Introduction

If you've read anything at all about Full Preterism, and it's claim that all of the prophetic writings have been accomplished, then you can appreciate the task that a preterist has when writing about his convictions. We are often told that preterism means that we take away people's hope in a future second coming of Christ and physical resurrection of the saints; among others of the "evils" we do. Well, we would be glad to teach that there will be a future second coming and a physical resurrection; if in fact that's what the Scriptures taught: but they just don't.

We are not going to try to justify our convictions by pointing to the fact that Jesus Himself said that He would come back in His disciple's lifetime, to punish Israel, resurrect the dead, judge the wicked, destroy Jerusalem and it's people and make an end of Israel's sins and their special relationship with the Lord; thereby fulfilling the law, and accomplishing His word that heavens & earth would pass away, and that the new heaven & earth would come at the accomplishment of these things. All of these things He did, as He promised in AD 70, at the great tribulation.

These have been dealt with in other documents which are readily available on this site and others. What we would like to focus on is the tree of life in Revelation 22. It is interesting to note that the futurist view does not properly account for this tree being in the New Jerusalem. When they do try to explain it, it usually turns out to be a lame excuse to continue believing "what the Church has believed for centuries". We must always remember that the Church does not determine what we should believe, as that has already been decided by God; but that it is to be the "column and support" of what is written. Otherwise, we fall into the same trap the Roman church did, and the "Church" then ends up imposing on it's followers what they are to believe.

For the purpose of this short study, we will ignore Dispensationalism, as it is so obviously not what the Scriptures teach; but will instead focus on the amill and postmill futurist conviction. By futurist, we mean that they believe in a future second coming and physical resurrection, in other words: they believe in only a partial accomplishment of the Olivet discourse.

The futurist view

We would like to ask a simple question: in view of the fact that futurists teach that the New Jerusalem of Revelation 22 is the saved of all ages, the bride of Christ at the end of the millennium, when all things have ended and we have embarked into eternity: what then is the tree of life doing there? The question seems rather innocuous, but don't be fooled: it has some very serious implications.

Let's suppose for a moment that we are futurists. According to this conviction, when the millennium - an indeterminate period of time - has ended, the judgement of all who ever lived then takes place. In Rev 20: 11ff we have the picture of Christ sitting on a "great white throne", and all the dead and those written in the book - we say this because the book of life is mentioned in verse twelve - are face to face with the King. When this judgement is done with, we are told that there is now a new heaven & earth. A little later, the New Jerusalem appears in it's pristine beauty, unmarred by sin, and ready to begin it's new life in eternity, in the presence of her Husband: the Lord of all creation.

We are given a fabulous description of her beauty. She's adorned with jewels of all kinds, has twelve of almost everything -ladies take note - and is so beautiful that only this kind of symbolic language can do her justice. We have here of course a description that is written in apocalyptic language, that must not be taken literally, as our Dispensational brethren so often insist that we do. If you will note verse five of chapter twenty one; John writes: "And He who sat on the throne said, behold, I make all things new." One certainly gets the impression that this is really the end of all things, the "end of time" as we know it, and the "beginning" of eternity: not that eternity has a beginning.

We will skip to chapter twenty two for now, and come back to verse six of twenty one later. In chapter twenty two John writes: (v.1) "And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, as clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb. (v.2) In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits and yielded her fruit every month, and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations." When we look at this verse, a question immediately comes to mind: why would the nations need healing?

They have entered eternity; sin, death, hades and Satan have all been cast into the lake of fire. Why would they need healing if they are now in eternal bliss? Remember that all evil has been disposed of, God has healed the Church of her ills, sin has been finally purged from her so that only a grandiose description of her can truly tell of her beauty. It seems a rather odd thing to have in the midst of the garden; this tree of life, with it's healing powers. Would you not agree with us that it is at least a bit curious? If one adopts the futurist view, then one is at pains to explain this tree. If however, one adopts the preterist view, the explanation is quite easy. By now you must think us rather arrogant... right? The reason the explanation is easy, is not because we are somehow more in tune with the spiritual truths of the Bible, but because the explanation lies in the fact that a past fulfillment makes it simple, because this is more in tune with spiritual truth.

