|
Home
Church Community
Statement of
Beliefs
Contact Us Search Our Site
Bible Study
Resource
|
|
|
Particulars
of Christianity:
313
Preterism
Addendum:
"The Time Is At Hand"
Preterism
Part 1: The Basics and Partial Preterism
Preterism Part 2: Olivet and the
Transcendent "You"
Preterism Part 3: The Remaining
"Proof Texts"
Preterism Part 4: Appealing to Josephus
Preterism Part 5: Uninterrupted
Futurism into 2nd Century
Preterism Part 6: Nero, History,
and Biblical Details
Preterism Part 7: Scripture and
a Delayed Coming
Preterism Part 8: Brief Summary
of Conclusions
Behold I Come Quickly
Things Which Must Shortly Come to Pass
When Was Revelation Written?
A Throne of His Own
Addendum: "The Time Is At Hand"
This
addendum article will address the phrase "at hand," which
occurs in Revelation 1 and 22.
Revelation 1:2 Who bare record of the word of God,
and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things
that he saw. 3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that
hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things
which are written therein: for the time is at hand.
Revelation 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the
sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.
Of course, by definition Preterism asserts that certain prophesied
events (such as the tribulation, the false prophet, mark of
the beast, antichrist, and a return of Jesus Christ) were
fulfilled by 70 AD. However, a literal interpretation of the
phrase "the time is at hand" in Revelation 1:3 and Revelation
22:10 is not compatible with or supportive of the Preterist
position. First we will explain why this phrase ("the time
is at hand") does not work with Preterism and then we will
explain what we believe the correct, literal meaning of this
phrase is.
First, in Revelation 1:3, John is told "…the words of this
prophecy and the things written therein: for the time is at
hand." Similarly, Revelation 22:10, states that the sayings
of the Book of Revelation should not be sealed "for the time
is at hand." Both verses indicate that the "time is at hand"
in regard to the fulfillment of all the prophecies contained
within the Book of Revelation. For emphasis, it's worth repeating
that this phrase is attached to all the prophecies in the
Book of Revelation. It is not selectively applied to only
some prophecies. This is important because the Book of Revelation
does not just contain prophecies of the tribulation, the antichrist's
kingdom, and Jesus' return. The Book of Revelation also contains
prophecies of the resurrection of the saints who died during
the tribulation (20:4), the millennial reign of Christ over
the earth with an iron rod assisted by the saints (20:3-7,
19:15, 2:27, 12:5), the resurrection of all the dead after
the millennium (20:5, 13), the final judgment of all at God's
great white throne (20:11-15), the coming of the heavenly
city to earth (21:2-3, 10), and God's coming to live with
men on the earth (21:20, 22:3-5). These important prophecies
immediately commence after the completion of the tribulation
and Christ's return.
Anyone who wants to suggest that "the time is at hand" (Revelation
1:3 and 22:10) requires a 70 AD fulfillment of Revelation's
prophecies, must, by necessity, believe that all these prophecies
also came to pass shortly after that 70 AD date (the resurrection
of the saints, the millennial kingdom, the resurrection of
all the dead, the great throne judgment, the coming of the
heavenly city, and the eternal state wherein God dwells with
man on earth forever). And yet, almost 2,000 years later these
prophecies remain unfulfilled. Consequently, it is clear that
these prophecies were not "at hand" in the first century AD.
This is the first reason why it seems impossible to conclude
that the phrase "at hand" was meant to indicate a fulfillment
that was only a few short years away in the latter half of
the first century.
Second, we can survey the meaning of the word "eggus," (Strong's
number 1451) which is the Greek word for the phrase "at hand"
in Revelation 1:3 and 22:10. Similarly, the Greek verb "eggizo"
comes from "eggus" (Strong's number 1448). For example, "eggizo"
is used by John the Baptist who says that the kingdom of God
was "at hand." (I will return to John the Baptist's use of
"eggizo" momentarily.)
In 1 Peter 4:7, Peter used "eggizo" to say that the end of
all things is at hand. According to scholars, Peter probably
wrote this epistle in the mid 60's AD. And because of that
timing, this particular epistle works well with a Preterists
interpretation of Revelation 1:3 and 22:10. However, other
uses of "eggizo" are problematic because they are written
much farther away from 70 AD. For example, Paul uses "eggizo"
in Romans 13:11-12. Speaking of our "salvation," Paul says
"now is our salvation nearer than when we believed." And in
he goes on to say that the day is "at hand." The salvation
that Paul said was "at hand" does not refer to the tribulation
period itself or its beginning. It must be a reference to
the deliverance brought when Jesus returns after the tribulation.
