Preterism Books

Jorge Medina's "Upholding Our Future Hope" is a book every Christian should read, from the new convert to the "seasoned veteran." This book exposes the horrific dangers of the cultic views and beliefs of Preterism. If your Pastor or any fellow believer has been denying the physical Kingdom of God, or the literal, physical FUTURE return of our Lord Jesus Christ, then he/she may very well be a Preterist! This book is just the armour you need to protect yourself from the heresy of Preterism.

Over the past year or so I've read many a preterist book. Sadly, I've tended to go for the lengthier works. As anyone interested in eschatology knows, it's a complicated subject, and often the longer treatment is necessary. I say sadly because it was late in the day that I came across Don K Preston's books.

The first book of his I read was "The Last Days Identified". At a mere 100 plus pages I wasn't expecting much. Yet it took me longer to read that book than in took me to read a book three time its size. Why you might ask? Because there's just so much information in it. Don's style is right to the point. He doesn't mess around with long, rambling introductions, and throw speculation after speculation at you. He deals with the facts with such immediacy, and with such force, that his conclusions are mind boggling to the uninitiated.

In this book, as with previous efforts, Don takes a genuinely unique approach to preterism. It's not just a rehash of the basic preterist proof texts, rearranged and revamped (which is the downfall of many preterist books on the market today). It's basically an examination of the book of Revelation, as it pertains to the identification of Babylon the Great, also touching upon Paul's epistles, and the book of Lamentations. There's also a section at the back which deals with potential objections to his presentation.

All in all, a book ideal for the newcomer and old pro alike, who I'm confident will find many new angles in Preston's work. Highly recommended.

It is impressive just how much Preston has packed into this relatively small book. Tieing OT and NT scripture together to weave indisputable proof that the "last days" (last hour, end of the age, etc. referred to in the Bible, refers to only one time in history, and it isn't in our future.

This workman's logical and articulate handling of the sharp and indestructible plow of Scripture will break up the hardest, rocky sod of popular presuppositions regarding the last days. Critical, yet teachable Christians and perhaps non-Christians will finish it and rejoice in a positive and bright new world view. Don Preston has an impressively deep grasp of this subject.
Alan Allison

Look to lighthouseworldministries-
dotcom for the DVDs and VHSs. Don
K does another magesterial work
for Western civilization here!
The video is simple outstanding.
Pick Up On It!

Don Preston employs his savant like gift of biblical observation and his obviously indefatigable efforts to present a thorough integration of prophecy and fulfillment. It must have taken many years to accrue such a wealth of insights into this important subject of eschatology. It remains to be tested, yet I am willing to wager this work is an irrefutable presentation of full preterism.
My excitement did wane a bit as Preston addressed Universalism in the Addendum. While he did rightly oppose it, he is weak in soteriology. How I wish that the Reformed church would profit from his eschatology as I wish he would profit from their soteriology. He would benefit from Gary Long's "Definite Atonement" and John Murray's "Redemption Accomplished and Applied" regarding the nature and the extent of the atonement.
Finally, his challenge to antinomian preterists in the post-Parousia age was excellent. He made the case for holiness with his usually keen observation and adroit use of logic.
Overall, it is a must read for all Christians; in particular those who deem preterism to be heretical. If you intend on controverting this work, you have Sisyphean task before you.

II Peter chapter of the bible to
date. Another winner from Don K.
Preston. Pick Up On It!

I highly recommend Don K Preston's
books. I listen to Don on John Ander-
son's Voice of Reason show, 9.330
mhz, shrotwave one (also on gcnlive-
dotcom), Sundays, 8-9 p.m. (The show
in it's entirity runs from 7-11 p.m.
Sunday nights, EST. All of Don Preston's
works are outstanding. They 'Study to
show thyself approved of god'.

For scriptural accuarcy, you really
can't do much, if at all, better than
Don K Preston!

The theological aberration that is hyper-preterism (hereafter HP) continues to be a thorn in the side of pastors and ministries whose members have been affected by the publications and web pages touting their position. In short, the HP position, called "Full Preterism" by its proponents, is the notion that Jesus returned in 70 AD and that all biblical prophecy has been fulfilled and that believers are now enjoying the benefits of the New Heaven and New Earth (for a fuller examination of this view from a premillennial perspective, see this reviewers article, "International Preterist Association: Reformation or Retrogression?" in MSJ 15:1 [Spring 2004], 39-58 at [...]

