Posts Tagged ‘hyper preterism’

The interpretation of this passage that I hold is the reformed Presbyterian view. I am fully aware of the Reformed Baptist understanding of this passage but obviously I find their interpretation to be over spiritualized and out of context but this isn’t the topic of this article. I am of the opinion that the Presbyterian exegesis does the most justice of the text and the most powerful against the heresy of Full or Hyper Preterism as we will see.

Jeremiah 31:31-34

The New Covenant
31 “Behold, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, 32 not like the covenant that I made with their fathers on the day when I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the Lord. 33 But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34 And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”

In the consummation of the new covenant there will be true knowledge and there would be no need to teach. There is an already but not yet aspect to this prophecy as most prophecies do. The NC is already a reality for us as the knowledge of God continues to go forth in the world through the preaching of the gospel and discipleship but it is in the consummation of the NC where it can be said that “they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest”. The “all” is the total number of God’s elect and the “all” will know the Lord perfectly.

Now the view of the Full Preterist is that this passage is already and totally fulfilled since for them the end and the consummation was the destruction of Jerusalem which was the end of the old Jewish age or the old covenant age. If that is the case then the Hyper Preterist refutes itself. How? Allow me to explain.

The fact that the Hyper Preterists are still trying to teach us their view of the gospel or their so called consistent or full preterism is self defeating. The mere fact that we are here discussing anything about knowing the Lord and His truths destroy their view of the new covenant. The prophet Jeremiah tells us that in this new heavens and new earth we will have full knowledge of God.

Compare with their exegesis of a parallel passage 1 Corinthians 13:12 which reads:

12 For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

I don’t fully know much less fully know God and neither do any of you. Now granted this is their interpretation not mine but if they are consistent they must stop teaching and assume we know all things concerning the Lord.

You see brothers and sisters, it is only in the final consummation of the new covenant, the new heavens and the new earth, the return of Christ that the “all” shall know the Lord because the only ones who will be there are His people, the Church. According to the hyprets we should “all” know the Lord in the now. So why don’t we? Why the need to keep teaching and preaching the gospel and doctrines about God? Now of course they will try but they can’t ever answer this in their paradigm. Knowing God fully is still in the future or else we have a clear contradiction on their part. We, the Church, will know God because the “all” or the total number of the elect will be gathered to Him in the consummation of history and the fulfillment of the new covenant. Hyper Preterists wants to have all prophecy in the past and do not take into account the already/not yet tension of eschatology.

Hyper Preterism refutes and defeats itself and slaps it’s own face.


Hyper-Preterist beginning premise starts at the garden where they claim that man was originally created mortal as was all living creation or creatures and therefore would have eventually died whether or not man had fallen into sin hence physical death had no consequence to Adams transgression. They falsely claim that physical death was just a mere natural consequence of being human made from dust. And, listen very carefully now, the ultimate resurrection was to bring back or reverse whatever “death” God cursed on mankind fall into sin. IF THAT ORIGINAL CURSE OF DEATH WAS ONLY A SPIRITUAL THEN THE TRUE RESURRECTION WHICH WOULD REVERSE IT MUST ALSO BE SPIRITUAL. Did you get that guys? This is the hinge that holds Hyper-preterism together take out the hinge and the fake kingdom collapses. 

Edward E. Stevens a well known proponent of HP states……

“We believe spiritual death ( the real curse) can be reversed without all the physical consequences being eliminated…..Physical death seems to be a planned, “natural” consequence of being human and living on earth” Stevens Response to Gentry, pg 56-58

John Noe agrees ( HP) …”Physical death of the old physical body remains the natural consequence of being created human . This was true for Adam and Eve. Its been true ever since. Even in Christ , we don’t regain or reverse that which was NEVER(emphasis mine) lost. Hence, the elimination of physical death was never the focus of Jesus’ redemptive work” ( Noe your resurrection body and life 71-72

Folks this is the starting point for their exegetical support (and you must catch this). These writers appeal to the fact that Adam and Eve did not die biologically “in the day that’ they sinned , therefore proving that biological death was not intended or included in their curse or punishment Genesis 2:17 which reads…..

17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.

One of the greatest theologians and exegetes of our time Geerhardus Vos made a very important and relevant point that I think puts this HP interpretation to rest, he makes a compelling suggestion that the phrase ” in the day that you eat of it” is simply a Hebrew idiom meaning ” as surely as you eat of it”. Vos compells us to compare 1 Kings 2:37 where King Solomon says to Shimei, ” The day you leave and cross the Kidron Valley , you can be sure you will die” but it was not until Shemei had gone across the Kidron and then returned to Jerusalem and the report had reached the king that Shimei was executed vs 38-46. Surely we can say that at the very moment of man’s sin, the seeds of psycho-physical death were planted and sown in his body and began to go to work.

I strongly concur with Vos that this is a more suitable exegesis of this passage..

Hyper preterism doesnt even get past the correct understanding of the fall of man much less deal with the rest of its erroneous conclusions which flow from here….and yes I will also deal with the whole tree of life issue as well…suffice for now my fellow brothas to ponder on these things.

Grace and peace

“Many, especially full preterists (which i’ll get to in a second), throw this slogan around to justify any and all different interpretations of Scripture. They come up with doctrines that are RADICALLY opposed to Reformed thinking and then holler, “Semper Reformanda”, as if the reformers would have been proud of their radical departure!

For reals? Am i really to believe that the Westminster divines would have sat there and listened to a man redefine the fall; redefine salvation; redefine sanctification and glorification; teach infinite procreation; deny election; so on and so on…and then think “oh yeahhhh, Semper Reformanda. Cool.””

Jason Bradfield aka King Neb
Former Full Preterist and personal friend