You are hereProphecy Beyond Israel
Prophecy Beyond Israel
To take the position that the eschatological events of the last days (30 AD to 70 AD) were related only to Old Covenant Israel repeats the erroneous understanding of Christ-rejecting Israel and misses the glorious accomplishment of the messiah...This article is intended to add to the important material Kurt Simmons set forth in his recent Planet Preterist article. In my 30 plus years in these studies, I’ve never perceived the fulfillments of the eschaton (last days time frame) as confined to the Jewish nation, but rather fulfilling God’s purpose of dealing with all of mankind through Abraham’s descendants. In the circles in which I fellowship, I had not encountered the aforementioned position. Nonetheless, with some having come to such a position, Simmons’ article is excellent material which ought to be considered.
Over the years I’ve experienced people hearing things you never said and drawing conclusions that were never intended. As an example because I believe the fulfillment of eschatological events affects the here and now, I’ve had critics, early on, claim that I therefore did not believe in an afterlife. They extrapolated that erroneous conclusion from their reasoning and limited information, not from my actual position of understanding. In fact- my understanding has caused my convictions of life beyond this physical realm to intensify a thousand fold.
The same thing occurs when someone hears a person who believes all prophecy has been fulfilled, and their mind begins racing ahead without getting all the information being shared. The “preterist” properly demonstrates that proper understanding of New Testament eschatological texts is rooted in their original Old Testament roots. In using those Jewish covenant roots, the hearer begins to hear things that aren’t actually being said. He begins to hear “this is just about Israel, and has nothing to do with anyone else…what a disappointment.”
1.) In fact, a fulfilled view says the following: God chose the descendants of Abraham, physical Israel, as a glorious means to a glorious end. Israel was the vehicle through which God would fulfill His statement to Abraham that through his descendants the whole world would be blessed.
2.) First century Christ-rejecting Israel made a mistake similar to those who would say “all preterists think the second coming, judgment, and resurrection dealt only with physical Israel.” Read through the book of Acts and notice when the Jews got bent out of shape when listening to the gospel being preached. Often they listened patiently till the speaker would say something that indicated the unfolding events of the eschaton were broader in their scope that just physical Israel. It’s like their mentality was “we can consider the words of the Jewish prophets pointing to Jesus and our nation, but don’t even try broadening those words to include the gentile dogs!” (See Acts 22:21-22, “ And he said to me, ‘Depart; for I will send you far away to the Gentiles.’” Up to this word they listened to him; then they lifted up their voices and said, “Away with such a fellow from the earth! For he ought not to live.”).
3.) The disciples themselves struggled with this at first, as evidenced by the events of Acts 10-11. Peter had to be slapped on the side of the head (metaphorically speaking) to even get him to preach the word to the gentile Cornelius. Once he did, the brethren demanded explanation for his doing this work outside the scope of national Israel. Peter and the rest of the Jewish brethren came to realize the gentiles were included in the eschatological completion of God’s redemptive work.
4.) Paul, in Romans clarified for his audience that the events of the eschaton involved all mankind, not just national Israel. Romans 2:28-29 is broadening the concept of who are true Jews involved in these unfolding events to include gentiles of faith. Romans 4 broadens the concept of who are the children of Abraham beyond national Israel to include gentiles of faith. Likewise the whole discussion in Romans 9-11, which points its first century audience to the fact that all these prophetic fulfillments, concurrent to these disciples, most definitely were broader than just national Israel.
5.) Paul’s message to the gentile audience at Athens in Acts 17 is certainly outside the Palestinian environment in its implications-“The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all men everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed, and of this he has given assurance to all men by raising him from the dead.”
6.) Paul’s discussion of the gentile inclusion in the makeup of the new spiritual temple (Ephesians 2), equally points us to understand that far more than military events in Palestine are unfolding.
7.) 1 Timothy 1:15 gives the same message-: “The saying is sure and worthy of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners. And I am the foremost of sinners…” This message was given to a young man whose ministry was outside national Israel and within Paul’s ministry to the known gentile world!
