The Acknowledgement of Extremes

Image from www.hyperpreteristarchive.com (Todd Dennis)

THE PURPOSE of this article is to acknowledge and to discuss the fact that extremes do exist within the framework of biblical preterism. [1]  In recent years, a zealous host of “former” preterists has arisen, shielded within the ranks of Futurist evangelical “orthodoxy” and determined to destroy that for which they once rejoiced and gladly endured the reproach and disdain of their contemporaries–the same ones who now congratulate their departure from such a “damnable heresy.”

Articles have been published, books written, and websites erected whose only purpose is the tearing down and criticism of others with whom they now disagree.  While the motives of each one are known only to God, their comments and actions certainly speak for themselves far beyond anything this writer could either quote or document.  Their “root of bitterness” is evident to anyone who cares to investigate the matter more closely (Heb. 12:15).  For some of these “former” preterists, it was the existence of certain extreme positions that caused them to fall away from the truth, instead of finding the place of balance in their own faith and lives.  For others, the seeming coldness of preterist intellectualism rather than increased spirituality caused them to run for the shelter of a more “idealistic” (subjective) theology.  The problematic existence of “anti-ism” and “liberalism” as extremes within the preterist movement have lead some to conclude that Completed Redemption must be rejected and therefore that Futurist theology must necessarily now be true.

DEFINITION OF TERMS

Most readers are not familiar with the proper definition of either “anti-ism” or “liberalism” as it exists within the context of preterist theology.  “Anti-ism” is a form of legalism that binds where God has not bound–elevates matters of opinion into matters of faith.  “Liberalism” comes in under the guise of “grace” or “liberty” and looses where God has bound–transforms matters of faith into matters of opinion.  Preterist examples of “anti-ism” are those who seek to bind their opinions on others regarding such issues as, the nature of the church since 70 C.E., the cessation of certain features of ministry, including baptism and the observance of the Lord’s Supper are no longer valid.  Those who would support the continuation of Evangelists, Pastors and Teachers within the context of the local body of believers (church), including the necessity of baptism and regular observance of the Lord’s Supper are condemned by these who espouse “anti-ism.”  Preterist examples of “liberalism” are manifested by those who have embraced various forms of “Comprehensive Grace” (Universalism), so-called “Beyond Creation Science,” and certain aspects of the “Emergent Church” theology fiasco.  Those who reject such unbiblical concepts are considered “old-timers” and “unenlightened.”  The use of such terms, while not absolute, certainly illustrates the danger and presence of a tendency on the part of some toward imbalance.

Since extremes do exist within biblical preterism, does this imply that one must “throw out the theological baby with the extremist bathwater?”  Not at all.  This behavior is identical to that which existed within the confines of the first-century community of faith by the Judaizers who sought to bind observance of the Mosaic Law on the Gentiles requiring them to first be circumcised when obeying the gospel (Acts. 15:1-29; Gal. 2:1-21).  These brethren were practicing “anti-ism” and binding where God had not bound and therefore were corrected of their error.  Likewise, a faction within the Gentiles existed that misunderstood the “liberty” of the gospel as an excuse to continue in their sinful conduct (Rom. 6:1, 2 et al).  The existence of the two extremes did not and does not negate the balance of the truth that lies between the two.

Preterism has become a virtual “magnet” for everyone with a “hobby-horse” to ride.  Negative encounters with various forms of Futurist evangelical Christianity has sent thousands of people on a perpetual journey with no place upon which to land–so Preterism becomes an attraction for them.  The emotional need for such ones to find theological validation in some “distinctive” viewpoint that sets them apart from their former experiences only serves to perpetuate the problem.  This new crop of “unlearned and unstable” preterist zealots (II Pet. 3:16) are often ” tossed and carried about by all kinds of teachings that change like the wind” (Eph. 4:14), “always studying but are never able to recognize the truth” (II Tim. 3:7).  Those who are mature in the faith ought to remain ever vigilant in affirming those principles associated with “sound doctrine” rather than to allow those carried away into the extremes to perish (Titus 1:9; 2:1).

