Preterism Versus Partial Preterism Eschatology
The interpretation of biblical prophecy, particularly concerning the "end times" and the return of Christ, is a deeply contested area within Christian eschatology. Among the various approaches, preterism and partial preterism represent distinct, yet related, frameworks for understanding these prophecies. The fundamental disagreement centers on the timing and fulfillment of apocalyptic texts, especially those found in the Gospels (e.g., Matthew 24), Paul's epistles, and the Book of Revelation. While both positions suggest a significant fulfillment of prophecy in the past, they diverge sharply on the extent of that fulfillment [2].
Full Preterism
Full preterism, sometimes referred to as consistent preterism, posits that all biblical prophecies, including the Second Coming of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, and the final judgment, were fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple by the Roman armies in A.D. 70. Adherents of this view argue that the language of "coming soon" or "at hand" in the New Testament must be taken literally, indicating an imminent fulfillment within the lifetime of the original audience [2].
According to this perspective, the "coming of the Son of Man" described in Matthew 24, often understood as a future, physical return of Christ, refers instead to a spiritual or judicial coming in judgment against apostate Israel. The destruction of Jerusalem, therefore, serves as the ultimate manifestation of God's judgment, bringing an end to the Old Covenant age and fully inaugurating the New Covenant [2]. Similarly, the resurrection of the dead is interpreted metaphorically as a spiritual resurrection or a transition from the Old Covenant spiritual death to New Covenant life, rather than a physical raising of bodies. The "new heavens and new earth" are understood as the new spiritual order established by Christ, replacing the old covenant system [2].
This view often emphasizes the continuity between the Old Testament prophetic tradition, which frequently used apocalyptic language to describe historical judgments, and the New Testament prophecies. For example, the language of cosmic upheaval (sun darkened, moon not giving light) found in Matthew 24 is seen as consistent with Old Testament prophetic descriptions of historical events, such as the fall of Babylon or Egypt, which were not literal cosmic collapses but rather the collapse of political and social orders [2].
Partial Preterism
Partial preterism, also known as moderate preterism, agrees with full preterism that many New Testament prophecies, particularly those concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the end of the Old Covenant age, were indeed fulfilled in A.D. 70. However, it maintains that certain key prophecies, most notably the bodily Second Coming of Christ, the general resurrection of the dead, and the final judgment, remain future events [2].
Proponents of partial preterism typically interpret passages like Matthew 24:1-34 as referring to the events leading up to and including the destruction of Jerusalem. They see the "coming of the Son of Man" in this context as a judgment event against Israel, fulfilled historically. However, they distinguish this from the subsequent verses (Matthew 24:36ff), which they interpret as referring to a distinct, future, and literal return of Christ at the end of the current age [2].
This position often emphasizes the distinction between prophecies that use "imminent" language and those that describe events clearly extending beyond the first century. For instance, while the "coming of the Lord" in judgment upon Jerusalem is seen as fulfilled, the physical resurrection of believers, as described by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15, is understood as a future, literal event [2]. Charles Hodge, in his Systematic Theology, discusses the comprehensive and difficult nature of eschatology, noting that it requires a survey of all prophetic teachings and acknowledges the vast literature on the subject, implicitly recognizing the complexity of distinguishing fulfilled from unfulfilled prophecy [2].
Partial preterists argue that a complete fulfillment of all prophecy in A.D. 70 would contradict the clear teaching of a future bodily resurrection and a final, universal judgment found elsewhere in Scripture. They maintain that the "end of the age" refers to the end of the cosmos, not merely the end of the Jewish age [2].
Shared Ground and Divergence
Both full and partial preterism share the common ground of recognizing the historical significance of the A.D. 70 destruction of Jerusalem as a pivotal event in redemptive history, marking the definitive end of the Old Covenant sacrificial system and the full establishment of the New Covenant [2]. They both challenge futurist interpretations that place nearly all apocalyptic prophecies in a distant future, arguing for a more immediate fulfillment in the first century.