In summary, the first century was the time when God made sacrificial atonement for the sins of all mankind, and effected his answer to the sin and death problem. The sin and death problem WERE NOT JEWISH. They predated covenant Israel, and covenant Israel served God’s purpose as a means to an end, worldwide need for God’s redemption. When Christ-rejecting Israel sought to constrain the redemptive prophecies to national Israel, the above was set forth to correct that misconception. All these things apply for those who would currently constrain the effects of prophetic fulfillment to a national Israel context.
Before there was an Israel, God was working his purpose to make redemption, resurrection, and restoration possible for all mankind. The seed of Abraham was raised up to further that purpose. “I am the LORD, I have called you in righteousness, I have taken you by the hand and kept you; I have given you as a covenant to the people, a light to the nations…” Isaiah 42:6.
Terry Hall
Dayton, Ohio
Home of TruthVoice 2007
My understanding is that in the first century, the Jewish State called themselves 'Israel' for their Father was Israel. These people were of the House of Judah. They were not 'Lost'...The Northern House of Israel were 'the Lost Sheep'.These people (the 'lost') had become 'as Gentiles' and needed to be rejoined (the two sticks) with their brothers as 'a new people with a new name'. Judaism was not the name of The Temple Worship Culture Religion at the time of Christ.This Religious Sect came aboutlater. We moderns tend to lump so much of this together as 'the Jews...Judah...Judaism...= Israel. We over look that there were many other sons of Father Israel. These people are not of Judah and do not practice Judaism. Josephs (Israels' faverite) two sons were given the Birthright by Father Israel and the younger son, Ephram is the leader of The House of Israel and out of him would come Many Nations...Jesus was sent to save the lost sheep of Israel and many of these sheep are called Gentiles (and the rest of us may be called the 'Barbarians').When Shiloh come, the Kingship was ripped away from what remained of the visible linage of Israel, Judah. And Christ became King of All Israel (visiable and 'lost')and Barbarians who would proclaim Him as Lord of All. Just some thoughts...
Brother Les
Brother Les
Trying to decide if fulfillment was Israel specific or universal in application or effect, may not be enough to explain both sides of the issue. IMHO I believe that it is not enough.
Good points by Kurt and Terry. Yes it went "beyond".
In the Garden it was promised that the "head" of the serpent would be crushed. One need only crush the head to have broader applications.
Dealing with the "world" or "sphere of influence" of Israel is also all that was needed. This "sphere of influence" where fulfillment is played out need not be the world of today or even the whole of the world of that day.
In this time peoples and communities and nations are in diverse ways being brought into both the natural and or spiritual things of Israel.
When the High priest said to Pilate that "we have no other King but Caesar" this covenantally extended the sorting out of covenantal outworking to Rome.
The end of the old covenant was the end of Caesar "economically". Rome would play no further covenantal "sorting out" any more than the temple would be rebuilt (in the new age).
Nevertheless the "world" of this time was not the universal world as we think of it. It did however represent humanity as a whole.
Paul's [everyone everywhere] call to repentance in Acts 17 was understood to be within the "sphere of Israel's influence". Paul's "under heaven" often referred to the "sphere of Israel's influence".
The reason why fulfillment need not be played out beyond this "world" is because of the meaning of fulfillment.
As long as Christians attach the same significance to "repentance" today as it had with the unfolding fulfillment of all things written then there will be a discrepancy between the "world" of Jesus and Paul and Peter and John and the world that we know now exists and did exist in the time of Jesus, Paul, Peter and John.
For the call of "repentance" during the time of unfolding fulfillment of all things written did not extend to area's and peoples that Paul was aware of.
During unfolding fulfillment "repentance" was concerning that which God was "showing" or manifesting through the Jew.
The meaning of this would then continue not if unfolding fulfillment but in outworking of what had been accomplished.
The change of mind and heart is now concerning that which is true for our age in view of a past age that is finished.
Outworking [which is the result of fulfillment] of that which is "true" and "real" and "applied" is different in nature from that which was being worked through.
Without this to stand on then the debate between local or universal will have no definitive answer. For it was both.
One need only crush the head to have broader applications. And so as this applied to Israel as in its then sphere of influence it also applies in principle to the new age universally.
Israel is the center of the universe in the Biblical writings. God worked from the center outword.
