The Preterist Blog ~ 100% Hyperpreterist Free|we can haz rezurekshun?

I have expressed over the past few years the view that I was coming to regarding the coming of Christ. (pun intended) That is that the coming of Christ is the reign of Christ bookended by two physical advents. It is both its parts and the whole. This is the most Biblically consistent way I believe of looking at the issue. Now, when I first thought of it, I was wary. I am always wary of theological novelty. I don’t presume to be so clever as to come up with some new theory that others have not. My first encouragement came when I was listening to Greg Bahnsen’s series on Revelation when he quoted Hengenstenberg. I immediately got the book, and I am not exaggerating to say that I got all misty-eyed with joy on how my thoughts were so eloquently put down nearly two centuries ago. Without further ado, here is the Hengstenberg passage that has blessed me so much, and is the key to inoculate oneself against hyperpreterism.

What is interesting is that Hengstenberg is working backwards to the same point I am working forwards to. He is coming at the passage as an orthodox believer in the future final physical return to show that this final return has echoes in the past and is part and parcel of an ongoing event.

I come to the passage as someone who sees clearly the first century application and works forward to show that it must point ultimately to the consummation. To deny either is to rob Christ of the fullness of His reign. Christ is not reigning in hyperpreterist-world as the mediator. He has already given up the Messianic Kingdom to the Father (1 Cor. 15). And to the hyperpreterist who denies an end of history and tries to claim that Christ already resurrected him, how could Christ even do that when there is no end to the number of the elect as there is no end to history. And an actual infinite number is an impossibility. No matter what number you posit, you can always add one more to it. This makes Calvinistic hyperpreterism absurd. It would fit with an open theism version of hyperpreterism, but not a Calvinist one. Calvinism requires a fixed number of elect that can be foreknown. A never-ending history does not and cannot provide that.

Read the rest of this entry »