A second question is commonly asked — the question of “How?” The A.D. 70 Doctrine seems to be, on its face, an absurd theory. How could any student of the Bible possibly entertain a doctrine that asserts the resurrection is past, and the end of the world has already occurred? It seems only necessary to clearly state the position to reject it. And yet, many have completely embraced the doctrine, and are convinced of its merit.

To answer the question of “How”, we refer by way of illustration to a recent scientific “discovery” making the rounds on the internet. It is referred to as “darksucker theory”, and entire discourses on the theory can be referenced by entering the term into any internet search engine. Here is a quote from one such document:

The most common hoax [perpetrated by the power companies] promoted the false concept that light bulbs emitted light; in actuality, these ‘light’ bulbs actually absorb dark which is then transported back to the power generation stations via wires. A more descriptive name has now been coined; the new scientific name is for the device is darksucker. (1)

Now, on the surface, this theory seems absurd, but it begins to make sense as it is fleshed out. You just have to begin to think of light and dark in a different way. Consider some of the demonstrations of dark sucker theory, supplied by those who promote it:

· Take for example, the darksuckers in the room where you are. There is much less dark right next to them than there is elsewhere, demonstrating their limited range.

· A candle is a primitive darksucker. A new candle has a white wick. You will notice that after the first use the wick turns black, representing all the dark which has been sucked into it.

· There are also portable darksuckers called flashlights. The bulbs in these devices cannot handle all of the dark by themselves, and must be aided by a dark storage unit called a battery.

· Dark has great mass, and so it is very heavy… [for example] the heavier dark sinks to the bottom of a lake, making it appear ‘lighter’ near the surface. (2)

Discerning readers, (hopefully that is everyone), will have come to the conclusion that darksucker theory is simply a joke. No one seriously advocates the idea that light bulbs really suck dark. It does, however, illustrate an important principle. It is possible to take a clearly established truth, turn it on its head, redefine terms by looking at it “in a different way”, and by doing so give it at least a surface plausibility. These tactics lead the credulous into believing a lie.

One illustrative example is the belief that the earth is at the physical center of the universe, and that the sun revolves around it rather than the other way around. The theory is called Geocentric Cosmology, and there are some who advocate it today, based upon a misunderstanding of the Bible. A book titled Geocentricity, by Gerardus D. Bouw, PhD., was published on the subject in 1992, and you can visit an internet site called The Geocentric Bible to read about the theory. One short quote from the front page of that site is instructive: “There is no proof for or against either theory (geocentricity — sun going around a stationary earth; or heliocentrism — earth spinning and going around the sun). All tests, including the stationary satellite, can be explained just as easily from the geocentric viewpoint.” (3)  In effect, it just depends upon the way you look at it!

A far more destructive doctrine that has permeated all of the denominations, (and infiltrated the church in some places), is Calvinism. It too arises from a peculiar viewpoint, John Calvin’s beliefs concerning the Sovereignty of God. His view of sovereignty precludes man’s involvement in his own redemption. As such, doctrines such as inherited depravity, irresistible grace, and limited atonement are invented out of whole cloth to fit into Calvin’s view of God. But if you look at the Bible through a Calvinist’s eyes, it is superficially plausible.

The A.D. 70 Doctrine is like this. If you begin to look at the Bible in a different way, all of a sudden it all makes sense! That is the claim of the Preterist, and that is the tact he takes in introducing his doctrine to the naïve.

A Different Paradigm

The term paradigm is often used by A.D. 70 Doctrine advocates. The term has several meanings, but a primary definition used by scientists refers to any particular metaview that dominates a group of scientific disciplines. In this sense, the theory of evolution is a paradigm that influences modern biology, geology, anthropology, and even psychology and sociology. In science, paradigms have changed as scientific knowledge increases. In time, the theory of evolution may very well be rejected, even by secular scientists, and a new paradigm adopted.

As time has passed, the term has entered popular language. The meaning has been adjusted slightly. Note the following definition:

A philosophical and theoretical framework of a scientific school or discipline within which theories, laws, and generalizations and the experiments performed in support of them are formulated; broadly : a philosophical or theoretical framework of any kind (4)

A.D. 70 Doctrine advocates talk about their paradigm, the framework they employ in interpreting passages regarding the end times. They freely admit that it is “new,” but claim that it is valid and transforming. Consider the rather astounding claims of Tim King concerning his father Max:

Just as the Scientific Revolution brought about a shift in the way we understand astronomy and the planets, so the field of fulfilled prophecy has begun to revolutionize the way we understand how history revolves around Jesus. Instead of seeing Jesus as someday bringing world history to its end, fulfilled prophecy sees Christ as opening an unending Age of New Creation. In Jesus, redemptive history, or the story of Israel, is brought to fulfillment. In the Last Adam all things are fulfilled and, as the Second Man from heaven (1 Cor. 15:47), a new way has been opened. Universal history now unfolds as people of faith enter God’s presence and likewise become a transforming presence in relation to nature and society.

All these lofty thoughts as to how The Spirit of Prophecy opened a new paradigm in biblical theology are hindsight. Personally, the worst part is that at the age of twelve, all you know about such matters is that your father can’t be right because the whole world disagrees with him – but he can’t be wrong because he’s your dad, the pillar of your life. (5)

Lofty thoughts and claims indeed. King is unrepentant in lauding his father as a visionary. To think that until 1971, in Tim King’s view, people were ignorant of the paradigm that would literally unfold “Universal history.”

What takes place when people begin to embrace A.D. 70 Doctrine is called a paradigm shift. Consider a final definition:

Paradigm Shift — A radical change in personal beliefs, complex systems or organizations, replacing the former way of thinking or organizing with a radically different way of thinking or organizing. (6)

Those who embrace the shift in paradigm see the Bible in a completely different way. It changes not only their view of the end times, but impacts all aspects of theology and faith. This is clear from the following quote, made by one who was, in his words, “converted” to Preterism:

“We read and study the Bible, and as a result we experience a paradigm shift which reveals to us a new insight into the Scriptures while creating new mysteries to be explored and discovered. This was one of the results of my “conversion” to Preterism. As a result of understanding fulfilled prophecy, I now find myself reassessing other areas of my faith in light of what happened in AD 70.” (7)

In pointing out the “How” — how does someone believe this — please consider that a new way of looking at the Bible is not necessarily wrong. In fact, the Restoration Movement is based on an idea that was, at the time, rather novel. “We speak where the Bible speaks, and are silent where the Bible is silent.” Ultimately this slogan is as old as God’s word, as we respect the authority of God’s will for man. But, it was certainly new to the bickering sectarians of Thomas Campbell’s day.

The question is whether the new paradigm embraced by A.D. 70 Doctrine advocates is valid. We began our refutation of it in the previous chapter, and continue it here.

Misconceptions Leading to this False Paradigm

In the previous chapter we dealt with the false concept of time entertained by proponents of the A.D. 70 Doctrine. Their contention that the language of the New Testament demands an end to the world in that generation can not be successfully defended from scripture. This insistence upon measuring time as man rather than as God (cf. 2 Peter 3:8) certainly influences their interpretation of passages.

A second false concept is tied in with this view of end time statements. A.D. 70 Doctrine advocates believe that the destruction of the city of Jerusalem and the temple in A.D. 70 is the second coming of Christ referred to in scripture. Consider this quote from King’s book:

There is no time period between the fall of Judaism and the second coming of Christ. They are essentially the same event – at any rate they are inexorably linked. (8)

This contention, when carefully examined, is found to be without scriptural foundation. The destruction of the temple was predicted by Jesus to His disciples in a conversation recorded by Matthew (chapter 24), Mark (chapter 13) and Luke (chapter 21). The three accounts are very similar, though the account given by Matthew is most often used by those contending the destruction of Jerusalem and the second coming of Christ refer to the same event.

The context begins with the disciples showing Jesus the grandeur of the temple. Herod’s temple was an impressive edifice, and the disciples were no doubt impressed with “how it was adorned with beautiful stones and donations” (Luke 21:5). Imagine their shock when Jesus proclaimed, “…not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down” (Matthew 24:2).

Their response was completely natural. “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” (24:3). The remainder of the context is taken up in Jesus’ answer to their questions.

The Destruction of Jerusalem

The first thing to note regarding the Destruction of Jerusalem is that the event would be preceded by unmistakable signs. These signs would give warning to the elect, so that they might flee the city, “then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains” (24:16). Put simply, the signs would occur in two stages. Verses 4-14 give a description of false Christs, wars and rumors of wars, famines, pestilences and earthquakes that are referred to as “the beginning of sorrows.” Concerning these signs, Jesus said, “See that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet” (vs. 6).

These initial signs would be followed by what Jesus called the “abomination of desolation”, a reference to the 70 weeks prophecy of Daniel (cf. Daniel 9). The identification of the “abomination of desolation” has been a matter of intense speculation among Bible students. Various theories have been promoted. Daniel King mentioned one, “Some have surmised that this is a reference to the Zealots installing in the final days of the sanctuary the imbecile Phannias, an unrighteous man, who thus ‘usurped a position that was not his.’” (9) We may have difficulty determining what it was, but as Daniel King continues, “I am sure they had less difficulty understanding what this meant than do we.” (10)

Whatever the “abomination of desolation” was, it signaled that the destruction of the temple was to shortly come to pass. The disciple was to “flee to the mountains.” He was not to take time to “take anything out of his house” or if in the field to “go back and get his clothes.” (vss. 17-18). It is important to recognize that while the disciples would not know the day or hour when Jesus would visit Jerusalem in judgment, they would have the signs, and could predict the time of that horrific event as it drew near, and escape. It was Jesus’ purpose in this discourse to give sufficient information that they might save themselves from death when the siege and destruction commenced. He said, “So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near — at the doors” (vs. 33). Further, the Lord indicated that this destruction would be visited upon Jerusalem within the lifespan of those living. “Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place” (vs. 34).

It is important to point out the figurative language used by the Lord in his prophecy concerning the destruction of Jerusalem. Premillennialists deny the language is figurative, and claim that the events of Matthew 24 speak of the second coming. They claim that the events described in the text, “the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the starts will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken” (vs. 29), have not literally happened, and so the prophecy is yet to be fulfilled.

