I’ve been a partial preterist for most of my Christian studies. But here recently I’ve decided to get back into this area and it seems to me that full preterism is the only Biblical option. The way I’m looking at it right now is that the New Heavens and New earth began in 70 A.D. after the destruction of the temple. It has yet to reach it’s final consummation though. It also seems right that the Lake Of Fire was where all the previous unbelievers and fallen angels were thrown and destroyed both body and soul. The Bible tells us elsewhere that the last enemy to be destroyed is death. This would have happened in 70 A.D. as well in the Lake Of Fire. If this is the case then death is no more. If this is the case then everyone who dies post 70 A.D goes to be with God as there is no more death. I’m just now getting into this and I need to study it some more but these are my current thoughts on the issue.
Hi Michael,
As a full prêterist myself it was this very conclusion, taking prêterism to its most natural logical conclusion, i.e., with death defeated God therefore has “no more enemies” that led me to develop my inclusive position of pantelism… meaning ALL is complete, both eschatologically AND redemptively.
And remember, “the death” which Jesus defeated on behalf of all was NOT “physical death”, it was the defeat and reversal of “Adamic death” i.e., spiritual aka relational/covenantal death. THAT was “the death” inflicted on Adam the day he fell; which should be obvious by the fact that “physically” he lived centuries beyond “in the day you so eat shall ye die”.
As for the ‘lake of fire’… I see NO post mortem application at all, but rather understand it wholly and solely as indicative of the old covenant’s final demise in Jerusalem’s conflagrations of Ad70. It is then in this sense that I understand and accept biblical “annihilation” as pertaining singularly to the PHYSICAL loss of life, no more and no less. Consider also this…
2Thess 1:9 These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power…
Remember, “eternal destruction” speaks not of longevity but of TOTALITY – this language is qualitative NOT quantitative. History bears witness to the fact that in the aftermath of the Ad70 Judgment aka ‘the Roman-Jewish Wars’ a good portion of Jewish insurgents were taken captive back to Rome, paraded and pilloried as slaves before the conquering Titus as part of the spoils of war. These prisoners were all still very much alive and yet having had “their part” Rev 21:8] in the ‘lake of fire’ were now banished forever… permanently exiled [DEATH] away from the presence of the Lord in Jerusalem – their entire world had come crashing down Mt 24:2; Lk 13:3-5] and they were as dead-men-walking… judged and found wanting.
Now, to wrench the ‘lake of fire’ out of its historical context and drag it over into the New Covenant age, as Christendom has done, giving it an ethereal continuance and perpetuity has burdened the New Creation world with a death and destruction that has neither place nor purpose. And yet having done this the logical sequence of events has become: a new separation the death, a new sting the sin and a new power the law – the very things Christ’s cross destroyed… go figure? 
Or as the old vernacular has it… “same house, different street”. So what, are we also then logically in need of a new saviour all over again??
Logically then according to this tragic scenario, prophetic recapitulation knows no end and thus becomes an endless loop at the whim of every wind of eschatological fancy and interpretation. I might add Michael that this pantelist position on Gehenna aka ‘lake of fire’ is rejected by most full prêterists who “need” to hang onto their ECT, but for mine a fulfilled redemption seems to be the most obvious and logical conclusion of the fulfilled eschatology of prêterism, but that’s me. 
That’s a whole lot to think about. I visited your website earlier and there is a wealth of reading. Time, I need more Time!!!
I need more time and money!!! 
Well… the apostle Paul wasn’t looking for death to have been destroyed in 70 A.D. His entire hope was in the resurrection! That’s why he wrote chapter 15 of Corinthians.
Paul seems to say in essence that if we are not raised to life when Jesus returns, then we may as well enjoy our lives here on earth as much as possible. For it will be the only life we have.
But perhaps some of you full preterists think that when you die and your soul or disembodied spirit goes soaring to heaven, that IS the resurrection. If so, you fit in well with the gnostics. That was their belief. Justin Martyr has something to say about that when he was talking to the Jewish man, Trypho, and his friends:
For if you have fallen in with some who are called “Christians” … who say that there is no resurrection of the dead, and that their souls, when they die, are taken to heaven; do not imagine that they ARE Christians."—Dialogue with Trypho, Ch. LXXX
When Jesus was raised to life, He had the same physical (albeit altered) body that He had while on earth. He showed them the nail prints in His hands and the wounds in His side. He ate food with His disciples. Would He have been able to do that if He had been raised as a soul or spirit?
