Let’s get down to brass tacks. Full Preterism, Realized Eschatology, Covenant Eschatology, or whatever  name it goes by, teaches that Christ returned in AD 70. All prophecy was fulfilled, and the Bible says nothing about events or persons after AD 70. The Bible was written to them, it’s their mail, not ours. We, the church, now live in the New Jerusalem that came down in AD 70 and since then we have been living in the benefits of that glorious kingdom in which there is no more pain, suffering, crying, or death we all live the victorious life where we have conquered sin, death, and all things have been made new.

Right.

The only problem of course God forget to tell Barnabus, Clement, Polycarp, Ignatius, the Apostle John himself, and the rest of the church that it was all fulfilled.

This view, which is the most heretical doctrine of demons to ever come down the pike  is not only being taught here in the US but is now spreading into other countries. Those FP who are attending Seminaries are now hiding the truth of their belief in fear of being expelled from their schools. A general survey of their teachings tells you why they are afraid to come out into the open.

Here is a list of Teachings that come out from Full  Preterism. These are the distinct Doctrines of the Full/Hyper Preterist that are being challenged.

(In other words, these are their false doctrines they espouse)

1. The Olivet Discourse and Revelation were all fulfilled in AD 70.
2. They deny the visible bodily return of Christ.
3. They deny the physical bodily resurrection of the saints.
4. Jesus had to die a Spiritual death on the cross to atone for our sin.^[1] Some believe he had to be born again in hades in order to Resurrect on the Third Day.
5. Adam was threatened with “spiritual” death in the garden for eating of the tree, not physical death.
6. The “Last Enemy” is Spiritual death, but physical death is “good.” Since death ruled and reigned in the Garden.
7. Genesis 1-3 tells the metaphorical story of first covenant man, not the literal creation of the world.
8. The Millennium took place during AD 33 – 70.
9. No one was saved until AD 70, when Jesus returned to take them to heaven. Jesus had to come out of heaven a second time to bring salvation to men in AD 70. (yet they were living in the glorious Millennium) There was no atonement until after he came out of heaven to fulfill the earthly types and shadows of the OC priestly system. Paul died in his sins.
10. Salvation is talked about in NT scriptures “proleptically” by Paul and the other writers. Meaning they wrote as if they were saved, but salvation did not come until AD 70.
11. Paul and all or the Apostles who died before AD 70 had to go to Hades until AD 70 when they were released at the great white throne.
12. Jesus exists in a spirit body in heaven, his “flesh and bone” body he was raised in was burnt up in heaven as part of the “second sacrifice” for sin.
13. The New birth is no longer Regeneration, it’s now “spiritual resurrection.”
14. The saints coming out Hades in AD 70 is the “resurrection of the dead” even though Jesus said the ones in Hades were the “living.”
15. The living saints who were still stuck in Old Covenant Judaism were resurrected out of that old system and placed into the new covenant realities in AD 70 as a “Third Resurrection.”  -Gentiles missed this Resurrection of the dead. There is no Physical / bodily resurrection of the saints, its either IBV, Individual Body View where the saints are raised out of Hades and then given a brand-new body in heaven or CBV, where Resurrection is turned into a Corporate Body where “Old Covenant Israel which is “dead” is transferred into the NEW Covenant, which makes zero common sense.
16. The Law of Moses remained valid until AD 70 for Jews as a way of “righteousness.” (this denies the sufficiency of Christ death to atone for sin)
17. Every person was judged in AD 70, therefore it has already been determined where every ones goes. No one has to stand before God to give an account after AD 70, when you die you either go to Hades, get annihilated, or go to heaven and get a “spiritual body”, and live out eternity plucking a harp while sitting on clouds.
18. Time never comes to an end, sin-death is never actually defeated literally only spiritually, so that sin and death will continue on Earth into eternity.
19. Hades was destroyed in AD 70 but “death” continues and was not thrown into the Lake of Fire.
20. Only the Holy Spirit can reveal the truth of Full Preterism to people and those who reject it are in darkness.
21. The New Heaven and Earth is here, and the church currently lives in the reality of the New Jerusalem.

