Tag: Hebrews 1:10-12

The “Growing Old” of “Heaven” and “Earth” of Hebrews 1:10-12 and Psalm 102 – End of World History or the Old Covenant Creation that Passed Away In AD 70? 

Introduction and the Partial Preterist Dilemma

As anyone who follows my work knows, the Partial Preterist system is extremely arbitrary. They rarely agree on which texts refer to the third and “final” coming of Christ to end world history and which ones were fulfilled in AD 70 to end the old covenant creation.  The disagreements also extend to which specific and key de-creation passages refer to the physical planet or the alleged “end of world history” or to the de-creation of the old covenant system in AD 70. When David Green and I wrote a book response to When Shall These Things Be? we discovered that they did not agree on what the key de-creation texts refer to.  There were two Partial Preterists (Kenneth Gentry and Keith Mathison) who believed 2 Peter 3 was the end of world history, while Doug Wilson believed it was the end of the old covenant heavens and earth in AD 70.  According to Gentry and Mathison, Isaiah 65 fulfills both 2 Peter 3 and Revelation 21-22, whereas Revelation 21:1ff refers to the passing of the old covenant or heaven and earth passing away in AD 70, and yet mystically the prophecy of Isaiah 65 in 2 Peter 3 somehow now refers to the end of human history.  According to Doug Wilson, however, the passing away of the “heavens and earth” of Isaiah 65, 2 Peter 3 and Revelation 21-22 consistently marks the end of the old covenant age, which ended in AD 70, and the beginning of the new covenant age:

“We are seeing here the transition between the first heaven (the Judaic aeon) and new earth (the Christian aeon).  …I do not take the new heaven and new earth as referring to the post-Second Coming eternal state.”  “So, I take the first heavens and earth as the Judaic aeon and the new heavens and earth as the Christian aeon, and these two aeons overlapped-–the latter beginning at Pentecost, and the former ending with the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D.”[1]

All of the Amillennialist co-authors with Wilson, Mathison and Gentry in WSTTB? were consistent like Wilson was on these three key texts, but felt all of these de-creation texts referred to the end of world history and the passing of the physical heavens and earth.  As usual hyper-creedal reformed eschatology is as clear as mud without Full Preterism being there to “bridge the gap” both exegetically and logically.

But back to Doug.  This puts Doug Wilson and the entire hyper-creedalist Partial Preterist system in an exegetical dilemma.  They NEED physical de-creation planetary texts or “end of world history” texts and or physical new creation texts to match their creeds which Gentry has referred to as “infallibly certain” (nothing Roman Catholic there – just keep walking).  John Lightfoot correctly identified the “creation” of Romans 8:18-23YLT as not the planet earth poetically groaning, but the creation of men,[2] while others like Wilson don’t see Isaiah 65; 2 Peter 3; or Revelation 21-22 as the physical creation passing away but the old covenant system.  Collectively this only leaves them with two “heaven” and “earth” de-creation texts – Hebrews 1:10-12 and Revelation 20:11.  I suppose the plot thickens because last night I heard a Reformed Partial Preterist podcast where Andrew Isker conceded that the “heaven” and “earth” of Hebrews 1:10-12 was the old covenant system that began to “grow old” at Christ’s ascension and then passed away in AD 70.[3]  This admission is sweet because Andrew Isker in a recent interview with Tucker, stated Doug Wilson was his “mentor.”  While I appreciate this admission by Mr. Isker, I must challenge him as to where he got this Preterist interpretation of Hebrews 1:10-12–if not from us, then who?  Please CITE your sources Mr. Isker.  This reminds me of Ken Gentry and James Jordan stealing our position on the resurrection of Daniel 12:2 being fulfilled in AD 70 and not showing us where they got that exegesis.

This now leaves Partial Preterism collectively with only one text in the entire Bible – Revelation 20:11.  If collectively your eschatological system only has ONE text to appeal to, then that should be giant red flag that your system is wrong and inconsistent.  We will address their last rallying point and last stand on Revelation 20:11 in a future article.

