The one proof against ALL arguments

There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to proper investigation. - Herbert Spencer

I understand entirely. It is emotional and fear inducing to have all you believe and hold to be true challenged. I have this experience every day, and often I fail to observe the proper response to such challenges...

Acknowledge emotions brought to or arising from controversy, else you will/may vent feelings but not state reasons. ... Make your own assumptions explicit. - Declare your prejudices, your pre-judgements. Good controversy should not be an argument about assumptions. An attempt at impartiality is a good antidote for the blindness that is almost inevitable in partisanship. If you have not read a [argument] sympathetically, your disagreement with it is probably more contentious than civil. Limit yourself to these four criticisms: I understand but I disagree because...
• You are uninformed
• You are misinformed
• You are illogical, your reasoning is not cogent
• Your analysis is incomplete.¹

It is sad when a brother or sister in Christ, or myself for that matter, is closed to respectful debate. Especially when the primary reason given for dismissal of the argument is the length of time one or other party has believe a position to be true.

Understanding how pride works in my life I have tried to always allow others the space to believe differently. I post this with reverent fear that I may be wrong.

I rest in the knowledge that G-d, working in the life I have lived, has brought me to this blessed place where I am today - despite my best efforts. I find comfort also in the promise of Ephesians 3:15 -

All of us who are mature should take such a view of things . And if on some point you think differently, that too G-d will make clear to you.

... and this is followed by the admonition of Ephesians 3:16 -

Only let us live up to what we have already attained.

Those who are in, or who aspire to be in, the Ministry of our Lord and Saviour, should be wary of pronouncing any condemnation on a brother or sister in the Messiah (Christ). We are not to sit in judgement of another's state of salvation, but we must preach to all who may be unsaved that they may know the road to safety. This, and this alone, is the commission our Saviour has given us. None other.

---

Footnotes:

1. Mortimer J. Adler & Charles Van Doren, How to Read a Book, (Touchstone - Simon & Schuster Inc. 1972) pp 154 - 167

God's Word, or Our Words?

God provided us with a Bible, at an incredible cost for its many cast members, many of whom suffered or died so that we can learn from their lives, their mistakes, and their triumphs. Many also suffered and died through history, just for preserving this book, even for translating it into English. It's a precious book, God knows that all serious Christians know that. So to see the many ways it has been mangled, twisted, and re-interpreted by some for their own purposes is just unacceptable. There are enough people who claim to have new revelations and new interpretations and we must learn to recognise when this is happening and reject it. The Bible has only one author, God, and the task we have is to know exactly what is in His heart as we read his words.

So how do we read and interpret the Bible? How can we tell what is in the heart of God as we read His words? We begin with two Greek words, exegesis, and eisegesis. Exegesis is the act of reading the words of the Bible and only receiving the truth that God put there. Eisegsis is the act of reading the Bible and only receiving what agrees with your own ideas. The first technique is, I hope you agree, the way we should approach hte Bible. The other one is the chosen route of our TV preacher and may God forgive him!¹

---

Footnotes:

1. Steve Maltz, How the Church Lost the Way, Saffron Planet, pp 72

A. D. 70: Preterism's Prohetic Dead End by Randall Price

---

The following article is reproduced with the permission of the Author in it's entirety without alteration or erasure. The article is an edited version of the original and appears in the January/February 2005 edition of Israel My Glory. It is reproduced here as it appeared in that edition of Israel My Glory. Dr. Randall Price is the Director and Founder of the World of the Bible Ministries and the full text of this article concerning preterism is published in PDF format on his site at http://www.worldofthebible.com.

We thank Dr. Price, World of the Bible Ministries, and Israel My Glory for permitting us to use this excellent analysis of Preterism.

---

In recent years a system of interpreting biblical prophecy known as Preterism has invaded the church, brining confusion and division to many congregations that have historically held to the future return of Jesus Christ.

