Fulfilled Eschatology :

A Brief Introduction
by Brian L. Martin
author of
Behind the Veil of Moses:
Piecing Together the Mystery of the Second Coming
as well as the general editor of
Fulfilled! Magazine
 Copyright© 12/15/2018
Brian L. Martin

This original article was formatted for this tract that was
designed/edited by T. Everett Denton (ASiteForTheLord.com)
Printed by BMD Printing and Business Services
Goodyear, Arizona, USA
 Presented By

http://fulfilledcg.com fcg.brian@gmail.com
 1

Past Fulfillment

The term “eschatology” refers to the branch of theological

study which deals with “last things” or “end times.” There-
fore, “fulfilled eschatology” is the view that all end-times
promises and prophecies—including the Second Coming of
Christ, the Resurrection of the Saints, and the Judgment
—have already been fulfilled.

Competing Views

One of several driving forces for the fulfilled interpretation

is the many timing passages which, at face value, limit the
expectations for these eschatological events to the first-
century generation. On the other hand, the driving force
for most Christians is their understanding of the nature of
the fulfillment of these events. An oversimplification of this
can be illustrated by the following passages:

The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him

to show His servants—things which must shortly
take place. He sent and signified it . . . to His servant
John, who bore witness . . . to all things that he saw.
Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the
words of this prophecy, and keep those things
which are written in it; for the time is near.

Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye

will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all
the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him.
Even so, Amen. (Rev. 1:1-3 & 7, NKJV. Unless otherwise
noted, The New King James Version is used throughout
this booklet unless other noted.)

Certainly to the original audience the time indicators

(shortly, near ) implied an imminent fulfillment of the pro-
phecies under consideration, for one would not conclude
from a face-value reading of the text that there were to be
some two thousand years before the prophesied events would
occur. Thus, fulfilled eschatology, for reasons shared below,
looks for fulfillments within that prescribed timeframe.
2

Futurists, on the other hand, argue that Christ’s return

was not seen by anyone in the first century, let alone
“every eye.” Therefore, futurism looks for the fulfillment of
these events in our future.

It becomes immediately obvious that, for those who embrace

fulfilled eschatology to believe Christ actually returned in
the first century, something other than a literal under-
standing of “every eye will see him” must be employed.
Conversely, though often not readily recognized, futurism
must also employ something other than literal meanings
to “shortly” and “near.” R. C. Sproul spelled out this literal
event versus literal time issue in reference to The Olivet
Discourse as follows (note that Sproul chose the terms “pre-
terism” and “preterists,” which come from the Latin praeter,
meaning past [hence a past fulfillment], as well as parousia,
meaning presence, but often translated arrival or coming as in
Christ’s Second Coming):

This problem of literal fulfillment leaves us with

three basic solutions to interpreting The Olivet
Discourse [i.e. Matthew Chapter 24]:

1. We can interpret the entire discourse literally.

In this case we must conclude that some ele-
ments of Jesus’ prophecy failed to come to pass,
as advocates of “consistent eschatology” maintain.

2. We can interpret the events surrounding the pre-

dicted parousia literally and interpret the time-
frame references figuratively. This method is
employed chiefly by those who do not restrict
the phrase “this generation will not pass away” to
the lifespan of Jesus’ contemporaries.

3. We can interpret the time-frame references literally

and the events surrounding the parousia figur-
atively. In this view, all of Jesus’ prophecies in
The Olivet Discourse were fulfilled during the
period between the discourse itself and the
destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.
 3

The third option is followed by preterists. The

strength of the preterist position is found precisely
in this hermeneutical method. When faced with the
option of interpreting the time-frame references
literally or interpreting the description of the parousia
literally, the preterist chooses the former. The
preterist’s choice is governed by a larger herme-
neutical principle, namely the principle of interpret-
ing Scripture by Scripture (analogia fide). … there is
much biblical precedent for interpreting figuratively
references to astronomical upheavals in biblical
prophecies of catastrophic events. On the other hand,
the time-frame references are not clothed in such
imagery, but expressed in straightforward, ordinary
language. Following Luther’s view of seeking the
“plain sense” of a Scripture passage, preterists
insist on interpreting the time-frame references in
their prima facie (“plain”) sense. (The Last Days
According to Jesus, pp. 66-67)

