CET: 12 A Biblical Evaluation of Amillennialism & Preterism

Book Navigation

Chapter 12

A Biblical Evaluation of Amillennialism & Preterism

A) A biblical evaluation of Amillennialism

B) A biblical evaluation of Preterism

Primary Points

Amillennialism is named after its belief that there is not a literal Millennium or 1,000-year Reign of Christ on the Earth.
Amillennialism is a prime promoter of interpreting the fulfillments of biblical prophecy in merely metaphorical and spiritual realities instead of literal and physical people, places, and events.
Amillennialism is a prime promoter of the apathetic view which claims the biblical specifics on the substance and sequence of Endtime events do not matter.
Amillennialism does very little to help the Church be prepared for the physical realities that are coming in the Endtimes.
So how should biblical prophecy be interpreted? With common sense.
The debate is not really about how biblical prophecy is to be interpreted. Rather, the debate is about how biblical prophecy will be fulfilled.
So how can we simply and clearly distinguish the two ways people expect biblical prophecy to be fulfilled? It is suggested the real debate is between the expectation of a “spiritualized” versus physical fulfillment of biblical prophecy.
The very great majority of biblical prophecies are both communicated and fulfilled in a literal way.
The metaphorical approach of many Bible scholars today would have led them to misunderstand a great deal about Christ’s First Coming. The same metaphorical approach will lead them to also misunderstand a great deal about Christ’s Second Coming.
A common strategy used to diminish the literal meaning of biblical prophecy is to label it as “apocalyptic” literature.
Almost 600 biblical prophecies have been identified as already being fulfilled in history. Every single one of them was fulfilled in a physical way by a person, place, or event. None of them were fulfilled in the way Amillennialism claims all or most prophecies will be fulfilled in the future.
Even when a prophecy is communicated in a symbolic way, we should still expect it to be fulfilled in a physical person, place, or event.
Metaphorical interpreters need to be asked, “When did God abandon His repeated practice of fulfilling biblical prophecy in a physical and literal way?” Contrary to the popular metaphorical view, God has not changed the way He will fulfill biblical prophecy.
We also have a moral reason to not haphazardly interpret biblical prophecies in merely a metaphorical way. Such an approach makes it more difficult to be certain God is keeping His promises.
Even more seriously, the metaphorical approach often drastically alters how it claims a prophecy will be fulfilled, in relation to the original promise given by God. In the process, they would make God a liar if He actually did fulfill the prophecy in the way a metaphorical interpretation claims it will be fulfilled.
There are several reasons that Amillennialism’s interpretation of Revelation 20 and the Millennium is unbiblical and unreasonable.
Preterism is the view that almost everything predicted in Christ’s Endtimes Teaching and even Revelation has already occurred in the past.
Preterism misinterprets what Jesus meant by “the end of the age” and “this generation” in His Endtimes Teaching.
Preterism depends on the unlikely claim that Revelation was written before A.D. 70.
Preterism ignores the literal and multiple fulfillment nature of biblical prophecy.

A) A Biblical evaluation of Amillennialism

A.1) Understanding Amillennialism

Amillennialism is named after its belief that there is not a literal Millennium. Therefore, it is called A-millennialism. This view claims that the thousand years of Christ’s reign (Rev 20:1-7) on Earth began with His Resurrection and is being fulfilled now during the Church Age, or will be fulfilled in Eternity. ^[1] Obviously, Amillennialism largely depends on a metaphorical, rather than literal, interpretation of Scripture.

For example, how will the prophecies about the coming Antichrist be fulfilled? In the book, The Beginning of Birth Pains, it will be argued that he will be a future physical person. But as noted in chapter 1 of Christ’s Endtimes Teaching, a recent survey claimed that 50% of Protestant Pastors deny or are not sure that Scripture predicts there will be a literal and physical Antichrist in the future. ^{^[2]}

Some of these Pastors believe the biblical prophecies about the Antichrist simply refer to the spiritual reality of growing evil in the Endtimes. In other words, this view expects the biblical prophecies about the Antichrist to be fulfilled in a “spiritualized” way rather than in a physical way. This is a foundational perspective of Amillennialism that will be discussed more below.

Amillennialism also claims that the OT prophecies about Israel prospering in the future have already been, or will be, completely fulfilled in a spiritualized way by the Church. This can be called “Replacement Theology.” It means the Church has eternally replaced Israel as the recipient of the unfulfilled promises God made to the nation in the OT. For example, Amillennialism claims that promises made to Israel to inherit geographical land need to be spiritualized and refer to the Church in Heaven, not literal land on Earth.

Therefore, this metaphorical approach to the fulfillment of biblical prophecy expects they will be completely fulfilled in spiritual realities, rather than in physical people, places, and events. As Millard Erickson puts it, “The amillennialist tends to expect no literal fulfillment of prophecy at some future time.” ^[3] This is one of the most common views taught in American seminaries and scholarly Bible commentaries and has been especially promoted by Reformed theology.

But understanding Amillennialism is not that simple. For example, some Amillennialists claim the Antichrist will be a literal person in the future. In other words, Amillennialists are divided and obscure about what they interpret literally and what they interpret merely spiritually. Therefore, it is rather difficult to clearly understand what Amillennialists believe. As Erickson also notes:

There are several obstacles to a clear understanding of it… So many explanations of … amillennialism have been offered that it tends to be a bit confusing, to say the least. At times one almost wonders if one is dealing with subtypes of a single basic view or with different views. ^[4]

This lack of unity among Amillennialists is one reason it is rare that they will offer a specific and clear view on the substance and sequence of Endtime events. Which is also why Amillennialism is a prime promoter of an apathetic view of the Endtimes which claims the biblical specifics on this doctrine do not matter.

As noted, Amillennialists sometimes do expect a future and physical fulfillment of a biblical prophecy. But their approach does not sufficiently value this. Amillennialism overwhelmingly prioritizes finding spiritual meanings in prophetic Scripture and saying relatively little about their future physical fulfillment.

As a result of all this, Amillennialism does very little to help the Church be prepared for the physical realities that are coming in the Endtimes. This will be further discussed in chapter 16 (sec. E).

The priorities of Amillennialism remind us of Jesus’ statement to the Pharisees: “You have neglected the more important matters of the law… You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel” (Matt 23:23-24). The Pharisees were prioritizing minor insights they thought they were discovering in Scripture (a gnat), but neglecting the much more important teachings of Scripture (compared to a camel). Amillennialism does the same with prophetic Scripture and also ends up being blind guides for those wanting to clearly understand important things God wanted to teach His people regarding the Endtimes. ^[5]

A.2) How are we to interpret the meaning and fulfillment of biblical prophecy? “Spiritualized” versus physical meaning

This section introduces a very complex topic in biblical interpretation. Often the issue is described as the debate between the metaphorical versus the literal interpretation of biblical prophecy. But this is too simple. For example, many biblical prophecies are communicated in very symbolic language that should not be interpreted literally. This is true of the very first prophecy in Scripture where the Lord God said to the serpent:

“And I will cause hostility between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring. He will strike your head, and you will strike his heel.” (Gen 3:14-15 NLT)

A common interpretation of this prophecy is that it refers to Satan injuring Christ (striking his heel) at His crucifixion, and Christ eventually destroying Satan (striking his head, cf. Rev 20:10). Even if this is the meaning of this prophecy, it must be admitted that it is communicated in very symbolic and metaphorical language. For example, we have no record of a serpent, or even Satan literally striking Christ’s heel.

Therefore, it is not correct to simply say all biblical prophecy should be interpreted “literally.” So how should biblical prophecy be interpreted? With common sense. There is hardly a better way to say it. And common sense dictates that some biblical prophecies should be interpreted in a symbolic and metaphorical way. But common sense also dictates that most biblical prophecies should be interpreted literally. This will be discussed further below.