Promoted by popular radio teachers, such as Reformed scholar R. C. Sproul, whose book The Last Days According to Jesus advances the moderate preterist position, Preterism has made inroads into evangelical seminaries and stimulated public debates on Bible college campuses. Although most Christians have never heard of the teachings of Preterism, its approach to prophecy diminishes the prophetic hope of the church while undermining the basis of the prophetic promises for Israel.

What is Preterism

Derived from the Latin word preter (past), Preterism holds fast that most, if not all, of the prophetic events of the Old and New Testaments have already been fulfilled. Like historicism, which interprets the book of Revelation as symbolic of church history, Preterism spirutalizes prophecy to make if fit historical events in the Church Age. However, unlike historicism, Preterism seeks to fit certain, if not all, prophecies relating the Christ's Second Coming and Israel's restoration into a specific historical event in the past.

As moderate preterist Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., explains, "Matthew 24:1-34 (and parallels) in the Olivet Discourse was fulfilled in the events surrounding the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. In Revelation most of the prophecies before Revelation 20 find fulfilment in the fall of Jerusalem."¹

Preterists contend that Jesus' use of the phrase this generation in His Olivet Discourse requires fulfillment in the first century; R. C. Sproul, in particular, argues that Christ's words failed unless this interpretation is adopted.

By contrast, Futurism (what we believe) maintains that the literal fulfillment of Messianic prophecy in Christ's First Advent confirms that His prophetic teaching must also be interpreted literally. Thus the Olivet Discourse and the Revelation will find fulfillment in the future, particularly during the Tribulation and Christ's Millennial reign.

Two types of Preterism today contend with each other for primacy. Partial, or Moderate, Preterism is the most popular version. Although it argues that most prophecy (such as the events of the Tribulation) was fulfilled in A.D. 70, it still understands that some prophetic teachings like Christ's Second Coming and the bodily resurrection, have a future fulfillment.

Partial Preterism, therefore , holds to two Second Comings: one that occurred in A.D. 70 as a parousia (Greek, "coming" or "advent") and Day of the Lord for the purpose of judging the Jewish nation and one that will occur universally at the climax of human history as the final and ultimate Day of the Lord.

Leading advocates of Partial Preterism who have published popular defenses of their position include R. C. Sproul, Gary DeMar, and Kenneth L. Gentry Jr., as well as the late David Chilton, who changes to Full Preterism after his books were published.

Full, or Extreme, Preterism contends that all prophecy (including Christ's Second Coming and bodily resurrection) was fulfilled by A.D. 70.

Full Preterism maintains that believers have been spiritually resurrected and the creation spiritually restored, so the church presently exists in the eternal state of the new heavens and new earth.

According to Thomas Ice, executive director of the Pre-Trib Research Center and one the foremost experts on Preterism, there is no evidence of any preterist interpretation in the history of the early church through the Reformation. ³

Preterism's View of Israel

Preterism teaches that Christ came in A.D. 70 to judge Israel and end the Jewish age.

Like historicists, preterists argue that the promises made to Israel were misunderstood as national promises. Therefore, when Israel rejected Christ, these "spiritual" promises passed to the church, the "true Israel."

Preterism, however, which forces the fulfillment of most prophetic texts, particularly the fall of Jerusalem and the Temple, in to the events of the First Jewish Revolt, views the destruction of the Jewish people as the central focus of prophecy.

As Preterist David Chilton stated, The Book of Revelation is not about the second coming of Christ. It is about the destruction of Israel and Christ's victory over His enemies in the establishment the New Covenant temple...Revelation prophesies the judgement of God on apostate Israel; and while it does briefly point to events beyond its immediate concerns, that is done merely as a "wrap up", to show that the ungodly will never prevail against Christ's Kingdom. ³

For preterists, the Jewish people are the true enemies of Christ; and their overthrow by the Roman army, sent by Christ to do His bidding, is the triumph of Christ over the Antichrist. In fact, they say, Christ came spiritually in the judgement by the Roman army (hence, a judgement-coming) fulfilling His promise "to come quickly."

