During the Liberalism vs. Fundamentalism period (roughly the 1910’s-1950’s) the Liberal schools, some of them quite preposterous, concentrated on Eschatology. Schweitzer, Dodd, Cullman, Bultmann, and others focused their efforts on locating a Jesus either devoid of eschatological speculations (Bultmann) or that he was simply a failed prophet (Schweitzer). Dodd, remaining evangelical, attempted a ‘realized eschatology’ as well as Cullman’s ‘mid-point’ eschatology. They were all trying to come to grips with the imminent statements of the gospels and epistles. On an unbiased reading of the gospel statements, Jesus clearly foresaw the restoration of Israel as something on the near horizon. Dispensationalism agreed, but postponed the event.

Most scholars today, including conservative evangelicals, are convinced that Jesus’ imminence language does indeed point to the Roman victory over the Jews, at least in some way. This is very encouraging to those of us that endorse a full-fledged Preterism (“consistent Preterism” as some call it). However, creeds die hard, and one of the main hurdles facing Preterism today is the fact that the majority of the church, in the majority of her history, has rejected any idea (or even entertained any such idea) that the Second Coming is a past event rather than a future one. I remember in my senior year at college creating quite a stir on campus (I even got called into the pastor’s office!). To even suggest that “it had all happened” meant that “nothing was left for us” today. In other words, the sheer ability to think outside a futurist framework as it relates to these things is surely the signs of a cult, or quackery.

I cut my teeth on the work of Russell. I have the first edition of the Baker Books reprint (ala Walt Hibbard). From a footnote in David Chilton’s book ‘Days of Vengeance: A Exposition on the Book of Revelation’ (Dominion Press) I found out about Max King and ‘The Cross and the Parousia of Christ,’ a mammoth volume devoted to this very issue. That was 1991. I began receiving the newsletter put out by ‘Living Presence.’ Among those authors were Jack Scott, William Bell, Larry Siegle, Doug King and a man by the name of Don Preston. Further, I contacted Ed Stevens and in Orlando, Florida, attended a conference that was immediately after the conference held by R.C. Sproul and Ligonier Ministries. At the latter conference, my instructor at Whitefield Theological Seminary, Kenneth Gentry, spoke. This was 1997, I believe. When R.C. wrote ‘The Last Days According to Jesus,’ the Preterist landslide began to take place.

R.C. had engaged in a lengthy conversation with Max King and comments on his work quite a bit in his book. There was a closed meeting between Max and Tim King, R.C., Reggie Kidd, Chuck Hill and Kenneth Gentry. It is still one of the best taped recordings available (from Stevens’ IPA publications). All that I can say at this point was that after R.C. published his book and J.S. Russell was reprinted again with R.C. writing a Forward, Preterism began to make its way into mainstream evangelicalism.

King, within the Church of Christ denomination, had lengthy debates, most notably with Jim McGuiggan (the McGuiggan/King debate is available on Planet Preterist). Living Presence had moved operations to Colorado Springs, Colorado under the guidance of Tim King, son of Max. Preston, Scott and Bell continued to labor in the fields in their own right (Bell, Preston and Scott are pastors in the Church of Christ). During this time, Moscow Press (Douglas Wilson’s outfit in Moscow, Idaho) published a book entitled ‘The End of All Things’ by C. Jonathin Seraiah, a Reformed Theological Seminary graduate (where I also attended for two years for Hebrew under Richard Pratt, Mark Futato, and Bruce K. Waltke). There was a brief written debate between Ed Stevens and Kenneth Gentry (which Gentry published in his book, ‘He Shall Have Dominion’ as an appendix). Ed Stevens wrote, ‘Stevens’ Response to Gentry.’ Gentry’s appendix, I believe, first appeared in Chalcedon Report, a Reconstructionist magazine, which I had subscribed to for many years. Keith Mathison wrote an appendix as well in response to what was being called “full” Preterism in his book ‘Postmillennialism: An Eschatology of Hope” (Presbyterian and Reformed Publications). Preterism, thanks largely to the efforts of Kenneth Gentry, David Chilton (who became a “full” Preterist months before his untimely passing away), James B. Jordan, and J. Marcellus Kik. These men were all Reformed (that is, Calvinistic). The battle lines were being drawn.

