I am a partial preterist in a world of southern Baptist dispensationalism. I got there by diligent study of Scripture as the Holy Spirit guided me, bringing Scriptures to mind as my eyes were opened to discrepancies in the widely popular, end-of-the-world-any-moment mindset affecting the Christian world in the 1970's, 80's, 90's. The dispensational view of "the last days" sells a lot of sensational books and movies, not to mention Scofield Bibles, but also a multitude of preachers and teachers who consider themselves to be authorities on end-times theology and alternate viewpoints as heretical. "For the time will come when people will not tolerate sound doctrine and accurate instruction [that challenges them with God’s truth]; but wanting to have their ears tickled [with something pleasing], they will accumulate for themselves [many] teachers [one after another, chosen] to satisfy their own desires and to support the errors they hold..." 2 Timothy 4:3, Amplified Bible
I know I am also an anomaly, I have only ever been in one church since I was saved, most are dispensational, but I have come to be a partial preterist historical premillennial, although I readily admit that of all the things of theology, my eschatology is what I hold most loosely, seeing the reasons why others hold to both amillennial, as well as postmillennial positions, yet not quite convinced to completely leave the premillennial position.
How do you address Bible study discussions that assume dispensationalism, and assume everyone in the study is a premil rapture dispensation believer? I have a hard time as the only one that I know if I’m my Baptist church.
Are you suggesting that the likes of Steven Lawson, Matthew Waymeyer, John MacArthur, Richard Mayhue, and Justin Peters (among many others) do not tolerate sound doctrine and are merely teaching errors to please the masses?
@@TwentyTwoThirtyThree Have you read MacArthur and Mayhue's book "Christ's Prophetic Plans?" It explains Dispensationalism in Michael Vlach's articles in Chapter 1, and explains what Dispensationalism is NOT in Chapter 2. Michael Vlach also has a great book entitled "Premillennialism: Why there Must Be a Future Earthly Kingdom of Jesus," as well as "Dispensationalism: Essential Beliefs and Common Myths." Anyway, I found these books helpful because I have found that many people today, even many well known pastors do not fully understand the position, and instead they believe the myths about it.
Then why have you not accepted Don K Preston's multiple challenges to a debate? If it's such a wacko theory, then crush it, stomp it out of it's misery in a public debate, and let all of us have front row seats to it while we chomp on popcorn.
@@CryoftheProphet which debates are you referring to? But yeah, preterists want to see him debate Don Preston, but he won’t. I think it is because he knows full preterism is true.
@@ProphetGreg94 ua-cam.com/video/4S0TQ2dXnms/v-deo.htmlsi=MMKjeH2Y3IJG6-TG Personally the historic premillennial had the most to offer in this discussion. Doug seemed like a fish out of water..
Is Matthew 10:23 about 70 AD, or is it about Jesus coming as the King to Israel? The answer is found below in Zech. 9:9. Did Jesus "cometh" as the King of Israel riding on a donkey during the week He was crucified? If Matthew 10:23 is about 70 AD, Peter ignored the commandment given by Jesus in Matthew 10:5-7, when Peter went to the house of Cornelius. It did not take the disciples forty years to take the Gospel to Israel. In Romans 1:16 Paul said the Gospel was taken "first" to the Jews. This time period of the Gospel going "first" to Israel is found in Matt. 10:5-23, and Acts chapter 2, and Acts 10:36-38, and Galatians 1:14-18. Zec 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass. The Old Covenant age died at Calvary when God ripped the temple veil in half from the top to the bottom at the moment His Son died at Calvary. There is no record in the NT of any person coming to salvation outside of the New Covenant between Calvary and 70 AD. Hebrews 7:12 proves there was a change in the law before 70 AD. We are not come to Mount Sinai in Hebrews 12:18. We are come instead to the New Covenant Church of Mount Zion and the blood of Jesus in Hebrews 12:22-24. This passage was written in the present tense before 70 AD. If the Hyper-Preterists (Full-Preterists) were correct the Old Covenant age would come back into existence if a temple were rebuilt, and animal sacrifices are renewed. Any basic book on Astronomy proves we are not now living in the "eternal" New Heavens and New Earth, because the sun only has a limited amount of nuclear fuel. We now understand the nuclear reaction inside the core of the sun, because of the testing of thermonuclear weapons.
Partial Preterists has unclear passages they can’t escape (Matthew 10:23,16:27-28, Luke 21:22, Daniel 12:1-3,7,9,13, Revelation 1:3,7,9,19, 11:2,14:4,17:10, 22:14-15). Full Preterism is flawless.
"'I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God" What is unclear about this passage? It is so clear.
@stacyturbeville6863 Interesting take. I knew something was amiss when you said PP "can't escape" passages like Matt 10:23. Actually, PP (like myself) use that verse to JUSTIFY PP and stump Futurists.
It’s just how we say it to distinguish the various ends of time periods. The Apostles wrote that they were in the last days, so if we just say “the last days” are still coming, we introduce some confusion.
@@allthingsbing1295, I agree. If there is an end of the physical earth in the scripture I cannot find it. The Revelation speaks of a continuation of history after the final judgment that has both kings and nations: _"And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. And _*_the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it."_*_ -- Rev 21:23-24 KJV_ _"... and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. And there shall be no more curse" -- Rev 22:2-3 KJV_ But many theologians speak of an "end of history," and I am curious about what they mean by that. Dan
He substituted "end of history" in place of ""end of the age." May not be same thing at all. "End of age" can very well be end of the old covenant age.
I say that those interested in a discussion/debate of preterism -- whether to debunk it or support it should agree to discuss/debate it. Stop the name-calling , the mudslinging , and enough of ' h ' word (heretic.)
You're asking the wrong question. The consummation of the age does not equal a physical end of the world. Wilson nor other postmill advocates for that.
Gary's obviously got a few of these guys feeling a bit uncomfortable. He raises some serious biblical questions in his podcasts which I have yet to hear refuted scripturally by partial preterists. The whole letter writing thing and asking him to answer 3 questions was demeaning and childish. And BTW wasn't 'the church' wrong about justification for 1,500 years 😏
Paul was writing to the Corinthians, not you. They were being raised (present tense) in 1 Corinthians 15, and therefore, that alone should tell you that the sting of death was not physical death, since those he was writing to were already alive physically. Your ideas are full of presumptions and ideas not from the scriptures, but from tradition (creeds).
I always enjoy hearing Doug's teachings. But I don't always agree with him. And, unless he were to deny the deity of Jesus, or adopt universalism, or possibly, misspell "TULIP", I wouldn't kick him out of my assembly. And I wouldn't threaten him with it in social media either. But that's just me. As Doug's hypothetical letter from Hypothetical Gary stated, I also wouldn't be able to make a case for any "end of history" eschatological view. Mostly because I can't find an ounce of logical support for an "end of history" or "last day" of a kingdom that was prophesied by both Isaiah and Daniel to be eternal, without end. And no human has been able to convince me that I should discard logic in order to accept such an absurd idea. Jesus (God) IS logical. His name, the Logos, isn't just coincidentally spelled similarly to the word 'logic'. But I am very curious to hear from someone - anyone - who thinks they can explain this to me without violating the Three Laws of Thought and, as long as you're at it, please tell me what God's word says about what is expected to happen in the days after "the last day", because it seems that dissolving the cosmos "at the last day" is not at all described in the Greek of God's word. Peter only speaks of the dissolving of the "elements" (principles, or rudiments) of old covenant Judaism, and an examination of the Greek, to me, makes this plain as well as a logical conclusion for the end of the old covenant. Yes, "the works in it" (the old covenant temple and all associated things, both physical and ceremonial elements, including sacrifice of animals and human priesthood based on a certain genetic makeup)... Those things - ALL of them - WERE burned up in AD70 in quite a blaze as it's been described by historians, that is, in a quite literal fashion as well as being symbolically described. Also, it seems from the writings of Paul, John, Peter, and James, that they ALL expected Jesus' return "at the last day" to be soon (to them) rather than thousands of years in the future. Maybe someone can convince me to accept the logical contradiction of "the apostles were all confused" and "God's word is God-breathed," because to me, those don't work as a team. I believe the apostles DID write the inspired word, but I don't believe the Holy Spirit gave them confusing messages to write. He's not the author of confusion, and look how much we get when we stop accepting normal meanings for simple words like "last day" or "this" or "generation" or "soon" or "at hand." (Revelation includes them half dozen times and they appear to be symbolically positioned as 'bookends' for the Revelation of Jesus Christ. Finally, for someone much smarter than I, can you answer (or even guess) how it is that the Greek word “μέλλω” (mello), which means: “about to” could go untranslated - that is, ignored - by translators so many times, when the natural inclusion of the word changes the meanings or implications of so many events being described. Ideas? Please feel free to share. Conspiracy theories will also be considered. They do happen. Psalms 2. Personally, I believe that ALL mentions of "the last day" refer to the singular last day of the old covenant. An eternal kingdom cannot, by logical definition, have a last day. But I'm always looking for a way to dissolve logic. Not. ;)
I love Gary and have learned an awful lot listening to him. As i also love the signers if the letter who i am familiar with Doug,kenneth,James and Jeff. It Grieves me that the letter was written as it has created an absolute which can only mean a damaging division among brothers. Im a partial preterist and post millennial and having listened to Gary explain his position on his podcast I really fail to see what he has done wrong here. There are texts which do merit further discussion and nothing is settled by creeds or confessions if that were the case virtually all reformed churches have erred in no longer holding to the WCOF and the pope being the antichrist and man of sin. Surely before drawing lines in the sand with letters you could all get together with Gary over the word of God only and have a good discussion. I feel that Gary is one step away from being denounced as a heretic by you all and this really grieves me. Please listen to what the man has to say and don’t divide over this issue.