The de-creation texts in Hebrews

The focus of this article will be on unpacking Hebrews 1:10-12 and Psalm 102:

“In many parts, and many ways, God of old having spoken to the fathers in the prophets, in these last days did speak to us in a Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He did make [Greek poieo] the ages [Greek aeon]”(Heb. 1:1–2, YLT).

The author continues:

“You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of Your hands. They will perish but You remain; they will all wear out [Greek palaiothesontai] like a garment, like a robe You will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But You are the same, and Your years will have no end” (Heb. 1:10–12).

“whose voice the earth shook then, and now hath he promised, saying, ‘Yet once – I shake not only the earth, but also the heaven;’ and this – ‘Yet once’ – doth make evident the removal of the things shaken, as of things having been made[Greek poieo], that the things not shaken may remain; wherefore, a kingdom that cannot be shaken receiving, may we have grace, through which we may serve God well-pleasingly, with reverence and religious fear;” (Heb. 12:26–28, YLT).

Here the author makes it clear that Christ is not only the agent of creation but also the one who upholds the old covenant “ages” (Greek aeon)—a structure that he explains will come to an end at Christ’s imminent second appearing in AD 70 (see Hebrews 1:2–3, 6; 9:26–28, ESV).

In Isaiah the theme is similarly developed. In Isaiah 51:15–16, God created Israel as a political or covenantal “heaven”and “earth” when she was delivered from Egyptian bondage. Later, Isaiah 65:17 prophesies the end of this old covenant order and the establishment of a new one.  In Hebrews, when the author quotes Psalm 102 (see below), he refers to the de-creation of the old covenant “heavens and earth.”

It is always important to examine the context of an Old Testament passage a New Testament author appeals to.  Biblical scholars such as Richard Hays, G.K. Beale, N.T. Wright, Scott McKnight, Mark Nanos, Tom Holland, Brant Pitre, Andrew Perriman and many others all agree that when New Testament authors quote or allude to Old Testament passages, they expected readers to grasp the full context and theology of the original text. This expectation was especially true for first-century Jewish readers, who often had much of the Old Testament memorized. A striking example is Jesus’ cry from the cross, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matt. 27:46), quoting Psalm 22:1. Jesus was not merely citing a single verse but invoking the entire psalm, which He was fulfilling in that moment, prompting readers to revisit its broader narrative of suffering and vindication.

Richard Hays defines metalepsis as the New Testament writers being so “deeply immersed in Israel’s Scripture, their references and allusions to it are characteristically metaleptic in character: that is, they nudge the discerning reader to recognize and recover the context from which their intertextual references are drawn … [often] a recovery of the fuller original context will shed light on the story the Evangelists are telling and add important nuance to an otherwise flat surface reading.”[4]

Ian Turner quotes various scholars emphasizing that a New Testament author expects his reader to understand the Old Testament context or narrative echo or allusion to which he is appealing:

“…G.K. Beale observes that when the OT is quoted by NT authors, “single verses and phrases are merely signposts to the overall OT context from which they are cited.” Robert Rendall observes that “it is not so much the actual words of a quotation that matter (though these also have importance) but the wider passage of Scripture to which they are an index.” In NT quotations of the OT, “the unit of reference was sometimes wider than the usually brief form of words actually quoted” and the quotation was “intended to call the reader’s attention to the wider OT context or theme and might be referred to as a ‘pointer quotation.’”[5]

Therefore, to fully appreciate what the author of Hebrews is teaching, we need to examine the context of Psalm 102.

The Eschatology of Psalm 102

The Psalmist anticipates the appointed time for God to come in his glory to save Zion:

You will arise and have pity on Zion; it is the time to favor her; the appointed time has come. …For the Lord builds up Zion; he appears in his glory;…” (Psalm 102:13–16)

Psalm 102:13 signals that the Psalmist looks forward to an “appointed time” (the Hebrew mowed) when God will save or have pity on Zion.  This Hebrew word mowed is the Hebrew equivalent to the Greek word kairos.  Kairos also means “a fixed or appointed time” at which something must be completed.  Accordingly, the author of Hebrews also has his sights on the salvation of Zion—that is, the new covenant Heavenly Jerusalem or the City of the Living God (i.e., the Church). Heb. 13:14 tells us, however, when Zion or the “City” will be saved by using the Greek word mello in the next chapter to refer to her “about to come.”  It is also important to note that Christ will appear a second time in glory throughout Hebrews in order to save Zion.