However, most scholars hold that Romans was written in about
57-58 AD, perhaps as much as a decade and a half prior to
70 AD, when Preterists suppose that Jesus' returned.
Similarly, James 5:8 uses "eggizo" and says that "the coming
of the Lord" (not the start of the tribulation) is "at hand."
But James wrote his epistle in between 45-50 AD, some two
decades or more before any 70 AD event. How long can we stretch
the meaning of the Greek words "eggus" and "eggizo" beyond
a few years? Furthermore, did Jesus' bring salvation to the
Roman Christians in 70 AD? If not (if he merely brought judgment
on the Jewish nation) then the salvation Paul told the Romans
was "at hand" was in fact a great deal more than a decade
and a half away. I would argue that we are still waiting for
it nearly 2000 years later.
To put an even finer point on it, these phrases from Peter,
Paul, James, and even in Revelation 1:3 and 22:10 are clearly
intended as encouragements or warnings. But in the case of
James' epistle, which was written in 45-50 AD, twenty years
away is hardly "at hand" from the perspective of a human lifespan.
Twenty to twenty-five years is anywhere from a third to a
half of a human lifespan (especially in the first century
when people generally did not live as long as they do today).
So, what point would there be to telling people the Lord's
return was "at hand" when they had nearly a third to half
of their lives to live before needing to repent before he
returned?
The point here is that the phrase "at hand" only really works
as an encouragement or warning when it refers to "a few, short
years" rather than a decade or two. However, if we assume
that the starting point of the "at hand" timeframe is the
moment when the words "at hand" were written on the page,
then 70 AD is still too far away from the time Romans and
James were written. Such a "from the moment they were written"
starting point may theoretically work for Preterists when
1 Peter or Revelation are viewed in isolation. But this starting
point does not work with the whole of the New Testament usage
of "at hand."
Third, as mentioned earlier, John the Baptist used the word
"eggizo" to say that the kingdom of God itself was "at hand."
Jesus himself used "eggizo" with regard to the kingdom of
God itself. On this issue, I think the Preterists are forced
into a catch-22. The Preterist argument concerning the phrase
"at hand" is essentially an appeal to interpreting such phrases
literally. (I will address how the Futurist interpretation
is also literal momentarily.) Here the application of "eggizo"
to the kingdom of God is insightful. When "eggizo" is taken
to literally mean an event is only a few, short years away,
what happens to the meaning of the phrase "kingdom of God"?
Based upon the promises and prophecies they had received,
the Old Testament patriarchs and prophets expected a literal,
physical kingdom involving "land promises," political dominance,
and physical deliverance from their earthly political enemies.
No such massive geographic or political event took place in
either the first century AD or anytime in the 2,000 years
since. But in order for the "kingdom of God" to be "a few,
short years away" as declared by John the Baptist and Jesus,
the Old Testament promises and expectations of the "kingdom
of God" have to be "spiritualized" and "allegorized."
Consequently, here Preterism's inconsistency is revealed.
Preterism purports to uphold a literal interpretation of the
timing elements found in prophecies while at the same time
the Preterists end up having to abandon the literal interpretation
when it comes to the object of the prophecies themselves.
Ultimately, either the literal meaning of the kingdom is wrong
or the Preterists' suggested literal meaning of "at hand"
is wrong.
Now let's turn our attention to how "at hand" should be interpreted.
First, in the case of John the Baptist and Jesus, I believe
their uses of "eggizo" are meant to refer to the intrusion
of Israel's king upon the stage of history. The people of
Israel should repent because the kingdom of God was at hand
in the sense that the king, the embodiment of that kingdom,
was there in their midst in the person of Jesus Christ. Here,
a literal interpretation of "eggizo" is preserved but that
literal interpretation is shown not to require any first century
Preterist fulfillment of tribulation, anti-christ, or kingdom
prophecies.
Second, let me address the use "at hand" in end-times prophecies
specifically (such as Revelation 1:3 or 22:10). The Futurist
position here is both simple and literal. The phrase "the
time is at hand" in Revelation 1:3 and 22:10 must be understood
in accordance with its literal definition and its scriptural
context, specifically including prior scriptural precedent.