Still, the debate is not really about how biblical prophecy is to be interpreted. Rather, the debate is about how biblical prophecy will be fulfilled. Even then, saying that biblical prophecy should always be fulfilled in a “literal” way is not true. Again, Genesis 3:15 was not fulfilled in a “literal” way. The prediction that the serpent, symbolizing Satan would strike Christ’s heel was probably fulfilled in Christ’s crucifixion.

So how can we simply and clearly distinguish the two ways people expect biblical prophecy to be fulfilled? It is suggested the real debate is between the expectation of a “spiritualized” versus physical fulfillment of biblical prophecy. The term “physical” seems more accurate than “literal.” Genesis 3:15 was not literally fulfilled, but it was fulfilled by a physical person and event. And this is what the metaphorical or spiritualized view of biblical prophecy wishes to consistently diminish or deny. The above examples of spiritualizing the biblical prophecies about the Antichrist, or Israel’s land demonstrate this.

A.3) Interpret the meaning and fulfillment of a biblical prophecy in a literal way when there is no biblical or reasonable basis to do otherwise

Two rules of interpretation can be suggested regarding biblical prophecy. First: Interpret the meaning and fulfillment of a biblical prophecy in a literal way when there is no biblical or reasonable basis to do otherwise. Webster’s defines “literal” as “adhering to the ordinary or primary meaning of a term or expression.” It is common to encounter complicated discussions about what “literal” interpretation means. Prophecy scholar Robert VanKampen explains it well:

The first principle is that all Scripture is to be understood in its most natural, normal, customary (i.e., literal or face value) sense. Of course, we allow for obvious figures of speech, which includes both symbols and expressions. Almost always these are explained in the same passage or elsewhere in Scripture…

This principle has special relevance in the study of prophecy. It finds strong confirmation in the [literal and physical] way Old Testament prophecy was fulfilled in the life of Christ. ^[6]

Again, an important rule for interpreting biblical prophecy is: Interpret the meaning and fulfillment of a biblical prophecy in a literal way when there is no biblical or reasonable basis to do otherwise. One reason for this is that the very great majority of biblical prophecies are both communicated and fulfilled in a literal way. For example, God promised in the OT through the Prophet Micah:

But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel (Mic 5:2 NIV).

Was Bethlehem meant to be merely a metaphor for something that was not a physical town? Of course not. The prophecy was fulfilled literally by a physical place. What if we applied the merely spiritualized view of the meaning and fulfillment of biblical prophecy to this prediction? We would conclude that Micah was not predicting Jesus would be born in a literal physical town. And we would be wrong.

For the same reason, those who incorrectly interpret the meaning of a biblical prophecy, or its future fulfillments, in merely a metaphorical way will be wrong. The metaphorical approach of many Bible scholars today would have led them to misunderstand a great deal about Christ’s First Coming. The same spiritualized interpretations will lead them to also misunderstand a great deal about the events surrounding Christ’s Second Coming.

For example, as noted, 50% of Protestant Pastors deny, or are not sure, that the prophecies concerning the Antichrist will be fulfilled in a literal way. However, writing of Antichrist’s Claim to be God, Paul wrote of when:

the man [anthrōpos, “a human being” ^[7]] of lawlessness is revealed, the son [person] of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he [auton “self” a person] takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God (2 Thess 2:3-4 NASB).

The Apostle Paul clearly believed the Antichrist will be a literal, physical man. Why are 50% of Protestant Pastors unclear about this? It would seem a priority of metaphorical interpretation has invaded the Church and created a distorting bias against the literal interpretation of biblical prophecy.

Amillennialism wants to claim that the Apostles and early Church expected OT prophecies to be fulfilled primarily in a spiritualized, rather than literal or physical way. But this claim is severely challenged by the example of the Gospel of Matthew. In this Gospel there are 14 references to Christ fulfilling an OT prophecy. Every single one of these 14 prophecies were both communicated in literal language and fulfilled in a literal way. These 14 prophecies and their fulfillments are as follows:

The virgin will conceive and bear a child (cf. Matt 1:22-23; Isa 7:14).
Bethlehem will be the birthplace of the coming ‘King of the Jews’ (cf. Matt 2:5-6; Mic 5:2).
“Out of Egypt I called my Son” (cf. Matt 2:15; Hos 11:1).
Weeping over the dead children after Herod’s slaughter of the infants in Bethlehem (cf. Matt 2:16-18; Jer 31:15).
Jesus would be called a Nazarene (cf. Matt 2:23; Isa 53:3). ^[8]
Jesus based his ministry out of Galilee (cf. Matt 4:13-16; Isa 9:1-2).
He took up our infirmities and bore our diseases (cf. Matt 8:17; Isa 53:4).
Jesus’ meekness and strength (cf. Matt 12:17-21; Isa 42:1-4). ^[9]
Jesus would speak to the people in parables (cf. Matt 13:34-35; Ps 78:2).
Jesus would enter Jerusalem riding on a donkey (cf. Matt 21:4-5; Zech 9:9).
Jesus would be struck down and His disciples would be scattered (cf. Matt 26:31; Zech 13:7).
Jesus’ betrayal would literally fulfill prophecy (cf. Matt 26:52-54).
Jesus’ capture would literally fulfill prophecy (cf. Matt 26:55-56).
The priests used the 30 pieces of silver to buy the potter’s field (cf. Matt 27:9-10; Zech 11:12-13).

All of these OT prophecies that Matthew recorded Christ fulfilling were to be interpreted in a literal way and were fulfilled in a literal way by a physical person, place, or event. This is how the Apostles and early Church expected OT prophecy to be interpreted and fulfilled. And this is how God wants the very great majority of biblical prophecies and their fulfillment to be interpreted.

For reasons that seem unclear, unreasonable, and unbiblical, Amillennialism simply refuses to value the future, physical, and literal fulfillment of biblical prophecy. The problem with such an “anti-literal” bias can be illustrated in the biblical prophecy that was given to Noah.

God said to him: “Look! I am about to cover the earth with a flood that will destroy every living thing that breathes. Everything on earth will die” (Gen 6:17 NLT). We know this prophecy was literally fulfilled. Of course, it would seem sea creatures survived the Flood. But only those people and animals who were not on earth but floating above the earth in a boat survived. Therefore, everything on earth literally died.

If this prophecy was about the Endtimes, or in prophetic Scripture, many Bible scholars today would be very tempted to interpret it metaphorically rather than literally. The idea of a world-wide flood making Everything on earth die would be deemed an exaggeration requiring only a spiritual or symbolic meaning.

Likewise, the “weirdness” of a literal 1,000-year reign of Christ on Earth seems to be one reason Amillennialists deny it will happen. But that perspective would have been misleading in correctly interpreting the prophecy of a literal world-wide flood. Therefore, we should not deny a literal interpretation of a biblical prophecy simply because it seems to be exaggerated. God can and will do things that will challenge our understanding of what is possible or appropriate.

Later God told Noah: “Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights” (7:4 NIV). Again, if this was a biblical prophecy about the future, many interpreters today would assume these numbers are only symbolic and not to be taken literally. But what happened? Exactly and literally “After the seven days the floodwaters came on the earth” (7:10). For how long? Exactly and literally, “rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights” (7:12). Therefore, we should interpret the meaning and fulfillment of a biblical prophecy in a literal way when there is no biblical or reasonable basis to do otherwise.

A common strategy used to diminish the literal meaning of biblical prophecy is to label it as “apocalyptic” literature. Based on this label, it is further claimed that such a genre is intended to be interpreted differently than the rest of Scripture. Specifically, it is claimed that we should expect “apocalyptic” literature to only be speaking about spiritual realities and rarely or clearly predicting future and physical events. There are several errors in this approach. ^[10]

First, the distinctions between prophetic and “apocalyptic” Scripture are not as clear or important as many would claim. ^[11] Second, these same scholars of “apocalyptic” literature all label significant portions of Daniel in this way. And yet, the “apocalyptic” prophecies of the large statue (Dan 2:31) and the four great beasts (Dan 7:3), were all physically fulfilled in the emergence of the Babylonian, Persian, Greek, and Roman Empires. In other words, Daniel is proof that even prophetic Scripture that some would label “apocalyptic,” needs to be expected to be fulfilled in a physical way by a person, place, or event.

