|Vol. 1, No. 10||Page 16||October 1999|
A.D. 70 Theory
Could you give me a little information on the doctrine of Kingism (70 A D)? ~ Norma PrestonApparently the A.D. 70 Theory predates its introduction into the churches of Christ, but has been popularized by Max R. King of Warren, Ohio. The proponents of this doctrine are militant. They have schooled several men over the years in this notion and sent them out to an often unsuspecting brotherhood. Their literature abounding with this one doctrine is plenteous. Consequently, several congregations where they have exerted any influence have been troubled and often divided over the A.D. 70 Theory.
On the surface, the A.D. 70 Theory hardly appears believable. It appears absurd that anyone would seriously consider such a doctrine. Especially religious people who usually exhibit a high regard for the authority of Godís Word and have intense familiarity with it would hardly be expected to be duped by such a thing. However, the A.D. 70 Theory has been embraced by many anyway. Part of the reason several have been susceptible to the persuasion of its proponents may be attributable to laxity in personal Bible study before hand.
The A.D. 70 Theory portrays all end-of-time events about which the Bible speaks as having already occurred at the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. For the proponents of this doctrine, all biblical prophecy is fulfilled. To accomplish this hermeneutically, its proponents have authored an entirely new vocabulary with which to replace biblical vocabulary. Any doctrine can seem plausible if one has the liberty to redefine the words of his choosing.
A.D. 70 Theory proponents believe that Jesus Christ and his apostles taught the imminent (then soon to occur) second coming of Jesus Christ. Yet, Jesus professed while on earth that he did not know when his second coming would occur (Matthew 24:36; Mark 13:32). The apostles Paul and Peter taught that our Lordís second coming would be as unexpected and at an unknown time as a thief in the night (1 Thessalonians 5:1-2; 2 Peter 3:10).
Those who advance the A.D. 70 Theory claim that remission of sins were not available in actuality following the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ on the cross. They, instead, argue that remission of sins was not proffered until the A.D. 70 destruction of the city of Jerusalem by the Romans. Of course, Scripture says differently. ďAnd you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his crossĒ (Colossians 2:14). The death of Christ (wherein he shed his divine blood), not the destruction of Jerusalem, was efficacious in taking away sins and redeeming souls (Hebrews 9:14; Ephesians 1:7; Acts 20:28; Revelation 1:5).
Adherents to the A.D. 70 Theory do not believe that Jesus Christ will return bodily. They imagine that our Lordís birth represents our Lordís only bodily coming and that his second coming was accomplished representatively by the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. They do not believe that Jesus is coming again! All prophetic promises are a matter of historyónothing is left to come.
Further, A.D. 70 Theory advocates do not believe in a bodily resurrection from the dead. They also claim that the final judgment and the end of the world occurred in A.D. 70 at Jerusalemís destruction. Every Scripture that pertains to end-of-time events has been recalibrated to correspond exclusively to A.D. 70 in Jerusalem at the horrific destruction of that city.
Several resources are available for a more thorough investigation
of the A.D. 70 Theory. These include: ďHas the Second Coming Occurred?Ē
(tract) by W. Terry Varner and Studies in Biblical Eschatology
by W. Terry Varner.