Thanks a lot Dear Mr. Don Preston.. He open my eyes. His book helped me to overcome from a lot of misunderstanding and superstitions... He is really a blessed man. He is a gift of God. Many are deceived by man made churches but when they understand the truth..they will set free...we can realize the real freedom in Christ.
I'm at the 38 minute mark and have been listening to Wallace for 10 minutes and he has yet to mention any Scripture. Does he not know this is a debate on eschatology? I think he might have asked Preston for the debate when he found out he was in town on a short notice thinking Preston would decline such a short notice. To his surprise he is quickly learning Preston is always ready to defend his stance (1 Peter 3:15).
Thanks to Don for helping me understand the scriptures better. Jason seems to only appeal to his traditions and creeds, and you can see that Jason is not thinking for himself, but only repeating what his traditions and creeds say. I much prefer to think for myself and ask the hard questions and find the answers. Don provides a path for understanding and explanation, rather than just saying that is not what I was taught growing up.
I'm Amill, but listening to Jason Wallace spend over 5 mins of his opening statement critiquing Dispensationalism in a debate against Preterism makes me groan.
I've been growing in understanding, and receiving full preterism and I've been in Dispensatinal for decades. Thank you for your devotion to scripture and not creeds or circumstances.
1:07:55 -Mr Wallace said he came prepared for a whole host of arguments except the main argument of preterism??? Really? I think Mr Wallace thought this would be a slam dunk and realized mid way that he was not prepared at all.
Not trying to be malicious, but Mr. Wallace, for all his sincerity, did not make once single coherent argument, point, or rebuttal. His entire modus operandi was argument from incredulity and to simply "declare" that things did not "fit"... He would do well to actually READ some of Mr. Preston's books to acquaint himself with the subject matter. Then, at least, he might have some grounds from which to even disagree with Don's position.
Thanks Mr. Preston. Always let The Word speak. Never go along to get along with the majority who refuse to let the Scriptures speak for themeselfs. God Bless my Brothers in Christ Jesus!!!
I couldn't help but feel sorry for Jason Wallace in this debate. I'm sure he's a very nice man but he obviously just wasn't up to it. Don wiped the floor with him. The amazing thing is that Pastor Wallace was the one who wanted the debate. Unbelievable!
49:40 Bam! Right there Dr. Preston says exactly what I was thinking. Why is Mr. Wallace spending so much time chatting about how he doesn't support dispensationalism?? He could have been exegeting scripture...
As someone who is on the fence between partial and full preterism I am very disappointed that jason didn't even attempt to defend his view from scripture. Don did a good job but wasn't even challenged
Putting aside that Jason is not a good debater, Jason presented mainly 3 arguments. 1) Full Preterism is not consistent with all of scripture. 2) Scripture quoting does not prove sound doctrine. 3) I don't really know.....Don did a fantastic job at being precise as to his Scriptural argument and James used the excuse "We did not come to debate Daniel but the 2nd coming of Christ" to avoid having to agree with Don's argument. A debate means you debate whatever comes up and I just think James was not as convincing scripturally although he did bring out some good points at times. The debate ended up being a debate of partial vs. full preterism in which Don continually asserted that Daniel 12 shows the resurrection occurring at the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 which I agree is the best argument one could make for full preterism. I learned more from Don than Jason but I do appreciate Jason. I am not a full Preterist yet I learn more from full than partial Preterist usually. Thanks
Don Preston did a great job presenting preterism. Jason Wallace did not do so well representing his side. I didn't care for the wicked tone of snideness he exuded or his 'I've been caught getting up to no good' countenance. Lol. Having said that I'm pretty sure Don Preston loses points for referencing the book of Jack Daniel around the 21:50 minute mark. Lol. No, but the truth has definitely come to light and it's funny how it contrasts with the darkness of confusion so starkly. Those in error often seem so unfriendly and falsely cordial, it stands out against the composure and congeniality of the correct. This isn't a rule but more often than not error is perpetuate by stubborn ignorance so it only follows. But we all learn and grow so far as we're willing to go.
Dr Preston brilliantly presented his argument using only what the Bible said, meshing Daniel and the New Testament sections. Wallace couldn’t refute anything
Jason's last argument...trust the church. Read the creeds, read (insert cherry picked church father). Sadly, with all his reading he still can't vocalize a solid biblical rebuttal. Seems he is blindly following the faction of Christianity he feels most comfortable (indoctrinated) to trust.
Wow. Don just nailed it! This was my aha moment years ago and watching it again now I am just so thankful for Don and the impact he had on my faith. Now the Bible finally makes sense! Jesus did exactly what he said he would do exactly when he said he would❤️. Don is the GOAT!🎉🙏.
