Preterism on Trial: Testing Fulfillment Claims Against Scripture, Logic, and History

A Berean Post Investigative Series by Dwaine Senechal

Part 1 — Testing Every Fulfillment Claim

(Series Introduction and Method)

If you have ever wondered whether all biblical prophecy was fulfilled in the first century, this series is for you.

Across the next several studies, we will place Preterism—both Partial and Full—under honest, biblical, and historical examination. This is not about scoring points in a theological debate. It is about testing a system that directly affects how we define death, resurrection, sin, Satan, and redemption itself.

By the end of this series, you will understand what Preterism teaches, why it appeals to thoughtful students of Scripture, and where it breaks down when measured against the Bible’s own words and the witness of the early Church.

As always, the Berean standard applies:

“These were more noble… in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”— Acts 17:11 (KJV)

Why This Series Matters

Few teachings reach so deeply into the foundations of the faith. Preterism challenges how we read prophecy, interpret time statements, and understand what “the end” actually means.

If Full Preterism is true, then the resurrection of the dead has already taken place, judgment has already come, and the kingdom has already been fully realized. If it is not true, then this doctrine quietly removes the believer’s future hope — the very hope that has anchored the Church since the apostles first proclaimed, “He is risen indeed.”

This study is not about dismissing prophecy or ignoring context. It is about defending the integrity of the gospel. When death, sin, and resurrection are redefined, redemption itself is redefined.

What Preterism Teaches

The word Preterism comes from the Latin praeter, meaning “past.” It teaches that most, if not all, biblical prophecies were fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

Partial Preterism (PP) holds that many of the prophecies of Matthew 24 and Revelation were fulfilled in that event. It sees AD 70 as the covenantal close of the Old Testament age but still affirms a future bodily resurrection, final judgment, and renewal of creation.

Full Preterism (FP) goes further. It claims that every prophecy — including the resurrection of the dead, the last judgment, and the new heavens and new earth — was fulfilled in AD 70. In this view, there is no future coming of Christ, no future resurrection, and no final consummation.

Partial Preterism sees fulfillment begun.Full Preterism claims it is finished.

For that reason, this debate is not just about timing — it is about the nature of the hope itself.

The Berean Method

Every doctrine must stand on Scripture’s foundation. The Berean method tests every claim by four measures: Text, Context, Logic, and History.

Text

What do the words actually say?When Paul writes, “The dead shall be raised incorruptible” (1 Corinthians 15:52 KJV), or John declares, “Every eye shall see him” (Revelation 1:7 KJV), these words carry a natural, bodily meaning unless the context forces otherwise.

Context

What did these words mean to their original hearers within the covenant story?Preterism rightly emphasizes audience relevance, but when pushed too far, it confines the promises of God to one century — as if the gospel’s reach ended in AD 70.

Logic

Truth cannot contradict itself. A system that must redefine death, resurrection, and judgment to preserve its timeline may appear tidy but becomes internally inconsistent. If “resurrection” means covenant renewal rather than bodily life, then Christ’s own resurrection becomes unnecessary — and a metaphor can never validate another metaphor.

History

How did those closest to the apostles understand these promises?The early church, which lived through the destruction of Jerusalem, still confessed in every creed: “I believe in the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come.”They had every opportunity to reinterpret their hope — but they never did.

The Berean approach doesn’t appeal to history instead of Scripture; it uses history to test how the earliest believers understood Scripture. Truth leaves a trail.

Acknowledging What Preterism Gets Right

Full Preterists are not careless readers of the Bible. Their strength lies in taking seriously what many ignore:

• The time texts — “This generation shall not pass…” (Matt. 24:34).

• The covenantal continuity between Old and New.

• The audience relevance of prophetic warnings to first-century Israel.

These insights sharpen our study. Yet, when applied without balance, they become a trap that forces every prophecy, resurrection, and judgment into AD 70, even those that plainly look beyond it.

The Berean does not fear hard questions — but neither does he accept answers that redefine plain truths.

Where the System Begins to Break

As this series unfolds, we will trace how Full Preterism begins to unravel at key points:

1. Death must be redefined as covenantal separation instead of physical mortality.

2. Resurrection becomes a metaphor for Israel’s restoration, not the raising of bodies.

3. Sin is reduced to the Mosaic Law rather than the condition of fallen humanity.

4. Satan must be declared destroyed, though evil and deception continue.

5. AD 70 must become the spiritual climax of history, even though nothing visibly changed for believers after the cross.

Each of these claims will be tested through Scripture, logic, and historical witness — without caricature, without hostility, and without fear.

The Road Ahead

In the next installment — Part 2: “When Death Stops Meaning Death” — we will examine how Full Preterism’s redefinition of death begins to alter the entire gospel.

From there, we will move through the resurrection, sin, Satan, and finally the meaning of AD 70 itself — measuring each claim against the apostolic teaching and the unbroken testimony of the early church.

If you want to follow this study step by step, subscribe to The Berean Post and join the investigation.Together we will test every fulfillment claim — not to prove a position, but to see whether these things be so.