Interview With The Orange Mailman

In this 53-minute podcast, Brian Simmons interviews Darrin (The Orange Mailman) on Preterism, the Great Tribulation, and the endtimes. Various topics are discussed including the applicability of the Olivet Discourse to A.D. 70, the literal fulfillment of prophecy, and the futuricity of events surrounding Jesus Christ’s second advent. Darrin also gives valuable insight on the Gog and Magog invasion (Ezekiel 38-39), which most prophecy teachers place before the commencement of the tribulation. The Orange Mailman advocates a pre-wrath rapture view.

Listen now: Interview With The Orange Mailman

Visit the Orange Mailman’s Blog: http://theorangemailman.spaces.live.com/

Conversation With Philip B. Brown

In this 43-minute podcast, Brian Simmons speaks to Philip B. Brown of New Wine For The End Times. Brown has written a book called in which he applies ancient Jewish eschatology to the solution of the controversy between Calvinism and Arminianism. Brown has also written some articles in which he refutes the Preterist eschatological system. In this discussion, Brown shows that while the second coming of Christ was imminent in the first century, it was (and still is) dependent on Jewish national repentance.

Listen now: Conversation With Philip B. Brown

Creation And The Fullness of God

Recently, a small sect of liberal scoffers arose to challenge the orthodox interpretation of the Genetic account. This group, which stands for “Covenant Creationism,” claims that the term “heavens and earth” really refers to something allegorical and covenantal. Since this group is so vocal, we thought we’d do a podcast to affirm the Biblical teaching of creation. In this informal 45-minute study, Brian Simmons views the Genetic creation from the standpoint of the Pleroma, and proves that the Genetic account describes a literal creation which will one day “pass away.” Perhaps few studies will be found more destructive of Hyper-Preterist doctrines!

Listen now: creation

Conditional Deferment Of Christ’s Parousia Required By Use of The Greek Particle ‘An’

   One of the strongest, most emphatic means to negate something in Greek is by the use of the double-negative “ou me.” The figure of speech, “Repeated Negation,” is a type of Synonymia in which two negatives are placed in apposition to strengthen the force of an assertion.

   This particular form of negation was used by our Lord on forty-six separate occasions. In the King James Version it is usually translated “by no means” or “in no wise.” In Matthew 24: 34 it appears in the former clause, as follows: “Verily I say unto you, in no wise (ou me) shall have passed away this generation.” The double-negative is likewise found in the former clauses of the following texts which indicate the time of the Lord’s second coming. Matthew 10: 23; 16: 28; 23: 39.

   But in the latter clause of Matthew 24: 34, the action of the verb is modified by the Greek particle “an,” which, though untranslatable in English, makes the entire clause conditional and contingent upon some circumstance either express or implied. Edward Robinson writes that this small and practically untranslatable particle always imports and element of contingency or doubt into any statement where it is included, “giving to a proposition or sentence a stamp of uncertainty, and mere possibility, and indicating a dependence on circumstances.” (A Greek and English Lexicon of the New Testament, pg. 43).

   This is corroborated by the leading authorities on Greek literature. Giving this primary sense of the usage of the Greek particle ‘an,’ William W. Goodwin, Ph. D. writes: “It denotes that the action of the verb to which it is joined is dependent upon some condition, express or implied.” (Syntax of the Moods and Tenses of the Greek Verb, pg. 54).

   Hence its usage in the latter clause of each of the four New Testament timing-statements used by Preterists to support the concept of an A.D. 70 parousia, cannot be overlooked without creating grave errors in the interpretation of eschatological passages.

   Regarding this use of the Greek particle “an,” Dr. E.W. Bullinger, an acknowledged authority on Greek grammar, writes that it “has no meaning in itself that can be expressed in translation, but which, whenever it is used, makes the whole clause, or sentence, conditional.” (Foundations of Dispensational Truth, pg. 62).

   Thus, when we come to study the Greek text of Matthew 24: 34, we see that the former clause contains the strongest negative that could possibly be used, whereas the latter contains an equally-defined conditional element. So likewise in Matthew 10: 23, 16: 28, and 23: 39. Translated into plain English, the text of Matt. 24: 34b reads: “Until all these things may take place (heos an panta tauta genetai)”.

   Incidentally, Young’s Literal Translation preserves (though somewhat ambiguously) this contingent element inherent in the Greek text. Here is how Young translates these four all-important verses:

   (Matthew 10: 23) “And whenever they may persecute you in this city, flee to the other, for verily I say to you, ye may not have completed the cities of Israel till the Son of Man may come.”

  (Matthew 16: 28) “Verily I say to you, there are certain of those standing here who shall not taste of death till they may see the Son of Man coming in his reign.”

  (Matthew 23: 39) “For I say to you, ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye may say, Blessed [is] he who is coming in the name of the Lord.”

  (Matthew 24: 34) “Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass away until all these things may take place.”

  Well, what are we to infer from all this? Quite simply, we are to infer exactly what the inspired texts indicate; namely, that the fact of Christ’s coming was certain, albeit His coming at a specified period, within the lifetime of the first-century disciples, was entirely contingent on some condition not necessarily expressed by the text. Naturally, we ask, what was that condition?

   The condition was, as quite clearly stated in the Old and New Testament Scriptures, the repentance of the Jewish nation (Lev. 26: 40-42; Jeremiah 22: 3-4; Hosea 5: 15; Micah 5: 3; Matthew 23: 39; Acts 3: 19-21). It was this alone that would bring the “times of refreshing” and the fulfillment of ALL THINGS that were written by the prophets. Jesus clearly stated that the nation would not see Him again until they repented. Their seeing Him again is certain (Matthew 24: 30; Rev. 1: 7; Zech. 12: 10). This same certainty, however, is conditional upon national repentance.

