Many years ago, after I had become brave enough to call myself a preterist, and had begun to feel comfortable with my new understanding of the "time statements" of our Lord and His apostles in relation to the Second Coming of Christ, I assumed that "filling in the details" would be a piece of pie. I could not, however, have been more mistaken. Read on and I will tell you why.

Today I have concluded that there are at least five (and probably more) different systems of interpretation that carry their adherents to some astoundingly different conclusions. My intention in writing this article is to assess, in a very general, non-technical manner, some of these differences. The assessment has to be very brief as a more detailed treatment could easily result in a book-length article devoted to each of the different views.

But first, let me state that I will be mainly concerned with the following:

Q. What really happened to the pre-parousia living saints around AD 70?

To begin, for the sake of convenience, I will assign a label to the first three schools of interpretation. I will call them "The Remained-on-Earth Views" of the rapture.

The first three groups can be called, (1) The Corporate view, (2) The Heaven Now view, and (3) The Covenantal Change view. All of these groups of preterists teach that the living pre-parousia Christians remained on earth at AD 70 and continued to do so until they died physically.

(1) The "Corporate view" teaches that the significance of the Second Coming was a judgment against apostate Judaism with the destruction of the city of Jerusalem and its Temple. One writer holding this view was quoted as saying, "The destruction of Jerusalem was the Second Coming of Christ." The significance of the rapture passages consists of "the raising of the body of Moses (the Old Covenant people) from the ashes of apostate Judaism into the full corporate body of the church of Jesus Christ (the New Covenant people)." And the "caught up in a cloud" language is "a figure of speech denoting the glory and elevated position of the saints on that day of vindication." This view denies that the doctrine of the resurrection relates in any significant way to an individual body resurrection. One writer devoted nearly 300 pages to explaining his unique view of the resurrection. Even that many pages, in the eyes of some, was not sufficient to give clear understanding to this view.

Objections: The Corporate view employs a bizarre hermeneutic which spiritualizes events that more logically require an historically grounded or literal interpretation. It is unclear just how the first century Christians were given relief from the Neronic persecutions of that period. How would the corporate view of the Second Coming answer to the Apostle Paul’s "we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly expecting adoption, the redemption of our body." (Rom. 8:23) In the final analysis, the pre-parousia Christians received nothing tangible, continued living if they weren’t martyred, and would still be looking, until the time of their death, for the deliverance that the rapture expectation passages had promised them. The complexity of the view would seem to render it unlikely that any of the original audience could have ever fathomed its implications. In a word this viewpoint could be described as contrived.

(2) The "Heaven-Now" interpretation maintains that the pre-parousia living Christians remained on the earth when the Second Coming of Christ took place around AD 70, receiving spiritually all the promised blessings of the inheritance. In other words, everything that the scriptures promised to believers at the Second Coming became the actual spiritual possession of those first century believers. They were really in heaven in their spiritual bodies, yet at the same time, still on earth in their earthly bodies! Did they really have two bodies at the same time? With these first century Christians remaining on the earth at the parousia and being joined by new generations of post-parousia Christians, the heaven now experience was the ultimate fulfillment of all that God promised to His people. Preterists who hold this view today would have us believe that they are really in heaven now, even though they are still in their physical bodies and awaiting physical death.

Objections: The great hope of God’s people from the very beginning has been to dwell in heaven with God, being clothed in our glorious spiritual bodies which would be fashioned for heaven, and beholding in full measure the glory of God in His perfection and splendor. Indeed, the New Testament speaks of the Christian as having a foretaste of heavenly things, such as Paul in Eph. 1:14 speaking of the Holy Spirit "who is an earnest of our inheritance, to the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory." But the vast grandeur of heavenly splendor, "a better, that is, a heavenly land" as being Abraham’s hope (Heb. 11:16), "for He prepared a city for them" can hardly be entered into apart from actually dwelling in heaven. (Ref. John 14:1-3) Is it really possible that these living preterists have received everything that God has in store for them? Most preterists do not possess the imagination necessary to picture themselves in heaven now, amid the sin, suffering, tears, bloodshed, anguish and troubles of this world. This view, incredibly, which is actually held by a number of preterists, smacks of fantasy more than reality. Holding to this position can only rob the believer of the true hope that awaits him in the real heaven in God’s presence.