The divergence between these two positions often stems from differing hermeneutical commitments, particularly regarding the interpretation of apocalyptic language. Full preterists tend to interpret almost all prophetic language metaphorically or spiritually, especially when it concerns events like the resurrection or the Second Coming, to fit within the A.D. 70 timeframe. Partial preterists, while acknowledging metaphorical elements in prophecy, insist on a more literal interpretation for certain key events, particularly those related to the ultimate consummation of God's plan [2].
The early church fathers, while not explicitly articulating "preterism" as a defined system, often interpreted some prophecies as having been fulfilled in their own time or in the recent past. Tertullian, for example, engaged with the concept of "was" in relation to existence, indicating a historical perspective on events [4]. He also discussed the origins of heresies, noting that later opinions were often judged against earlier truths, suggesting a historical progression of understanding [6]. However, the patristic writings also contain strong affirmations of a future, physical resurrection and a literal Second Coming, which aligns more closely with partial preterism or traditional futurism [1, 3, 5].
Sources
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 3: Tertullian — ELUCIDATIONS. (part 1): (Arrangement, p. 4, supra.) THE arrangement I have adopted in editing these Edinburgh Translations of Tertullian is a practical one. It will be found logical and helpful to the student, who is referred to the Prefatory pages of this volume for an Elucidation of the difficulties, with which any arrangement of these treatises is encumbered. For, first, an attempt to place them in chronological order is out of the question;(1) and, second, all efforts to separate precisely the Orthodox from the Montanistic or Montanist works of our author have hithe”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 3, section 84: § 1. Preliminary Remarks. This is a very comprehensive and very difficult subject. It is intimately allied with all the other great doctrines which fall under the head of eschatology. It has excited so much interest in all ages of the Church, that the books written upon it would of themselves make a library. The subject cannot be adequately discussed without taking a survey of all the prophetic teachings of the Scriptures both of the Old Testament and of the New. This task cannot be satisfactorily accomplished by any one who has not made ”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 5: Hippolytus, Cyprian, Caius, Novatian — CHAP. III.--NOETIANISM AN OFFSHOOT FROM THE: HERACLITIC PHILOSOPHY. But since we have exhibited the succession of their genealogy, it seems expedient next that we should also explain the depraved teaching involved in their doctrines. For this purpose we shall first adduce the opinions advanced by Heraclitus "the Obscure,"(1) and we shall next make manifest what are the portions of these opinions that are of Heraclitean origin. Such parts of their system its present champions are not aware belong to the "Obscure" philosopher, but they imagine(2)”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 3: Tertullian — CHAP. XXVII.--SOME HAIR-SPLITTING USE OF WORDS IN WHICH HIS OPPONENT HAD INDULGED.: But you next praise your eyebrows, and toss back your head, and beckon with your finger, in characteristic disdain,(20) and say: There is the was, looking as if it pointed to an eternal existence,--making its subject, of course, unbegotten and unmade, and on that account worthy of being supposed to be Matter. Well now, for my own part, I shall resort to no affected protestation,(21) but simply reply that "was" may be predicated of everything--even of a thing which has been created, which”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 3: Tertullian — CHAP. IV.--HEATHENS AND HERETICS ALIKE IN THEIR VILIFICATION OF THE FLESH AND ITS FUNCTIONS, THE ORDINARY CAVILS AGAINST THE FINAL RESTITUTION OF SO WEAK AND IGNOBLE A SUBSTANCE. (part 1): Hence it is that heretics start at once from this point,(1) from which they sketch the first draft of their dogmas, and afterwards add the details, being well aware how easily men's minds are caught by its influence, (and actuated) by that community of human sentiment which is so favourable to their designs. Is there anything else that you can hear of from the heretic, as also from th”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 3: Tertullian — CHAP.I.--THE OPINIONS OF HERMOGENES, BY THE PRESCRIPTIVE RULE OF ANTIQUITY SHOWN TO BE HERETICAL. NOT DERIVED FROM CHRISTIANITY, BUT FROM HEATHEN PHILOSOPHY. SOME OF THE TENETS MENTIONED.: WE are accustomed, for the purpose of shortening argument,(1) to lay down the rule against heretics of the lateness of their date.(2) For in as far as by our rule, priority is given to the truth, which also foretold that there would be heresies, in so far must all later opinions be prejudged as heresies, being such as were, by the more ancient rule of truth, predicted as (one day) to ”