Introduction
One of the seemingly strongest objections raised against the preterist view is the charge that it revives what Paul condemned as the “Hymenaean heresy.” In 2 Timothy 2, Paul warns about men who claimed that the resurrection was already past and who, in doing so, were overthrowing the faith of some. Because consistent preterism teaches that the resurrection was fulfilled in the first-century passing of the Old Covenant order, many assume this is precisely what Paul was condemning.
But was Paul really attacking the idea of resurrection being present in his own generation? Or was he addressing something more specific, a distortion tied to the struggle with Judaizers, who wanted to keep the old covenant system inside the new?
To answer this, we need to closely examine Paul’s letters. When we do, we discover that the Apostle Paul himself often spoke of resurrection as already at work, even while he looked forward to its consummation. This forces us to reconsider what Hymenaeus was teaching, why Paul opposed it, and how it fits into the larger story of covenant transition.
1. Why 2 Timothy 2 Sounds So Decisive
Many people appeal to 2 Timothy 2:17–18 whenever preterism is raised:
“And their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort, who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some.” (NKJV)
At first sight, it looks straightforward. Hymenaeus said the resurrection was already past. Preterists also say that the resurrection belongs to the first century. Doesn’t that settle the matter?
Not quite. When we step back and read Apostle Paul’s letters as a whole, a different picture emerges.
2. Paul on Resurrection as a Present Reality
Paul did not speak of resurrection strictly as a forthcoming hope. He also spoke of it as a reality believers were already experiencing.
Romans 6:4 (NKJV): “Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.”
In this verse from the letter to the Romans, Paul equates being raised from the dead with walking newness of life.
Ephesians 2:5–6 (NKJV): “Even when we were dead in trespasses, [God] made us alive together with Christ … and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus.”
Colossians 2:12 (NKJV): “Buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.”
Colossians 3:1 (NKJV): “If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God.”
The message is consistent: believers were already raised with Christ. Resurrection was not simply future, it was present, real, and transformative.
3. Not a Question of Empty Graves
Opponents of preterism often quote 2 Timothy 2 with the assumption that the Apostle Paul was pointing out the obvious, namely that the resurrection couldn’t have been past for the simple reason that we haven’t seen the tombs emptied and bodies raised as a final global event.
If resurrection in this context was simply about empty graves, then why was the Apostle Paul making references to a seemingly unrelated matter?
2 Timothy 2:17-19 (NKJV): And their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort, 18 who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some. Nevertheless the solid foundation of God stands, having this seal: “The Lord knows those who are His,” and, “Let everyone who names the name of Christ depart from iniquity.”
As we can see in 2 Timothy 2, the Apostle Paul quotes Numbers 16:5: “The LORD will show who is His and who is holy.” That passage addresses Korah’s rebellion, a conflict over who truly belonged to the Lord, or in other words who truly were the people of God. Paul’s response makes clear that the real issue was covenant identity.
This fits with the main conflict that runs through Paul’s ministry: the struggle with Judaizers. Israelites who accepted Christ but refused to let go of the Mosaic law. They forced the old covenant system on new covenant faith. Paul resisted them at every turn, because their teaching undermined the gospel of grace.
Galatians 5:1–4 (NKJV): Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage. Indeed I, Paul, say to you that if you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing. … You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.
In the following verse, Paul is also clearly drawing a distinction in terms of covenant identity, reminding believers that in Christ is the true circumcision, those who worship God in the Spirit, renouncing the works of the flesh and revealing the true purpose of his reference to Korah’s rebellion in the context of the Hymanean heresy.
Philippians 3:2–3 (NKJV): Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the mutilation! For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.
Here’s another excerpt where Paul clearly draws the distinction between the righteousness in Christ and the self-righteousness sought through the futile works of the law:
Romans 10:3–4 (NKJV): For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and seeking to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted to the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.