Literal vs. Spiritual

When the topic of “literal” interpretation surfaces, state-

ments like “we hold to a literal interpretation of the Bible”
and “they spiritualize or allegorize everything” are often
thrown around. Although not necessarily intended, any
non-literal interpretation can often become “guilty by
association” with liberals who do not accept the Bible as
the literal Word of God. Such is not the case with fulfilled
eschatology. The debate isn't whether fulfilled eschatology
or futurism accepts the Bible as the literal Word of God;
that’s a given in both cases. Rather, the debate is, “What
portions or passages have something other than a strictly
literal interpretation?” As demonstrated above, both sides
must employ a non-literal view to either the time state-
ments or the nature statements. Because most of us have
been raised with a futurist paradigm, we easily accept non-
literal interpretations of the timing statements—“shortly”
cannot literally mean shortly, and “near” cannot literally
mean near if we are still waiting for Christ’s return two
thousand years after those words were written. Yet we still
claim that we “interpret the Bible literally.” Likewise,
4

knowing that Scripture describes God as a spirit, we

realize that, even though passages speak of the “arm of
the Lord,” God does not have a literal arm as do you or I.
Therefore, the debate is not over the literal interpretation
of the Bible, but over how to interpret the various genres
(historical, metaphor, parable, etc.) presented in the text.

Audience Relevance

In helping to determine which biblical elements we interpret

in a non-literal fashion, an important consideration is the
concept of “audience relevance.” Audience relevance dic-
tates that we must ascertain who wrote or spoke the words,
why, when, and where they were written or spoken, and
how the original audience would and/or were expected to
have understood them. We have a tendency to read Scrip-
ture from a twenty-first century, western-culture mindset.
Thus, we read Scripture the way we understand it, and
assume that such is how the original audience would have
understood it. In other words, we read ourselves and our
culture into the text. In order to rightly divide the Word of
Truth (2 Tim. 2:15), we must strive to understand how the
original audience understood and/or were meant to under-
stand it in their contemporary setting. For example, the
English word “let” typically means “to allow.” However,
several centuries ago “let” meant just the opposite to
English-speaking people: it meant “to hinder” (cf. 2 The.
2:7 in the KJV). This usage has been retained in the game
of tennis in which a serve that clips the top of the net is
called a “let.” Rather than allowing the tennis ball to pass,
the net actually hindered it. So as diligent students of God’s
Word, we must attempt to determine how the original audi-
ence would have understood the message given to them.

Relationship of Old and New Testaments

Part and parcel with audience relevance is the relationship

between the Old and New Testaments. Many Christians
believe the Old Testament is the foundation upon which
the New Testament is built and that, when there are per-
ceived inconsistencies between the two, the Old Testament
takes precedent. Thus, we must interpret the New Testa-
 5

ment in light of the foundation laid in the Old Testament.

However, many others (including those who embrace fulfilled
eschatology) believe the New Testament actually interprets
the Old Testament and that, when there are perceived
inconsistencies between the two, the New Testament takes
precedent. This is because the Old Testament contains
things which were shrouded in mystery, types, and shadows.
These mysteries were revealed to the New Testament
apostles, and the types and shadows were fulfilled in
Christ and the New Covenant:

. . . and to make all see what is the fellowship of the

mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has
been hidden in God who created all things through
Jesus Christ . . . . (Eph. 3:9)

. . . the mystery which has been hidden from ages

and from generations, but now has been revealed to
His saints. (Col. 1:26)

Furthermore, in the specific arena of eschatology, Peter

clearly stated that the Old Testament prophets did not
always understand the substance and timing of their pro-
phecies, whereas Jesus promised His apostles that when
the Spirit came He would teach them the things to come:

Of this salvation the prophets have inquired and

searched carefully, who prophesied of the grace that
would come to you, searching what, or what manner
of time, the Spirit of Christ who was in them was
indicating when He testified beforehand the suffer-
ings of Christ and the glories that would follow. To
them it was revealed that, not to themselves, but to
us they were ministering the things which now have
been reported to you through those who have preached
the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven—
things which angels desire to look into. (1 Pet. 1:10-12)

When He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide

you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own
authority, but whatever He hears He will speak;
and He will tell you things to come. (John 16:13-14)
6

Thus, Old Testament prophecies that were hidden in ages

past and not understood clearly were revealed to the first-
century apostles and saints. Therefore, the New Testament
must be used as a divine commentary on the Old Testa-
ment. This is not to imply that the New Testament super-
sedes the Old Testament, for Paul stated that he taught
nothing but what was found in Moses and the prophets.
Rather, the New Testament completes the foundation of
Scripture upon which doctrine and theology must be built,
for it is “...built on the foundation of the apostles and pro-
phets, Jesus Christ—the chief cornerstone . . . .” (Eph. 2:20)

Timing Passages

In our example from the opening verses of Revelation, we

focused on the time-related words “shortly” and “near.”
When one examines the New Testament, they will find a
multitude of similar statements. Here are just a few:

For the Son of Man will come in the glory of His

Father with His angels, and then He will reward
each according to his works. Assuredly I say to you,
there are some standing here who shall not taste
death till they see the Son of Man coming in His
kingdom. (Mat. 16:27-28)

Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no

means pass away till all these things take place.
(Mat. 24:34)

You also be patient. Establish your hearts, for the

coming of the Lord is at hand. (James 5:8)

But the end of all things is at hand; therefore be . . .

watchful in your prayers. (1 Pet. 4:7-8)

Little children, it is the last hour . . . . (1 John 2:18)

While there are over one hundred such “imminency” state-

ments concerning Christ’s return, the Judgment, and/or the
Resurrection (cf. http://livingthequestion.org/time-indicators),
there is not one passage which so much as hints that any
 7

of these eschatological events were to be expected beyond

the first-century generation. However, just the opposite is
true of Old Testament predictions of Christ’s first coming
and the Resurrection, which were stated as being far off:

I see Him, but not now; I behold Him, but not near
. . . . (Num. 24:17)

Go your way, Daniel, for the words are closed up

and sealed till the time of the end. (Dan. 12:9)

But you, go your way till the end; for you shall rest
[die], and will arise to your inheritance at the end of
the days. (Dan. 12:13)

While Daniel’s words were sealed till the “time of the end,”
John’s Revelation was not sealed: Do not seal the words of
the prophecy of this book, for the time is at hand. (Rev.
22:10-11)

Likewise, Daniel was told he would die (rest) and be raised

at the time of the end, while Paul wrote the Corinthians
that they would not all die (sleep): I tell you a mystery: We
shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed . . . . (1 Cor.
15:51)

It is these timing passages—and numerous others—which

cause those who embrace fulfilled eschatology to consider
first-century fulfillments for the prophecies of the Second
Coming of Christ, the Resurrection, and the Judgment.

Apocalyptic Language

As mentioned earlier, if we're to assume that Christ actually

returned to His generation, we cannot take the phrase
“every eye will see Him” in Revelation 1:7 in a strictly
literal sense. Keep in mind, however, that if we believe
Christ has not yet returned, there are over one hundred
imminency passages (near, at hand, shortly, quickly, etc.)
which we cannot interpret in a strictly literal sense.
8

Much of the imagery used to describe the events that

accompany the Second Coming—the sun not shining, the
moon turning to blood, the various plagues of Revelation—
is the use of what is called “apocalyptic language.” This
language is recognized by Bible scholars as the use of
symbolic, metaphoric descriptions applied to common-
place events orchestrated by God. For example, when God
delivered David from the hand of Saul and his enemies,
David described his deliverance in apocalyptic language:

Then the earth shook and trembled;