A.4) Expect a biblical prophecy to be fulfilled in a physical way by a person, place, or event when there is no biblical or reasonable basis to do otherwise

This leads to a second rule for interpreting the meaning and fulfillment of biblical prophecy. Expect a biblical prophecy to be fulfilled in a physical way by a person, place, or event, when there is no biblical or reasonable basis to do otherwise. ^{^[12]}

This rule of interpretation is generally denied or diminished in Amillennialism. As noted by Erickson above, “The amillennialist tends to expect no literal fulfillment of prophecy at some future time.” ^{^[13]} It is also true that this view tends to expect no “physical” fulfillment of prophecy at some future time. Unfortunately, Amillennialism seems to completely ignore how God has fulfilled biblical prophecy in the past.

OT scholar J. B. Payne has provided what is probably the most detailed study of biblical prophecy available. In his Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy he identified 592 OT and NT prophecies that have already come true in history. ^{^[14]} Every single one of these almost 600 biblical prophecies was fulfilled in a physical way by a person, place, or event. ^{^[15]} None of these prophecies were fulfilled in merely a metaphorical or spiritualized way.

It is possible that Payne did not document every single biblical prophecy that has been fulfilled in all of history. Perhaps he missed a few. But the 592 he did identify clearly represent almost every fulfilled biblical prophecy in the history of the world. And none of them were fulfilled in the way Amillennialism claims all or most prophecies will be fulfilled in the future.

Note that it is not being claimed here that no biblical prophecy can have a spiritualized meaning to its fulfillment. Perhaps there are some clear examples of this. But Amillennialism rather dogmatically claims that most or all biblical prophecies in the future will be fulfilled in only or primarily a spiritualized way. Therefore, this view seems to be ignoring the overwhelming historical precedent God Himself has established.

This is true even in the many instances when God communicates a biblical prophecy in metaphorical language. The example of Genesis 3:15 was already noted above. Again, this prophecy was communicated in symbolic language (i.e. the serpent would strike Christ’s heel). But it was fulfilled by a physical person and event (Christ’s crucifixion), not a spiritualized reality.

Likewise, in Daniel, the Greek Empire of Alexander the Great was predicted and described as the chest and arms of silver on a large statue (2:31-32) and a beast that looked like a leopard (7:6). But obviously these symbolic prophecies were fulfilled in a very physical kingdom on this Earth. Therefore, even when a prophecy is communicated in a symbolic way, we should still expect it to be fulfilled in a physical person, place, or event.

Metaphorical interpreters need to be asked, “When did God abandon His repeated practice of fulfilling biblical prophecy in a physical way?” Contrary to the popular metaphorical view, God has not changed the way He will fulfill biblical prophecy.

Unfortunately, Amillennialism does claim God has radically changed the way He fulfills prophecy. For example, the influential Amillennialist Kim Riddlebarger says those who would value how God has consistently fulfilled prophecy in the past, “downplay or ignore how Old Testament passages are interpreted by the authors of the New.” ^{^[16]} He writes, “A specific example of what I mean might help to clarify the issue.” It seems probable then that Riddlebarger would offer one of Amillennialism’s best examples of how God has changed the way He fulfills prophecy. Acts 15 and the “Jerusalem Council” is the example he offers. There we read:

The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. When they finished, James spoke up. “Brothers,” he said, “listen to me. Simon has described to us how God first intervened to choose a people for his name from the Gentiles. The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written:

“‘After this I will return and rebuild David’s fallen tent. Its ruins I will rebuild, and I will restore it, that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord, even all the Gentiles who bear my name, says the Lord, who does these things’ — things known from long ago.” (Acts 15:12-18 NIV)

What is Riddlebarger’s interpretation of James’ intent? He writes:

James saw the [entire] prophecy as fulfilled in Christ’s resurrection, exaltation, and in the reconstitution of his disciples as the new Israel. The presence of both Jew and Gentile in the church was proof that the prophecy of Amos had been [entirely] fulfilled. David’s fallen tent had been rebuilt by Christ. ^{^[17]}

That seems to be a lot of assumptions. Riddlebarger’s interpretation is also a classic example of “Replacement Theology” and the denial that God plans any future for the nation of Israel. There are several problems with Riddlebarger’s common interpretation.

First, it ignores God’s overwhelming precedent of fulfilling prophecy in a physical and even literal way. If Amillennialists want to claim God has radically changed this, then they need a great deal more evidence than this.

Secondly, Amillennialism is reading far too much into this text in order to support its view. James’ primary (if not only) point was that OT prophecy predicted that God would save Gentiles and not just the Jews. James himself made it clear that the issue being debated was whether or not God has intervened to choose a people for his name from the Gentiles (v. 14). To argue this was the case, James said, “The words of the prophets are in agreement with this” (v. 15). He then quoted a prophecy from Amos that predicted in the future the rest of mankind will seek the Lord, even all the Gentiles (v. 17). ^[18] That was clearly James’ primary (if not only) point. ^{^[19]}

But Amillennialism wants to dogmatically claim that James also believed that the salvation of the Gentiles fully fulfilled God’s promise to rebuild David’s fallen tent. But again, such a merely spiritualized fulfillment of an OT promise is a radical change from how God fulfilled at least 592 biblical prophecies in the past. And there is no indication in the text that James thought everything in Amos’ prophecy was being fulfilled in the salvation of the Gentiles.

Amos’ original prophecy stated:

“In that day I will restore the fallen house of David. I will repair its damaged walls. From the ruins I will rebuild it and restore its former glory” (Amos 9:11 NLT).

Contrary to Amillennialism, this promise from God was not fulfilled in a spiritualized way by Gentiles being saved in the first century. It more obviously refers to the hundreds of Bible verses predicting the physical and spiritual restoration of the nation of Israel, and even the city of David (1 Kgs 11:27), Jerusalem. All of this will occur during Christ’s 1000-year Reign on Earth that Amillennialism wishes to deny will ever exist (cf. Rev 20:1-6).

Again, if Amillennialism wants us to believe God has radically changed how He expects us to interpret hundreds of Bible verses predicting the physical restoration of the nation of Israel, then it needs a lot more clear biblical proof than it provides.

Also contrary to Amillennialism, the OT prophecies of Gentiles being saved will not be finally and completely fulfilled in the NT Church Age, but in the Millennium. Amillennialism completely ignores a proven attribute of biblical prophecy. Many of them will have more than one fulfillment. It is possible that God intended to have some prophecies initially and partially fulfilled in a spiritualized way. But Amillennialism has no biblical or historical proof that these prophecies will never be finally and completely fulfilled in a physical and even more literal way. In other words, we have no clear examples where a merely spiritualized application of a biblical prophecy completely replaced an additional and physical fulfillment. The multiple fulfillment nature of biblical prophecy is discussed further below to also correct Preterism.

The point here is that a primary example that Amillennialism puts forth to claim God has radically changed the way He fulfills prophecy (Acts 15:12-18), does not even come close to clearly proving this. Likewise, the relatively few other examples offered by Amillennialism do not seem to prove its foundational way of interpreting prophetic Scripture either. The fact is that God fulfilled 592 prophecies in the past in a physical and often literal way, and Amillennialism falls far short of providing biblical evidence that God has or will change this.

A.5) Metaphorical interpretations of biblical prophecy make it more difficult to be certain God is keeping His promises

We can ask another important question that Amillennialism seems to ignore. Why does God consistently fulfill biblical prophecy in such a literal, physical, and obvious way? Because prophecies are promises. For example, God said:

“When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will come to you and fulfill my good promise to bring you back to this place” (Jer 29:10 NIV).

Did you notice that God said this prophecy was my good promise? In fact, all biblical prophecies are a promise from God. Also notice that God fulfilled His good promise in a very literal and physical way. The Book of Ezra describes God literally bringing the Jews back to the land of Israel after exactly seventy years of captivity in Babylon.