Preterist, do you really believe in Preterism? Then PLEASE read this. Here are some big problems for the preterist view. If the Millennium happened in the first century from 30AD to 70AD when did this happen? Isaiah 65:20 says, “Never again WILL THERE BE in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his years; the one who dies at a hundred WILL BE thought a mere child; the one who fails to reach a hundred WILL BE considered accursed." This is a prophecy of a FUTURE event, from Isaiah's writing, notice the words WILL BE. When Isaiah was written in 8 BC, the life expectancy was 20-30 years, so from the time it was written until NOW, there has NEVER been a time when this was true: "Never again WILL THERE BE in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his years; the one who dies at a hundred WILL BE thought a mere child; the one who fails to reach a hundred WILL BE considered accursed." These things are CLEARLY A REFERENCE to a future Millennial period. It has to be future from us for this to be true in any sense of the word. Isaiah 11:6 says, "The wolf WILL live with the lamb, the leopard WILL lie down with the goat, the calf and the lion and the yearling together; and a little child WILL lead them." This is a reference to a FUTURE time (notice the word WILL over and over) when the carnivorous nature of animals will be no more. From the time Adam and Eve sinned until RIGHT NOW there have been carnivorous animals. We know this has to be a reference to the Millennial Reign. AND there has NEVER been a time when this happened. It absolutely has to be FUTURE from us right now. Think this through, logically, but first take off your preterist-lensed glasses.
Jason says that Preterism is not valid because no one has understood it until recently. But yet he would claim that the scroll in Daniel that was told to be sealed until the end was not fully revealed until centuries later. It's perfectly biblical for doctrine to be unfolded over time.
A complete shutout. Wallace had no business on the stage wasting Don's time. To refute the closest thing Jason had to a point: He thinks that Preterism was invented in the 1960s by Max King. WRONG. Just for starters: 1826 : Thomas Brown - A History of the Origin and Progress of the Doctrine of Universal Salvation 1832: Thomas Whittemore: Notes and Illustrations of the Parables of the New Testament 1843 : Adin Ballou - The True Scriptural Doctrine of the Second Advent, an Effectual Antidote to Millerism 1843 : Thomas B. Thayer - Universalist Miscellany The "Coming" "Appearing" "Revelation" &c. in Scriptural Usage1845 Review: Dr. David Thom - Three Grand Expositions of Man's Enmity to God The history of both New and Old Covenant Israel is a constant flow into error and correction. The fact that much/most/(almost) all of the Church has had its eschatology wrong for a long time can be freely granted as it has no bearing on the correctness of the doctrine.
I sure enjoyed the girl's music pieces during the breaks! Nothing more beautiful than sister's singing together, their voices harmonize so perfectly...
When answering the question about the dangers of preterism, pastor Wallace said Preterists eventually become universalists. I presume he thinks the reverse is also true. Well. I must confess that after two years of difficult struggle with full preterist propositions I ran across John Noe's book Hell Yes, Hell No and, once again, felt a veil being possibly lifted from my eyes. I've been struggling with it (Evangelical Universalism) for about 6 months now. Mind you, I'm talking about the Christ-centered, cross-necessitating brand. I can't really see a connection between preterism and universalism at the moment to explain why I'm on this journey. Are any of you other commenters having a similar experience?
I love to see Don defend his position. He always does such a fantastic job presenting his argument with scriptural evidence. I do wish though, that he didn't spend quite as much time as he did being annoyed with Jason's misunderstanding of how a debate works. I do understand that Dr. Preston is so careful to follow the protocol of debate ethics, and Jason somewhat ignored them. I wish in Preston's second turn at the mic he would have used more of his time exposing Jason's lack of position instead of his lack of obedience to the debate rules. I believe he had a similar response in his debate with Brian Schwertly. I know it is frustrating for Don to have to put up with this, but I would like to hear more about the issues of the debate and less about the issues with the other debater. I do understand the frustration though. All in all though, Don did a fantastic job dealing with Jason's snarky responses, his heavy breathing while Don was talking, along with all of his head shaking at everything Don said. Don handled himself as a gentlemen as usual. I would have shown my frustration much more than Don had I been in his shoes. I really liked Don's point about 1 John 3:2 1 John 3:2 (NASB) 2 Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is. So, even after John witnessed Jesus ascend into heaven, he didn't know what his own body will be after the resurrection. At least that's what I take from the passage. John knew exactly what Jesus looked like during the ascension, however it seems that John understood there to have been a change that took place afterward. Maybe it has to do with John's understanding of 1 Cor. 15 (1Co 15:50 NASB) Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. Copenator
Regarding the discussion about Antiochus Ephiphanes vs. the events of AD 70 around 1:30.... Jason seems unable or unwilling to answer WHAT EVENTS would meet the qualifications of Daniel 12:7 where the "power of the holy people" is shattered. He seems to suggest that Antiochus Ephiphanes desecration of the temple and slaughter of some of the people was a "foreshadow" of Daniel's fulfillment...but he NEVER ONCE DIRECTLY answers Don's question about what event WOULD fulfill the prophecy about the resurrection in Daniel. Finally, he casts the prophecy of Daniel into the realm of imagery that apparently (in his mind, at least) cannot be understood... simply amazing!
Bothers me seeing Jason expressions with his face and head, very des respectful and ignorant at the same time. He expend all the debate making assumptions and acting so ridiculous like he was sure of what he was talking about. Ridiculous.
I really wanted Jason to present a more coherent statement, as some of Dons positions leave me with questions. Mr. Preston knows his stuff and mowed over yet another debater.