The unfortunate thing is that now as of 2023 they have splintered into so many variance that one can hardly keep track of each version. One offshoot called “Israel Only” claims to be the consistent view of Full Preterism and everything else is pure nonsense. IO uses the bible to prove that no one is saved after AD 70, the church came to an end, and we are all “wannabe Christians.”

After following FP for nine years and two debates I discovered a person cannot win against them in any debate or discussion. When boxed into a corner they simply “invent” some new thing to justify their position. They choose to allegorize every difficult verse and then smugly declare they are right because that’s what the bible says. The historical meaning of words simply has no effect on their thinking.  Then the character of most has degenerated to the point of where one leader  is using their radio program to call homosexuals Faggots, making them no different than the Hillsboro Baptist church.

According to many proponents and champions of Full Preterism, it begins with time statements that demand a first century completion. Full Preterism stresses that from Mathew 24, it teaches that Christ had to return in that generation, or Jesus lied. This argument then demands that FP have a more complete understanding of scriptures than anyone else in history since no one got it right except them.

From this point of origin, all previously known Christian doctrines, theology, and especially Eschatology, is redefined and reinterpreted to fit the Preterist Paradigm. Its birth during the 1960’s was from inside the Churches of Christ, through Max King, and his father-in-law, C.D. Beagle. It is shaped by a “denominational deviations” that allowed for such heresy to infiltrate its ranks. Where checks and balances among scholarship circles were rejected along with the Nicene Creed.

Much of what FP teach comes from a very small list of books, a plethora of You Tube videos, FACEBOOK debates, and online “papers.” It is not taught in any accredited school as a viable system of Eschatology because it creates to many contradictions, inconsistencies, and violates what is defined in the Creeds as to what Christianity is. When I present to you what FP believes, let it be understood that there are over twenty different types of “Preterisms;” orthodox Preterism, historical, idealist, evangelical, proper, and any survey of FACEBOOK will reveal a full bevy of names and so no one view embodies all the same beliefs. As mentioned before, a major faction is between the Individual Body View (IBV) and the Corporate Body View, (CBV) people. The CBV people deny that resurrection has anything to do with a body coming out of the ground or of a “dead one” coming out of Hades, (IBV) but it is all spiritualized to mean the Corporate body of death, the Old Covenant (CBV), the Jews come out of it into the New Covenant body of Christ, and into new life which ignores the significant number of Gentiles who were never in the Old Covenant.

There is no book one can buy that explains all their theology, or even comes close to systemizing it, let alone builds a cohesive position in which everyone can agree on the ability to cite sources outside of You Tube videos and books is almost impossible. So, what I present here is gleaned from these years of interaction and their sources. The leaders as I have mentioned before: Don K Preston, William Bell, and Ed Stevens have been in it longer than most. Their disciples, Alan Bondar, Michael Miano, Daniel Rogers, Michaela Sullivan, Ed Hassertt, David Green, and a host of others follow up and repeat much of the same thing as what comes from their leaders. I have interacted with every one of them on some level or another. It should also be noted that not everyone will agree with what I put down as coming from their view, but this is not intended to formulate one branch or view but an assimilation of many facets that represent the core beliefs.

AD 70

If the great white throne was to happen in that generation, then the evidence would have been apparent from a historical point of view. The testimony of the church is that no great white throne took place in AD 70. No Early Church Father ever declared that Christ returned in AD 70, and in fact the earliest statement made in the Didache^[2] declared in its final paragraph.

And then shall appear the signs of the truth first, the sign of an outspreading in heaven; then the sign of the sound of the trumpet; and the third, the resurrection of the dead; yet not of all, but as it is said: The Lord shall come and all His saints with Him. Then shall the world see the Lord coming upon the clouds of heaven.

Many Biblical scholars have affirmed that the “coming” described in the Olivet is not referencing a great white throne but a coming of Judgment from him who sits on the throne. (Dan 7:13, 14)  The FP is forced by their paradigm and lack of education to insist the events of AD 70 was the great white throne even though Christ was never observed to have come. (They argue we live by faith and not by sight, and that the kingdom was to come without observation which defies Jesus who claimed the Kingdom had come and others, including Paul, who stated Christ would appear at his coming.)