In this case, we must understand Revelation 1:3 and 22:10
in terms of other biblical usages of "eggus" in reference
to future events. Here the commanding precedent is Jesus'
statements in the Olivet Discourse. In Luke 21:30-31, Jesus
uses "eggus" ("at hand") and says, "when we see the signs
leading up to his coming we will know that his coming is at
hand."
Luke 21:29 And he spake to them a parable; Behold
the fig tree, and all the trees; 30 When they now shoot
forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now
nigh at hand. 31 So likewise ye, when ye see these
things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh
at hand.
In Luke's account, the "at hand" timeframe is not applicable
to the present time when Jesus spoke the prophecies. Jesus'
return was not presently "at hand" when Jesus spoke this prophecy
near 30 AD. (Even for Preterists it was 40 years away in 70
AD.) Instead, in Luke's account, the nearness or "at hand"
timeframe refers to the point in time when the preceding signs
begin to be fulfilled. Jesus' return would be "at hand" once
the signs began to commence. In short, the literal meaning
of "at hand" is preserved, but simply with a different starting
point than the Preterists assert. Instead of assuming the
return is "at hand" starting from the time those words were
spoken or written on the page, the return is "at hand" starting
from the time that the preceding signs begin to appear.
In fact, Preterists themselves acknowledge the connection
between Jesus' use of "at hand" in Luke 21:30-31 and the occurrences
of "at hand" in Revelation 1:3 and 22:10. According to Preterists,
the Book of Revelation was written in the mid 60's AD and
ended with the return of Christ and destruction of the Temple
in 70 AD. So, according to Preterists, John wrote the phrase
"the time is at hand" literally just as the events of the
predicted events leading up to Jesus' return were beginning
to unfold. Consequently, Preterists acknowledge that Revelation's
"at hand" timeframe commences with the occurrence of the preceding
signs, just as Jesus said in Luke 21:30-31. And in saying
this, Preterists have automatically agreed to two factors.
First, Jesus' statement is the precedent for interpreting
similar phrases in Revelation 1:3 and 22:10. And second, that
the "at hand" timeframe only commences once the signs have
begun to unfold. Therefore, the issue with Preterists is not
one of a dispute over the interpretation of "at hand" in Revelation
or its connection to Jesus' statements in Luke 21. Instead,
the debate with Preterists is simply a question of whether
or not the preceding signs actually occurred in the 60's AD,
thereby initiating the "at hand" timeframe described by Jesus
in Luke 21.
Revelation 1:3 and 22:10 are simply applying Jesus' comment
from the Olivet Discourse to Revelation's elongated, more
detailed description of the events at the end of human history.
All these "end of history" events will be "near at hand" once
the required preceding signs begin to commence. (And I believe
Peter, Paul, and James all understood this precedent for "at
hand" given by Jesus and intended to pass on his admonishment
for his church to vigilantly watch for the signs of his return
rather than to grow slack and unconcerned with his return.)
This futurist interpretation is literal with regard to the
phrase "at hand." It interprets the phrase "at hand" to mean
"nearness of time" but it interprets this phrase in light
of scriptural precedent - precedent which specifies a particular
starting point for when the "at hand" timeframe will commence.
Consequently, the futurist interpretation of "at hand" does
not abandon the literal interpretation of scripture. In fact,
the futurist interpretation can interpret all the components
of prophecies literally, both the timing components and the
content of the prophecies themselves, such as the nature of
the kingdom of God and things like the darkening of the sun,
moon, and stars.
We will close with two points about literal interpretation
of prophecy. First, if Preterists don't uphold that the prophecies
were fulfilled literally, why argue from a literal fulfillment
of the timeframe components within the prophecies? Second,
there is ample reason from the bible itself not to restrict
"at hand" in Revelation 1:3 and 22:10 to mean "a few years
away" in the first century AD. And it is much easier to interpret
the timeframe required by the phrase "at hand" in light of
directly related prophetic precedent than it is to explain
how significant prophecies happened just after John wrote
Revelation in the first century AD (such as the resurrection
of the saints, the millennial kingdom, the resurrection of
all the dead, the great throne judgment, the coming of the
heavenly city, and the eternal state wherein God dwells with
man on earth forever).
|
|
|
|
|
|