In contrast, the proponent of the A.D. 70 Doctrine contends that not only is the language concerning this judgment of Christ over Jerusalem figurative, but that every time language is used regarding judgment, it must be understood to be figurative rather than literal. This claim fails to take into consideration the concept of context. As D.R. Dungan related in his respected work on the science of Bible interpretation:

“Many seem disposed to regard themselves as at liberty to make anything out of the Bible which their theology may demand or their whims require. And if, at any time, they find a passage that will not harmonize with that view, then the next thing is to find one or more words in the text used elsewhere in a figurative sense, and then demand that such be the Biblical dictionary on the meaning of that word, and hence that it must be the meaning in that place.” (11)

It is clear from the context that the language of Jesus in Matthew 24 is figurative. It contains hyperbole commonly associated with Hebrew prophecy. Daniel King presents a concise case for Old Testament similarities to Jesus’ words:

… a brief series of parallels from the Old Testament. The stars becoming dark, the moon not giving its light, etc. (v. 29), is paralleled in the picture of the fall of Babylon (Isa. 13:10), the fall of Idumea (Isa. 34:4, 5), and the judgment against Egypt in Ezekiel 32:7-8. The “sign of the Son of Man,” the coming, etc., have parallels in the day of judgment on Egypt and Ethiopia (“a day of clouds”) in Ezekiel 30:3-4; in Ezekiel 19:1 Jehovah rides on a swift cloud to bring judgment on Egypt. The picture of His “coming” is consistent with other quotations from Jesus which do not necessitate an actual physical return but instead a “presence” in some event or happening (cf. Matt. 16:28; 26:64). This “coming” cannot be the second coming, for Luke 21:27 and Mark 13:26 refer it to the fall of Jerusalem. See also Isaiah 19:1 and Zephaniah 2:7. The “Gathering of the Elect” (v. 31) is a figurative picture of the Christians fleeing the city. Comparison may be made with Zechariah 2:6ff.; Hosea 1:11, etc. (12)

Jesus did not literally come to earth when Jerusalem was destroyed. He came in judgment upon Jerusalem. The language of Matthew 24, and the destruction of Jerusalem as seen in the context, contains figurative language. The fact that the language of Matthew 24 is figurative does not mean that any time a reference is given to an end time event, it is to be taken figuratively. The student must consider the context before making that determination.

Now, in contrast to the destruction of Jerusalem, which was portended by signs that could be used to predict the event, there is a reference in the immediate context of Jesus’ discourse of a final judgment (and coming) of Christ that would be devoid of such signs. In other words, while the A.D. 70 Doctrine proselyte believes Jesus teaches in Matthew 24 that the destruction of Jerusalem and the second coming of Christ are the same event — the actual discourse, covering chapters 24 and 25 makes a clear distinction between the two. They are not, in the words of Max King, “essentially the same event.”

Jesus’ teaching in the parable of the wise and foolish virgins illustrates the point (cf. Matthew 25:1-13). When reading that parable, keep in mind the attitude of the scoffers who said, “Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of ‘creation’” (2 Peter 3:4). The foolish virgins ran out of oil as the bridegroom delayed his coming. They were unprepared, and when they left to buy more oil, “the bridegroom came, and those who were ready went in with him to the wedding; and the door was shut” (25:10). The application Jesus made at the end of the parable is clear, “Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour in which the Son of Man is coming.”

That this parable references the final coming of Jesus is made clear in the context, as Jesus describes the judgment scene in verses 31-46.

Literal Language Regarding the End Times

While the language of Matthew 24 is figurative, much of the writing concerning the final coming of our Lord is shown by context to be quite literal. For example, the apostle Paul speaks in literal terms when referring to the resurrection of the dead. In 1 Corinthians 15, the apostle refuted the contention some were making that “there is no resurrection of the dead” (vs. 12). The centerpiece of his argument was Christ’s resurrection. There is no denying that Jesus Christ was literally resurrected from the dead. He walked among the disciples for weeks following his resurrection, and bodily ascended into heaven (Acts 1:9). Paul’s argument has no merit if the two things — Christ’s resurrection and the resurrection of the dead — are not parallel in their nature.

It is important to make a distinction here between a literal resurrection, and a fleshly resurrection. Max King is constantly confusing and intermingling such terms, and thus obfuscates the truth. Paul is clear. The body we will have when we are literally resurrected at Christ’s coming is different from the one we have now. “It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body” (vs. 43-44). Paul is not affirming that the resurrection is figurative, he is affirming an individual and personal resurrection, and a change in the body we will have. “We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed” (vs. 51).

The second and final advent of Jesus Christ is likewise revealed to be a literal coming. When the messengers of God appeared to the disciples at Jesus’ ascension they affirmed, “This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11). When Jesus left this earth, He literally rose up into the sky. God’s messengers state that when He comes again, it will be “in like manner.”

The destruction of the world is prophesied in literal terms by the apostle Peter. Again, context clearly reveals this to be true. In 2 Peter 3, Peter compared the final destruction of the world with that first destruction of the world by water. He affirmed that in the days of Noah, “the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water.” In the very next verse, as a continuation of his thought, Peter wrote, “But the heavens and earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men” (vss. 6-7). The literal earth, in the first world judgment, was literally flooded with literal water. The literal earth that now exists will be preserved until the final day of judgment, where God has decreed it will be destroyed with literal fire. “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up” (vs. 10). Respecting context, if the water was literal, the ultimate destruction prophesied in verse 10 must be construed as literal as well.

Deficiencies in the A.D. 70 Doctrine

Up to this point we have dealt with some of the fundamental tenants of the A.D. 70 Doctrine, and showed them to be without scriptural foundation. False doctrines invariably conflict with truth. This doctrine is no different. Those who teach it are put into the uncomfortable position of having to explain away or rationalize their opposition to other truths contained in Gods word.

For example, Jesus taught that in the resurrection there will be neither death nor marriage. The Sadducees of Jesus’ time denied the resurrection. In Luke 20 they presented a hypothetical scenario regarding 7 brothers who all had the same woman as a wife. In an attempt to show what they perceived to be the absurdity of the doctrine of the resurrection, they asked Jesus, “Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife does she become? For all seven had her as wife” (vs. 33). Consider Jesus’ answer carefully, “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage; nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection” (vs. 34-36).

Max King clearly contends that as Christians, we have attained “that age, and the resurrection from the dead.” Notice the following from his pen:

The New Testament saints preached, wrote, suffered, and died in the last days, but this is not true of us today. We are now in that world which was to come. We are in the eternal kingdom of Christ, and instead of being in last days we are in eternal days – a world without end (Eph. 3:21). (13)

If Max King is right, there should be no more marriage or death. We should be equal with the angels. This is demonstrably not so — (for example, this author has been married for over 27 years as of this writing). He has also officiated at many funerals in the 30 years he has been preaching the gospel.

King makes a rather pathetic attempt to explain this passage within the construct of his paradigm. He contends that Jesus is referring to the spiritual nature of the kingdom, making the same point Paul does in Romans 14:17, “for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.” The context precludes such an interpretation. The Pharisees of Jesus’ day believed in a literal resurrection from the dead. It is this doctrine the Sadducees objected to, and sought to refute by their scenario. Jesus answered their contention. King’s interpretation would make that answer incomprehensible to the Sadducees. Further, while the kingdom of God most certainly is a spiritual kingdom, those of us in it still marry, and still die.

Jesus was not the only one who shared the Pharisee’s view of a literal resurrection. Paul believed it as well. In his defense before Felix he said, “I have hope in God, which they [the Pharisees] also accept, that there will be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and the unjust.” A.D. 70 Doctrine advocates claim that the passages concerning the resurrection reference a figurative raising of the kingdom rather than an individual, literal resurrection. In this they have an opponent in Paul.

There is another point that can be derived from Paul’s conversation with Felix. In Acts 24:24-25, Luke reveals that Felix listened to Paul “concerning the faith in Christ. Now as he reasoned about righteousness, self-control, and the judgment to come, Felix was afraid and answered, ‘Go away for now; when I have a convenient time I will call for you.’” Remember, Max King’s contention is that the judgment to come concerned the end of the Jewish world. But, Felix was a Roman governor. He not only would have no reason to be afraid when considering the destruction of Jerusalem, he would actively encourage the intentions of Rome. King’s doctrine does not fit into the reality of the New Testament narrative. Felix was afraid because he realized the judgment to come would have a bearing upon the eternal destiny of his soul!

One final observation from scripture indicates an inconsistency in the practice of A.D. 70 Doctrine advocates. In 1 Corinthians 11, Paul explained the purpose of observing the Lord’s Supper, “For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes” (vs. 26). While Paul clearly states that the proclamation was to continue until the Lord’s second coming, those who believe this peculiar doctrine for some reason continue their observance to the present. If they are right, there is no reason nor authority to persist in the practice. And yet, we know of no instances among Christians who have been caught up in this error where this act of worship has been discarded. We wonder, why not?

Other similar arguments could be raised to point out the invalid nature of the Preterist paradigm. These are sufficient to make the point. It is indeed a new way of looking at scripture, but in this case newer is most certainly not better.

Conclusion

We have positively established the truth revealed in God’s word regarding the end times. The Bible clearly teaches a literal second advent of Jesus that will bring about a resurrection of both the just and unjust dead, a final judgment and a dissolution of the physical universe.

We have introduced the Realized Eschatology error with special emphasis upon the peculiar tenants of Max R. King. It is his book The Spirit of Prophecy, written in 1971, and his followers who have caused the greatest distress to the Lord’s church. We have pointed out the motivation behind those who advocate the error, and the dangers associated with a toleration of that teaching.

Finally, we have identified the prominent tenants of the doctrine, and supplied a concise refutation of them. In this we have made no effort to be overly technical, or comprehensive. Such an undertaking is beyond the scope of this little book.