The foundations of heaven quaked and were shaken,
Because He was angry.
Smoke went up from His nostrils,
And devouring fire from His mouth;
Coals were kindled by it.
He bowed the heavens also, and came down
With darkness under His feet.
He rode upon a cherub, and flew;
And He was seen upon the wings of the wind.
He made darkness canopies around Him,
Dark waters and thick clouds of the skies.
From the brightness before Him
Coals of fire were kindled. . . .
Then the channels of the sea were seen,
The foundations of the world were uncovered,
At the rebuke of the Lord,
At the blast of the breath of His nostrils.
(2 Sam. 22:8-13 & 16)

Interestingly, in the historical narratives of David’s con-

flicts with Saul, we never read of astronomical or tectonic
activity playing a role or of God being seen physically at
any time, even though the text states He was seen upon
the wings of the wind. Yet this is how David described his
deliverance. This language is used to describe God’s direc-
tion of human affairs in the judgment or blessing of indivi-
duals and nations. To have the sun, moon, or stars not
give their light is descriptive of judgment:
 9

Behold, the day of the Lord comes,

Cruel, with both wrath and fierce anger,
To lay the land desolate;
And He will destroy its sinners from it.
For the stars of heaven and their constellations
Will not give their light;
The sun will be darkened in its going forth,
And the moon will not cause its light to shine.
(The Lord judging Babylon, Isa. 13:9-10)

All the host of heaven shall be dissolved,

And the heavens shall be rolled up like a scroll;
All their host shall fall down
As the leaf falls from the vine,
And as fruit falling from a fig tree.
(The Lord judging Edom, Isa 34:1)

The earth quakes before them,

The heavens tremble;
The sun and moon grow dark,
And the stars diminish their brightness.
(The Lord judging Israel, Joel 2:10)

Conversely, an increase in the brightness of the moon and

the sun is representative of blessing:

For the people shall dwell in Zion at Jerusalem;

You shall weep no more.
He will be very gracious to you at the sound of your cry;
When He hears it, He will answer you . . . . Moreover
The light of the moon will be as the light of the sun,
And the light of the sun will be sevenfold,
As the light of seven days,
In the day the Lord binds up the bruise of His people
And heals the stroke of their wound.
(Isa. 30:19 & 26)

Surely it would not be a blessing if the sun’s brightness

were to literally increase sevenfold! Note that this same
type of Old Testament imagery is used to describe Christ’s
Second Coming:
10

Immediately after the tribulation of those days the

sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its
light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers
of the heavens will be shaken. (Mat. 24:29)

I looked when He opened the sixth seal, and behold,

there was a great earthquake; and the sun became
black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became
like blood. And the stars of heaven fell to the earth,
as a fig tree drops its late figs when it is shaken by
a mighty wind. Then the sky receded as a scroll
when it is rolled up, and every mountain and island
was moved out of its place. (Rev. 6:12-14)

Since the Old Testament apocalyptic passages were descrip-

tions of God’s judgment upon nations, could not this same
type of language in the New Testament also be associated
with God’s judgment? Doesn't the Bible describe Jesus as
coming to judge the nations in His Second Coming?
Consider also the fact that Jesus prophesied Jerusalem’s
destruction, and His disciples associated that event with
His coming!

Then Jesus went out and departed from the temple,

and His disciples came up to show Him the build-
ings of the temple. And Jesus said to them, “Do you
not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not
one stone shall be left here upon another [judgment],
that shall not be thrown down.” [Then] the disciples
came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will
these things be? And what will be the sign of Your
coming, and of the end of the age?” (Mat. 24:1-3)

Moreover, Jesus stated that He only did what He saw the

Father do and that the Father had committed all judgment
to the Son. Should we not expect Jesus to judge the nations
as the Father had judged them in the Old Testament?
 11

Then Jesus answered and said to them, “Most

assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of
Himself, but what He sees the Father do; for what-
ever He does, the Son also does in like manner. . . .
For the Father judges no one, but has committed all
judgment to the Son.” (John 5:19 & 22)

If we can accept that the apocalyptic language describing

Christ’s Second Coming is not to be understood in a literal
sense—just as it is not literal in the Old Testament, we can
begin to see that the nature of Christ’s Second Coming is not
necessarily what we may have traditionally believed it to be.