Soon after AD 70 the apostle Barnabas^[3] made the same claims that the Olivet was fulfilled according to the prophecies of Jesus in Mathew 24 yet looked forward to a great white throne.

The Apostles Creed (AD 90-150) was the first document by  the first century church stating a belief in a still future coming of Christ,

From thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body and life everlasting.

About AD 325 Eusubias presided over the Nicene council held by Constantine which also declared, “He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, … and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead.” It was the churches unanimous belief that the Great white throne was still future based not only on the testimony of those who were living through AD 70 but also on the scriptures they believe taught a bodily return of Christ and also a physical resurrection of the dead in Christ. These beliefs are evident throughout the writings of the Anti-Nicene^[4] church fathers.

The Full Preterist whishes us to believe these are all lies and yet Jesus said, “I will build my church” and so we must conclude that he failed to build a “true” church for 2000 years since it is based on the notion of a still future coming of Christ if we are to believe the claims of FP. Secondly, they declare the perfect is here, and according to scriptures he gave teachers and such to help and build up the church until “we all attain to the unity of the fullness of Christ.” (Eph 4:13) Well were all here in the new heaven and earth but we still have not attained unity so what’s the hold up?

When a church father is cited, the FP will claim that our doctrine is based on these “uninspired men” and not scriptures as a diversion tactic, men who they claim were either apostatized, deceived, or completely ignorant.  All one must do is read their writing to understand these men were not apostatized. Secondly, John, Barnabas, Timothy, Titus, Clement, and Ignatius, lived beyond AD 70 based on multiple testimonies yet the FP is forced to deny these claims and historical documentation. They will outright claim all of the Apostles  died before AD 70 but have no response to the status of their disciples with how they died or why they died. One demanded that the church cease to exist because they were all raptured and no one was left to carry on so the church that exists today is not the same church.

They then argue that these Anti-Nicene Fathers were not inspired and so their writings are not to be trusted.  Yet they themselves write uninspired books to teach their beliefs and people read them starting with Max King, “The Spirit of Prophecy.” Max King was an uneducated “preacher” in the Churches of Christ that started the whole Full Preterist movement and in his later days turned to universalism.^[5] (what made him an authority different from Joseph Smith?) As opposed to these Church Fathers who spoke Greek, Latin, and in some cases Aramaic. They are asking us to trust their interpretations over what the men who not only lived through these events but also died on stakes, burnt alive, beheaded, torn apart by lions, and crucified, testified to in their letters. They also seek to “poison the well” for new converts from Futurism to fall into the same ditch they wander aimless in.

While we read the works of the ECF no one person states they were perfect or that we believe everything they say, or believe they were inspired. From them we glean two important things. We come to understand what they believed and like them we also believe in the doctrine of the Trinity,^[6] Incarnation, and many other doctrines. This does not imply we accept all dogma of the Catholic church such as the veneration of Mary. We are accused of cherry-picking doctrines to accept and instead of using the God given ability to think they fail to grasp that we accept what they teach because it’s based in scriptures, if not we “jettison” the teaching.

Secondly, we learn from them historical facts. For example, multiple writers acknowledge that John lived to about 96-98 AD. Scholars in mass believe he wrote the Revelation after the death of Domitian and released to return to Ephesus. It was on the Island of Patmos that John received the vision of the Revelation according to church history and scriptures. Then testified by many Christians.

The FP will outright claim that every apostle died before AD 70 and that all books were written before AD 70 for one simple reason. IF it is proven that even one Apostle lived after AD 70, wrote one book after AD 70, then they must admit that inspiration and the gifts of the Spirit continued after AD 70. They also have suggested that all the gifts ceased in AD 70 so those who spoke in tongues or prophesied were no longer able to after AD 70 despite the historical evidence of Phillips daughters who continued to prophecy after AD 70. The great white throne is the end of the Spiritual Gifts since “that which is perfect has come” so tongue had ceased when he came in AD 70.