Also He was “the first-born from the dead” (Col 1:18). This implies that there will be others who will be “born from the dead”, that is, raised in the resurrection. They won’t be souls and they won’t be spirits. They will be complete persons, just as Jesus was when He was raised.
Davo,
It looks like you and me are just about on the same page. One reason why I believe the New Heaven And Earth started in 70 A.D. but hasn’t yet reached it’s final consummation comes from Isaiah:
Here Isaiah speaks of a time when the New Creation still experiences sin, aging, and death. The New Creation begins flowing into history in 70 A.D. before it’s final consummation in the future.
Paiadon,
I’m just now studying this issue of the resurrection in a new book I got written by a full preterist. I think that the general resurrection of the dead of believers and those who rejected Christ, the ushering out of the Old Covenant order, and Christ’s Second coming in judgment, were all fulfilled in 70 A.D. Death was destroyed along with all those who rejected Christ and the fallen angels in the Lake Of Fire in 70 A.D. People who die post 70 A.D. go immediately to heaven with incorruptible and immortal bodies leaving the old corruptible bodies behind. We would be the second fruits.
“But perhaps some of you full preterists think…" this is an oft faced problem for prêterists – an assertion or blatantly being told what we believe and then being expected to answer or solve the ridiculous proposition as stated. It “may” be true that some prêterists you know hold to these gnostic notions, I can’t say with my vast experience within prêterism that I know any. It’s been my experience however that these types or assertions get thrown up in the pejorative sense much like the moniker “universalism” is often sullied as a doctrine of demons by those opposing it.
Paidion, I know you often tout “context” as something relevant to be considered, and I agree. By way of background information: Paul struck two major problems in his ministry to the various churches – one was ‘Jewish exclusive-ism’ via the Judaisers with the other being ‘Gentile separatism’ among those who thought more highly of themselves than they ought.
There was among some of the early Jewish congregations “zealots” who were insisting upon gentile believers the observance of circumcision and other ‘OC law’ rites, much to the consternation of Paul who said such zealots should go the whole way with themselves Gal 5:12; Acts 15:1-2] rather than impose that which God did away with in the sacrifice of Christ.
On the other side of the coin Paul had to deal with the growing superiority complex some gentile converts were exhibiting in their false and errant belief that God had now done away with or by-passed historic Israel and transferred his blessing to them. It might be noted that this belief is still present in various forms of what is called ‘replacement theology’ where “the Church” is said to have replaced Israel – it was in fact the firstfruit saints “in Christ” who FULFILLED historic Israel’s mandate on behalf of historic Israel and thus consequently the world.
These gentiles understood, correctly, that historic or OC Israel constituted “the dead” – “dead in trespasses and sins” – what they had wrong however was the that God had promised “resurrection” i.e., covenant restoration to Israel and this Israel had in Christ – the trail blazer of the new covenant. They just hadn’t realised it, for had they, they would never have as Paul charged them… “crucified the Lord of Glory” 1Cor 2:8.
Now by way of that I say this… Paul says this in Acts 26:22-23:
Therefore, having obtained help from God, to this day I stand, witnessing both to small and great, saying no other things than those which the prophets and Moses said would come— that the Christ would suffer, that He would be the first to rise from the dead, and would proclaim light to the Jewish people and to the Gentiles.”
We know from Scripture that Jesus in fact WAS NOT “the first” to rise literally-biologically from the dead, and yet here Paul seemingly says otherwise – is this a contradiction? – the answer is no. There are at least 7 occurrences of “literal-biological resurrection” recorded in the Bible BEFORE Christ’s, and two after – this then should tell us something about Paul’s NT usage and understanding of “resurrection”. So what was Paul really saying? He was saying that He, Jesus, was THE FIRST to rise up out of old covenant Israel i.e., “the dead”. Jesus was THE resurrection, THE new Israel. Resurrection for Israel was NOT about biological anastasis BUT covenant restoration; That restoration begun in Christ was fulfilled by the firstfruit saints of Jesus’ “this generation” Ad30-70 era.