However, we are confident that in these pages we have supplied sufficient material to identify the specious nature of the A.D. 70 Doctrine. It is our prayer that the reader will be able to correctly understand the danger of the doctrine, and to avoid the shipwreck of their faith (cf. 1 Timothy 1:19). The reader is encouraged to take advantage of the Chapter Endnotes, to closely examine the source material, and to further study the many excellent materials referenced in this book. Contained with them is a clear refutation of the A.D. 70 Doctrine.

Max King and his ilk are no better than Hymenaeus and Alexander. Be on guard, and avoid their leaven.

Chapter Endnotes

1. Dark Conspiracy Involving Electrical Power Companies Surfaces
   http://www.beyondweird.com/conspiracies/dark1.html
2. Ibidem
3. The Geocentric Bible
   http://www.geocentricbible.com/
4. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
   http://www.merriam-webster.com/
5. The Transmillennial^® View, Tim King
   http://www.presence.tv/cms/transmillennial_view.php
6. Answers.com (Paradigm Shift)
   http://www.answers.com/topic/paradigm-shift
7. Who is Afraid of Postmodernism?
   Virgil Vaduva, Planet Preterist—Prophecy Fulfilled in A.D. 70
   http://planetpreterist.com/news-5208.html
8. The Spirit of Prophecy, Max R. King
   Pages 137-138
9. Perversions of Matthew 24 (2), Dan King
   http://truthmagazine.com/archives/volume27/GOT027175.html
10. Ibidem
11. Hermeneutics, D.R. Dungan
    Page 217
12. Perversions of Matthew 24 (2), Dan King
    http://truthmagazine.com/archives/volume27/GOT027175.html
13. The Spirit of Prophecy, Max R. King
    Pages 137-138

Addendum

Early in our Introduction to Realized Eschatology (chapter 2) we noted that those who believe the doctrine enthusiastically promote it. When the doctrine is initially introduced into a congregation, it is typically portrayed as a belief that should not be a point of contention or lead to a test of fellowship. We repeat here a direct quote from one who promotes the doctrine, as he claimed that the doctrine had nothing to do with “…your salvation, your worship of God, or the work of the church. Therefore in the spirit of Romans 14 we can agree to disagree.” (1)

We first note the specious nature of the contention that only those doctrines impacting your salvation, your worship of God and the work of the church are worthy of a test of fellowship. There is no such differentiation of doctrines to be found in scripture. They are to be found solely in the arbitrary imaginations of men’s minds. Further, the context of Romans 14 deals with matters of no consequence to God. Surely those who advocate so vociferously their contentions regarding the end time do not consider their doctrine of no consequence to the Almighty? And if so, why would they be so insistent to be heard, even to the division of congregations, if it matters not a whit to God? The contention is invalid, because the doctrine of God concerning the end times is a significant part of the Christian’s faith.

Is it necessary to be accurate regarding the question, “Is the resurrection already past?” It certainly was in the first century. Paul wrote in 2 Timothy 2:16-18, “But shun profane and idle babblings, for they will increase to more ungodliness. And their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort, who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some.” Paul warned Timothy to shun the error then, and it is no less important today. As the resurrection is yet future, to say that it is past is to introduce the same cancer among God’s people as that which overthrew the faith of some in Paul’s day.

The Bible clearly reveals the response we are to have toward those who advocate doctrinal error. The principles would certainly apply toward those who teach the A.D. 70 Doctrine. While we should be patient in teaching any man who is wrong doctrinally, are not to “yield submission even for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue…” (Galatians 2:5).

We are to “contend earnestly for the faith once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). Elders are admonished to “convict those who contradict” (Titus 1:9). We are to realize that “a little leaven leavens the whole lump” (Galatians 5:9), and heed the apostle’s admonition to “all speak the same thing” (1 Corinthians 1:10)

Ultimately our acceptance by God and right of fellowship with one another is dependent in part upon remaining doctrinally pure. As John wrote, “Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds” (2 John 9-11).

Whatever affinity we may have for any man, if he promotes error he must be rejected. Our responsibility is to protect the flock against error, and to refuse the errorist. To do any less would be a dereliction of duty before the Almighty.

Chapter Endnotes

1. Sing to Me of Heaven (A Study of Fulfilled Prophecy)
   Keith Roland, page 3

There have been those who have held to the Realized Eschatology doctrine for many years.  There is an internet site, Preterist Archive (1), that contends Preterist Eschatology can be found in the earliest writings of the church fathers.  On their site they have a book titled A Paraphrase and Annotations Upon All the Books of the New Testament, written by H. Hammond, and published in 1653.  The claim is that Hammond espoused this doctrine in that book.

It is generally accepted that the modern advocation of the doctrine has its origin with C.H. Dodd (1884-1973).  Dodd was a Congregationalist minister for three years before becoming an academic.  He eventually reached his professional pinnacle as a Professor Emeritus of Divinity at Cambridge University.  In describing his views, Wikipedia states, “He is known for promoting ‘realized eschatology’, the belief that Jesus’ references to the Kingdom of God meant a present reality rather than a future apocalypse.” (2)  Herein lies a problem when discussing this issue.  The reader will note that the contributor to the Wikipedia article indicated that a belief that the Kingdom of God is presently established makes one an advocate of Dodd’s position.  This, of course, is too broad a brush.  Millennialists have a perception that colors references to Dodd and his ilk.

Dodd was an influential theologian, especially among theological liberals.  As the same Wikipedia article notes:  “This view is attractive to many people, especially liberal Christians, since it reverses the notion of Jesus’ coming as an apocalyptic event, something which they interpret as being hardly in keeping with the overall theme of Jesus’ teachings in the canonical gospels, and are troubled by its firm association with evangelicalism and conservative politics. Instead, eschatology should be about being engaged in the process of becoming, rather than waiting for external and unknown forces to bring about destruction.” (3)  Theological liberals are more interested in social justice than final judgment, and Dodd’s teaching (as well as the doctrine of Max King, as we shall see), dovetails nicely with that world view.

One scholarly review of C.H. Dodd’s influence on modern eschatological thinking states:

“The discussion concerning eschatology, however, has to be seen in the larger context of the rise of neoorthodoxy which tended to limit the effect of Dodd’s influence on liberal theology as a whole. Suggs has summarized this as follows: “The fact that the church at large was not driven to Schweitzer’s position is traceable to a number of factors, only some of which are academic. First, there was the discovery of R. Otto and C. H. Dodd of the element in primitive Christian eschatology which is usually spoken of as ‘realized.’ Secondly, there was the appearance of a new historical skepticism in European scholarship which focused attention on the Christ of faith rather than upon the embarrassingly Jewish Jesus of history. Thirdly, there was the rise of a new theology which formed a more positive place for eschatology because of a negative anthropology which demanded a transcendent rather than an immanent hope.” (M. Jack Suggs, “Biblical Eschatology and the Message of the Church,” Encounter, XXIV (Winter, 1963) 4-5, cf. Adolf Harnack, What Is Christianity? p. 5).

Dodd, however, has unquestionably influenced the attitude of liberal scholarship toward eschatology and an understanding of his position is essential in approaching liberal theological concepts of the twentieth century. (4)

Several things are important to note from these sources.  First, though Dodd is a well respected theologian, especially among liberal scholars, his views of eschatology do not have a large following.  Second, his views are decidedly modernist.  He does not fully respect the sanctity of scripture, and is quite willing to deny or ignore passages which do damage to his assertions.  Finally, we recognize that the information regarding the doctrine of Realized Eschatology from these denominational sources has little relevance to our study.  Those in the Lord’s church who are being led astray by what we will from this point on consistently refer to as the A.D. 70 Doctrine, are by and large parroting the doctrine first espoused by Max King in his book, The Spirit of Prophecy, published in 1971.

Max King

Consider the following quote taken from the preface of King’s 2002 revision of that book:

“Fulfilled Bible prophecy is being taught all over the world. What a difference from the religious and social climate of the early 1970’s! This was long before it was acceptable to question traditional dogma, and the attitude was anything but open and embracing. At that time, I was not aware that others had written on this subject in earlier centuries, such as J.S. Russell (1816-1895). I stood, with my family, very much alone. Yet here we find ourselves some thirty years later seeing the world filled with a brighter – and better – understanding of the victory of God.

This work stood alone for nearly 15 years until many of the authors writing today on fulfilled prophecy came along and began to labor with us.” (5)

Other than the fact that both Max King and his son Tim have a tendency to promote themselves and their influence beyond what is credible, we accept that he is for the most part self-taught, and that his error has indeed led some astray.

King’s fourth son, Tim, has written several biographical pieces regarding his father.  Among them, consider the following quote:

The view (advocated by King, SC) first spread among the Churches of Christ in the ’70s and ’80s, and then throughout Reformed Presbyterians. Today Transmillennialism is an active network across various cultures and countries and seeks to offer an authentic and fresh approach to taking faith beyond the exhausted field of Christian millennialism. (6)

The Kings’ website (7) was created in 1999 as a message board, and a cursory examination of the site indicates that it was actively maintained until 2005.  Since that time, it seems that little new information has been added.

In looking at the web site, several things become obvious.  First, the doctrinal basis for the A.D. 70 Doctrine is the bailiwick of the father, Max King.  Tim King (his son), and fellow contributor Kevin Beck are more concerned with where the doctrine will take those who accept it.  This is an important consideration, as it shows where 30 or 40 years of this doctrine will lead any group of people.

They advocate what they refer to as The Four Paths of Transformation (8):

1. Covenantal Transformation. This is referred to as “the source of all transformation”, and is a reference to the doctrine developed by Max King.
2. Personal Transformation. Consider the following, rather “new age” quote:  “By learning who we are, what we are, and what capabilities we have, we change from passive spectators to active creators of our lives and the world around us. Life doesn’t happen to us; it happens from us.”
3. Organizational Transformation. This point refers to the agenda of the group.  By transforming yourself, you can combine with others, and transform a congregation!  Many have asked why advocates of the doctrine are so militant in spreading their view?  Note the following quote:  “Because we live in an interconnected web of relationships, transformed people come together to create transformed organizations, whether that is at home, in the workplace or as part of a spiritual community. Transformed organizations move from being run-of-the-mill institutions filled with dreary routine to being vibrant communities of animated individuals pulsating with spontaneity. Communities filled with ‘presence’ provide people with the opportunity to shine. Transformed organizations are filled with talented and transforming people who continually enhance the life experience of every member.”  (emphasis mine, SC)
4. Societal Transformation. This is the ultimate goal of this doctrine.  In other words, the A.D. 70 Doctrine does not point the hearts of men to heaven, but utopia.  The doctrine leads its adherents to a desire to transform a man to make him a positive force in his community, rather than to convert a man to the salvation of his soul.  Again, a quote from their material:  “Societal transformation on a grand scale yields both a transformed humanity and a transformed universe.”  Ultimately, the end is simply an implementation of the social gospel.