EDIT: I have removed the erroneous quote t I had formerly understood was a direct quote from Eusebius' Theophania. However, this was an error on my part as it was a quote from Samuel Lee, D.D. in a disertation ABOUT Theophania circa 1843. My resources indicated it was genuinely from Eusebius and I had no reason to doubt. But further checking discovered this to be false. Sorry for the confusion. However, the argument I originally made in favor of the Preterist view being far older than Mr. Wallace and many others insist can be supported by other direct quotes of Eusebius, such as this one from Theophania: "But the things which took place afterwards, did our Saviour, from his foreknowledge as THE WORD or GOD, foretell should come to pass, by means of those which are (now) before us. For He named the whole Jewish people, the children of the City; and the Temple, He styled their House. And thus He testified, that they should, on their own wicked account, bear the vengeance thus to be inflicted. And, it is right we should wonder at the fulfilment of this prediction, since at no time did this place undergo such an entire desolation as this was. He pointed out moreover, the cause of their desolation when He said, “If thou hadst known, even in this day, the things of thy peace:” intimating too His own coming, which should be for the peace of the whole world. But, when ye shall see it reduced by armies, know ye that which comes upon it, to be a final and full desolation and destruction. He designates the desolation of Jerusalem, by the destruction of the Temple, and the laying aside of those services which were, according to the law of Moses, formerly performed within it. The manner moreover of the captivity, points out the war. of which He spoke; “For (said He) there shall be (great) tribulation upon the land, and great wrath upon this people : and they shall fall by the edge of the sword.” We can learn too, from the writings of Flavius Josephus, how these things took place in their localities, and how those, which had been foretold by our Saviour, were, in fact, fulfilled. On this account He said, “Let those who are in its borders not enter into it, since these are the days of vengeance, that all may be fulfilled which has been written.” Any one therefore, who desires it, may learn the results of these things from the writings of Josephus." ---Eusebius, Theophania, Book IV, paragraph 18--- Source: undeception.com/is-full-preterism-a-new-doctrine/
Jason Wallace begins his “refutation” of preterism, by discussing dispensationalism. The whole purpose of the straw man in a “straw man argument” is to knock it down. Good job Jason you knocked down the straw man that had NOTHING to do with Mr Preston’s impeccable exegetical discussion of the basis of letting scripture interpret scripture, you know “sola scriptura “ the Bible scholars put the correlating OT texts in the NT margins and vise versa, because they directly correlate, even more they are direct fulfillment’s.
One thing that drives me bonkers are word-salad people like Pastor Jason. Word-salad people argue like this: they toss a whole lot of words up in the air, do a little circular reasoning, adding a pinch of sarcasm and some name calling and put downs in for good measure, but they never do get around to answering a single question. If Jason should need a second career, he’d make a great tap dancer or politician 🥴
42:00....Why in the world would the angel tell them that if they weren't even going to be around when he came back?? Think about it people. Why would the angel tell MEN that who would have to be 2000+ years old to be able to see him come again?
PRETERISTS take away from the words of the book of prophecy. Revelation 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
I love Jason as a brother in Christ, I honestly do. But I get the feeling he is teaching his side more because he feels it is required, rather than because he has a love for truth. Does that make sense?
Rev. 1/7 Behold, he comes with clouds; and every eye shall see him, ((and they also which pierced him)) and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. Case Proven :)
Wow. I'm a fairly new adherent to preterism, and I actually expected that this debate might present some actual challenges that I might have to do further research on. But the futurist made no coherent, logical argument at all. Mr. Preston approached the task with complete preparation, and you can tell that he has actually dedicated time to get to the bottom of these issues. Fascinating.
I listened to this entire debate and here is my quick response: This was not a debate on Preterism, it was a debate mostly on Dispensationism. Unfortunate!
PRETERISTS take away from the words of the book of prophecy. Revelation 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
What is this nonsense about how no one thought this way for 1800 years. Where is the proof of that? What about the idea that this simply doesn't work in the totality of the entire work... Proof please. Where can you show us that? I'm concerned about this thinking - that we knew such and such and your ideas are bad because we didn't already know them - !!! That's simply insane. Even Einstein said that we are all as young school children with ideas but no complete knowledge of truth. C'mon man. ❤ great debate
Jason Wallace, I might say, Don K Preston ' almost puersuadist me to be a preterist '. Keep at it, Wallace is on his way to Preterism. Some of us just don't get it all like Don does...lol
42:34....well. you would have to admit that "soon" means "soon" then too Jason. And "quickly" "Time is at hand" These are all terms used to describe to this audience on when he would return.
This is a topic I've been thinking about a lot lately. I see partial preterism, but not sure about full preterism. I have some pretty complex questions. I'd like to hear what some of you think. My first question is...if full preterism is true, then how does the Bible relate to us today? Also, the Bible says that we are to walk as Jesus walked. Jesus kept the OT law. Doesn't that mean that we should do the same? I understand that preterism believes that the law is no longer required for us to keep, but how does this idea match up with the Scriptures? (Note: I am not keeping the law. Just trying to think things out). Next, I'm wondering how full preterism can explain the promise that God made to Abraham. He promised him a physical land, and Abraham has not inherited that land. How can a full preterist explain this? If the resurrection has already occurred, as Don K Preston says, then are believers today going to be resurrected when we die? Will there be a judgment day for all of mankind? Obviously, I have lots of questions. I'm sure they'll require some lengthy responses, but if anyone wishes to respond, I'd be appreciative. Thanks.