(3) The "Covenantal view" is a view of the Second Coming that is probably held by more preterists than any other. At one time I leaned somewhat in this direction. This view teaches that when Jesus returned around AD 70, the "change" that Paul speaks of in I Cor. 15:51-52 is the change from the perishable to the imperishable, from mortal to immortality. It was the gathering together of God’s people, both dead and living saints. The Second Coming event, therefore, qualified these living saints to rise immortal at the time of their physical death. The pre-parousia living saints were not literally raptured but remained on the earth, awaiting the time of their physical death, one by one, when they would receive their incorruptible, glorified spiritual bodies (I Cor. 15) and join the throng of Old Testament departed saints delivered out of Sheol/Hades previously, at about AD 70.

Objections: Adherents of this view must spiritualize the I Thess. 4:15-17 passage, finding a way to avoid the lexical meaning of the word "caught up" where, in several other places in the New Testament, such as Acts 8:39-40, it does refer to a literal catching up from one place to another. Another major problem with this view is where Paul in the passage cited above mentions the living believers being "caught up together" with the Old Testament saints resurrected out of Sheol/Hades. This is clearly spoken of as a unified event where the departed saints are taken to heaven, thus demanding that the living saints would accompany them into God’s heavenly realm (Heb. 11:40). But those pre-parousia living Christians supposedly were allowed to remain on earth until the time of their death, in some cases many years into the future. An equally serious objection to this view is the record of the overwhelming number of promises given to the first century Christians which could only be realized apart from life on this earth. They were promised deliverance from suffering, persecution, tears, sin in every manifestation, into God’s very presence. If the rapture in AD 66-70 was nothing more than a covenantal change or a figurative fulfillment, the living pre-parousia believers of that day would actually have received virtually nothing and would have faced a major disappointment in not receiving the promises even when the parousia of Jesus Christ actually happened. It would have been merely a "ho-hum no-show" event, with no tangible or experiential evidence that anything like the Second Coming of Christ had ever taken place. I have noticed that Christians who hold this viewpoint seldom have much to say about the rapture verses. Some even deny the fact of a rapture when approached by their futurist friends. Clearly, this view does not measure up to the fulfillment that scripture requires.

In summary of all three of these "Remained-on-Earth" views of what actually happened to the pre-parousia Christians at the time of the parousia of Jesus Christ, we may conclude that any non-Christian in the first century, working shoulder to shoulder with a believer in Christ, could not have possibly known that anything unusual had happened. And yet, the fulfillment that had apparently just taken place in that first century, was such a magnanimous event as to be called "the completion of the salvation of the Christian." Yet, nothing apparently happened that anyone could perceive, not even the benefactors of the event themselves! Something is missing here. Where is the deliverance from Neronic persecution that was the hope of these first century people? Where are the incorruptible, immortal, glorified, spiritual bodies that they had been promised at the parousia? Where was the "better resurrection" that Paul spoke of? How was their salvation any nearer than when they first believed, as far as they could tell? Where was the hope of eternal life in the very presence of Jesus Christ Himself? And what about the face-to-face experience that they were promised? (I Cor. 11:12) If we are to accept what these well-meaning brethren would have us believe, then we would have to abandon the glorious expectations promised in the New Testament for those first century living believers, all of which were to be unfolded at the parousia, or conclude that they had somehow been mislead.

To refresh our minds at bit, I want to quote just a few of the verses that the pre-parousia Christians set their hope on when Christ would return:

2 Tim. 4:7-8 "I have fought the good fight. I have finished the course. I have kept the faith. For the rest, the crown of righteousness is laid up for me, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will give to me in that Day, and not only to me, but also to all the one’s loving His appearance."