According to John Gill, both Daniel 9:24–27 and Revelation 11:1–2 give a reasonable indication of when this passage and the “appointed time” will be fulfilled:

For the time to favour her, yea, the set time, is come; not the seventy years of the captivity made known to the prophet Jeremiah; rather the seventy weeks of Daniel fixed for the Messiah’s coming; or the fullness of time agreed upon, between Christ and his Father, for him to come and redeem his people; but it may best of all design the end of the forty two months, or the 1260 days, or years, fixed for the treading under foot the holy city, for the witnesses prophesying in sackcloth, and for the reign of antichrist; which when come will usher in glorious times in favour of Zion, the church of God, Revelation 11:2.[6]

Daniel 9:24–27 and Revelation 11:1–2, 18 point to “the appointed time” when the old covenant Jerusalem and her temple were judged and ultimately destroyed in AD 70—coinciding with God’s establishment and salvation of Zion, the new covenant Jerusalem. The two passages use the term kairos (the appointed time) and refer to the “three-and–a-half-years” between AD 67 and 70 (Dan. 9:26–27 LXX; Rev. 11:1–18).

While Daniel 9:24–27 describes the judgment and desolation of the old covenant temple, it also affirms that at this appointed time God “…will anoint a most holy place” (Daniel 9:24).  In Greek, naos refers not necessarily to the entire temple but specifically to the inner, most holy place—a term that finds its fulfillment in Revelation 11:1.  Revelation further depicts the New Jerusalem (Zion) as a perfectly proportioned most holy place where God dwells (Rev. 21:16).  In the first century, Christ’s coming in glory (cf. Matt. 16:27–28; Matt. 24:30–34; Rev. 1:7–17; Rev. 22:3, 7, 20) was understood as the moment when His Church—the true Zion—would be filled with His presence. As Paul writes, “Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Col. 1:27), a glory that both Paul and Peter anticipated would soon be fully revealed in the Church (cf. Rom. 8:18, YLT; 2 Thess. 1:10, 12, ESV; 1 Pet. 5:1, YLT).

There is no doubt that the Psalmist was aware of the prophecy found in Deuteronomy 32:35–43 that an “appointed time”would arrive when God would save and vindicate His people—rescuing them from persecution and shame into a state of security and glory in Him.

A Generation Recorded for the Future (v. 18)

Let this be recorded for a generation to come, so that a people/nation yet to be created may praise the Lord (Ps. 102:18, YLT).

Throughout Deuteronomy 32:20–22, Moses links a specific last day’s “generation” with the “people” and “nation” that are to be created when old covenant Israel undergoes a de-creation event.  In Psalm 102 and the epistle to the Hebrews, these elements converge. The Psalmist, who had long memorized and sung the Song of Moses, also grasped its eschatological significance and thus composed the Psalm with the future in mind.

According to Adam Clarke, the creation of this “people/nation” occurred at the time of the coming of the New Heaven and New Earth described in Isaiah 65:17–18:

“The people which shall be created — “The Gentiles, who shall be brought to the knowledge of salvation by Christ,” as the Syriac states in its inscription to this Psalm: how often the conversion of the soul to God is represented as a new creation, no reader of the New Testament need be told. See Ephesians 2:10; 4:24; 2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 6:15.Even the publication of the Gospel, and its influence among men, is represented under the notion of “creating a new heaven and a new earth,” Isaiah 65:17–18.”[7]

The Gathering in Zion 

The Psalm continues by declaring that the peoples and kingdoms are “gathered” in Zion and Jerusalem:

“That they may declare in Zion the name of the Lord, and in Jerusalem his praise, when peoples gather together, and kingdoms, to worship the Lord (Ps. 102:21–22).

