The doctrines of Hyper-Preterism (in which it is claimed that all prophecy was fulfilled in A.D. 70) are so inherently foolish, that I often wonder how anyone can accept them with a straight face.  There are, however, earnest men and women who take Hyper-Preterism seriously, and remain unaffected by the critiques offered by Christians who believe in a future second advent of Christ.

   An example of the foolishness that comes from embracing Hyper-Preterist doctrines may be seen when we read their conflicting interpretations of Revelation 19, in which John clearly predicts that the beast and false prophet wil be “taken alive” and cast into the lake of fire.  Preterists agree with futurists that this occurs at the parousia.  However, in placing the parousia in A.D. 70, innumerable difficulties are created, which result in what may be termed “theological bloopers.”

  For instance, in Revelation 19: 21 John prophesies that when the beast and false prophet are taken, the remnant of their armies are slain with the sword proceeding from Christ’s mouth.  Whether or not we take the sword as being symbolical (and most Christians would concur that it is), the result is certain: the armies are slain, and all the fowls filled with their flesh.  I am unaware at this time of any Preterist who claims that this was a spiritual or allegorical slaying.  Of course, I could be wrong.  But it seems to me that the “remnant“ are clearly identified as those who follow the beast.  And as the beast and false prophet are both cast into the lake of fire at Christ’s second coming, the physical slaying of their armies seems the most logical interpretation of Revelation 19: 21.  That is, if words have any meaning.

  Well, here’s the difficulty.  Most Hyper-Preterists claim that the beast was the Roman emperor Nero.  The problem is, Nero was not “taken alive” at Christ’s parousia!  He committed suicide in A.D. 68.  This discrepancy creates a “timing blooper” which Hyper-Preterists have a hard time getting around.  [At this moment, I am sitting at my desk quietly chuckling over their dilemma].

   J. Stuart Russell (1816-1895), Congregationalist clergyman and acknowledged high-priest of Hyper-Preterist doctrine, tries to solve this problem by pleading for “poetic license.”  This is a literary device common to classical poetry, where words are transposed out of their usual order to preserve metrical form or allow words to ryhme.  In this case, however, Russell attributes such a device to the inspired prophet, who allegedly switched TIMED EVENTS out of their natural order, in order to maintain Preterism’s indefensible position that Nero was the beast!

   “No doubt there is here something of an anachronism.  The death of Nero is placed in the vision subsequent to Jerusalem, whereas it actually preceded that event by two years or more.  As we have before remarked, something must be conceded to poetic license.  In an epic, a drama, or a vision, it is unreasonable to require strict chronological sequence.” (The Parousia, pg. 512).

   Russell and his modernistic legion of Hyper-Preterist camp-followers forget that the Bible provides a clear TIME-FRAME for the activity of the beast.  That time-frame is 42 months (Rev. 13: 5).  The beast is destroyed at Christ’s parousia, which takes place after the 42 months.  This is confirmed by parallel texts.  I am thinking particularly of Daniel’s vision of the “fourth beast” and his predicted destruction (see Dan. 7: 23-25). 

   Moreover, the beast, the kings of the earth, and their armies are seen by John as going out to meet Christ when He returns from heaven (Rev. 19: 19).  John’s vision unmistakably represents them as being destroyed as an effect of His coming.  This fixes the timing beyond question.  If Christ returned on August 9th, A.D. 70 (the day the temple caught fire), then the beast, the kings of the earth, and their armies had to have been destroyed at that time!

    Hyper-Preterists create another blooper by saying that the 42 months covers the period of the siege of Jerusalem (which took place in A.D. 67-70).  That means they would have to place the beast’s persecution within that period, and his destruction at its close.  Which they can’t do.  Certain hardcore Hyper-Preterists (like Don Preston and William Bell) try to solve this problem by claiming that the beast wasn’t Nero after all, but the first-century Jews.

   However, if that is the case, then how are we to interpret Rev. 19: 21, where John records that that the remnant are slain?  Josephus certifies us that after the taking of the city by Rome, 97,000 were led away into captivity.  Are we to conclude that 97,000 Jews escaped the sword that proceeded from the King’s mouth?  Why did so many get away scot free without being killed?  This difficulty is insoluble, unless (as stated above) one claims that the slaying was merely “metaphorical” (note: I use that term loosely, as the figure metaphor is always identifiable). 

   Hyper-Preterists have little choice but to say that the sword didn’t do its job in A.D. 70.  By this argument, they make Jesus Christ a false prophet, Who clearly said:

  “But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and SLAY THEM before me” (Luke 19: 27).

   So, what Hyper-Preterists present for our consideration is: — 1): a figurative parousia; 2): a figurative taking alive of the beast and false prophet; 3): a figurative slaying of the beast’s armies; and 4):  a figurative sort of ”fulfillment.”  Yes, according to Hyper-Preterists, the parousia was not literally fulfilled in A.D. 70. It was only spiritually fulfilled!

What say you, uncle?

 Boink.. boink… boink…