Rom. 8: 18 "For I calculate that the sufferings of the present time are not worthy to compare to the coming glory to be revealed in us."

I Pet. 5:4 "And at the appearing of the Chief Shepherd, you will receive the never fading crown of glory."

Matt. 16:27 "For the Son of Man is about to come with His angels in the glory of His Father. And then ‘He will give reward to each according to his practice.’"

2 Thess. 1:6-7 "Since it is a just thing with God to pay back tribulation to the ones troubling you, and to give you, those being afflicted, relief with us at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from Heaven with angels of His power…"

1 John 3:2 "Beloved, now we are the children of God, and it was not yet revealed what we shall be. Be we know that if He is revealed, we shall be like Him, because we shall see Him as He is."

Phil. 3:20-21 "For our citizenship is in Heaven, from where we also wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform the body of our humiliation, for it to be conformed to His body of glory, according to the working of Him to be able even to subject all things under Himself."

Before we move on to consider the last two views of the rapture, we need to emphasize that all the benefits that the pre-parousia Christians were expecting to receive, according to the scriptures, had their focal point at the Second Coming. Jesus Himself would return and deliver His people from the persecutions that they were enduring, clothe them with their new, incorruptible, immortal, glorified, spiritual bodies, bestow upon them the rewards for faithfulness to Him, and receive them unto Himself in the place that He had gone to prepare for them soon after His ascension. (John 14)

Since we assigned a label to the first three perspectives on the subject, namely, "The Remained-on-Earth" viewpoint, now we will assign a general label to the last two views that we are considering. We shall call them the "Taken-to- Heaven" views, and further break them down into (4) The Literal Rapture Expectation view, and (5) The Perfect Is Heaven view.

(4) The "Literal Rapture Expectation" view teaches that the pre-parousia disciples of Jesus Christ were convinced that the promise of deliverance from persecution at the hands of the Jews and Romans in that first century could only be realized if the references to the rapture (ref. I Thess 4:13-17; I Cor. 15:51-57) were taken at face value. In addition to the deliverance from harsh treatment and other earthly perils, these Christians were eagerly anticipating the gathering together with the other large group of previously deceased and delivered out of Sheol/Hades pre-parousia believers and together would be escorted by the Lord Jesus to heaven, the place that He had prepared for them awaiting His parousia. Included in that grand heavenly procession would be these two groups of God’s people, each one having been given their new incorruptible, immortal, glorified, spiritual bodies. Such an overt expectation virtually demanded an equally overt literal rapture. No mere positional, figurative, or covenantal change could ever fulfill the expectations of these living Christians, nor grant them the crowns, rewards, and words of commendation and praise that they had been led to expect for their faithfulness to Jesus. This view also teaches that the amazing period of silence that followed the parousia, where few if any Christian writings have been found, according to the eminent historians covering that period, such as Josephus, F. W. Farrar, Eusebius, et al, could only be understood if a literal rapture had removed all living believers up to that time. While the silence issue is one ingredient in the overall argument for this view, it is not essential to its main thesis. It is the expectation statements of the New Testament that clinch the viewpoint.

Objections: With the significant number of New Testament passages which the "Literal Rapture Expectation" view seems to faithfully acknowledge for the first time in contemporary preterist circles, it will not be easy for me to come forth with a studied argument in opposition to this view. In fact, from my studies, I would suggest that this will be more of an attempt to point out certain inconsistencies within the body of arguments than to present a clean-cut refutation. So I’ll try to do just that, but no more. I would find it difficult to argue against my own recent writings!

First, if the "silence argument" is as strong as proponents of this view maintain, then the counter-argument that neither is there any record of non-Christian writings to report that all of the true Christians suddenly disappeared, might seem to hold equal validity. To the minds of some people, this kind of argument may be conclusive to them, and be the reason for them to reject the "Literal Rapture" view entirely. Of course, what these critics need to be made aware of is that there are strong arguments that definitely undermine their position. But the obvious reply to this type of objection is to get back to the basics, namely, that the inspired scriptures teach a "catching up," or an "upward call," or "a meeting of the Lord in the air," involving true Christians, and that the silence argument, which ever side you take, while interesting, is not really the main reason to argue for or against the "Literal Rapture" view. The powerful "expectation verses" form a much more formidable argument for the "Literal Rapture" than the absence of anything. The weight of these verses seems impossible to refute, in my opinion.