This is a significant revelation.  Dodd’s purpose, as indicated earlier in this chapter, was to engage us in “the process of becoming.”  In the end, the same is true with King.

This revelation also explains the methodology often used in introducing the A.D. 70 Doctrine into a local congregation.  While references to such efforts are by nature anecdotal, on many occasions this error has led to division.

Advocates call for tolerance as they initially introduce their view.  Groundwork has already been laid, and there are several who hold the position.  They maintain that such matters should have no bearing on fellowship, as they have nothing to do with “…your salvation, your worship of God, or the work of the church.  Therefore in the spirit of Romans 14 we can agree to disagree.” (9)  (Note:  At the end of our study we will consider the question of fellowship.  Here we simply note that such an appeal to Romans 14 is without merit).

The next step is to object to songs sung and sermons preached that deal with the second coming and the resurrection.  After all, they are not going to be contentious toward your beliefs, so it is inappropriate for you to be contentious toward them.  If you persist in defending the truth, you are then guilty of being divisive, not them.

Meanwhile they continue to work behind the scenes to convert others to their way of thinking.  This is the most important doctrine to them, (remember that this doctrine is “the source of all transformation”).  They persist in sharing it with anyone who will give them a hearing.  Peter warned about this type, “But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction.  And many will follow their destructive ways, because of whom the way of truth will be blasphemed” (2 Peter 2:1-2).

When sufficient influence has been gained, they press their advantage.  After all, the traditionalists have for years stifled the spiritual growth of the church, and it is their responsibility to effect, in the words of the Kings, “organizational transformation” through “covenantal transformation.” In their minds they are doing great good.  If their influence has been sufficiently destructive, all that is left for the defender of truth is to leave and find another group that has been untouched by the error.  Hundreds of good brethren have been dispossessed through this process, and can attest to the truthfulness of this assessment.

That doesn’t mean all who are seduced by this doctrine succumb because of the appeal of “social transformation” championed by the Kings.  We are sure that many who hold to this doctrine have never read Max King’s books, and may have no knowledge of The Four Paths of Transformation.

For these, the appeal lies elsewhere.   In Acts 17, the historian Luke referred to the Athenians as being individuals who “spent their time in nothing else but either to tell or to hear some new thing” (vs. 21).  This may be lauded by some as being open-minded, but to be enamored with new things precisely because they are new is dangerous and indicative of a serious character flaw.  Truth is not new.  The apostle Paul  admonished Christians 2000 years ago, “Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle” (2 Thessalonians 2:15).

In his early thirties Max King locked himself in his office, and developed a radical new theory about the end times.  He  admitted that, in effect, he alone believed it.  In his view, Christians of earlier generations had missed this most important doctrine entirely.  The traditionalists of his day were close minded.  As he put it when he published his book, “This was long before it was acceptable to question traditional dogma, and the attitude was anything but open and embracing.” (10)   He was the author of a new paradigm that would yield both a “transformed humanity and a transformed universe.”  Lofty claims indeed, and claims that could unfortunately appeal to those who may be “…tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting” (Ephesians 4:14).

To be an advocate of that which is new is a heady thing, and appeals to the pride of man.  We are reminded of a discussion we once had with an older gentleman who had embraced the peculiar doctrines championed by Charles Holt via his magazine, The Examiner.  This discussion happened when we were about 30 years of age.  He was very dismissive of our objections to his arguments, and assured us that when we grew older and studied more, we would come to see things as he did.  Well, 18 years have passed between that event and this writing, and he most certainly was wrong in his assessment.  But, most objectionable was his arrogance.  He and a few others knew something that the rest of us poor souls did not.  He was an initiate, and because we were bound by tradition, we were blind to his superior discernment.

This arrogance was a characteristic of the incipient gnostic heresy both Peter and Jude dealt with in their epistles.  In dealing with these ungodly false teachers, Peter described both their character and their end, “They are presumptuous, self-willed. They are not afraid to speak evil of dignitaries, whereas angels, who are greater in power and might, do not bring a reviling accusation against them before the Lord. But these, like natural brute beasts made to be caught and destroyed, speak evil of the things they do not understand, and will utterly perish in their own corruption” (2 Peter 2:10-12).  Those who teach the A.D. 70 Doctrine often show the same type of arrogance, as they refer dismissively to the “the sectarian obsession with institutional self-preservation that stifles the search for truth.” (11)

Unfortunately, there is never a dearth of audience for the false teacher.  This may be because of worldliness or simple ignorance, but there are always folks who “because they have itching ears, will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and will be turned aside to fables” (2 Timothy 4:3-4).  Whatever the reason, the A.D. 70 Doctrine persists, and the faith of some continue to be overthrown.

Introducing the Doctrine

Consider the following quotes from the pen of Max King that clearly represent his doctrine.

“Prophecy found its complete fulfillment in the second coming of Christ, and now may be regarded as closed and consummated.” (12)

There is no time period between the fall of Judaism and the second coming of Christ. They are essentially the same event – at any rate they are inexorably linked.  (13)

“Some want to have the Old Covenant age end properly at the fall of Jerusalem, but they are hesitant to assign the expected coming of Christ to that time. This effectively creates a third age that extends from the fall of Jerusalem  to a future return of Christ. There is no such age or period of time, because the end of the Jewish world was the second coming of Christ. That was the time of restitution of all things spoken by the prophets. That was the bringing in of the new heaven and earth, where righteousness dwells.” (14)

King and his followers argue that Christ came in judgment upon Jerusalem, and that coming is properly understood as His second and final advent.  They contend that the language portending that event indicate it was to take place within that generation and that to claim He has not yet come again is to do violence to such phrases as “at hand”, “last days” and “quickly.” As the world remains, and no bodily resurrection has taken place, they are forced to contend that all references to the dissolution of the heavens and earth, and a bodily resurrection are figurative.  In fact, King believes such passages to be veiled references to the destruction of the Jewish world, and the ascension of the Kingdom of Christ.

Significant Differences

No one denies that Jesus predicted the destruction of Jerusalem to take place within the lifetime of those who heard his words.  As he answered his disciples’ questions in Matthew 24, he clearly establishes that destruction would happen in that generation.  “Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place” (vs. 34).

Likewise, all Christians recognize that Jesus prophesied the establishment of the Kingdom in that generation as well.  As He said in Mark 9:1, “Assuredly I say unto you, that there are some standing here who will not taste death till they see the kingdom present with power.”

Differences begin with the unprovable assertion that the two passages refer to the same event, and that this event is also the second coming promised by our Lord in John 14:2-3, “In My Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.  And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also.”

Consider the following quote from King, “Although the kingdom had its inception on Pentecost, it did not have its victory until the fall of Jerusalem. The destruction of Jerusalem was the time of Christ’s coming in his kingdom with power and victory (Matt. 16:27-28; Luke 21:31).” (15)  Consider that King’s doctrine has God’s covenant with the Jews coexisting with the Kingdom of Christ for a period of 40 years.  He allows the establishment of the kingdom on Pentecost in A.D. 30.  He contends that the allegory of Galatians 4:21-31 affirms a period where Ishmael and Isaac (and what they represent) “overlapped for a season.”  This allegory is extremely important to King, as he states, “This simple allegory (Gal. 4:21-31) establishes the ‘spirit of prophecy,’ confirming prophecy’s fulfillment in the spiritual seed of Abraham through Christ (Gal. 3:16, 26-29), and these prophecies cannot be extended beyond the fall of Jerusalem.” (16)

To answer theses assertions, we need to deal with two separate issues.  First is the question of time.  Second is the peculiar interpretation of Galatians 4:21-31.  You will note his association of his book’s title, The Spirit of Prophecy, with this passage.

The Question of Time

One of the arguments King uses to contend for the past fulfillment of prophecy concerning the second coming centers on the Greek term mello which appears in passages like Matthew 16:27, Acts 17:31 and 2 Timothy 4:1.  Answering that argument has the felicitous benefit of answering all such quibbles about the concept of time.  In each of the cited passages the word mello is translated will, as in “will come” and “will judge.” King contends:

“Paul said God ‘was about’ (Greek mellei) to judge the world. This word mello, used in this tense, conveys not only intention of purpose but also nearness of action, meaning at the point of, or ready to do what has been stated. Had Paul meant to teach a judgment 2,000 or more years in the future, he certainly would not have used mello in any tense, especially the present tense.” (17)

While the word certainly can indicate nearness in the sense of a short duration of time, it is as certain that the word does not necessarily indicate such.  This is clear from Thayer’s definition of the term:

“… to be on the point of doing, or suffering something … to intend, have in mind, think to … of those things which will come to pass by fixed necessity or divine appointment … in general, of what is sure to happen.” (18)

Looking at that definition, those of us who contend that the second coming of Jesus is yet future can say that He is “on the point of” coming; “intend [-s]” to come; is “divinely” appointed to come; and is “sure” to come.  And all of this can be stated without reference to a determined date or interval of time.  In fact, that is the argument made by Peter in 2 Peter 3.

In the text, Peter referenced “scoffers” who in the passing of a few years had begun to ridicule the idea of Jesus’ second coming.  Peter’s answer had three parts:  First, that Jesus promised He would come, and that He keeps His promises.  He used the first destruction of the world, with water (in the days of Noah) to establish that fact (vss. 5-7).  Second, that while they may think the passage of time made null His promise, it was not so.  He stated, “But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day” (vs. 8).  Third, the circumstance that had delayed His coming to that point had nothing to do with time at all, it had to do with the longsuffering of the Lord. “The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance” (vs. 9).

