Tuesday, October 08, 2019

Beale on a Point Against Preterism

"Some preterists believe that the great tribulation was to take place before and during the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. But they do not adequately explain how the churches of Asia Minor would be affected by a future tribulation limited to Jerusalem or even to Palestine." (Beale, Revelation, 435)


  1. Maybe an immediate/later fulfillment paradigm?

  2. (1) The problem with that interpretive principle is it begins with a stacked deck and therefore impossible to be falsified. Whether you are discussing physics, philosophy, history, or theology, if your theory does not allow the theoretical possibility of being falsifiable with counter evidence, then that is an indication that the theory is invalid. In other words, it is impossible for there ever to be any evidence against that theory. To be sure, for a theoretical (or interpretive) principle to be falsifiable, it does not mean that it is necessarily false—it could be true. It just means that a valid theory or principle requires objective criteria that would allow it to be falsified if there were evidence. In fact, all true theories are falsifiable. One of the most common red flags of an unfalsifiable theory is circular reasoning.

    (2) The specific prophecy in this instance is construed by "AD 70 preterists" as having a specific fulfillment, ruling out a "later fulfillment." Hence, Beale's counter point.

    1. How could you falsify the principle of falsifiability?

    2. We have many unfalsifiable beliefs. The problem is not the unfalsifiability but the lack of evidence that justifies the belief.