And it is proven. Even if no other argument is given in defense of the Historical Christian faith these points alone necessitate the claims of Full Preterism bankrupt.

There is no rational argument that can justify why we must ignore and negate church teaching for 2000 years and exchange it for the created fantasies of “two men and a bible.”

Why do two men with no education have the power or the authority to tell the world we have had it wrong for 2000 years? How do these people have the right to declare their independence from a creed and yet accept their own creeds^[7] apart from the rest of the church? Then tell us were wrong for not joining them and believing their way?

When caught in a lie children will often create another lie to cover the first lie. Then they must create another lie to cover the second lie, and in so doing contradict the first lie. It is in this way the lie eventually catches up to them and the whole tale unravels, and they are exposed for what they are.

Unfortunately, the Full Preterist doubles down instead of admitting they lied.

The Full Preterist has changed everything theologically that has been understood for 2000 years and they are proud of that fact. In recreating “Christianity” they primarily have undermined sound hermeneutics and so in any discussion it is perfectly acceptable to contradict themselves and create inconsistency in the biblical narrative. Difficult passages are made to be “allegorical” or some other figure of speech and then they claim to employ exegesis and accuse the other of “eisegesis” when we disagree.

Exegesis would demonstrate why a passage is meant to be taken as a figure of speech but not one pretaerists can tell you how the words used are a figure of speech to be interpretated in any way they wish. Instead of recognizing were using two different sets of Hermeneutics. Then they tell us and  all scholarship of those who went before “ya’all suck” based on their lack of hermeneutics or complete absence of them. “Yet they have been studying the bible for forty years.” They can’t even explain the proper step for exegesis and how it’s done or the rules of Hermeneutics. Then castigate the rules of Hermeneutics as if it’s some evil  invention of man.

The two versions of; Full Preterism and historical Christianity  are nowhere compatible as FP redefine words and pour new meanings in long held beliefs. The “resurrection of the dead” is the most destroyed doctrine among them all and ripped from its historical understanding.

When a FP “teacher” outright lies about a passage, how do you combat that lie? You can’t. You can speak all the truth in the world until your blue in the face, but FP will hold onto that lie no matter how many contradictions are exposed. When they are confronted with the really hard passages it’s as if their eye’s glaze over and they repeat the same lie over and over again as some kind of mantra that protects their truth. They want us to accept their lies is almost as bad as “transgenders,” you get upset all you want to, but a woman does not have XY chromosomes. Or even worse many have gone to the “Flat Earth Society.”

They will also tell you their interpretation is just as viable as our own, but it fails to see the issue of denying Christ humanity, the necessity of maintaining his bodily form in heaven as the “man” Christ Jesus. They deny man was made to be physical and castigate the physical not understanding how that plays into Gnosticism. Or claiming His body died for a second time when He became a “spirit” being again in heaven without one shred of scriptural evidence. Their way of doing exegesis is finding the same word being used in one verse and finding it t in another verse with a different context and then declaring it’s the same context. This is done with the word “mello” in Acts 24:15 and so claim every bible version that states, “there  will surely be a resurrection” is wrong only because it does not fit their paradigm when the Grammar books explain the rule why. It seems inconceivable that in every instance where mello is used it indicates something happened right away, but they want us to believe in this verse it no longer means right away but forty years later or so. (then use the flawed KJV to try and prove they’re right.) They simply assert the grammar books are wrong and they are right and can’t figure out that people with no education and skills in Greek do not have the “authority” to override Greek scholars, instead they lose respect. Then they can’t figure out why they are ignored and that their opinions count for nothing. FP is rejected by every credited learning institution and every major denomination, and they again are proud of that fact, but somehow think the churches are going to have an epiphany and come around to the fulfilled view?

It’s akin to the emperor with  no clothes on. His friends and family cheer him on while the one honest kid says it like it is, “you have no clothes on.” – But the kid is the one only one doing eisegesis according to them. They argue for hours “yes I do.” Then happily strut around as if they are the cat’s meow in their birthday suit, breaking their arm trying to pat themselves on the back for a wonderful job they did.