Seraiah’s book, in many ways, marked the first sustained attack against “full” Preterism. He referred to it as “pantelism” (from the Greek “pan” which means “all” and “telos” which means “end”). It was that book that caused me to write ‘Misplaced Hope’ (available on Planet Preterist). I wrote it in 6 months on my kitchen table with my trusty laptop that I stole from my wife. I was Reformed. I was schooled in the same places these men were. And they were flat out wrong. I wrote it from that conviction.

When I began to enter into the fray, I was not aware of the various movements within Preterism itself. I was involved in my Hebrew studies and did not stay abreast of these various things, and I also owned a lucrative janitorial business. When I came back into the mix, Preterism had grown! Bi-Millennial Publications agreed to publish my book, and after that, it was a full time endeavor. Within one year after the publication of that book (after seven years of cleaning toilets for a living), I was invited to pastor a new work in St. Petersburg, Florida. After much prayer, I accepted.

Seraiah’s book was still the only thing out there that was a major attack on Preterism. However, as the movement continued to grow, that would change. It is a clear sign that a movement (for lack of a better word) is gaining momentum when critics become louder. R.C. Sproul, Jr, one of the most vitriolic of critics, wrote the Forward for Seraiah’s book, and Pratt, Sandlin, and Gentry endorsed the back cover. It would be these men, minus Sandlin (of Chalcedon Report, and Razor Mouth.com) that would write a massive response, ‘When Shall These Things Be?’ from a major publication house, Presbyterian and Reformed Publications. The Reformed take their creeds seriously. Yet, they want their Preterist cake, too!

John Anderson began to have a conference three years ago along with Virgil Vaduva in Dayton, Ohio. Christ Covenant Church began to put a conference on as well in October of 2002. Dr. Kelly Birks was our first keynote speaker. Gary DeMar, William Bell, Jack Scott, Don Preston, John Anderson, Ovid Need, and your truly became frequent conference speakers. Tim King continued to put on a conference in Colorado Springs. More books began to flood the tables. More books were being written against Preterism, notably, best selling author Tim Lahaye and Thomas Ice in ‘End Times Controversy.’ We sponsored a debate between Ice and Preston in 2003. Living Presence sponsored a conference attached to the Society of Biblical Literature in 2003 in Atlanta. Jay Adams, best selling Christian author, wrote ‘Preterism: Orthodox or Unorthodox? (Timeless Texts).’ I would say, then, that by 2002, Preterism had hit a major nerve.

Never before in the history of Preterism has it enjoyed such a sustained momentum. Russell could not boast of such things. Kurt Simmons and the Tom Kloske wrote two massive volumes exploring the doctrine of Preterism. Ward Finley, Don Preston, John Noe, Dave Curtis, Ovid Need and several, several others have put out important works on this issue. As stated, one could literally attend the conference in Warren, Ohio back in 1999 and see very few books. Just recently, at John Anderson’s conference, there were well over 25 titles devoted solely to this issue!

As I listen to Dr. Steven Sizemore and Don Wagner give a history of Dispensationalism and the Christian Zionist efforts, I am awed by the fact that they, too, started the same way. They sponsored small ‘prophecy conferences’ back in the nineteenth century. After 100 years, Scofield hit the scene. Hal Lindsey brought it into such a popularity as never before in the 1970’s and LaHaye has revived this popularity. Dispensationalism is still not 200 years old. So, where are we?

Living Presence Ministries and the Transmillennial think tank has boldly moved into uncharted waters. I do not believe that the ramifications of placing the Second Coming of Jesus have been fully explored, theologically speaking. Theology is my cup of tea (and philosophy proper as well). Christian dogma has been done within the framework of an incomplete redemption. It looks forward to an end of history. It has never been done with a framework that leaves history open within a completed redemption. For example, Calvin worked out the doctrine of sanctification with an eye always on the Second Coming of Christ to complete the process of the work of the Spirit in our lives. If that Coming has already occurred, however, then what? Calvin was right to connect the process of sanctification with the Second Coming, but since we hold that the Second Coming has come, then what? Are we made holy, entirely?