Many interpreters see this verse as a recapitulation of the creation of the people/nation mentioned in verse 18. I join those commentators who connect this gathering with the arrival of the New Jerusalem—or, more precisely, the new heavens and new earth described in Isaiah 60:3 and Isaiah 65–66. Orthodox partial preterism, for example, concedes that this is not the coming of a renewed physical planet but the passing away of the old covenant heavens and earth, as realized in AD 70. Furthermore, if Isaiah 60:3 indeed fulfills Psalm 102:18–28 (a view with which I concur), then its fulfillment occurs during the “appointed time”—shortly in AD 70 (cf. Isa. 60:22LXX). The prophetic “appointed time” mentioned in Psalm 102:13 (YLT) echoes the “appointed time” in Deuteronomy 32:35LXX (KJV), when the de-creation of Israel and the emergence of the new covenant nation were to take place.

This eschatological “gathering” is further linked to the resurrection at Christ’s coming in AD 70, when the Gentiles gathered from East to West to dine with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the matured new covenant kingdom (Matthew 8:10–12; Matthew 24:30–31).  John claims that the destruction of Jerusalem for “three-and-a-half years” [AD 67–70] was the “appointed time” for the judgment of the dead when “the kingdoms of this world became the kingdom of our Lord” (Rev. 11:1–18).

The urgency of this future hope is underscored in Hebrews when the author writes, for example, that the salvation of this “nation,” whether understood as Zion or Jerusalem, was “about to come” (cf. Heb. 13:14 Weymouth New Testament; or Worrell New Testament).

The Perishability of the Old Creation (vv. 25–26)

In Psalm 102 the Psalmist also reminds us:

“In the beginning you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands. They will perish, but you will remain; they will all wear out like a garment. You will change them like a robe, and they will pass away (Ps. 102:25–26).

It is interesting—and perhaps ironic—that many commentators draw linguistic parallels between Psalm 102:25–26 and Isaiah 65–66 (and by extension 2 Pet. 3), noting that the Psalmist discusses the same prophetic de-creation event. Yet Partial Preterists (John Owen, John Lightfoot, R.C. Sproul, Peter Leithart, Doug Wilson, among others) maintain that the de-creation of Isaiah 65–66 and 2 Peter 3 is referring to nothing other than the old covenant heavens and earth that passed away in AD 70! As usual Futurist “orthodoxy” is found to be contradictory or forms Full Preterism:

Major Premise: The Psalmist in Psalm 102:25–26 is drawing upon the same de-creation event previously developed by Isaiah in Isaiah 65–66 (Classic Amillennialists and Premillennialists). In logical terms “A=B” or A (Isa. 65–66) = B (Ps. 102:25–26).

Minor Premise: But the de-creation of Isaiah 65–66 is “only” referring to the passing away of Israel’s old covenant “heavens and earth” in AD 70 (Postmillennial Partial Preterists).

Conclusion: Since the Psalmist is drawing upon the same de-creation event as Isaiah 65–66, and Isaiah 65–66 was fulfilled in AD 70, then both A (Isa. 65–66) and B (Ps. 102:25–26) were fulfilled in AD 70 (Full Preterism).

The Author’s Self-Interpretation in Hebrews

One of the first steps in hermeneutics or exegeting a text is to allow the author to define the meaning of the words he uses and to understand his contextual and theological flow.  In light of this, let us turn to Hebrews 12:

“At that time his voice shook the earth, but now he has promised, ‘Yet once more I will shake not only the earth but also the heavens.’ This phrase, ‘Yet once more,’ indicates the removal of things that are shaken—that is, things that have been made—in order that the things that cannot be shaken may remain. Therefore, let us be grateful for receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, and thus let us offer to God acceptable worship, with reverence and awe” (Heb. 12:26–28).

