Blogger reformats this, for a non-reformated version click on:
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=ddwxqf3_43gv8hx2gm&hl=en
Check these videos: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3Fh60q5pgufliHc47wX83g
Harry Heise
The picture isn't Harry Heise...its me...I'm holding up the Preterist's Bible.
Harry Heise is a Preterist.
Question: what is a Preterist?
Answer: a Preterist is someone that believes two things (actually it's rather simple).
All prophecy is history
All prophecy was fulfilled at the distraction of the temple in 70 A.D
.
The two simple statements above need to be understood in the light of why they believe what they believe. Why they believe what they believe, is also simple. A Preterist believes that the Book of Revelation was written prior to the distruction of the temple, probably around 65 A. D. I will concede that if the Book of Revelation was indeed written prior to the destruction of the temple, then Preterism has a valid theological basis. However, if the Book of Revelation was written after the destruction of the temple (as is supposed around 95 to 100 A.D.) then the whole theological system of Preterism falls down like a house of cards.
The main scholarly publication regarding the subject of Preterism is a book written in 1878 by James Stuart Russell, the title of this book is Parousia. This book, even though written before the turn of the last century is published today by Kingdom Publications, the name of the book is Parousia, it is a very scholarly work of 561 pages.
Below is an OCR scan of page number 126:
126
THE PAROUSIA IN THE GOSPELS.
However startling or incredible such a conclusion may at first sight appear, it is what the teachings of the New Testament are absolutely committed to, and as we advance in this inquiry, we shall find the evidence in support of it accumulating to such a degree as to be irresistible. We shall meet with such expressions as ' the last times,' 'the last days,'
The Resurrection, the Judqment, and the Last Day.
JOHN vi. 39.-' This is' the Father's will which hath sent me, that 01 nll which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.'
JOHN vi. 40.-' I will raise him up at the last day.' JOHN vi. 44.-' I will raise him up at the last day.'
JOHN ix. 24.-' He shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.' JOHN xii. 48.-' The word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him
in the last day.'
We have in these passages another new phrase in connexion with the approaching consummation, which is peculiar to the Fourth Gospel. We never find in the Synoptics the expression 'the last day,' although we do find its equivalents, 'that day,' and 'the day of judgment.' It cannot be doubted that these expressions are synonymous, and refer to the same period. But we have already seen that the judgment is contemporaneous with the' end of the age' (CTlJVTE")"Eta TO~ alwvo,), and we infer that' the last day' is only another form of the expression ' the end of the age or aeon.' The Parousia also is constantly represented as coincident in point of time with the , end of the age,' so that all these great events, the Psrousia, the resurrection of the dead, the judgment, and the last day, are contemporaneous. Since, then, the end of the age is not, as is generally imagined, the end of the world, or total destruction of the earth, but the close of the Jewish economy; and since our Lord Himself distinctly and frequently places that event within the limits of the existing generation, we conclude that the Parousia, the resurrection, the judgment, and the last day, all belong to the period of the destruction of Jerusalem.
{Contemporaneous adj existing or happening in the same period of time}
Note: Used twice
Can you read?!
“…the Psrousia, the resurrection of the dead, the judgment, and the last day, are contemporaneous”
“…we conclude that the Parousia, the resurrection, the judgment, and the last day, all belong to the period of the destruction of Jerusalem”
A Preterist does NOT believe in a Literal, Physical Resurrection!
Go ask Harry Heise!
Behold the below passages from Paul's second letter to Timothy, the 2nd chapter, verses 16 through 18. (2Tim 2:16-18)
16 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase in unto more ungodliness.
17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;
18 Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.
Could it be that you people just stop reading after your favorite verse 15? Isn't it interesting that Hymenaeus is one of the people whom Paul delivered to Satan.
I can summarize very succinctly James Stuart Russell's position on eschatology, it is all:
Figuratively symbolic of something spiritual
Spiritually figurative of something symbolic
Allegorical
If anyone suspects me of being overly simplistic, get this book and read it, all 561 pages. You wouldn't even have to buy one, ask Harry Heise if you can borrow his.
Change of tone, back to my days with the Maranatha Bible Society
At first I did not place any great importance on Harry Heise’s view of prophecy. He out right told me he was a Preterist. Oh, I said. And the very first thing he brought up concerning Preterism, was the date of the writing of the Book of Revelation. He insisted it was in A. D. 65.
To be academically prepared to discuss the subject with him, I went out and bought a copy of Parousia. On just a skim of this book I concluded the matter was heresy, and I shunned him (as per 2Thess 3:14). This got the attention of other members of the fellowship, I received a letter from Ken Brandt (since destroyed... I should have saved in), if I remember correctly, it read as follows:
"... the book of Revelation has nothing to do with the Body of Christ..."
He signed it "a concerned brother"
I would like to make a digression regarding the above, hey Ken Brandt, you are not my brother!
I am leading up to something, this matter of the Book of Revelation got the attention of Dusty Rhoades, he preached several messages concerning me, without directly naming me. There was one message he preached in Michigan that I will quote to a part of "The Body of Christ is never never never in the book of Revelation"
A slight change in the train of thought, it is a doctrinal plank of the Maranatha Bible Society that the members thereof are members of the Body of Christ. This being so there is total identification with Jesus Christ himself. The important thing of what I have just written is the "total identification".
Back to the book of Revelation, and the never never never. Look up Strong's New Testament word #4352. Explain the usage of that word in the Book of Revelation, chapter 3 verse 9. If you are indeed a member of the Body of Christ this should be a trivial matter, particularly in that there is total identification.
The conclusion of the whole matter:
Harry Heise = Hymenaeus and Philetus
Dusty Rhoedes = Elymas Bar-jesus
Hey Ken, hey Roger, hey Jerry, hey Hank, Hey Dale, if you think Harry Heise is your brother, you are going to be burning in Hell right along side of him!
I WARNED YOU
Written by my hand: Allan Lewicki
.
.
PS: Preterism is not as rare as one may think, Google “Preterist”, you will fall over, among Preterests: D. James Kennedy
Read my Book on issuu:
http://issuu.com/allanlewicki/docs/condemned__richard_e._rhoades_and_his_spawn__the_m
Read my Book on scribd:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/29444174/Condemned-Richard-E-Rhoades-and-His-Spawn-The-Maranatha-Bible-Society-by-Allan-Lewicki
Read my Book on yudu:
http://www.yudu.com/item/details/148099/Condemned--Richard-E.-Rhoades-and-His-Spawn--The-Maranatha-Bible-Society
.
.