Barry
we are all in this together
Barry, to underline what you already said, I am always surprised at how much Preterists completely ignore the very first promise made by God to mankind, which is the promised redemption from the Fall (to all) and the crushing of the serpent's head (to all). This is a universal promise affecting all people throughout all ages past or future.
For someone to only focus on the Mosaic or Abrahamic covenants is very much like wearing horse glasses. The picture is bigger than Abraham - it's universal in scope and nature.
Actually, the promised blessing was that "in Christ" all nations would be blessed. Only those that are baptized are "in Christ." (Rom. 6:3-6) Therefore, they alone enjoy the blessing of salvation. See Gal. 3:16-4:7, which place the blessings in Christ to those that are baptized (v. 27), and them alone. :)
I know what you are saying Kurt. [I was a Church of Christ Preacher and and then missionary overseas. I taught baptism very well :) ]
However, as in the Ark and as with the flood a particular group got through the water in tact which then brought about comprehensive blessings[removal of the curse upon the earth, was more comprehensive that who got through that age in tact].
If we do not do this [make age changing historical] then we have no way of figuring out anything else thereafter either with the flood or with the end of the age.
The flood receded and the rain stopped and they got out of the Ark. This was accomplished historically.
The harvest "is" the end of the age, and cannot be brought further.
In both cases, saved from what and delivered too what becomes the question.
In both cases salvation becomes a past experience that is bound up in past history.
We cannot produce another second death of either covenant or elements of an old economy (which both passed away). One need only crush the head.
We cannot produce a new resurrection.
We cannot have an new destruction of the last enemy.
Nor are we able to explain away or make up an idea that one's own personal experience constitutes a never ending personal historical fulfillment for each individual in ongoing history.
The issues on the table are now one's of recognizing and living by the comprehensive blessings or not. These are different matters from fulfillment which is historical.
The only way to configure fulfillment is by making fulfillment historical as was the flood and the benefits of age changing comprehensive. For there is no way to relive or reproduce this history. And there is no way to make what was fulfilled history only a personal spiritual experience.
And this IMHO is what many Preterist have not yet fully explored.
Henceforth there is a difference between the outworking of what is now true in humanities blessings and the fulfillment that brought these blessing to bear.
Blessings Barry.
we are all in this together
Kurt, we may agree in principle - we would probably have to talk in detail about this - but I see those blessings being beneficial and applying to all humanity, just as the promise was made to "all" Eve's descendants and "all nations" in Abraham. Now I can see the differentiation you are making, but what if the entire world is "in Christ" in the post AD 70 age as a result of the fire baptism of AD 70?
We both seem to see baptism as a necessary covenantal transitional tool, but I am wondering how you see the baptism of fire John the baptist spoke of? Also, what do you make of Paul's words anticipating that in Christ "all things in heaven and on earth" will be reconciled?
Virgil: …but what if the entire world is "in Christ" in the post AD 70 age as a result of the fire baptism of AD 70?
Kurt, this IS the reality of the Cross-Parousia event – the whole world of humanity who up until Christ's reconciling redemption had been through no choice or confession of their own summarily place in the first Adam, were summarily place in the last Adam by the Divine and sovereign will and act of God – again, through no choice or confession of their own, period.
This is where the "in Christ" understanding becomes a missed understanding. Those who you mention as being "in Christ" – who are so by the call of God, are indeed "in Christ", and are so to the service of His will. Being "in Christ" as Paul so clearly states means that a salvation takes and is taking place in their [our] lives where deliverance [being saved] frees one from the toxicity of a life lived short of the knowledge and subsequent relationship of and with God; in this life.
To interpret "in Christ" as meaning qualifying for heaven upon death is to impose on Scripture what IT itself nowhere says – it is a religious assumption to assume that "heaven" for some was ever in doubt. Salvation is and always was about purpose in life, NOT position thereafter.
davo
davo – pantelism.com
To maintain the analogy with Noah's flood, perhaps we should consider the possibility that being "in Christ" is as relevant as being "in Noah/the Ark" thus being saved from the cataclysmic events involving a change of an age: from Adamic curse and arid lands to fertile ground and curse-less world.