Some are dismissive of this passage.  But, it is extremely significant, as the context directly impacts the question of time regarding our Lord’s second coming.  In effect, this passage precludes anyone legitimately arguing that the coming must have already happened because of any time interval.  Time is not a consideration regarding Christ’s second coming.  Even if it were, it still would not be possible for us to determine how long that interval would be.  God reckons time differently than we do.  No, the only thing that will determine when Christ comes again, regardless of how many years, decades, centuries or millenia that may be, is the longsuffering of Christ.

A.D. 70 Doctrine advocates are almost identical to the scoffers of Peter’s day.  The scoffers claimed the time interval proved He wouldn’t come.  King and the like claim the time interval proves He already came.  Peter’s argument defeats them both.

Paul’s Allegory in Galatians 4

We have previously noted the significance King places upon Paul’s allegory of Hagar and Sarah, written to the churches of Galatia.  We have given a partial quote previously, and reproduce it in its entirety here:

Abraham had two sons, and there was no gap between them. They overlapped for a season, but Isaac “came on” when Ishmael “went out.” The son born of the spirit was given the place and inheritance of the son born of the flesh. This simple allegory (Gal. 4:21-31) establishes the “spirit of prophecy,” confirming prophecy’s fulfillment in the spiritual seed of Abraham through Christ (Gal. 3:16, 26-29), and these prophecies cannot be extended beyond the fall of Jerusalem. (19)

The first obvious objection to his interpretation of the passage is that it is a clear departure from the context.  The text contains an allegory that is intended to relate a spiritual truth to Paul’s readers.  The question is, what is that truth?  The answer is contained in the context.  In fact, it is explicitly stated in verse 21 of the text.  “Tell me, you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law?” We supply here two very good quotes from Bill Reeves, who in 1973 wrote a series of articles reviewing King’s teaching:

Now to his “key” passage, Gal. 4:21-31. The purpose of Paul’s allegory of Sarah and Hagar is presented in v. 21. This is Paul’s purpose; King has a different one in mind! This allegory serves its inspired purpose when it is applied to the invalidness of the Law of Moses, now that the New Testament of Christ has been established. Any other use of this allegory is a perversion! Re-read, please, V. 21.

In the allegory Hagar (the servant) represents the Law of Moses given on Mt. Sinai, and so the Old Testament, and Ishmael (born according to natural law) represents the Jews under the Law. On the other hand, Sarah (the freewoman) represents the Law of Christ, and so the New Covenant, and Isaac (born miraculously and according to promise) represents Christians of all races. As Hagar and Ishmael were cast out, so was fleshly descendancy from Abraham of no merit in determining heirship. The “blessing of Abraham” and “promise of the Spirit through faith” (Gal. 3: 14) was justification from our sins (v. 8). The Judaizers sought this justification by the law (5:4), and so, Paul by means of this allegory showed the Galatian brethren the consequences of desiring to be under the law: it was to be like Ishmael and Hagar; i.e., to be cast out! They were no part of God’s promise to bless the seed of Abraham! (20)

It in interesting that King’s interpretation of the allegory stands in direct opposition to Paul’s expressed intent.  Paul desired to establish the folly of seeking justification from an abrogated law, “Cast out the bondwoman and her son” (vs. 30), and King maintains Paul’s epistle to the Galatians was written at a time when that law remained.  In fact, he claims that to be the significant point of the allegory.  Just as the time of Ishmael and Isaac overlapped, so did the Jewish world (with its law) overlap with the Kingdom of Christ.  Another quote from his book makes this clear:

Why have men concluded that the last days refer to the gospel dispensation? One reason is that many assume – erroneously – that the Jewish age came to a close on Pentecost day. This is assumed on the basis that Pentecost was the beginning of the Christian age. The problem here lies in a failure to see the overlapping period of these two ages or dispensations. Ishmael and Isaac co-existed in Abraham’s house for a time before Ishmael was cast out.

The Jewish age did not end until their city, temple, and state fell under Roman invasion in A.D. 66-73. (21)

This is folly.  It is a textbook case of putting “darkness for light, and light for darkness” (Isaiah 5:20).   The Bible clearly teaches that the bondwoman was cast out (the law abrogated) at the cross, not at the fall of Jerusalem.  For example, Paul wrote to the Colossians, “And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us.  And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross” (2:13-14).

Paul wrote the Romans, “But now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter” (7:6).  In that context he noted that a woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives (vs. 2).  Therefore, she can not marry another man until her husband dies, lest she be called an adulteress (vs. 3).  In the same way, a Jew could not be under the covenant of Christ until the former covenant was abolished.  This happened at the cross, and that fact is one of the most prevalent themes of Paul’s writings.  The Judaizing teachers of Paul’s day were unwilling to grasp that truth, and it seems the advocates of the A.D. 70 Doctrine suffer from the same malady.

A final short note concerning King’s view of Galatians 4.  He states that Ishmael was for a time the rightful heir to Abraham.  Notice his description of Isaac as a child:

Likewise, during his minority, he was overshadowed and threatened by Ishmael, the firstborn who had the right of primogeniture. The meaningful moment in Isaac’s sonship was the casting away of Ishmael, which in a sense was Isaac’s adoption into a position of full inheritance. (22)

In fact, Isaac was always the heir!  Ishmael never had the right of primogeniture because it was God’s purpose before the birth of either child that in Isaac the promises would continue.

In Genesis 15, God renewed his promise to Abram, initially given in chapter 12.  When Abram raised up his servant Eliezer as a potential heir, the word of the Lord came to him and said, “This one shall not be your heir, but one who will come from your own body shall be your heir” (15:4).  When Sarai gave Hagar to Abram, with Ishmael being the fruit of that union, God again made it clear that Ishmael would not be heir.  As he did before with Eliezer, Abram raised up Ishmael saying, “Oh, that Ishmael might live before you!” (17:18).  But, the Lord replied, “No, Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his descendants after him.  And as for Ishmael, I have heard you.  Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly.  He shall beget twelve princes, and I will make him a great nation.  But My covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah shall bear to you at this set time next year” (17:19-21).

The idea that Ishmael ever had the right of primogeniture as the firstborn of Abraham is another figment of King’s rather fertile imagination.

Conclusion

Having dealt with the issue of time, and Max King’s most precious allegory, we have produced sufficient evidence to discredit the A.D. 70 Doctrine.  We have shown that doctrine to be insidious, and the agenda of its leaders to be the destruction of local congregations.  While its advocates present themselves as harmless, examples can be supplied of numerous congregations over the past four decades that have been badly harmed or destroyed by their heresy.  It is the division of a church not 30 miles west of this author’s home, as well as news of other Texas congregations that have split over this issue that is the occasion of this refutation of the doctrine.  The doctrine continues to trouble brethren, and so there is the need for such a introduction to and refutation of the error.

In the final section of this work, we will make further arguments refuting the A.D. 70 Doctrine.  It is not our intent to review Max King’s book, or examine in detail every prophecy and verse that he has wrested in his teaching.  To kill the beast it is only necessary to cut off the head.    This we have already done.  However, permit us a bit of “overkill” as we further expose the absurdities of the A.D. 70 Doctrine.

Chapter Endnotes

1. Preterist Archive
   http://preteristarchive.com
2. Wikipedia:  C. H. Dodd
   http://wikipedia.org/wiki/C.H._Dodd
3. Ibidem
4. Realized Eschatology
   John F. Walvoord (President, Dallas Theological Seminary)
   http://bible.org/article/realized-eschatology
5. The Spirit of Prophecy, Max R. King
   Preface
6. Frequently Asked Questions, (5. Who Is Max King)
   Tim King
   http://www.presence.tv/cms/faqview.php#q5
7. Presence.tv
   http://presence.tv
8. The Four Paths of Transformation (presence.tv)
   Attributed Author:  Staff
   http://www.presence.tv/cms/whatisdoc.php
9. Sing to Me of Heaven (A Study of Fulfilled Prophecy)
   Keith Roland, page 3
10. The Spirit of Prophecy, Max R. King
    Preface
11. Ibidem
12. The Spirit of Prophecy, Max R. King
    Page 137
13. Ibidem, pages 137-138
14. Ibidem, page 137
15. Ibidem, page 152
16. Ibidem, page 370
17. Ibidem, pages 254-255
18. Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament
    Joseph Henry Thayer, pages 396-397
19. The Spirit of Prophecy, Max R. King
    Page 370
20. The Preterist View Heresy (II), Bill Reeves
    Truth Magazine January 11, 1973
    http://truthmagazine.com/archives/volume17/TM017155.html
21. The Spirit of Prophecy, Max R. King
    Page 134
22. Ibidem, page 362

A doctrine exists which asserts that all Biblical prophecies regarding the end times were ultimately fulfilled with the destruction of Jerusalem by Rome in A.D. 70.  It is known by several names.  It is referred to most commonly by the awkward “A.D. 70 Doctrine”, technically by the term “Realized Eschatology”, recently by some of its adherents as “Transmillennialism®”, and less precisely by the more generic term “Preterism.”

Definitions

A.D. 70 Doctrine. As indicated above, the generally accepted date of the siege and destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman general Titus is A.D. 70.  The doctrine this work examines asserts that all of the “end time” prophecies and references in the New Testament refer to that event.  It is contended that at that time, Jesus came for the second and final time.  At that time, taking the language of 2 Peter 3, (and wresting it, we might add), “both the earth and the works that are in it” were burned up; and the “new heavens and a new earth” were established.  Though it is not a phrase used by the adherents of the doctrine, it is descriptive and appropriate.

Realized Eschatology. The term eschatology is defined by Webster as “the branch of theology concerned with the final events in the history of the world or mankind.”  Or, secondarily, “any of various Christian doctrines concerning the second coming of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, the Last Judgment, or the nature of human existence upon the completion of history” (New Collegiate Dictionary, 1977).  In the term realized the doctrine is identified as contending all of these events to have already happened.

