The Menace Of Radical Preterism

By Wayne Jackson

The word “eschatology” derives from the Greek word, eschatos, meaning “last.” It has to do with the biblical doctrine of “last” or “end-of-time” things. The term embraces such matters as the return of Christ, the end of the world, the day of judgment, and the resurrection of the dead.

One philosophy of eschatology is known as “preterism.” Ther term “preter” issues from an original form meaning “past.” Preterism, therefore, is an interpretive ideology which views major portions of Bible prophecy, traditionally associated with the termination of earth’s history, as having been fulfilled already.

But the term “preterism” is flexible. Some scholars, for instance, have dated the book of Revelation in the late 60s A.D. They contend that virtually the whole of the Apocalypse, therefore, was fulfilled by A.D. 70— when Judaism was destroyed by the invading Roman armies. A more moderate form of preterism moves the fulfillment of Revelation forward somewhat. These scholars hold that while Revelation was penned near the end of the first century, the major focus of the book is upon the fall of the Roman empire (A.D. 476); consequently they feel there is little beyond that date that is previewed in the final book of the New Testament.

While we do not agree with either of these concepts of the book of Revelation, we consider them to be relatively harmless. They represent ideas upon which good men can honestly disagree with no significant error being involved.

On the other hand, there is a form of preterism that is quite heretical.

This theory argues that all Bible prophecy has been fulfilled; nothing remains on the prophetic calendar.

This radical preterism was championed by James Stuart Russell (1816-95), a Congregational clergyman in England. Russell authored a book titled, The Parousia, (from a Greek word meaning “coming” or “presence”), which first appeared in 1878. Russell set forth the idea the second coming of Christ, the judgment day, etc., are not future events at the end of the current dispensation. Rather, prophecies relating to these matters were fulfilled with Jerusalem’s fall in A.D. 70. There is, therefore, no future “second coming” of Christ. Moreover, there will be no resurrection of the human body. Also, the final judgment and the end of the world have occurred already— with the destruction of Jerusalem.

Advocates of this bizarre dogma claim that the preterist movement is growing wildly. It probably is expanding some— though likely not as prolificly as its apologists would like everyone to believe. (“new wave in Reformed world” -ED) Occasionally the sect will get a thrust when a prominent name becomes identified with it. For example, noted theologian R.C. Sproul has apparently thrown his hat into the preterist ring— at least to some degree. Recently he characterized J.S. Russell’s book as “one of the most important treatments on Biblical eschatology that is available to the church today” (quoted in The Christian News, June 7, 1999, p. 17).

Radical preterism (also known as “realized eschatology” or the “A.D. 70 doctrine”) is so “off the wall”— biblically speaking— that one wonders how anyone ever falls for it. But they do. And, as exasperating as it is, the doctrine needs to be addressed from time to time. One writer, in reviewing the A.D. 70 heresy, recently quipped that dealing with preterism is like cleaning the kitty litter box; one hates to fool with it, but it has to be done. He can just be thankful that cats aren’t larger than they are.

THE BASIS FOR THE DOGMA

Preterists strive for consistency in their view of Bible prophecy. The goal is admirable. But when a series of propositions is linked, and they are grounded on the same faulty foundation, when one of them topples— like dominos in a line— they all fall. So it is with the A.D. 70 theory.

Here is the problem. In studying the New Testament material relative to the “coming” of Christ, preterists note that:

There are passages which seem to speak of the nearness of the Lord’s coming— from a first-century vantage point (cf. Jas. 5:8).
They observe that there are texts which indicate a “coming” in connection with the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 (cf. Mt. 24:30).
Combining these, they conclude that the Savior’s “second coming” must have transpired in A.D. 70.
Furthermore, since the Scriptures are clear as to the fact that the resurrection of the dead, the judgment day, and the end of the world will all occur on the day the Lord returns, the advocates of “realized eschatology” are forced to “spiritualize” these several happenings, contending that all will take place at the same time. In this “interpretive” process, a whole host of biblical terms must be redefined in order to make them fit the scheme.

And so, while preterists attempt to be consistent, it is nonetheless a sad reality that they are consistently wrong!