But imagine prior to its fulfillment, Amillennialism claimed this promise was not to be interpreted literally (especially the seventy years). More than that, it was claimed this promise was fulfilled in a spiritualized way, and not a physical way. It must be admitted it would be much more difficult to be certain God kept His good promise. Literal and physical fulfillments are the best way we can be certain a prophecy and promise from God was fulfilled.

Therefore, we also have a moral reason to not haphazardly interpret biblical prophecies in merely a metaphorical way. Such an approach makes it more difficult to be certain God is keeping His promises. For example, God promised regarding those in the first resurrection that they will reign with Christ for a thousand years (Rev 20:5 NLT). Amillennialism claims this promise cannot be interpreted literally, and is already being fulfilled now in a spiritualized way by Christ and saints reigning in Heaven. If so, can we be certain God has kept his promise that those in the first resurrection will reign with Christ for a thousand years?

No, we cannot. And Amillennialism’s complicated and obscure arguments to claim we should be certain God is already keeping His promise about the Millennium are not convincing enough for such a serious question. When God makes a promise we rightly expect it to be fulfilled in an obvious way, not the ambiguous way Amillennialism claims God keeps His promises.

Even more seriously, the spiritualized approach often drastically alters how it claims a promise of God will be fulfilled, in relation to the original promise given by God. In the process, they would make God a liar if He actually did fulfill the promise in the way metaphorical interpreters claim He will. If you think this is an exaggeration, consider an example.

As noted above, Amillennialism claims that promises made to Israel to inherit land need to be spiritualized and will be fulfilled by the Church living in Heaven, not literal land on Earth. Read the following promises from God and ask yourself this question: If these promises are fulfilled by Christians living in Heaven, wouldn’t a reasonable person conclude God is a liar? For example, we read:

On that day the LORD made a covenant [a promise!] with Abram and said, “To your descendants [the Jews] I give this land, from the Wadi of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates [in modern day Iran] (Gen 15:18 NIV; cf. 12:7; 13:14-17; 48:4). ^[20]

If instead, as Amillennialism claims, this promise is fulfilled by not giving Abram’s descendants real, literal, physical land as far east as modern day Iran, then can we still clearly and simply claim that God keeps His promises? No, we cannot. Again, Amillennialism’s view of how God keeps His promises requires some rather obscure and complicated explanations that diminish a clear and simple claim that God keeps His promises.

Of course, Christians have been united with Israel as God’s chosen people (cf. Eph 2:11-22) and are Abraham’s spiritual descendants (cf. Rom 9:8; Gal 3:17). But Paul clearly explains this specifically refers to promises of salvation first given to Abraham (cf. Gal 3:8, 14). And even those promises are not completely and finally fulfilled in the Church, but all Israel will be saved (Rom 11:26) in the Endtimes. Nowhere does the NT teach that all the promises given to Abraham or Israel have been fulfilled or replaced by Christ or the Church.

In fact, Paul points out, The agreement God made with Abraham could not be canceled 430 years later when God gave the law to Moses [the Old Covenant]. God would be breaking his promise (Gal 3:17). Likewise, The agreement and promises of land that God made with Abraham could not be canceled about 2,000 years later when God gave us the New Covenant through Christ. Otherwise, God would be breaking his promise. ^{^[21]}

God repeated this promise when He told Ezekiel in a vision of the future:

This is what the Sovereign LORD says: “Divide the land in this way for the twelve tribes of Israel… I took a solemn oath and swore that I would give this land to your ancestors, and it will now come to you as your possession. (Ezek 47:13-14 NLT). ^[22]

But Amillennialism essentially claims this will never happen. As a result it does not seem to adequately respect the promises and word of God. He said to the Jews, not Christians, “I took a solemn oath and swore that I would give this land to your ancestors.” If He does not literally give land to the Jews in the Endtimes, then most reasonable people would rightly conclude God’s promise was at least misleading. Certainly, the Jews would! If anyone made a promise to an Amillennialist and fulfilled it the way they claim God fulfills promises, there is no doubt they would think the person was a liar too.

One more thing can be said about Amillennialism’s rejection of any literal future for the nation of Israel. In Acts we read:

Then they [the Apostles] gathered around him [Jesus] and asked him, “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom [and land!] to [the nation and people of] Israel?” He said to them: “It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority” [to do that very thing!] (Acts 1:6-7 NIV)

Jesus surely wanted the Apostles to have a correct understanding of what they were asking about concerning the literal and physical nation of Israel. If Amillennialism’s view of the future of Israel were correct, it seems very probable that Jesus would have corrected the Apostles right here. In that case, He would have said something “Amillennial” like: “The kingdom will not be restored to Israel as you understand it, but will be fulfilled in the Church which you are the foundation of.” But Jesus said no such thing. In fact, by not correcting their belief that the Lord is going to restore the kingdom to the literal nation of Israel, He confirmed the Apostles’ belief that this is precisely what will happen in the Endtimes.

For all the reasons above, the fulfillment of biblical prophecies needs to be expected to occur in a literal or physical way. And in general, even prophetic Scripture should be interpreted literally, except when symbolism is obviously being used. Therefore, a well-known rule for interpreting the Bible says: “When the plain sense, makes common sense, seek no other sense.” This is how God intended Scripture to be interpreted, including prophetic Scripture. Therefore, throughout the Endtimes Essentials you will be encouraged to interpret even prophetic Scripture in its plainest, most literal sense, when there is no biblical or reasonable basis to do otherwise.

A.6) Amillennialism’s unbiblical interpretation of Revelation 20:1-3

As noted, Amillennialism argues that many Endtime events are currently being fulfilled now throughout Church history in a spiritual and metaphorical way. This includes the events predicted during the Millennium in Revelation 20. As also noted, Amillennialism rejects a literal and physical interpretation of the thousand years of Christ’s reign on the Earth (Rev 20:1-7). In general, it believes this is already being fulfilled as Christ spiritually reigns over His Church from Heaven.

A fundamental question for the doctrine of the Endtimes is this: is the following prophecy being fulfilled now during the Church Age in a spiritualized way, or will it be fulfilled in the future in a physical and rather literal way. In Revelation 20:1-7 we read:

And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.

I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands.

They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years.

When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison. (Rev 20:1-7 NIV)

For Amillennialism to be true, it must deny that this promise from God will be fulfilled in a physical way. But there are clear and biblical reasons to reject Amillennialism’s interpretation of this promise.

First, as noted above, God has established an overwhelming historical precedent for fulfilling biblical prophecy in a physical, and often literal way. Again, every one of the almost 600 biblical prophecies that have already been fulfilled in history, were fulfilled in a physical way by a person, place, or event. Revelation 20 will not be an exception to the rule God Himself has demonstrated.

Second, notice that six times in the span of six verses the text reads a thousand years. Do you think God is wanting to emphasize something here? If he merely meant the thousand years to be a symbol for something, would He repeat a thousand years in every one of the six verses in this prophecy? Probably not. But in spite of God’s own emphasis on a literal meaning for the thousand years, Amillennialism still ignores it.

Third, there is no clear reason in the text of Revelation 20, or anywhere else in Scripture, to deny God intended this prophecy to be interpreted literally. There are no statements in Scripture that would contradict a belief in a literal one thousand year Reign of Christ on this Earth. In fact, there are Scriptures that seem to clearly describe this period of time (cf. Isa 65:19-25). This includes all the OT predictions about the restoration of Israel at this time. The only way Amillennialism can find what it claims to be contradictions to a literal thousand year Reign of Christ, is to interpret all these OT promises as spiritual metaphors. Which, again, is not how God fulfills His promises.

Fourth, another serious problem with the Amillennial view of Revelation 20 is verses 1-3. The prophecy states that Satan will be bound (edēsen, v. 2). The Greek word is used many times in the NT to mean preventing the activity of someone with chains or prison. The obvious sense here is that at some point in time Satan will be bound such that he is not active at all outside of the Abyss.