The preterist, or past fulfillment view

As we have said before, there is a variety of materials available that explain the basics of the preterist view; so we won't get into the particulars. Let's just suppose, as we did for the futurist view, that we have a past fulfillment view of "end things". In the preterist view of end things, the old heaven & earth is the covenant world that God created at Sinai, for the Israelites to "live" in. In Isaiah 51:16 the Lord declares :" And I have put my words in thy mouth, and I have covered thee in the shadow of my hand, that I may plant the heavens, and lay the foundations of the earth, and say unto Zion, thou art my people." It is obvious from this context that the Lord is not talking about the literal heaven & earth, but the covenant heaven & earth that He founded for Israel to be his people. Otherwise, you would have the ridiculous situation of laying the literal foundation of the heaven & earth while He was speaking to Israel. This that he laid, was the covenant world they would live in.

Now, in the time of Jesus, all these things were about to pass away; Matt. 5:17,18 is a witness to this. Jesus states that heaven and earth would pass away when the law was fulfilled. The obvious implication is: if the old covenant was the old heaven & earth, then the new covenant has to be the new heaven & earth. In AD 70, the Lord ended His relationship with Israel by destroying the city, desolating it's temple and dispersing the people into all the nations. This judgement is the great tribulation, and ended once and for all God's special relationship with Israel (Luke 21:22,24,32,33). There was a transition period between the taking away of the old to establish the new. This period lasted about 40 years; the same as the wilderness wandering, by the way.

When one considers this data, then one may easily come to the conclusion that the tree of life is very much something that belongs in the scene set by John in Revelation 22. The new heaven & earth is the new covenant, and the tree is there for the healing of the nations, via the gospel of Christ. This language is symbolic and should not be taken literally. If we view this as paradise restored in eternity, after all things have ended, then we have to explain how come the tree of life is needed to "heal the nations". It makes no sense to heal someone that doesn't need healing. But, it makes perfect sense to heal someone who does, after the new covenant (read: new heaven & earth) has come unto it's own. The healing spoken of, is the salvation that Jesus paid such a high price for, to obtain "healing" for the elect of all nations, kindred, tongues and peoples. (Rev. 5:9)

The language isn't at all strange once this is understood. It is in fact very much like the rest of the language at the end of the book of Revelation. Take Rev. 21:6, spoken of above, for instance. The Lord Jesus says: "... it is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst, of the fountain of the water of life freely." How can the saved in eternity be "athirst"? Jesus said that: "Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again:" (John 4;13), so they cannot be the ones who thirst. The ones who thirst are they who have not yet been saved; and this is not what is supposed to happen "in eternity".

The past fulfillment view allows for this seeming incongruity to be easily explained, because it fits very well in the context. With the preterist view the context is not violated by saying that this is in eternity. Finally, we would like to point out, in further defence of the preterist view, that the ending of chapter twenty two favors our view because of the last declaration of the Lord Himself: (v. 12) "And behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be." This is speaking of judgement, the judgement that occurred after the great tribulation of AD 70 (Matt. 16:27,28; Mark 8:38). These verses cannot be explained away; they speak of the judgement to occur when the Son of man comes in the glory of his Father. All this is in the context of "that generation", that is: the generation that was alive when He had spoken those words.

Conclusion

We can of course, ignore those clear words in the Bible; but we do so at our own peril. We could be guilty of calling Jesus a liar. This is very serious, so we urge you to be wise when considering these words, and let the Bible interpret the Bible. The words of our Lord were spoken in a very specific context, and that context was in "that generation". Explaining away these verses because we just can't believe that the second coming has already taken place, is not honest exegesis. Reading into the Scriptures what they do not say is eisegesis. "But the church has always believed this", is not an excuse. The word of God stands on it's own and doesn't need us to retain it's validity. Those who claim to take the word at face value, have a lot of explaining to do when they ignore those clear words of our Lord.