear that the Jewish nation would not see the Lord Jesus again until they would say, “Blessed is He that cometh in the Name of the Lord.” This means that He will not come until the nation is repentant. Since the nation was not repentant in 70 A.D. this must mean that Christ did not come at that time. Notice that Matthew 24:30 specifically says that they would SEE the Son of man coming.”

Glenn Miller

  • 2000: Jesus didn’t fulfill the validating prophecies “If God said that his Messiah would.. bring peace to the world, rebuild the temple and reunite the Jews, then why do Christians believe Jesus was that Messiah? The only answer I have been given is that I guess Jesus promised to fulfill the prophecy in his 2nd  coming.”

Markus Mossiman

Chuck Musslewhite

  • 2012: The Historical Problems with Preterism “I am more familiar with Preterism than I care to be. I will be frank in that I believe it is one of the biggest false doctrines in the church today. If you don’t know what Preterism is let me give it to you in a nutshell”

Narrow Way

  • 2003: Preterism – Clear and Present Danger “Who is answering God’s call to repentance today, our pastors, leaders, loved ones, friends? Do they hear when God “speaks”? Or does the evil continue in God’s sight despite the warnings. Aren’t the bars still full on the weekends, the parties continue, the sexual immorality, lust, love of money, baby killing, sodomy, pride, selfishness, cheating, lying, stealing, hatred, killing. I’d call this a  real “preterist” world in ‘spiritual’ peace! Wouldn’t you?” Who do we believe, the preterist cult or Jesus Christ, the Lord?”

H.L. Nigro

Otto Nordgreen

  • 2000: The Problems of a Pre-AD70 Date of the Apocalypse “The date of the Book of Revelation (Rev) has been as disputed as its authorship. The dates proposed for the composition oscillate between, on the one hand, the time before or during the so-called Jewish War (66-77 CE) and, on the other hand, the time of Emperor Trajan, viz. late 1st century (Aune 1997:lvii). Traditionally, the prevailing view has been that Rev was written sometime during the reign of Emperor Domitian (81-96 CE); more specifically (and in harmony with the ancient testimony of Irenaeus ) towards the end of his reign, viz. ca. 94/95 CE. “


  • 2000: “In Like Manner” Not Always Interpreted the Same (By Preterists) “When speaking of something happening “in like manner” in Acts 1:11, we are told by James Stuart Russell that this “must not be pressed too far.” But in Luke 13:1-9, the same phrase – “in like manner” – is used to defend the belief that the parousia of Jesus Christ occurred in 70 A.D. The inconsistency of this is almost too much to believe.”

Graham Pearce

  • 1982: The Revelation — Preterist Interpretation “Is it likely that God would provide a super abundance of prophetic guidance for those living around AD 70, and then provide nothing for the centuries ahead? This is barely credible. An interpretation that applies the Revelation only to the 1st century and the distant future, leaving 18 centuries or more of prophetic darkness cannot be accepted (cf. Amos 3:7). “

People’s New Testament

Joel Porter

  • 2004: A Backwards Look to Find the Truth – “Although the whore is destroyed by the beast and his ten kings, the beast and his army are destroyed at Armageddon, not the whore. The time frame for all the events appears to be at the end of the age we are living in. Although I am willing to be persuaded by the great effort by many people to fit this into the time frame of AD 70, I find that it just does not fit with history or what the bible says. We must go by the bible, everybody has a right to study scripture, but sooner or later we will find we need to get back to what the book says. “

G. Reckert

  • 2009: Anti-Preterist Message Board and Articles In is now 2009 and my 14 year campaign has succeeded in all three goals. There is not a single Jesus Name organization that has openly accepted preterism as its interpretation of prophecy. There have been many others encouraged to take a stand.

John J. Reilly

  • 1999: What if the Second Temple had survived AD70? “Akenson’s governing assumption is that the key event that created Christianity and Rabbinical Judaism was the destruction of the Temple at Jerusalem in AD 70”

David W. Roth

  • 1998: Knowing the Love of Christ “To deny the physical bodily resurrection of both Christ or the believer is a departure from the faith”

Chad Rudolph

  • 1998: The Problem with Preterism “Preterists (akin to Antimillennialism, Church of Christ, Covenant Theology, Reformed Theology, Catholicism, Cults, 1/2 of Protestants) believe that all or most of the prophecies in the Olivet Discourse/Matthew 24-25 and Revelation were fulfilled when Rome destroyed Jerusalem and her temple in A.D. 70. Partial preterists believe that the 2nd coming, judgement and destruction of the earth are yet future (Rev. 20). “

Larry Spargamino

  • 2001: Was All Bible Prophecy Fulfilled By A.D.70? “Even the Mark of the Beast is explained as a low – tech brand, used on slaves and animals. No microchip technology here! Christians need to be aware of those teachings that would turn “the blessed hope” into “the blasted hope.”
  • 2001: Preterism and the Eclipse of Pre-millennialism “Pre-millennialists do not have to create doomsday scenarios. They already exist. Denials of the critical nature of our present situation will not make the danger go away.”