With a straight face the FP will tell you that Jesus was bodily raised from the dead, that his “corpse stood again” and so when Paul says that every Christian who has died, and at “his coming” will also rise in the same way He did, using the exact same language, They will look you in the eye and claim, “nowhere in scriptures does it teach a physical bodily resurrection of the dead.” AND yet the very Greek word means, “the standing again of a lifeless corpse”  – Yes that’s what Jesus did but it never teaches us in scriptures that is what will happen to us. This coming from someone who probably barely finished high school and read the Bible once at a Holiday Inn.

So, I provide scriptures, definitions, and arguments based in logic what do we get served up?

A scripture they believe contradicts the verse I brought up in support of my argument. A different definition of words from the way it’s been understood traditionally for years. A twisting of what I stated and personal attacks.

Another tactic they use to convince their approach is the correct one is they often argue that the bible is not to be taken all literal. Then they cite a passage that is clearly is meant to be metaphorical as proof the bible is not literal.

One FP posted memes with quotes of Origin implying he never taught physical bodily resurrection but when the quotes are examined in context, they say the exact opposite. The FP never bothered to do his own research but merely passed on bad information which is a common thing done among them. They often claim, “were just teaching what the bible says” as if their interpretations are perfect and above question.

The Old Testament prophecy, of which much was fulfilled through the Babylonian captivity and into AD 70, used language that at times can be very metaphorical such as passages, “Hear me, you heavens! Listen, earth! For the LORD has spoken…” (Isa 1:2) in which we know the literal heavens and earth can’t listen and hear. At the same time many passages are very literal.  “he protects all his bones, not one of them will be broken.” (Psalm 34:20.) The FP will then argue two things. One when the New Testament quotes from the Old we are to use the context of the Old Testament passage as the context for what Paul is talking about.^[8] Secondly, they claim the Old Testament bring clarity to the New Testament despite the fact that Paul stated the mysteries of the Old are revealed in the New.

Neither premise is true, but they use this as the excuse in which to use the OT in such a way they can manipulate the language to make it say what they want. The perfect example is Isa 26:19.

19Your dead shall live; their bodies shall rise.
You who dwell in the dust, awake, and sing for joy!
For your dew is a dew of light,
and the earth will give birth to the dead.

Taken literally it speaks of the Resurrection of the dead as described in Mathew 27:53^[9] in which dead bodies come back to life. The full preterist will turn around and say this is metaphorical of the new birth and others claim it’s a metaphor for baptism which neither view fits the context at all. Yet when the same language is used in Dan 12:2 it now becomes literal. Then they deny the OT ever speaks of a physical resurrection.

When that argument is exposed as being weak, they resort to finding an obscure translation or use the LXX version to show why Isa 26:19  does not mean literally what it states so clearly. Remember the Golden Rule,

When the plain sense of scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths indicate clearly otherwise.

We have no evidence from the context of Isaiah 26 to suggest this is to be taken metaphorical or as a figure of speech of some kind. BUT the verse must be rejected by the FP without grounds from any type of exegesis,^[10] (then we are told we are practicing eisegesis) because it teaches a literal bodily resurrection from the dead.

In Zech 14:2^[11], the siege of Jerusalem is to be taken literally and fulfilled in AD 70 at the “coming of the Lord” according to FP. Most scholars agree that Zech 12. 14 are both great white throne prophecies.^[12] Yet in verse 16, it states,

Then everyone who survives of all the nations that have come against Jerusalem shall go up year after year to worship the King,”

In AD 70 Jerusalem was destroyed by their Romans and they were the winners. This verse makes Jerusalem the winner, therefore it must mean metaphorically it is the “New Jerusalem” that is the winner according to the FP.

The FP is completely unable to explain,

And it shall be inhabited, for there shall never again be a decree of utter destruction, Jerusalem shall dwell in security. – The inhabitants of Jerusalem have strength through the LORD of hosts, their God.’ – 8On that day the LORD will protect the inhabitants of Jerusalem,

Other than to say, “it’s talking about the New Jerusalem.” As if the New Jerusalem can be physically attacked On That Day.

