Eschatology has been at the forefront of recent debates within the Reformed world. The debate is particularly between partial-preterists and full-preterists. A partial-preterist is someone who believes that many — but not all — of the apocalyptic prophecies in the New Testament were fulfilled in the first century, by the year A.D. 70. A full-preterist is someone who believes that all of the apocalyptic prophecies were fulfilled in the first century. For example, partial-preterists believe that a bodily return of Jesus, a final judgment, and a resurrection of the dead are in our future. Full-preterists deny that these things are in our future.
These views are in contrast to what we might call “full-futurism.” A full-futurist believes that all of the apocalyptic passages are yet to be fulfilled. This is the most popular position among Christians today. I was raised in a full-futurist home, but I have adhered to partial-preterism for nearly 20 years. I believe it is the most biblical and balanced position. Partial-preterism (and therefore partial-futurism) avoids the opposite extremes of full-futurism and full-preterism.
Having come from a full-futurist upbringing, I can attest to the excitement of learning deeper truths of scripture. There is perhaps no greater paradigm shift than an eschatological paradigm shift. Consequently, once you dive into the preterist perspective, you’ll find yourself asking, “Which passages are still future?” That’s the question this essay attempts to answer.
(more…)