The Jewish Temple is likewise seen as the center of spiritual apostasy and its destruction as the fulfillment of the abomination of desolation, which was God's holy judgement for the wicked crucifixion of Christ by the Jews.

Preterists, therefore, reject any aspect of a future for ethnic Israel (apart from the church) and contend that any eschatological system that looks for a restoration of Israel and its Temple is heretical, for such would be tantamount to rejecting Christ and restoring blasphemy.

Preterist Gary DeMar explains:
There is nothing in Jesus' teaching in this Gospel [Matthew] which suggests that after this period of judgement there will be a restoration. ... The Apocalyptic Discourse (ch. 24) moves away frm Jerusalem. ... Does the Bible, especially the New Testament, predict that the Temple will be rebuilt? It does not. ...To make the Temple of stone a permanent structure in the light of Jesus' atoning work would be a denial of the Messiah and His redemptive mission. ⁴

Preterism's Problems

(1) - The Date of the Book of Revelations

For the prophecies of Revelation to fit in to the Roman conquest of Jerusalem, it is necessary to date the composition of the book before A.D. 70.

Preterists understand the necessity of dating the book early in Nero's reign (A.D. 64-67), confessing, "If the book was written after A.D. 70, then its contents manifestly do not refer to events surrounding the fall of Jerusalem." ⁵

However, if dating the book was so crucial to its interpretation, why did not the apostle John clearly indicate somewhere in its 404 verses the time of its writing? However, as Mark Hitchcock, who wrote a doctoral dissertation on the subject, concluded, "I do believe that the case for the late date (A.D. 95) can be proven at least by a preponderance of the evidence, if not beyond a reasonable doubt." ⁶

This evidence includes the external testimony of the most reliable early church fathers, such as Irenaeus (A.D. 120-202), who made the unambiguous declaration, "For if it were necessary that the name of him [Antichrist] should be distinctly revealed in this present time , it would have been told by him who saw the apocalyptic vision. For it [the Revelation] was seen no long time ago, but almost in our generation, toward the end of Domitian's reign." ⁷

In addition, the internal evidence favours the late date in the time of Domitian. This support includes (1) the condition and description of the seven churches in Revelation 1-3, which make no mention of Paul's missionary journeys; (2) John's banishment to Patmos, rather than execution, as with Peter and Paul under Nero; and (3) the prophecy of the New Jerusalem (Rev. 21:9-22:5), which implies that the old Jerusalem has already been destroyed.

(2) - Lack of Historical Agreement With First-Century Fulfillment

If Preterism's interpretation of prophecy were correct, the historical record should support details. However, the opposite is the case.

For example, the direction of Christ's advent to Jerusalem (Mt 24:27) is compared with lightning flashing from "east to west." But the Roman army, which preterists interpret as fulfilling this prophecy, advanced on Jerusalem from "west to east." Even if we take this simply to mean the Roman army advanced "like lightning" (i.e., quickly), history reveals a very slow assault on Jerusalem; the war lasted several years before Jerusalem was even besieged!

In many cases a "correlation" can only be made through the eschatologically biased interpretation of first-century historian Flavius Josephus, such as (1) associating divine signs with the Roman army's impending conquest; (2) reinterpreting the text to fit the preferred historical data, such as taking "the clouds of heaven" as the dust kicked up by the Roman army's advance; or (3) taking statements that do not fit the historical events, such as the unprecedented and unsurpassed nature of the Tribulation, as hyperbole in order to claim first-century fulfillment.

Even the central concept of Preterism - that Christ's judgement-coming was to end the Jewish nation - cannot stand in light of Judaism's continued vitality and the modern state of Israel.

The historical consequences for Israel in the aftermath of A.D. 70 were indeed critical. But the Jewish people and Jewish nationalism not only survived, but hope for the restoration promised by the prophets increased. Moreover, the "Temple consciousness," perpetuated through rabbinic Judaism's spiritual transference to the synagogue, also expressed itself in tangible ways.