   The concept of prophetic deferment is demonstrated by the fact that all of Israel’s blessings were conditional upon the obedience of the nation (Exodus 19: 5-6; Leviticus 26; Deut. 11: 13-15, etc.). The supreme blessing, the advent of Messiah, was first offered to Israel as a nation under law, providing groundwork for the conditional elements later put forward in connection with the timing of Christ’s return. Preterists (as well as Futurists) agree that the law remained in effect for national Israel until the destruction of the temple and the nation’s dispersion in A.D. 70. Israel’s failure to meet the conditions required of them under the Mosaic charter explains why the blessing of a returned Redeemer never materialized during the lifetime of those to whom it was first promised.

   Inasmuch as there was no national repentance that satisfied the conditions required to bring about Christ’s certain return and the subsequent national restoration and New Covenant blessings, there was no return of Christ. It’s that simple. The destruction of the temple in A.D. 70 attested to the fact that the period of national probation had ended, and all things regarding the parousia of Christ put in abeyance until a future time. The “times and seasons” of Christ’s return now remain in the safe-keeping of the Father’s Divine counsel.

   Such an interpretation as ours fits in, of course, with consistent Protestant exegesis of the Scripture, where timing elements expressing imminency are taken quite as literally as language descriptive of those very events which were to happen “soon“–if only Israel had “received” John the Baptist as Elijah (see Matthew 11: 14), and later Christ as Messiah.

   This “apotelesmatic” principle, when properly and systematically applied, is the Christian’s only answer to the non-Protestant interpretive methods of those who take the timing-texts literally, but use a subjective understanding of the same to impose false meanings on the plain and literal statements of inspired Scripture, thus tampering with the controlling context of the very time-indicators upon which they profess to base their interpretations.

   We hold, emphatically, that the timing-statements are to be taken quite as literally as those that indicate the nature of what was to occur when the inspired writers received the oracles of God. A proper understanding of the usage of the Greek double-negative ‘ou me,’ as well as the particle ‘an,’ in all the primary texts which speak of the Lord’s second advent, while not the sole foundation of an apotelesmatic interpretation of New Testament prophetic passages, is an essential key in the hands of Christians who would unlock sacred truth, and a powerful weapon against those who attack our “blessed hope.” Maranatha!

Resurrection and The Land Promises

   One of the strange inconsistencies of “orthodox Preterists” is seen in regard to the doctrine of the Resurrection. Preterists tenaciously hold to belief in a future resurrection of the body. Naturally, this is part and parcel of New Testament theology. And we’re glad that Preterists maintain their position against the outright denial of the Hyper-Preterist cult.

   But at the same time Preterists err in denying that there will be a future literal restoration of Israel to the land of promise. When Pre-Millennialists ask Preterists to give a reason for their denial of this future hope, we’re told that the land promises are now fulfilled “In Christ.” That is, somewhere along the line there was an abrogation of God’s promises made to Israel. Somehow, some way, the promise of a future physical reality was replaced by something entirely hypothetical. Do you see the inconsistency? If not, continue reading.

   Because Preterists believe in a future resurrection, they admit that something of a profoundly physical nature will occur at Christ’s second coming. Very well. So orthodox Christians have believed for centuries. But when it comes to the doctrine of restoration of the land, they don’t believe it. Why not? It is ten times more incredible that God should raise dead bodies from the dust, than that He should restore to the Jews the land God promised their fathers. Furthermore, if Scripture is carefully studied, it will be seen that both doctrines (land restoration and resurrection of the body) are closely related. So, my question is: If God will accomplish the one, will He not accomplish the other?

   Both promises are represented as having their fulfillment in connection with physical things. Why spiritualize the land promises, but maintain the literality of the resurrection? I am not quibbling. I am merely pointing out what seems a fatal anomaly in the Preterist theory. Orthodox Preterists believe that Christ will return in His own body, just as He ascended. And yet passages which describe this physical coming (like Zechariah 14) are understood as being entirely “spiritual.” Well, if this is the case, why can’t the resurrection be spiritualized as well?

   According to the prevailing mode of allegorizing the Scriptures, it would be easy to insist that the resurrection of the body is fulfilled “In Christ,” in precisely the same manner that the land promises are. Just suppose that when Paul spoke of the resurrection, he used language descriptive of earthly things to symbolize higher spiritual truths. “Heresy!” you cry. And so it is. But if such a view is condemnable, how are we to react to the spiritualization of such passages as Daniel 12: 2: “And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.” Surely, any spiritualization of this verse is also worthy of condemnation.

   But let us look at another passage that is often allegorized by Preterists. I speak of Ezekiel’s prophecy of the dry bones. “Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel. And ye shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves, and shall put My Spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land” (Ezekiel 37: 12-14). How are we to interpret this passage, which ostensibly looks forward to a physical resurrection?

   I hear you respond that this is a hypothetical resurrection of which the prophet was writing. You say that it was fulfilled in the return of the Jews from Babylonian captivity. Very well. So we are to understand the resurrection of the dry bones as being allegorical in nature. But what about the land? Was it allegorical land to which the Jews returned? Of course not. But if the “land” meant was really the land of Palestine, then what warrant do we have for spiritualizing the doctrine of the resurrection? For according to Ezekiel’s prophecy, the resurrection would place them back in the land.

   Now do you admit that the land to which the dry bones would be restored was physical? Then move down to 37: 25. “And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob My servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children’s children for ever.”

   Neither does this passage admit of any spiritualization. The very phrase “the land wherein your fathers have dwelt” reveals this prophecy as relating to Israel, and not to the church. A simple glance at the succeeding context tells us that the passage will be fulfilled when the everlasting covenant (i.e., New Covenant) is established, and the Divine sanctuary placed in the midst of the children of Israel forever (Ezek. 37: 26-27).

   And this is not a mere isolated proof-text I am giving. Hearken to Ezekiel once more: “And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them. And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be my people, and I will be your God” (Ezekiel 36: 26-27).