Some Preterists would say, “no.” We are not made totally holy until we physically die and “get” a new body to enter into heaven with. Others disagree. Still, what of the church? Are we to still meet regularly? Are there still leaders within the body of Christ? Is there, even, a body of Christ on earth to speak of at all? Some argue that we are in the glorified body now (corporately, in Christ’s body), and others say, no, we will get one in the future.

Still, others, assert that the rapture took place in C.E. 70 in order to “prove” why it is we have no “evidence” in the early church records of the Second Coming in that time. Some Preterists still maintain the gifts of the Spirit. Some are universalists, some are still very much particularists, seeing that most of the world goes to an eternal hell. Others have argued that the ‘hell language’ of the Bible is merely figurative of the C.E. 70 conflagration and is no more eternal than an ant. And, yes, we still have those pious souls that see all of this debate and simply want to love Jesus and stop “all the fighting.” All of this sounds remarkably like Christianity to me! I grew up with an Adventist father, who argued for annihilationism and the cessation of the gifts. My mother was Charismatic, and I was raised in the Pentecostal experience. Needless to say, our dinner time conversations were quite interesting indeed.

Preterism did not originate these topics. Universalism was around and some charge arose within Presbyterian circles. Annihilationism has been around for a long, long time and Ed Fudge, one of its most ablest defenders, is hardly a Preterist. The argument over the gifts is as old as the Pentecostal movement itself. Christians arguing that pastors are irrelevant is nothing new. Ever hear of para-church ministries and tele-evangelists? That argument started around the time of radio. If “two or three gathered together” means “church” then why not stay at home with your family and listen to a guy on the radio?

In the Reformed faith, as well, there is an intramural of debates occurring. Need we be alarmed that there are debates within Preterism as well? Is that not the nature of theology? Does Preterism solve the philosophical problem of many perceptions, many ways of seeing things? Or, rather, does it not suggest that we do, in fact, allow for a great room of error? Preterism is a new kid on the block, which means that for the history of the church, no one, and I mean no one, was discussing how to fit I Corinthians 15 into an C.E. 70 framework! So, would one contend that no one was saved until Preterism showed up? If not, then God has allowed error, massive error, to flourish while yet at the same time calling his people: “my people.” Does error discount us from salvation life in Christ? Obviously not. What, then, is the benefit of removing error from our lives? Why do we want to “get it right”?

Preterism, in conclusion, has come a long, long way. I, for one, welcome Transmillennialism to the table. I welcome Bi-Millennialism to the table. Thank God for Ed Stevens, trouble-maker that he can be. Thank God for Max King and Ward Finley. Praise the Lord that the Kloske brothers wrote a book. I say, let’s have more!!! Let Kelly Birks argue his point, and allow for King to argue his. Let’s throw it all out there and see where it goes. But, if we are not in dialogue….if we are not talking….if we are not even interested….then I can hear the death-knell of Preterism and Transmillennialism. Regardless of the ‘next wave’ of the future, nothing, and I mean nothing whatsoever, can replace dialogue and respect. Bring on your technological age, give us your age of space and travel, and bring on the new dimension of perception…but “without love, these things are only clanging cymbals” and entirely useless enterprises. In all of this, and in all of these travels I have learned one thing from Preterism: I can sit at the table with Church of Christ Arminians, Reformed Calvinists, Roman Catholic defenders, tongue-talking Charismatics, annihilationist liberals, and immortal body at death rapture in A.D. 70 proponents and love them. That does not mean that I abandon my presuppositionalist, Calvinistic, pro-pastorate, pro-church, gift-cessationist, anti-empirical, immortal body now Preterism. It simply means, “hey, brother, want to talk?” There is nothing like a debate over beer and pizza (sorry if that offends the “Jesus drank only grape juice” Preterists).