Dr. Michael D. Stallard

  • 2002: A Review of R.C. Sprouls The Last Days: An Analysis of Moderate Preterism “Moderate preterism also suffers from inconsistencies as pointed out by the fact that radical preterism is sometimes called “consistent” preterism. While having its own problems, radical preterism does handle all of the day of the Lord passages in the same way. Sproul, as a moderate preterist, does not want to deny the literal Second Coming and future resurrection of believers. Therefore, he must do a balancing act with some of the passages supporting 70 A.D. fulfillment and some pointing toward the future. Exegetically and theologically he is attempting the impossible.”

David Sungenis

  • 2003: Art Sippo and the Demise of Catholic Apologetics “Sippo: Scott (Hahn) is very well read in the Patristic literature and is on the cutting edge of modern biblical scholarship. Anyone who has tried to keep up with the field knows that the movement for “biblical theology” is a new and exciting area of study that crosses confessional lines and participates in the New Pauline Perspective which has been systematically dismantling the classical Protestant interpretation of Scripture in favor of a view of soteriology that is more favorable to the traditional Catholic position. R. Sungenis: Thanks for proving my point. In case you didn’t catch it, Sippo has admitted by the statement “crosses confessional lines and participates in the New Pauline Perspective,” that he and Hahn have received their newfound ideas on soteriology from Protestants. Need I say more?”

Dean Tisch

  • 2001: A Preterist’s Presuppositions “Preterists make “THE stars” and other parts of the context to be fulfilled totally in 67-70 A.D. Preterist Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., states their good figurative case for this more thoroughly than any other Preterist I have found. What do the Premillennialists do here? They make “THE stars” into some meteors [the parallel is in the Sixth Seal of Revelation 6:13] so that this earth is not destroyed when they think Jesus will appear before the Millennium. How are these two usually battling positions, Preterist and Premillennial, alike? Neither of them can stand the literal meaning of the language.”

Stanley Toussaint

  • 1996: A Critique Of The Preterist View “Moderate preterism believes large blocks of New Testament prophecy were fulfilled in the siege and destruction of Jerusalem in A. D. 70, but they also hold to a future literal return of Christ with a bodily resurrection of believers and unbelievers. This preterism has seen a strong revival with the Reconstructionist movement; it is essentially the view of reconstructionist postmillennialism.”

United Pentecostal Church

Cornelis P. Venema

  • The Promise of the Future “Part Six includes four chapters covering the most fundamental elements of cosmic eschatology: the resurrection of the body, the final judgment, the doctrine of eternal punishment, and the new heavens and earth. In each of these chapters, the author does an excellent job of presenting the biblical view as well as critiquing various unbiblical alternatives. In the chapter on the resurrection of the body, Venema includes a thorough discussion of the nature of the resurrection body as well as an insightful evaluation of the recent debate between Murray J. Harris and Norman Geisler over Harris’s understanding of the nature of the resurrection body. This discussion will prove to be especially valuable to those who are dealing with recent attempts among hyper-preterists and others to revive Harris’s doctrine. “

James Ventilato

  • 2005: Preterist Time Texts Answered by Scripture – “Within the confines of this relatively short paper, the four key passages of scripture which Preterism (of all stripes) relies upon for the very life-blood of its theory will be taken up: namely, Matt.24:34Matt.10:23Matt. 16:28, and Matt. 26:64. As the Lord enables, some of the issues and insurmountable problems involved in its isolated (2 Pet. 1:20), pseudo-literal, eisegesis of these four key texts will be exposed, and the only scripturally tenable view of each passage will be set forth.”

1817: Thomas Scott

  • 1817: Predictions Respecting the Second Advent of Jesus “The first attempt to assign all to the destruction of Jerusalem until we reach Matt. xxv. 31, is utterly untenable and indeed absurd. No words can be plainer than those of Matt. xxiv. 29, 30, 31. If they do not denote the visible coming of the Son of man in heaven to exercise judgment over all the tribes of earth, no words whatever suffice to enunciate this doctrine. Nothing but the extreme stress of the difficulty, extreme reluctance to admit the ignominious failure of prophecy, could ever drive a sensible man to pretend that these three verses mean nothing but the overthrow of one city—the dissolution of one nation.”

1829: Dr. John H. Church

  • 1829: The National Preacher “Having thus spoken of his coming by death, and given warning to prepare for this momentous event, Christ was naturally led to foretell his coming to judge the world, and render to all according to their deeds. And thus he passed from the destruction of Jerusalem to the state of every man, either at death, or at the final judgment ; and spoke for the instruction and warning of men in all future time. But all this was not fulfilled when he desolated Jerusalem.”