This is confirmed by the fact that He will be cast into the Abyss which will be locked and sealed … over him (v. 3). The Abyss is the place where the dead and demons are confined (cf. Rom 10:7; Luke 8:31). The prophecy is clear that during this thousand years the devil will not be active or present on Earth or in Heaven at all.

One result will be that Satan will not be deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended (v. 3). Deceiving is Satan’s essential nature and activity. As Jesus said of the devil:

He has always hated the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, it is consistent with his character; for he is a liar and the father of lies. (John 8:44 NLT)

If Satan will not be deceiving during the thousand years, then this is more evidence he will not be doing anything during this time. Therefore, being bound in the Abyss and not having any presence or activity on Earth or in Heaven would obviously prohibit the devil from other activities described in Scripture.

This completely refutes the Amillennial claim that Revelation 20:1-3 is being fulfilled during the Church Age. Scripture itself denies this. In fact, the Apostles Peter, Paul, and John did not believe in this foundational claim of Amillennialism. They wrote the following texts even after Christ’s Death and Resurrection. As you read them, ask yourself the question: Is it reasonable or biblical to believe Satan could do the following things if he was bound in the Abyss and having it locked and sealed … over him so that he cannot be deceiving people?

Be alert and of sober mind. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour [by deception!]. Resist him [because he is very active on Earth], standing firm in the faith, because you know that the family of believers throughout the world is undergoing the same kind of sufferings [from the attacks of Satan]. (1 Pet 5:8-9 NIV)

Put on all of God’s armor so that you will be able to stand firm against all strategies of the devil [to deceive!]. For we are not fighting against flesh-and-blood enemies, but against … evil spirits in the heavenly places [including Satan]. (Eph 6:11-12 NLT)

And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. The god of this age [Satan] has blinded [deceived!] the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ (2 Cor 4:3-4 NIV)

We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control [and deception!] of the evil one. (1 John 5:19 NIV)

That ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray [by deception! and is] the accuser of our brothers and sisters, who accuses them before our God [in Heaven!] day and night (Rev 12:9-10 NIV)

It does not seem reasonable to believe, as Amillennialism does, that Satan can be doing all of this in Heaven and on Earth even though he is currently bound in the Abyss and being prohibited from his activity of deceiving. You can be assured that all the complicated arguments and additional metaphorical interpretations of Scripture that Amillennialism uses, do not refute the clear, literal, and obvious meaning of the verses cited above.

How does Amillennialism attempt to overcome these biblical arguments against its view? Only by severely limiting the binding and confining imposed on Satan described in Revelation 20 and forcing their meaning to fit this view. Amillennialism would claim that instead of being cast into the Abyss, and having it locked and sealed … over him, that Satan is still present and active on the Earth and in Heaven, doing all the things the above Scriptures describe.

In addition, Amillennialism attempts to limit Satan’s deceiving to only deceiving some people in the nations about only the Gospel. But even that is refuted by Paul’s claim above that during the Church Age the god of this age [Satan] has blinded [deceived!] the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel (2 Cor 4:4).

Even the label Amillennialism is founded on its claim that there will be no literal 1,000-year Reign of Christ on this Earth. Therefore, the very foundation of Amillennialism in not biblical.

B) A biblical evaluation of Preterism

In chapter 3 (sec. B) the popular but faulty view of “Historicism” was discussed. This claims among other things that the biblical prophecies Christ gave us in His Endtimes Teaching have essentially been fulfilled throughout Church history and have little relevance for the future. A related view is Preterism which is addressed in this section.

B.1) Understanding “the end of the age” & refuting Preterism Matt 24:3

Another view of the Endtimes that is particularly common in scholarly Bible commentaries is Preterism. ^{^[23]} The term comes from the Latin word praeter which can refer to something that is in the past. Therefore, the fundamental view of Preterism is that NT prophecies have already been fulfilled in the first century.

For example, Preterism claims the predictions of Antichrist’s abomination of desolation (Matt 24:15) and the greatest persecution (v. 21) in Christ’s Endtimes Teaching were fulfilled in A.D. 70 when the Roman army destroyed Jerusalem and the temple. Likewise, Preterism claims the prophesies in Revelation were fulfilled in the ancient Roman Empire.

First, Preterism ignores the question the Apostles asked to prompt Christ’s Endtimes Teaching. We read:

Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. “Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen [the destruction of the temple], and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” (Matt 24:1-3 NIV).

Preterism claims that by the end of the age, the Apostles meant only the destruction of the temple and not Christ’s physical Return. Therefore, Preterism also claims that the Apostles believed the beginning of birth pains (v. 8), the greatest persecution (v. 21), and even in some symbolic way, the Cosmic Signs, Christ’s Return, and the Church’s Rescue (vs. 29-31) all occurred in A.D. 70!

It is true that the disciples probably believed the destruction of the temple would occur at the end of the age when Christ Returned. But why would Jesus confirm their error as Preterism claims? Contrary to Preterism, what the Apostles did understand, and what Jesus taught, was that at the end of the age Christ would physically return. Both their understanding of the end of the age is reflected earlier in Matthew when Jesus had shared a parable and explained:

The harvest is the end of the age, and the harvesters are angels. As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil [probably by means of the Church’s Rescue, cf. Matt 24:31]. (Matt 13:39-41 NIV; cf. v. 49)

Likewise, in the Great Commission given later in Matthew, Jesus said:

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” (Matt 28:19-20 NIV)

Therefore, when the disciples asked, “what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” did they mean something different than the end of the age described elsewhere by Jesus in the hearing of the disciples as Preterism claims? No they did not. Both Jesus and the Apostles knew that the disciples were asking what was going to happen immediately before Christ’s physical Return. And contrary to Preterism, Jesus answered their question. ^{^[24]}

The claim of Preterism that Matthew 24:4-35 only applies to the first century is also clearly refuted by Christ’s statement in verse 14 where Jesus said, “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come” (NIV). According to a Preterist perspective, this prophecy was also fulfilled before A.D. 70. ^{^[25]} Again, that is not true.

B.2) Understanding “this generation” & refuting Preterism Matt 24:33-34

A key text for Preterism is Christ’s statement in His Endtimes Teaching:

When you see all these things [the events described throughout Christ’s Endtimes Teaching], you know that it [Christ’s Return] is near, right at the door. Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened (Matt 24:33-34).

Preterism interprets this generation to refer to the first century in which Jesus was speaking. But this is impossible. Jesus said the generation He was referring to would see all these things. All these things included the Cosmic Signs, Christ’s Return, and the Church’s Rescue described in the immediately preceding verses. In the first century, the stars did not fall from the sky, all the peoples of the Earth did not see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of Heaven, with power and great glory, and Jesus did not send out His angels with a loud trumpet sound, and … lift up and gather together God’s elect people from one end of the sky to the other, from everywhere on Earth (Matt 24:29-31).

Accordingly, most Preterists claim that all these things does not include the above events, but only Antichrist’s Claim to be God and The Greatest Persecution described earlier in the text (vs. 15-21). But Jesus said the generation He was referring to would experience all [panta] these things. In order to support their view, Preterists depend on the same faulty view of prophecy fulfillment as Amillennialism. It claims that at least some of the above predictions were fulfilled in merely a spiritual or symbolic way, not in a literal physical event. But as noted above, this approach ignores the fact that every one of the 600 biblical prophecies that have already been fulfilled in history, were fulfilled in a physical way in a person, place, or event.

Therefore, it is rather clear to understand this generation to be the Last Generation living when Christ Returns. They will be the generation who will see all these things that Christ predicted that will lead up to His Return. That generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. In other words, all of the Endtime events described by Christ will occur within one generation, the Last Generation. ^{^[26]}

Christ confirms this when He describes several Endtime events in Luke’s version of His Endtimes Teaching and then concludes: For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written (Luke 21:22 NIV). Was all biblical prophecy fulfilled in A.D. 70? Clearly not.