While this movement has not made significant inroads within those ministries holding to a futurist premillennial position, it has been a bane in Reformed circles and among those of the traditional or classic preterist mode of prophetic interpretation and within the historicist position. This current work is a series of essays by leading Reformed scholars (both of the theonomist and non-theonomist position) pointedly critiquing the hyper-preterist position on several fronts. There are seven essays by Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., Charles E. Hill, Richard L. Pratt, Keith A. Mathison, Simon J. Kistemaker, Douglas Wilson and Robert B. Strimple.

The work is well constructed with excellent footnotes and contains useful (but brief) indexes of names, subjects, scripture and ancient literature. The work lacks a bibliography, which in our view would have been a helpful addition, so the reader is left the cull out the references from the footnotes. The contributors center their arguments against the writings of perhaps the four leading proponents of HP'ism Max King, Timothy King, Ed Stevens and John Noe (the last two of which operate the International Preterist Association).

Mathison, the general editor, admits that the contributors "to this volume so not completely agree in their interpretations of every eschatological text" (p. 155). He notes "some of the contributors are amillenialists, while some are postmillennialists" (ibid). All of the contributors are united against the HP position, because, as Strimple states, "In order to maintain their heretical doctrine of the resurrection, the hyper-preterists have devised heretical doctrines of creation, man, sin and its consequences, the persona and redemptive work of Christ, and the nature of salvation. Much more than eschatology narrowly defined is at stake in this debate" (p. 352).

Several of the essays are especially noteworthy. Gentry's examination of the historic church creeds as over against the Hp position is particularly well done (pp. 1-61). He thoroughly debunks the HP constant claim of "No creed but the Bible" (p. 61). He states that the adherent of HP "feigns `scholarship' and claims `consistency' as a lure to theologically immature Christians" (ibid). Interestingly hard line fundamentalists have often used the same arguments to keep their own sub-biblical teachings above Scriptural and theological scrutiny.

In the chapter on "Eschatology in the Wake of Jerusalem's Fall," (63-119) Hill takes the "bible" of the HP interpretative scheme, J. Stewart Russell's Parousia, to task. The Parousia was originally published anonymously and then with Russell's name (London: Daldy, Isbiter & Co., 1878) and (London: T. Fisher Unwin, 1887). Besides influencing Milton Terry and his methodology toward prophetic interpretation in his Biblical Hermeneutics, Russell's work made little impact and was largely out of print for nearly 100 years, until Walter Hibbard of Great Christian Books (who himself had adopted the HP position) arranged with Baker Book House to reprint the work in 1983. Hill notes that Russell's work is "as brilliant as it is bizarre," and that, "his solution [to the rapture] is almost too fantastic to deserve a response" (p. 92). Hill demonstrates from early church history that Russell's 70 A.D. "rapture" simply could not have occurred.

The work of Kistemaker on HP and their view of the Book of Revelation is also noteworthy as he deals with their schema of prophecy, but is most decisive on dealing with the key issue of the dating of Revelation. HP fails entirely if the traditional or "late date" of the composition of the book is correct. He notes, "both the evidence from Revelation itself and the accounts of the church father favor a late date for the writing" (p. 236). The work of Mathison on the "Eschatological Time Texts of the New Testament" is also a highlight of this work (even for those of us who take a dispensational and futurist approach to those texts). Strimple's chapter on HP and the resurrection is a devastating expose to the HP heresy on this vital doctrine. The one weak chapter in this work is that of Douglas Wilson. While it does not display some of his notable theological oddities, it really does not say anything that Gentry had not said in his chapter. The notations are weak and it reads more like a sermon than a theological essay.

That minor criticism aside this is a valuable and much needed work exposing the heresy of Hyper-Preterism. Even approaching the subject from eschatological and interpretative viewpoints we might disagree with, we agree that this is a common enemy of the church for both the Covenantal and Dispensational evangelical. This is a work that pastors should avail themselves of as the HP error continues to creep into assemblies through those influenced by their material and Internet activity. We highly recommend it.

If you are thinking of buying into hyper-preterism, then I think this book is a worthy purchase and read, especially for Strimple's chapter on the resurrection. This, I believe, is at heart in the issue with hyper-preterism. The FACT that Jesus Christ, the second Adam, rose bodily (self-same body he was crucified, dead, and buried with), bringing immortality to light and all who are in the Messiah will be like him settles the issue.