Doug's hypothetical letter at the end is simply strong arming while appearing to be lenient, instead, Gary should be able to say, "I am not sure on all 3 questions based on scripture, and I would like for you to explain to me your answer on these 3 questions using scripture alone, and with full knowledge that some of you (Doug/Durbin) believe that Matt 24 is fulfilled and also believe we are in the New Heavens and earth and then try to match that with your other beliefs. Did Christ come back to THAT generation then, like He said or not? If He did, which you both affirm, then where do you find another coming of Christ? Gary is asking good questions, Martin Luther did the same, you should to.
The different types of Christ’s coming has been addressed by all or most of the parties. Coming in judgment of apostate Israel vs. coming at the end of history for the great resurrection and final judgment. Remember, nowhere is “second” coming found, and also remember that in Revelation’s early chapters, Jesus mentions potential coming to judge various churches in various places on earth, presumably at various times. We don’t need to list them by his 7th coming, 8th coming, etc. (or 17th, counting known and unknown OT Era appearances?). We can just say “final coming,” which partial preterists hold as future, and fulls hold as past. Jesus certainly did come in 70AD. Just not the way futurists think.
@@f308gtb1977 I'm calling myself an "Open" Preterist, I've looked into Full Pret a lot and the difficulty is, its hard to argue against to be honest, but I still have questions, which is all Gary was doing, was asking questions, and so far no one has answered them.
As a dispensationalist I wouldn't ever root for full preterists. I have no desire to see partial preterists fall into a clear heresy, I don't need to win an argument that bad
Having been a futurist for a long time and teaching that ideology, it so saddens me when folks say things like this, viz. that they'll never accept something regardless of any logical argumentation that demonstrates Jesus was either a liar or a lunatic due to several statements He made; I finally had to force myself to accept that Jesus is Lord and was right while I was wrong and thus had to go about making sure the nature and purpose of biblical eschatology fit within the time parameters provided.
Earl Grey Hot wrote, "As a dispensationalist I wouldn't ever root for full preterists. I have no desire to see partial preterists fall into a clear heresy, I don't need to win an argument that bad." Atheists use the doctrine of the premillennialist to "prove" that Jesus was a false prophet. They never consider the possibility that the words of Jesus are true, and the premillennialist is the false prophet. Dan
@@paulbrennan4163 I heard them all Paul. It's pure dreaming and fantasies and totally unbiblical. Doug is teaching that we're now living in the NH and the NE, but he's still wairting for something more, lol!
@@Chopin_JT I have no idea with what Doug teaches, I haven't even watched the video. Right now I'm just interested in how full preterists deal with the fact that scripture indicates that there is a future hope for Israel?
@@paulbrennan4163 God is finished with Israel, he came to destroy Jerusalem in 70AD. We are now in the NC, the old has vanished and done away with. It was merely a type and a shadow of the real spiritual Jerusalem with a spiritual temple. Don't make the same mistake that the Jews in the first century made, expecting a physical kingdom on earth with a temple and animal sacrifices and an earthly king. Jesus rejected that idea and ran from them when they tried to grab him to make him a king in Jerusalem. The writer of Hebrews showed that those earthly realities were merely a shadow of the heavenly reality.
Well done. I never miss one of Gary’s Podcasts. One of the reasons he’s my favorite Podcaster is you can hear those thin pages turning. Some time ago I sent in an email to the show asking him which verses in scripture would he say refer to the coming of Christ at the end of the eschaton. He actually answered my email in a Podcast shortly after it was sent. He said he didn’t know and was still studying. And you know what. I’m perfectly fine with him saying that. Also, correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Gary say on his March 10th episode that he did believe in the Second Coming? I just get the sense that Gary wants to be Biblically consistent.
@@shenanigansofmannanan if you knew Gary you would understand. And you would also know that Doug is very fond of Gary also as his American Vision is part of Canon Press and they often break bread together
You obviously are very knowledgeable. Please agree to debate Don Preston so that everyone can hear the best arguments from both camps and make an informed decision. Refusing to debate just makes partial preterists look scared and weak. It also applies that you think those of us who don’t have a bunch of letters behind our names from various seminaries aren’t intelligent enough to understand the arguments.
I don't think the letter to Gary was necessary. He is still studying and learning...he hasn't said he's a full preterist. He is just making sure he is really analyzing the Scriptures rather than just agreeing with everything everyone is wanting him to.
How or why is it assumed that Martha believed 'the last day' was the end of time? Is it not possible that 2nd temple Jews did not fully understand the resurrection they hoped in? Apparently Martha did not think it meant that Lazarus would rise up to stand on the earth again but to be raised into the heavenly realm at the end of the AGE not WORLD. Jews believed in Sheol and expected their resurrection to be FROM there TO heaven. I cannot find any biblical reference to 'end of time' - age however is confirmed many places. Therefore 'end of time' is the theory...AND we do not have the same hope as the OT Jew who knew his covenant was coming to an end to begin the better hope Messiah would bring in with the NT. Which Jesus continues to share with Martha in John 11:25-26 - v 25 is OT, but we stand in the NT hope of v26! EDIT: John 11:23 Jesus saith unto her, Thy brother shall rise again. 11:24 Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day. 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: 11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this? 11:27 She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world. When Martha speaks about believing that Jesus is the Christ who was to come into the world, she is speaking about His first coming - not the hope in His 2nd. Which suggests to me that she expected Jesus to fulfill ALL the things the Law and Prophets spoke about Him in that age into which He was born. Luk_24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Which includes her hope in the resurrection of the dead - yet not as a return to physical life such as how Lazarus would be raised. This is what Jesus is telling her before He raised her brother. So assuming that for her the last day was an expected end to history/time rather than to the covenant age that was to end in judgment; because this is what the Law & Prophets said was coming to the generation that saw Christ's first coming - would seem to be what Jesus is correcting in her understanding. Perhaps if Doug would put himself into the 1st century audience that was the generation to which these things were spoken, he would understand the timing & the signs THEY were given.
Marathon word dump. Even changing the playback speed to .75 didn't help. Hey Doug. Have you been taking speech lessons from Ben Shapiro? I'm going to have to listen to that again...
As I see it, the major problem with Preterism is this: when Jesus says, “Truly I say, this generation shall not pass away until all these things are fulfilled,” that is a literal statement and then everything else is a metaphor. But before you read the rest of this post, look in a Greek Concordance and you will see that the word “genea” that is translated as “generation” also means race or family. From the very beginning Satan has wanted to destroy the Jews because He knew that God was using the Jews to fulfill His prophetic will. So, Satan used Hamen, Herod, Hitler and countless others including Islam to destroy the Jewish race. So, if Jesus said, “This Jewish race will not pass away (in spite of Satan’s efforts) until all prophecy will be fulfilled,” that makes more sense. For instance, Revelation 20 says, “And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. He seized…Satan and bound him for a thousand years…to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time. I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years...they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him... When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth-Gog and Magog-and to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God’s people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them.” BUT… In the Preterist view, Satan is NOT bound for a thousand years, the ones who were martyred for Christ did NOT come to life and, they were NOT priests of God and Christ who reigned with Christ for one thousand years. In the Preterist view, Satan did NOT gather the deceived nations (In number they are like the sand on the seashore) for battle against God’s people and evidently God did NOT literally reign fire down on them FROM Heaven and devour them. As a Preterist, you may say these things happened, but just not in a physical sense and NOT for a thousand years. But that is NOT what scripture says. Some will say the thousand years is NOT literally a thousand years just like when the Bible says, “God owns the cattle on a thousand hills…” it doesn’t mean He ONLY owns the cattle on a thousand hills. Well, it didn’t say God’s wealth is LIMITED to the cattle on a thousand hills. We know, as the eternal creator of the universe, God owns EVERYTHING. So, that would be literally TRUE to say God owns the cattle on a thousand hills. He owns those thousand hills AND all other hills. BUT to say the millennial reign ONLY lasted forty years or so, does NOT allow for the verses that say, “When the thousand years are over…” OR the verses that say “we will worship with God and Christ for ONE THOUSAND years.” That would be simply NOT true. ONE THOUSAND years is NOT a metaphor for forty years in any sense of the word. Also, Matthew 24:30-31: “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then ALL the peoples of the earth (NOT just Jerusalem) will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, (NOT just Jerusalem) from one end of the heavens to the other." IF this happened in the first century and ALL the peoples of the earth saw the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, I think it would be the most spectacular event in all of history and historical records around the entire world would be rife with reports of dumbfounded people in total shock at the most amazing sight ever! Notice it says ALL the people of the earth and not just those around Jerusalem. Or are you saying All the peoples of the earth is a metaphor for people around Jerusalem. Also, Peter says, "The Day of the Lord comes as a thief, the heavens will disappear with a roar, the elements will melt in fervent heat, and the earth and all its works will be laid bare. Sorry, this did NOT happen in the first century Jerusalem. Again, the Bible says, “ALL the peoples of the earth (NOT just Jerusalem) will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds... And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, (NOT just Jerusalem) from one end of the heavens to the other.” Jesus also said, " For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now-and never to be equaled again." Whatever happened in the first century was NOT the greatest distress the world has ever been in. If this ONLY happened in and near Jerusalem, how does that surpass the death and destruction experienced in WW1, WW2, Nazi Germany’s horrible torturous murder of 6 million Jews and 6 million non-Jew as well. Then Jesus said, “Immediately after the distress of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.” This did not happen in the first century. It just seems to me, that Preterism takes a misunderstanding of the word “Genea” (generation instead of race) and makes EVERYTHING else to be some metaphor that doesn’t even make sense metaphorically.
You must agree with C.S. Lewis then, as he implies that Jesus is a false prophet. • C. S. Lewis said this: “It is clear from the New Testament that the disciples all expected the Second Coming in their own lifetime. And, worse still, they had a reason, and one which you will find very embarrassing. Their Master had told them so. He shared, and indeed created, their delusion. He said in so many words, ‘this generation shall not pass till all these things be done.’ And he was wrong. He clearly knew no more about the end of the world than anyone else.
