Full Preterism and the Death Problem

Introduction

One of the mistakes people make in their consideration of full preterism is the mistake of thinking that it is a matter of simple chronological placement. You know, like how the dispensationalists have their pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib debates. What it all comes down to, the thinking goes, is where you put the arrow on the board when explaining your particular eschatological position, on say, the rapture.

But the full preterist position is far more radical than that. It affects absolutely everything, from Genesis on through to the end of Revelation. It represents a completely different worldview.

One of the doctrines that is radically altered by the idea that there will be no Second Coming is the idea of death. Not only will there be no final conquest of death, we also find that death existed prior to the Fall. Death is no longer the same kind of enemy . . . if it is to be considered and enemy at all.

Now I am not going to interact with any particular full preterist here, but rather I want to outline my understanding of Scripture when it comes to the subjects of entropy and death. I believe that what I will urge here will provide a stark contrast with the full preterist position.

But I don’t assume that it will affect all full preterists equally, because I know that they frequently disagree mightily amongst themselves. But I welcome that as well, because one of the arguments I have seen them use is that partial preterists differ among ourselves when it comes to this passage or that one. So consequently I applaud any dissent from within the full preterist camp, because if you all agree together then my argument here is made the stronger, and if you differ, then one of your arguments is made the weaker. All good to me.

Entropy in a Perfect World

What was the nature of perfection in the Garden of Eden? What did an unfallen world look like?

Too many Christians have the idea that a world without corruption would have to be a world made out of some kind of rubberoid plastic. Either that, or stainless steel. The idea is that a perfect world would necessarily have no entropy. Entropy is what happens when you go from an ordered state to a disordered state.

But we actually know that there had to have been entropy in the Garden before the Fall. Adam and Eve were told that they could eat from any tree in the Garden but one (Gen. 2:16-17). And when they did so, their teeth would break the fruit down in their mouths, and then enzymes would break it down further in their stomachs. When it came to that particular apple or orange, entropy increased. We are not told about the process continuing through to defecation, but there is no good reason not to assume it.

So much would seem to strengthen the idea that we could have had death before the Fall. In the process of digestion, bacteria die. And presumably leaves could die, and cover the forest floor. And the fruit that got eaten certainly dies.

What I believe we need to reject is the idea of agonistic death—pain and suffering. And the reason for this is that as God was creating the world, He repeatedly calls it “good.” Do we really want to make room for agonies as being part of a perfect world? Quite apart from where we locate Rev. 21:4, it is a picture of perfection—and there is no pain in it.

Would it have been wrong for a pre-fall Adam to kick the dog? Not because he was exasperated by anything, because that would have been sin, but rather just kicking the dog for fun? Think long before you answer.

So prior to the Fall we have room for entropy at some level—but it is not necessary to affirm that prior to the Fall it would have been impossible for Adam to shuffle a deck of cards. Shuffling a deck of cards increases randomization, which is entropy. Just imagine Adam shuffling the deck, and he kept coming up with four aces or royal flushes.

But entropy is really a big part of our problem in this fallen world. I draw this from Romans 8, where Paul says there was a point where the world was subjected to futility and bondage to decay (Rom. 8: 21-22). The created order was enslaved to corruption at a certain point in history, and at some future point in history, she will be delivered from that slavery. So it is not the presence of entropy (corruption), but rather enslavement to it.

Allow me to quote a string of verses that give us a sense of the kind of corruption that the creation is currently in bondage to, and which the created order will one day be delivered from.

So I take the Fall as being the point where entropy spiraled out of control. What had been a friend became an adversary. The river of entropy had been a beautiful river, but then it overflowed the banks.

We can see this problem clearly in the pages of Genesis. The idea that Adam was already going to die is belied by the fact that when God utters the curse as it applies to Adam, He tells him that “dust thou art and to dust thou shalt return”(Gen. 3:19). In addition, just a few verses later Adam is banished from the Garden because if he were to eat from the tree of life in his current condition, then he would live forever in that condition, cutting off hope of redemption. He would be stuck that way (Gen. 3:22).

The fact that the tree of life would enable him to live forever indicates that this was the original plan. Living forever was the plan because that tree was not the prohibited tree. And why would that tree make the fallen Adam live forever, and not do that for the unfallen Adam?

Of course, this would not preclude an unfallen Adam being promoted or translated upward, like Enoch or Elijah were. We do not have to assume that Adam would be standing there still, hoeing his bean patch. But any transformation would have to be something glorious. Dying, and going into the ground in order to decompose? Not a chance.

So when Romans 5 tells us that through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin (Rom. 5: 12), we know that we are talking about the kind of death that God referred to in the curse given to Adam. Dust thou art, and the live-forever tree is now closed off to you and your descendants . . . for the time being. Through Christ, we now have access to the tree of life once more (Rev. 2:7).

Getting this muddled up is a real problem for every sort of theistic evolution. They are constrained by their system to say that over the course of millions of years, death eventually produced Adam. Death ushered in Adam. But the Bible says that Adam ushered in death, and he did it by means of his sin. Adam was the horse, and death the cart. Not the other way.

So depend upon it. Any attempt to normalize death is at some level attempting to normalize sin. This is just “the way it is.” People have always died, people will always die, and we shouldn’t make such a big deal out of it.

But the fact of death is God making a big deal out of our sin.