When proponents of the Preterist (“historical”) view also claim most of the events in Revelation have already been fulfilled, their view becomes even more unbelievable. When did a fourth of humanity perish? (cf. 6:8). When did every person on Earth see the face of Him who sits on the throne and … the wrath of the Lamb (cf. 6:15-17). When has a third of the sea turned into blood and a third of the living creatures in the sea died (8:8-9)? Obviously, dozens of examples from Revelation could be given. And again, the only way Preterism can make their view work is to suggest merely spiritual fulfillments of prophecy in the Revelation and abandon God’s precedent for fulfilling His promises with physical events, people, and places.

In addition, Preterism’s interpretation of this generation requires that the book of Revelation was written before A.D. 70. Otherwise, John was simply describing events that had already happened. Accordingly, the influential Preterist Kenneth Gentry has admitted that if Revelation was written after A.D. 70 then the Preterist view would “go up in smoke.” ^{^[27]} If your theological view depends on the correct and rather precise dating of a NT document, then you have a very questionable foundation.

Unfortunately for Preterism, the clearest and most authoritative statement ever made in the Early Church about the dating of any NT document, was written about Revelation. The “Early Church Father” Irenaeus wrote in his Against Heresies that the Book of Revelation “was [first] seen not long ago, but almost in our own generation, at the end of the reign of Domitian.” ^{^[28]}

Irenaeus (c. A.D. 130-200) had personally heard the teaching of Polycarp (c. A.D. 70-155), ^{^[29]} who was a personal disciple of the Apostle John (c. A.D. 10-100). ^{^[30]} Therefore, Irenaeus was in a unique position to know when Revelation was written. Roman historical records state that “Domitian was assassinated on September 18, A.D. 96.” ^{^[31]} This means that the “end of the reign of Domitian” would date John’s writing of Revelation in A.D. 96. Accordingly, Carson, Moo, and Morris agree with the vast majority of Revelation scholars, and conclude after a detailed discussion: “We are inclined, then, to follow the oldest tradition [from Irenaeus] on this point and date Revelation in the last years of [the Roman Emperor] Domitian.” ^{^[32]} In fact, it is essentially only Preterist scholars who even suggest otherwise.

B.3) Preterism ignores the fact that many biblical prophecies have more than one fulfillment Isa 7:14-16; Rev 1:1-3

What else is Preterism based on? There were some events in Jerusalem in A.D. 70 that were partial fulfillments or “foreshadowings” of predictions in Christ’s Endtimes Teaching. For example, Roman soldiers brought an image of the Roman Emperor into the temple area and made sacrifices to it, therefore certainly “desecrating” it.

But no one did what the Apostle Paul said will happen in the complete and final fulfillment of the abomination of desolation. The Apostle said the future Antichrist will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God. (2 Thess 2:4). Again, none of the fanciful and metaphorical explanations of Preterism should convince a reasonable person that this actually happened in A.D. 70.

Also, Preterism tries to make the case that what the Jews experienced in the Roman destruction of Jerusalem, rather fully fulfilled Jesus’ prediction that there will be the greatest persecution of God’s elect people. It will be greater than any persecution since the world began, and it will never be equaled again (Matt 24:15, 21). The persecution of the Jews by the Romans was horrific, but it was not the greatest persecution of God’s elect people there will ever be. Contrary to Preterism, the Antichrist will be worse than the Romans.

Preterism ignores an important biblical principle for interpreting prophetic Scripture. Many biblical prophecies have a near/partial fulfillment before their final/complete fulfillment. God intends these to be a “down payment” on His plan for the ultimate fulfillment of these prophecies. So, of course the events in A.D. 70 “foreshadowed” the final and complete fulfillment of Christ’s predictions. But contrary to Preterism, first century events were not the ultimate or most important fulfillment of those events. ^{^[33]} Some of Jesus’ predictions were to have more than one fulfillment. ^{^[34]}

There are many examples of the near/far nature of biblical prophecies. One of the first and clearest regards Christ’s birth. In the book of Isaiah we are told that Pekah, the king of Israel, formed an army to attack the kingdom of Judah, led by king Ahaz (cf. 7:1-2). The Prophet Isaiah is told by God to tell Ahaz the battle “will not happen” (vs. 3-9). Then God says He will give king Ahaz a miraculous sign to prove this prophecy will come true. We read in verses 14 and 16:

Therefore, the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel… Before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste. (NIV)

Therefore, sometime around 700 B.C. a real virgin miraculously conceived a child and gave birth to a son who was named Immanuel. Before the boy was old enough to understand right from wrong, ^{^[35]} the two kings attacking Judah were destroyed. That was God’s promise and God’s proof of His promise to Ahaz.

Unfortunately, many modern Bible scholars want to deny this happened. But if this prophecy was not literally fulfilled in Ahaz’s time, then God was a liar, and the king had no reason to believe Isaiah was speaking for God.

Obviously, the virgin birth of this baby named Immanuel around 700 years before Christ was not the final, nor the most important, fulfillment of this prophecy. Matthew wrote regarding Jesus Christ’s birth by the virgin Mary: All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet [in Isaiah 7]: ‘The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel’” (which means “God with us”)” (Matt 1:22‑23 NIV).

This was the final, complete, and most significant fulfillment of this prophecy about 700 years after it was given. ^{^[36]} But its near and partial fulfillment in Ahaz’s time should not be ignored.

Why did God communicate prophecy and plan its fulfillment in this way? Was it to make prophecy unnecessarily complex? Of course not. Most scholars recognize what the eminent prophecy scholar Dwight Pentecost said many years ago: “It was the purpose of God to give the near and far view so that the fulfillment of the one should be the assurance of the fulfillment of the other.” ^{^[37]} Accordingly, the miraculous birth of a baby from a virgin mother ca. 700 B.C. was a confirming sign that it would happen again in a much more important way.

Indeed, what was the most important fulfillment of this prophecy? Was it in the time of Ahaz in 700 B.C., or what happened in Christ’s birth ca. 1 B.C? The answer is obvious. But what a Preterist perspective would do is focus on what happened in 700 B.C. and claim that virtually all of the prophecy was fulfilled then, or at least its most important fulfillment occurred then. As a result, they would miss the more important meaning of the prophecy of Christ’s First Coming. Likewise, this will be the case for Preterism’s understanding of Christ’s Second Coming.

Other examples of multiple fulfillments of biblical prophecy include predictions of the Antichrist in Daniel fulfilled in the 2^nd century B.C. by Antiochus, and predictions of the destruction of the Jewish temple by Jesus in His Endtimes Teaching. This latter phenomenon has confused many about how to interpret these passages. Jesus gave His Endtimes Teaching 40 years before Rome attacked Jerusalem and destroyed the temple. Therefore, it is clear that Jesus was predicting these events. Some claim that Luke’s version of Christ’s Endtimes Teaching (21:5-36) uniquely emphasizes this. Therefore, it is fine to find elements of Christ’s prophecy that were fulfilled in A.D. 70. But Preterism is wrong to claim these events were the final and complete fulfillment of Christ’s predictions. This view ignores the multiple fulfillment nature of biblical prophecy.

The multiple fulfillment nature of biblical prophecy helps us understand the very difficult statements at the beginning of Revelation:

The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place… blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near. (Rev 1:1, 3 NIV)

The fact that Jesus said His predictions in the Revelation were to occur soon (v. 1), and the events were near (v. 3), is a primary reason that Preterism believes most (if not all) of the prophecies in Revelation have already been fulfilled. Admittedly, these are difficult statements, but a helpful answer is the near/far nature of prophecy fulfillment in Scripture. Some of the prophecies in Revelation did occur in the first century. For example, Jesus warned many first century churches of painful consequences that would occur if they did not repent (cf. Rev 2:5, 16, 21-23; 3:16). No doubt, these churches experienced these things in the first century. Likewise, this prophecy to the church in Smyrna was certainly fulfilled soon (Rev 1:1) after the Revelation was given:

Do not be afraid of what you are about to suffer. I tell you, the devil will put some of you in prison to test you, and you will suffer persecution for ten days. (Rev 2:10 NIV)

That happened soon after this church received the Revelation. But again, because of the multiple fulfillment nature of biblical prophecy, there is no reason to believe that Revelation 1:1-3 is saying that all of Revelation was fulfilled in the first century.

