Preterism, Futurism Or Historicism?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Preterism, Futurism or Historicism? A Theological Analysis of three Interpretive Schools of Apocalyptic Prophecy within the Doctrine of the Last Things by Reinhardt Stander Dissertation presented in requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), Department of Systematic Theology and Ecclesiology, Faculty of Theology, Stellenbosch University. Supervisor: Prof Robert R Vosloo Department: Systematic Theology and Ecclesiology, Faculty of Theology, Stellenbosch University March, 2021 Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za DECLARATION By submitting this thesis, I declare that the entirety of the work contained therein is my own, original work, that I am the sole author thereof (save to the extent explicitly otherwise stated), that reproduction and publication thereof by Stellenbosch University will not infringe any third party rights and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it for obtaining any qualification. Signed: Reinhardt R. Stander Date: March 2021 Copyright © 2021 Stellenbosch University All rights reserved ii Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za ABSTRACT As the interest in eschatology within academia as well as amongst many Christians increases, the natural outflow of apocalyptic prophecy interpretation has given occasion to two main popular interpretations, namely futurism and preterism – even to the extent of questionably influencing politics and theocratic movements. With the aim of identifying an adequate school of apocalyptic interpretation within the discourse of eschatology, this theological study within systematic theology analyses the way apocalyptic prophecy is interpreted within broader discourses on eschatology. The different hermeneutical assumptions of the various interpretation schools of apocalyptic models are researched and challenged. Preterism, which assigns apocalyptic prophecy’s fulfilment to the past; futurism, which consigns apocalyptic prophecy’s fulfilment to the future; and historicism, which disperses apocalyptic prophecy’s fulfilment throughout the lapse of history, are the focus of this study. The study is directed towards determining whether the more adequate system for interpreting apocalyptic prophecy can be identified within the doctrine of the last things (eschatology). An analysis model is developed whereby the three interpretational schools are critically evaluated. The consequential proposal from this research is a historicist hermeneutic. iii Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za OPSOMMING Twee prominente apokaliptiese interpretasiemodelle, naamlik preterisme en futurisme, het die afgelope tyd na vore getree as ‘n natuurlike uitvloeisel van die toenemende belangstelling in eskatologie onder akademici sowel as Christene, soms met ‘n twyfelagtige uitwerking op die politiek en teokratiese bewegings. Derhalwe het hierdie teologiese studie binne die dissipline van sistematiese teologie dit ten doel om ‘n toepaslike skool van apokaliptiese interpretasie te identifiseer binne die breër diskoers oor eskatologie. Die hermeneutiese aansprake van verskeie apokaliptiese interpretasieskole word ondersoek en uitgedaag. Die studie fokus op preterisme, wat die vervulling van apokaliptiese profesie in die verlede plaas; futurisme, wat die vervulling daarvan aan die toekoms koppel; en historisisme, wat aanvoer dat die vervulling van apokaliptiese profesie deur die loop van die geskiedenis plaasvind. Die studie is daarop gerig om te bepaal of die meer toepaslike sisteem van apokaliptiese interpretasie geïdentifiseer kan word binne die leer van die laaste dinge (eskatologie). Vir hierdie doeleinde word ‘n analisemodel ontwikkel vir die kritiese evaluering van bogenoemde interpretasieskole. Die voorstel wat hieruit voortvloei is ‘n historisistiese hermeneutiek. iv Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS To Professor Robert Vosloo, I appreciate your patience and insight with reference to this research. Thank you for all the guidance and advice with your academic finesse. To Doctor Ron du Preez, I appreciate your willingness to give me relevant input in the study under question. To Edwin de Kock, for all the books donated to this study and the many phone calls of encouragement. To Sanri Theron, words cannot suffice nor express my appreciation for the many hours you have sacrificed towards this study in proofreading it. To Scott Mayer and family, for hosting me at their lovely home for 2 weeks while studying at McKee Library on the campus of Southern Adventist University. To Doctor Rick Remmers and the Executive Committee of the Chesapeake Conference of Seventh-day Adventists for their contribution to my studies. To my congregations Williamsport SDA Church, Tygerberg SDA Church, Parow SDA Church and Durbanville SDA Church, for all your love and support. To my wife, Irinda Stander, and children, Josua and Simoné, thank you for all your love and support through this period of study during which you sacrificed hundreds of hours. To all my special friends who supported me and my family during this time, also when life was particularly challenging amid this research: Retha and Francois van Zyl and children; Regardt, my brother; Patrick Stander and Daniel Arnolds; Mynhardt Branders and family; De Wet and Sanet van Aarde; Werner Eiselen and family; John Fortune; Roelof Geldenhuys; Eugene and Pikkie van Rensburg; Johan and Kobie Coetzee; and the many others… v Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za DEDICATION To my parents, Wally and Ria Stander, and grandparents, Hendrik and Maureen Stander, and Koos and Chrissie van den Heever who have all inspired me from childhood with the blessed hope of the coming eschatos, Jesus Christ. vi Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za Table of Contents CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1 1.1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................. 2 1.1.1 Eschatology and apocalyptic ....................................................................... 2 1.1.2 Interpretation schools .................................................................................. 3 1.1.3 Apocalypticism ............................................................................................. 3 1.1.4 Reflection ..................................................................................................... 5 1.2 THE STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM ............................................................. 6 1.2.1 The main research question ........................................................................ 6 1.2.2 The sub-questions ....................................................................................... 6 1.3 THE ELUCIDATION OF THE PROBLEM .......................................................... 7 1.3.1 Delimitations of the study............................................................................. 7 1.3.2 Definitions of key terms ............................................................................... 8 1.3.3 Presuppositions of the researcher ............................................................... 9 1.4 THE VALUE OF THE STUDY .......................................................................... 10 1.5 THE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................ 12 1.6 THE RESEARCH STRUCTURE ...................................................................... 13 1.7 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................. 14 CHAPTER 2: AN ANALYSIS MODEL FOR THIS RESEARCH .................................... 16 2.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 16 2.2 ANALYSIS MODEL .......................................................................................... 18 2.2.1 A Christological analysis ............................................................................ 20 vii Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za 2.2.2 An apocalyptic analysis ............................................................................. 25 2.2.3 A prophetic image analysis ........................................................................ 36 2.2.4 An exegetical analysis ............................................................................... 41 2.2.5 A practical relevance analysis ................................................................... 54 2.3 Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 58 CHAPTER 3: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF PRETERISM .............................................. 60 3.1 PRETERISM DEFINED ................................................................................... 60 3.1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 60 3.1.2 Broad definition .......................................................................................... 61 3.1.3 Full preterism (or) historical critical preterism ............................................ 64 3.1.4 Partial preterism (or) moderate preterism .................................................. 66 3.2 MAPPING PRETERIST TEACHING ................................................................ 69 3.2.1 Dating of Revelation .................................................................................. 70 3.2.2 Time indicators