   Again, the phrase “the land I gave to your fathers” (note the use of the personal pronoun “your“) identifies exactly what the prophet was talking about. It has nothing to do with spiritual promises to the church, but refers to the land of Palestine. The Christian church was not instituted until the first century A.D. Therefore, Ezekiel’s original audience could only have understood such promises as referring to themselves and to their children. However, if God made a promise to them, which was later abrogated, why may not promises made to church be set aside? If the land promises are fulfilled “in Christ,” then why may not the resurrection also be fulfilled “in Christ?”

   However, God’s promise to give Israel the land of Palestine is entirely unconditional, and based on the original grant made to Abraham. Dispensational scholar Clarence Larkin writes: “God’s promises to Abraham were progressive. At Ur the promises were the ‘land,’ and that his seed should become ‘a great nation.’ Gen. 12: 1, 2. At Shechem the promise of the ‘ownership of the land to his descendants.’ Gen. 12: 7. At Bethel, a” the land ‘thou seest,’ and that his seed should be as the ‘dust of the earth for number.’ Gen. 13: 15, 16. At Mamre, that his seed should be for numbers as the ‘stars of the heavens,’ and that the land should extend from the ‘River of Egypt’ to the ‘River Euphrates.’ Gen. 15: 5, 18. And at Moriah the promise as to the number of his seed was repeated. Gen. 22: 16, 18. These promises were unconditionally confirmed to his son, Isaac (Gen. 26: 1-4), and to his grandson, Jacob. Gen. 28: 10-15.”

   True, the law was added 430 years later, but this later addition cannot annul the original promise (Galatians 3: 15-17). The reason why the Jews have never gained permanent possession of the land, is because they sought it through the law. But the original promise was by grace. In Jeremiah 7: 5-7, the prophet lays down the conditions necessary for possessing the land: “For if ye throughly amend your ways and your doings; if ye throughly execute judgment between a man and his neighbor; if ye oppress not the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, and shed not innocent blood in this place, neither walk after other gods to your hurt: then will I cause you to dwell in this place, in the land I gave to your fathers, for ever and ever.”

   Now because Israel could never meet these conditions, they never obtained permanent possession of the land. But once the conditions are met, what is to hinder God’s promises from being fulfilled? A bit of honest reflection will inform us that the land promises will be literally fulfilled when the New Covenant is established.

   Listen to Jeremiah, as he delivers the words of Jehovah Himself: “But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and will write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be My people” (Jeremiah 31: 33). Israel can only keep the law by being brought into the bonds of a new and better covenant. Once they receive the blessings of the Spirit, they will keep the law and be restored to the land forever.

   But you say that the above passage has already been fulfilled, for it was quoted by Paul in Hebrews 10: 16. The mistake, however, is obvious. Paul nowhere said that Jeremiah’s prophecy was “fulfilled.” In fact, he had previously said that the Old Covenant was still in effect, and ready to give place to the New (Hebrews 8: 13). Moreover, Paul could not have understood Jeremiah 31: 33 as already fulfilled, for he cites it again in Romans 11: 27, as proof that “all Israel will be saved.” This was cited hand-in-hand with Isaiah 59: 20, which refers to the same permanant sanctification of Israel, at the second coming of Christ (Isaiah 59: 16-21—read entire passage). Therefore, the fulfillment of the New Covenant remains future.

   If this be so, then it is clear that the resurrection and the land promises are intimately related, and both involve physical realities. For as the land was personally promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; and as none of them ever lived to possess their inheritance, but wandered as strangers and pilgrims in the very land that God had given them (Acts 7: 5; Heb. 11: 9): then there must be a resurrection in order that God may keep His promise. Hence Christ’s quotation, “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob” was enough to put the Sadducees to silence (see Luke 20: 27-39). For God fully intends to keep His promises. And it is nonsense to claim that later promises can be used to upset and overthrow earlier ones.

   Therefore, if one spiritualizes the land promises, insisting that they are hypothetically fulfilled “in Christ,” then one may just as well spiritualize the resurrection. But as orthodox Preterists believe in a future coming of Christ in His own body, and a resurrection of the dead upon His return, it should not be hard to accept the doctrine of a future restoration of Israel to the land that God promised them. And this is precisely what Pre-Millennialists believe. As you can see, our doctrines are not so irrational, after all.

The Key of Prophetic Interpretation

  Whenever we examine the context of Scripture, we do so with the intent of discovering what the Word of God has revealed to us. In the field of prophecy, examination of context is important, for without a careful reading, we’ll be apt to wander from the truth. This has been evidenced in the case of many who confuse the physical with the spiritual. By mixing the various Dispensations into a common melting-pot, they are unable to discern whether a passage should be taken literally, or in a symbolic sense.

   Recently, I got involved in a discussion with an A-Millennialist who did just that. He insisted that the “living waters” of Zechariah 14: 8 were to be understood as the present outpouring of the Spirit in this Dispensation of Grace. He quoted many verses from the New Testament which proved that water does sometimes denote the Spirit’s work. However, he erred in judgment, because he did not distinguish the times and seasons to which Zechariah referred. Therefore, he was unable to determine the true nature of fulfillment. The fact is, that because Zechariah 14 is fulfilled at the RETURN OF CHRIST, the entire chapter must be taken literally.

   Let me explain. It is true that spiritual interpretation of Old Testament language applies today, for Christ is absent from earth, and has sent His holy Spirit to indwell believers and to guide them into all truth necessary for their edification. Therefore, during this Dispensation of Grace, everything is spiritual. However, this does not annul phsyical and objective realities. It only means that for the time being, spiritual realities have taken their place. Because now we walk by faith and not by sight (2 Cor. 5: 17), we know that the literal physical fulfillment of the Old Testament Scriptures is in abeyance. Such is the characteristic of the present Dispensation.

   True, the Comforter was sent in Christ’s absence. But what when He comes back? When Jesus Christ returns in His own body, the Comforter’s present work will be finished, and we shall “know, even as we are known” (1 Cor. 13: 12) When we “see HIm as He is” (1 John 3: 2) faith will be turned to sight, and the objective and physical nature of the kingdom manifested. Then will the age of spiritual application be over.