4. Why Hymenaeus Fits the Judaizer Pattern
Paul’s battles, letter after letter, centered on the same problem, Judaizers. It is natural to read 2 Timothy in that same light. By quoting Numbers 16, Paul places the discussion in covenant terms, not in terms of graves and bodies.
A Judaizer could easily argue, “Christ has risen, so resurrection has come; Israel, with the Law still intact, is part of it.” In this way he could call resurrection complete while keeping the old covenant in force. Whereas the bible clearly teaches as I illustrate in the next section that indeed the resurrection, or the transition to the new covenant is achieved with the complete passing of the old, which consummated in the 70AD destruction of the temple, the final boss of the old covenant system.
Paul’s other warnings match this. Colossians 2:16–17 speaks of sabbaths and festivals as “a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.” In Philippians 3:3 he insists, “For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.” Hymenaeus stands in that same stream of opposition.
Seen this way, his message strengthened the Judaizing agenda. It declared resurrection finished while leaving the Old Covenant still standing.
This helps us understand why Peter, writing later, warned about those who said, “Where is the promise of His coming?” (2 Peter 3:4). Both Paul and Peter were facing voices that distorted the timing and meaning of God’s promises, either by moving them prematurely or by keeping the old system alive.
The scoffers in 2 peter 3 were undermining the work of Christ by indicating that things haven’t changed since the fathers, and from a pre-consummation perspective, people who were back then anticipating the imminent Parousia could have been deceived by these attempts in such a way that would make them doubt the work of Christ, yet Peter again re-establishes first century believers in the promises of God, calling to patience and diligence.
The parallel here is striking. Exploring that connection to its full extent will need its own discussion, which I will leave for another article.
5. Resurrection Consummated with the Passing of the Old
The bible clearly illustrates that resurrection could not be fully complete as long as the old order remained, pointing to a back then anticipated imminent consummation. Here are clear pointers in scripture:
Hebrews 9:8–10 (NKJV): “The Holy Spirit indicating this, that the way into the Holiest of All was not yet made manifest while the first tabernacle was still standing.”
The same theme begins earlier in the letter to the Hebrews
Hebrews 8:13 (NKJV): “In that He says, ‘A new covenant,’ He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.”
The same theme also emerges in Paul’s second letter to the Corinthians, where Paul pushes the point on how the Ministry of the Spirit (Life in Christ) is much more glorious than the back then “passing away” Ministry of Death (In the Law).
2 Corinthians 3:11 (NKJV): “For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious.”
At this point it’s clear that the theme of covenantal transition is not a side topic, but the core of Paul’s ministry.
1 Corinthians 15:56 (NKJV): “The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law.” As long as the Law remained, death still had power.
Now revisiting old testament prophecy, how much clearly does the described foretell the message of Paul and the reality of the first century?
Daniel 12:7: “When the power of the holy people has been completely shattered, all these things shall be finished.”
The message is consistent: resurrection could not be consummated while the Old Covenant stood. It reached completion when that system finally collapsed. That took place in A.D. 70 with the destruction of the temple and the end of the old covenant order.
6. Conclusion
Second Timothy 2:17–18 is not a simple refutation of preterism. Paul spoke of resurrection as both already present and not yet consummated. Hymenaeus’ error was not saying resurrection had begun but claiming it was already finished while the Old Covenant was still in force.
Paul’s citation of Numbers 16 makes the issue one of covenant identity, the very same struggle he faced everywhere against the Judaizers. Hymenaeus was not teaching covenantal fulfillment in Christ. He was teaching a version of Judaizing, declaring resurrection complete while still binding believers to the old system.
In Paul’s thought, resurrection is covenantal transformation: life from the death brought by the Law. That transformation reached its consummation only when the Old Covenant vanished. Far from being “Hymenaean heresy,” this understanding brings Paul’s writings together and shows the New Testament’s story of covenant transition in its fullness.
And as 2 Peter 3 shows, Paul was not alone. The apostles together confronted distortions of God’s promises, whether by denial or by misplacement. That parallel deserves closer attention, which I will return to in a future article.