Clearly this was written because of the Gary DeMar issue. But Gary has answered it beautifully on his podcast. He does not deny a final return of Christ. He is not a heretic. And frankly, Doug and jeff durbin did him dirty signing that letter. I learned about the preterist view through Jeff, who learned it from Gary. Now they’re trying to throw him under the bus
Doug: next time you do a deep theological talk like this, can you start off by defining terms? I'm fuzzy as to the exact definitions of preterism and partial preterism. It would be helpful first start with the definitions.
Full preterism (which is actual preterism since it's ... well ... full) teaches Luke 21:22, viz. that Jesus taught that every i-dot and t-cross of prophecy was fulfilled in/around the time of the events of AD 70, while partial preterism (a misnomer but apparently essential today) believes there are still prophecies to be fulfilled and that they cannot all be fulfilled until an end of time or end of the universe or some renewed Edenic earth situation (meaning things are being looked at in a materialistic manner instead of a spiritual manner).
Contrary to what Tony says, when people say preterism they mean partial preterism, and the heretical view is specified by the apron addition of the full designation. This is the common usage.
I was using logic, not how in your world the term is usually understood to mean; preterism is from the Latin for past, and thus preterist eschatology has to do with how that biblical eschatology is PAST. Partial preterism is therefore an oxymoron.
Didn't say I don't like the word. My major in college was English grammar, rhetoric, composition, editing, etc., and I just like for folks to use words accurately, not making them mean what they want them to mean.
4:16 It is not an argument for leaving it in, but rather it is an argument for disregarding that person's underinformed conclusions. Whether or not the final conclusion should be to leave it in or take it out, has especially little to do with the conclusions of those who are especially underinformed.
When you’re discussing a heretical position that denies the bodily resurrection and return of Christ, it’s to be expected (though still sad) that the comments will be hateful and lack the love of Christ.
Where are the Scriptures that define "the end of History". Please don't quote scripture that speaks of the end of the Old Testament age, that is not the "end of History".
I'm willing to accept Wilson's comments on the Table of Contents as a creed provided we clarify that its authority comes not from being a creed but from its correspondence to the Word.
@lemnisgate8809 you can't spin it that way because that passage is about nations NOT taking up arms against OTHER nations. He will not grow faint or weary until he has established justice in the Earth and the coastlands await his law. That's Isaiah 42. Also 1 corinthians 15 says he must reign until he has placed all enemies under his feet, and the LAST enemy is death. Habakkuk 2, the world will be as full of the knowledge of the lord as the waters cover the sea. Not to mention people still die, which automatically means the resurrection and final judgment have yet to happen.
I will be honest. I felt like I walked into a room, and instead of being an old man, I was suddenly a child learning at the knee of my fathers books. I had to look up some of the words. I didnt get the gist of all of it but a vague guesstimate of the discussion. just when you think you know something. something like this discussion can come along and just rip that rug out from under you. it is painful to fall upon one's tailbone. but perhaps it is good and necessary thing, to keep us from getting too big for our britches.
David wasn't "still dead" on Pentecost (in sheol). Christ set captives free at ascension as well as being transfigured in to new form (metamorphosis). No point listening after that blunder.... Partial pret = partial Scripture knowledge, apparently.
@@natedowney9590 Why can't futurists read more than one verse at a time? You seem to have missed verse 27 and the whole point of that section on David. David's tomb (a grave that holds a decaying corpse made from dust) WAS and IS still there because he wasn't the Messiah. David was a prophet that pointed towards Christ, one of his own descendents that Sheol/death wouldn't hold. They weren't saying that David is in a "soul sleep" or that he was still in Sheol... Surely you're not implying that because David's tomb still exists that his soul is still awaiting evacuation from Sheol into reconciliation to the Father... That would make you a literal adversary to Christ's works; -"to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord." Also, futurists love to point out how "death" isn't defeated. Maybe you can tell me what "tense" verse 24 is in? Only 5 verses before 29; -"putting an end to the agony of death" Death = Sheol, the holding of souls until Christ reconciled them. Death IS defeated according to scripture. He led captives free upon ascension; -"Therefore it says, “When He ascended on high, He led captive the captives, And He gave gifts to people.” That's why Moses and Elijah appeared with Christ during His transfiguration/metamorphosis vision. They were freed from Sheol/death's captivity at His ascension.
The "orthodox" believers at that time had almost everything wrong about the Messiah, Doug's reasoning on that one doesn't make sense. I think Gary DeMar is asking the right questions, that is how reformations happen, Doug and the boys put way too much "faith" in the Creeds. I lean Ful Pret, but am happy with Partial Pret Post Mil as well, I am not 100% sure, but I do see more questions that need to be answered by the Partials than the Fulls and based on Scripture alone. Doug used very little scripture (based on the 3 questions they challenged Gary with) here.
I am in the same boat as you with being open an undecided thus far, but DW's arguments here are just silly. The people building fences need to justify them. We don't need to give them any credibility otherwise. I do think we should treat those who disagree, living or dead, in a charity that treats them like brothers, but no more. Listen to their arguments, but they get no special power over us.
I think its coming to a head, Full Pret is gaining ground and I am thinking rightly so, it simply makes the most sense, but I still have questions, but I had questions before... @@georgechristiansen6785
The bottom line even from someone who grew up and still go to a Southern Baptist Church, is that once you accept Matthew 24 as a past event then you’re bound scripturally to put all time indicators exactly where they’re placed: IN THEIR GENERATION. Ask yourself this: what was the promised New Covenant and New Heaven and New Earth promises? Scripture (the Old Testament) ends promising the Spirit of God among men putting his laws on our hearts. Joel calls this the last days. Peter confirmed that was THEIR DAY AND THE SPIRIT BEING POURED OUT. In other words the point of Revelation 21 and 22 is the nations tasting of the tree for healing (symbolism for salvation in Jesus) and coming into an always open city (the New Covenant Church). There really is neither Jew nor Greek. We now live in the eternal New Covenant Kingdom Age FROM GENERATION TO GENERATION FOREVER. Offspring to Offspring. The Bible is about SPIRIT RESURRECTION NOT PHYSICAL. A new better body post physical death (1 Corinthians 15:42-50).
@@cosmictreason2242 I forgot that Doug Wilson video are the ultimate authority. I am sure when ever God needs an answer to something he call Doug and Doug gets him straitne out. To bad Doug was not there when Jesus was, he could corrected all the errors Jesus made.
It would have been nice to get statements on arguments full preterists use, such as the verses that say the resurrection of the dead and the judgment was about to happen. We can't simply disregard these time statements without doing what Futurists do with partial preterist arguments (ignore or twist scripture). There has to be a completely logical explanation for these time statements other than their clear meaning, or full preterism is true. To refute full preterism one also has to show that there are different comings of Christ (judgment in 70 AD and one in our future) something that is never taught or even hinted at in scripture. These are just 2 arguments for full preterism. I'm not saying full preterism is the truth, but unless these arguments are dealt with I will never fully believe it to be false.
Since MT 16:27,28 provide us with the timing of the coming of the Lord in vengeance on that generation as being while some of the Disciples would still be alive; and since MT 23 & 24 give us so much more details of those events about to come on them, culminating with the return of Christ and the gathering of His elect from the four winds of the earth at the felling of that temple in Jerusalem; where is the scriptures that would allude to a still yet future, or “3rd coming,” of the Lord?
He was physically resurrected, as a Picture of CHRIST'S Eternal Resurrection Power. We can assume HE was Born Again (which is Spiritual, not physical, and Grants a New Nature, New Heart of flesh in place of the Heart of stone {Ez.}). They are never to be placed in contrast to one another tho
Here 12:25 I would like to point out that Christ fulfilled the prophetic Firstfruit typology pointing to him from Leviticus 23:10-11. He arose on the of first fruits.
The Hebrew "last day" was not the end of time or history. The Hebrews had no such idea of the end of time. This idea of the end of history or time is such a theological jump, that the rocks below, will not be kind for those who take that leap. It is pure presumption that the "last day" or "days" are anything other than the end of one age and the beginning of another. The Church age or Christian age has no end. The Kingdom is here, and it has no end. Of course you won't debate people like Dr. Don Preston on this very issue, since that probably wouldn't be good for your book sales (or maybe it would). You'll never know, unless you try. Don says the offer is still on. And you know who he is.
Give him time folks, prophecy is unfolding at alarming rates, particularly in the area of judgement on a fallen world, as in the days of Noah.. Anyone who doesnt embrace at least the premillennial view will soon enough, the world is dissolving, not improving, Christ is returning, not staying hidden, and Christians who have never been persecuted might want to ask themselves why.
14:45 min mark the sun will be darkened, and we do not revolve around the sun the sun circuits around us above( a local light) now I understand why so many wrongly understand the written scriptures.
I was a partial Preterist for just over 20 years. But after after further study, I realized the full Preterist position is the correct one. A lot of light bulbs went on when I realized it was all fulfilled.
Hey Doug, as a partial preterist, when did ten gentiles take whole to the coat of a Jew and say; "We will go with you: for we have heard that God is with you"? And this to celebrate the feast of tabernacles of all things. Asking for a friend. BTW, did you see Johnny Mac's sermon on Zechariah 12-14 at the Shepard's Conference? Got any problems with it?
Freind, when You read Holy Scripture, do You really go 'None of this has happened, but one day, maybe this one i am reading about called Jesus, will ____". Naw, no CHRISTian Does This. So, [i will not speak for You] You do believe that CHRIST has Actually Accomplished some of what You read, right?
@@PresencePioneer He even stated quite boldly some of those standing in front of him would see him come. "For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done. 28 Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom." In their lifetime - judgement - ad70.
Listen to minute 4:25 to minute 4:27 and before that put on your discerning Christian hat! Doug Wilson KNOWS that there is no Second Coming or at the very least he KNOWS that Scripture does not speak to a Final Coming of Jesus Christ! Funny, I listened to this before and did not pick up on that. Clever Lad!