I would love to communicate with you on these questions! However, the youtube comment section is not the best place. If you are interested, send an email to truthsearchpodcast@gmail.com, and I will give you several ways to contact me.
Pastor Jason behaved in a rude, curt, and immature manner. He failed to construct any counter arguments. He cut Dr. Preston off repeatedly. He interrupted him repeatedly. He was ill prepared. He kept saying that Dr. Preston's argument didn't work but didn't demonstrate that even once!
I think it should have been the audience to cross examine both speakers and let the audience walk away with something learned from their cross examinations. This church practice of sitting there and learn with a passive state of mind needs to stop across all churches. church sermons needs to be more interactive to develop its listeners and not just sit and accept all my false teaching theology. We need to ask questions too.
Good grief. Can we hear Jason actually debate the subject? He continues to tell us that this is “flawed” and this doesn’t “add up”, but he won’t tell why exactly it doesn’t add up and why it’s flawed... He’s talking about everything EXCEPT the topic. HORRIBLE HORRIBLE debating.
Jason Wallace, I can see your points and hear you speak but I only see a dead man talking. I witnessed my father, a pastor, change from death to life, hatred to love, a man full of passion. Jason, where is that passion and love? I see no life in your bones! However, I do see that same love and passion in Don Preston. It's not what Don Preston says, knows, believes, teaches, or even how he says it. It is a light that shows through his human clay irregardless of his fallen state. It is the love for others, of the Truth, and most importantly of our Christ. Jason, please accept the salvation that Yeshua came, suffered, and died to provide to you. You can experience that change for yourself. Love calls to all. I will be praying for you.
Mr. Jason might not be a good debator but I still appreciate his stand point that everything that Mr. Preston said ISN'T TRUE DOES which is very Right . Coz the generation in 70 AD is not the so called " wicked generations "
I dont see how that poor guy has a chance at winning this bible debate when Don Preston is always confusing him with all those damn bible verses all the time!!
1:46:25...Don has an answer for everything...he won't even let him respond to it.....We are getting into late rounds and Jason is almost done....he's barely hanging on...
+apstlcpwr Pastor Wallace was not prepared. There are much more effective rebuttals to Preterist interpretations than just basically saying that the Bible is too nuanced to expect "that to mean just that." Having said that, I think Dr. Preston could have more impact with a smaller delivery hammer. I don't mean less scripture, I mean just a touch quieter and slower. And his direct attack on an obviously wounded opponent was a little putting off. That caused Pastor Wallace to counter attack in some ways. Although Pastor Wallace did imply up front that Preterism was sophomoric even compared to dispensationalism.
People, including myself, are scared of dying, whether Jesus came or not. He knows all this and how hard it is for the believer to admit this fear. Its therefore understandable that both Don Preston and Jason Wallace can't and won't budge from their views. This is an emotional topic folks.
Thanks a lot Dear Mr. Don Preston.. He open my eyes. His book helped me to overcome from a lot of misunderstanding and superstitions... He is really a blessed man. He is a gift of God. Many are deceived by man made churches but when they understand the truth..they will set free...we can realize the real freedom in Christ.
Death for the believers has been destroyed. We go from this life into heaven. Eternal life
I must say this, nobody knows this stuff quite like Don K Preston does. I really think Don K Preston is a genious.
I'm at the 38 minute mark and have been listening to Wallace for 10 minutes and he has yet to mention any Scripture. Does he not know this is a debate on eschatology? I think he might have asked Preston for the debate when he found out he was in town on a short notice thinking Preston would decline such a short notice. To his surprise he is quickly learning Preston is always ready to defend his stance (1 Peter 3:15).
I’m an atheist but can still appreciate the debating prowess of Don.
And why would you be an Atheist?
Thanks to Don for helping me understand the scriptures better. Jason seems to only appeal to his traditions and creeds, and you can see that Jason is not thinking for himself, but only repeating what his traditions and creeds say. I much prefer to think for myself and ask the hard questions and find the answers. Don provides a path for understanding and explanation, rather than just saying that is not what I was taught growing up.
I'm Amill, but listening to Jason Wallace spend over 5 mins of his opening statement critiquing Dispensationalism in a debate against Preterism makes me groan.
It’s clear what the truth is and Don Preston broke it down clearly
I almost felt bad for Jason lol! He was in way over his head with Don.
I've been growing in understanding, and receiving full preterism and I've been in Dispensatinal for decades. Thank you for your devotion to scripture and not creeds or circumstances.
1:07:55 -Mr Wallace said he came prepared for a whole host of arguments except the main argument of preterism??? Really? I think Mr Wallace thought this would be a slam dunk and realized mid way that he was not prepared at all.
Don Preston nailed it as always
Not trying to be malicious, but Mr. Wallace, for all his sincerity, did not make once single coherent argument, point, or rebuttal. His entire modus operandi was argument from incredulity and to simply "declare" that things did not "fit"... He would do well to actually READ some of Mr. Preston's books to acquaint himself with the subject matter. Then, at least, he might have some grounds from which to even disagree with Don's position.