PROPHETIC IMMINENCE

A major fallacy of the preterist mentality is a failure to recognize the elasticity of chronological jargon within the context of biblical prophecy. It is a rather common trait in prophetic language that an event, while literally in the remote future, may be described as near. The purpose in this sort of language to is emphasize the certainty of the prophecy’s fulfillment.

Obadiah, for instance, foretold the final day of earth’s history. Concerning that event, he said: “For the day of Jehovah is near upon all the nations…” (vs. 15). This cannot refer to some local judgment, for “all nations” are to be involved. And yet, the event is depicted as “near.”

There are numerous prophecies of this nature, including passages like James 5:7— “the coming of the Lord is at hand.” James could not have been predicting the literally imminent return of the Savior, for such knowledge was not made available to the Lord’s penmen. Not even Jesus himself knew of the time of his return to earth (Mt. 24:26).

THE COMPONENTS EXPLAINED AND BRIEFLY REFUTED

Let us give brief consideration to the four eschatological events that are supposed to have occurred in A.D. 70— the Lord’s Second Coming, the resurrection of the dead, the day of judgment, and the end of the world.

Was there a sense in which Christ “came” to folks at various times and places? Yes, and no serious student of the Bible denies this. Jesus “came” on the day of Pentecost via the outpouring of the Holy Spirit (see Jn. 14:18). The coming was representative, not literal. The Lord warned the brethren in Ephesus that if they did not repent, he would “come” to them in judgment, and they would forfeit their identity as a faithful congregation (Rev. 2:5). In describing the horrible judgment to be inflicted upon rebellious Jerusalem, Jesus, employing imagery from the Old Testament, spoke of his “coming” in power and glory (Mt. 24:30). Again, this was a representative “coming” by means of the Roman forces (cf. Mt. 22:7). Verse 34 of Matthew 24 clearly indicates that this event was to occur before that first-century generation passed away. For further consideration of this point, see the essay on “Matthew 24” in our Archives.

The Lord’s “second coming,” however, will be as visibly apparent as his ascension back into heaven was (Acts 1:11). Indeed, he will be “revealed” (2 Thes. 1:7), or “appear” to all (2 Tim. 4:1; Heb. 9:28).

It is a mistake of horrible proportions to confuse the symbolic “comings” of Christ with the “second” (cf. Heb. 9:28) coming. And this is what the preterists do.

It is utterly incredible that the preterists should deny the eventual resurrection of the human body— just as the Sadducees did twenty centuries ago (Acts 23:8). The entire 15th chapter of 1st Corinthians was written to counter this error: “How say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead [ones – plural]?” (15:12).
But those who subscribe to the notion of “realized eschatology” spiritualize the concept of the resurrection, alleging that such references are merely to the emergence of the church from an era of anti-Christian persecution. In other words, it is the “resurrection” of a cause, not a resurrection of people.

The theory is flawed in several particulars, but consider these two points:
1. The Scriptures speak of the “resurrection” as involving both the good and the evil, the just and the unjust (Dan. 12:2; Jn. 5:28-29; Acts 24:15). Where, in the preterist scheme of things, is the resurrection of “evil”? Was the “cause” of evil to emerge at the same time as the “cause” of truth?
2. As noted above, the resurrection contemplated in 1 Corinthians 15 has to do with the raising of “dead ones” (masculine, plural)— not an abstract “cause” (neuter, singular). Significantly, the bodily resurrection of Jesus is cited as a precursor to the general resurrection— in this very context (15:20, 23).
  Christ charged that those who deny the resurrection of the body are ignorant of both the Scriptures and the power of God (Mt. 22:29).
The Bible speaks of a coming “day of judgment” (Mt. 11:22). Preterists limit this to the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. But the theory simply does not fit the facts. The devastation of A.D. 70 involved only the Jews. The final day of judgment will embrace the entire human family— past, present, and future (Acts 17:31). The citizens of ancient Nineveh will be present on the day of judgment (see Mt. 12:41), as will other pagan peoples. But these folks were not in Jerusalem in A.D. 70. How can clear passages of this nature be ignored?
Here is an interesting thought. When Paul defended his case before the Roman governor, Felix, he spoke of “the judgment to come,” and the ruler was “terrified” (Acts 24:25). Why would a Roman be “terrified” with reference to the impending destruction of Judaism— when he would be on the winning side, not the losing one?
According to the preterists, the “end of the world,” as this expression is employed in Bible prophecy, does not allude to the destruction of this planet. Rather, “world” has reference to the Jewish world, thus, the end of the Jewish age. This, they allege, occurred in A.D. 70.
But this view simply is not viable. Consider these two brief but potent points.
1. The responsibilities of the Great Commission— to teach and immerse lost souls— was commensurate with that era preceding the “end of the world” (Mt. 28:18-20). If the “end of the world” occurred in A.D. 70, then the Lord’s Commission is valid no longer. This conclusion, of course, is absurd.
2. In the Parable of the Tares, Jesus taught that at “the end of the world” the “tares” (i.e., evil ones) would be removed from his kingdom and burned (Mt. 13:39-40). Did that transpire with the destruction of Judaism? It did not. The notion that the “end of the world” is past already is false.