Secondly, the "Literal Rapture Expectation" view, where this "catching away" actually resulted in "seeing the Son of Man" (Matt. 24:29-31; 26:64) and being taken to heaven with Him (John 14:2-3), should also suggest that we always need to keep the basic hermeneutic principle of "audience relevancy" constantly in mind as we study. Many preterists who seemingly have mastered this hermeneutical principle, often neglect to follow through when it comes to discussing heavenly realities, and instead tend to apply these things to post-parousia Christians living on the earth. It would be more consistent to clearly affirm that those scriptures that teach us about the glories of heaven, were intended, when they were written, to become a "present possession" ONLY to that pre-parousia company of saints who very soon would be raptured into heaven. The problem of inconsistency arises when proponents of the "Literal Rapture" view begin to teach that these "heavenly verses" actually apply to life on this earth in the post-parousia period, including this 21st century. As a result of this misapplication, the "Literal Rapture" people find themselves coming dangerously close to the "Heaven Now" view surveyed in (2) above. The "Literal Rapture" view would be strengthened considerably if "audience relevance" was more carefully observed, and recognition was given to the fact that only life in heaven provides complete fulfillment for God’s people.

Given the two inconsistencies stated above, I find that the "Literal Rapture" view is a major breakthrough in scholarly preterist studies, and has given me personally a much better understanding of the entire AD 66-70 scenario of events.

(5) And now, we shall survey the "The Perfect Is Heaven" view. I would not consider this a completely distinct view from the previous one, but rather as a more consistent working out of some of the details of the "Literal Rapture Expectation" view. But first, I am very pleased to introduce the Christian gentleman who, more than any other preterist, is responsible under God’s grace for suggesting these fresh insights into preterism. His name is Ian Harding. He lives in Australia, far removed from the American preterist scene but keenly aware of it. Ian is virtually unknown in the States at this time. But he has written a new book that hopefully will be published within the next year or two. Anything that I point out here that illuminates the scriptures is likely to have come from the pen of Mr. Harding, as God’s Holy Spirit has given him these insights. My efforts to provide a survey of his position must fall far short of the beautiful book he has written, but nevertheless, I will do my best to pass on some of the important elements as I currently understand them to be.

Mr. Ian Harding is essentially in agreement with "The Literal Rapture Expectation" view, arriving in his own studies with basically the same position apart from any dependence on what would happen in America about the same time. He also affirms the absolute necessity of a literal rapture happening around AD 70. Any other view, he asserts, simply does not do justice to the pertinent biblical material. But what is most interesting, I noticed, is his fresh and original approach to the audience relevancy issue. To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Harding is the first preterist scholar to arrive at these conclusions and it will be very instructive to all of us to learn of his insights. I shall set forth some of these points in outline form at this time.

A. The New Testament authors were addressing the pre-parousia Christians who were about to be raptured. They were assuring these persecuted people that what they were about to enter into could only take place in the heavenly realm. They should not be expecting these things to happen on the earth. He reminds us that "flesh and blood is not able to inherit the kingdom of God" (I Cor. 15:50) and it is only when God bestows incorruptible, immortal, glorified, spiritual bodies to the raptured saints, both living and dead, that the ultimate fulfillment of the promises would be realized. These living New Testament Christians were living on the very threshold of entering into heaven and it was only to these people that these comforting words were written. Audience relevancy, consistently applied, drives him strongly to this position. In the words of Ian Harding, "Paul does not seem to me to be saying anything at all about what will be present or not present on earth for post-parousia Christians after the perfect has come for the pre-parousia saints. Rather he is totally talking about what those pre-parousia Corinthians will leave behind, be finished with, will no longer have a need for, once the perfect has come at Christ’s parousia, for they are all partial, dim, childish things which they won’t need anymore where they are going – into the realm of the perfect realm of glorification together with Christ." I believe that Mr. Harding has said this very well and expressed something that is often overlooked.