1834: Lewis C. Todd

  • 1834: A Defence Containing the Author’s Renunciation of Universalism Explained “Again when “all nations were gathered together before him,” and the King said to them on the left hand, “depart from me ye cursed,” &c. who and what did he mean? Why the wicked persecuting Jews. Well, let these stand for the wicked of all nations. How did they depart into (aionion) everlasting fire; and go away into (aionion) everlasting punishment? Why, they were slain by the sword and by famine, and went to the everlasting joys of heaven! MONSTROUS ABSURDITY! Let us see the absurd thing once more, in form of a paraphrase.”When the Son of Man shall come in his glory and all the holy angels with him, (when the Roman army shall besiege Jerusalem,) then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory (invisible and unknown both to Jews and Romans,) and before him shall be gathered all nations ; (the Jews and Roman army shall come together,) and he shall separate them one from another as a shepherd divided his sheep from the goats. (The believers shall be separated from the rest of the Jews.) Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand ; come ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. (Come ye blessed of my father, ye shall escape the sword and the famine now at the destruction of Jerusalem ; and ye shall live to suffer all the horrors of persecution — to be sawn asunder, imprisoned, and burned to death, by the Roman Emperors, after they get through punishing the Jews, and sending them to glory !) For I was an hungered and ye gave me meat, &c. (For you Christianize Jews did this to one another.) Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels. (Depart from your country and lives, ye cursed, unbelieving Jews, into death and immediate everlasting happiness in the kingdom of glory, prepared for the Jewish nation, the enemy of Christ, and the high priests, and Judas, and all his adversaries!) And these shall go away into everlasting punishment; but the righteous into life eternal. (And these shall most of them die, which all must do soon, and go away into age-lasting punishment, a state of immortality and bliss; but the righteous into life age-lasting, the enjoyment of the gospel of Christ, by which they shall be persecuted from city to city, bleeding under the lacerating scourge, during life, and at last they shall come to the same place,) or if that will not do, say, (these shall die and go to heaven, and a remnant of them shall be scattered abroad in the earth ; and their posterity shall not come to a knowledge of the gospel for many ages ; but the disciples shall continue to enjoy the gospel which they have enjoyed before.)”

1834: Parsons Cooke

  • 1834: Modern Universalism Exposed “But here the Universalist says that the phrase “this world” means only “this age,” before the destruction of Jerusalem. Then the passage reads- He that surrenders life in this period, before the destruction of Jerusalem, shall have eternal life BY LIVING THROUGH THAT DESTRUCTION. That is, by suffering himself to be killed before, he shall escape being killed then. . . this interpretation then is miserably lame in every limb and joint.” “If I would be a Universalist after the model of these writers, I must furthermore believe that Paul being now ready to be offered, and the time of his departure at hand, had his soul filled with emotions unutterable, in anticipation of a crown that he was to receive at the time of Jerusalem’s destruction.”

1842: Philemon Russell

  • 1842: A Series of Letters to a Universalist “The Christians at Corinth appeared at the destruction of Jerusalem, your judgment seat of Christ, about in the same sense in which the editor of the Trumpet, appeared at the judgment seat of Christ, at the battle of Waterloo.  It could have been nothing more than an imaginary appearing in judgment, just such a judgment as the devil and wicked men love.  Now how can you regard St. Paul as an honest man, if you believe he referred in 2 Cor. 5:10, only to the destruction of Jerusalem?  His language is general and universal.  ‘WE must ALL appear.”

1844: E.B. Elliot

1847: Rev. Edward Beecher

  • 1847: Remarks on Stuart’s Commentary on the Apocalypse (PDF) “But when we come to consider the fundamental principles of prophetic interpretation, and raise the inquiry, has the interpretation of our fathers been radically and thoroughly overthrown, and ought the German interpretation to supersede it, then we must beg leave to demur. We do not believe that the fundamental idea in the interpretation of our fathers has been overthrown, or that it can be. And this last and greatest effort of Professor Stuart has the more confirmed us in that belief. The reasons of this conviction we proceed to assign.”

1856: Daniel Buck

  • 1856: Our Lord’s Great Prophecy, and Its Parallels Throughout the Bible “When it is remarked, that the prophecy is now finished, it not meant that there is nothing afterwards introduced which is of a prophetic character, for there are several instances to be noticed.” “The wretched attempts to make it (all prophecy) apply somehow to the period of the downfall of Jerusalem, are certainly too superficial, and too utterly destitute of any historical evidence, to deserve a formal reply. Let any one endeavor to fix upon some historic evidence of Christians being redeemed, as the figurative theory supposes, upon the downfall of the Jewish, nation ; let him satisfy himself as to what Christ meant by “these things beginning to come to pass,” and thus indicating their redemption drawing nigh; — let him produce a single Scripture or historic proof that ” the kingdom of God was nigh at hand,” implying that the gospel kingdom had not been previously established let him refer to a single proof of any kind that the destruction of the Jewish nation had anything to do, either with the beginning, or the establishing of the gospel kingdom, and this portion of the Treatise shall be confessed to be a failure.”