The dogma of “preterism” or “realized eschatology” is erroneous from beginning to end. For a more detailed consideration of this matter, see our book, The A.D. 70 Theory, listed in the Catalog section.

A COMMON METHOD OF PROPAGATION

The doctrine of preterism is so radically unorthodox that its advocates realize that their efforts to win converts represents a formidable task. Consequently, they have developed a covert strategy that seeks to quietly spread their novel dogma until such a time when congregational take-overs can be effected. The distinctive traits of this discipling methodology are as follows.

It is alleged that this system represents an attractive, consistent method of interpretation. But there is no virtue in consistency, if one is consistently wrong!

Preterists criticize what they call “traditional” views of interpreting Bible prophecy. They suggest they have a new, exciting approach to the Scriptures— with a spiritual thrust. Of course the “new” is always intriguing to some.
The messengers of “realized eschatology” frequently are secretive in their approach. They select only the most promising candidates with whom to share their ideas. Eventually, then, the A.D. 70 theory will be woven subtly into classes, sermons, etc.
When ultimately confronted relative to their teachings and methods, they will argue that eschatological issues are merely a matter of opinion, and that divergent views— especially theirs— should be tolerated. This, of course, ignores plain biblical implications on these themes (cf. 2 Tim. 2:16-18; 2 Pet. 3:16). If church leaders fall for this ploy, more time is gained for the indoctrination of the entire congregation.

CONCLUSION

Wise church leaders will inform themselves relative to the theory of preteristic eschatology. If such ideas are discovered to be circulating within a local church, the proponents of such doctrines should be dealt with quickly and firmly. It is a serious matter.

What do YOU think ?

Submit Your Comments For Posting Here
Comment Box Disabled For Security

Date:: 15 Oct 2001
Time:: 17:06:26

Comments

keep studying so your debates are not flawed

Date:: 26 Oct 2001
Time:: 12:19:14

Comments

A careful study of the Parable of the Tares would indicate that Jesus was talking about “this age” that was about to end. Your points do not refute Jesus coming in Judgment upon Jerusalem as the prophets prophesied and he promised. You do as you accuse others, you rely on long held beliefs rather than scholarly study that indicates some of these beliefs are in conflict with other passages of scripture so you ignore them. In response to you Matt. 24 study, see the parallels of vvs. 35 on in the account of Luke. Some of those things that are post vs 34 are in the pre vs 34 happenings listed in Luke. Jesus said he was “coming quickly” (Rev. 22:7),why do we make him out to be a liar to hold on to our interpretations that are weak and convoluted.