   When Jesus was on earth the first time, Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled to the letter. Now they are fulfilled spiritually, because He is gone, and the Holy Spirit has taken His place. When Jesus Christ comes back, however, the remainder of Old Testament prophecies will be fulfilled just as literally as they were during His first advent. The reason is quite simple. Christ’s manner of presence determines the nature of fulfillment. When He is present on earth, the fulfillment is physical. When He absent, the fulfillment is spiritual. This important principle may be used as a key to unlock the true interpretation of any prophetic verse in the Bible.

   Take Isaiah 55: 1, for instance. “Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, and buy wine and milk without money and without price.” The fulfillment of this verse is obviously spiritual, for it pertains to the current Dispensation characterized by the presence of the Holy Spirit, and the absence of our Lord. Therefore, the waters, the money, the wine and the milk, must all be interpreted in a spiritual sense.

   However, let us now look at Isaiah 64: 1-2: “Oh, that thou wouldest rend the heavens, that thou wouldest come down, that the mountains might flow down at thy presence, as when the melting fire burneth, the fire causeth the waters to boil, to make Thy name known to thy adversaries, that the nations may tremble at thy presence.” In this instance, the fulfillment is the very opposite of spiritual, for it describes the second coming of Christ, and His return to earth. Therefore, it is to be interpreted in a literal sense, and expressive of a future physical realities.

   To prove that this principle is correct, we read in Luke 23: 45 that “the sun was darkened” at our Lord’s crucifixion. It was a literal darkening of the literal sun, because the Son of Man was present on earth. But no one would look for the darkening of the sun and moon in this spiritual dispensation. When Christ returns, however, we find that “the sun and the moon shall be darkened, and the stars shall withdraw their shining. The Lord also shall roar out of Zion, and utter His voice from Jerusalem; and the heavens and the earth shall shake” (Joel 3: 15-16). These predictions will be literally fulfilled, because they point to the Lord’s personal return to earth.

   This is why the parousia is expressly referred to as the Son of Man’s return. “And then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven; and then they shall see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” (Matt. 24: 30). Please note that the term “Son of Man” is always indicative of our Lord’s humanity; and therefore, whenever the term is employed in Scripture, it relates to presence on earth. This is how we determine whether Matthew 24: 30 is to be taken literally, or metaphorically.

   The Son of Man is none other than the Second Adam, He who shall redeem the creation from the bondage of vanity when He returns. And how will He return? Metpahorically, or in His own body? After Christ ascended from the Mount of Olives, the two angels informed His disciples that He would return in like manner as He asended (Acts 1: 11). Now go to Zechariah 14: 4: “And His feet shall stand in that day upon the Mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east.” The verse predicts Christ’s second coming, when the Dispensation of the Spirit shall have ended. Therefore, the connected prophecies may not be spiritualized. They are be understood as descriptive of physical and objective events.

   It is interesting to note that the phrase “Son of Man” occurs eighty-four times in the New Testament, but is never once used in the church epistles. The first use of the title is in Matt. 8: 20, where it is written, “The Son of Man hath not where to lay His head.” Its last use is in Rev. 14: 14, where the Son of Man is seen as “having on His head a golden crown.” Between the Gospels and Revelation, the term occurs only twice, in Acts 7: 56 and Hebrews 2: 6.

   What is the reason for this? The answer is quite simple: Because the phrase “Son of Man” has nothing to do with this present Dispensation of the Spirit, during which Christ is absent, but has everything to do with His first and second advents. Therefore, Matt. 24: 30 and related prophecies do not speak of any “spiritual” coming, but denote the Lord’s personal presence restored. This fact demolishes forever the false doctrines of Preterism, A-Millennialism, and every other teaching which spiritualizes passages pertaining to the parousia.

   Remember, all things are spiritual in this Dispensation, because Christ is absent. Therefore His presence is realized only in the third person of the Trinity. In this age, the natural things have been set aside, that spiritual things might take their place. For example, the natural Israel has fallen, while the spiritual Israel gains prominence (Romans 11: 11 ff.). Natural circumcision is replaced by that of the Spirit (Phil. 3: 3); and even the the resurrection we enjoy now is of a spiritual nature (Eph. 2: 1, 5). But do we still look forward to a physical resurrection? Of course we do. And when will this take place? When the Lord returns. Is the natural Israel to be restored? Of course it is! But only when the Lord returns (see Romans 11: 26-27).

   Applying this principle again, we come to Revelation 20, the long-studied passage which speaks of the first resurrection and “1000 years.” We know that during this Dispensation, our reign is of a heavenly (spiritual) character (Eph. 2: 6). But does Rev. 20 speak of the same thing? How is John’s vision of the Millennium to be taken–literally, or spiritually? The key is found by examing the time of fulfillment.

   Since the beast and false prophet are to be cast into the lake of fire WHEN JESUS CHRIST RETURNS (Rev. 19: 19-20), we know that the ensuing visions of the binding of Satan and reign of the martyrs will take place on earth, and in a literal fashion. For Paul writes that Antichrist will be destroyed by the epiphany of Christ’s parousia (see 2 Thess. 2: 8). And since the same parousia is mentioned in Matthew 24 in connection with the coming of the Son of Man, it is evident that the subsequent events will take place in the natural realm. Compare with Revelation 2: 26-27 & 5: 10.

   This principle of distinguishing between natural and spiritual fulfillment may be called “The Master Key of Prophetic Interpretation.” I do not claim any originality for this view. However, I do claim that this method is the absolutely correct one; and that, when properly applied, it will clear up the meaning of any prophetic passage in the Word of God. Just take the simple method of interpretation which I have outlined above, and see how easy it is to use. As such, it will be found helpful in refuting any kind of error that may present itself for consideration. And this makes it not only a key, but also a very formidable weapon.