B. Mr. Harding draws a sharp distinction concerning the "promise-hope- inheritance" theme in its "firstfruit-deposit" experience in the lives of the pre-parousia believers living on earth, compared to the "hope of glory" in its fullness that these same Christians would shortly experience at Christ’s parousia. These believers had arrived at the very threshold of heaven! "But you have drawn near Mount Zion, even the city of the living God, to a heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, and to a gathering and an assembly of the first-born ones having been enrolled in Heaven; and to God the Judge of all, and to spirits of just ones who have been perfected; and to Jesus the Mediator of a new covenant, and to blood of sprinkling speaking better things than that of Abel." (Heb. 12:22-24)

C. Like other preterists who believe in "The Literal Rapture Expectation" view, Mr. Harding sees the necessity of both the dead saints being delivered out of Sheol/Hades and those living first century saints all being gathered together as one body and caught up to be with Jesus Christ at the time of the parousia. Citing specific scriptures that teach this, such as Heb. 11:40 ("God having foreseen something better concerning us, that they should not be perfected apart from us"), Mr. Harding stresses the point that any view of the rapture which separates the time of final glorification of the pre-parousia dead saints from that of the pre-parousia living saints, who allegedly would not go to heaven until the time of their physical death, actually contradicts the clear teaching of scripture.

D. Ian Harding’s understanding of "the perfect" in I Cor. 13:10 (coupled with Heb. 11:40 and 12:23) takes exception to the traditional view of many preterists that AD 70 brought in the perfect to accomplish complete fulfillment, encompassing all of covenantal life, both in heaven and on earth. Indeed, around AD 70 was the time when the perfect was put into place, but it initially affected only the pre-parousia saints, both the dead and the living, who were about to be raptured. For subsequent generations of post-parousia believers, the perfect would only be realized at the time of physical death when they would be taken to heaven in their glorified spiritual bodies.

E. Traditional views of the perfect, as pointing to the completion of the canon of scripture, all of which was written prior to AD 70, is not what the Apostle Paul was referring to as he penned these words. Comparing scripture with scripture, in many citations, Mr. Harding sees the perfect as the consummation of the Christian’s hope in heaven. No where in the context of I Cor. 13, or elsewhere in Scripture, do we find any statements as to when the believers were to look for the canon to be completed. In fact, no one could have known when the last of the inspired writings would be completed. Only later did it become evident that the New Testament scriptures were indeed completed before AD 70, but that is not what Paul is talking about in the I Cor. 13 passage. Rather he is showing the superiority of love over all of the other gifts including prophecies, tongues, and knowledge. Only love continues forever, even in heaven, in contrast to the other mentioned gifts which will cease because they won’t be needed when the raptured Christians enter into the perfect, which is another name for heaven. "Now I know in part, but then I will fully know even as I also was fully known." (I Cor. 11:12b) Paul contrasts the then-present experience of the pre-parousia believers, like that of an infant, seeing only dimly through a mirror, and knowing only in part, compared to the mature man, the face-to-face experience with Christ, and with full knowledge as God would allow. It is only the gift of love that shall continue in heaven forever. That is why Paul speaks of love as the greatest gift. Once again Mr. Harding consistently recognizes audience relevance in a very consistent ground breaking manner.