Date:: 23 Feb 2003
Time:: 11:53:45

Comments

If this author wants anyone that actually understands what preterism is, to take him seriously, he should deal with what preterists actually believe instead of twisting thier beliefs so he can more easily make them to look like utter fools. This is called the Straw Man Fallacy. Description of Straw Man The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person’s actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of “reasoning” has the following pattern: Person A has position X. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X). Person B attacks position Y. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed. This sort of “reasoning” is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person. For example, preterism does not hold that there isn’t a resurrection of the dead, but a resurrection of a “cause”. Preterism teaches that it already happened and that it wasn’t a physical occurance, but it was a resurrection of the Old Testament people in judgement. They were taken out of Hades or Sheol and judged at the Great White Throne Judgment. Read some articles on this website for more information. A good one is David Curtis’ message titled: The Rapture, physical or spiritual. Another thing that really bothered me was when the author stated that the penmen of the NT didn’t know when the Lord would return and neither did Jesus. He then uses Mt. 24:26 to back that fact up. Well, I personally don’t see what that verse has to do with Jesus not knowing when His return would be. However, if you go a mere 8 verses farther we read where He says that He will return within their generation! Also, wasn’t the entire Bible inspired by God? Well I’m sure that God knew when He was going to return and since He inspired the Bible, why are the penman of the Bible limited to knowing when He would return? I don’t think they were. All through the NT we see they expected His return during their lifetime. Why? I believe because they believed their master when He said He would return when some of them were still alive. Mt 16:26-27 So Wayne, if you want to argue against Preterism that’s fine with me. I would however, appreciate it if you would deal with the actual preteristic view and not a Straw Man that you build to easily knock down.

Date:: 21 Apr 2003
Time:: 19:58:33

Comments

Mennace? Really – what is the MENNACE? Even if Preterism were proved to be false – by a secret rapture… (i don’t think this will be the case, but just suppose)… what tennent of the Christian faith have we denied? We believe in the trinity, the divinity of Christ, the atoning work of his sacrificial death, his resurrection, the resurrection of believers (though spiritually rather than physically) What about that is such a mennace?

Date: 03 Oct 2005
Time: 14:16:48

Comments0:

Jiminy Cricket, what’s the greek word for “spot-the-logical-fallacy”?? Straw man…prejudicial language…red herring…slipery slope…circular deffinition…poisoning the well…two or three non-sequiturs…wow, its just like class!!

Amongst other things, would someone please explain to this guy that the “resurrection of the body” at the very least should be not be assumed out of hand to be identical with the “resurrection of the dead” (which is what 1 Cor 15 is REALLY all about).

Consider two brief but potent points?? Please. Spare me. Let’s paraphrase:

“a. The implications for the great commision if preterists are correct is staggering to me since I’ve been taught otherwise all my life. Therefore the preterists are patently wrong.”

“b. My argument rests on the erroneous idea that an accurate translation of ‘aion’ is ‘world.’ I’ve completely ignored this problem because it either aids in building my straw man or because I’m too lazy to actually study.”

Date: 30 Sep 2006
Time: 10:59:25

Comments:

wayne, a simple question for ya? what does the term “this generation” mean?

Date: 30 Sep 2012
Time: 12:04:02

Your Comments:

The Very First Bible Translation; Including the Names of the Two (2) Gods. C. 2007

PRAISE: “Lord, the God, The [One] [keeping] THE ALL POWER [and] TIME” – Rev. 4.8.
Kurioj o Qroj to pan kratoj kai kroptoj kai wra New Name of God – Rev. 3.12.
I have been praying and searching for twenty years for the translation of (Ihsouj).
“IESOUS” reads: I = tenth, E = the, sous = of us. Translation of: Savior – Joshua 1.1 – Heb.
This makes no sense and originated from Hebrew for, “Joshua” – [[why = He (Y) The [H] [One]
Saving (‘SWHY) = in Greek – Autos o Swtheria = He The [One] Saving – but not recorded in NT.
This phony name (Iesous) was from the “Blinded” Jews – Isaiah 6.9-13, Matthew 13.14-15.
Besides this, Paul wrote of the prophecy of the blindness of the Jews, “and if they do not remain in
the unbelief, they will be grafted in, the God is able to graft them in again” (Rom 11.23).
Isaiah predicted this long ago:
“And doing ‘He Is [of] Hosts’ (twabc hwhy hV[w) to all of the peoples in mountain, the-this,
from doing oils drinking them, keeping them oils from blotting out refined ones. Keeping them,
ones being refined. Swallowing in mountain, the-this, face of wrapping, wrapping over all of the
peoples and [the from veiling her] (h kcm h w) the ‘he will cover her’ (h ksm n h w) over all
the nations. Swallowing the death to ever and blotting Lord of [me] ‘He Is’ (hwhy ynda) tearing
[vwhy Autpj o Swthria = He The [One] Saving*