Zechariah 14: Preteristic Or Pre-Millennial?

   Whenever I deal with Preterists, and get to engaging in a discussion of theological differences, I always bring up Zechariah 14. This is to my mind one of the most important eschatological chapters in the Bible, illustrating as it does what will happen when Christ returns to the Mount of Olives from whence He ascended, and describing in glowing language the ensuing Millennium that will follow Israel’s sanctification in the sight of all nations.

   A few months ago, I wrote some articles in which I dealt with Zechariah 14. Yet since that time, and as my studies have deepened, I’ve found that it forms one of the most compelling topics of end-time dicussion. Not only do the visions the prophet describes tie in with crucial New Testament texts, but the whole passage, when read in its grammatical, contextual, and historical sense, makes any kind of Preteristic view of Christ’s coming impossible. In the following article I hope to demonstrate this, and to confirm once more that Pre-Millennialism is the correct system of eschatology.

I. Preterist Chicanery

   Preterists know that Zechariah 14 is an important link in the understanding of end-time fulfillment. Therefore, when doing a Google search of this Bible-chapter I wasn’t surprised to learn that Preterists have tried, as usual, to monopolize the discussion. But it heartens me to know that there are still several resources which give the correct interpretation of the prophetic text, and which anyone may find. Despite the differences, when notes are compared the Pre-Millennial view will always be found to make the most sense.

   Because of the correspondence between Zechariah’s Apocalypse and the prophecies of the Lord Jesus in His Olivet Discourse, it is alleged by many Preterists that Zech. 14 was fulfilled in A.D. 70. Is this the truth? or is it just another example of Preterist chicanery? A simple reading of the passage will clear things up. Zechariah is talking about the destruction of the enemy nations that will surround Jerusalem. This is a far cry from what occurred in A.D. 70, when the Romans destroyed the temple and the Jews were dispersed. When we try to force the Roman conquest into the context of Zechariah’s vision, the result will surely be confusion.

II. Who Are The Nations?

   Whenever in the Old Testament we see the term “nations” employed, it is always used in contradistinction to God’s chosen people of Israel. In Deuteronomy 32: 8-9 we read: “When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when He separated the sons of Adam, He set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.” This tells us that God pre-determined His purposes regarding the people of Israel two hundred years before the call of Abraham (see Gen. 10: 32). For this reason, Israel has always remained distinct from the “nations,” or Gentiles. In Numbers 23: 9, Balaam is recorded as confirming this by prophetic utterance: “Lo, the people shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations.”

   With the above facts in mind, we ask how can anyone see in the phrase, “the nations that come against Jerusalem” (Zechariah 12: 9; cf. 14: 2-3) any reference to the Jewish people? Such an interpretation will surely induce a spiritual blindness as great as that which overtook the scribes and Pharisees. But their error is manifest to all.  As the same prophet predicts the deliverance of the “inhabitants of Jerusalem” from these very “nations” (Zech. 12: 8-9), one must marvel at anyone who would maintain a Preteristic view of Zechariah’s Apocalypse.

III. A Personal Coming of Christ

   It is suggested by Preterists that what Zechariah describes in 14: 4 is not a personal coming of Jesus Christ to the Mount of Olives from whence He ascended to take His seat at the right hand of the Father; but is in actuality a providential and non-personal coming. And of course, they claim that this coming was in A.D. 70, to destroy the Jews! Now, would any unbiased person reading this passage see in verse 4 a mystical, allegorical coming of Christ to destroy the very people He promised through His prophet to defend? If such be the case, language loses all meaning, and the words of God may be spiritualized in opposite directions to suit whatever view each interpreter desires.

   But God has not left His children in such darkness. We submit that no interpretation is needed to understand the predictions of Zechariah. For the Holy Spirit Himself has interpreted what man could never understand without a direct revelation. In Zech. 14: 4 Christ is described as standing on the Mount of Olives. “And His feet shall stand on that day upon the Mount of Olives.” If the Holy Spirit had meant that Christ’s coming would be providential and not personal, why did He use terminology which implies the exact opposite?

   On the other hand, if He had meant a personal coming, could He have described it any better? For the planting of Divine feet upon a mountain certainly denotes a personal visitation. Therefore, accepting the language of Scripture as absolute and authoritative, we conclude that the coming of Christ as described in Zechariah 14 will definitely be personal, and will constitute the fulfillment of Acts 1: 11, in which it was revealed by angelic sources that the Lord would return in “like manner” as the apostles saw Him ascend into heaven–that is, personally and bodily.

   Knowing that this never occurred in A.D. 70, Preterists twist these verses out of their context, enforcing an allegorical and mystical meaning which robs language of any kind of signification. They tell us that Zechariah 14 was written in “symbolic language;” but for some reason, they can’t explain to us what the symbols mean. The Hyper-Preterists are the main offenders in this department of eisegesis. But many partial preterists, knowing that their theology, too, is on the line, have agreed with the Hyper-Preterists in their assertions that Zechariah 14 is totally “past fulfillment.” Shame on them all.

IV. Geographical Disturbances

   Another point which proves that Zechariah’s visions relate to a yet future coming of Christ is that the prophet speaks of geographical disturbances which have never occurred in past history. When Christ descends from heaven with all His saints (Zech. 14: 5) and stands upon the Mount of Olives, “the Mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south” (Zech. 14: 4).

   For reasons which should be manifest, what Zechariah has depicted is a future event. As the prophet Joel describes the nations being gathered together for judgment in the valley of Jehoshaphat (Joel 3: 2, 14), our suggestion is that the new valley will be created, or the present one significantly enlarged, when the Lord descends from heaven to stand upon the Mount of Olives. According to Joel’s prophecy, this must take place after an invasion of the land of Israel by enemy forces (see Joel 2). We believe that these invaders will be the same enemies mentioned in Ezekiel’s prophecy of “Gog and Magog” (Ezekiel 38-39). A careful reading of these passages is necessary to get the full meaning of Zechariah’s vision. They speak of things which will be verifiable on earth, and in the physical realm: and not of any spiritual and unverifiable “events.”

