Preterism as an acceptable system of prophetic interpretation has arisen to the forefront during the past twenty years and continues its steady pace of growth and development. Preterism might well be described as “open-source” theology since its systematic development has come from the layman’s perspective rather than that of seasoned theologians and noted Bible scholars. Although diversity and freedom of exploration continues within the preterist community at large, recent attempts at categorization has exposed significant differences, each of which deserves careful attention and consideration.[3] According the Todd Dennis, current trends within preterism could be broken into at least four major categories with as many as five subcategories.[4] As the division and fragmentation becomes more pronounced bewildered believers are ‘lining up’ behind their most cherished leaders and looking for answers.

As is the case with dispensationalism, Amillennialism, postmillennialism and idealism, preterism has been ‘adapted’ to fit within the particular traditional, creedal or confessional guidelines established by the variety of denominations embracing the view. In most instances the preterist viewpoint is simply ‘tacked on at the end’ of each statement of belief as though nothing of significance has happened. The reality is quite the opposite. The inclusion of preterism into one’s theology has a profound effect on virtually everything that pertains to the overall belief system. Denominational resistance stems from the recognition that preterism is not just about the ‘end-time’ but also reaches back in time to the very beginnings of redemptive history itself. This is that about which scholars are most concerned and alarmed.

The implications of eschatology reaches into the very most intimate aspects of one’s personal relationship with the Lord for those now living ‘beyond’ the prophesied ‘end-time’ in the biblical “age to come” (Matt. 12:32; Mark 10:30; Luke 18:30; Eph. 1:21; Heb. 6:5). The easy part of eschatology is that which establishes the time aspect for prophetic fulfillment as pertaining to those events associated with the fall of Judaism in A.D. 70 when the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by the Roman armies (Matt. 24:3-51 el al). Hundreds of articles have appeared in print and on websites discussing the significance of the “last days” having occurred within the “generation” to whom the prophecies were directed (Matt. 23:36; 24:34; Acts 2:40). The difficult part of eschatology is in providing satisfying answers to questions pertaining to what life is like after the “end of the age.” The answers to these questions are unsettling and challenging to traditional churches since most are established on the foundation of futurist hopes and expectations. Church services, Sunday school, sermons, liturgical pageantry, hymnals and even prayers offered up are all ‘forward-looking’ in both scope and content. Mission efforts, evangelistic outreach programs and benevolence programs all exist and operate in the shadow of promised fulfillment and expectations.

The tragic result of having recognized this dilemma by some preterists has been the abdication and complete rejection of the “historic” church altogether[5] leaving believers in the “land of nowhere” with respect to fellowship and edification. Conceptually, the “Kingdom of God” motif taken in the extreme has come to be seen as wholly esoteric without structure, purpose or direction in our post-modern society. “In those days there was no king in Israel, every man did what was right in his own eyes” (Judg. 17:6; 21:25).

Some seeking to move “beyond preterism”[6] have opened the floodgates of ‘hyper-inclusionism’ embracing a form of universalism that fails to recognize that the justice of God is an element of His Divine Nature, requiring that sin and disobedience be punished as a logical consequence. Although attempts have been made to connect this viewpoint with the ‘covenantal view’ of resurrection, evidence strongly suggests that no organic relationship necessarily exists between the two concepts.

The answer to eschatological bewilderment lies with the preterist understanding of the importance of covenant within the scope of the redemptive plan of God. God is inseparably connected to His covenant because of His own ‘sworn oath’ to keep the sacred promises contained therein (Heb. 6:13-20; Titus 1:2). Eschatology cannot be understood apart from acknowledgement of the importance of seeing redemptive history in a covenantal context.

The failure of every system of prophetic interpretation is tied directly to the misapplication and misunderstanding of how God operates in the affairs of man through the administration of His covenant. The revelation of covenant begins with the separation of Adam and Eve from the presence of God in the garden of Eden and continues through the consummation of redemptive history at the predicted “end of the age” in A.D. 70. The distinctive relationship between the physical and spiritual aspects of the Abrahamic covenant forms the basis for the working out of the redemptive drama. The defeat of sin-death and the restoration of willing humanity back into the life-giving presence of God is bound within the confines of having a proper understanding of covenant promise and covenant fulfillment. Everything that humanity now experiences is a direct result of the appropriation of the benefits established in and through the operation of the “blood of the everlasting covenant” (Heb. 13:20).

The suggestion of this writer is that preterists be willing to go ‘back to the drawing board’ with respect to how the eternal principles of the New Covenant promises apply today. A humble recognition that those first-century, transition period believers were then laying the groundwork for what was to become the very foundation of how the Kingdom of God would operate in “the age to come” is the place to begin. The administration of the New Covenant as it pertains to the structure, purpose and direction of a ‘faith-fulfilled’ reality-based community as determined by what has been revealed in the Word of God will be the means through which balance of thought and application can now be made.

The “church” of the 21^st century is destined to experience renovation that will bring it into conformity with the biblical model without the necessity of embracing extremism in any form or fashion. The same established principles of hermeneutics that continues to lead thousands into the truth of preterism, properly applied, will continue to move the community forward in the restoration of dominion and victory to which every believer is entitled.

During the past twenty years much progress has been made in this direction, but more still is needed. This is no time for preterists to settle into the comforts of King-ism, Simmons-ism, Preston-ism, Stevens-ism, Siegle-ism or any other of our favorite teachers. Each of us has the awesome responsibility of picking up the sword of the Spirit and delving deeply into the richness contained therein. Each of us has the responsibility to explore the New Covenant principles for worship, prayer, singing and fellowship in the Kingdom of God. Each of us has the challenge to discover how to bring preterism into reality as a practical expression of God’s love to billions who need to hear the message.

Only when this answer to this call is received will the problem of eschatological bewilderment be resolved fully and completely and unity restored! The plea is that each of us, “…walk worthy of the calling with which you were called, with all lowliness and gentleness, with longsuffering, bearing one another in love, endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph. 4:1-3).

[1] Richard Allen Greene, “Evangelical Christians Plead for Israel” (BBC News, Washington) 07/19/06.

[2] “Amillennialism” (Wikipedia) 2007.

[3] Todd Dennis, “Doctrinal Classifications and Color Keys” (www.preteristarchive.com). 2007.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Kevin Beck, “Moving Beyond Preterism” (www.presence.tv) 10/30/02.