Thanks Mr. Preston. Always let The Word speak. Never go along to get along with the majority who refuse to let the Scriptures speak for themeselfs. God Bless my Brothers in Christ Jesus!!!
Too bad James White won't debate Don Preston.
Amazing presentation Don!
I couldn't help but feel sorry for Jason Wallace in this debate. I'm sure he's a very nice man but he obviously just wasn't up to it. Don wiped the floor with him.
The amazing thing is that Pastor Wallace was the one who wanted the debate. Unbelievable!
Don, that was awesome!
New Testament clearly teaches Jesus was supposed to come back in the first century. Not sure why people make up these elaborate end times scenarios.
49:40 Bam! Right there Dr. Preston says exactly what I was thinking. Why is Mr. Wallace spending so much time chatting about how he doesn't support dispensationalism?? He could have been exegeting scripture...
Amazing how Preston knows the Bible so well, he doesn't even need one. He is saying all this from memory. He has to be a genious.
I love Dr. Preston, he's so kind.
Man Don crushed this poor guy...
As someone who is on the fence between partial and full preterism I am very disappointed that jason didn't even attempt to defend his view from scripture. Don did a good job but wasn't even challenged
Putting aside that Jason is not a good debater, Jason presented mainly 3 arguments. 1) Full Preterism is not consistent with all of scripture. 2) Scripture quoting does not prove sound doctrine. 3) I don't really know.....Don did a fantastic job at being precise as to his Scriptural argument and James used the excuse "We did not come to debate Daniel but the 2nd coming of Christ" to avoid having to agree with Don's argument. A debate means you debate whatever comes up and I just think James was not as convincing scripturally although he did bring out some good points at times. The debate ended up being a debate of partial vs. full preterism in which Don continually asserted that Daniel 12 shows the resurrection occurring at the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 which I agree is the best argument one could make for full preterism. I learned more from Don than Jason but I do appreciate Jason. I am not a full Preterist yet I learn more from full than partial Preterist usually. Thanks
Don Preston did a great job presenting preterism. Jason Wallace did not do so well representing his side. I didn't care for the wicked tone of snideness he exuded or his 'I've been caught getting up to no good' countenance. Lol. Having said that I'm pretty sure Don Preston loses points for referencing the book of Jack Daniel around the 21:50 minute mark. Lol. No, but the truth has definitely come to light and it's funny how it contrasts with the darkness of confusion so starkly. Those in error often seem so unfriendly and falsely cordial, it stands out against the composure and congeniality of the correct. This isn't a rule but more often than not error is perpetuate by stubborn ignorance so it only follows. But we all learn and grow so far as we're willing to go.
Ture
Dr Preston brilliantly presented his argument using only what the Bible said, meshing Daniel and the New Testament sections. Wallace couldn’t refute anything
Jason's last argument...trust the church. Read the creeds, read (insert cherry picked church father). Sadly, with all his reading he still can't vocalize a solid biblical rebuttal. Seems he is blindly following the faction of Christianity he feels most comfortable (indoctrinated) to trust.
Songs were beautiful🌸💐🌸Thank You
Don Preston always the gentleman, bravo, you did a great job as always!
what a great presentation of preterism. Thank you Don Preston. Almost felt sorry for Jason Wallace... not really but almost.
Wow. Don just nailed it! This was my aha moment years ago and watching it again now I am just so thankful for Don and the impact he had on my faith. Now the Bible finally makes sense! Jesus did exactly what he said he would do exactly when he said he would❤️. Don is the GOAT!🎉🙏.
In the preterist view, when does Revelation 21:2 take place? "And I saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God."
Preterist, do you really believe in Preterism? Then PLEASE read this.
Here are some big problems for the preterist view. If the Millennium happened in the first century from 30AD to 70AD when did this happen? Isaiah 65:20 says, “Never again WILL THERE BE in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his years; the one who dies at a hundred WILL BE thought a mere child; the one who fails to reach a hundred WILL BE considered accursed."
This is a prophecy of a FUTURE event, from Isaiah's writing, notice the words WILL BE.
When Isaiah was written in 8 BC, the life expectancy was 20-30 years, so from the time it was written until NOW, there has NEVER been a time when this was true: "Never again WILL THERE BE in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not live out his years; the one who dies at a hundred WILL BE thought a mere child; the one who fails to reach a hundred WILL BE considered accursed."
These things are CLEARLY A REFERENCE to a future Millennial period. It has to be future from us for this to be true in any sense of the word.
Isaiah 11:6 says, "The wolf WILL live with the lamb, the leopard WILL lie down with the goat, the calf and the lion and the yearling together; and a little child WILL lead them." This is a reference to a FUTURE time (notice the word WILL over and over) when the carnivorous nature of animals will be no more.
From the time Adam and Eve sinned until RIGHT NOW there have been carnivorous animals. We know this has to be a reference to the Millennial Reign. AND there has NEVER been a time when this happened. It absolutely has to be FUTURE from us right now.
Think this through, logically, but first take off your preterist-lensed glasses.
