Musings on Preterism (2)

One of the major elements of Full preterism or so called "Apostolic Preterism" that interrupts its relationship with the Apostolic church is the omission of the imminent return of Christ. I feel Pentecost was founded upon the "soon coming of the Lord" and that is what brought them haste in "searching the scriptures", e.g. Charles Parham and students in Kansas.

This is old news, but preterism is problematic in regards to the dating of Revelation also. Preterist hold that since both the apostles and Jesus talk about the Lord’s coming as near, either the event happened in their lifetime or both Jesus and His apostles were liars. This is held despite the fact that Joel describes the same event as “nigh at hand” seven hundred years earlier.

The vast majority of all biblical scholars agree that the Book of Revelation was not written until the close of the first century, long after the fall of Jerusalem. If this were indeed the case, then it would obviously be impossible for the Book of Revelation to be prophesying the demise of a city that was already destroyed.

Revelation was written by John, and scholars typically suggest that it was written during the reign of Domitian (81-96). Irenaeus specifically supports this claim. Additional evidence can be supplied by any number of church fathers.

According to the Anchor Bible Dictionary,

“Victorinus of Pettau states that John was banished (damnatus) by Domitian to a mine or quarry (metallum) on the island of Patmos, where he saw the revelation.”

Additionally, ”Eusebius cites Irenaeus and follows him on the date of Revelation. Jerome states that John was banished (relegatus) by Domitian to the island of Patmos, where he wrote Revelation (De. Vir. Ill. 9).” The majority of scholars argue that the weight of evidence is that both Origen and Clement are making reference to Johannine authorship during the reign of Domitian, that is, at the close of the first century.

Preterism always finds itself in the minority, uses spurious documentation, and falsely interprets the Scripture. The interpretation is not even supported by the very dating of the book of Scripture (Revelation) that they wish to distort.

God created time. He transcends but at the same time works with us by the power of His Spirit. In the Incarnation God entered human history and events. As the creator of time He knows it from beginning to end, if there be. The past is only a human perspective of past time. The future is only our contemplation and hope for what will actually come in time. The only real time is the present.

The context of the Revelation of John is a revelation. A revelation from the Almighty God. It was a prophetic experience certainly where John saw things as they were happening and going into the past. He was however in a prophetic realm and therefore the events were yet to be done. They had not actually happened in actual time.

In fact that is why events have yet to happen in Revelation and other prophecy of Scripture as well. The interpretation of Preterism is off, its understanding of time is off, and importantly the understanding of the very nature of John's Revelation is off as well.

The futurist does not need the dating of the Revelation to be early or late. By acknowledging the later date and its preeminence in scholarship the futurist simply points out the warning sign that reads STOP, or even DEAD END. Needless to say there was probably a few more warning signs before this one though. They just got ignored.