In my opinion, Don Preston is correct in asserting that the author is most likely using an interpretive inclusio to connect the themes beginning in chapter 1 with those in chapter 12.  According to Hebrews 1, Jesus “made” (Greek poieo) the old covenant ages just as He “made” (Greek poieo) the earth and heavens (cf. Heb. 1:1–2, 10–12).  Christ’s first and second appearances as the Church’s High Priest were to occur at the end of these created “ages”—which, as Hebrews notes, are “growing old” (Greek palaiothesontai). As the discussion proceeds in Hebrews 8, it becomes clear that what was “growing old” was not the planet itself but the old covenant system.

Furthermore, in Hebrews 12 the author alludes to Exodus 19 and Haggai 2 to depict the shaking of the heavens and the earth. In our previous work in House Divided, we examined Haggai 2:6–9, 21–23 and found that within about four years (“in a little while”) after the prophecy was given, God overthrew the nations and filled His temple with glory (compare Haggai 1:15; 2:10; Ezra 6:15). This event, which saw Darius of Persia subdue Israel’s enemies (cf. Ezra 6:11–12; Ezra 6:8–10), typifies the transition from the old covenant structure to the “more heavenly” worship inaugurated by Christ:

“The prophecy of Haggai 2:6–9, 21–23 was fulfilled, in a “typical” sense, in the lifetime of Zerubbabel. In about four years (“in a little while”) after the prophecy was given, God overthrew all the nations, (He “shook the heavens, the earth, the sea and the dry land”) and the desire or wealth of all nations came, and the temple was filled with glory (with gold and silver). (Compare Haggai 1:15; 2:10 and Ezra 6:15.)

This all took place when Darius King of Persia overturned Israel’s enemies, who for years had been preventing the rebuilding of God’s house. Darius decreed, “May God . . . overthrow any king or people who lifts a hand to change this decree or to destroy this temple in Jerusalem” (Ezra 6:11–12). Darius forced Israel’s enemies themselves to pay the full cost of the rebuilding, as well as the full cost of all the daily, priestly services (Ezra 6:8–10).

The military and political power of Israel’s enemies was overthrown.  They had tried to turn the king against Israel (Ezra 5), but God turned their own stratagems against them. He made them subservient to His people, taking their own wealth for the building of His glorious, earthly house. God had thus “moved heaven and earth” to keep the covenant that He had made with His people through Moses (Ezra 6:18; Hag. 2:5).

The prophecy of Haggai 2:6–9; 21–23 also foreshadowed the fulfillment of the better promise (Heb. 8:6) that was fulfilled in Christ’s generation. Israel’s building of the greater, earthly house in Zerubbabel’s generation was an example of the building of the true, heavenly “House” in Christ.

Within perhaps only four years (“in a little while”) after Hebrews 12:26 was written, God overthrew all the nations. He “shook the heavens, the earth, the sea and the dry land.” The desire of all nations came, and God’s Temple was filled with Glory.

This happened when God overturned His kingdom-enemies who, in their persecution of the church, had furiously resisted the construction of His new covenant temple (Eph. 2:21–22; I Peter 2:5). Despite the rage of the enemies, God enlisted countless multitudes of them to build His new House (Rom. 5:10; Col. 1:21; Rev. 5:9); and the enemies who resisted to the end were crushed, and were cast out of the kingdom in AD 70 (Matt. 8:12; 21:43; Luke 13:28; Acts 4:25–28; Gal. 4:30; Rev. 3:9).

God “moved heaven and earth” to keep the covenant that He made with His elect through the blood of Christ. Now the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit dwell eternally in the universal church, which is the new covenant House of promise (John 14:23; Gal. 4:19; Eph. 2:21–22; 3:17; Col. 1:27; II Peter 1:19; Rev. 3:20; 21:2–3). Through the power of the eternal gospel, the desire of the nations flows into “the more perfect tabernacle” today and forever (Heb. 9:11; Rev. 21:26–27), and God Himself is its unfading Glory (Rev. 21:23). Amen.”[8]

Hebrews 1:10–12 further clarifies that the “earth” and “heavens” that were “made” refer to the old covenant “earth” and “heavens” that were visible and subject to being “shaken” throughout Israel’s history.  By the Babylonians and other world powers, Israel’s kingdom was susceptible to being “shaken” in the sense that her earthly temple and city could become “desolate.”  In anticipation of AD 70, the author describes the old covenant creation of the “earth” and “heavens”as having to be “shaken” “once again.”  Commentators such as Matthew Poole, Adam Clarke, and John Owen have similarly argued that the “shaking” of the “heavens” and “earth” refers to the complete removal of the Jewish political and cultic system in AD 70.