Jason says that Preterism is not valid because no one has understood it until recently. But yet he would claim that the scroll in Daniel that was told to be sealed until the end was not fully revealed until centuries later. It's perfectly biblical for doctrine to be unfolded over time.
Don Preston: I need to find a pen
Me: SOMEBODY GIVE HIM A PEN!!
🤣😂
A complete shutout. Wallace had no business on the stage wasting Don's time.
To refute the closest thing Jason had to a point:
He thinks that Preterism was invented in the 1960s by Max King. WRONG. Just for starters:
1826 : Thomas Brown - A History of the Origin and Progress of the Doctrine of Universal Salvation
1832: Thomas Whittemore: Notes and Illustrations of the Parables of the New Testament
1843 : Adin Ballou - The True Scriptural Doctrine of the Second Advent, an Effectual Antidote to Millerism
1843 : Thomas B. Thayer - Universalist Miscellany The "Coming" "Appearing" "Revelation" &c. in Scriptural Usage1845 Review: Dr. David Thom - Three Grand Expositions of Man's Enmity to God
The history of both New and Old Covenant Israel is a constant flow into error and correction. The fact that much/most/(almost) all of the Church has had its eschatology wrong for a long time can be freely granted as it has no bearing on the correctness of the doctrine.
Ok, I'm at the 33:00 mark in this video and I'm starting to wonder if Jason thinks he's debating a dispensationalist
Ouch! I feel badly for this brother…there’s a time to just honorably submit…this is one of them.
Thank you for posting this!
I sure enjoyed the girl's music pieces during the breaks! Nothing more beautiful than sister's singing together, their voices harmonize so perfectly...
Don mopped the floor with Jason
No one will want to debate Don after this. He knows his bible too well.
When answering the question about the dangers of preterism, pastor Wallace said Preterists eventually become universalists. I presume he thinks the reverse is also true.
Well. I must confess that after two years of difficult struggle with full preterist propositions I ran across John Noe's book Hell Yes, Hell No and, once again, felt a veil being possibly lifted from my eyes. I've been struggling with it (Evangelical Universalism) for about 6 months now. Mind you, I'm talking about the Christ-centered, cross-necessitating brand.
I can't really see a connection between preterism and universalism at the moment to explain why I'm on this journey. Are any of you other commenters having a similar experience?
I love to see Don defend his position. He always does such a fantastic job presenting his argument with scriptural evidence. I do wish though, that he didn't spend quite as much time as he did being annoyed with Jason's misunderstanding of how a debate works. I do understand that Dr. Preston is so careful to follow the protocol of debate ethics, and Jason somewhat ignored them. I wish in Preston's second turn at the mic he would have used more of his time exposing Jason's lack of position instead of his lack of obedience to the debate rules. I believe he had a similar response in his debate with Brian Schwertly. I know it is frustrating for Don to have to put up with this, but I would like to hear more about the issues of the debate and less about the issues with the other debater. I do understand the frustration though.
All in all though, Don did a fantastic job dealing with Jason's snarky responses, his heavy breathing while Don was talking, along with all of his head shaking at everything Don said. Don handled himself as a gentlemen as usual. I would have shown my frustration much more than Don had I been in his shoes.
I really liked Don's point about 1 John 3:2
1 John 3:2 (NASB) 2 Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is.
So, even after John witnessed Jesus ascend into heaven, he didn't know what his own body will be after the resurrection. At least that's what I take from the passage. John knew exactly what Jesus looked like during the ascension, however it seems that John understood there to have been a change that took place afterward. Maybe it has to do with John's understanding of 1 Cor. 15
(1Co 15:50 NASB) Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.
Copenator
I love your rebuttal that he spoke about dispensation brother Don you were in beast mode
Jason got owned, unfortunately, he wouldn't know it, because he knows he is right.
Jason was so weak and so not prepared for this debate.
Regarding the discussion about Antiochus Ephiphanes vs. the events of AD 70 around 1:30.... Jason seems unable or unwilling to answer WHAT EVENTS would meet the qualifications of Daniel 12:7 where the "power of the holy people" is shattered. He seems to suggest that Antiochus Ephiphanes desecration of the temple and slaughter of some of the people was a "foreshadow" of Daniel's fulfillment...but he NEVER ONCE DIRECTLY answers Don's question about what event WOULD fulfill the prophecy about the resurrection in Daniel. Finally, he casts the prophecy of Daniel into the realm of imagery that apparently (in his mind, at least) cannot be understood... simply amazing!
"Im not a debater" - Jason
THEN DONT DEBATE!
well done Don! always handle yourself well, and love your use of SCRIPTURE!!
Bothers me seeing Jason expressions with his face and head, very des respectful and ignorant at the same time. He expend all the debate making assumptions and acting so ridiculous like he was sure of what he was talking about. Ridiculous.
"Futerist" must be a typo. Surely it is "futurist."
Excellent presentation by Dr. Preston. Poor presentation by Jason Wallace.
I really wanted Jason to present a more coherent statement, as some of Dons positions leave me with questions. Mr. Preston knows his stuff and mowed over yet another debater.