Whenever circumstances favoured rebuilding the Temple, there were Jewish activists who returned to Jerusalem to attempt it. Today the Roman Empire is long vanished; but the Jewish people are again in the Promised Land, in control of the Holy City and its Temple Mount, and making plans to rebuild the Temple.

Is it reasonable to accept the events of A.D. 70 as a fulfillment of God's program for the Jews but not accept these subsequent events as also part of His ongoing divine plan? A futurist interpretation agrees much better with Jesus' statement in the Olivet Discourse that, when He comes, the Jewish people are to "look up and lift up your heads, because your redemption draws near." (Lk 21:28) Clearly this text teaches that Christ's Second Coming involves Israel's redemption, not destruction.

As a result of such historical and textual incongruities, Robert Gundry commented concerning the preterist interpretation of a first-century fulfillment:

Whether writing just before, right at, or just after 70 C.E., Mark [or any of the other gospel writers] is not liable to have suffered from very much ignorance of what went on. From beginning to end, then, the events and circumstances of the Jewish war disagree with the text of Mark [also Matthew and, in part, Luke] too widely to allow that text to reflect those events and circumstances. ⁸

If the historical correlation with an A.D. 70 fulfillment for the Olivet Discourse fails, and Preterism depends on such a fulfillment for the maintenances of its eschatological system, then Preterism itself fails as a viable eschatological interpretation.

The Dangers of Preterism

Every teaching has consequences for the spiritual life. Therefore, the teachings of Preterism must be considered for their practical dangers.

Preterism teaches that Christ has already returned (spiritually) and, in its extreme form, that He will never return again bodily. However, the divine declaration in Act 1:11, "This is the same Jesus...will so come in like manner as you say Him go into heaven," contradicts both Partial and Full Preterism.

The teaching then is false. It not only distorts the prophetic program and denies the blessed hope (Ti 2:13) but promotes the deception that there will be no end to history, that evil has been eradicated from the world (Full Preterism), and that believers now live in the eternal state.

Such false doctrine also prevents Christians from obeying the manifold commands of Scripture directed to those awaiting Christ's Second Coming (1Th. 1:10). Practical admonitions given in light of Christ's return - such as "awake...walk [behave] properly" (Rom. 13:11-13; cf 1 Th. 5:4-10); "live soberly [sensibly], righteously, and godly" (Ti. 2:12); and live in purity (1 Jn. 3:3) - have no meaning to those who believe His coming is past.

Preterism also corrupts the understanding of the present work of Satan and his demons by teaching Satan was crushed and bound at the cross and that apostasy is a thing of the past. Yet Scripture states that our struggle is "against powers, against rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places" (Eph 6:12); "the whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one" (1 Jn 5:19); and "in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons" (1 Ti 4:1).

How then can Christians obey such commands as "Resist the devil" (Jas 4:7; cf 1 Pet 5:9) and "from such people [apostates] turn away!" (2 Tim 3:5)?

Moreover, the preterist approach to prophecy affects the way Christians understand God's purpose for the Jewish nation and their political views toward the existence of the modern Jewish state. Preterism replaces Israel with the church, teaching that "ethnic Israel was excommunicated for its apostasy and will never again be God's Kingdom" ⁸

If Israel's future salvation and restoration (Rom 11:25-27) in God's program is abrogated, so, too, is God's promised blessing for the world (Rom. 11:12) in fulfillment of the Abrahamic Covenant (Gen. 12:3).

The apostle Peter summed up the divine verdict towards Preterism when he wrote, "Scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, and saying, "Where is the promise of His coming?" (2 Pet.3:3-4), Even so, come, Lord Jesus.