The most shaken and nervous Ive ever seen Doug is in a three way discussion about Eschatology. Not his strong suite of talents to be sure. His otherwise fountain of wisdom however shouldnt be thrown out with the baby.
I prefer Jesus's: John 11:25 "I am the resurrection and the life." Matthew 22:30 "For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven."
All of the New Testament writers, inspired by the Holy Spirit, wrote their texts to their first century readers, prophesying that the resurrection and the coming of the Lord were to occur in that generation then living and breathing at that time. There was no confusion or misunderstanding on the matter! Even Paul said to his readers; “We shall not ALL sleep.” He knew! Now, here is what we MUST conclude: Either the resurrection and the coming of the Lord did happen when and how they said it would; or God just flat out lied to them! Are we then to assume that these writers, the Holy Spirit that inspired them, Jesus Christ who said it plainly, and God the Father who brought it forth, ALL got it wrong????????????? BOULDERDASH! And if God did lie; what else might he have lied about? And can you really trust the bible which you don't believe is actually true and accurate, since you don't believe those prophecies have happened? Do you see how your believing that the bible, with its prophecies, are both true and accurate is the paramount of your faith? You must choose one way or the other! God requires that you believe what he has preserved. Choose..........They did not get it wrong!
@@cosmictreason2242 We do not now die. We cast off the physical body to be buried and are united with our spiritual body fit to live there. Remember that Paul said there was a spirit in man that gave him human understanding. That is what goes to heaven.
@@makarov138 “it is appointed For man once to die and after this to face judgment” “the dead in Christ will rise first” sorry your opinion is unbiblical
Okay, this is the last one... Minute 12:16 that verse has nothing to do with the Resurrections. Okay I am bored now. Doug Wilson, I thought you knew better.
I thought the video was going to explain and defend the position Biblically. I don't know, after reading Matthew Waymeyer's brilliant little book, "Revelation 20 and the Millennial Debate," I just can't believe anything other than a dispensational, futuristic premillennial position. I know that position catches a lot of flak today, but nothing else makes sense to me because it seems to spiritualize or allegorize texts when there is no warrant in the text to do so.
@@ophiuchus9071 I agree that scripture interprets scripture, but in coming to the conclusion that you have, I do not believe that you have done so. Dr. Robert L. Thomas, in addressing those who assert that Jesus has already come, and how some utilize the account of Josephus in order to further their assertion that Jesus came in the clouds at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD, he asked in his "Theonomy and the Dating of Revelation:" "How is it that the “cloud-coming” of A.D. 70 involved no personal coming of Christ, but the “cloud-coming” at the end of history does (Acts 1:11; 1 Thessalonians 4:13 ff, Matthew 24:30; 26:64; Revelation 1:7; 2:5, 2:16, 2:25; 3:3, 3:11, 3:20; 16:15; 22:7, 22:12, 22:20)? Where did Christ distinguish between two such comings, and where did He say that He would personally appear at one and not at the other? The answer to both questions is “nowhere.” When we let scripture speak, we know that His coming is yet future.
@@ophiuchus9071 What passage of scripture says that "coming in the clouds of heaven" is a phrase that means, "a spiritual judgment from God?" In Matthew 19:28, 25:31, Jesus says that He will assume His glorious Davidic throne and reign over Israel *in the regeneration, at the time of His second coming when He comes in glory and all of the angels with Him, and not before* (cf. Luke 1:32-33, 2 Samuel 7:12-13, 17, Isaiah 9:7). At that time, the disciples of Jesus will judge/rule over the twelve tribes of Israel that has been restored. Until this happens, “difficult times will come” in the last days as “evil men and imposters will proceed from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived” (2 Timothy 3:1, 13); things will not be improving here on earth, but getting worse (cf. Luke 17:26ff, 18:8, Matthew 24:37). While it is true that all authority has been given to Jesus in heaven and on earth (Matthew 28:18), and it is true that Jesus has indeed sat down at the right hand of God, having finished His work of making purification of sins for His people as promised for His first advent (Hebrews 1:3), *this is not His Davidic throne rule,* this is Jesus fulfilling His role as intercessor; “He always lives to make intercession for them” with the Father (Hebrews 7:25, 9:24, Romans 8:34). Jesus will remain seated at the right hand of the Father as Intercessor until the Father makes the enemies of the Son a footstool for His feet (Psalm 110:1), only then will Jesus rule “in the midst of Your enemies;” only then will “He will bring forth justice to the nations” (Isaiah 42:1); this time of Jesus’s rule is the Millennium after the Second Coming. Until then, “He (the Father) must reign until He (the Father) has put all His enemies under His (Jesus) feet” (1 Corinthians 15:25), lastly defeating death itself. Until the Millennium, it is the Father who reigns (1 Corinthians 15:25). This time of judgment takes place after the seventh trumpet of the tribulation, and it is at this time that “the kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ,” it is only then that Jesus first begins to reign (Revelation 11:15-19), when all things are subjected to Him (1 Corinthians 15:28), and we then see His coronation as King in Revelation 19. This will fulfil the vision of Daniel 7:13-14 where He receives universal authority from the Ancient of Days. Note that in Daniel 7:9, the thrones are not even set up until the time of judgment (cf. Revelation 20:4). This is very significant. Jesus explicitly ties His Davidic throne reign with His second coming to earth and not before. This shows that Jesus’ kingdom is future from our standpoint. The kingdom of God is present wherever Christ is (cf. Luke 17:20-21), therefore the kingdom comes when Jesus comes again; while the kingdom of God was incomplete at His first advent since many rejected Him then, after His second advent when He is given an everlasting dominion, glory, and a kingdom, all the peoples, nations, and men of every language will serve Him (cf. Daniel 7:14), and this kingdom of God can only be seen by those who are born again (John 3:3) who will receive and possess the kingdom of God at this time (Daniel 7:18). This truth makes positions like preterism, amillennialism and postmillennialism all impossible since these positions assert that Jesus is now reigning from the Davidic throne in His millennial kingdom in this age. Incidentally, the “regeneration” spoken of in Matthew 19:28 refers to the “new heavens and new earth” of the Messianic age (Isaiah 65:17, 2 Peter 3:13), the renewal of the cosmos; the glorification of creation (Romans 8:19-23); the eschatological restoration of all things (Acts 3:21). So, because Jesus has not yet returned in glory with all of His angels, because there has been no judgment “in flaming fire” against those who do not know God nor obey the Gospel (2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, 2 Timothy 4:1, Matthew 25:31-46), because there has not yet been a glorification of the creation, Jesus’ Davidic Kingdom rule is yet future, therefore *any views that see Christ's Davidic reign as a present reality are necessarily false,* and any attempt to maintain those views require one to either spiritualize or allegorize the text, ignoring its plain meaning.
@@ophiuchus9071 That's pretty weak... You are taking Old Testament passages where the one is intent on creating a word picture designed to conjure up images of riders kicking up dust, and another passage describing a windstorm full of lightning, and intending to insert these passages into Jesus's words on His second coming? The reference to "coming on the clouds of heaven" is something that the angel recognized at His ascension when he said "This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven.” Furthermore, your position negates everything I said in my previous post where I pointed out the necessity that the second coming is yet future based on the fact that we are not now living in the regeneration. I mean no disrespect, but this is a position that one can only hold to if he comes to the scriptures with this as his preconceived position. The scriptures do not permit preterism.
@@ophiuchus9071 You said: *"Jesus was seated in heaven in 70 AD"* I have already discussed Jesus's seating in a previous post. Please refer to that one. You said: *"But on Pentecost, Jesus actually returned to them as He promised He would."* I'm sorry, but the scripture doesn't say that at all. The Scripture says that the Spirit came and filled them. Jesus never returned after the ascension in Acts 1. The scriptures are clear that He will come in like manner to His ascension, and that is not what occurred in Acts 2. You said: *"How can someone say Christ has not come to dwell in their flesh and still claim to be a Christian?"* Don't put words into my mouth, that's not what I'm saying, and I think you know that. Yes, the scriptures talk about Christ being in someone (Cf., Galatians 2:20, Ephesians 3:17, etc.), however there is no warrant in scripture to equate this with the second coming. Again, see my earlier post explaining that this only occurs at the time of the regeneration, and not before. You said: *"Have you been born again and received the Holy Spirit> Because this is necessary in understanding."* Wait, so you think that because I am not a Preterist, then I am not a Christian? OK, this conversation is over. I will not respond any farther. Have the last word, whatever, I'm done.
Minute 4:58 No darling she did not! Do you read her mind from the future? She believed that She and Her brother would be resurrected in the last days of the Covenant! Love it.
Hey Doug, Let’s debate Preterism vs Full Preterism on any channel you want. Standing for Truth, Apologetics Dog, or the Gospel Truth would be a few good ones.
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'm with you, it seems pretty clear that at least some preterist ideas are Biblical and reasonable, but I can't go all the way. Oddly full preterism seems entwined with New Perspective theology in my mind.
In 1975, there was NO known New Perspective Theology We were studying the Bible. Not the word/windy church, Father's. Eusibius was read because of his recounting of the Destruction of Jerusalem, mostly from Josephus. The rest of the church Fathers were playing footsie with their heretical church father brethren. Please go back to the Bible, Old and New Testaments. Creeds are nothing but a pedagogical explanation in theological shorthand. Useless for looking at the Word of God. Except to point out the church theological missteps. Futurists have no future in understanding the Eschaton of God Almighty the Lord Jesus Christ. Just failure after failure, hoping to guess right on some fictional dates and personality of Anti-christ or man of sin. The futurists' futility is amazing and exhaustive. They are like Darwinian Evolutionists, the Darwinians are looking for the missing link, which never shows up. And the futurists looking for that cloud carrying Jesus. The clouds were real but not physically real. Oops. Futurists can not see with spiritual eyes.
