I was contacted recently by an author whose website is devoted to exposing the errors within preterism (www.preteristheresy.wordpress.com). The methodology employed throughout the weblog is that of taking a sentence or paragraph from a preterist author and then contrasting the statements with his own understanding of the Scriptures. Although the identity of the writer of the blog is not revealed, it is readily apparent by the tone of his comments that his former experience from within preterism was not pleasant one.
One point of contrast raised by the author relates to the importance of time and history as it pertains to the fulfillment of Bible prophecy:
Revelation is about the revealing of the removal of sin and death (not the removal itself), and the revealing of life in his kingdom (not that the event gave eternal life ). Sin and death is the issue, and can not be destroyed or removed by historical events. This removal or possession can not be a past or future event that is removed by historical events. The destruction of Jerusalem did not place you in the new covenant, nor did it remove your sin, death or separation from God. If it did, there would be no reason to be born again. You were or have been in bondage to the flesh (covenant of death represented by the Mosaic Covenant) and if you are in Christ, you have been born again to the New Covenant of the Spirit. How is this process a past event, how did the old pass in 70ad, when you died to the old by being born again.
There is a deliberate attempt to discount the importance of and to distinguish between the time of the event and the event itself. It might be agreed that the purpose of Divine Revelation is the “revealing of the removal of sin and death” but it must also be seen that corresponding action must take place in the realm of space and time that verifies that which was revealed. Near the beginning of the earthly ministry of the Lord Jesus, John the Baptizer was heard to proclaim, “Behold, the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). Although Jesus was “the Lamb of God” even at the moment John the Baptizer uttered those words, the action of ‘taking away the sin of the world’ did not occur actually until the sacrificial shedding of the blood of Jesus Christ on the Cross. The words of John were the revelation, the Cross was the action that accomplished what had been revealed.
The author attempts to displace “historical events” as unnecessary to the fulfillment of the redemptive purpose of God–something that undermines the authenticity and integrity of the word of God itself. God, although timeless in nature, “from everlasting to everlasting” (Psa. 90:1, 2; Isa. 57:15), has chosen to work within the limitations of space and time in order to accomplish His redemptive purposes. Jesus came into the world, “when the fullness of the time came” (Gal. 4:4). The earthly ministry of Jesus began when “the time was fulfilled” (Mark 1:15). The completion of God’s plan of redemption would occur during the “administration of the fullness of times” (Eph. 1:10). The elements pertaining to the Jewish system of things would only continue until the “time of reformation” (Heb. 9:10) arrived. Without the historical setting, the happening cannot happen!
It is the historical event that sets the stage for those who benefit from the fulfillment of that event. If Jesus did not die at some point in time, then the event never occurred at all. Does the event save us? The redemptive event provides the basis upon which every believer obtains his or her salvation. The emphasis on the historical nature of the event is not meant to overshadow the purpose of the event, only to draw attention to the fact that God keeps His promises and fulfills His word. The history and the accomplished purpose are not mutually exclusive in nature.
God, acting as the Master Artist took the brush of His power and painted the grand and glorious portrait of redemption on the canvas of history. God accomplished what He said He would do when He said He would do it! That which He set out to accomplish, foretold in the pages of His word, He demonstrated through Divine intervention into the affairs of fallen humanity. It did not return to Him void or without the expected results having occurred (Isa. 55:9-11).
Today we appropriatethat which has already been provided for us. Is it a valid criticism that preterist authors sometimes discuss more about what verses meant instead of what they mean? Perhaps. Imbalances ought to be corrected, not rejected. Negating the historical importance of the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 for the sake of imagined spirituality is not a valid solution. Devoting more time to studying and discussing the “what now?” aspect of accomplished salvation will bring a genuine sense of spirituality into the lives of preterists everywhere. The corporate aspect of salvation does not negate the necessity of individual response. Salvation is a group plan with individual benefits!
From a physical standpoint alone, what could a dying man hanging on a piece of wood actually accomplish for the benefit of anyone? Likewise, from a physical point of view, how could the events related to some army destroying a city centuries ago in a remote area of the world have accomplished anything of value? It was the spiritual aspect of the Cross that had meaning then and now. It was the spiritual aspect of the destruction of Jerusalem that had meaning then and now. Without the spiritual aspect, history is just history–nothing more, nothing less, nothing else. Remember history is His-Story and ours!
Larry D. Siegle
PRETERIST 
#1 by preteristheresy on January 3, 2008 - 11:07 pm
Hey Larry, thanks for your review. I have attached a link to my comments and response to your article. God Bless.
http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/2008/01/larry-siegel.html
#2 by Frankista on January 4, 2008 - 4:59 pm
Larry why in the world are you spending time responding to an anonymous face or cowards with an obscure blog i never head of? I don’t even want to read this because it’s a waste of time.
If you think you will change the minds of hatemongers think again. You are also giving this idiot the attention he wants.