Indeed; as long as they remained "in the boat" they from delivered THROUGH, not from, calamity:
Acts 27:31 Paul said to the centurion and the soldiers, “Unless these men stay in the ship, you cannot be saved.”
davo
davo – pantelism.com
Davo,
I think that is a very good observation in bringing Paul's experience to bear in relation to the flood. Wish I would've seen that when I preached through Acts a couple of years ago. That is a neat one. Thanks.
Tim Martin
www.truthinliving.org
lol yeah Virgil and Tim, and you know how it goes -- you read something a thousand times, then one day you read it one more time yet within a given framework of thought and wonder "how on earth did I not see it before?" -- and you're right Tim, usually straight away you realise "darn, I could have used that...". Life is sweet ;)
davo – pantelism.com
Paul said to the centurion and the soldiers, “Unless these men stay in the ship, you cannot be saved.”
Whoa - I never noticed that before in the context of the flood!!!
-- too bad you don't have the ability to correct typos on this site -- that was meant to read:
as long as they remained "in the boat" they were delivered THROUGH, not from, calamity:
davo – pantelism.com
Terry,
“In my 30 plus years in these studies, I’ve never perceived the fulfillments of the eschaton (last days time frame) as confined to the Jewish nation, but rather fulfilling God’s purpose of dealing with all of mankind through Abraham’s descendants. In the circles in which I fellowship, I had not encountered the aforementioned position. Nonetheless, with some having come to such a position, Simmons’ article is excellent material which ought to be considered.”
In my less than 1 year into preterism with an extensive amount of reading and research I too have not noticed the “aforementioned position” unless it was related to Max King’s position which I am not as greatly familiar with. It appears that Kurt is just reaffirming positions that most of us already adhere to. This almost sounds like elementary Christianity where most would easily comprehend the universal application of the “Cross” to all mankind. I guess I have come to the preterist position so recently that I must have missed the heavy debates of the previous position of “only Israel”.
It appears that when “His Message or Word” encounters new principalities and powers in this world that those “powers” are defeated anew. I think we can look at the past history of nearly 2000 years and see his ongoing universal “ruling” over those dominions encountered.
Good follow up piece.
Norm
Most in the preterist movement would interpret, before now, the "elements" of II Peter Three in reference exclusively to the destruction of Israel, and the "world" that was passing away as the Mosaic age. Yes, the cross was universal as was also the parousia in affect. But was it universal in terms of the wrath poured out upon the nations and the Bible's prophetic scope of treatment? That is the question. Most Preterists have missed or neglected a universal 2d coming until now, focusing exclusively upon Israel, interpreting all prophecy as pointing to its destruction. The idea that Christ also came against Rome, Asia, Egypt, etc has been passed over or missed. That is the issue the article speaks to.
Kurt,
I stepped back and reread your article “ Rethinking II Peter Three, ect.” And yes you are right you are taking a different position than others and although you have a lot of true positions within your articles it seems that you could have overstated your case somewhat in the manner of some of your scripture interpretations. Specifically looking at your analysis of Galatians 4 there appears the possibility of your misapplying the “elements” contextually in that portion. That whole structure appears to be a very complex discussion and I can see both sides of the issue there. I would not necessarily want to go into court with that analysis as the backbone of my case. Another point is your discussion of “heavens and earth” passing away, this is a possible misadventure in interpretation there as well. So in essence I believe the jury is still out on a complete rendering of judgment for your position. Now in a civil case you might get a 60 or 70 percent settlement as you are avowing some good positions and truths within the presentation.
I pulled out Don Prestons book “The Elements Shall Melt With Fervent Heat” and reread his section and he is obviously at odds with your analysis. Given time Don might eventually come over to your position, but in the mean time it would interesting to see a debate between the two of you on your new positions. Especially I would like to see more detail from you regarding specifics of what the “old heavens and earth” entailed.
(Mat 15:24 NIV) He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel."
(Heb 8:8 NIV) But God found fault with the people and said : "The time is coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.