1880: Nathaniel Starkey & T. May

  • 1880: T. May: A Reply to Nathaniel Starkey “Mr. Nathaniel Starkey, in the January Rainbow, wishes a preterist to reply to his note on the 5th chapter of Revelation. Would you kindly allow me a short space?”

1891: Thomas Lucas Scott

  • 1891: The visions of the Apocalypse and their lessons (Donnellan lectures for 1891-92) “The Praeterists—who think that the events with which the visions were concerned are altogether fulfilled, having taken place in the first centuries of Church history—are very numerous. And at present one section of the School—those who think that the book is concerned almost entirely with contemporaneous history—is very vigorously supported by Archdeacon FarrarHe thinks that the crash, and the coming of the Lord, to which the visions all point, refer to the Lord’s coming at the destruction of Jerusalem, and the breaking up of the entire Jewish polity. Others of this School allow a more extended scope for the visions, and refer the predicted crash to the breaking down of heathenism before Christianity, or to the breaking up of the Roman empire. But many of the most thoughtful of the Praeterists admit (or strongly advocate) that the visions and these events have lessons for all ages, and look forward as well as back. Thus there are commentators—such as Isaac Williams, MauriceHengstenbergBoussett, Vaughan, and others—who may be classed among the interpreters of both the Spiritual and Praeterist Schools; and all of the Spiritual School can recognize in the events to which both the Historic and Praeterist Schools point, illustrations of the principles which we think the Apostle depicted in these visions.”

1892: David B. Updegraff

  • 1892: Old Corn: Or, Sermons and Addresses on the Spiritual Life “THE effort to make people believe that the promised parousia [coming] of our Lord took place at the “destruction of Jerusalem” tends to mislead souls, blot out the Christian’s hope, and destroy the value of Scripture as a definite testimony to anything.”


Jeffrey Cagle

  • 2003: The Last Days: Four Views  He is a graduate of Princeton University and is currently a M. Div. candidate at Reformed Theological Seminary. He is married to Colleen and has taught physics and chemistry for over 10 years at Chapelgate Christian Academy.

Ferrel Jenkins


Preterism has been making strides over the last two years. Preterists believe that biblical prophecies were fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 and a spiritual coming of Christ at that time. As we approached the year 2000, preterism was taking a back seat to premillennialism. In the driver’s seat were premillennial views that the end times could be near. However, after the hype of Y2K died down, preterism began to make gains. Enough so that Grant Jeffrey devoted a significant portion of his book, “Triumphant Return,” to defending premillennialim; Dr. Larry Spargimino wrote “The Anti-Prophets: The Challenge of Preterism”; and popular author Thomas Ice produced a series of articles for “The Midnight Call” magazine on the preterist/premillennilist debate.” more…

Debate On Israel’s Identity

Landmark Israel Discussion I attended at my sending church in 1996 | 1. Ovid Need, Pastor of Linden Baptist Church – Linden, Indiana – PARTIAL PRETERIST – Israel is Jesus Christ, and all “joint-heirs” in Christ through faith, with no merit in one’s nature. 2. Greg Dixon, Pastor of Indianapolis Baptist Temple – Indianapolis, Indiana – DISPENSATIONALIST – Israel is comprised of those “Jews” spread throughout the world, who are currently on “God’s prophetic shelf,” and are eternally distinct from the church. 3. Ted Wieland, Evangelist – Scottsbluff, Nebraska – CHRISTIAN IDENTITY – Israel is the literal (natural) ‘seed’ of Abraham, which is comprised solely of the Anglo-Saxon, Germannic Tribes and remnant of Judah. 4. Tom Brush, from Carmel, Indiana – SEEDLINE IDENTITY – Israel is the literal (natural) ‘seed’ of Adam, as opposed to the “Cainites,” which are the literal ‘seed’ of Satan’s intercourse with Eve.


2014: Articles on Preterism from Bridgeport (TX) Church of Pentecost: “Its slow rise to mainstream attention completed, Preterism was embraced by Sproul and a host of others, despite the impossibility of compressing all of apocalyptic prophecies to be fulfilled from 33 AD to 70 AD. Preterism was no longer an obscured opinion limited to a few. The acceptance by respected theologians gave Preterism the modern credibility it needed to be considered plausible, and the impetus it needed to be spread throughout the world.”