from of all of faces and repropach He will take away people of Him from upon all of the Earth
(Israel) for ‘’He Is’ (hwhy) saying”* – Isaiah 25.6-8.
[This was “removing the Veil” (of blindness of the Jews) in order to found New Jerusslem, AD
77].
“……And the saving us (yn[wvwh) this ‘He Is’ (hwhy) trusting Him, to Him we will rejoice and we
will rejoice in salvation of Him. For she (salvation) will rest hand of ‘He Is’ (hwhy) in Mountain
(New Jerusalem) the-this, and he will be trampled under him, Moab, as trampling straw in manure”
– Isaiah 25.9-10.
MOAB: ba w m = 1) from (M) of (W) father (BA: “Lot”) “Surely Moab shall be as Sodom,”
Zephaniah 2.9 [meaning destroyed by fire, Isaiah 25.10]. 2) Geographical region of descendants
of Moab.
“Moab” is a symnol for, “Israel” or, “Condemned People.”
“Who the man the wise and he is brother (y!b) of this and whom speaking mouth of ‘He Is’ (hwhy)
God of him (wyla) and he saying, ‘Against what destroying her, the Earth (Israel), wasting her as
(K) from (M) speaking from heart of [him] over” – Jeremiah 9.11.
“Look, days coming them saying,’He Is’ (hwhy) and punishing ‘of Me’ (yt) to all of the
circumcised in flesh [Israelites]. Against Egypts* and against Judah and against Edom and against peoples of Ammon [Compare Judeges 10.6] and against Moab and against all of ‘corners of cutting to grow’ (ycwcq hap), the ones dwelling in desert for all of the nations circumcised ones and and all of house of Israel circumcised [of] heart. Hear of the word that saying ‘He Is’ (hwhy) to you house of Israel. For saying ‘He Is’ (hwhy) to Way of the nations, you not learn them and from signs of the Heavens (Governments, Matthew 24.29-31) you not terrified of Me (yt) for they terrifying the nations (12 Tribes) from them (Signs in Heavens;*
Matthew 24.27-30)” – Jeremiah 9.24 – 10.2.

This* is a prophecy of the End* of Israel; AD 66-73. And with the End of Israel comes the
Foundation of New Jerusalem. Isaiah had almost the same description in Chapter Nineteen:
“In day, the-this, she will be highway [Street of Gold – Rev. 21.21] from Egypts [Upper Egypt and Lower Egypt = one kingdom; Egypts] to Assyria and going Assyrian in Egypts and and they will worship Egypts with Assyrian. In that day, the-this (AD 77), he will be a third, to Egypts and to Assyrian, a blessing in midst of the Earth (Israel changed to New Jerusalem) that blessing him ‘He Is’ [of] Hosts’ (twabc hewhy) to saying, ‘Blessing people of Me, Egypts; and work of hands of [Me] Assyria, and inheritance of Me (yt) Israel – 19.23-25.’”

AND – this was the borders of New Jerusalem in AD 77 – “The light of the Sun sevenfold”- Isaiah 30.26.

Now then, the “Name of the Savior of the World” and our introduction to Revelation will be
complete. [“The Rapture,” in AD 77, in Chapters Rev. 5 & 7, is separated from the “Founding of New Jerusalem,” in AD 77, Chapters Rev. 21 & 22. This would have made the message to difficult to understand, if they had been listed one right after the other. God knowing our weaknesses described these two events separately, to make the message clearer. But He had written the process in clearer terms in Isaiah 65.17.]

“For looking creating of Me heavens, new ones, and new earth and not you will remember her, the first of her and not she (Israel) will come her to heart” – Isaiah 65.17.

“Three Ages of Man on Earth” – 2 Peter 3.6 – Pre-flood, 3.7-10 – Old Heavens (including Israel) – New Heavens 3.13 = AD 77.