Transmillennialism®.  Max R. King is the person most responsible for popularizing this doctrine among churches of Christ.  He was an institutional preacher in the 1960’s and early 1970’s who published a book titled The Spirit of Prophecy in 1971, in which he made public his peculiar defense of this doctrine.  His youngest son Tim is an ardent and active defender of his father’s teaching, and has written a very revealing “definition” of the term transmillennialism®.

In the summer of 1999 we invented a new word – “Transmillennialism.” As a new term, this could stand beside ‘pre-,’ ‘a-,’ and ‘post-’ millennialism, the final forms that had developed in Christian eschatology.

As a prefix to millennialism, “Trans-” means “across” or “over” or “on the other side of.” It also means “above and beyond, transcending” such as “transatlantic.” The “trans” part of Transmillennialism™ stands for moving through or beyond what has gone before. (1)

As you can see, the King family made up the word themselves.  Interestingly, they have trademarked the word.  As you will see in our examination of their doctrine, we will see that this is not the only time they have arbitrarily defined words to suit their purpose.  In fact, it is characteristic of their treatment of God’s word.

Preterism. The term preterit is defined by Webster as “bygone, former” and indicating “action in the past” (ibid). Though we do not have access to an unabridged dictionary, one source indicated that the 1913 edition of Webster’s unabridged dictionary defined the term preterist as “One who believes the prophecies of the Apocalypse to have already been fulfilled. (2)  So, Preterism would be the doctrine that “the prophecies of the Apocalypse have already been fulfilled.”

It is important to note that the A.D. 70 Doctrine is only one of numerous Preterist doctrines.

Characterizing the Doctrine

The doctrine is not popular. It has very few disciples.  However, those who believe this doctrine are often vocal, enthused and insistent.  In congregations of God’s people where it has gained a foothold, it has led to division and ruin.  It is worthy of our examination and refutation.

The doctrine is without merit. One of the difficulties in answering this error is to figure out where to start!  The doctrine rests upon a false assumption regarding the imminence of Christ’s second coming.  This preconception concerning the last days leads to a shift in perspective that requires a completely new way of looking at the scriptures concerning our Lord’s second coming, and the resurrection of God’s children.  Since a straightforward treatment of these passages contradicts their hobby, advocates play fast and loose with sound principles of Bible interpretation.  In effect, rather than being careful to accept any particular text at face value, they read into it what they want it to say.  The tactic is typical of the false teacher, and fairly effective in leading the ignorant away from truth.

The doctrine is insidious. The most common response we get when we try to explain the A.D. 70 doctrine to Christians is, “How could anybody get caught up in that stuff?  It makes no sense!”  It is important we not underestimate the ability of the false teacher to deceive.  This is why we are warned “that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting” (Ephesians 4:14).  Sophistry is defined as “deceptively subtle reasoning or argumentation” (Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary).  The A.D. 70 doctrine can rightly be described as sophistry, and its promulgators as sophists.  The aforementioned Max R. King is especially adroit at the redefining of terms and subtle shifts in reasoning that allow him to make his error palatable to the undiscerning.  Bill Reeves,   in his review of King’s book The Spirit of Prophecy, accurately describes the man as a “play-on-words artist.” (3)

The doctrine is consuming. It seems that if a congregation embraces this error, it defines itself by this doctrine alone.  Much like the premillennialists, who have an insatiable appetite for all things pertaining to their theory, these individuals often will make their views a hobby.  It dominates their preaching and teaching.  They ask for tolerance as they advocate their views, and insist on being heard.  They also insist that there is no reason to divide over the issue, but do not rest in trying to proselytize the weak or ignorant.

This work has as its goal a concise treatment of the A.D. 70 Doctrine.  It is our desire that a careful reading of this book inoculate the average reader against the harmful influences of this false doctrine.  The apostle Paul warned Timothy of a particular error that comports remarkably with the object of our attention:  “And their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort, who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some” (2 Timothy 2:17-18).  Whether the doctrine that “the resurrection is already past” was asserted 2,000 years ago, or today, it is false.  If followed, it will lead to the overthrow of the faith of its disciples.

This examination of the A.D. 70 Doctrine will consist of four major parts:

• A Biblical treatment of Eschatology (what the Bible teaches about the end times).
• An introduction to the doctrine of “Realized Eschatology.”
• A concise refutation of the doctrine of “Realized Eschatology.”
• Warnings and Exhortations regarding religious error, and the Christian’s response to it.

Though not an exhaustive treatment of the subject, it is our hope this material is sufficiently plain and substantial to serve its stated purpose.  The reader will judge whether that goal is met.

Bible Eschatology

The story has been told of the country preacher who was asked to supply a definition of the term premillennialism.  He said:

“Pre–” means before… “millennial” has reference to 1000 years … and “–ism” means it ain’t so!

There is no shortage of “-ism’s” regarding the end times.  Men love to speculate upon what the future holds, and when it will come to an end.  Though Bible teaching on the matter is straightforward and fairly simple, men have created many complex and convoluted theories about the end times.

These theories can be fairly intimidating (and by extension their advocates can intimidate as well).  When confronted with obscure passages from apocalyptic books, coupled with the fevered and dogmatic speculations of the sophist, a Christian can sometimes feel overwhelmed.  He thinks, “This person has studied the issue much more than I have, and he obviously has a familiarity with some of these passages that I do not enjoy.  How can I know for sure that what he is teaching is wrong?”

The solution is fairly simple.  First, a Christian should understand that a hobbyist is not right just because he is well versed in his hobby.  It means he has learned his doctrine well.  It does not mean that his doctrine is true.  Second, a Christian should become familiar with what the Bible teaches about the end times.  In doing so he can identify the false assumptions that lead some astray.  It is not necessary to answer every misinterpreted passage to disprove a false theory.  What is necessary is to have a sufficient positive knowledge of what the Bible teaches.  This allows the Christian to competently examine the claims of the doctrine, and reject it if it is false.  In other words, we are to be as the noble Bereans, who “searched the scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so” (Acts 17:11).  In this portion of our study, we intend to positively state what the Bible teaches concerning the “end times.”  This affirmation will precede our examination of the A.D. 70 Doctrine, and will stand in stark relief to it.

The Scarlet Thread

In the first paragraph of Homer Hailey’s book, From Creation to the Day of Eternity, he wonderfully describes the contents of the Bible:

“Through the ages philosophy has sought a better answer to the origin, sustaining and purpose of the universe than that given in the Bible, but to date no better answer has been offered… Its doctrine of redemption is the unfolding of God’s plan to rescue and redeem man, the creature made in His image, who rebelled against Him.  It is the story of infinite love, in patience and sacrifice working out an eternal purpose – a purpose worthy of an infinite mind.  It is a story made necessary by sin, the story of a purpose finding consummation in a restored fellowship between Creator and creature in this present time and in an eternal fellowship and association to continue when the lights of this present world have grown dim and their last flicker has vanished.” (4)

God’s scheme for the redemption of man has been described as the scarlet thread that runs throughout the holy Scriptures.  The Bible records God’s creative prowess, and His pronouncement of man as His crowning achievement in that work. “Then God said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.’  So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them” (Genesis 1:26-27).  It records man’s fall into sin, and from that point intimates the redemption that would one day come through grace.  “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel” (Genesis 3:15).

In God’s promise to Abraham (Genesis 12:1-3) we find the outline establishing how God intended to accomplish that redemption, determined from “the foundation of the world” (Ephesians 1:3-6).  He would give the descendents of Abraham a land, making them a great people.  And he would, through Abraham’s Seed, bless “all the families of the earth.”

Paul clearly established the meaning of the promise, “Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, ‘And to seeds,’ as of many, but as of one, ‘And to your Seed,’ who is Christ” (Galatians 3:16).  It is in Jesus Christ that redemption is found.  The message of the cross, Christ’s blood sacrifice as payment for our sins, is referred to as the gospel of Christ.  It is “the power of God unto salvation” (Romans 1:16).

Simply put, sin separates man from God (cf. Romans 6:23); and the blood of Christ brings reconciliation (cf. Romans 5:6-21).  It is important to note that this reconciliation results in access to eternal life in the Son.  “so that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Romans 5:21).

The means through which this eternal life is attained is the resurrection of the dead.  This is significant, as any doctrine that denies the literal resurrection of the dead robs the Christian of his hope.  Paul admonished the Corinthians, “For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen.  And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins!  Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.  If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable” (1 Corinthians 15:16-19).  Perhaps this is the reason Paul was so forceful in his rebuke of Hymenaeus and Philetus, “But shun profane and idle babblings, for they will increase to more ungodliness.  And their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort, who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some” (2 Timothy 2:16-18).

The New Testament reveals that this resurrection will occur at the end.  The end of what?  The end of everything surrounding our material existence.  As Peter put it, “the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat” (2 Peter 3:12).  As Paul wrote, at Christ’s coming all who are His “shall be made alive…”, “Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power” (1 Corinthians 15:22,24).  With this before us, we now consider the following Bible teaching regarding Eschatology (the final events).

The Second Coming of Christ

The first time Jesus came to earth, He did so to offer Himself as a sin sacrifice.  We are told He did this “in the fullness of the time” (Galatians 4:4).  It was the time ordained or purposed by God.  All prior things occurred in preparation for His incarnation.  This included God’s choosing of Israel, and the giving of Moses’ law.  “…It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made” (Galatians 4:19). The sin sacrifice of Jesus served a specific purpose.  He did it that He might “redeem us from every lawless deed, and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works” (Titus 2:14).

The Greek word translated redeem in Titus 2:14 is defined by Vine, “to release on receipt of ransom… (b) in a spiritual sense, Tit. 2:14, of the work of Christ in redeeming men ‘from all iniquity.’” (5)  Men were in bondage because of sin.  Paul wrote, “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23).  Jesus’ incarnation was necessary.  Without Him and His selfless act we would be lost.  “In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins” (1 John 4:10).