Before His incarnation He did not have a human body like ours although He could take an appearance like ours as He did with Abraham. One of the big things about His time on earth 2000 years ago was that He had an actual physical body like us, born of a virgin and therefore without sin. He became human. Recall that after His resurrection He allowed the apostles to touch Him and see for themselves that He was not just a spirit but that His actual physical body was alive again. Gnostics of the time tried to teach that The Lord was in a spiritual body and wasn't actually human, which nullifies His work on the cross, or rather attempts to.
@@highlightning6693 You should really cut the biblical scholar man of God routine - it's impossible for heathen to believe in God his Son or written word especially caucasians - utterly impossible - example - "what did Christ look like" in his carnation - you'll say anything but what's written - because your people are haters of Christ - but go ahead describe his appearance
@@habakkuk2510 most of what you posted reads like hostile rambling. The most we know about Christ's physical appearance comes from Isaiah 53:2 - "He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. *He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him* ". That's talking about Jesus. I didn't try and describe the appearance of the Lord so I can only assume that your comment stems from some bitterness you have towards believers in general.
@@bigscarysteve I've never read that term in the bible - it sounds like a cliche Caucasian made up to try to subtly hide their racism - are you a red Hebrew ed-o-mite??
I am SouthernBaptist and have come to partial preterism by way of Gary DeLamar (please forgive spelling if incorrect), so i own much to preterism but cannot agree. Hopefully more of my SBC friends and brothers can explore an alternate end times view.
Thank you so much Pastor Doug for this wonderful commentary! So grateful for this message! It comes across loud and clear with love and clarity to the glory of the Lord!!! You've been a key influence in bringing me to Postmil as well as Gary for which I will always be grateful. I pray that he will come to see the truths in your message very soon and that God will be glorified.
Partial Preterism IS another form of Futurism. Regardless if it is correct or not, it's just ignorant to not see this obvious fact. And the Creedal argument is simply ridiculous. One can EASILY trust that the church got the authorship of the NT correct via proximity (working backwards from there to get the OT) without insisting they could make authoritatively binding creedal statements. Those are two entirely different categories and DW's conflating the former with being a creed is simply wrong.
The problem big man is that you do not have the guts to step up to the plate and debate Don Preston and/or Michael Sullivan and see how well your arguments stand up. Until such time as you (and the other "Moscow Boys") grow a pair and publicly debate this position what you say here is just dribble. Be men, step up to the challenge and defend your position.
While we're subtweeting Gary, can we also ask him to stop attacking strawman Hal Lindsay 1972 dispensationalism and begin interacting with what prominent academic dispys are teaching in 2023? That would be nice.
EPHESUS LOL (Acts18:18-21) And PAUL after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren and he came to "EPHESUS", and left them there: but he himself entered into the synagogue, and reasoned with the "JEWS" when THEY desired him to tarry longer time with them, he consented not But bade THEM FAREWELL, SAYING, I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem: BUT I will RETURN AGAIN unto YOU, if God will. And he sailed FROM Ephesus (Zechariah 11:14) Then I cut asunder mine other staff, even Bands, that I might BREAK THE BROTHERHOOD BETWEEN JUDAH and ISRAEL (kingdom split) (2nd Chronicles 13:16-17) And the children of IsraYel FLED before JUDAH: and God delivered them into their hand. And Abijah and his people SLEW them with a great slaughter: so there fell down SLAIN of ISRAEL five hundred thousand chosen men (☝️War) (2nd Chronicles 28:5-6) And he was also delivered into the hand of the king of ISRAEL, who smote him with a great slaughter For Pekah the son of Remaliah SLEW in JUDAH an hundred and twenty thousand in one day, which were all valiant men (☝️War) (Ezekiel 37:19,22) Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of EPHRAIM, and the tribes of ISRAEL his fellows, and will put them without him, even with the stick of JUDAH, and make them ONE stick, and they shall be ONE in mine hand and I will make them ONE NATION in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all(Christ) and they shall be NO MORE TWO NATIONS neither shall they be DIVIDED into two kingdoms any more at all (☝️Both kingdoms made 1again) (Ephesians 2:14) For he is OUR peace, who hath made BOTH ONE, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between "US" ☝️ Ephesians like all of Paul's epistles was written to ethnic Israelites NOT heathen - change your profile name
@@Ephesians-yn8ux You obviously didn't know that Ephesians along with all of Paul's epistles were written to ethnic bloodline Israelites - in your biblical ignorance the word "gentile" led you to believe his epistles were written to you heathen lol - so rather than speak "truth" you'll hurl insults and flat out lie to uphold your false blasphemous doctrine - example - who does the bible say Paul was preaching to in "Ephesus"?? forked tongue activate 👇 (Acts18:18-21) And PAUL after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren and he came to "EPHESUS", and left them there: but he himself entered into the synagogue, and reasoned with the "JEWS" when THEY desired him to tarry longer time with them, he consented not But bade THEM FAREWELL, SAYING, I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem: BUT I will RETURN AGAIN unto YOU, if God will. And he sailed FROM Ephesus
@@Ephesians-yn8ux Again who does the bible say Paul was preaching to in "Ephesus"?? 👇 (Acts18:18-21) And PAUL after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren and he came to "EPHESUS", and left them there: but he himself entered into the synagogue, and reasoned with the "JEWS" when THEY desired him to tarry longer time with them, he consented not But bade THEM FAREWELL, SAYING, I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem: BUT I will RETURN AGAIN unto YOU, if God will. And he sailed FROM Ephesus
I'd highly recommend Heaven Misplaced as well as Doug's commentary on Revelation, read before Chilton's Day's of Vengeance..... Gary North's Millennialism and Social Theory.
Great analysis, but I feel that most of your points regarding resurrection and the rising of the dead is easily rebutted by saying THE resurrection is referring to spiritual resurrection. Lazarus' first resurrection was physical, but he died, that wasn't the resurrection because as you said it's supposed to be into an undying body which is correct, it's a spiritual resurrection. In the same vein, Jesus' resurrection was manner A, but it had to be done in that manner to fulfill prophecy, ours would be very similar to His in that we will also be resurrected to a life with the Father, in manner B because there is no need for us to be resurrected into our corrupt bodies. And so on
I was just studying this intently last night especially 1 Cor 15:35-49 and this is the conclusion I come to as well. I also think faith in God is faith in the invisible God. No images, not bodies. Jesus came once in the body. Our faith is not in the body. Our faith is still in the invisible God. We don’t look for images and signs and wonders to ground our faith. I don’t look forward to a fleshly coming of Jesus Christ, his work is finished, he has made me clean and has reconciled me back into the presence of God now. That is glorious, that is the glorious fulfillment.
Chesterton’s fence is logically invalid to any surveyor, and to anyone who understands what a marking stone is. Fences get put up by people who don’t know the true boundary with an alarming amount of ease. If the fence doesn’t coincide with the boundary markings (or have an express and blatant reason not to) then it should be torn down with haste lest anyone else assume the fence equals the true boundary and draw any further conclusions based on that wrong headed idea. - an actual surveyor
Full Preterism is the only escatological view that is true to scripture. Any other position makes Jesus a false prophet. He CLEARLY promised His second coming would come in the first century
The only schatalogical view that it true to scripture? Well that's obviously what _you_ would say, but since Jesus never said anywhere that he would come in the first century then how could he possibly be a false prophet? Now I'm sure that you are well versed in the popular futurist view involving a generation in the future, but I have a slighty different view than that which I can support perfectly with scripture. And actually it is full preterism that makes God a false prophet - in several different ways. Scripture for exampe points out the fact that there is a future hope for Israel. Full preterism denies this.
I was always taught that those mentioned as leaving their graves in Matthew 27:52-53 were only those saints who had died since the beginning of the preaching of John the Baptist, thus linking this passage to Luke 16:16.
Fun and good read but not really an argument. Doug just stated his position. Fine. However, what these signatores and a bunch of others are doing to a dear brother, Gary, is wrong. Publicly and behind his back, calling him heretic, insulting him personally. Doug should get his name off that letter without any doing from Gary. This letter was made and sent and published with bad blood. These "we do this out of love" is a bunch of crap. Gary is a brother in the Lord, a gift to the Church. Stop this craziness. Act like men, not like little jealous kids and little good for nothing gang affiliates. You are men of God. We have respected you and Sandlin, and Jeff and James, and Britto, etc for a long time. Hell, even Jeff has praised Gary as his heroe. Gary has been asking these questions for a long time. 25 years! So, what if he is a preterist? So friking what? Like you have all figured out. Has he denied our Lord? The Trinity? Justification by faith? A lot of people watching. What a shame.
Gary DeMar along with the rest of the ICE brothers is where the Truth is faithfully taught! These wishwashy tossed around with every wind of doctrine idiots that achieve nothing as far as having a regenerating effect on the World remind me of the Laodicean Church spoken of in Revelation! Yes, He will spew you out of His mouth!
Minute 6:43 Douggy come on, We who are in Christ do not die and go to Hades or Sheol anymore! We go to be with Our Father and Christ! But somehow I think you already know this. Clever.
@@TwentyTwoThirtyThree No he is not, he is simply asking the right questions, and he doesn't call Full Prets heretics, he sees their points, but has not crossed over, he's in process and may stay a Partial Pret, but the "other side" is upset with him for just asking questions.
@@mcgragor1 Pastor Joel confirmed with Gary himself that he holds to the full preterist view. This is also why he was dropped from the roster at Joel's church conference.
@@TwentyTwoThirtyThree No, Pastor Joel wanted him to affirm or deny some questions like the others, Gary would not, but he has said clearly, even recently, he is NOT a FP, what he is saying, is he thinks FP who love Jesus and are otherwise orthodox, should be counted as brothers and that the FP indeed have some very good points, and Partial Prets have some very hard contradictions, with some of their affirmations, that need to be sorted out. He remains a Partial, Post Mil, but with questions and may be on the fence with some, but remains where he was, but thinks we need to be talking about these things. That is my best interpretation of what I think he has been saying.