The Benson Commentary correctly points this out:

Or declared, saying, (Haggai 2:6,) Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven — Meaning, probably, the abolition of the civil and ecclesiastical constitution of the Jews, with the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, Matthew 24:29; John 4:21, 23…”[9]

Matthew Poole also sees AD 70 to be in view:

This he removed away, and brought them then into a church state [through the exodus Ex. 19–24] with himself by covenant, which church state obtained the name or title of heaven, Matt. 21:43, and is by the prophet styled the old heaven, Isa. 65:17, which was to be shaken and removed also. …but this is also a powerful, moral shaking, so as to change and remove that heavenly church frame pitched in the Jewish tabernacle; that he might pitch a tabernacle himself more heavenly and spiritual, whereof Jesus should be the Lord High Priest and Ruler, as well as Minister, chap. 3:1, 2.[10]

And of verse 27 Poole correctly writes:

And this, Yet once more; as if he said, I told you that God promised, Yet once more, &c.; what he meaneth by it I now declare to you: this shaking of God intends not a small alteration, but a total removal and abolition of the Israelitish heaven and earth, forementioned, an alteration of their church, religion, and administration, and a total abrogating of them, because they are hand-work, chap. 9:24. Such as were at God’s direction made by men, as tabernacle, altar, and that typical service, not reaching the spiritual design of God, and but types of far better to succeed them; and which settled, did make the others to be finished, past, and never to return again. That those things which cannot be shaken may remain:these better things are the administration of Christ’s kingdom unshakeable, his church state which is heavenly, settled by his own evangelical laws and ordinances,…[11]

Adam Clarke sees the shaking of the “heavens” and “earth” as the destruction of the Jewish political and cultic system in AD 70:

“Probably referring to the approaching destruction of Jerusalem, and the total abolition of the political and ecclesiastical constitution of the Jews; the one being signified by the earth, the other by heaven; for the Jewish state and worship are frequently thus termed in the prophetic writings. … The whole of the Jewish polity, which had been in a shaken state from the time that Judea had fallen under the power of the Romans.”[12]

In fact, A.W. Pink quotes John Owen to explain the proper meaning of “heavens” and “earth” in verse 27 as being the old covenant physical system which would cease to exist in AD 70:

“But, as we observed before, it is the dealing of God with the church, and the alteration which He would make in the state thereof, concerning which the apostle treats. It is therefore the ‘heaven’ of Mosaic worship and that Judaical church-state, with the ‘earth’ of their political state belonging thereunto, that are here intended. These were they that were ‘shaken’ at the coming of Christ, and so shaken as shortly after to be removed and taken away, for the introduction of the more heavenly worship of the Gospel, and the immovable evangelical church-state. This was the greatest commotion and alteration that God ever made in the ‘heaven’ and ‘earth’ of the church. This was far greater and more glorious than the shaking of the ‘earth’ at the giving of the law. Wherefore, not to exclude the senses before mentioned, which are consistent with this, and may be respected in the prophecy as outward signs and indications of it, this is that which is principally intended in the words, and which is proper to the argument in hand” (John Owen).[13]

In contrast to the old covenant’s visible, physical heavens and earth—subject to shaking by Babylonian and other powers—the author of Hebrews teaches that God was preparing a kingdom that could not be shaken: an invisible, eternal realm inaugurated “within” His Church (cf. Dan. 2:34; Luke 17:20–37; 21:27–32).

