Through this series of lectures on the end
times we've been looking at those New Testament prophesies that in one sense or another perhaps
were fulfilled within the first century time limits, particularly in and around the destruction
of Jerusalem and of the temple. And those who believe that these prophecies
of the Olivet Discourse were fulfilled in the first century are usually described as
being preterists or adopting the theory that is called preterism, meaning that these future
prophecies have already been fulfilled in the past. But we also have to be careful to distinguish
between two various and different forms of preterism. There is that group which call themselves
full preterists, and those that would call themselves partial preterists. Now, what's the difference between full preterism
and partial preterism. Well, full preterism as the name suggests
believes that all of the specific future events that are prophesied in the New Testament regarding
the end times have already taken place in the first century, so that would include not
only the destruction of the temple and the destruction of Jerusalem and the return of
Jesus, but also the great resurrection, the rapture, and all other matters that pertain
to future prophecy. Partial preterism, however, differs from full
preterism in this respect, that the partial preterists believe that though the return
of Jesus in AD 70 was a return of Christ in terms of a return in judgment over Israel,
it was not the parousia or the final coming of Jesus at the end of history. The partial preterists would say that Jesus
came in AD 70 at the end of an age; namely, the Jewish age, but not at the end of all
history. That the destruction of Jerusalem and the
visitation of God's wrath upon his people there was a significant day of the Lord, but
not the final and consummate day of the Lord, which remains yet to occur in the future. But most significantly is the difference on
understanding the future resurrection of the saints and the rapture and last judgment that
are predicted in the New Testament. Now, let's look first today at the difference
with respect to the resurrection. When we turn to 1 Corinthians 15 where we
have Paul's most lengthy and complex teaching regarding the resurrection of the bodies of
the saints who will participate in the glorified body of Christ in line with His resurrection,
Paul concludes that study in 1 Corinthians 15 with this teaching beginning at verse 50. "Now this I say brethren that flesh and blood
cannot inherit the kingdom of God. Nor does corruption inherit incorruption. Behold I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall 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 incorruptible and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption,
and this mortal must put on immortality so that when this corruptible has put on incorruption
and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is
written, 'Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is your sting? O hell, where is victory?' The sting of death is sin, and the strength
of sin is the law, but thanks be to God who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus
Christ." Now, prior to this section of 1 Corinthians
15, Paul talks about our being raised with glorified bodies after the similitude of the
resurrection body with which Christ rose from the dead. Now, up till this point in our discussions
about the future prophecy, the most central, controlling factor in our consideration has
been the timeframe references that Jesus gives, or the author of the book of Revelation gives,
with respect to the time in which we can expect the fulfillment of these prophecies. Now, we understand that in the early church
one of the very first Christian creeds that was formulated is that creed called the Apostles'
Creed. And in the Apostles' Creed, there is a phrase
in the original Latin that reads, 'Resurrectionis carnis,' in which we affirm as Christians
our faith in the resurrection of the body. We say, "I believe in the resurrection of
the body." That profession of faith that comes from the
early church was not simply a profession of faith in Christ's resurrected body but rather
in our resurrected bodies. As Christ has promised to be the firstfruits
of those who will be raised from the dead, so we are told in the New Testament that in
the resurrection we will have glorified bodies. That we will not be disembodied spirits wandering
through eternity in that stage. But there will come a time when we -- our
souls will be reunited with our bodies, our bodies will be raised, and the new bodies
that we will enjoy will be incorruptible and immortal, so to speak. And so that's always been a major hope of
the Christian community that we look forward to that day where we will participate in the
resurrection of the body. Now, full preterists argue that that prophecy
about the future has already been fulfilled, which is a startling and astonishing conclusion. Well, let's argue -- well, let's see first
why they argue for its past fulfillment, and then we'll look at how they present that argument. If you noticed when I was reading from 1 Corinthians
15 Paul says these things: "Behold I tell you a mystery. We shall not sleep, but we shall all be changed
in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye at the last trumpet" etc. And then he goes on and said, "We shall be
changed." Now, we notice that in this text, unlike the
Olivet Discourse, there are no specific explicit timeframe references. Paul doesn't say this is going to happen before
