John Noe and I have been exhibiting Preterist books at the annual meetings of the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS) for the last four years. It is "the" place where thousands of conservative theologians, seminary students, professors, writers, speakers, ministry leaders, and pastors gather for study and interaction. At those meetings we have put thousands of preterist books into the hands of our fellow conservative Christian leaders. At the last ETS meeting in Atlanta in November, we gave away over 200 copies of Russell's book, The Parousia . Our activity there is having significant impact, and is provoking our critics to respond in print. We must continue our presence there at ETS.

Eight scholars contributed articles to Mathison's book:

1. R. C. Sproul, Jr. (Foreword -- creedal cheerleading)
2. Kenneth Gentry (you are heretical by creedal standards)
3. Charles Hill (history does not document the Parousia)
4. Richard Pratt (conditional prophecy vs. time statements)
5. Keith Mathison (means soon only if it explicitly says soon) 6. Simon Kistemaker (post-70 date for the book of Revelation)
7. Douglas Wilson (creeds and church authority vs. preterism)
8. Robert Strimple (resurrection of the physical body required)

This book mentions a broad group of Preterists, including (but not limited to): David Curtis, Ken Davies, Sam Frost, Joe Gautier, David Green, Dan Harden, Walt Hibbard, Max King, Richard & Janice Leonard, John Noe, Randall Otto, Don Preston, J. S. Russell, Ed Stevens, and Milton S. Terry. The Preterists being attacked most frequently were Max King, Ed Stevens, John Noe, Sam Frost, Dan Harden, and J. S. Russell. Don Preston was also mentioned several times.

It is actually the third book-length critique of Preterism coming from the Reformed community. The previous two were by Jonathin Seraiah ("The End of All Things") and Jay Adams (Preterism: Orthodox or Unorthodox?). Some of you may not have either of the Seraiah or Adams books. Down below we offer a way to get all three. Preterist websites have posted good responses to Seraiah and Adams. Very few (if any) of the arguments in Mathison's book are new, but they are better developed and more convincingly argued by a broader range of critics than ever before, so several of us have already begun work on a multi-authored response.

Here's what two of those writers have already said about Mathison's book:

DON PRESTON: "Essentially Mathison says that...if a text does not use "at hand" then it is future. ...he is dancing an extremely thin line. He knows that if he...seeks to discredit the "at hand" statements, he calls his own partial preterism into question. On the other hand, if he concedes it, he is doomed! Lots of smoke and mirrors here! ...I have started making notes for my response."

SAM FROST: "The 'age to come' is future according to the creeds.... C. Jonathin Seraiah is quoted favorably by Wilson. He should be, for the same publishing house that cranks out Wilson's books also cranked out Seraiah's. Yet, on page 48 of Seraiah's book, he disagrees with the Nicene Creed: "The 'age to come' cannot have ended in A.D. 70, that is when it began." The 'age to come' according to Seraiah began in A.D. 70! The creeds and Wilson say it is still future. They both cannot be right. One is a heretic according to Doug Wilson's reasoning. ...Both Pratt and Seraiah believe we are now living in the age to come. Pratt has it beginning in 33 AD right after Christ's first appearing, while Seraiah has it 'beginning' in A.D. 70. Either way, according to Wilson, both are heretics."

Mathison's book is proof that the next wave of reformation (the "Preterist" Reformation) has begun. Its articles sound so hauntingly similar to the creedalist and Romanist complaints against the first Reformers. This is another of those times in church history when the voice of REFORM must be shouted above the hysterical whines and woeful moans of blind tradition. Our response to Mathison's book may become one of the defining documents of the Preterist Reformation, much like Russell's book was for the last century. The articles in this book will be the kind of "theses" we will need to nail to the electronic doors of every futurist institution in the world.

We here at IPA are committed to producing and publishing this response to Mathison. It will include articles from both major resurrection views within Preterism ("collective body" versus "individual body"), as well as from both Reformed and non-Reformed perspectives.

Sam Frost, Don Preston, John Noe, Walt Hibbard, Ken Davies, David Green and Ed Stevens have already committed ourselves to writing responses for this book.

This kind of comprehensive and fair-minded approach will be much appreciated by all seekers of truth, and will greatly benefit the whole Preterist movement. But we absolutely must have your help to accomplish it.

Here's what you can do:

-- Pray for us writers, editors, and publishers
-- Make a contribution