Brother Doug (I'm being sincere here) You are a futurist post mill theonomist. Isn't FP actually a threat to your futurist Postmill Theonomist position? Love in Christ (sincere again) brother David up her in snowy but - yeah - melting Canada.
I've been studying end times and preterism for the past year. I was not sure which way on the scale I was leaning, but FP was making sense. However, when I looked at 1 Cor. 15 where Paul talks about the last enemy to be destroyed is death, and the fact that evil still exists in the world meaning that Satan is still devouring, I cannot in good conscience accept a FP view. I do believe that the OD is reference to 70AD only. I also believe that the rapture has occurred, also in 70AD, but was not a physical phenomenon. I draw this conclusion from the fact that 1 Cor. 15:52 states, that we will all be changed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. The trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. Now compare this with 1 Thess. 4:16-17. The Lord will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. The trumpet blowing tells us that this is the SAME event. The dead in Christ rise first. This is the same as 1 Cor 15 where the dead are raised incorruptible. Then v. 17 says that we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. So, the change that occurs in 1 Cor. 15 is a spiritual change. Paul is obviously talking about the same event in 1 Cor 15 and 1 Thess. 4. However, in 1 Thess. 4, he expounds upon how we are changed. He doesn't tell the Corinthians anything about being caught up and going anywhere, only that they will be changed. Yet, it is clear that he is talking about the same thing in 1 Thess. 4. However, even as a PP, I believe that there was a resurrection of OT saints and martyrs in 70AD which would correlate with the beginning of the millennium that we are currently in. After all, someone was reigning with Christ for 1000 years per Revelation 20:4. How else would the martyred souls be reigning with Christ? So, while I believe that a resurrection has already occurred, I also believe that there is still some finality remaining in regard to death, Satan, and final resurrection and judgement. While Jesus is reigning, all things have not been put under His feet yet.
Might I suggest that you take a long look at my extended YT video series on 1 Cor. 15 and the resurrection? I think you will find it enlightening to say the least.
Biological death was not the last enemy. If it was then why do we still dies biologically when Christ died in our place. Are we really going to say that Christ died to pay the penalty for our sins, but we still have to pay it anyways? Why did Jesus teach that if we believe in him we will never die (John 5:24, 6:50, 6:58, and 11:25) Was he wrong or did he lie? There is still sin and death in the new heavens and the new earth (Isa. 65:20 and Revelation 21 - 22). Evil does not require Satan, we are perfectly capable of it on our own ( James 1:14-15) When is the last trumpet? If you believe the last trumpet is past (and it is) then you must believe the resurrection is past (and it is). If you believe the resurrection is past then you must believe the second coming and the end of the age are past (and they are). In other words you are a full preterist and do not realize it.
@@cosmictreason2242 There is no good evidence that Revelation was written in the 90s. In fact the evident is overwhelmingly in favor of the early date. Even if it wasn't, what took place shorty after the 90s that could have fulfill the Revelation? If Revelation was written in the 90s it was a false prophecy.
Martha's eschatology wasn't necessarily correct one. Jews of Jesus' times believed in demons and ghosts... and bodily resurrection... as some Christians do now.
Demons exist, the idea that you need to be deadfed three days before your soul passes on odd a superstition God entertained in order to prove resurrection
1,) Theologians are the ultimately authority and God’s word must be conformed to fit their view. 2.) Martha’s resurrection doctrine - Lazarus will rise again at the resurrection at the last day. Jesus’s resurrection doctrine - I am the resurrection and the life. Doug’s resurrection doctrine - Martha is the one that is right. We must follow the outline of the believers who rejected Christ? No where does Christ affirm a resurrection of our physical bodies and Paul clear taught otherwise. Christ said that those worthy of the resurrection at the end of the age (Matthew 24:3 - Mathew 24:34, Heb. 9:26, 1:1-2, 1 Cor. 10:11) would be like angels in heaven (Matthew 22:30). 3.) Doug’s primary eschatological sources seem to be predominately extra biblical. 4.) What is a better resurrection? Is not the resurrection body (spiritual 2 Cor. 15:44) that God gives us (2 Cor. 15:38), which is not the physical bodies we already posses (2 Cor. 15:37), better than our fleshly bodies (2 Cor. 15:42-44)? Why did Abraham long fore a heavenly country and not an earthly one (Heb. 11:16). There is no biblical text that talks about the end of history. Only the end of the age, which came at the destruction of the temple (if you believe Jesus that is). 5.) Once again, the early church defines the Bible, might as well toss our bibles in the trash. Jesus said the final coming would be before some who were standing there listening to him would die (Matt. 16:27-28), which is consistent with all his other teaching and the teachings of the apostles. Romans 8:18 Paul says the glory which is *about to be revealed*. Agree with Doug or agree with Paul. The telos is the consummation of all things. The telos (goal of the ages) according to Paul came upon Paul and his generation (1 Cor. 10:11). Once again, agree with Paul or agree with Doug. Christ resurrected here (on earth) as a sign (Matt. 12:40). No where does the Bible tells us that Christ still has his physical body and John certainly did not think so (1 John 1:1 and 1 John 3:2). The creature (8:21) is mankind, not animals and trees. Again, the Bible does not teach the end of the world. There is death and sin in the new heavens and the new earth, if you believe God’s word that is (Isa. 65:20 and Revelation 21 - 22). 6.) Let’s dig up the graves of dead Christians, after all they can’t still be there since we are resurrected the way Jesus was and he was resurrected after 3 days and his body did not see decay. Why do we get to be resurrection into perfect glorious bodies, but Jesus body still had his wounds? 7.) of course Mathew 27 wasn’t the general resurrection, that would be at Jesus’s second coming, which was to be in the first century (Matthew 16:27-28, Mathew 10:23, Rom. 13:11-13, 1 Cor, 15:51-52, 1 Thess :4:17, 2 Thess. 1:5-9, 1 Peter 1:7, and Heb. 10:37, just to name a few). 8.) 1000 does not symbolize a long period, it symbolizes completeness. A day in your courts is better than a 1000 elsewhere does not mean that 1001 days elsewhere is a good deal (Ps. 84:10), it means that to be in the presence of God is far greater than being anywhere else. God owns all the cattle not just the ones on a certain 1000 hills (Ps. 50:10). Preterism must be wrong because futurist could use it against my (Doug Wilson) point of view. What a meaningless point. You may all agree the full preterism is wrong, but the Bible teaches otherwise. Of course, we know who your ultimate authority is. Doug Wilson says of the fullpreterist: “The boundaries of the scripter he is appealing to are creedily defined.” In other words, the creeds define the Bible. Sorry, Doug, but the creeds are subject to God’s word, not the other way around. Full preterist do not take a scripture not creeds approach. We do take a different approach then you in that we believe the creeds must be in line with the scripture or they are wrong. You define God’s words by the creeds, we define God’s words by God’s word. Provide a single passage that places the second coming in our future. Full preterism is the only biblically consistent eschatology.
I am a partial preterist in a world of southern Baptist dispensationalism. I got there by diligent study of Scripture as the Holy Spirit guided me, bringing Scriptures to mind as my eyes were opened to discrepancies in the widely popular, end-of-the-world-any-moment mindset affecting the Christian world in the 1970's, 80's, 90's. The dispensational view of "the last days" sells a lot of sensational books and movies, not to mention Scofield Bibles, but also a multitude of preachers and teachers who consider themselves to be authorities on end-times theology and alternate viewpoints as heretical. "For the time will come when people will not tolerate sound doctrine and accurate instruction [that challenges them with God’s truth]; but wanting to have their ears tickled [with something pleasing], they will accumulate for themselves [many] teachers [one after another, chosen] to satisfy their own desires and to support the errors they hold..." 2 Timothy 4:3, Amplified Bible
I know I am also an anomaly, I have only ever been in one church since I was saved, most are dispensational, but I have come to be a partial preterist historical premillennial, although I readily admit that of all the things of theology, my eschatology is what I hold most loosely, seeing the reasons why others hold to both amillennial, as well as postmillennial positions, yet not quite convinced to completely leave the premillennial position.
How do you address Bible study discussions that assume dispensationalism, and assume everyone in the study is a premil rapture dispensation believer? I have a hard time as the only one that I know if I’m my Baptist church.
Are you suggesting that the likes of Steven Lawson, Matthew Waymeyer, John MacArthur, Richard Mayhue, and Justin Peters (among many others) do not tolerate sound doctrine and are merely teaching errors to please the masses?
@@lawrencestanley8989 Both Lawson nd Macarthur aren't true dispys, they say they are "leaky". Sadly it is an area they have errors in
@@TwentyTwoThirtyThree
Have you read MacArthur and Mayhue's book "Christ's Prophetic Plans?" It explains Dispensationalism in Michael Vlach's articles in Chapter 1, and explains what Dispensationalism is NOT in Chapter 2. Michael Vlach also has a great book entitled "Premillennialism: Why there Must Be a Future Earthly Kingdom of Jesus," as well as "Dispensationalism: Essential Beliefs and Common Myths." Anyway, I found these books helpful because I have found that many people today, even many well known pastors do not fully understand the position, and instead they believe the myths about it.
Then why have you not accepted Don K Preston's multiple challenges to a debate? If it's such a wacko theory, then crush it, stomp it out of it's misery in a public debate, and let all of us have front row seats to it while we chomp on popcorn.
Exactly. They are scared of the debate, that’s why.
If you have seen Doug in a debate about eschatology, you would know its probably not where God wants him, he clearly doesnt do well in that area.
@@CryoftheProphet which debates are you referring to? But yeah, preterists want to see him debate Don Preston, but he won’t. I think it is because he knows full preterism is true.
@@ProphetGreg94 ua-cam.com/video/4S0TQ2dXnms/v-deo.htmlsi=MMKjeH2Y3IJG6-TG
Personally the historic premillennial had the most to offer in this discussion. Doug seemed like a fish out of water..