Thus when in 1Cor 15 some were contending that “the dead rise not” what they were really saying was “God has forsaken Israel” and yet this couldn’t be further from the truth. Paul rebukes this and points out the obvious, that if Israel the dead] be not raised covenantally], then surely they are not as well BECAUSE the new covenant life that came to the world came through Israel, and in particular Jesus, as Israel personified i.e., true Israel Isa 5:1-7; Jn 15:1].
Small correction:
I think that the general resurrection of the dead of believers and those who rejected Christ, the ushering out of the Old Covenant order, and Christ’s Second coming in judgment, were all fulfilled in 70 A.D. Death was destroyed along with all those who rejected Christ and the fallen angels in the Lake Of Fire in 70 A.D. Since this is so, people who die post 70 A.D. go to purgatory where they are cleansed and given incorruptible and immortal bodies leaving the old corruptible bodies behind. These people are the second fruits.
Jesus was the first to have a true resurrection—the kind of resurrection that Paul depicts in I Cor 15, the kind that all disciples of Christ will experience when Christ raises them to life on the last day (John 6:39,40,44,54). In this “literal-biological” resurrection, “This mortal must put on immortality” as Paul declared in I Corinthians:
Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. (1 Cor 15:51-53)
All those “resurrections” to which you refer, were not true resurrections, but resuscitations. Those people still had mortal bodies. All of them died again. But Jesus was the first to rise with an immortal body—never to die again. It was the same body, but a changed body. It had “put on immortality.”
All of Jesus’ disciples whom He will raise at the last day will also rise with immortal bodies, never to die again.
Good point.
Full Preterism believes the book of Revelation all ends by 70AD. However the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple were all clearly spelled out many times prior to Revelation. So why did God call the book “Revelation” which means an unveiling of things not previously known, if the main points were previously known?
Why does He reveal them (70AD) in highly symbolic language in Revelation since they were clearly spelled out before Revelation? Doesn’t add up for me.
I would also like to add that it fits reality. Anybody who has studied ancient times and their barbarisms know that we have improved today tremendously. Especially with with science and medicine. We don’t suffer near as much as the ancients did. We are evolving towards improvement. Sure there are setbacks but the overall picture is one of improvement. Things have changed tremendously since Biblical times. We are not there yet but I think we have come a long way since OT and NT times.
Steve,
There is strong and convincing evidence that Revelation was written prior to 70 A.D. There are over 60 authors, from different theological persuasions, that hold to a pre-70 A.D. date. Revelation was written specifically to Christians who were living at the time that John wrote it. As is clear in the early chapters, Revelation was a letter written to specific historic churches in Asia Minor.
Paidion,
The way I see it, is that the physical resurrection of the dead was of those Christians who believed in Christ and those who rejected him in that time period. The sheep and the goats. The goats were destroyed in the Lake Of Fire along with the fallen angels and death. Death has been destroyed. Therefore, the second fruits who now live post 70 A.D. go to purgatory when they die and are cleansed and given new immortal bodies.
Steve,
There is strong and convincing evidence that Revelation was written prior to 70 A.D. There are over 60 authors, from different theological persuasions, that hold to a pre-70 A.D. date. Revelation was written specifically to Christians who were living at the time that John wrote it. As is clear in the early chapters, Revelation was a letter written to specific historic churches in Asia Minor.
I agree it was probably written before 70AD, but that doesn’t make Full Preterism correct.
Steve,
I never said it did.
Steve,
I never said it did.
OK then what was the reason for mentioning it?
Oh! I thought you were saying it wasn’t written prior to 70 A.D. I misunderstood.
I haven’t seen any such evidence at all. I HAVE seen arguments for it having been written prior to 70 A.D., but I found them neither strong nor convincing.
Second-century Christians understood the book of Revelation to be speaking of events FUTURE to the time in which they lived! For example, Irenæus spoke of the Antichrist who was to come, and giving possible names for Antichrist, the letters of whose names, when adding up the Greek numerical equivalents, total to 666. After suggesting several names, Irenæus then made this statement:
He who beheld the apocalyptic vision was, of course, John the author of Revelation. Irenæus states that that apocalyptic vision was seen by John almost in his own day, toward the end of Domitian’s reign. That would put it later than 90 A.D.