Preterism and Full Preterism | Doug Wilson

In this episode of Ask Doug, pastor Douglas Wilson answers the question, "What are your thoughts on full preterism?"

[Razaiel]

Not a full preterist, but I do believe that the Olivet Discourse & Jesus's statement in Matthew 26:64 were fulfilled in AD 70.

[DanielThompson]

Being a Preterist, that is a perfect explanation. First book to read, “Last Days according to Jesus” R. C Sproul

[Appregator]

I found Bruce Gore's very detailed YT lectures Apocolypse in Space and Time very comprehensive on understanding the book of Rev. He also sees Rev as being written pre 70 AD and he too had to be persuaded, before coming to that revelation.

[evantheorthodox]

The 3 books Wilson mentioned are fantastic.... Read Wilson's "When the Man Comes Around", a great explanation of the book of Revelation.

[AP-digu]

Partial preterism definitely has substance, but I personally just can't get on board with full preterism.

[mkshffr]

The problem futurists have (and I was one) often breaks down to not understanding apocalyptic literary forms as well as a lack of historical perspective. I think there are some matters of eschatology that will always be a bit shrouded in mystery but that is not out of character for God to keep some things to himself.

[caedmonnoeske]

I think the problem is that most American Christians somehow think that Preterism, whether full or partial, is somehow outside the realms of orthodoxy. This is NOT the case!

[andrebias]

It looks very unorthodox but that is where scripture would take you,

[douglasedwards]

I really loved this explanation. I am a partial preterist

[ELLIOTADRIANCONTE]

Good explanation. I would be interested in hearing more specific detail, which passages you believe have a preterist explanation and which don't.

[aln.]

I would highly recommend "The Days of Vengeance: An Exposition of the Book of Revelation " by David Chilton / Dominion Press

[FAITHandLOGIC]

"The problem with Preterism is that is has great explanatory power. It explains a lot of passages very well."

That's a problem? 🙄

[marij]

What about: "Absent from the body. Present with the Lord?"    II Corinthians 5:6-8
"Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, while we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord: (For we walk by faith, not by sight:) We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord."

[solitairecat]

Many verses say Yahshua was returning soon, in that generation, like in Matt 16:28, 24:30 to 34, and Rev 1:1 to 7.

[supernova]

Thanks for the clarity and very intriguing topic.

[JohnO]

Doug Wilson Rocks!!
I have the dvd he did with Christopher Hitchens as well as the debate with Dan Barker.

[russelldavis]

I am fairly new to this concept. I am reading Lynn Louise Schuldt's older book titled "Prophecy Paradox". In addition to referencing every claim made, she gives a lot of history on the Jewish Wars. Her's is a classic preterist book.

[RetiOrchid]

It certainly wasn't a "shiny hammer" in my experience. 'Twas very cautiously, even reluctantly approached, with a wide theological understanding essentially "Reformed", with justification by grace alone upon faith alone right at the heart of the gospel...Like many positions (e.g. "Reformed"), "full preterism" isn't monolithic, and I too am sensitive to certain concerns such is Christology. But here's the thing: every element of what put together equals Full Preterism has shown up in part in different Partial positions historically. And simply, there is no hermeneutic warrant for sorting NT passages into "AD70" vs "yet to be" that isn't begging the question. If you stick to redemptive historical covenants and a biblical redemptive history (yet with an awareness of the principles that are inherent in them per a sound understanding of "theological" covenants - again, not a monolithic treatment that latter) and realize that Paul, as he stated, preached "nothing but the hope of Israel" with regards "the resurrection" (Acts 24, 26, 28) and that that hope is the consummation/establishment of the New Covenant inheritance (resurrection from the Adamic curse having received post-Judgment justification by the gift of righteousness) - that the eschatology of all the Law and Prophets, Psalms, Job, synoptics, letters, epistles and finally Revelation is one and the same, and the timing and nature accord, there it is. For my part, I believe in the ongoing humanity of Christ, as well as his deity, and that the resurrection/kingdom inheritance won by virtue of the atonement subsists in Him. I also believe when those in Christ die, they obtain their physical resurrection body in consummate form, no gap. But just as our bodies cycle through a whole new set of cells/atoms every 7 years (quicker for many parts), so which set of atoms mixed with other things will a physical resurrection body so-dependent obtain(?) the biblical heart of the doctrine of resurrection has always been spiritual - that is, to be raised from the dead spiritually by virtue of justification unto reconciliation to God - so everything physical depends on that. It's not an either-or, it's a question of logical priority : obtain the spiritual seed, see the fruit in time. In essence, my view, while full preterist of a sort, even entails a (spiritual, gospel, not structures of this world) postmillenial-esque "increase"/manifestation of fruit. And the picture at the end of Revelation, per Isa 65, 66 from whence comes the "New creation" language (and strong Partial Preterists like Edwards called this present earth a new [covenant] heavens and earth, too) isn't the same as what is demanded by a "what appears" reading and expectation. But it is representative of a covenantal reading. In reality, seen properly, in my eyes this is the furthest view from a Gnostic/Platonic Dualist conception of soteriology, eschatology, and anthropology, very much in tune with the ancient Hebraic and Old Testament conception of "the body" (both personally - "man is a body who has been made a living soul/spirit, not a spirit who has a morally corrupt body" - a frequent asceticism in theology - and corporately - "in Adam"/the body of death/sin/a broken covenant of works - "in Christ"/raised, alive from that death, a covenant of grace"). That is, rather than foisting an essential dichotomy between the spiritual and the material, it makes the distinction properly, and grounds the physical properly in the spiritual. No disjunction or "second redemption", as it were, for the physical. And an ongoing salvation of people, an ongoing living fellowship with God in Christ (no veil of the Law after judgment!, tabernacles fulfilled) and grace upon grace as new creations for eternity (forever time not a "disjunct" from "time"). It is supposed to be better in our experience and conception today, I believe, and eschatology is not supposed to be fractured, complicated, and all over. It's just meant to be understood as the redemptive history of soteriology, the establishment of the covenant kingdom of Christ with the Father, saved man raised as sons, heirs of God, joint-heirs with Christ, with a glorious future and ongoing fruit of it because of a finished redemption.

[gloryman]

I am a full preterist now and started out as a partial preterist, but I kept persevering with the more "difficult" aspects of the full position and I'll tell you it was worth it. For example, when you dig into studying the resurrection, you discover that the problem is not with the FP position but with the fact that (1) we have been heavily seeded with futurism and (2) we come face to face with a decidedly different culture (ancient Judaism) which is far different than our modern American culture. When you take a serious look at the "resurrection" in the New Testament it is saturated with a "spiritual' resurrection position. For example, "You died and your life is hidden with life in God." and "It is no longer I that live, but Christ." Salvation is resurrection! You died with Him and you were raised with Him. Jesus said the "flesh profits nothing." We're redeemed spiritually which is the center of the issue. From there you have the opportunity to overcome everything including physical death! Remember...Adam died spiritually instantly, but it took almost a millennium for his body to come to an end. There are good teachers on the more difficult aspects of the FP position and not so good ones, and also still more areas that need to be studied but as long as you keep with the two basic pillars: time stamps and audience relevance you will remain anchored. Keep on persevering. God bless!

[randomdude]

I was a full preterist for years. It was only by the grace of God that my heart was softened. Otherwise I never would have known how far I had drifted. I now see full preterism as horrible. It strips the promises of Jesus right out of the NT.