Or so I've been told.
Growing up rather fundamentalist, I'd always assumed that the standard end-of-days narrative (Anti-Christ,
rapture, mark of the beast, eating our babies for breakfast) was just part-and-parcel with a belief in God and Jesus and singing hymns,
it all just went together. At some moment, people will just start vanishing before your eyes, and then immediately afterward, the president will announce that its high time we all get barcodes tattooed to our foreheads.
It's an easy belief to mock, and I was doing just that one day a couple of years ago, with a friend who is also a pastor, and he just said very matter-of-factly, "Oh, don't you know? Revelation actually refers to the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD."
What? No, I didn't know that. How could I have grown up completely ensconced within the Christian subculture and never even heard of such a thing?
Not long afterward, a friend from facebook suggested that I 'like' a page done by a friend of hers, Preterism. Looking through the posts, I realized, aha, this was what my pastor-friend had been talking about.
I can’t say that I'm sold on it, but it at least opened me up to seeing that one could be a
Christian who believes in the book of Revelation without necessarily constructing a bunker in their backyard.
The founder of the page is Vernon C. Klingman. He agreed to be my guinea pig.
Part One - What Do You Believe and Why?
"When it comes to viewing eschatology, hindsight is 20/20.”
-Vernon Klingman
Vernon: Preterism is
the belief that the second coming of Christ and its attendant events took place
by the time of the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. The term “preterism” comes
from the Latin word "praeter,” which simply denotes something is past.
Those who hold this view of Bible prophecy are called “preterists.”
The preterist sees Jesus teaching that He would return before His apostles
could personally preach to all the cities in Israel (Mat. 10:23), that He would
arrive in His kingdom before some standing beside Him would die (Mat.
16:27-28), and that His coming would coincide with the destruction of the Jewish
temple that would take place before the passing of His generation (Mat. 24:34).
The preterist also sees Jesus teaching that His kingdom is not of this physical
world (John 18:36), and that it would not come with observation, nor with
people pointing at it, but that it would nevertheless be in our midst (Luke
17:20-21).
In light of these teachings, the preterist believes that the fall of Jerusalem
in A.D. 70 signaled the return of Christ to establish a spiritual kingdom in the
unseen realm that is in our midst. The preterist also holds that anyone who
believes that Jesus died for their sins and rose again, manifests this kingdom
on earth, and will enter the fullness of it upon their passing from this life.
SM: Growing up, I was always attracted to The Book of Revelation
and the end times myself. Everything about it sounded so fantastic: people
vanishing in the blink of an eye, the mark of the beast... This was years before
the Left
Behind series, but I'm sure I would have
eaten them up if they'd been around. I even wrote stories about superheroes
dealing with the rise of the Anti-Christ!
I recall vividly
our church having a meeting concerning the book, 88 Reasons Why
the Rapture Will Be In 1988, and I remember we
had a speaker who had this whole system worked out wherein he added up the
numeric value of the letters of Sadam Hussein's name…
When I grew
older, though, I realized, wait… do I really believe all this stuff? It just
seemed so crazy. It made for good fantasy - clearly - but was just too insane
for me to take seriously anymore.
When I learned
about preterism through your facebook page, it made the insanity of Revelation seem somewhat more grounded in reality,
relatively speaking. I wonder how I would have reacted to it if I'd known about
it at a young age.
Vernon: It is certainly
not the view I was raised with either.
I grew up in a church like yours, that taught pre-millennial dispensationalism
- the theology of the Left Behind
series. This view asserts, among other things, that the coming of Christ is yet
future, and that His kingdom will in fact come with observation and have its
capital in modern-day Israel. So it's about as far from preterism as you can
get.
I can remember staring out the car window as a child - I'm not exactly sure how
old I was, but I know I was in elementary school - wondering if the prophet Daniel
or John might be standing on the sidewalk in the spiritual realm, watching our
family drive by, since I thought that some of their visions spoke of modern
transportation. I can also remember sitting in a pew during "grown-up"
church - I must have been about the same age - reading the Book of Revelation
and praying to God that I would one day understand it.
As I got older, I continued studying prophecy from a dispensational
perspective. I spent countless hours reading books and listening to sermons on
the last days by teachers such as John MacArthur, David Jeremiah, and J. Vernon
McGee. I had their system down.
However, as I entered my twenties, I found myself being increasingly bothered
by the time-statements regarding the return of Christ.
As
a dispensationalist, I knew how to pick them apart one by one, and explain how
they didn't really mean what they seemed to say. However, as I continued
encountering these statements, they began striking me as too numerous and too
varied in their expression not to mean exactly what they clearly seemed to say:
that the return of Christ had, in fact, been near: in the first century.
So I decided to explore other views of eschatology, that is, the study of last
things. That's when I picked up Revelation:
Four Views, by Steve Gregg. This book presented four parallel
commentaries on the book of Revelation, all from different theological perspectives,
including the preterist view. As I read the commentary from the preterist
perspective, it so resonated with me that I found it difficult to keep reading
the commentaries from the other views.
I think what impressed me most about preterism is how consistently it applied
reasonable and logical principles of interpretation to the Scriptures. I knew
that to properly interpret a book of the Bible, I had to consider its original
audience, their culture, and the events of their day. However, it seemed
that dispensationalism required me to abandon these principles when
interpreting passages relating to last things. The preterist view, however,
insisted that applying these principles to passages relating to eschatology was
the key to understanding them as well.
After reading Gregg's book, I began reading the authors he cited in it, such as
David Chilton, Kenneth Gentry and James Russell. While I certainly gained
Biblical insight from these authors, and others, I feel it was the preterist
view itself that truly opened up God's Word to my understanding. I believe it
did this by motivating me to consistently apply proper interpretive methods to
the Bible, and by encouraging me to just believe what Christ said concerning
the timing and nature of His kingdom.
SM: It sounds
like you're describing a born-again experience.
Vernon: I suppose, in a
sense, it was. It certainly felt as though I had been blind, but could now see.
It's
hard for me to imagine what my life would have been like had I not arrived at this
position, but knowing my disdain for the ignorance and hypocrisy of the
institutionalized Church, and my conviction to place my faith only in what is
sound and reasonable, I'm not completely sure I would have continued in the
Christian faith otherwise.
Looking forward to the second part. Good job. What bothers me the most, is how Evangelicals can become rabid in defending futurism. Absolutely rabid, and then resort to name calling and judgement. You know it is unsafe when you cannot hold to beliefs publicly and have to stay as close to silent as possible. That is where it is neither safe nor prudent to be. I don't debate this anymore with futurists. I just walk away. I keep my peace. I know what I believe and why. I don't have to prove anything to anyone. I know the convictions I hold. Until Jesus shows me, I won't change a thing. I was a futurist once. Became a historist. Then I discovered what I now know. This is the only thing on this subject that now gives me peace and rest and allows me to live in the now and not worry about the things that obsess futurists. Jesus said it. Jesus did it. I believe it. That settles it.
ReplyDeleteThanks for writing, Sam, I hope you enjoyed the rest of it!
ReplyDelete