All of which is the complete opposite of anything that happened to Jerusalem in AD 70 so therefore it cannot be accepted as being literally Jerusalem that is being protected on that day, they claim is AD 70 but in verse 2 it is the literal Jerusalem that is destroyed.

Now in the NT the language is certainly literal in the four gospels and the Epistles unless a specific verse contradicts claims made by FP. The FP insist, for example,  they believe that the heaven and earth that now exist will continue forever a world without end. (Eph 3:21) Then Jesus stated multiple times, “Heaven and earth will pass away,” (Math 24:35. They recognize this as a contradiction so the way to solve this problem is to find a thought or idea that makes the “heaven and earth” to mean  the old covenant  and the temple. So, they find a reference in Josephus that claims the Jews looked at the Temple as the Heavens and Earth, so the heavens and earth that is passing away is the temple which it did in AD 70. Not the literal heavens and earth. Again in 2 Peter 3:10 to their interpretation it’s not the literal heavens and earth that is being destroyed but the temple in AD 70. Any suggestion to the contrary by a futurist we are doing eisegesis.

What we find in Luke 16:17 is  a clarification, (let scriptures interpret scriptures.) “But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the Law to become void.” The Law is then defined in a rigid sense to mean all of the prophecies in the OC, the law, psalms, and the  prophets, yet when “jots” and “titles” are mentioned, this refers to the accent marking and the smallest letter of the Greek  alphabet, iota, i , the “I”. They are referring to the “small print” of a lawyer’s contract, we are always warned to “read the fine print” before signing a document.

Here Luke is stating the fine print of the contract  must also be fulfilled that God made with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob before it comes to its end. The statements concern the covenant made with Abraham where promises were exchanged between the two parties. The simple point being made is that terms of the OC contract must be completed before the contract can come to an end. The end came in AD 33 when Jesus fulfilled the terms by keeping “all of the law” perfectly, then instilling its punishment upon men in that they were to  die for their failure to keep the law. Christ died in their place so fulfilling all of the terms and condition found in the OC made with Abraham and then to Moses with his addition of the laws. Jesus therefore stated that a new covenant was being enacted upon better promises and inaugurated upon his shed blood on the cross.

Thirdly, the book or Revelation uses highly symbolic language to frame the literal events that are to take place. The Tribulation period, the Great white throne, Millennium reign, Great White Throne Judgment and the coming of the New Heaven and Earth. For example, we have in Revelation 19 a description of the great white throne of Christ. 1. He is literally coming out of heaven (Acts 1:11) 2. He is riding on a horse which is symbolic of a King coming to make war. 3. He literally comes with his saints (Zech 14:4)   as his army etc. etc. Each verse must be looked at to determine if the language is being used to make a literal claim or is it being used to invoke a picture of something literal?

The FP will automatically assign metaphorical use and deny the literalness of what’s being expressed because it completely undermines their position. The whole narrative of Revelation 19 is a returning King of Kings who defeats the beast and his armies literally. The FP turns this into a spiritual reality of Christ defeating the beast, who was sent by God to punish Israel. Does that make any sense to a normal human being? But when you’re so divested into a paradigm you simply accept the bizarre to maintain your own sense of “I’m right.”

Once the Full Preterist has laid out his argument for “Audience Relevance” they begin the process of introducing time statements. All preterist accept the literalness of the imminent time statements yet reject the literalness of “HOW” those events take place in time simply because they knew these events did not literally happen in 70 A.D. but accept, they happened “spiritually” THUS denying the same type of literal NON-apocalyptic plain language used of timing statement in describing the “nature” of each event. The result is contradictions.

If any point of the foundation can be overturned, then the house called “Preterism” must fall along with the foundation.

Just Another View?