EDIT: I have removed the erroneous quote t I had formerly understood was a direct quote from Eusebius' Theophania. However, this was an error on my part as it was a quote from Samuel Lee, D.D. in a disertation ABOUT Theophania circa 1843. My resources indicated it was genuinely from Eusebius and I had no reason to doubt. But further checking discovered this to be false. Sorry for the confusion.
However, the argument I originally made in favor of the Preterist view being far older than Mr. Wallace and many others insist can be supported by other direct quotes of Eusebius, such as this one from Theophania:
"But the things which took place afterwards, did our Saviour, from his
foreknowledge as THE WORD or GOD, foretell should come to pass, by means
of those which are (now) before us. For He named the whole Jewish
people, the children of the City; and the Temple, He styled their House.
And thus He testified, that they should, on their own wicked account,
bear the vengeance thus to be inflicted. And, it is right we should
wonder at the fulfilment of this prediction, since at no time did this
place undergo such an entire desolation as this was. He pointed out
moreover, the cause of their desolation when He said, “If thou hadst
known, even in this day, the things of thy peace:” intimating too His
own coming, which should be for the peace of the whole world. But, when
ye shall see it reduced by armies, know ye that which comes upon it, to
be a final and full desolation and destruction. He designates the
desolation of Jerusalem, by the destruction of the Temple, and the
laying aside of those services which were, according to the law of
Moses, formerly performed within it. The manner moreover of the
captivity, points out the war. of which He spoke; “For (said He) there
shall be (great) tribulation upon the land, and great wrath upon this
people : and they shall fall by the edge of the sword.” We can learn
too, from the writings of Flavius Josephus, how these things took place
in their localities, and how those, which had been foretold by our
Saviour, were, in fact, fulfilled. On this account He said, “Let those
who are in its borders not enter into it, since these are the days of
vengeance, that all may be fulfilled which has been written.” Any one
therefore, who desires it, may learn the results of these things from
the writings of Josephus."
---Eusebius, Theophania, Book IV, paragraph 18---
Source:
undeception.com/is-full-preterism-a-new-doctrine/
Mr wallace is preaching not debating
Jason pretty much admitted defeat multiple times here; just repeated some blabber.
YES 70 A.D. fits what the bible says! The Kingdom is here!
Jason Wallace begins his “refutation” of preterism, by discussing dispensationalism. The whole purpose of the straw man in a “straw man argument” is to knock it down. Good job Jason you knocked down the straw man that had NOTHING to do with Mr Preston’s impeccable exegetical discussion of the basis of letting scripture interpret scripture, you know “sola scriptura “ the Bible scholars put the correlating OT texts in the NT margins and vise versa, because they directly correlate, even more they are direct fulfillment’s.
("We cant be wrong.
This is what we've been taught for hundreds of years.)
---The Scribes and Pharisees
Pride goeth beforr a fall
Don Preston arguments are more scriptural, it allows scripture to define its own fulfillment. The other side can be interpreted anyway.
One thing that drives me bonkers are word-salad people like Pastor Jason. Word-salad people argue like this: they toss a whole lot of words up in the air, do a little circular reasoning, adding a pinch of sarcasm and some name calling and put downs in for good measure, but they never do get around to answering a single question. If Jason should need a second career, he’d make a great tap dancer or politician 🥴
42:00....Why in the world would the angel tell them that if they weren't even going to be around when he came back?? Think about it people. Why would the angel tell MEN that who would have to be 2000+ years old to be able to see him come again?
PLEASE don't tell Dr. Preston how to prepare his presentation, WORRY about how you need to prepare yours.
Don based his argument on Scripture while Jason based his on the traditions of men.
Do these people know what they’re getting into when they try to debate a theological genius such as Preston ?
PRETERISTS take away from the words of the book of prophecy.
Revelation 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Just like Dr. Pickett, Wallace Did a great Job representing the wrong point of view, as best as one can, not that one should.
Wallace challenges Don then gets the snot beat off him. Just filling time
Daniel 12:2 says many, not all shall be raised. This could mean that AD70 included the first resurection but not the second. Could that work?
Then show us Jason HOW it falls apart. Give us some 🥩
I love Jason as a brother in Christ, I honestly do. But I get the feeling he is teaching his side more because he feels it is required, rather than because he has a love for truth. Does that make sense?
Once again, Don is solid
Yeah that Jason guy is no worthy opponent for you Dr Preston.
Please don’t miss understand I’m not A preterist.
So Jason's argument against preterism is to talk about dispensationalism? No way Jason!
Rev. 1/7 Behold, he comes with clouds; and every eye shall see him,
((and they also which pierced him))
and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.
Case Proven :)
Wow. I'm a fairly new adherent to preterism, and I actually expected that this debate might present some actual challenges that I might have to do further research on. But the futurist made no coherent, logical argument at all. Mr. Preston approached the task with complete preparation, and you can tell that he has actually dedicated time to get to the bottom of these issues. Fascinating.
I listened to this entire debate and here is my quick response:
This was not a debate on Preterism, it was a debate mostly on Dispensationism. Unfortunate!
Don Preston is truly a gifted man. Convinces me that the Scriptures are plain and clear to those who believe them
PRETERISTS take away from the words of the book of prophecy.
Revelation 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Neither preterism or futurism are what the reformers believed.
Brilliant debate.