The Pope has boasted that he has changed New Jerusalem to be after the Final Resurrection in
Third Heaven with, “… to The [One] sitting on the throne, and to the Lamb” – Revelation 7.10.

But then, “Anyone can boast that they have ‘overthrown God’ – however accomplishing this task
is much more difficult than boasting the feat.” The Living God had driven the Papacy and Pope
Pius IX out of Rome on September 20, 1870. Where was his boasted power then?

LITMUS TEST OF A ROMAN CATHOLIC:
Revelation 13.5-6: “And a mouth (Early Church Fathers) was given him (Beast = Papacy) speaking great [THINGS] and blasphemy, and authority was given Him to do War 42 Months [AD 600-1860 = Battle of Two Sicilies, Garibaldi conquered Sicily and the Bootheel of Italy, labeled, “Two Sicilies,” by the Papacy.]

And he opened the mouth of him in blasphemy against God [“I am infallible.”] to blaspheme the
name of Him – [Catholic Bishop of London (Richard Calloner) changed, “Iesus” to “Jesus” in AD 1738, while editing the, “Rheims NT.” There was no letter, “J’ – worldwide until that year. “Rheims NT,” AD 1738, read, “Iesus.” Tynedale’s NT, and Geneva Bible, and Matthew’s Bible, and King James Version, AD 1611 – all read, “Iesus.” Jerome’s “Latin Vulgate”, AD 405, had chabged, “Iesous” to “Iesus.”] and the Dwelling of Him (God; New Jerusalem) and “the [ones] dwelling in heaven (Rapture AD 77).

The congregation of my youth, AD 1943, being, “the thousand year reign with Anointed” denied
the names of the “Two (2) Gods” [from the Jews’] and the First Century Resurrection [from the
Papacy.] “These are the Three Blasphemies of the Beast [Papacy],” and almost all churches today teach, and believe them.” These are: 1) new name for “God” [Two Gods in Bible], 2) New
Covenant denied (New Jerusalem) – The Pope teaches the “church”* was anointed on the “Day of Pentecost.” NOTE *: There is no word “church” in the Bible! EK KLHSIA = “From Calling.”

The Pope changed, “From Calling” to “Church.” [So then, “You could have been in the church
with the Pope,” or, “You can believe in the Lamb’s Old Testament “From Calling.”]

“And on account of tradition of you [meaning the Jews in the First Century, and you today], [you]
have nullified the commandment of the God. Hypocrites!” – Matthew 15.6-7a.
IMAGINE THAT! The seducing Jews of the Septuagint (possibly 270 BC) – HAVE YOU IN
CAPTIVITY TODAY!
THE NAME OF THE SAVIOR, The translation was impeded by, “The Curse of Blindness on the
Jews.” AND BY – “The Savior” and His apostles quoting the Cursed, “Septuagint.” From these
two facts came the Jewish Proposition:
A) The Septuagint was consistently quoted by the Lamb and His apostles. True!
B) Therefore it must have been inspired by God! False!
C) The Hebrew text is “faulty.” False!

NO MAN CAN SERVE TWO LORDS.
The Lamb of God served God.
One of His duties was, “To enforce the Curse of Blindness on the Jews.”
See: Isaiah 6.9-13; and Matthew 13.14-15; and Romans 11.20-27.

Then God declared that the Jews were “divorced” from God – Isaiah 50.1.
God also labeled Jews as “Satan.” Zechariah 3.2; and Luke 10.18; Revelation 2.13.
[You cannot truthfully say, “We were not warned!”]

THE JEWISH SUPERSITION:
The Jews publish: 1) The name of God is too holy to be uttered. 2) When we come to it, WE
CHANGE IT. Example: [Plural] “Gods” (myhla); Genesis 1.1 changed to [single] “God” (la). AND – the church doctors (banned – Matthew 23.1-10) still teach the Jews
lies today [AD 2012].
Plural “Gods” was changed to singular “God”; Genesis 1.1; and 2,482 times.
The Lamb of God translated [plural] “Gods” myhla – Psalm 82.6 – to read plural “Gods” (Qeoi) –John 10.34. Were the Jews authorized to deny the translation of the Lamb? – You were warned!
“You cannot truthfully say, “We were not warned”!