V. Confusion of Enemies

   We find also that the nations that besiege Jerusalem will be put into confusion by the coming of the Lord. Not only will they be afflicted with sore and grievous plagues (Zech. 14: 12), but they will “lay hold every one on the hand of his neighbor, and his hand shall rise up against the hand of his neighbor” (Zech. 14: 13). This depicts the unprecedented discord which will take place when all the armies are amassed together before Jerusalem. Compare with Ezekiel 38: 21.

   Turning to the prophecies of Jeremiah, chapters 50-51 give us a graphic description of the fall of Babylon. What do these chapters reveal? Is there any “sure truth” on which we may lay hold? Yes! And here is what the Word reveals. Shortly before the time of the end (probably near the close of the last-half of Daniel’s 70th week), Babylon will be invaded by armies which come from the northern regions (Jer. 50: 3, 41-42). These armies are identical with those described by Ezekiel in 39: 2, and by Joel in 2: 20.

   The prophet Daniel gives us to understand that when the “king of the north” (ostensibly Gog) comes against Antichrist “like a whirlwind” (Daniel 11: 40), it will cause him (Antichrist) to “enter into the countries,” “overflow,” “pass over,” and finally enter into the glorious land (Israel), at which time he will “plant the tabernacles of his place between the seas in the glorious holy mountain” (Dan. 11: 45).

 Hence we infer that the northern armies mentioned by Ezekiel, and alluded to by Joel, will be raised up against Babylon at the time of the end.  Chasing Antichrist out of his own land, they will force him to flee into Jerusalem, where he will seat himself in the temple and demand divine honors (see Isaiah 14: 13-14; 2 Thess. 2: 4).  The Minister of State Religion (the false prophet) will have already supported his claims (Revelation 13: 12).  But prior to this final profanation, the image of Antichrist alone will be worshipped.  In the middle of the week the image is set up. Toward the end of the week, Antichrist himself takes the place of the image.

   Before Antichrist’s ultimate destruction, the pursuing armies will reach Jerusalem, surround the city, and there will be a great battle, during which the armies will fight against each other. During this juncture the Jews will cry out in their affliction, and God will send Jesus Christ to deliver them from the wrath of the enemy. Now, reader, please ask yourself: did any such scenario occur in A.D. 70?

VI. Restoration of The Land

   Those who still maintain the Preterist view of Zechariah 14 have, however, another piece of evidence which they must get around. And that is, the glorious results of this last battle, as outlined in verses 6-11. When Jesus Christ returns to save His people, the Jews, living waters will go forth from Jerusalem (Zech. 14: 8), cleansing the land from all defilement. Then the land, having been leveled into a beautiful plain, will be “lifted up, and inhabited in her place” (Zech. 14: 10).

   The living waters will proceed from the sanctuary described by Ezekiel in 40-44. The waters will flow eastward from the sanctuary (Ezekiel 47: 1-12), and proceed southward, wending toward the rebuilt city of Jerusalem. From Jerusalem the river will part into two heads (Zechariah 14: 8). Half the river will flow toward the “former sea” (Dead Sea); while the other will find its way into the “hinder sea” (Mediterranean). And the waters shall be healed. Let us simply believe what God says, and we’ll never accept any view which claims a mystical and allgorical fulfillment. After all, haven’t we shown that the texts related to Zechariah 14 harmonize in a wonderful manner, and can only be undertood through an interpretive lens that understands the Divine words according to the established laws of human language?

VII. The Millennium

  As a final point, let us not forget that Zechariah provides an exellent delineation of the Millennial times which shall follow the destruction of Christ’s enemies.  He writes: “And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, and to keep the feast of tabernacles” (Zech. 14: 16).  Surely we cannot understand this in any allegorical sense.  Or let the allegorists themselves tell us what is meant by all nations coming to Jerusalem to keep the feast of tabernacles!

   We know, of course, that the fulfillment of that passage will be literal.  And what Zechariah tells us is corroborated by other inspired Scriptures.  David writes: “All nations whom Thou hast made shall come and worship before Thee, O Lord; and shall glorify thy name” (Psalm 86: 9).  And hearken to Isaiah: “And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before Me, saith the Lord” (Isaiah 66: 23).  A glance at the preceding context tells us when this worship will take place.  It is after the Lord comes “with fire, and with His chariots like a whirlwind, to render His anger with fury, and His rebuke with flames of fire.  For by fire and by His sword will the Lord pleasd with all flesh: and the slain of the Lord shall be many” (Isaiah 66: 15-16).

   The nations which are left are evidently those who are mentioned in the latter part of Christ’s Olivet Discourse (see Matthew 25: 31-46).  They are the nations that receive the Jewish witnesses during the Great Tribulation, when the Gospel of the Kingdom is re-proclaimed.  Their reward will be entrance into Christ’s Millennial kingdom; even the kingdom of heaven, which was “prepared from the foundation of the world” (Matt. 25: 34).  This kingdom is quite distinct from the kingdom of God, which was prepared “before the foundation of the world” (Eph. 1: 4).  The nations that enter into the Millennial kingdom are they who shall come to Jerusalem from year to year to keep the feast of tabernacles, when the kingdom is restored to Israel. 

VIII. Conclusion

   While there is plenty more in Zechariah’s prophecy which we could use to demonstrate that the Preteristic view is flawed, I am sure that readers will agree with us that the Apocalypse of Zechariah awaits a future fulfillment. As Thomas Ice once asserted, Preterists cannot provide a textual interpretation of this most important prophetic passage. But when we use the literal method, the vapors induced by man’s interpretation fly away like mist before a morning breeze. Oh, confusion, away with thee! How refreshing it is to know that God has not left us confounded when it comes to understanding prophecy. Anyone who accepts the grammatical meaning of the words used to describe Christ’s coming will avoid falling into the snares and traps laid out by Preterists.