BLOG-OLATRY

Each person ultimately renders “an account of himself to God” for that which he believes and practices (Rom. 14:12).  There is no escaping the consequences of that which one does in this realm of existence (II Cor. 5:10; Heb. 9:27).  Although the eschatological Judgment Day has long ago past, individual responsibility before God remains as part of the everlasting New Covenant.  The fact that pre-70 C.E. believers already experiencing the fullness and power of the “age to come” understood their accountability provides the foundational basis upon which those living 2,000 later continues to stand (Heb. 6:5).  Those who mistakenly believe that fulfillment implies only an “end” and nothing beyond that time are lacking the proper balance and biblical perspective necessary in order to experience the abundant life God now has to offer.

There is a great debt owed even to the strongest detractors of Completed Redemption.  The ease with which many are prone to embrace whatever doctrinal notion is presented or dangled in front of them is a dangerous problem with respect to the future of past fulfillment.  The extremes threaten to overshadow the glorious truth that lies between.  Not every website or blog that sells or brands itself as a “Preterist” haven of rest, can be trusted as a reliable source of balanced truth.  Not every “man of God” is the genuine article and therefore each person who listens to or reads his teachings must first “prove all things, hold fast that which is good” (I Thess. 5:21).  This generation of believers must take care not to commit “blog-olatry” by accepting anything and everything they see on the Internet.  The old addage, “all that glitters is not gold” is true.

On the other hand, not everything posted by “former” preterists is an accurate portrayal of the facts either.  Sometimes even the most honest refutation of a particular position is clouded beneath the haze of subjective human emotions and experiential disappointments.  To leave behind a whole community of friends and those who were once considered “brethren” being disillusioned and disappointed often leads that one into other forms of depression, imbalance or inconsistency.  There is no future in Futurism in it’s varied forms and many manifestations–Premillennial, Post-millenial, Amillennial or even the more recent Idealist paradigms.

Todd Dennis, makes the following observation about Hyper-Preterism (a recent tag line attributed to the teaching of Completed Redemption):

The HyP teaching that the New Covenant wasn’t in its full establishment until long after the cross event shows how Hyper Preterism is fundamentally different from Christianity as it has always been known. This “AD70 storyline” is foreign to the Bible, and to Christianity as a whole throughout all of its centuries and denominations. Only the Universalists of the last 200 years have embraced this type of AD70-centrism. [2]

Futurists are far more guilty of denying the efficacy of the Cross of Christ and the establishment of the New Covenant than anything ever presented within the ranks of the preterist community.  Calling attention to the extreme position of Universalism misses the point completely.  What about the Futurist who denies the Cross with the implication that salvation remains incomplete and unfulfilled?  Premillennial author Rene Pache, in his classic presentation on The Return of Jesus Christ states:

While his [Christ] absence continues, we are not yet in possession of complete salvation.  Our sorrows continue, and alas! too often our failures also, while the enemy wages a merciless war against us.  But let us take courage, for soon we shall burst into songs of happiness and adoration, when Jesus, going forth again from the heavenly sanctuary, shall come to save us totally and definitively. [3]

Is this the victorious “message of the Cross” proclaimed by apostles living under the expectation of the nearness of the Parousia of Christ of which Todd Dennis and others wish to support?  2,000 years (and counting) of failed promises and unrealized expectations are the heritage which every Futurist must embrace because no other “logical” conclusion than was expressed by Pasche exists within that faulty framework.  How does this view of incomplete salvation magnify the Cross of Christ and produce a sense of joy within the hearts and minds of the waiting multitudes?