One argument for Preterism is that biblical prophecy must be made applicable and meaningful for those who initially received it. That is not true. The Apostle Peter wrote:

Concerning this salvation [that was prophesied in the OT] the [OT] prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently and with the greatest care, trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of the Messiah and the glories that would follow. It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you [in the far future] (1 Pet 1:10-12 NIV)

Contrary to Preterism, a lot of OT prophesies had no practical relevance for those who initially received or heard them. God regularly gave prophesies that were for people living many hundreds of years later. The Book of Revelation is an example.

Preterism has some value in helping us understand the near (Rev 1:3) fulfillments of biblical prophecy. But like Amillennialism, Preterism also strains out a gnat but swallows a camel (Matt 23:23-24). This is because it focuses on past, partial, metaphorical, and often questionable fulfillments of biblical prophecies, and ignores the more important, literal, future, and final fulfillments. As a result, Preterism also ends up being a blind guide to helping the Church to understand and be prepared for the Endtimes. ^{^[38]}

Of course there are spiritual realities about the Kingdom of God that were initiated by Christ’s First Coming. Therefore, there is some sense in which God’s Kingdom on Earth and the Endtimes began with this (cf. Matt 12:28; Luke 17:20-21; Rom 14:17; 1 Cor 10:11; 1 John 2:18). Theologians call this “realized eschatology” or the “already not yet” aspect of God’s Kingdom on Earth. Christ’s First Coming and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit have initiated some things that will be consummated in Christ’s Second Coming and even after the completion of His 1,000 year Reign on Earth. This is also related to the near/final and partial/complete nature of the fulfillment of biblical prophecy discussed in section B.3 in this chapter.
Unfortunately, some (such as Amillennialism) focus so much on what can be included in “realized eschatology” that they neglect a biblical understanding of what is still to be fulfilled in biblical prophecy. For more on “realized eschatology” see Additional Studies on the Endtimes (ASE), ch. 3. ↑
The survey of Protestant Pastors on the Endtimes can be found online at https://news.lifeway.com/2016/04/26/pastors-the-end-of-the-world-is-complicated/. See explanation of statistics in endnotes in ch. 1. ↑
Erickson, Guide, 84. ↑
Ibid., 73. ↑
For more on biblical principles for interpreting biblical prophecy see chapters 1-4 in ASE. ↑
Van Kampen, 6. ↑
BDAG. ↑
The prediction that Christ would be a Nazarene (Matt 2:23) is nowhere explicitly stated in Scripture. Carson seems to reflect the best explanation when he reminds us that in the first century the town of Nazareth “was a despised place (Jn 7:42, 52).” Therefore:
Matthew is not saying that the OT Prophets foretold that the Messiah would live in Nazareth; he is saying that the OT prophets foretold that the Messiah would be despised (cf. Pss 22:6-8, 13; 69:8, 20-21; Isa 11:1; 49:7; 53:2-3, 8; Dan 9:26)… In other words Matthew gives us the substance of several OT passages, not a direct quotation. (124-5) ↑
Matt 12:15-16 help us understand how Matthew viewed these events as a fulfillment of the OT prophecy in Isa 42:1-4. In v. 15 we read that he healed all who were ill. Such feats usually drew large and demanding crowds (cf. Matt 8:4; 9:30). This was burdensome for Christ. So much so that He told the healed not to tell others about him (12:16). In other words, Christ’s ministry, including His healings, were demanding. Therefore, Matthew recalled the prophecy in Isaiah which described a meek servant of God would be empowered by God’s Spirit on him (Isa 42:1; cf. Matt 12:18). Accordingly, Carson writes on Matt 12:15-21: “Jesus’ conduct under these pressures, Matthew perceives, was nothing less than the fulfillment of the Scriptures … of the Suffering Servant” (330). ↑
For more on interpreting “apocalyptic” texts in Scripture, see “Primary Principles for Interpreting Biblical Prophecy” online at http://www.traniningtimothys.com. ↑
Contrary to the distorting emphasis many scholars place on Revelation by labeling it an “apocalypse,” Osborne writes:
It is impossible to distinguish ultimately between prophecy and apocalyptic, for the latter is an extension of the former… John calls his work a prophecy five times (1:3; 22:7, 10, 18, 19)… Revelation is a symbolic book, but that does not mean the symbols do not depict literal events, like the “great tribulation” (7:14), as well as the various depictions of the “three and a half years”… or the “beast” for the Antichrist. (13-16)

Even the influential Amillennialist, Gregory Beale, writes: “Too much distinction has typically been drawn between the apocalyptic and prophetic genres” (37). ↑
An example of a biblical prophecy clearly predicting a spiritual event is Ezek 36:
I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws. (Ezek 36:26-27 NIV)

This prophecy has been fulfilled in a rather literal way by a spiritual event. When a Christian is regenerated and indwelled with God’s Spirit at conversion, they literally receive in a spiritual way a new heart and a new spirit. God explained the spiritual reality He predicted when He added, I will put my Spirit in you. In other words, there is no need to guess what the metaphorical language in the prophecy meant. God explained it. And this is the same in the vast majority of prophetic Scripture. God provides an explanation of the symbols and metaphors in the prophecy.

In addition, the promise of spiritual regeneration in Ezekiel 36:26-27 is a good example of the multiple fulfillment nature of biblical prophecy. Unfortunately, metaphorical interpreters of biblical prophecy consistently ignore this proven attribute of prophetic Scripture. For example, this promise of the Spirit’s indwelling has already been partially fulfilled in the Church Age. But it will be completely and finally fulfilled in the spiritual restoration of Israel in the Endtimes. For a similar example see Acts 2:14-21 (cf. Joel 2:28-32).

It is suggested that Ezekiel 36 is one of the very rare cases that we should expect a biblical prophecy to be fulfilled in a spiritual rather than physical way. But this is because the prophecy clearly and literally predicted a spiritual event. Of course, metaphorical interpreters of the fulfillment of biblical prophecy suggest many examples of biblical prophecy will be fulfilled in a spiritual reality, rather than a physical one in the future. But, unlike Ezekiel 36, the prophecies in question are not clearly promising a spiritual reality. ↑
Erickson, Guide, 84. ↑
Payne, 653. In spite of Payne’s exhaustive work, including his “Summaries,” it is difficult to determine helpful data. The claim of 592 prophecies fulfilled to date comes from having to distinguish past and future fulfillments under Payne’s category “church.” Past fulfillments seem to stop at #591, but then he lists the remembrance of “Mary’s act of anointing Jesus” throughout the Church Age (cf. Matt 26:13). Thus, we suggest 592 prophecies fulfilled to date. Payne lists 737 total prophecies in Scripture, with 145 remaining to be fulfilled.
Payne’s numbers will seem low to many because they have heard things like “There are over 300 prophecies about Christ’s First Coming and over 2,000 remaining for His Second Coming.” But such statistics are referring to the total number of biblical references to individual prophecies. For example, Payne lists 12 places in the OT that refer to the one prediction that Christ “will be from the household of David.” (646). ↑
Of course the only way for the reader to verify this conclusion is to obtain Payne’s book and evaluate the prophecies in the “Summaries” section for yourself. But in this author’s opinion, every single one of the 592 fulfilled prophecies Payne identified were fulfilled in a physical way by a person, place, or event. ↑
Riddlebarger, 39. ↑
Ibid. It is admitted that many respected NT scholars would agree with Riddlebarger on the interpretation and application of Acts 15:12-18 (cf. Stott, Acts; Bruce, 293; Marshall, 252; Peterson, PNTC). ↑
James’ use of Amos 9:11-12 is complicated by the fact that he used the ancient Greek translation of the OT (Septuagint, or LXX) instead of the Hebrew text used by modern Bibles. Therefore, James’ quote of the prophecy is quite different from the text of our Bibles. ↑
MacArthur is in agreement with the interpretation of Acts 15:12-18 argued for in this section:
The Amos passage speaks of the millennial kingdom. It is then that God will rebuild the tabernacle of David which has fallen, … rebuild its ruins, … and restore it. In the millennial kingdom, the rest of mankind will seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by My name, says the Lord, who makes these things known from of old. Gentiles will be saved as Gentiles, without first becoming Jews, or else verse 17 would make no sense…

