Kurt Simmons: It is no secret that Presence Ministries of Max R. King, who has built his built his writing career on the covenantal heavens and earth model, has gone over to Universalism. The number of articles and quotes that may be marshaled in support of this charge make it beyond successful refutation. Indeed, Presence Ministries feels no need to even deny the accusation by issuing a statement or disclaimer. We here provide quotes from Universalists of varying shades and colors, all of whom make happy use of the covenantal heavens and earth concept to advance their cause. The last quote is by Tim Martin; although not a Universalist, his theology nevertheless bears an obvious logical connection thereto. All the people quoted accept the basic covenantal heavens and earth model of King. Please note the progression of thought:
Tim King - “Simply stated, man is changed because his world changed. Man is reconciled to God because he no longer lives under the rule of sin and death as determined by the Mosaic world. Through the gift of Christ he dwells in a world of righteousness and life. The issue is cosmic and corporate, not individual and limited.” Tim King, Comprehensive Grace, 2005
Kevin Beck - “There’s no sin and no sin-related death in a world that has the New Jerusalem in it’s midst.” Kevin Beck, The Creation of Jerusalem, Feb, 08
David Timm - The second Adam (Christ) reversed all the spiritual separation brought by the first Adam, not just part of it…in the new world people are reconciled to God without any say in the matter. God loves all those that He has made in His image equally. David Timm, Grace Upon All, Oct. 2006
David Embury- "A man was who he was according to his 'world', and for the Jews their world centred around Yahweh - they were His people and He their God, and so by covenant. Who were the first-fruit believers in Paul's eyes? None other than the 'Body of Christ'. Having been crucified, buried and raised in Christ they were thus delivered out of the body of sin and death i.e., the Old Covenant world, or what we might call the 'Body of Moses' – Paul having spoken of "the fathers" being "baptized into Moses" etc. [can you see the train of thought?] The designation "the flesh" is not one facet of man as opposed to another part of man i.e., "the spirit", but rather "the flesh" speaks of man as a whole in a given mode or realm of existence, as does likewise the spirit. So Paul's spirit/flesh language was indicative of life under covenant, either of the "flesh" as in OC or of the "spirit" as in NC – reading Gal 3 and Phil 3 bears this out." David Embury, Plantet Preterist post, Friday, December 05 @ 20:23:16 PST
Ed Burely – “In spite of the fact that I do not believe that the first chapters of Genesis have anything to do with the physical creation (but instead with a covenant creation), I still will not buy an argument that says "young earth" but not with biblical evidence. A covenantal view of the bible's beginning, along with scientific data, speaks to me that this earth, and this universe is old." Ed Burely, Planet Preterist, Tuesday, November 13 @ 10:56:06 PST
Tim Martin - "Just as the formation of Israel and giving of the Law was the metaphorical creation of “heaven and earth,” so the destruction of the Judaic society, the Law, the priesthood, and temple would be the passing away of Israel’s “heaven and earth.” Tim Martin, Beyond Creation Science (unpublished manuscript version)
“Do you believe that there were any people outside of the garden at creation? If all were in the garden in God's first (what you take to be physical) creation, wouldn't that have implications for God's redemption?...As you can see, it could be that it's never been about us doing anything (right or wrong); it's always been about God redeeming his creation; not just small parts of it.” Tim Martin, Planet Preterist Post, Thursday, February 21 @ 09:48, 52:05 PST
“Redeeming all of his creation” means all in the “covenant creation” (“covenantal heavens and earth”). Thus, to avoid the Universalism inherent in placing all men in Revelation’s new heavens and earth (where these are interpreted as the New Testament), Martin is forced to place other men outside of his “covenantal garden of Eden.” Tim King and Kevin Beck, on the other hand, make no qualms that all mankind is redeemed in the new heavens and earth. Such is the mischief the covenantal heavens and earth model has wrought.
Conclusion
Established usage shows that “heavens and earth” were metaphors for thrones and dominions, peoples and nations. They have never had any covenantal signification in scripture. Preterists need to disabuse themselves of this erroneous idea.
The Sword & The Plow Vol. X, No. 3 – April 2008
Newsletter of the Bimillennial Preterist Association