With that said, I had to give it three stars because I don't believe this book quite hits the mark for several reasons. First, the conglomeration of authors do not set forward a positive eschatology. Obviously, the point of this book is not to positively set forth an eschatology in toto, but to critique hyper-preterism without really offering an alternative is not that helpful. The critique would have been strengthened by positively setting forth an eschatlogy. Second, the conglomeration of authors personally offer different perspectives on eschatology. For example, Ken Gentry, whose chapter on the creeds is excellent and well worthwhile, is a strong advocate of a pre-ad 70 dating for the book of Revelation and, as far as I know, so is Keith Mathison. Then why would Keith Mathison, the editor of this work, include a chapter by Kistemaker arguing, at least in part, for a late date of Revelation? Granted, I can accept a late date for Revelation and this would do away with hyper-preterism, but to a layman versed in basic eschatology you are left asking, "What does this intramural debate mean to these authors?" Third, I wish the authors would have done more Biblical and exegetical work. Strimple's chapter, I believe, does the best job interacting with hyper-preterists and exegeting 1 Corinthians 15 as well. Mathison's chapter touches on this, but the other chapters aren't as thorough as I would've liked. The other chapters are all good, worthwhile reads, but if you are a hyper-preterist or thinking about hyper-preterism, then I really don't think these chapters are as convincing as they could be.

Overall, I give the book three stars. It is good, but not great.

The book is generally THE WORST HUNKA SKUBALOS EVER WRITTEN. Of course it is not perfect, what book is (except the Bible, of course)? I think the biggest weakness was having ANY chapters on the creeds; None would suffice. Strimple's and Hill's chapters were probably the best EXAMPLES OF SKUBALOS. What is interesting is that Hill shows that the first and second generation of Christians still expected a future comming! Why would Jude's grandson, for example, not know that it [the second comming] already happened READ SAM FROST'S "MISPLACED HOPE" YOU SILLY PINATA
? Indeed, why would the majority of 1st and 2nd century Christians not know a HUGE eschatological event like this??? The counter is absurd. A non-Biblical assumption that the first century Christians fell into some sort of theological stupper (examine this claim with Ephesians 4 and the *building* up of the CHURCH).
I am thankful for the above posts since they show how intellectually silly these hyPO-preterists are. Did everyone notice the overheated way in which they typed? They serve as a prime example of docrine affecting life. If, as the hyper-preterists say, we are already sanctified...then why strive?

Finally, hypO-preterism has been destroyed by the "transcendental argument against hyper preterism"

I felt like a knight on a white horse had come to my rescue after reading this book. Gentry's description of hyperpreterists as combative, naive, millitant, etc. rang perfectly true -- I should know, I'm married to one. But instead of using frothing emotion and schizophrenic theological reasoning he stays on track with calm reasoning.

I've often felt that hyper preterists used the same "logic" as JW's and this book cited many reasons I hadn't even thought of. My main beefs with hyperpreterism are: 1. there is no love in their attack to win converts. They're preterists before Christians and although they have no time to tell an unbeliver about the gospel, they'll spend every waking minute trying to argue everyone they know into preterism. 2. There is no accountability so they are free to sin (my husband is a hyper Calvanist too, surprised?) 3. Although their interpretation of a scripture *may* be true, they never admit that an opposing interpretation may be true. It's either A or B. Which one, they demand? Does it mean A or B? When the real answer is C but they never allow that choice to be entertained.

Anyway, I'm grateful for this book -- not that it would change anything if my husband read it. He is not willing to change his position for any reason or reasoning. I'm glad to see one reviewer was saved from this growing cult by the book.

(...) Denies the perspicuity of scripture. http://www.pharisees.org
This book edited by Dr. Mathison IS FULL OF THE DOCTRINES OF DEMONS. The severE theologians who have contributed to this work really expose HypO-Preterism as a dangerous and heretical movement.

If you want to COMMIT THE "2000 years" FALLACY of ESCHATOLOGICAL Christian WAFFLING, maybe HypO-Preterism is for you! If you prefer a biblical and EXEGETical approach to Christianity, steer clear of the HYPOS. Mathison has SHOWN THIS in this book!

Besides a decided arrogance among many of its proponents, HypO-Preterism is trying to DIVIDE the Christian faith. They are deNYING that the Second Coming of Christ occurred in the first century -- but that nobody noticed it! Though the Apostles taught about Jesus' Return the entire church has missed it until this Internet-based cult pointed it out to us.

The various chapters in Mathison's book APPROVE this new movement for its many errors. Dr. Strimple shows that the movement has several different views of the resurrection of believers. The only thing uniting their various views is that they all deny the BIBLICAL resurrection of the dead! Even though this is so clearly taught in Scripture and so widely declared in Christian history.

This book also shows that the new movement is recommending a new Christian holiday: A celebration of the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70!

It shows that the movement is also denying that human death is a result of sin coming into the world through Adam's fall. The Preterists believe that death was a part of God's creation from the beginning in Eden!

