Item description for The End of All Things: A Defense of the Future by C. Jonathin Seraiah...
Overview The easiest way to deal with false doctrine is to affirm its absolute opposite. Unfortunately, this opposite affirmation is often no less erroneous than the false doctrine against which it reacts-sometimes, it is worse. Most conservative Christians in the twentieth century have been obsessed with "the last days." An absolute opposite answer has recently emerged in the form of what C. Jonathin Seraiah terms "pantelism," the view that all final events had taken place by the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. With on fell swoop, this viewpoint eviscerates dispensationalism. Unfortunately, it also undermines orthodox Christianity.
Publishers Description In the present work, C. Jonathin Seraiah ferrets out the leading flaws of pantelism (the so-called consistent preterism) and reinforces the accuracy of the orthodox understanding of eschataology - the future physical Second Advent of Christ, physical resurrection of just and unjust, and final judgment. The author shows that the leading biblical texts that pantelists employ to buttress their position do not in fact support it and that other texts flatly refute it. He observes, moreover, that pantelism is not a marginally flawed interpretation; rather, it subverts and restructures the Faith itself. This book is essential reading for those interested in a biblically grounded and historically informed eschatology. (Andrew Sandlin)
Promise Angels is dedicated to bringing you great books at great prices. Whether you read for entertainment, to learn, or for literacy - you will find what you want at promiseangels.com!
Studio: Canon Press
Est. Packaging Dimensions: Length: 8.53" Width: 5.55" Height: 0.52" Weight: 0.65 lbs.
Release Date Oct 1, 1999
Publisher Canon Press
ISBN 1885767536 ISBN13 9781885767530
Reviews - What do customers think about The End of All Things: A Defense of the Future?
Brilliant May 8, 2007
I once was a pantelist (hyper-preterist). I was committed. I was writing a book on the topic. And then. And then I read Mathison's "When Shall These Things Be." I read it to refute it. I still have my half-finished refutation in my computer. I couldn't make it through three chapters of that book. I was convinced. Hyper-preterism is wrong. Flat out wrong. I threw out my book manuscript. Then I got this book, out of interest. It nailed shut the coffin lid. I was done with pantelism. Forever. I compared what Mathison and Seraiah were saying with the hyper-preterist response. The hyper-preterists were stretching, reaching for answers that were not readily forthcoming. They weren't in the same league.
Seraiah's book is a direct theological response to hyper-preterism, and it does its job well. It has helped a number of my friends escape pantelism as well, and so I am personally thankful for its paraousia.
Occasionally I return to those websites that I used to haunt as a hyper-preterist. So far I have not found one response to this book or to Mathison's, that is anywhere near the same league, in terms of theology and scholarship.
More Tripe Aug 10, 2006
It is generally refreshing to read preterist treatments of eschatology, even partial. One normally feels a kinship with those who recognize the imminence of at least some New Testament events. Unfortunately the purpose of this book is not to bind more closely but poison the well.
Seraiah is to commended for maintaining that Revelation 1:7's "every eye will see him" means apostate Israel--"all the tribes of the Land"--as in Jesus' declaration to the Sanhedrin "after this you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power and coming upon the clouds of heaven." Addressed as it was to them, it meant they--indeed all unbelieving Israel--would recognize Christ's ascension to the Father's throne and "mourn because of Him" who had come to judge them and take away the Kingdom. The connection with Matthew 24:30 is undeniable: "At that time the sign of the Son of Man [who is] in heaven will appear and all the tribes of the Land will mourn." Then He would "gather His elect from the four winds"--the great ingathering of Gentiles now that the New Covenant was in full swing. Daniel 7:13-14's vision of a Son of Man taken into God' Presence and all peoples, etc. worshipping was thereby explained and fulfilled.
Matthew 23-25 pretty well determines one's whole framework for "end times." And it is here that PARTIAL preterists (for that is what Seraiah and his colleagues are) are only PARTIALLY right. Seraiah correctly dismisses attempts to translate "genea" as race or make it some other generation--Mt 23:36 squashes that (context, always context). But they err when they try to position a wedge somewhere after the "time text" ("this generation will not pass away until all these things take place"--verse 34), separating Jerusalem's AD 70 Fall from yet future events. The analogy with Noah is typically said to refer to a much later, still future, physical, visible, cosmos-ending Second Coming. It won't do. Luke 17:20-37 has a half dozen of the same events of Matthew 24 but in a different order. The "vultures" passage is before the time text in Mt 24, Noah after. In Luke, Noah is before the vultures. Matthew 24 is obviously one big event occurring at the same time. That said, Matthew 24:36-51 concerns the Fall of Jerusalem, ending in AD 70, and Matthew 25 must, too: 25:1 "At that time," verse 25:14 "For/because," and verse 31 "And."
So AD 70 is also the time of the famous "sheep and goats" judgment. But partial preterist Seraiah postulates it "is evidently not an event that took place in A.D. 70" (p. 45). This is sadly so much like Dispenationalism's first principle of interpretation: if it doesn't look like my idea of what should happen, it hasn't yet. But any attempt to separate 31-46 by thousands of years fails because Mt 16:27-28 is essentially the same subject: "The Son of Man will SOON come in the glory of his Father and with his angels to reward all peo¬ple for what they have done. I pro¬mise you that some of those stand¬ing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming with his kingdom." The "soon come" translation of "mello" is recognized by Young's Literal, Good News, CEV, Darby, and Modern Literal.