It is likewise necessary that Jesus come again!  As Homer Hailey wrote, “The second coming of Christ is necessary to the consummation of the scheme of redemption.”  Hailey further commented, “As has been said, Christ’s first coming was as a sin offering intended to redeem man from sin.  His work now is that of King, high priest, mediator and intercessor.  His second coming will be to raise the dead, reward the righteous with the complete reward and to separate the wicked from the righteous with a final, complete and eternal separation.” (6)

To put it simply, there is little purpose in Christ’s atoning sacrifice if it does not result in an eternal benefit for those who take advantage of the gift.  Paul argued this point strenuously in his letter to the Corinthians.  “For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen.  And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins!  Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.  If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable” (1 Corinthians 15:16-19).  Paul first asserted the individual bodily resurrection of God’s people.  He argued that if such a resurrection is not possible, then Christ’s bodily resurrection did not happen.  If that be the case, regardless of His sinlessness and sacrifice, “those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.” The value of Christ’s atoning sacrifice will be realized at His second coming, as we “meet the Lord in the air” (1 Thessalonians 4:17).

We are sure Jesus will come. We have His promise, and the guarantee of the Spirit.  Jesus told His disciples in John 14, “… I go to prepare a place for you.  And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to myself; that where I am, there you may be also” (vss. 2-3).  The Holy Spirit, through the pen of the apostle Peter, argued for that coming in 2 Peter 3:1-13.  Scoffers were ridiculing the idea of His return, saying “Where is the promise of His coming?  For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation” (vs. 4).  But they “willingly” forgot the first time God judged the world (the flood).  That time God promised judgment, and delivered.  Peter’s point is that it will happen again.  It will happen because God promised it will happen.  As Peter writes, “… all these things will be dissolved” (vs. 11).

We know what Jesus’ coming will be like. Luke gave us a record of Jesus’ ascension into heaven.  After Jesus shared with His disciples final assurances regarding the promise of the Holy Spirit, Luke wrote concerning the resurrected Lord, “Now when He had spoken these things, while they watched, he was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight” (Acts 1:9).  As their gazes remained focused on the cloud, messengers of God assured the disciples, “… This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11).  The translation is accurate.  God’s messengers were saying that His return will be in the same fashion as His departure.  It will be a visible, bodily return.  We may not know the day of His coming, but we do know that on that day our gazes will again turn to heaven, and we will see him.

Paul said as much to the Thessalonians in his first letter to them, “For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven  with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God.  And the dead in Christ will rise first.  Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.  And thus we shall always be with the Lord” (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17).

We do not know when Jesus will come. Again we quote Hailey on this matter, “Is the end imminent, as claimed by some?  Is it likely to occur at any moment?  Is it impending?  Of this no one except God knows or can know.” (7)  This point will be established more fully as we endeavor to refute the doctrine of Realized Eschatology, but the Bible is again clear on this point.  The Thessalonians understood it, as Paul wrote them, “For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night” (1 Thessalonians 5:2).  Peter made the same point within the context of complaints regarding the delay surrounding that day.  He first reminded them, “…do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day” (1 Peter 3:8).  He then wrote, “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.”

The Resurrection of the Dead

The passages we have cited regarding the second coming of Jesus clearly show that at that time there will be a resurrection of the dead.  While the emphasis of Paul’s writing was the resurrection of the righteous “… And thus we shall always be with the Lord” (1 Thessalonians 4:17); the Lord revealed clearly that the resurrection will include the wicked dead.  He told His disciples, “Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth — those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation” (John 5:28-29).

When it is noted that the second coming of Christ coincides with the resurrection of all the dead, and the judgment of man, the error of the Premillennialist is made clear.  There will not be two separate resurrections, with 365,000 days in between; the resurrection of all will happen in the same “hour.”

The resurrection is literal.  The Bible is clear that the dead will rise.  It does not, however, reveal the nature of the body the wicked dead will inhabit.  It simply states that the wicked dead will be resurrected for the purpose of judgment.

Scripture does establish the nature of the body the righteous will enjoy on that day.  To state the contrast between the body we presently have, and the one we will have in the resurrection, we note the description given by Paul in 1 Corinthians, chapter 15.  First, he establishes that the “glory” of the resurrected body will differ from that of the body we now inhabit (vs. 42).  Our present body is corruptible, the resurrected body will be incorruptible (vs. 42).  Our present body is stated as characterized by “dishonor”, and contrasted with the “glory” of the resurrected body (vs. 43).  Where our present body is weak, the resurrected body will be powerful (vs. 43).  Our present body is natural, but the resurrected body will be a spiritual body (vs. 44).

Paul argued that “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (vs. 50).  So, in order to take our rightful place in heaven, the resurrected body must be different.  He wrote, “Behold, I tell you a mystery:  We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed—in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet.  For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.”

We may not be able to fully comprehend what we will be like on that day, but John assures us that “… we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is” (1 John 3:2).  We know that we will have “put on immortality” (1 Corinthians 15:53), and that we will “always be with the Lord” (1 Thessalonians 4:17).

The Judgment

Following the Lord’s second coming, all of mankind will be judged.  The idea of judgment is sometimes misunderstood.  It is not that Jesus will determine the fate of each man on that day.  A man’s fate is in a sense self-determined.  As Paul wrote, “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad” (2 Corinthians 5:10).  God’s grace has already been extended to all men, in the form of His Son.  Those who embrace that gift of grace and live of righteously will spend eternity in heaven.  Those who rebel against the will of Christ will spend eternity in hell.

Jesus will not arbitrarily determine who will go to heaven or who will go to hell on that day.  Rather, we will be judged according to words spoken by the Lord (cf. John 12:48).  On that day the punishment or reward will be meted out to all men.  Matthew recorded the teaching of Jesus concerning that day in chapter 25 of his gospel: “When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory.  All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats.  And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left” (vs. 31-33).  Concerning the sheep (the righteous), our Lord will say, “Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (vs. 34).  Concerning the goats (the unrighteous), the word of our Lord will be, “Depart from me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels” (vs. 41).

The scene depicted by Jesus in Matthew 25 establishes both His lordship and His righteousness.  Concerning His lordship, Paul revealed that God has “highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on the earth, and of those under the earth” (Philippians 2:9-10).  It is appropriate that Jesus will be our judge, it is He we are to revere. “And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul.  But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matthew 10:28).

Concerning His righteousness, the Apostle Paul wrote plainly:  “…it is a righteous thing with God to repay with tribulation those who trouble you, and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels” (2 Thessalonians 1:6-7).  He told the Thessalonians that Christ would come “in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of Christ” (vs. 8).  He affirmed that their punishment would be with “everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord” (vs. 9), and that it would happen “when He comes, in that Day, to be glorified in His saints, and to be admired among all those who believe” (vs. 10).
Christ’s second coming is sure, and its purpose is sure as well.  When He comes again, it will be to judge the world!

The Destruction of the Physical Universe

If you turn the television dial to the Discovery Channel, it will not be long before you are presented with a documentary program whose purpose is to introduce possible doomsday scenarios.  It is of great interest to many to speculate on how the world is going to come to an end.  Will life on the planet be wiped out by plague?  Will an asteroid or comet impact the earth, and destroy all higher life forms? Is there a possibility that the sun may explode and bring the earth to an end?  There are multiple theories, but most of them fail to acknowledge the inevitability of the end of all things.  To the atheist, matter is eternal.  Life may come and go, but the universe will remain.  It may collapse on itself, and the process may begin again, but matter is constant, and as such, the universe is eternal.

The Bible disagrees.  God created the “heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1), and has determined to one day destroy it.  His ability to do so can be seen in the creative work itself, and in the demonstration of His power when He destroyed the world by water in the days of Noah.  “So He destroyed all living things which were on the face of the ground: both man and cattle, creeping thing and bird of the air. They were destroyed from the earth. Only Noah and those who were with him in the ark remained alive” (cf. Genesis 7:23).

Peter used the argument regarding the Flood in predicting the dissolution of the universe in 2 Peter 3.  His conclusion was that God kept His promise then, and He will keep it now!  “For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water.  But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men” (2 Peter 3:5-7).

The fact that Peter had the complete dissolution of the universe in mind is made clear in the verses to follow:  “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.  Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat?” (vs. 10-12).

It is amazing that men can read these verses, and contend that the earth will remain at His coming.  Some, (the Jehovah’s Witnesses for example) contend that verse 13, where Peter speaks of “new heavens and a new earth” indicate a renovation of the old earth rather than the creation of a new eternal abode.  The context alone argues strongly against such a conclusion, and there is nothing intrinsic in the definition of the Greek word rendered “new” that would require it.  Likewise, the apostle John, in the Revelation, clearly showed the intent of Peter’s words.  Homer Hailey explains this well.  Note the following quote:

Consider now the parallel use of the word new with reference to the new heaven and the new earth which clearly settles the matter.  John says, “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth:  for the first heaven and the first earth are passed away; and the sea is no more.  And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, made ready as a bride adorned for her husband” (Revelation 21:1-2).  John saw in vision exactly what Peter taught in simple language, “the first heaven and the first earth are passed away:”  Peter said they were burned up… The first heaven and earth pass away; they are burned up.  It is not a renovation, it is the passing of the one thing making way for a new.  The new is new, not renovated; it is a new home for the resurrected saints.” (8)

As shown above, when Jesus comes again, that is it!  The universe will not persist.  We don’t have to speculate about how the world (or mankind) will come to an end.  It will happen at the end of Christ’s longsuffering (cf. 2 Peter 3:9), when He comes again, and destroys the heavens and the earth with fire.

Conclusion

This chapter of our study is purposefully full of quotes from Scripture.  It is our intent to show that the Bible clearly and fully explains what will happen in the “last days.”  While many passages were used, the reserve of Scripture was by no means exhausted.

We have been able to establish that Jesus’ coming is yet future.  This is a necessary conclusion from the fact that the universe persists, and mankind remains on the planet.  We have shown that when He comes again it will be a visible coming, apart from sin, to bring His disciples to eternity.  His coming will be visible, and we who belong to Him will be transformed to be as He is.  The righteous will be gathered and granted entrance into heaven.  The unrighteous will suffer His wrath, and be sent to Hell for eternal punishment.  As a part of that day, the physical universe will be dissolved.