Many FP argue that since the bible says he was to come in that generation then he had to come. If he did not, then Jesus lied. They never consider that they could be wrong about what they think the bible says. Secondly, they never consider the obvious that if Christ had returned, His followers in AD 70 would have screamed it from the rooftops and all of the world would have known. They also insist that the preterist view is a legitimate way in which to read the bible, yet any theologian of any caliber recognizes it for what it is. A lie. Jesus did not return in AD 70.

From the amazon website^[13] for a book written by Micah Stephens he stated,

Much of what Christianity understands and teaches concerning biblical end times is an extremely violent, negative, and fear-based view which promises a strange, moral utopia in the future without modern technology. In this book, the author conveys to his readers a position which is growing rapidly in popularity around the world and seeks to show that today’s common perceptions of the last days are misconceptions of Scripture which are easily rectified. When one applies basic rules of biblical interpretation to end times prophecies, it becomes apparent that they were actually fulfilled in the first century, leaving us with the presence of God on Earth and a peaceful, hopeful outlook for the future.

Then the events of 64 – 70 upon Christians was exactly that, horrible. Yet in the FP future sin is never removed, rape, murder, and homosexuality will dwell forever and ever side by side with “New Jerusalem.” Sorrow, tears, sickness, and death never come to an end, how is that a “peaceful, hopeful outlook for the future?” Because in my version all those things are destroyed, abolished, and no longer exist in this world. So why the difference?

They assert that Hades was cast into the Lake of Fire in AD 70 based on Rev 20:154, “Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire.” so that now Hades no longer exist, and  “spiritual death” has also been cast into the Lake of Fire yet tell us with a straight face that people are still made  “spiritually dead” the first time they sin. (They reject the fallen nature of man from birth which is a Church of Christ distinctive.) This apparent contradiction is justified for believer because he is born again but the Hadean realm was for the unbeliever, doubling down on their confusion.

When noted that in Gen 3:21 that God made coats of skin, the FP will deny the obvious link to the sacrificial system to cover Adam’s sin, and instead insist that Adam was threatened with “spiritual death” and not physical death for his disobedience. They try to argue that If Jesu came to save us from biological death why did Adam still die nine hundred and some years later. The complete lack of logic is easily recognized by anyone with common sense. BUT they must go to great lengths to protect their assertions that Christ died to save us from “spiritual death” and the physical aspect had nothing to do with the atonement, then double down and say the atonement did not happen until AD 70.

---

[1] If Jesus died spiritually then he needed to be “born again.” A person cannot be  born again after they have physically died, they face judgment. The FP then implies the heretical doctrine of the word of faith movement that Jesus was “born again” in Hades after suffering spiritual death.

[2] The Didache is the earliest church writing after AD 70, that was nearly accepted as “inspired” work, written somewhere between AD 70-120.

[3] All FP will quote from liberal scholars any type of accusation that brings the letter in question as a justifiable means for rejecting any statements made in the letter concerning the future second appearing of Christ.

[4] Anti-Nicene refers to church leaders prior to AD 325.

[5] Universalism teaches that all men will be saved in the end, from Genghis Khan to Pol Pot.

[6] We believe in the full deity of Christ who is equal with God in substance and nature.

[7] A creed is a statement of faith. Of what one believes. CoC unlike other churches accept baptism as being necessary for salvation. They accept (in some circles) the use of musical instruments in worship is a cause for losing one’s salvation because they are not worshipping in spirit and in truth. They have no qualms in telling you, you’re not saved unless you belong to their church and believe the way they do.  

[8] Most Preterist have learned that Paul often quoted from the Greek LXX and not the Hebrew text.

[9]  52The tombs also were opened. And many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised, 53and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many. 

[10] The FP demands that they arrive at their conclusions through sound exegesis and yet not one can demonstrate the proper steps in conducting exegesis or have ever been taught what exegesis is. To them exegesis is running list of verses that uses the same word and so assume they must all mean the same thing.

[11]  2For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city shall be taken, and the houses plundered, and the women raped. Half of the city shall go out into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be cut off from the city.

[12] Some feel it is speaking of  Antiochus Epiphanies.

[13] https://www.amazon.com/Micah-J-stephens/e/B084L7CXLG%3Fref=dbs_a_mng_rwt_scns_share