Is Matthew 10:23 about 70 AD, or is it about Jesus coming as the King to Israel? The answer is found below in Zech. 9:9. Did Jesus "cometh" as the King of Israel riding on a donkey during the week He was crucified? If Matthew 10:23 is about 70 AD, Peter ignored the commandment given by Jesus in Matthew 10:5-7, when Peter went to the house of Cornelius. It did not take the disciples forty years to take the Gospel to Israel. In Romans 1:16 Paul said the Gospel was taken "first" to the Jews. This time period of the Gospel going "first" to Israel is found in Matt. 10:5-23, and Acts chapter 2, and Acts 10:36-38, and Galatians 1:14-18.
Zec 9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.
The Old Covenant age died at Calvary when God ripped the temple veil in half from the top to the bottom at the moment His Son died at Calvary. There is no record in the NT of any person coming to salvation outside of the New Covenant between Calvary and 70 AD. Hebrews 7:12 proves there was a change in the law before 70 AD. We are not come to Mount Sinai in Hebrews 12:18. We are come instead to the New Covenant Church of Mount Zion and the blood of Jesus in Hebrews 12:22-24. This passage was written in the present tense before 70 AD.
If the Hyper-Preterists (Full-Preterists) were correct the Old Covenant age would come back into existence if a temple were rebuilt, and animal sacrifices are renewed.
Any basic book on Astronomy proves we are not now living in the "eternal" New Heavens and New Earth, because the sun only has a limited amount of nuclear fuel. We now understand the nuclear reaction inside the core of the sun, because of the testing of thermonuclear weapons.
"We are not allowed to establish a system with the clear passages and then force fit the unclear passages into our system"
This is so good.
Partial Preterists has unclear passages they can’t escape (Matthew 10:23,16:27-28, Luke 21:22, Daniel 12:1-3,7,9,13, Revelation 1:3,7,9,19, 11:2,14:4,17:10, 22:14-15). Full Preterism is flawless.
"'I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God" What is unclear about this passage? It is so clear.
@@billhesford6098 Those time statements don't count, since they aren't creedal. hehe. BTW, I agree with you.
@stacyturbeville6863
Interesting take. I knew something was amiss when you said PP "can't escape" passages like Matt 10:23. Actually, PP (like myself) use that verse to JUSTIFY PP and stump Futurists.
@@stuffipost137 it doesn’t support partial Preterism either because Partial Preterists are futurists.
Where can I find "the end of history" in the scripture?
Dan
It’s just how we say it to distinguish the various ends of time periods. The Apostles wrote that they were in the last days, so if we just say “the last days” are still coming, we introduce some confusion.
The “end of physical earth” is never mentioned in scripture
@@allthingsbing1295, I agree. If there is an end of the physical earth in the scripture I cannot find it. The Revelation speaks of a continuation of history after the final judgment that has both kings and nations:
_"And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. And _*_the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it."_*_ -- Rev 21:23-24 KJV_
_"... and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. And there shall be no more curse" -- Rev 22:2-3 KJV_
But many theologians speak of an "end of history," and I am curious about what they mean by that.
Dan
I think I heard “at the end of history” several times. Please show the verses that say this. Thank you.
Exactly.
That proves nothing.
He substituted "end of history" in place of ""end of the age." May not be same thing at all. "End of age" can very well be end of the old covenant age.
Yes that end if history tag was a new one on me and I've been around a while.
I say that those interested in a discussion/debate of preterism -- whether to debunk it or support it should agree to discuss/debate it. Stop the name-calling , the mudslinging , and enough of ' h ' word (heretic.)
And it seems only Wilson's side is hiding from the debate.
Thanks Doug. This is really good as an example in disputing with fathers in the faith, and in charity, alongside quality content and exegesis.
This was very clarifying, thank you!
So Doug...Can you give me one scripture that you believe affirms a physical end of the world and of all human history please?
Nothing.
You're asking the wrong question. The consummation of the age does not equal a physical end of the world. Wilson nor other postmill advocates for that.
@@paulv.6040 OK so according to Wilson and other post mills which parts of Revelation are fulfilled and which are still in the future?
@@thecanberean Some have different views. Don't know for sure what there's are but IMO, Rev. 20-22 is present Kingdom age.
@@thecanberean But that is not about the "end of the world."
Never go full preterist.
If this is from what I think it is, you are a genius.
I was going to make this comment before I saw it 😂. Well done.
Preterism is the truth that makes sense.
Full preterism is the only fully consistent interpretation of eschatology.
@@Ajsirb24perhaps according to the wisdom of man, but it is inconsistent with the wisdom of God.
Gary's obviously got a few of these guys feeling a bit uncomfortable. He raises some serious biblical questions in his podcasts which I have yet to hear refuted scripturally by partial preterists. The whole letter writing thing and asking him to answer 3 questions was demeaning and childish.
And BTW wasn't 'the church' wrong about justification for 1,500 years 😏
Paul was writing to the Corinthians, not you. They were being raised (present tense) in 1 Corinthians 15, and therefore, that alone should tell you that the sting of death was not physical death, since those he was writing to were already alive physically. Your ideas are full of presumptions and ideas not from the scriptures, but from tradition (creeds).
I always enjoy hearing Doug's teachings. But I don't always agree with him. And, unless he were to deny the deity of Jesus, or adopt universalism, or possibly, misspell "TULIP", I wouldn't kick him out of my assembly. And I wouldn't threaten him with it in social media either. But that's just me.
As Doug's hypothetical letter from Hypothetical Gary stated, I also wouldn't be able to make a case for any "end of history" eschatological view. Mostly because I can't find an ounce of logical support for an "end of history" or "last day" of a kingdom that was prophesied by both Isaiah and Daniel to be eternal, without end. And no human has been able to convince me that I should discard logic in order to accept such an absurd idea. Jesus (God) IS logical. His name, the Logos, isn't just coincidentally spelled similarly to the word 'logic'.
But I am very curious to hear from someone - anyone - who thinks they can explain this to me without violating the Three Laws of Thought and, as long as you're at it, please tell me what God's word says about what is expected to happen in the days after "the last day", because it seems that dissolving the cosmos "at the last day" is not at all described in the Greek of God's word. Peter only speaks of the dissolving of the "elements" (principles, or rudiments) of old covenant Judaism, and an examination of the Greek, to me, makes this plain as well as a logical conclusion for the end of the old covenant. Yes, "the works in it" (the old covenant temple and all associated things, both physical and ceremonial elements, including sacrifice of animals and human priesthood based on a certain genetic makeup)... Those things - ALL of them - WERE burned up in AD70 in quite a blaze as it's been described by historians, that is, in a quite literal fashion as well as being symbolically described.
Also, it seems from the writings of Paul, John, Peter, and James, that they ALL expected Jesus' return "at the last day" to be soon (to them) rather than thousands of years in the future. Maybe someone can convince me to accept the logical contradiction of "the apostles were all confused" and "God's word is God-breathed," because to me, those don't work as a team. I believe the apostles DID write the inspired word, but I don't believe the Holy Spirit gave them confusing messages to write. He's not the author of confusion, and look how much we get when we stop accepting normal meanings for simple words like "last day" or "this" or "generation" or "soon" or "at hand." (Revelation includes them half dozen times and they appear to be symbolically positioned as 'bookends' for the Revelation of Jesus Christ.
Finally, for someone much smarter than I, can you answer (or even guess) how it is that the Greek word “μέλλω” (mello), which means: “about to” could go untranslated - that is, ignored - by translators so many times, when the natural inclusion of the word changes the meanings or implications of so many events being described. Ideas? Please feel free to share. Conspiracy theories will also be considered. They do happen. Psalms 2.
Personally, I believe that ALL mentions of "the last day" refer to the singular last day of the old covenant. An eternal kingdom cannot, by logical definition, have a last day. But I'm always looking for a way to dissolve logic. Not. ;)
It appears that my challenge to Doug Wilson to discuss full preterism with me in a formal debate has been removed. Hmmm.
Doug Wilson is wholly unprepared and lacks the ability to debate a full preterist apologist.
Why else do you think he wants to change the subject?
@@timmartin5987 I agree, Tim.
@@MrDonPrestonI don’t slim
@@Lance-o8k And what is that supposed to mean?
@MrDonPreston
It’s no wonder why nobody will waste their time debating something as absurd as hyper preterism.
I love Gary and have learned an awful lot listening to him. As i also love the signers if the letter who i am familiar with Doug,kenneth,James and Jeff. It Grieves me that the letter was written as it has created an absolute which can only mean a damaging division among brothers. Im a partial preterist and post millennial and having listened to Gary explain his position on his podcast I really fail to see what he has done wrong here. There are texts which do merit further discussion and nothing is settled by creeds or confessions if that were the case virtually all reformed churches have erred in no longer holding to the WCOF and the pope being the antichrist and man of sin.
Surely before drawing lines in the sand with letters you could all get together with Gary over the word of God only and have a good discussion.
I feel that Gary is one step away from being denounced as a heretic by you all and this really grieves me. Please listen to what the man has to say and don’t divide over this issue.
Doug's hypothetical letter at the end is simply strong arming while appearing to be lenient, instead, Gary should be able to say, "I am not sure on all 3 questions based on scripture, and I would like for you to explain to me your answer on these 3 questions using scripture alone, and with full knowledge that some of you (Doug/Durbin) believe that Matt 24 is fulfilled and also believe we are in the New Heavens and earth and then try to match that with your other beliefs. Did Christ come back to THAT generation then, like He said or not? If He did, which you both affirm, then where do you find another coming of Christ? Gary is asking good questions, Martin Luther did the same, you should to.
The different types of Christ’s coming has been addressed by all or most of the parties. Coming in judgment of apostate Israel vs. coming at the end of history for the great resurrection and final judgment. Remember, nowhere is “second” coming found, and also remember that in Revelation’s early chapters, Jesus mentions potential coming to judge various churches in various places on earth, presumably at various times. We don’t need to list them by his 7th coming, 8th coming, etc. (or 17th, counting known and unknown OT Era appearances?).