this generation passes away, nor does he say these things must take place shortly, or that
they are near at hand. So why then would somebody find in here a
future prophecy that one would expect to take place in the near future? Well, those who hold to full preterism seize
upon the use of the word 'we' in this text. Three times in the passage that I just read
Paul uses this term we. He says, "We shall not all sleep, but we shall
all be changed, and we shall be changed into this incorruptible situation." Now, elsewhere with respect to the rapture
Paul speaks in similar terms, and this is linked to the rapture text where Paul says
in 1 Thessalonians that those of us who are alive at His coming, that that indicates that
the 'us' and the 'we' would include the Apostle Paul, so that Paul seems to be saying that
these things are going to happen while he is still alive since he is including himself
in the group that is designated by the word we or the word us. Now, notice that this is not a statement whereby
Paul says I will be alive explicitly and concretely. But rather he just says in passing, those
of us who are alive at that time, and here in 1 Corinthians, "We shall be changed," and
so on, does not necessarily mean that the Apostle expected that he would be alive when
these prophecies would be fulfilled. Now, the advocates of full preterism argue
that the 'we' implies that Paul expected these things to take place during his lifetime. And I have to say at this point that the preterists
are not the only people who assume that Paul is indicating his own personal expectation
of being included in those who were still living when these prophecies would be fulfilled,
because this is a point that the higher critics of the New Testament have also seized upon
arguing that Paul certainly expected the final consummation of the kingdom in his lifetime,
including the great resurrection and the rapture. And they argue on the same basis that the
preterists do from inferences drawn from the inclusive language that the Apostle uses when
he says 'we' or 'those of us who are still alive.' But those words again do not necessarily require
that we assume that Paul was trying to communicate to his people that he personally would be
alive, but he was speaking to the Christian community, not only to his contemporaries
but to the whole body of Christ from that day forward. And certainly Paul would be included in the
resurrection whenever it would take place, whether it was in the first century or in
the third millennium; who knows? He would still be included in the 'we' because
all of the believers will participate in the resurrection, and all will participate in
the rapture, and when he said -- and of course in the rapture when he says those of us who
are alive again does not require that it include that he be living on the earth at that time. Now, what I'm saying again is that those inferences
drawn from the preterists, the full preterists, are possible inferences from the text, but
not necessary inferences from the text. And so we look at this in terms of how they
see the fulfillment of these things in the first century. In order to take the position that both the
resurrection and the rapture took place in the first century, one has to spiritualize
the texts in terms of the descriptive ideas and concepts that are used about this resurrection. And if there's any place where it's a serious
problem to begin spiritualizing something is when that which you're spiritualizing is
discussing something that is supposedly physical and bodily. It's very difficult to spiritualize the bodily
resurrection of the saints without at the same time actually denying the bodily resurrection
of the saints, because if it's only a spiritual resurrection then manifestly it's not a physical
resurrection. But advocates of full preterism such as Stuart
Russell and Max King do precisely this. They say that the resurrection of which Paul
speaks did take place in AD 70, but it was a spiritual resurrection of those who have
died; they were spiritually raised and are now in heaven, and they are not to be understood
in physical categories. Not without reason this position has been
charged with being a form of gnosticism, because as the Gnostics deny the full reality of the
physical resurrection of Jesus, and even of His physical incarnation, this would seem
to be denying a real physical resurrection of the saints; since in order to have taken
place in the first century without anybody's knowing it, and nobody in the early church
recording the resurrection of those who had died before them that this would force them
to this idea of a spiritual resurrection. Now, the same type of thing happens with respect
to the treatment of the rapture, which Paul describes in his correspondence to the Thessalonicans. In 1 Thessalonians, in chapter 4 of 1 Thessalonians,
we read the following account of the rapture, which has gained so much attention in Christian
eschatology that it warrants that we read the text. In verse 13, we read these words in chapter
4 of 1 Thessalonians, "But I do not want you to be ignorant brethren concerning those who
have fallen asleep lest you sorrow as others who have no hope. For we believe that Jesus died and rose again. Even so God will bring with Him those who
sleep in Jesus. For this we say to you by the word of the
Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede
those who are asleep. For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven
with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be
caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord. Therefore comfort one another with these words." Now, here the Apostle is addressing a concern
that was a vital concern of early Christians. The early Christian community had the hope
for the future resurrection and for the return of Christ in clouds of glory, and yet before
these things took place many of the Christians of the early community died. And so the obvious question that their relatives
were asking was this: Does this mean that our relatives and our friends who have passed
on will miss these great eschatological events that have been promised to us? And Paul is answering the Christian community
by saying, by no means. In fact, not only will those who have died
not miss the return of Christ at the end of time and the great resurrection, but they
will be front-row-seats participants. They will be at the head of the line, because
the Apostle says, "The dead in Christ will rise first." And they will be taken up into the air, and
we who are alive at His coming will also be taken up to join the Lord, or "to meet the
Lord" as the language of the Apostle Paul says, "in the air," as He descends with the
trumpet sound and that sort of thing. Now, the full preterists have to speak again
of a secret rapture, a rapture that was spiritual, that was silent, and that was invisible. To argue that the rapture has already taken
place means it occurred, nobody heard it, nobody saw it, and no one was aware of it. And so if it were simply spiritual and invisible
and silent, we wonder how we can do justice to the language of this text and others. Well, again Russell and others fall back on
the symbolism that is frequently used in prophetic prophecies that say you don't have to make
a literal interpretation of these things. But to me it involves a serious bending of
the words of this text to talk about a secret which according to the language of the Apostle
will be the worst kept secret in history, and hardly a silent event as all heaven will
break loose. Now, on the other hand, there's all kinds
of debate about what actually is going to take place in the rapture and again when the
rapture will take place. Those who hold a completely future interpretation
of New Testament eschatology, particularly in Dispensational premillennialism expect
the rapture to take place before the tribulation. And you'll hear people talk about the pre-trib
rapture. The idea here is that there's going to be
a great tribulation at the end of history, but prior to that tribulation the church will
be caught up to meet Jesus, and Jesus will sort of come half-way back to the earth; He'll
take up His saints out of the earth to meet Him in the air, and then He will stay with
His saints aloft either for the whole seven years of the tribulation or however the schema
is worked out, and then at the final time, He will come back again for His final manifestation
returning with the saints that He had taken up out of the world before the tribulation. So this scheme has two returns of Jesus at
the end of the times -- one, the secret return first just for His saints who are taken up
out of the world who meet Him, and then His final return after the tribulation and so
on. I think this fundamentally misunderstands
the imagery that is used here by the Apostle with respect to the rapture and its meaning. Paul does not say that the Christians will
be caught up in the air and then stay up in the air with Jesus. The imagery here is of meeting Christ as He
is returning in glory, so that the Christians are participating in His victorious return
to this world. It's not that He'll come so far, catch up
the church and then stay there or go back to heaven until a later time. But the whole point of the imagery here echoes
and reflects something that was commonplace in the contemporary world in which Paul wrote;
namely, the pattern and practice of the triumphal return to Rome of the Roman armies. Whenever the Roman armies would come back
from a campaign, before they would enter the city of Rome they would camp outside the city,
about a mile outside the city, and there would be all of the soldiers plus all of the captives
that they had brought home from the campaign. And then they would send a messenger into
the senate to announce their arrival. Remember they carried the banners, of SPQR,
the Senate and the people of Rome, and that would give time for the city planners to erect
an arch of triumph and to decorate the city, much as we would for a tickertape parade for
conquering heroes. They would spray garlands with a sweet aroma
throughout the city to cover up the smell of slaves and their odor and so on, and then
at a prearranged time a signal would be made whereby the trumpets would be blown, and that
was the signal for the armies of Rome to march in triumph into the city. But before they began their march, at the
signal of the trumpet everyone who was an actual citizen of Rome was invited to come
outside the city to join the parade to march back in through the arch of triumph with the
victorious army, so that they participated in the victory and participated in the triumph. And I think if you'll see throughout Paul's
writings he frequently borrows the imagery of the Romans from this. And what I hear Paul saying is that when Jesus
comes He's going to come back to this earth with His whole church. The church will be caught up to meet Him as
He descends and they will -- He will continue to descend along with His whole entourage
of believers. Now, when this will occur depends on what
your views of the millennium may be and so on, and we'll look at those things in our
next and final session.