Read the reviews that speak POSItively of this book. Notice how difficult the reviews are to understand, how little sense they make, and how mean-spirited they are. I have heard many stories of Christians who have had people from this movement try to infiltrate their churches. I now see from some of the POSITIVE reviews the attitude that flows from this movement.

HOPEFULLY DR. MATHISON WILL NOT INFILTRATE YOUR CHURCH!!!

PHYSICAL DEATH SHALL CONTINUE FOREVER

THE HUMAN ENEMY IS NOT SEPARATION FROM OUR BODIES

THE SEPARATION FROM GOD IS THE DEATH THAT IS ETERNAL

JESUS "APPEARED A SECOND TIME W/O DEALING WITH SIN TO BRING THOSE
WHO EAGERLY WAITED" SALVATIon.

For some years now there has been a serious need for a Biblical attempt at a refutation of a true, scriptural teaching that has been gaining adherents among the theologically reforming.

This is not it!

That teaching, commonly known as Preterism, proclaims that the Final Advent has been completely misunderstood by 99.9% of ALL theologians over the past 2000 years. We show from scripture that it is to be totally identified with the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, and hence there is NO future (we would say "third") coming of Christ.

Although advocates of this view enlist the names of men like Spurgeon, John Owen, and Philip Mauro into their ranks, the fact is, there are many more Bible scholars and theologians that have advocated the doctrines of Preterism as they are currently propagated. And for GOOD reason: this teaching spells the end of Pharisaical, unbiblical Christianity. This is one reason why Hypo-Preterism is in a doctrinal decay, with new eisegesis, ever more bizarre teachings, and heretofore unknown "discoveries" from the pages of Scripture.

Dr. Keith Mathison and Dr. Ken Gentry are to be condemned for their efforts at dividing Christians in order to keep their jobs as Pharisees and HIGH Priests of the obsolete Old Covenant.

Some of the finest Bible scholars and theologians in today's Reforming churches show quite clearly the serious problems with unorthodox Hypo-Preterism. Potential buyers should not be swayed by scurrilous attacks on the book and its authors by the Hypo-Preterists who have posted insulting and condescending reviews. Here is a book by people stuck in the sixteenth century and unwilling to reform. It is eisegetical, unsound, and denies the perspicuity of scripture. The contributors brazenly ignore the fact that you can't prove anything from history.

Gentry and Mathison show themselves to be creedolaters without shame. Along with the positive reviews, Gentry and Mathison dismantle the Bible WORD by WORD.

So Mathison and Gentry went to Whitefield in Florida, what accreditation does that seminary have?

Save your money and wait for a book that exegetes scripture

To accept the view of this book, one must believe that Jesus and the apostles either did not speak the Word of God, or that they spoke in error, by the Spirit of God. Either way, it would mean that Jesus wasn't God--heresy #1. Whatever the reason, to believe that this book is right is to reject the full inerrancy and God-spiration of Scripture. Either the Bible is right, or Spargimino is right. If Spargimino is right, then it's time to find another religion, for then Christianity would have a book of deceit for its foundation.

Those who critique orthodox preterism tend to have the same problem: They read the Bible as though it was written yesterday and for them personally. Spargimino got a doctorate at seminary, but somehow managed not to learn his own lesson, instructing us that the Bible does need to be read with a first century eye. He never got that "eye" himself -- to see what I mean, check out Caird's excellent work, Language and Imagery of the Bible.

Much of the book is spent arguing that a preterist view necessitates a "replacement theology" (the church is the new Israel and subject to all its blessings; Israel as it now exists is irrelevant -- why not say rather that Israel has been expanded to include Christians?) and leads to reconstructionism and a total preterist view. Funny, because I don't subscribe to any of these views and see no need to. Space is also devoted to Spargimino lamenting that when he believed preterism, it made it impossible for him to see any real significance in the day's headlines. Ironically, that is the very problem that preterists: the use of the newspaper as a guide to Biblical interpretation, with the result that dispensational eschatologists have fallen like a line of dominoes, from Lindsey to Van Impe to Whisenant. Will the lesson ever be learned? Not as long as writers like Spargimino let their hearts rule their heads when it comes to exegesis.

This shows in the way Spargimino responds to preterist points on the Olivet Discourse. Preterist exegeis and theory is described in such terms as "evasion" [24], "pathetic" [27], "blatant wresting of Scripture...[preterists must believe] God gave prophecy to confuse, not to reveal," [130] and so on; it's just the same argument: We need to read passages like Olivet in a "literal, straightforward manner" rather than grasping it in its context as symbolic apocalyptic -- which Spargimino disparingly refers to as reading it as "gross exaggerations", which is the sort of spin-doctor description we would expect from uneducated persons who advise us to read the Bible like a newspaper. Yes, apocalyptic WAS "exaggeration" of a sort (actually, more like symbolic excess) -- and that's how those who read it in the first century understood and interpreted it.