It is important to note that the A.D. 70 Doctrine denies every fundamental point we have made.  It claims that Christ already came, the judgment has already happened, and the heavens and the earth have already been dissolved.  As this is demonstrably not true, the A.D. 70 Doctrine apologist has to deny the plain import of scripture, and seek to “spiritualize” all of these things to fit his peculiar views.  In future chapters we will introduce his thinking, and refute his approach to Bible interpretation and Eschatology. (9)

Article 1 Endnotes

1. The Transmillennial® View
   http://www.presence.tv/cms/transmillennial_view.php
2. Introduction to Preterism
   http://ecclesia.org/truth/paradigm.html
3. The Preterist View Heresy (I-VIII), Bill Reeves
   Truth Magazine, Volume 17, Numbers 9-16
   http://truthmagazine.com/?p=35
4. From Creation to the Day of Eternity
   Homer Hailey, page 1
5. Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words
   Volume 3, page 263
6. From Creation to the Day of Eternity
   Homer Hailey, pages 200-201
7. Ibidem
8. From Creation to the Day of Eternity
   Homer Hailey, page 211
9. In the interest of full disclosure, the material for this chapter is constructed in much the same way as the 13th chapter of Hailey’s From Creation to the Day of Eternity.  The title of that chapter is “The Consummation.”  The headings are almost identical to the ones we have used, and in the same order:  The Second Coming of Jesus, The Resurrection of the Dead, The Resurrected Bodies, The Judgment, and The Passing of the Present Order.

Some years ago I saw a documentary by Walter Cronkite concerning the running of the marathon in the Olympics. I recall vaguely the story of one runner who came into the stadium as he completed the 26 mile run. The huge crowd shouted encouragement as he stumbled and staggered around the track. He was so exhausted from having run the great distance that he came to what he thought was the finish line and collapsed thinking he had won the race. However, some 20 minutes later another runner came jogging into the stadium and won the race.

How terrible to have run as hard as the first runner and collapse thinking he had won only to awake to hear he had lost. He was so close, but so far. Being close didn’t count in that race nor in our spiritual race to heaven (Heb. 12:1-2). What if I die believing I have completed the race God has appointed for us, but fail to finish my course (2 Tim.4:7)? Will he reward me with the crown of righteousness (2 Tim.4:8; cf. Matt.7:21-23)?

Many are the teachings which have convinced man that he has finished the race to heaven. When these arise at judgment, they will find they had never crossed the finish line. Others will find they had been running on the wrong track. If you think the marathon runner was disappointed when he realized he didn’t receive the temporal crown how about those who find they have lost the eternal crown? The crown for which we strive is not corruptible. It will not age, tarnish, turn yellow or fade away (1 Pet. 1:4). We must be absolutely sure we are running the track that God has appointed and not man.

Let us look at some of these false teachings and the tracks upon which many are running only to hear from the Lord “Depart from me ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt.25: 41). We shall not attempt to cut all the limbs off these doctrines for after you have felled the tree the limbs do not have to be removed to kill the tree.

The UniversalistThe Universalist believes at the end of the world all will be saved. He says God is too merciful to punish anyone. This doctrine would have us line up at the starting block of disobedience. If all will be saved, no matter what they do, because of the goodness and mercy of God, what do I have to worry about?Without faith it is impossible to please God (Heb. 11:6). Are those who do not please God still going to heaven? Paul says that God will take “vengeance on them that know not God and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2Thes. 1:8). Is the Lord’s vengeance shown by sending the unbelievers and disobedient to heaven?The Romans had “obeyed from the heart” the doctrine that was delivered them (Rom.6: 17). They were then free from sin and servants of righteousness (vs. 16,18). The Universalist would tell us whether one is the servant of sin or righteousness he is still going to heaven. The inspired apostle disagrees again. Galatians 5:19-21 tells us those who commit such sins, as those listed in those verses, cannot go to heaven (cf. 1 Cor. 6: 10-11).

The PremillenialistThe Premillenialist wants us to believe there is a semi-final race called the rapture, Of course he has his scripture , l Thess. 4: 13-17, which proves(?) there will be a rapture. He describes the rapture as the time when the Lord will secretly take all the saved from the earth for a period of seven years. This is done because, they say, there will be the battle of Armageddon (Rev. 16:14-16). This battle will be so horrible that the Lord will have to come, with his saints, to save the earth from total destruction. Then he will set up his kingdom and reign on earth for a thousand years. Thus, we have premilleniailism. Does this teaching agree with the Bible?What we can read in the Bible is clear and understandable. Here is what we know about the second coming of Christ and the end of the world. It will not be silent and secret. It will be with a shout and with the trump of God, 1 Thes.4: 16. It will come unexpectedly as a thief in the night (2 Pet.3:10-13). John has it narrowed to a single hour (John 5:28-29). In that hour all that are in their graves, the good and evil, shall hear his voice and come forth. Here again we see the second coming will be obvious to all, even the dead. There will be no time for a seven-year rapture.The kingdom has already been set up (Col. 1: 13). Paul said the Colossians had been translated into the kingdom. You can’t be in something that doesn’t exist. Jesus and John the Baptist said the kingdom of heaven was at hand (Matt.3: 2; 4:17). If the kingdom hasn’t been set up then it wasn’t “at hand” as Jesus and John said. I think the millenialists have missed it, not Jesus and John.

The Jehovah’s WitnessesThe Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that at the end of the world “the literal heavens and earth will not be destroyed” (Let God Be True, p.56). They are wanting us to wear weights that will beset us in our race to heaven (Heb. 12: 1).In my living room I have been asked by Jehovah’s Witnesses, “Don’t you want to live on earth forever?” My response is that the Bible says the world isn’t going to be here forever 2 Peter 3:9-13. Jesus said, “heaven and earth shall pass away“ (Mt.24: 35 emph. mine – mh). Jehovah’s Witnesses say, “No it won’t”. I prefer scripture over the wisdom of men. Jesus says in Matt.6:19-20, “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth… but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven.” Why would I want my treasures to be in heaven if I am going to live forever on earth? Is the Lord telling us to put all our hope faith and trust in going to heaven, but knowing all the time that you’ll never get there?Jesus also said, “I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go to prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you unto myself, that where I am, there you might be also.” He did not say, that where you are there I might be also. In verse 6 Jesus continues, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except by me” (John 14:2-3,6). The Father is in heaven (Mt.9:6) and there is no scripture that mentions his coming to earth only our going to heaven to be with him.

The A.D. 70 AdvocateThe A.D. 70 Advocate says don’t bother running the race, it’s a thing of the past. Max R. King, of Warren, Ohio, is the champion of this doctrine. He debated this proposition in 1973: “The Holy Scriptures teach that the second coming of Christ, including the end of the world, and the resurrection of the dead, occurred with the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.” Read what he says in his book The Spirit of Prophecy page 186 under the heading “LITERAL OR SYMBOLIC LANGUAGE” -

“We have studied five different ways the world would pass away, namely, by burning, by shaking, by waxing old and decaying, by roliing up as a scroll, and by fleeing away. It should be obvious to the thoughtful reader that these are symbols or figures of speech, all designed to show the ending of a world (the Jewish system) and the beginning of a new world (the Christian dispensation). To choose one passage and one symbolic term to the exclusion of all the rest, and insist on a literal application does great violence to the plain and ordinary meaning of the scriptures. It results in an erroneous concept that will lead us astray in the search for truth in God’s scheme of redemption.It would be just as logical and right to insist that the world was going to run or flee away, or be rolled together in a little round ball, or wax old and decay, as to insist on its destruction by fire. One term of speech is no more or no less literal than the other. Fire is just as symbolic as any of the other forms or descriptions of destruction.”

One must have help from Max King to learn that such scriptures as the following don’t mean what they say:

1. “Heaven and earth shall pass away” (Matt.24:35).
2. “They (earth and heavens, mh) shall perish; but thou remainest; and they shall wax old as doth a garment,- And as a vesture thou shalt fold them up, and they shall be changed:” (Heb. 1: 10-12 – Psm. 102: 25-27).
3. “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of person ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?” (2Pet. 2:10-12).
4. “And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away, and there was found no place for them.” (Rev.20:11).

Read and study these passages (Acts 17: 11; 2 Tim.2:15; Eph. 3:4; 5:17). Have we missed the meaning of these passages? Do such words and phrases as: “pass away”, “perish”, “melt with fervent heat”, “be dissolved” not mean what they say? I think your confidence in the clarity of scripture will be reaffirmed when you study these scriptures in the light of their context.

The angels in Acts 1: 11 “this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.” They saw him with their eyes, a visible ascent. Will it be a visible descent when he returns? Can we believe what God instructed the angels to say and what Luke recorded? The Hebrew writer records “and unto them that look for him shall he appear a second time…” (9:28). That agrees with the angel’s statement. Max King says it is a spiritual coming. God has appointed the day and the judge (Acts 17:31; 2 Tim. 4:8; Jn. 12:48; Jas.2:12). On that last day all that are in their graves shall come forth the righteous dead and living shall “meet the Lord in the air and so shall we ever be with the Lord” (Jn.5:28-29; Acts 24:15; IThes. 4:17). That day has not occurred. Max King is the one who has missed the teaching of God.

ConclusionHave we answered every argument concerning these false teachings? No, but it can and has been done. As we stated in our introduction that was not our purpose.The fact that truth doesn’t change the false teacher is not the fault of the truth or its teacher. The problem is with the heart of the false teacher (Matt. 13:10-23). Are there other false teachings concerning the end of the world? Will there be more? If the world stands it appears there is no end to the perversion of truth. That is why the Lord warns us in his word about them (Matt.7:15-20; Acts 20:28-32; Gal. 1:7-9; 1 Tim.4:1-3; 2 Tim. 4:1-4; 2 Pet. 2:1-3; l Jn. 4:1; 2 Jn 10- 11). “He that rejecteth me, and the receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.”May God give us the heart of David, his servant and friend, in our search for truth. A few verses from Psalm 119 will be sufficient: “With my whole heart have I sought thee: 0 let me not wander from thy commandments. Thy word have I hid in my heart, that I might not sin against thee.” (vs. 10- 11); “Thou hast rebuked the proud that are cursed, which do err from thy commandments.” (v.21) “I will run the way of thy commandments, when thou shalt enlarge my heart” (v. 32).