Cloud Comings

Closely associated with apocalyptic language is the con-

cept of “cloud comings.” We are all familiar with the fact
that Jesus’ Second Coming was stated to be with clouds:

Behold, He is coming with clouds . . . . (Rev. 1:7)

Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught

up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord
in the air. (1 The. 4:17)

And the high priest answered and said to Him, “I

put You under oath by the living God: Tell us if You
are the Christ, the Son of God! ” Jesus said to him,
“It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, here-
after ['soon' per the Contemporary English Version] you
will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of
the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.”
(Mat. 26:63-64)

Recalling the principle of audience relevance discussed

earlier, we must ascertain how the first-century readers
would have understood this cloud-coming language.
Furthermore, when we consider that the New Testament
was written mainly by Jewish authors to a predominately
Jewish audience, we realize that we must seek to under-
stand how cloud-coming language was used and under-
stood by the Jews.
12

Upon examining the Old Testament, which is the basis of

Jewish culture, we find that the concept of God “coming on
clouds” was part of their language. Cloud-coming language
is often used to describe God coming in judgment of His
enemies and/or deliverance of His people:

The burden against Egypt.

Behold, the Lord rides on a swift cloud,
And will come into Egypt;
The idols of Egypt will totter at His presence,
And the heart of Egypt will melt in its midst.
(Isa. 19:1)

For the day of the Lord is coming,

For it is at hand:
A day of darkness and gloominess,
A day of clouds and thick darkness,
Like the morning clouds spread over the mountains.
(Joel 2:1-2)

The great day of the Lord is near;

It is near and hastens quickly.
The noise of the day of the Lord is bitter;
There the mighty men shall cry out.
That day is a day of wrath,
A day of trouble and distress,
A day of devastation and desolation,
A day of darkness and gloominess,
A day of clouds and thick darkness . . . .
(Zep. 1:14-15)

Although there were literal judgments and/or deliverances

occurring in these passages, they were described figura-
tively with cloud-coming language—God Himself was
never seen on clouds or on the earth. Since this is the
pattern established by God in the Old Testament, and
since Jesus said that He would come in judgment as He
had seen the Father come in judgment, and since He de-
scribed His Second Coming with cloud-coming language,
why should we expect to see Jesus physically and bodily
in clouds at His coming? The Father was not seen when
He came in judgment.
 13

End of the World

It may be objected that, “While God’s Old Testament cloud

comings were described in apocalyptic language, the end of
the world was never predicted along with those judgments;
on the other hand, Christ’s return is to occur at the end of
the world. Therefore, there is a significant difference between
the Old Testament descriptions of God coming on the clouds
and Christ’s Second Coming on the clouds.”

The phrase “the end of the world” is due largely to a poor

translation in the King James Version. Newer versions
have corrected this phrase to read more accurately as “the
end of the age.” Thus (just as the Bible never speaks of
“the end of time”), it was not the end of the world that was
expected to accompany Christ’s return, but the end of the
age, i.e. the Old Covenant age. Note the difference between
the King James and the New King James translations of
Matthew 24:3:

. . . the disciples came unto him privately, saying,

Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall
be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the
world? (Mat. 24:3, KJV)

. . . the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell

us, when will these things be? And what will be the
sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?”
(Mat. 24:3, NKJV)

Just as the timing passages confine Christ’s Second Coming

to the first-century generation, they place the end of the age
squarely in that generation as well:

Now all these things happened to them as examples,

and they were written for our [first-century audience]
admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have
come. (1 Cor. 10:11)

. . . but now, once at the end of the ages, He has

appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of
Himself. (Heb. 9:26-27)
14

The Old Covenant was drawing to a close in the first

century, and when Jerusalem was destroyed by the
Romans in AD 70 it ended forever. In AD 30 Christ had
wept over the city and predicted its judgment in that
generation. Forty years later—the span of a biblical
generation—the city was destroyed. Just as God had used
foreign armies to carry out His judgments in the Old
Testament, so Christ used the Roman armies to come in
judgment upon apostate Israel. Just as God’s Old Testa-
ment judgments were described in apocalyptic language
and as comings in/on clouds, so Christ’s return was
described in apocalyptic language and as coming in/on
clouds. And just as God was never seen by the physical
eye during His judgments, so Christ was not seen by the
physical eye during His Second Coming.