#3 by Brian Simmons on January 7, 2008 - 7:13 pm
Larry,
I just read your recent article. As the man said, Wheeeew-ee! So, let’s suppose I never heard of Jesus Christ in my life. Someone gives me a Bible, I read it, and accept Christ by faith. Yet I’ll never know the real truths of Christianity until I know what happened in A.D. 70?? So, the Bible is really not enough.. This position is extremely strange, especially considering that most of its advocates claim to be “Sola Scriptura.” This means that the final truths of our faith are not actually in the Bible, but in the mouths of its interpreters. Without history, you really cannot know the truth. I suppose that according to this theory, history really does matter, Larry! It matters more than the Bible, for F.P.’s use it to change the Bible’s teachings. Let us just be honest about what we’re doing. F.P.’s have every right to believe this, but they must stop claiming that they are ‘purely Biblical.’ Actually, they rely on history and tradition, in the same sense the Roman Catholics do.
Peace and Health,
Brian
P.S.– Please do not take offence. I am just pointing out what I perceive as one of the main flaws of the F.P. system. I will continue to point this out at every opportunity I get. For it really demonstrates that the F.P. system is false.
#4 by preteristheresy on January 8, 2008 - 7:59 pm
Larry, I do appreciate your comments. I look forward to further discussing these issues with you. Feel free to comment anytime.
After reading your comments, I realize that you are still confusing spiritual things with non-spiritual things. You state “The historicity of the events described in the text and the spiritual meanings attached to them are not mutually exclusive.” “My objection is not with the SPIRITUAL application” This demonstrates the very problem preterism is facing. Have we narrowed the focus of the spiritual so much as to call it (the antitype, the eternal) a mere application of the shadow? This is completely backward from how I view this, and is a quite different point of view. I ask you, what is the application, the shadow or the things that cast the shadows? So how can the Spiritual be called an application? History is the application of the eternal spiritual unseen substance.
I find it interesting that the very arguments that you use against me are the same as the Judaizers used against Paul. They maintained that the law of Moses was important. That those elements would never pass away because they were ordained by God. That the types were actually the righteousness. That the invisible is all well and good, but it must be anchored to the Law. How ironic indeed! The antitype (eternal) exists totally independent of the type (temporal and visible). After all, the work was complete before the world was created. It just remained to be seen. Like I said in this article, how much more should we glorify that which is seen. If anything it must be put it in its proper place. We must realize it is not the same as that which can’t be seen. Type/AntiType, Shadow/Light, Seen/Not Seen
Despite the fact that ALL FP is a utter mess (which is one reason for starting this blog), I see holding a Preterist view can only lead to heretical teachings and this blog is to demonstrate how and why.
My beef with Preterism is three fold.
1.) They claim spiritual things are past events. Or they claim spiritual things are really just historical events. Using every means possible to uncover hidden timelines in scripture (or over exaggerating time statements) just to prove a meaningless point.
2.) They teach that the transition from old to new ends and begins in 70ad despite the fact that not one passage of scripture proves this is so. One must deduct or infer outside of scriptures and to maintain God did not tell us everything we needed to know is unimaginable. There can only be one simple reason why. 70AD IS NOT THE FOCAL POINT.
3.) The implications of #1 and #2. #1 Paul condemns those who claimed that a spiritual resurrection was a past event. This seems to encompass more than just the resurrection, especially since the Parousia, Judgment are linked at the hip. If someone is claiming the parousia, harvest, judgment, and resurrection to be spiritual, how can they be past events, yet still be ongoing? If it these things are indeed fulfilled spiritual, they are fulfilled within the heart. Thus they can not be past events. And because of #2, of making historical lines where things end and things begin, Universalism is the result. Because the old passes (representing flesh), and the new begins (whereby ALL are now in the new). This is the problem!!!! This blog is FULL of claims that Full Preterist have made saying things ended and begin in 70ad. And to hear them moan and groan about Universalism is no better or worse that Bill Clinton’s “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.”
There is no avoiding it UNLESS, 70ad is removed from being the transition point and we gain a better understanding of what those spiritual THINGS we have called historical events really are all about. When one does this, they are forced to NO LONGER BE A PRETERIST. Only then I think we will be on the same page.
I hate to tell you that it isn’t not me who is failing to seize on the inheritance!!!! By this I mean, holding on to the old visible things so hard with white knuckled intensity. Especially when we are told to flee those things and accept that the substance CANNOT be restricted to the world. ie. the earth is but a footstool.
God Bless
http://preteristheresy.blogspot.com/2008/01/larry-siegel.html
#5 by mellentos on January 9, 2008 - 4:32 am
Brian
The “historical” events only serve the purpose of confirming the truth of God’s word and are not a substitute for the truth itself. Knowing what occurred in A.D. 70 is NOT essential for salvation, or even for having a relationship with the Lord, it is simply a testimony of the fact that Jesus said what he said and did what he said he would do. Millions will die futurists and still be saved (although after they die I am certain they will THEN become preterists) (SMILE).
I would maintain that believers can live and think differently about themselves, the world and about other people because of understanding the truth of preterism. It is a change of perspective FROM waiting in hope, to living in reality. I would rather have the SUBSTANCE than lurk in the SHADOW waiting for the arrival of the “sweet-bye and bye”