---

Endnotes:

1. Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr., He Shall Have Dominion: A Postmillennial Eschatology (Tyler, TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1992), p. 159.
2. Thomas Ice, “The History of Preterism,” The End Times Controversy. Edited by Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2003), pp. 42-46.
3. David Chilton, Paradise Restored: An Eschatology of Dominion (Tyler, TX: Reconstruction Press, 1985), p. 43.
4. R. Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church. 4th ed. (Atlanta: American Vision, 1999), pp. 52, 61.
5. R.C. Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1998), p. 140.
6. Mark Hitchcock, “The Stake in the Heart – The A.D. 95 Date of Revelation,” The End Times Controversy, p. 125.
7. Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.30.3.
8. David Chilton, Paradise Restored, p. 224.

---

Randall Price is an archaeologist, author, and president of World of the Bible Ministries, Inc., an organization dedicated to exploring and explaining the past, present, and prophetic world of the Bible.

Copyright © 2004-2006 World of the Bible Ministries, All Rights Reserved. Used By Permission.

Separation of Church and State II

The "State" church has been around since Nicea (324) when Constantine usurped it for his political ends:

"Two things have happened at the time of Nicea. The Church became a "State" entity with the full backing of the Emperor Constantine, and the Christian Church expelled Judaism from its ranks."¹

A State church is a scriptural nonsense, and is where Reformed Theonomy and Kingdom Now Theology meet. Some refer to the Church being coupled to the state as infidelity, and I agree with this position. The Church is NOT supposed to be used as a repository for State power or as a way to dominate and control people (Dominionism).

HOWEVER, this does not proscribe/prohibit political activism by Christians. In fact, the way I read my bible, we are commanded to influence all we possibly can and oppose all evil.

Jefferson used the term "Wall of Separation" when writing to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802, to assure them concerning "the religious liberties they enjoyed were not seen as immutable rights, but as privileges granted by the legislature". (See here: http://www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html) Jefferson took much time "to assure that his words would not offend while still conveying his message: it was not the place of the Congress or the Executive to do anything that might be misconstrued as the establishment of religion."

The term - Separation of Church and State appears no-where in the US Constitution, which is a surprise to many people, but has appeared in a number of other constitutions, including the Soviet Unions.

David Barton deals with this very well here: http://www.davidbarton.org/2010/02/12/separation-of-church-state-part-one-by-david-barton/

---

Footnotes:

1. The Roots of our Faith, Normative Hermeneutic

Apostasy

What is apostasy?

"The departure from the truth that one professed to have." The term does not imply that apostate has ever had the truth. They have however, by accepting an office of the church or some other mechanism professed to have the truth. How do you recognise an apostate?

Deeds and actions of the Apostasy

The Footsteps of the Messiah Page 71 - 72 b

1. Jude 17-19 - Mockery (results in division in the church)
   But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts. These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.
   
   
2. Mocking of the fundamentals of the faith, verbal inspiration of the Scriptures, Virgin Birth, substitutionary death of the Messiah.
   
   

Mark of Apostasy

The Footsteps of the Messiah Page 70

1. 2 Peter 2:1
   But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
   
   

Teachings of the Apostasy

The Footsteps of the Messiah Page 70 - 71

1. 1 John 2:22-23 - denial of the Trinity
   Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is Antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.
   
   
2. 1 John 4:2-3 - denial of the Incarnation
   Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of Antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
   
   
3. 2 John 7 - denial of the Incarnation
   For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an Antichrist.
   
   
4. 2 Peter 3:3-4 - denial of the second coming
   Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
   
   

Character of the Apostasy

The Footsteps of the Messiah Page 66 - 70

1. 1 Timothy 4:1-3
   Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
   
   
2. 2 Timothy 3:5
   Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
   
   
3. 2 Peter 2:1-22
   But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgement now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not. For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an example unto those that after should live ungodly; And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked: (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds;) The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgement to be punished: But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, self-willed, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities. Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord. But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption; And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you; Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children: Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness; But was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man's voice forebad the madness of the prophet. These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever. For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error. While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage. For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.