The Kingdom

Those who embrace fulfilled eschatology believe the timing

passages confine all eschatological fulfillments to the first
century. They also believe Christ’s Second Coming (described
in the same apocalyptic and cloud-coming language precedents
of the Old Testament) was fulfilled in the same nature as
God’s Old Testament comings.

“Where, then, is the kingdom?” one might ask. “Isn’t Christ

supposed to establish an earthly kingdom upon His return?”
Recall that Jesus told His disciples that the Holy Spirit
would “teach them the things to come,” and that the New
Testament expounds and explains much of what was
shrouded in types and hidden in mysteries in the Old
Testament. The New Testament never speaks of a future,
physical kingdom ruled by Christ on Earth. This concept
must be imported from Old Testament passages, which
are then applied in a woodenly literalistic manner.

While the Jews and Samaritans debated where exactly one

was to worship God, Jesus told the woman at the well that
the hour had come when neither in Jerusalem nor in
Samaria would true believers worship; rather, God was to
be worshipped in spirit and in truth (John 4). Christ came
to establish a spiritual kingdom (John 18:36) in which He
 15

rules and reigns in the hearts of His people, not to sit on a

physical throne. The Jews who did not understand the
typology and mystery of the Old Testament were looking
for a literal king to reign over a physical kingdom. Thus,
they tried to take Jesus by force and make Him king, but
Christ eluded them (John 6:15). If Jesus came preaching
the kingdom, and the kingdom He had in mind had been
physical in nature, why did He reject the efforts of the
Jews to crown Him king? Like the Jews of Jesus' time, much
of Christianity today is directly applying Old Testament pass-
ages to Christ’s kingdom without having rightly interpreted
them via the insight of the New Testament.

Conclusion

When all of this is taken into consideration, the logic of

fulfilled eschatology begins to come into focus. The
promised return of Christ was taught and expected within
the time frame of the first-century generation. It was fore-
told in the same type of language used in the Old Testa-
ment to foretell national judgments. While this language
spoke of astronomical signs and God coming on clouds,
there is no evidence of any astronomical phenomena or of
God ever being seen with the physical eye. The Second
Coming of Christ is described in this same language, and
we see in the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 a ful-
fillment similar to the judgments rendered upon the Old
Testament nations. Just as promised, this took place forty
years after Jesus foretold it—within that generation.

For those who feel that fulfilled eschatology is “redefining”

the nature of Christ’s Second Coming, keep in mind that if
someone believes the Lord's return is still future, they are
redefining all of the timing passages which describe the
first-century nearness of His return. Furthermore, fulfilled
believers would claim that they are not redefining the
scriptural depiction of Christ’s Second Coming, but rather
they are redefining the Church’s traditional interpretation
of the Second Coming.
16

While, as demonstrated, there’s ample biblical precedent for

apocalyptic and cloud-coming language being metaphorical
in nature, there’s no biblical precedent for redefining time
statements. We would remind the reader of the opening
example from Revelation:

The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him

to show His servants—things which must shortly
take place. And He sent and signified it by His
angel to His servant John, who bore witness to the
word of God, and to the testimony of Jesus Christ,
to all things that he saw. Blessed is he who reads
and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and
keep those things which are written in it; for the
time is near. (Rev. 1:1-3)

Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye

will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all
the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him.
Even so, Amen. (Rev. 1:7)

The times statements (shortly take place and time is near )

and the “every eye will see Him” statement cannot both be
taken in a strictly literal sense; therefore, one or both
must have been meant to be taken non-literally. Fulfilled
eschatology holds that biblical precedent establishes the
metaphorical use of apocalyptic and cloud-coming language,
while time statements are to be understood by their natural
meanings. Obviously, this is but a brief introduction, so
you are encouraged to study these topics, examining the
Scriptures to see if these things are true (Acts 17:11).

~~~~~

For information concerning Fulfilled! Magazine visit

http://fulfilledcg.com.