F. Challenging the "Remained-on-Earth" preterists, Mr. Harding waxes eloquent as he writes, "The remained-on-earth assumption regarding the pre-parousia Christians alive at the parousia, logically holds that all post-parousia Christians, including us today, enter the same fulfillment of the hope of glory, upon our faith in Jesus as Lord and Savior, as what the pre-parousia Christians entered at the parousia of Jesus. If the hope of glory expected at the parousia – the hope that the apostle Paul preached and rejoiced in and longed for…- if that hope was fulfilled to the living pre-parousia Christians by giving them an experiential fellowship with God and a spiritual transformation no greater than what we see in a modern preterist, or in the lives of the early church fathers – then of all men they are to be pitied! If the first pre-parousia Christians facing martyrdom under evil Nero could have known that the fulfillment of their hope of glory that they expected at the parousia would consist in their being made only as perfected as modern remained-on-earth preterists, one wonders how such a hope could have ever sustained them in their sore trials. It would certainly have been a disillusioning fulfillment. But of course – thanks to God – it was the hope of a REAL, experiential glorification at the parousia that sustained them, just as, since the parousia, the hope of real glory upon their death has sustained post-parousia martyrs. A covenantal or figurative glorification, etc. just will not fit the scriptures." We can only add a hearty 'amen' to these powerful statements.

G. Ian Harding also teaches that the "deposit-firstfruit" experience of the first century living Christians parallels the experience that we 21st century believers have today. Yet he carefully notes the exceptions that we have with the completed canon of holy scripture, and we are not looking for a repeat-parousia event. Rather, we today anticipate our physical death, at which time we will enter into the fulfillment of all the promises that first century believers experienced at the parousia about AD 70. So Mr. Harding sees a real parallel experientially of Christians living today with those pre-parousia saints of the first century. And that is one reason why we today can so readily identify with those suffering saints and can draw so much benefit and comfort from reading the New Testament scriptures. Yes, we too have the "deposit-firstfruit" experience that those early believers had!

H. Differing with some other preterists who maintain that the ministry of the Holy Spirit as Paraclete was completed at AD 70, Mr. Harding sees no support from scripture to hold this view. He teaches that the ministry of the Paraclete as set forth in John 14-16 is just as much needed by Christians today as His ministry to the pre-parousia Christians was needed in the apostolic period. He firmly believes that the present day ministry of the Holy Spirit, in His equipping for service, in His comforting ministry, in His indwelling in the hearts of God’s people, and everything else that the New Covenant promises to sustain us, is ours, as we await our personal call to the heavenly realm.

Objections: I am hard pressed to find any defect or error in the exegesis that has been the hallmark of this monumental study by Mr. Ian Harding of Australia. (I have read his entire book carefully, some of it several times.) I see his refinement of "The Literal Rapture Expectation" view, which I have called simply "The Perfect Is Heaven" view, as the only preterist view of the rapture and related events that meets the full requirements of scripture. It will be very interesting to observe the comments that this survey may invoke. It does not come easy for any of us to change our viewpoint, especially after holding to a particular position for several years. In the final analysis, however, since all of us see only dimly, especially in spiritual things, in this life on earth, we can unitedly look forward as believers in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ to that day when "we shall be like Him, because we shall see Him as He is." (I John 3:2) It is hoped that the "The Perfect Is Heaven" view, which embraces most of "The Literal Rapture Expectation" view also, will be adopted by hundreds of preterists in the near future.

Already I have heard Arthur Melanson on his Joy of the Lord radio broadcast (at 10:00 to 11:00 am daily over WTMR, Camden, NJ, 800 on the AM dial) introduce this wonderfully satisfying view to his thousands of daily listeners. Mr. Harding’s studies have warmed the hearts of both Arthur and me through the ministry of God’s Holy Spirit, the Comforter or Paraclete, as well as the hearts of countless other listeners, who have called in with their responses.

I hope many of you who read this article will also be blessed toward a richer, fuller, and more accurate understanding of the preterist view of eschatology. Preterist eschatology has not been the subject of contemporary post-parousia scholarly studies in any great depth until the final quarter of the last century. All of us preterists welcome continued exegetical studies from many members of the preterist community. Hopefully, what our gifted friend from Australia, Ian Harding, has written in his new book will find its way into published book form within the next year or two. In the meantime, I urge all of you to carefully study preterism with your Bible open and keeping "audience relevancy" fully in mind. May our Lord continue to illuminate the hearts and minds of His people