James reassured his Jewish audience that the inclusion of Gentiles into the church did not abrogate God’s plan for Israel. In fact, in the kingdom they will be the messengers to bring Gentiles to God (Zech. 8:20–23). (loc. 9090; cf. Longenecker, Acts, 242.) ↑
Some have suggested this promise was fulfilled in the time of David. But the promise was forever. Earlier in Genesis we read:
The LORD said to Abram after Lot had parted from him, “Look around from where you are, to the north and south, to the east and west. All the land that you see I will give to you and your offspring forever. (Gen 13:14-15 NIV)

Likewise God told Abraham:

“I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. The whole land of Canaan, where you now reside as a foreigner, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God.” (Gen 17:7-8 NIV)

Accordingly, David Jeremiah writes:

The land promised to Abraham and his descendants was described with clear geographical boundaries. It takes in all the land from the Mediterranean Sea as the western boundary to the Euphrates River as the eastern boundary. The Prophet Ezekiel fixed the northern boundary at Hamath, 100 miles north of (Syrian) Damascus (Ezek 48:1), and the southern boundary at Kadesh, about 100 miles south of Jerusalem (v. 28).

If Israelis were currently occupying all the land that God gave to them, they would control all the holdings of present-day Israel, Lebanon, and the West Bank of Jordan, plus substantial portions of Syria, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia… Israel has never, in its long history, anywhere near this much land—not even at the height of its glory days under David and Solomon. (https://davidjeremiah.blog/the-promised-land-of-israel/) ↑
For more on the relationship between Israel and the Church see Additional Studies on the Endtimes, ch. 11, online at http://www.trainingtimothys.com. ↑
Amillennialism is especially prone to claim that the prophecies of Ezekiel, starting in chapter 40, cannot be fulfilled literally. For scholarly arguments to the contrary, see K&D. ↑
There is a recognized difference between “full Preterism” and “partial Preterism.” The “full” variety claims that virtually all biblical prophecy has already been fulfilled, including the Resurrection. Most rightly regard this view as heretical based on Paul’s condemnation of Hymenaeus and Philetus, whom the Apostle said, have departed from the truth. They say that the resurrection has already taken place, and they destroy the faith of some. (2 Tim 2:17-18 NIV). The “partial” variety claims that most of the predictions in Christ’s Endtimes Teaching have already been completely fulfilled, including the Antichrist’s Claim to be God and The Greatest Persecution. However, they believe Christ’s Return and the Resurrection are still to come. Prominent proponents of “partial Preterism” include the highly respected Reformed theologian R. C. Sproul, the NT scholar N. T. Wright, and Hank Hanegraaff of “The Bible Answer Man” radio program. ↑
Piper writes in response to Preterism’s belief about Christ’s Endtimes Teaching:
When the disciples used the phrase “end of the age” (συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος, Matt. 24:3), they were very likely using it the way Jesus had used it in their hearing, namely, to signify the very end of this age marked by the judgment on unbelievers… (Matt 13:39-43; cf. 13:49; 28: 20)… It is unlikely that as Jesus began to speak in Matthew 24, the disciples would have understood verses 4–35 to be unrelated to this “end of the age” [as Preterism claims] (229-230). ↑
Piper describes the Preterist view when he writes:
Those who believe that the events prophesied in Matthew 24:4-35 should be limited to the events leading up to AD 70 argue that the mission to the nations prophesied in verse 14 was fulfilled by that date…

Sam Storms [an Amillennialist who therefore must depend on Preterist interpretations] says:

As far as Jesus’ prophecy in Matthew 24:14 is concerned, his point is that following his resurrection the gospel will be preached outside the boundaries of Judea, such that the Gentile nations in the inhabited world known as the Roman Empire will hear the testimony of his redemptive work. Only thereafter, says Jesus, will the ‘end’ of the city and temple occur [and this prophecy of the gospel being preached in the whole world will be fulfilled]… [Regarding] The Great Commission in Matthew 28 … My point … is simply that Matthew 24:14 is not concerned with that task. (Sam Storms, Kingdom Come: The Amillennial Alternative (Mentor, 2013), pp. 242-44) (232)

With all due respect, this seems to be an example of an arrogant attempt to twist Scripture into a preconceived theology. ↑
Accordingly, MacArthur supports the correct view of this generation:
“This generation,” that is, the generation living during the time of those end-time events, “will not pass away until all these things take place” (v. 34). The signs of Matthew 24 will all be fully experienced within one generation, a generation that could be no other than the generation living when Christ returns. (MNTC, loc. 42713; cf. Bock, 1691-2) ↑
Kenneth L. Gentry, “The Days of Vengeance: A Review Article,” The Counsel of Chalcedon, Vol. IX, No. 4., p. 11. ↑
Eusebius, Church History 3.18.3. ↑
Irenaeus, Against Heresies 4.14.1-8; 5.33.4. Letter to Florinus. Irenaeus writes, “I can remember the events of that time… so that I am able to describe the very place where the blessed Polycarp sat… and the accounts he gave of his conversation with John and with others who had seen the Lord” (Irenaeus as quoted by Eusebius, Church History 5.20.5-6). ↑
Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.3.4. ↑
https://www.evidenceunseen.com/bible-difficulties-2/nt-difficulties/jude/date-of-revelation/#_ftnref1. This is a good website for the refutation of Preterism’s claim that Revelation was written before A.D. 70. ↑
An Introduction to the New Testament, D. A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo, Leon Morris (Zondervan, 1992), 476. ↑
Many names for the near/far nature of biblical prophecy fulfillment have been used. They include “prophetic foreshortening,” “prophetic telescoping” and a myriad of others.
While this principle of interpretation for biblical prophecy is essential to correctly understanding it, the highly respected Old Princeton theologian Geerhardus Vos was correct when he wrote: “The philosophy of this foreshortening of the beyond-prospect [there’s one more name for it] is one of the most difficult things in the interpretation of prophecy in the OT and NT alike” (Biblical Theology, [Banner of Truth Trust, 1948], 290). Therefore, it is one of the most difficult things in the entire task of interpreting Scripture. For more on this see ASE ch. 3. ↑
Against Preterism, Piper explains how the near/far aspect of the fulfillment of biblical prophecy helps to explain Christ’s Endtimes Teaching:
Therefore, to argue from this presumed [Preterist] structure that Matthew 24:4-35 relates only to the first century (pre-AD 70) and the rest of the chapter (24:36-51) describes the yet-future second coming, is, I think, unwarranted. I suggest that both the disciples’ questions (Matt. 24:3) and Jesus’s answer reflect what I have called “prophetic perspective” (see chapter 8, note 1). The near and distant mountain ranges of the future are seen as a whole. (229). ↑
The prophecy stated that Before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste (Isa 7:16). How old was this child when the prophecy was fulfilled? According to the Association for Psychological Science:
Children know the difference between right and wrong before they reach the age of two, according to new research published today. Scientists have found that babies aged between 19 and 21 months understand fairness and can apply it in different situations. (“Research shows toddlers understand right from wrong at just 19 months” (2012); online at https://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/research ↑
King Ahaz reigned from 732-716 B.C. when the prophecy was made. ↑
Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come (Zondervan, 1958), 47. ↑
For a resource for refuting Preterism, see online at http://www.according2prophecy.org/Preterism.html. Perhaps unfortunately, all the authors noted there are Pre-tribulationists. ↑

Chapter 12

A Biblical Evaluation of Amillennialism & Preterism

Contents

Primary Points