What is preterism?
Question 10136
Preterism is an approach to biblical prophecy, particularly to the book of Revelation, that holds that most or all of the prophetic events described in the New Testament were fulfilled in the past, principally in the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple by Rome in AD 70. It is a significant interpretive framework with a long history, and understanding it is important both for grasping the landscape of eschatological debate and for evaluating its claims against the biblical text.
What Preterism Teaches
The term comes from the Latin praeteritus, meaning “gone by” or “past.” Preterism exists in two main forms. Partial preterism (sometimes called moderate or orthodox preterism) holds that the majority of Revelation’s prophecies, including the Tribulation, the beast, and the judgement of Babylon, were fulfilled in the events surrounding the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70, while still affirming that the Second Coming, the bodily resurrection, and the final judgement remain future. Full preterism (sometimes called consistent or hyper-preterism) holds that all biblical prophecy, including the Second Coming and the resurrection, has already been fulfilled. Full preterism is regarded by most evangelical scholars as heretical, since it denies the future bodily return of Christ and the physical resurrection of the dead.
Partial preterism has more serious scholarly advocates. It reads Jesus’ Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24; Mark 13; Luke 21) as primarily referring to the destruction of Jerusalem, not to a future Tribulation. Revelation, on this view, was written before AD 70 (an early date of composition is important to the preterist case) and describes the imminent judgement on Israel that was about to fall. The beast of Revelation 13 is identified with Nero, the great city Babylon with Jerusalem, and the cosmic language of Revelation with the covenantal upheaval caused by the end of the old temple-centred order.
The Historical Background
The destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 was a catastrophic event. The temple was razed, the city was devastated, and the Jewish sacrificial system came to a permanent end. Preterists argue that the language of the New Testament prophecies fits this event with remarkable precision. Jesus warned that “not one stone will be left upon another” (Matthew 24:2), and this was fulfilled literally. The “great tribulation” of Matthew 24:21 is understood as the horrors of the Roman siege, described in graphic detail by the Jewish historian Josephus. The “abomination of desolation” (Matthew 24:15) is identified with the Roman standards in the temple precincts or with the Zealot desecration of the temple during the siege.
Evaluation from a Futurist and Dispensational Perspective
While the fall of Jerusalem was unquestionably a significant prophetic event, preterism faces substantial exegetical difficulties that prevent its adoption as a governing framework.
The language of the Olivet Discourse extends beyond what AD 70 can accommodate. Matthew 24:29-31 describes the sun being darkened, the moon not giving its light, the stars falling from heaven, and the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. Preterists treat this as symbolic language for covenantal upheaval, but the text connects it directly to the visible, personal return of Christ and the gathering of the elect from the four winds. Nothing remotely matching this description occurred in AD 70. The Roman conquest of Jerusalem was terrible, but it was not the visible return of Christ to earth.
The dating of Revelation is a critical issue. The preterist case depends heavily on Revelation having been written before AD 70. The early external testimony, however, including the weighty statement of Irenaeus (writing around AD 180), places the composition of Revelation during the reign of Domitian, in the mid-90s. If Revelation was written after AD 70, the preterist framework loses its primary anchor, since the prophecies cannot describe events that had already occurred before the book was written.
Preterism struggles to account for the scope of the events described in Revelation. The seal, trumpet, and bowl judgements describe a devastation that is global in scale, not local. Revelation 6:8 speaks of a quarter of the earth’s population being killed. Revelation 8:7-12 describes the destruction of a third of the earth’s vegetation, a third of the sea, and a third of the rivers. Revelation 16 describes judgements poured out on the earth, the sea, the rivers, and the sun. These are not descriptions that can be contained within the events of a single city’s destruction, however catastrophic that destruction was.
The distinction between Israel and the Church, central to the dispensational framework, is also at stake. Preterism tends to collapse this distinction by treating the destruction of Jerusalem as the definitive end of God’s programme with Israel, with the Church inheriting all the promises. This is a form of supersessionism that contradicts Paul’s clear teaching in Romans 11:25-29 that Israel’s hardening is partial and temporary, and that the gifts and calling of God are irrevocable.
So, now what?
Preterism raises important questions about the relationship between prophecy and history, and the events of AD 70 are genuinely significant in the biblical story. A balanced approach recognises that Jesus’ prophecy about the destruction of the temple was fulfilled precisely, while maintaining that the broader prophetic programme, including the Tribulation, the Second Coming, and the Millennium, remains future. The fall of Jerusalem may serve as a partial, typological foreshadowing of the greater tribulation to come, but it is not the fulfilment. The King has not yet returned. The promises to Israel have not yet been fulfilled. And the best is still ahead.
“For I tell you, you will not see me again, until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.'” Matthew 23:39