13 By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear.
Also about the wrath being “world wide”, I think a more accurate term would be “regional wide” as some principalities in the rest of the physical world did not fall until centuries later. I alluded to this and a couple of examples would be when the “New World” was opened up and exposed to Christian teachings. The evil “powers and principalities” were dissolved, specifically I’m thinking of Montezuma and his human sacrifice worship and Inca human sacrifice worship. This was appalling to the new comers and eradicated by them or should I say “God’s Wrath” with the Spanish Conquistadors being the instrument of His wrath.
Norm
Hi Norm,
I recently wrote up a verse-by-verse exposition of Isa. 65, 66 and the new heavens and earth and will be posting it soon. You can then judge for yourself what heavens and earth passed away. That the elements in Gal. 4 is not the mosaic law is easily seen by the fact that the Gentiles were under the "elements" even while worshiping the celestial bodies and idols. The better view is that the elements refers to the elementamental forces of man's fallenness, consisting in the motions of sins in his flesh. Jew and Gentile were in bondage to these. The Jew, inasmuch as the temple service could not deliver from sin; the Gentile, inasmuch as he was worshiping objects of his own imagination. Both were in need of the salvation only Jesus could provide.
Kurt,
I don’t want to nit pick as it appears that your basic premise on elements has some perceptive merit.
But in the case of Gal 4, I believe we may see “elements” assigned more to the “Law” than possibly the “world”. Looking at vs. 3 we find elements seemly ascribed to the “Law” due to the context within which it lies. When we come to vs. 9 there becomes a doubt whether to assign elements to the previous vs. 8 or perhaps it is referring back again to the prior cite in vs.3? The debate arises due to vs. 10 which seem to indicate more of Hebrew practices in the contextual setting. In fact this whole section starting in Chapter 3 thru 4 is permeated with the “Law” contextually speaking. Also the question Paul raises concerning their turning again to the “elements” which you desire again to be in bondage is in response to his statements in the preceding verses concerning the “Law”. The only qualifying verse that would support your premise here is vs. 8 which you equate with Col 2:8-22.
Describing this section in vs. 8 (you served those which by nature are not gods) as equating “celestial bodies, philosophy, and assorted commandments of men” seems to be overstating contextually. It might work in Col 2 but it doesn’t seem to fit contextually in Gal 3 & 4. Also in attempting to make your case one would have to assign this small section of vs. 8 with the overriding contextual equivalent of all of the rest of chapters 3 and 4 which are without reservation in my opinion describing the “Law”.
I have gone back and reread Galatians 3 and 4 and your article several times now trying to mesh them. I don’t really have a “dog in this fight” so to speak and I find your overall premise with some good ideas to consider. But your position is going to have to stand up under scrutiny eventually and I just believe your Gal 4 section is a weak link. I realize that you have comprehensively detailed this section and that is why it needs extensive analysis as it is not simple to comprehend in casual reading. If your position is determined to be God’s truth then it will stand up otherwise you may have to move to other avenues to support this new proposition. There is also the possibility that Gal 4 may be complimentary to your position without the strong declarations of your approach. The reason I’m giving this section such investigation is because your stated position is contradicting previous understandings of Gal 4. It appears no one challenged you previously on this point which I can understand because at first glance it seems plausible and you did a thorough job of working the subject. But if this teaching is to become foundational it needs to be critiqued extensively and then it will continue to be developed and useful for instruction.
I’m looking forward to your article on “the heavens and the earth” and expect that we will glean from it as well, benefiting from your dedicated and fruitful work.
Norm
It appears that when “His Message or Word” encounters new principalities and powers in this world that those “powers” are defeated anew. I think we can look at the past history of nearly 2000 years and see his ongoing universal “ruling” over those dominions encountered.
That's another excellent observation. You rightly are pointing out the ongoing, continuous victory of God over sin, death and the curse and fallenness of man. What we see happening today and what you've observed in history over the past 2,000 years is nothing but a repeat of AD 70, a continous manifestation of God's power, reign and victory over death and sin.