Our interpretation aligns with commentators who view the de-creation of the “heavens” and “earth” in Hebrews 1:10–12, Hebrews 12:26–27, Psalm 102, and Isaiah 65–66 as a single, simultaneous event. We also agree that the de-creation described in Hebrews 12:26–27 and Isaiah 65–66 specifically refers to AD 70. Harmonizing these perspectives yields a consistent exegetical position that fits the overall flow of Hebrews, which contrasts the enduring superiority of the new covenant age with an old order that was “growing old” and ready to disappear in AD 70.

As we have seen, the de-creation of the old covenant heavens and earth and the gathering of a new people are intricately linked in the prophetic literature and in the theology of Hebrews.  The book of Hebrews and Psalm 102 teach that at the de-creation event of Israel’s old covenant heavens and earth a new People / Zion / Nation is created.  This is in perfect harmony with Deuteronomy 32:20-22 and Isaiah 65-66.  It is more than odd to have a new People and Nation created and just beginning at the end of world history.  It makes much more sense to see the creation of this People and Nation to be God’s new covenant People that continues once the old covenant People and Nation ceased to exist in AD 70—which is exactly what Moses and Isaiah prophesied.

Conclusion

Neither Jesus nor any New Testament writer predicted the end of the physical planet or world history, as is often assumed. When we examine the works of influential theologians within the Reformed and Evangelical communities, we find a Full Preterist interpretation of nearly every eschatological de-creation prophecy in the Bible. Scholars including John Owen, John Locke, John Lightfoot, John Brown, R.C. Sproul, Gary DeMar, Kenneth Gentry, James Jordan, Peter Leithart, Keith Mathison, Crispin H.T. Fletcher-Louis, Hank Hanegraaff, and N.T. Wright (to name just a few) interpret the passing away of “heaven and earth” (cf. Matt. 5:17–18; 24:3, 29, 35; 1 Cor. 7:31; II Peter 3; I John 2:17–18; Rev. 21:1) as referring to the destruction of the temple or the civil and religious worlds of men—Jewish or Gentile They argue that the rulers of the old covenant system or world, along with the temple, were symbolized by the “sun, moon, and stars” of the “heaven and earth” that perished in AD 70. See the following works:

  • John Owen, The Works of John Owen, 16 vols. (London: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1965–68), 9:134–135.
  • John Lightfoot, Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica: Matthew – 1 Corinthians, 4 vols. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, [1859], 1989), 3:452, 454.
  • John Brown, Discourses and Sayings of our Lord, 3 vols. (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, [1852] 1990), 1:170.
  • John Locke, The Clarendon Edition of the Works of John Locke: A Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistles of St Paul Volume 2, (NY: Oxford University Press, 1987), 617–618. R.C. Sproul, The Last Days According to Jesus(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1998).
  • Kenneth Gentry, He Shall Have Dominion (Tyler TX: Institute for Christian Economics, 1992), 363–365.
  • Kenneth Gentry (contributing author), Four Views on the Book of Revelation (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1998), 89.
  • Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church (Powder Springs: GA, 1999), 68–74, 141–154, 191–192.
  • James B. Jordan, Through New Eyes Developing a Biblical View of the World (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Publishers, 1998), 269–279.
  • Crispin H.T. Fletcher-Louis (contributing author) Eschatology in Bible & Theology (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1997), 145–169.
  • Peter J. Leithart, The Promise of His Appearing: An Exposition of Second Peter (Moscow, ID: Canon Press, 2004).
  • Keith A. Mathison, Postmillennialism: An Eschatology of Hope (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1999), 114, 157–158.
  • T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1996), 345–346.
  • T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2003), 645, n.42.
  • Hank Hanegraaff, The Apocalypse Code (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2007), 84–86.

These interpretations, while individually considered, “orthodox.,” show how Full Preterists synthesize Reformed and Evangelical views to present a cohesive reading of the key eschatological de-creation passages.