When actually confronting preterist arguments on Olivet at least, Spargimino often operates under the shortchange principle. The word "world" in Matt. 24:14 was the word used for the Roman Empire, not the whole earth. Spargimino's response: 1) To the NT writers, the Roman world was the entire world (which only would prove the preterist view! -- but it is false anyway; nations like India and China were known of, but not considered part of the Roman oikoumene; 2) preterists give no way for God to refer to the entire earth and would miss any such message (which is simply false, as Spargimino would know had he read DeMar carefully; the oik-word is a specific term, whereas Jesus' "ends of the earth" command offers a much broader delimitation). Isaiah could not refer in Ch. 13 to the 539 BC destruction of Babylon, in part because the Medes and Persians came from the east, where Isaiah says they will come from the north (13:3 -- as DeMar explains, but Spargimino also apparently missed, all ancient armies approached their city-prey from the north; approach from the east, west, and sometimes south [in the Northern Hemisphere during battle season] and you'll get the sun-in-your-eyes disadvantage). Matthew's end of the age must mean the end of the world (not a word about the two ages believed in by the Jews which frame this reference culturally). It doesn't look like Spargimino took any preterist writer seriously enough to read carefully what they had to say.

It is clear that Spargimino has been blown away by what N. T. Wright calls "the folly of trying to fit the hurricane of first-century Jewish theology into the bottle of late-modern western categories..." His work adds nothing new to the debate other than another reason to worry that the era of inexpensive self-publishing has opened a few doors that would have been better not only left closed, but also nailed shut. I find it no surprise to hear that on his radio show Spargimino features the likes of KJV Onlyist Gail Riplinger. Let the level of scholarship speak for itself.

In this book, Dr. Larry Spargimino connects the unbiblical teaching of preterism with the dangerous Kingdom Now/Dominion Theology movement. Then in the latter part of the book he uses Biblical texts to refute preterist claims. Naturally, preterists will not want you to read this book lest their false teachings be exposed in the light of God's eternal holy Word.

Having read this book, I have found that the author spent more time and energy bouncing around different doctrines and issues than what he claims he was going to be treating. Undoubtedly, Preterism does pose some serious thinking and paradigm shifts in Eschatological worldview. The issue is not about Calvinism, Dominion Theology or any other possible doctrine that the author feels need discuss. If I see an Author claim that they are going to provide Biblical response to the claims of Preterism, then I expect to see a point by point refutation. However, I have not seen Dr. Spargimino provide such information. He spends more time skirting the issue at hand. I am currently working on responding to this book and showing forth the inept reasoning in his dealings with Preterism and the lack of information regarding the so called problematic of Preterism

Many "Christians" whom believe in preterism will, without doubt and as already seen, disagree with Larry Spargimino's latest work, "The Anti-Prophets: The Challenge of Preterism." Notwithstanding, this theological study analyzes preterism along with its basic concept and tenants. Preterism believes that Christ will not come back to earth in the future, that He already has around 70AD. Spargimino strips the preteristic belief down to a hermeneutical cause; incorrect exogesis of Scripture. Of course no preterist wants to hear this. The usual preterist recourse is to launch verbal assaults and claim some form of heresy upon the theologian speaking out. This is what the Pharisees did with Christ and His followers.

Larry Spargimino has created an excellent resource that should be the staple of every seminary. His honest and insightful approach shows compassion for those who have become entangled in liberal theology. Christ will surely return and Spargimino details that quite clearly.

I was enthusiastic when I received as a gift Adams' pamphlet, "Preterism: Orthodox or Unorthodox." That enthusiasm lasted for about 19 pages. It was on page 19 that Adams' allowed his presuppositions to offer a spurious (albeit possible) interpretation of Paul's us of "we" in Thessalonians. One need only read Ridderbos' "Paul: An Outline of his Theology" (pp 489ff)to see a contrary view. Further on in the study, this writer (me), finds Adams' recapitulating many of the weaker arguments against full-preterism typical to reformed dogmatics ("When Shall These Things Be?"). This is a very complicated and humbling endeavour: to understand how the NT applies Jesus' words to his generation and how that word is carried over into the new age. May we do so with all the proper contrition and deference owed each other in the body of Christ, World Without End, Amen. TmF

The Promise Of His Appearing: An Exposition Of Second Peter