Terry,
Thanks for the compliment. I have noticed much insupportable exegesis in preterist circles, defining the "elements of the world" as the law of Moses, Christ's statement about "heaven and earth" passing away being references to the old law, etc. I made many of these mistakes myself, but now feel these were forced attempts to explain this language in terms of the destruction of Jerusalem, rather than the end of the epoch marked by the reign of sin and death. The "elements of the world" really speak to the elemental forces of man's fallenness - the social, political, philosophical, and religious moorings of a world marked by the reign of sin and death. The elements included apostate Judaism, but were not defined by it - not by any means.(I would refer the reader to my earlier article which reconsiders II Peter, chapter three, discussing at length some of the exegetical mistakes we preterists sometime make, particularly concerning the "elements".) God's blessings! Thanks again for writing. Kurt
Wow, Kurt..I am blown away by your comment:
The "elements of the world" really speak to the elemental forces of man's fallenness - the social, political, philosophical, and religious moorings of a world marked by the reign of sin and death.
I wish I could say it as eloquently as you did. I believe that the core message of Preterist eschatology should be exactly what you said above, that sin, death, curse, fallenness were all dealt with, and EFFECTIVELY so in AD 70. All those things (and I would add Satan, Hades, etc to the list) were dealt a deadly and final blow at that time.
You do realize that your comment will not make you many friends in calvinist circles right? :)
I don't know why Calvinists would take exception to that statement. All who attain to the age of accountability are still under the legal power of man's inherent fallenness outside of Christ. Only those that obey the gospel and are baptized are "in Christ" (Rom. 6:3-6); they alone enjoy the adoption of sonship. The rest are still under the sentence of death. Sin, death, man's inherent fallenness have been dealt with effectively in Christ at AD 70, but not for those out of Christ. However, the "fashion of the world" is being changed for all men; Christ is remolding and remaking every human institution to bring it into better conformity with his word and will.
To a Calvinist, the age of accountability is an oxymoron - all people are decaying, rotting sinners from the time of conception on because of Adam - we are ALL in Adam, the entire creation, trees, rocks, rivers and distant planets. It is only because of God's pleasure that a tiny tiny minority of humans find favor in God's eyes.
A slightly sarcastic but very accurate description of the extremist Calvinistic cockamamie theology. What happened in AD 70 resolved nothing as far as the original sin and the Fall go. At least I never got a preterist Calvinist to reasonably deal with those contradictions.
1.) In fact, a fulfilled view says the following: God chose the descendants of Abraham, physical Israel, as a glorious means to a glorious end. Israel was the vehicle through which God would fulfill His statement to Abraham that through his descendants the whole world would be blessed.
…covenant Israel served God’s purpose as a means to an end, worldwide need for God’s redemption. AMEN Terry, this is what I was also saying in my response to Kurt's article: "Thus Israel was God's chosen means to God's chosen ends – the restoration of man "in Christ" – – "So, I see much of the NT "world" and "all" language as exclusively orientated by virtue of the fact that that was the divinely pre-ordained redemptive path for Israel, but with the wider divinely pre-ordained all inclusive intent that all humanity be reconciled to Him."
However, what I think does happen is that we in our modern evangelicalism read back into the text/s "our" Christianized mindset that negates the means [Israel] as being that which God drew humanity into in Christ, i.e., God now sees the whole world as His people – Israel [Psa 2:8; 24:1], and we believers as the kingly priesthood [Mt 24:43] within, to minister to those without in "proclaiming the praises of Him…" 1Pet 2:8-9.Read through the book of Acts and notice when the Jews got bent out of shape when listening to the gospel being preached. Often they listened patiently till the speaker would say something that indicated the unfolding events of the eschaton were broader in their scope that just physical Israel.This again is nothing new, it continues today – the same "religious exclusivity" still runs rampants. Back then it was "the Jew" against "the Gentile" whereas today we have "the Saved" against "the Lost". Yet IF we can grasp the reality of the Gospel that through Christ these walls have been abolished it would make for a much healthier humanity.
davo
davo – pantelism.com
Excellent article Terry and a great compliment and supplement to Kurt's. Again most of the NT was written to people outside of Palestine. If the Parousia was only a local event, why then does the NT mention that they, outside of Palestine, would know the Day had arrived and as Kurt pointed out the whole creation (mankind) was awaiting the revealing of the sons of God? The sin and death problem concerned all mankind because all have sinned and continues to concern all mankind.
Glenn