We're also supposed to believe "near" doesn't mean "near" in the Bible. Seraiah quotes Ezekiel 12:23 in a tortured attempt to prove this (pp 100-101) but the reader who actually looks it learns the Lord says "NONE of My words will be DELAYED ANY LONGER." God can tell time after all! (Also, Amos 6:3; 8:2, Hosea 1:4, Isaiah 56:1 & 12, Mt 26:18, 45, John 14:19)
Too many Christians are trying to make two pictures from the one "puzzle" box of eschatology. Seraiah grants a first century resurrection, Coming of Christ, Judgment, etc. but speaks of an additional General Resurrection, Final Judgment, Final Coming, etc. He speaks of the need "to distinguish between a spiritual `coming' (invisible for temporal judgment, as in A.D. 70) and the physical coming." Apparently Paul said, "first ... the natural, and after that the spiritual--and then the natural again!" (1 Cor 15:46). Of course he didn't, but the spiritual isn't good enough anymore. The bewildering sets of two pictures people try to construct from one box should be a signal that something is amiss in the whole approach: there's just one picture, my friends. For the best insight into 1 Corinthians 15 is Sam Frost's "Exegetical Essays on The Resurrection of the Dead." The tenses are correct in his work and Paul finally doesn't contradict himself--a must read for those not afraid of the truth.
Partial preterists seem to like partial quotes, such as with early Christian writers. He's eager to emphasize their MATERIAL expectations but keeps readers in the dark about their TIMING. The book that explicitly answers Seraiah here is Sam Frost's "Misplaced Hope" available at this Web site.
Why no unanimous assent to historical Parousia??? May 19, 2005
Unless Christ's 70AD 2nd Coming can be unequivocally demonstrated as historical a fact as Incarnation, Miracles, Transfiguration, Crucifixion, Resurrection, Ascension - i.e. proven, documented, Holy Spirit-attested, apostolically supported, inscripturated and undeniable across Christendom's Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox communions - then Pastism or any strain of preterism or fulfilled historicism is D.O.A.
IRRATIONALISM May 11, 2005
Seriah and Mathison are at it again, denying the perspicuity of scripture. In his chapter of "WHEN SHALL THESE THINGS BE" incoherent, hypo-preterist Keith and Chori Jonathin have denied that the biblical time texts mean what they say. Apparently they need to read the Bible 25 For I am the LORD: I will speak, and the word that I shall speak shall come to pass; it shall be no more prolonged: for in your days, O rebellious house, will I say the word, and will perform it, saith the Lord GOD.
In Mr. Mathison's books " Postmillennialism " and " Sola Scriptura ", he shows himself not to be a defender of the gospel as taught in scripture at all, but rather a pseudo-intellectual needing a remedial course in logic. Mr. Mathison and his ilk (Gentry, Sandlin, Crisler, West, North, Sproul Jr., Seriah, and all the other self-appointed defenders of their revisionist view of orthodoxy) are Creedalists pushing their Creedalism- not bible believing Christians contending for the faith that " was once for all " entrusted to the saints- as they want you to believe! In what follows, these claims will be supported.
In appendix three of his book "Postmillennialism" you find "A Brief Critique of Full Preterism" where he accuses preterists of attacking the creeds, not distinguishing between ecumenical creeds and denominational confessions and seriously misunderstanding the Reformation doctrine of sola Scriptura. Mathison claims biblical interpretation "necessarily sinks into the sea of subjectivity" if creedal orthodoxy is not maintained as a boundary. He quotes Mr. Sandlin from his paper Hymenaeus Resurrected, "Sola Scriptura means that the Bible in the context of Christian orthodoxy is the sole, ultimate touchstone for faith and practice." Really? Notice the complete absence of subjectivity and vicious circularity in that quote, all us hypers should become hypo-preterists immediately-DO NOT PASS GO, DO NOT COLLECT $200.00!-NOT!! Mr. Mathison and ilk-GET THEE TO A LOGIC CLASS!!!
One should not miss the arrogance in Mathison's reply to a recent preterist post -not that arrogance is completely absent here ("Answer the fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit")- and the ad hominem approach taken by the aforementioned writers. About the forthcoming book Mathison writes, "The project is a critique of hyper-preterism (not preterism)...." as if they are the only ones that correctly use the term. He further states about the author of the article, that he raises, "...some questions that adherents of biblical Christianity cannot answer...." No sir, Mr. Mathison, only adherents of Creedalism cannot answer the questions. Mr. West writes that preterists are full of satanic pride. Gentry says preterists are all unemployed but have internet access (Golly, I wonder how we pay for it, Mr. Gentry?) When informing his "flock" about Walt Hibbert's alledged mis-interpretation of Jesus pronouncement in Luke 21:22 that when Jerusalem was surrounded by armies it was for the fulfillment, "...of all that was written....", Gentry said all does not mean all and, "...when you answer one preterist fly all the other preterist flies come to his funeral." I am sure we can look forward to more of the same in "H" published by P&R Publishing ISBN 0-87552-552-0.
Important book May 4, 2004
Seriaiah has performed an important service to the evangelical theological world. He has provided a succinct and insightful introduction and critique of an alarming aberrant theology. He calls it "pantelism" ("all things-ism") whereas others call in "Hyper-Preterism" (see espcially Keith Mathison's equally helpful expose, When Shall These Things Be?").
This book provides a well-reasoned critique of several of the leading errors of this new, innovative movement. The Pantelists believe that ALL of biblical prophecy has been fulfilled. That Jesus's Second Coming occurred in AD 70, and that the Last Day and the resurrection all occurred then. The "last day" is in their view "the last day of Israel."
I highly commend this book as an important tool in witnessing to members of this faulty theological movement. There may not be many Pantelists around, but when just one of them shows up, you will know it! They are determined to debate the topic at the drop of a hat. (In this regard see some of the strange reviews by them of Keith Mathison's "When Shall These Things Be?"