Can we do this again, but with Don Preston and Jason Lisle? I feel that'd be more conducive to getting answers from both sides...
What is this nonsense about how no one thought this way for 1800 years. Where is the proof of that? What about the idea that this simply doesn't work in the totality of the entire work... Proof please. Where can you show us that? I'm concerned about this thinking - that we knew such and such and your ideas are bad because we didn't already know them - !!! That's simply insane. Even Einstein said that we are all as young school children with ideas but no complete knowledge of truth. C'mon man. ❤ great debate
Jason Wallace, I might say, Don K Preston ' almost puersuadist me to be a preterist '. Keep at it, Wallace is on his way to Preterism. Some of us just don't get it all like Don does...lol
42:34....well. you would have to admit that "soon" means "soon" then too Jason. And "quickly" "Time is at hand" These are all terms used to describe to this audience on when he would return.
hey great discussion ty
This is a topic I've been thinking about a lot lately. I see partial preterism, but not sure about full preterism. I have some pretty complex questions. I'd like to hear what some of you think.
My first question is...if full preterism is true, then how does the Bible relate to us today?
Also, the Bible says that we are to walk as Jesus walked. Jesus kept the OT law. Doesn't that mean that we should do the same? I understand that preterism believes that the law is no longer required for us to keep, but how does this idea match up with the Scriptures? (Note: I am not keeping the law. Just trying to think things out).
Next, I'm wondering how full preterism can explain the promise that God made to Abraham. He promised him a physical land, and Abraham has not inherited that land. How can a full preterist explain this?
If the resurrection has already occurred, as Don K Preston says, then are believers today going to be resurrected when we die? Will there be a judgment day for all of mankind?
Obviously, I have lots of questions. I'm sure they'll require some lengthy responses, but if anyone wishes to respond, I'd be appreciative. Thanks.
I would love to communicate with you on these questions! However, the youtube comment section is not the best place. If you are interested, send an email to truthsearchpodcast@gmail.com, and I will give you several ways to contact me.
Jesus returned in ad70 it's very clear
Pastor Jason behaved in a rude, curt, and immature manner. He failed to construct any counter arguments. He cut Dr. Preston off repeatedly. He interrupted him repeatedly. He was ill prepared. He kept saying that Dr. Preston's argument didn't work but didn't demonstrate that even once!
I think it should have been the audience to cross examine both speakers and let the audience walk away with something learned from their cross examinations. This church practice of sitting there and learn with a passive state of mind needs to stop across all churches. church sermons needs to be more interactive to develop its listeners and not just sit and accept all my false teaching theology. We need to ask questions too.
Do you believe Creeds or Scripture?
Good grief. Can we hear Jason actually debate the subject? He continues to tell us that this is “flawed” and this doesn’t “add up”, but he won’t tell why exactly it doesn’t add up and why it’s flawed... He’s talking about everything EXCEPT the topic. HORRIBLE HORRIBLE debating.
Jason Wallace, I can see your points and hear you speak but I only see a dead man talking. I witnessed my father, a pastor, change from death to life, hatred to love, a man full of passion. Jason, where is that passion and love? I see no life in your bones! However, I do see that same love and passion in Don Preston.
It's not what Don Preston says, knows, believes, teaches, or even how he says it. It is a light that shows through his human clay irregardless of his fallen state. It is the love for others, of the Truth, and most importantly of our Christ.
Jason, please accept the salvation that Yeshua came, suffered, and died to provide to you. You can experience that change for yourself. Love calls to all. I will be praying for you.
I’m embarrassed for Jason😢
Mr. Jason might not be a good debator but I still appreciate his stand point that everything that Mr. Preston said ISN'T TRUE DOES which is very Right .
Coz the generation in 70 AD is not the so called " wicked generations "
I dont see how that poor guy has a chance at winning this bible debate when Don Preston is always confusing him with all those damn bible verses all the time!!
Preterism can only be countered by Futurism. Partial preterism doesn't completely do it.
1:46:25...Don has an answer for everything...he won't even let him respond to it.....We are getting into late rounds and Jason is almost done....he's barely hanging on...
Don Preston owned this guy. It was kinda sad to watch.
Jason wallace did a horrible job..he shouldve quit at 1:08:00 "im not prepared" blah blah blah...just horrible.
+apstlcpwr Pastor Wallace was not prepared. There are much more effective
rebuttals to Preterist interpretations than just basically saying that
the Bible is too nuanced to expect "that to mean just that." Having
said that, I think Dr. Preston could have more impact with a smaller
delivery hammer. I don't mean less scripture, I mean just a touch
quieter and slower. And his direct attack on an obviously wounded
opponent was a little putting off. That caused Pastor Wallace to counter
attack in some ways. Although Pastor Wallace did imply up front that
Preterism was sophomoric even compared to dispensationalism.
People, including myself, are scared of dying, whether Jesus came or not. He knows all this and how hard it is for the believer to admit this fear. Its therefore understandable that both Don Preston and Jason Wallace can't and won't budge from their views. This is an emotional topic folks.
Haven't seen anyone able to debate Don yet. How can his stance be reasonably challenged?
I think it would make better sense for the audience to cross examine the speakers…