   My suggestion is that we each take time to study Zechariah 14 as we’ve never done before. Knowing that the scenes depicted therein may take place in our own lifetimes will be a powerful incentive to our belief in a literal fulfillment. And above all, let no man rob you of the comfort of knowing that the victory will be won by Christ on His own ground, and according to His own terms. As Christ is the true Seed of Abraham (Gal. 3: 16), so He must return to His own inherited land to obtain the victory over His foes. And we being Abraham’s children through faith in Him Who shall one day conquer (Gal. 3: 29; Romans 4: 13), let us be assured that we shall see, with our own eyes, the fulfillment of all the promises written in the Holy prophets. To this we daily look forward. Maranatha!

The New Heavens And Earth: Literal or Figurative?

 In Revelation 21, the apostle John gives us a beautiful picture of a “new heaven and new earth,” upon which a new metropolis and center of divine worship, the New Jerusalem, descends.  For many centuries the church has interpreted John’s vision as relating to a future reality.  Most Christians today would agree.  They do not believe the vision is to be taken in any allegorical or mystical sense, but in a plain and literal sense. 

   However, not all concur with this opinion.  There are still a few Christians, most of them of the “Reformed” group, who insist that the “New Heavens and New Earth” are simply another name for “the Gospel administration;” and that the “curse” of Genesis 3 has been done away “in Christ“–a convenient phrase which may mean anything, or nothing at all, according as it is applied.

1. Typology of The Creation Account

 In order to find out the truth of the matter, it is suggested that we go back to the original creation account.  For what we have in Revelation is obviously an “antitype” of the “heaven and earth” mentioned in Genesis 1: 1: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”  As with the two resurrections in Revelation 20, we assume that if one is literal, the other is also literal.  If one is figurative, the other is figurative as well.  If the “new heaven and earth” of Revelation 21 is allegorical, then we may reasonably hold that the Genetic account is also an allegory.  For the one is the antitype of the other.

   Confusion ensues when the student fails to see that Revelation is the complement of Genesis.  Genesis is the book of beginnings.  Revelation is the book of the end.  In Genesis we have accounts of the creation of the earth, Satan’s first rebellion, the entrance of sin, and the curse.  In Revelation we are told of Satan’s final rebellion,  the abolition of sin, the passing away of the earth, and removal of the curse.  As death came upon all men through Adam’s transgression (Romans 5: 12), and as Christ will return to earth as the Second Adam (1 Cor. 15: 45), so His redemptive work must be worldwide in its effects.  Perhaps a closer look at the typology of creation will bring this out.

II. The Creative Ages

  In Genesis 1: 1-2, we read: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.  And the earth was (became) without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.”  This describes the creation of the primal earth, and the chaos into which it subsequently fell.  We do not know how the earth became “tohu va bohu;” but our theory is that Satan was placed over the original earth, and apostasized by attempting to mimic God’s creative works.  His efforts resulted in a race of monsters (dinosaurs) whose existence brought on a global deluge, and so the earth became “without form and void.”  The antitype of this primal creation is the “new heaven and earth” of Revelation 21.

   Peter, writing of the last days scoffers, alludes to this original primal creation.  “For this they are willingly ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water, and in the water: whereby the world that then was (the primal creation), being overflowed with water, perished” (2 Peter 3: 5-6).  In Genesis 1-2, Moses records the restoration of this primal earth.  But Peter writes that the “heavens and earth which are now” (2 Peter 3: 7) are reserved unto fire.  This fiery deluge (referred to in Rev. 20: 11 and 21: 1) is the antitype of that deluge of water whereby the original earth became without form and void.

  The six-days’ work related in Gen. 1: 3-31 was not the creation of a new earth out of nothing, but the restoration of the earth to its original condition before it became submerged in water.  But after the fall of Adam the present earth fell into degeneration; and so it was cleansed with water.  It now awaits an additional cleansing by fire. This will precede the Millennium, that age in which the earth will be restored and blessed by God. Christ purchased the creation with His own blood (as evidenced by the crown of thorns); and His second coming, the antitype of the Noachian deluge, will not issue in the “new heaven and new earth” as described in Rev. 21, but in a restoration of the “heaven and earth which are now.”

   In light of the above, the “creative ages” (Alpha Ages) may be viewed as threefold and progressive, having a direct link to end-time antitypes.  The first phase was the creation of the original earth (Gen. 1: 1).  The second was a “chaotic earth” (Gen. 1: 2); while the third resulted in the “present earth” (Gen. 1: 3-2: 7).  The present earth was flooded by water in the days of Noah.  But it awaits its fiery baptism, which will occur when Jesus Christ returns from heaven to establish His Millennial reign. 

   The purging of the creation by fire, related in 2 Peter 3 and Revelation 20, does not refer to Christ’s second coming, but is the antitype of the watery baptism of the primal creation.  There are two water-baptisms and two fire baptisms.  One belongs to the “heaven and earth which are of old.”  The other belongs to the “heaven and earth which now are.”  Recognizing this principle is essential to “rightly dividing the word of truth” and understanding God’s plan and purpose to restore creation.  The Dispensational scheme of the Bible shows that this restoration will be brought about in inverse order to that of its ruin.  It is not accomplished all at once, but in stages and gradations.

III. The Creative Week & The Redemptive Week

  Wrapped up, as it were, in this typology of the creation, is a smaller typlogy of redemption.  The subordinate typology does not annul or “replace” the larger typlogy, but complements it, allowing us to understand, on a micro level, truths which are universal and comprehensive in their fulfillment.   The “creative week” of Genesis may be seen as a “type” of the “redemptive week” of man.  It is quite important that we bring this out.   