LITMUS TEST OF A SERVANT OF THE LIVING GOD.
“Ask, and it will be given to [plural] you (umin); seek and [plural] you will find; knocking and it
will be opened to [plural] you (umin)” – Matthew 7.7.

The kingdom of God (New Jerusalem; Rev. 21.22) – And a temple I did not see in her (auth)
[singular] for Lord, the God The [One] [keeping] the all Power [and] Time is her temple and the
Lamb – Rev. 21.22.

We are “One Body.” When the “brightest” in the Body learns something from God – then he
shares his blessing with the rest of the Body. I have been taught extreme wisdom from God, in the “thousand year reign with Anointed,” when I was only ten years old. The “witness” began by
witnessing that: God Lives! God lives today! God lives today on earth!

This is the “sign” of a sertvant of God!
Anyone denying one of these beliefs is exposed as an enemy of God.
The Pope and Papstst deny that God is alive with these words, “Revelation was confined to the
First Centuiry.”
“Revelation is not a “prophecy”* for prophecies cover long periods and this book is short, limited
period of time limited to the Seven Churches of Asia – Rev. !-3.
“Blessed the [one] reading, and the [ones] hearing the words of the prophecy,* and keeping the
[things] having been written in her (auth), for the time [is] near” – Revelation 1.3.

The Pope is condemned for teaching, “This is not a prophecy.”*
Then he added, “The time was near to fulfill the prophecy – probably in ’42 months’ when
Jerusalem was taken by Tiberius and his Roman legions.”

NOTE: Later he exposed himself, teaching that, “Armageddon” would be seven years of war at the End of Time. Also the “First Resurrection” – Rev. 20.4-6 – was stated to be the resurrection of our “generation.” – Reference: The New American Bible, 1986.

Compare the more logical Protestant Interpretation: “For the time is near” meant the time for the
fulfillment of these prophecies to begin was near.

[They began with the resurrection in AD 77; “You will have tribulation ten days” – Rev. 2.10.
Then they chronologically interpreted the prophecies to, “Fall of Babylon” (Papacy and Pope on
September 20, 1870). Reference: “Dictionary of the Popes,” – Oxford Press.]

THE MIRACLE OF 1992
Two Church of Christ preachers had a public debate in September of 1992, in Ardmore, Oklahoma. They were discussibg, “The Final Resurrection” (Read: 1 Cor. 15.22-24).
Don Preston believed #1 – Anointed the firstfruits, AD 32.
He also believed #2 – coming of Son of Man – dated AD 70 (should read AD 77 – “ten days” – Rev. 2.10 – AD 67-77.
BUT — he denied #3.

His opponent, Bill Lockwood, believed #1 and #3, BUT – he denied #2 (Coming of the Lord).

Sid Williams concluded the debate (later, and by mail): 1) We ignore both denials of Scripture.
2) We accept all three Scriptures: 1Cor. 15.4: “and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third Day (AD 30, 31, 32) according to the Scriptures.”
1 Cor. 15.22-24: “For as in the Adam all rot, so also in the Anointed (tw Cristw) all will be made alive, but each in his own order: (1) firstfruits Anointed (AD 32), (2) then the [ones] of the Anointed (Cristou) in the coming of Him (ten days = AD 77), (3) Then the End (of Time – Rev. 20.11-15).

These are listed again in Revelation: “And You made them to the God kings and priests, and they will reign over the earth” – Rev. 5.10; AD 77.

1) “And from Iesous Anointed, the faithfull witness, the firstborn of the dead [ones] and the ruler of the kings of the earth”; AD 32 – Rev. 1.5.

2) “And I looked, and I heardas a voiceof many messengers around the throne and the [four] living creatures and the [24] elders. And the number of them was ten thousand of ten thousands (Jude 14) and thousands of thousands” – AD 77; Rev. 5.11.

3) “And the sea, she gave up the deas, the [ones] her, and the Death and the Hell gave up the dead, the [ones] in them ………. This is the second death, the lake of the fire” – Rev. 20.13-14.

The Menace Of Radical Preterism