Since the “end of world history” is NOT “near” the Church can stop living in the perpetual newspaper eschatology and carrot and stick mindset of the last 100 years of the “prophecy experts” which continually shout “we are the terminal generation that will see the end” and that “we have to support national Israel.”  No that old covenant world or heaven and earth of national Israel came to her “end” in AD 70 and the modern State of “Israel” and the Khazarian Jews are a Talmudic Rothschild scam and PSYOP designed to drag us into WWIII thinking it is a fulfillment of “Armageddon.”  With sound Theology and Eschatology, the Church can get back to building things and being a true Biblical influence in our world!

Partial Preterists such as Doug Wilson are unable to “show their [exegetical] work” and prove to us that Hebrews 1:10-12 and Psalm 102 relate to a different de-creation and new creation event than what he takes as fulfilled in AD 70 in Isaiah 65; 2 Peter 3 and Revelation 21:1ff.  Although Wilson cannot demonstrate his exegetical work, he continues to attack men like Gary DeMar and Full Preterists like myself.  As of now, Doug has never responded to our book, House Divided, which is a response to his co-authored book WSTTB?, and has withdrawn from a debate with me and doing a documentary.  This article, along with the upcoming one on Revelation 20:11, illustrate why this is the case. David Green and I are also willing to continue to have a written debate with Doug and a partner of his choice, but he is not interested in doing so.  It is common for individuals such as Kenneth Gentry and Doug Wilson to believe that they are above others in some ivory tower and are not required to respond to their critics or bothersome peasants.  For them, that has not been a very successful strategy.  We are winning the eschatological debate and our appeals to continue to reform and change the WCF in the area of eschatology continue to resonate with many around the world.

[1] Doug Wilson, WHEN THE MAN COMES AROUND A COMMENTARY ON THE BOOK OF REVELATION (Moscow, ID:  Cannon Press, 2019), pp. 245-246

[2] See my development of Lightfoot’s view in my co-authored book, House Divided Bridging the Gap in Reformed Eschatology A Preterist Response to When Shall These Things Be? Second Edition (Ramona, CA: Vision Publishing, 2013), pp. 116-122 and my book, Armageddon Deception The Eschatology of Islam and Zionism A Biblical Response, (Ramona, CA:  Vision Publishing, Revised 2023), pp. 272-276

[3] Joel Webbon and Andrew Isker, Zionism, Modern Israel, & “The Divine Council,” March 7, 2025, https://rightresponseministries.com/podcasts/zionism-modern-israel-the-divine-council/

[4] Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Gospels (Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2016), 360–61 (emphasis original). Cf. idem, Reading Backwards: Figural Christology and the Fourfold Gospel Witness (London: SPCK, 2015), 97.

[5] Ian Turner, “Going Beyond What Is Written or Learning to Read? Discovering OT/NT Broad Reference,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, JETS 61, no. 3 (2018): 577–94, p. 577.

[6] John Gill, John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible, BibleHub, accessed Feb 16, 2025, https://biblehub.com/commentaries/gill/psalms/102.htm

[7] Adam Clark, “Commentary on Psalms 102:18”, “The Adam Clarke Commentary”, accessed Feb 12, 2025, https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/acc/psalms-102.html#verse-18. Emphasis added.

[8] David Green, Ed Hassertt, and Michael Sullivan, House Divided: Bridging the Gap in Reformed Eschatology: A Preterist Response to When Shall These Things Be? (Ramona, CA: Vision Publishing, second edition, 2013), 63–65.

[9] Joseph Benson, Benson Commentary, Biblehub.com, accessed Feb 16, 2025, https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/rbc/hebrews-12.html. Emphasis mine.

[10] Matthew Poole, Annotations upon the Holy Bible, vol. 3 (New York: Robert Carter and Brothers, 1853), 874.

[11] Poole, Annotations upon the Holy Bible. Emphasis added.

[12] Adam Clarke, Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible, StudyLight.org, accessed Feb 16, 2025, https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/acc/hebrews-12.html. Emphasis added.

[13] Arthur Walkington Pink, An Exposition of Hebrews (Swengel, PA: Bible Truth Depot, 1954), 1058.