The post-Cross and pre-70 C.E. ministry of Jesus Christ was moving toward a stated “end” or “goal”–that of removing the remaining elements of an Old Covenantal system that could not provide forgiveness and salvation for people and into the realm of a New Covenant system where both forgiveness and salvation are a present reality.  Certainly the Cross is the central message of God’s eternal purpose, but just as certainly also was the hope of the Parousia as the consummating act of God in the completion of the process that was set in motion.  Jesus Christ “finished” His work as “the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29), and “began” His work as High Priest and as King of kings and Lord of lords following His resurrection and ascention–entering into the heavenly sancuary to administer the benefits of His sacrificial death on the Cross.  The rest of the New Testament is the “storyline” of consummation–how that precious message was taken to “every nation under heaven” (Acts. 1:8; Rom. 16:26; Col. 1: 23) in fulfillment of the Great Comission (Mark 16:15, 16; Matt. 28:18-20)–“unto the end (consummation) of the age” (Matt. 28:20)

CONCLUSION

There is every reason to acknowledge the existence of extremes with the framework of preterism, without the necessity of denying the truth of the total message of Completed Redemption within the confines of theological balance.  Beyond the theology surrounding preterist teaching is the need now, more than ever before, for believers to actively demonstrate the power of the message as evidenced in their daily walk with the Lord.  Completed Redemption demands that believers, as “partakers of the divine nature” (II Pet. 1:4) produce fruit that is consistent with the reality of that which we now affirm.  The devotional nature of what Completed Redemption means to each of us and how it affects are daily walk of victory in this world is a key element that cannot  be ignored.  The “fruit of righteousness” evidenced in the lives of believers can and must serve as a powerful demonstration of the truth of this message.

Completed Redemption means that believers are better husbands and wives, better mothers and fathers, better children, better employers and employees, and better citizens.  Intellectual arguments and logical presentations are a poor substitute for actual relationship with God that is lived out in our daily interactions with people of the world and at home.  Discussions about “time statements” and speculations about other points of doctrine provides little comfort for the millions whose marriages are being consumed, whose lives are being destroyed by sexual immorality, drug and alcohol abuse, homelessness and poverty.  The true message of Jesus Christ alone in the context of all He has accomplished has the power to change lives and to “bind up the brokenhearted”–as was the original intention.

A final word for those whose only purpose in life has become the destruction of so-called Hyper-Preterism:  Find the peace of God and devote your efforts to something positive, something that builds the Kingdom of God instead of seeking to destroy and undermine the faith of others who have gone on their way rejoicing in the reality of Completed Redemption.  A sad as it may seem, there will aways be “former” preterists who somehow lost their sense of joy and who tumbled back into the darkness of the “almost” but “not quite” of Futurist eschatology.

As long as the centrality of the Cross is championed by preterists, the eschatology will remain in balance.  It is just as wrong to “see” 70 C.E. in every verse of the Bible as it is in ignoring the historical significance of the events that transpired historically.  The Cross was both a historical and a redemptive event–the two things are not mutually exclusive.  It was God who chose to interject and the manifest Himself in human affairs and history.  The Bible cannot be seen as “anti-historical” anymore than it can be seen as “anti-spiritual.”  To two concepts operate in complete harmony and balance.  May God give us the wisdom to preach the full and complete gospel of Christ each and every day!

FOOTNOTES

[1]  Biblical Preterism is the teaching that the second or final coming of Jesus Christ, the Resurrection of the dead, and the Judgment occurred with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 C.E.  More accurate terms such as “Accomplished Salvation” or “Completed Redemption” are preferred by KINGDOM VICTORY since the emphasis is correctly placed on the finished work of the Cross of Christ and those predicted events that would accompany the consummation or fulfillment of that work through the establishment of the New Covenant (Heb. 13:20).

[2] Todd Dennis, AD70 Storyline Fundamentally Different from Historic Christianity (Hyper-Preterist Archive) 01/09/09.

[3]  Rene Pasche, The Return of Jesus Christ (Condensed Edition) (Chicago:  Moody Bible Institute:  1975). 26.