   The creative week occupies the seven days of creation (including the sabbath), and as such belongs to the “restoration” phase of the “Creative Ages.”  This typical week saw the creation and/or restoration of:– 1): Cosmic light (the first day); 2): the firmament (second day); 3): dry land and vegetation (third day); 4): solar light (fourth day); 5): fish and fowl (fifth day); 6): land animals & man (sixth day).  Since the perfection of the the creative week was marred by sin, the seventh day of the creative week was moved to the last day of the redemptive week.

  The redemptive week began upon Adam and Eve’s eviction from Eden, on the sixth day of the creative week.  The redemption wrought by Christ was typified by a slain animal, probably a lamb (see Genesis 3: 21); and thence a “day” became equivalent to “1000 years.”  Adam died on the day he ate of the fruit, living to be 930 years old (Gen. 5: 5).  Mercy was afforded him through the merits of the lamb’s blood, and he died within the first day of the redemptive week.  Notice that when the Dispensation of Innocence ended, God began “working” according to a different scale of time.

  From the Dispensation of Conscience to the close of the Legal Dispensation, all of God’s promises of redemption looked forward to the true sabbath, or seventh day–otherwise known as the Millennium.  However, during the Dispensation of Grace, an additional day is held forth, even the eighth day, in which all things will be restored under a permanent and eternal administration.  This will have its fulfillment in the New Heaven and New Earth. 

    It is doubtful whether the Old Testament prophets saw as far as the eighth day.  It is rather believed that they saw only as far as the Sabbath (Millennium), and that the prophet Isaiah’s “new heaven and new earth” (Isaiah 65: 17; 66: 22) is actually the “1000 years ” of Revelation 20, and not the “New heaven and new earth” of Revelation 21.  However, that is just an afterthought.

IV. Lack of Distinction Creates Confusion

  Due to failure to distinguish between the two typologies (creative and redemptive), allegorists see Revelation 21 as nothing more than a highly figurative account of Christian salvation.  Failure to “discern the things that differ” is the fountain and springhead of all errors concerning the exact meaning of the term, “new heaven and earth.”  However, the terminology itself points us back to the Genetic typology.  The “new heavens and earth” described by John is creative, and not redemptive, in nature.  The denizens of the new administration are described as already redeemed, and cannot enter the city unless they are fully sanctified (Rev. 21: 7-8, 24; 22: 14-15).

  On the other hand, when Paul says, “if any man be in Christ he is a new creation” (2 Cor. 5: 17), he refers to a redemptive work, and not a creative work.  As you see, there is a difference.  No one would imagine that the “new creation” mentioned is identical to that of Revelation 21.   If the “new heaven and earth” seen by John represents realities in the redemptive sphere alone (and by this I mean personal redemption), then what does Genesis 1: 1-3 signify? It certainly has nothing to do with the Gospel.  Those verses speak of God’s creative works, which came about before man was even formed, or in need of salvation.  

   Therefore, the first two chapters of Genesis have nothing to do with personal redemption.  Moreover, if John’s vision of Revelation 21 can be demonstrated as having typological connection with the Genetic account, then that forever settles the question of whether or not the “new heaven and earth” is a literal future reality.  For the salvation of individuals is still ongoing in this dispensation.  If still ongoing, then it is incomplete, and Christ is still “working,” and remains in the holy place making intercession for our sins.  If this be so, then we are still in the “sixth day,” and have not yet been fully sanctified.  Therefore, Revelation 21 awaits a future fulfillment.  As such, it can have nothing to do with the present Dispensation.

V. A Properly Balanced View

  The New heaven and new earth are where God’s plan of redemption will have its perfect fulfillment. As stated above, when Adam and Eve sinned on the sixth day of the week, the creative week was marred; and so the sabbath, which came a day later, looked forward to something better.  Since the creation was subjected to vanity on account of man’s sin (Romans 8: 20), it too got packaged in God’s plan of redemption, and the sabbath of the creative week was moved to that of the redemptive week.  The seventh day is when the blessed jubilee will come; and we find its nature vividly described in the Old Testament (see Psalm 65: 7-13; Isa. 11: 6-8; 30: 23-26; Ezek. 47: 6-12; Joel 3: 18; Amos 9: 13).

  The Millennium, however, will only be the restoration of the restored earth (that third phase of the “creative ages”).  Its fulfillment does not take us back any farther than Genesis 1: 3.  There still remains the cleansing of the original heaven and earth, which were once deluged by water (as implied in Gen. 1: 2-3), but will, at the close of the seventh day, be deluged by fire.  

    As Satan’s first rebellion caused the flooding of primal creation, so Satan’s last rebellion, his being loosed for a “little season,” (see Rev. 20: 3, 7) will issue in the dissolution of the heaven and earth as graphically described by Peter. The result will be a “new heavens and new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness” (2 Peter 3: 13).  The reason why Peter overlooks the Millennium (the seventh day), and focuses exclusively on the eighth day, is probably because the glorified saints (the church of the first-born) will reign with Christ in the New Jerusalem during the Millennium, but while the New Jerusalem is still above the earth. 

   During the “1000 years,” the regenerated nation of Israel (the church of the second-born) will bear rule on earth from the rebuilt city of Jerusalem: not the New Jerusalem, but that described in the latter chapters of the book of Ezekiel (see Ezekiel 40-48).  Then, after the general judgment, the Israel of the Millennium will be resurrected into the New Jerusalem, and, the whole number of God’s elect being complete, the city will descend upon the new earth.  Then will God’s plan of redemption be fulfilled, and the “Perfect Age” will begin.

  From the facts above, it is obvious that any figurative view of the “new heavens and earth” would force us to overlook, not only the typology preserved in the Genetic account of creation, but also many of the most important prophetical truths set down for our edification and enlightenment.  Let us take this “sure word of prophecy” (2 Peter 1: 19) and embrace the promises that it holds forth.  For if the “new heavens and new earth” are figurative, then the connected promises may also be figurative.  But if they are literal, then we know that they are based on literal promises.  And every promise made by God will surely come to pass.