We can just say “final coming,” which partial preterists hold as future, and fulls hold as past. Jesus certainly did come in 70AD. Just not the way futurists think.
@@f308gtb1977 Are you a Full Preterist? Some of what you said sounds like John Noe (if you've heard of him), on the comings of Jesus.
@@mcgragor1 no I’m not, Partial like Wilson, etc. Though I love DeMar and hope he doesn’t go all the way he seems to be leaning.
@@f308gtb1977 I'm calling myself an "Open" Preterist, I've looked into Full Pret a lot and the difficulty is, its hard to argue against to be honest, but I still have questions, which is all Gary was doing, was asking questions, and so far no one has answered them.
@1:05 “As many wives have said to their spouse while standing on the porch in the dark, with him fumbling at the lock, "It goes the other way.” Lol 😂
yes I thought it was funny too. reminds me of several things.
This guy is always funny, I like him.
As a dispensationalist I wouldn't ever root for full preterists. I have no desire to see partial preterists fall into a clear heresy, I don't need to win an argument that bad
Having been a futurist for a long time and teaching that ideology, it so saddens me when folks say things like this, viz. that they'll never accept something regardless of any logical argumentation that demonstrates Jesus was either a liar or a lunatic due to several statements He made; I finally had to force myself to accept that Jesus is Lord and was right while I was wrong and thus had to go about making sure the nature and purpose of biblical eschatology fit within the time parameters provided.
@@TonyDenton Mr. Denton, glad to see you here! Your videos were a great blessing to me in helping shed such Hellenistic/Westernized dogma!
Earl Grey Hot wrote, "As a dispensationalist I wouldn't ever root for full preterists. I have no desire to see partial preterists fall into a clear heresy, I don't need to win an argument that bad."
Atheists use the doctrine of the premillennialist to "prove" that Jesus was a false prophet. They never consider the possibility that the words of Jesus are true, and the premillennialist is the false prophet.
Dan
Watched the whole video waiting to hear some scriptural arguments why Doug is rejecting fp, but I didn't hear anything of that nature.
Damage control? G.K. Chesterton is supposed to help us FP.
Pete, I'm a futurist and can give you scriptural arguments against full preterism if you want. It's up to you.
@@paulbrennan4163 I heard them all Paul. It's pure dreaming and fantasies and totally unbiblical. Doug is teaching that we're now living in the NH and the NE, but he's still wairting for something more, lol!
@@Chopin_JT I have no idea with what Doug teaches, I haven't even watched the video. Right now I'm just interested in how full preterists deal with the fact that scripture indicates that there is a future hope for Israel?
@@paulbrennan4163 God is finished with Israel, he came to destroy Jerusalem in 70AD. We are now in the NC, the old has vanished and done away with. It was merely a type and a shadow of the real spiritual Jerusalem with a spiritual temple. Don't make the same mistake that the Jews in the first century made, expecting a physical kingdom on earth with a temple and animal sacrifices and an earthly king. Jesus rejected that idea and ran from them when they tried to grab him to make him a king in Jerusalem. The writer of Hebrews showed that those earthly realities were merely a shadow of the heavenly reality.
Well done.
I never miss one of Gary’s Podcasts. One of the reasons he’s my favorite Podcaster is you can hear those thin pages turning. Some time ago I sent in an email to the show asking him which verses in scripture would he say refer to the coming of Christ at the end of the eschaton. He actually answered my email in a Podcast shortly after it was sent. He said he didn’t know and was still studying. And you know what. I’m perfectly fine with him saying that.
Also, correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Gary say on his March 10th episode that he did believe in the Second Coming? I just get the sense that Gary wants to be Biblically consistent.
Yep, totally agree.
Sounds like you're both VERY fond of whoever this Gary guy is.... like...Veeeeeeeeeeery... fond of him.... you might want to examine that....
Agreed!
@@shenanigansofmannanan if you knew Gary you would understand. And you would also know that Doug is very fond of Gary also as his American Vision is part of Canon Press and they often break bread together
That’s why we call him uncle Gary🙌🏽
You obviously are very knowledgeable. Please agree to debate Don Preston so that everyone can hear the best arguments from both camps and make an informed decision. Refusing to debate just makes partial preterists look scared and weak. It also applies that you think those of us who don’t have a bunch of letters behind our names from various seminaries aren’t intelligent enough to understand the arguments.
🎉 Thank you my Pastor Doug
I don't think the letter to Gary was necessary. He is still studying and learning...he hasn't said he's a full preterist. He is just making sure he is really analyzing the Scriptures rather than just agreeing with everything everyone is wanting him to.
Agree 100%. He’s stated this multiple times. He wants to be consistent and, more importantly, Biblical.
This didn't happen in a vacuum
😥😥😥😥😥😥.....😆😆😆😆😆
Every real minister is still studying!
It’s necessary
How or why is it assumed that Martha believed 'the last day' was the end of time? Is it not possible that 2nd temple Jews did not fully understand the resurrection they hoped in? Apparently Martha did not think it meant that Lazarus would rise up to stand on the earth again but to be raised into the heavenly realm at the end of the AGE not WORLD. Jews believed in Sheol and expected their resurrection to be FROM there TO heaven. I cannot find any biblical reference to 'end of time' - age however is confirmed many places. Therefore 'end of time' is the theory...AND we do not have the same hope as the OT Jew who knew his covenant was coming to an end to begin the better hope Messiah would bring in with the NT. Which Jesus continues to share with Martha in John 11:25-26 - v 25 is OT, but we stand in the NT hope of v26!
EDIT:
John 11:23 Jesus saith unto her, Thy brother shall rise again.
11:24 Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.
11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:
11:26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?
11:27 She saith unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world.
When Martha speaks about believing that Jesus is the Christ who was to come into the world, she is speaking about His first coming - not the hope in His 2nd. Which suggests to me that she expected Jesus to fulfill ALL the things the Law and Prophets spoke about Him in that age into which He was born.
Luk_24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
Which includes her hope in the resurrection of the dead - yet not as a return to physical life such as how Lazarus would be raised. This is what Jesus is telling her before He raised her brother. So assuming that for her the last day was an expected end to history/time rather than to the covenant age that was to end in judgment; because this is what the Law & Prophets said was coming to the generation that saw Christ's first coming - would seem to be what Jesus is correcting in her understanding.
Perhaps if Doug would put himself into the 1st century audience that was the generation to which these things were spoken, he would understand the timing & the signs THEY were given.
Marathon word dump. Even changing the playback speed to .75 didn't help.
Hey Doug. Have you been taking speech lessons from Ben Shapiro?
I'm going to have to listen to that again...
As I see it, the major problem with Preterism is this: when Jesus says, “Truly I say, this generation shall not pass away until all these things are fulfilled,” that is a literal statement and then everything else is a metaphor. But before you read the rest of this post, look in a Greek Concordance and you will see that the word “genea” that is translated as “generation” also means race or family.
From the very beginning Satan has wanted to destroy the Jews because He knew that God was using the Jews to fulfill His prophetic will. So, Satan used Hamen, Herod, Hitler and countless others including Islam to destroy the Jewish race. So, if Jesus said, “This Jewish race will not pass away (in spite of Satan’s efforts) until all prophecy will be fulfilled,” that makes more sense.
For instance, Revelation 20 says, “And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. He seized…Satan and bound him for a thousand years…to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.
I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years...they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him...
When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth-Gog and Magog-and to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God’s people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them.” BUT…
In the Preterist view, Satan is NOT bound for a thousand years, the ones who were martyred for Christ did NOT come to life and, they were NOT priests of God and Christ who reigned with Christ for one thousand years. In the Preterist view, Satan did NOT gather the deceived nations (In number they are like the sand on the seashore) for battle against God’s people and evidently God did NOT literally reign fire down on them FROM Heaven and devour them.
As a Preterist, you may say these things happened, but just not in a physical sense and NOT for a thousand years. But that is NOT what scripture says.
Some will say the thousand years is NOT literally a thousand years just like when the Bible says, “God owns the cattle on a thousand hills…” it doesn’t mean He ONLY owns the cattle on a thousand hills.
Well, it didn’t say God’s wealth is LIMITED to the cattle on a thousand hills. We know, as the eternal creator of the universe, God owns EVERYTHING. So, that would be literally TRUE to say God owns the cattle on a thousand hills. He owns those thousand hills AND all other hills. BUT to say the millennial reign ONLY lasted forty years or so, does NOT allow for the verses that say, “When the thousand years are over…” OR the verses that say “we will worship with God and Christ for ONE THOUSAND years.” That would be simply NOT true. ONE THOUSAND years is NOT a metaphor for forty years in any sense of the word.
Also, Matthew 24:30-31: “Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then ALL the peoples of the earth (NOT just Jerusalem) will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, (NOT just Jerusalem) from one end of the heavens to the other."
IF this happened in the first century and ALL the peoples of the earth saw the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, I think it would be the most spectacular event in all of history and historical records around the entire world would be rife with reports of dumbfounded people in total shock at the most amazing sight ever! Notice it says ALL the people of the earth and not just those around Jerusalem. Or are you saying All the peoples of the earth is a metaphor for people around Jerusalem.
Also, Peter says, "The Day of the Lord comes as a thief, the heavens will disappear with a roar, the elements will melt in fervent heat, and the earth and all its works will be laid bare. Sorry, this did NOT happen in the first century Jerusalem.
Again, the Bible says, “ALL the peoples of the earth (NOT just Jerusalem) will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds... And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, (NOT just Jerusalem) from one end of the heavens to the other.”
Jesus also said, " For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now-and never to be equaled again." Whatever happened in the first century was NOT the greatest distress the world has ever been in. If this ONLY happened in and near Jerusalem, how does that surpass the death and destruction experienced in WW1, WW2, Nazi Germany’s horrible torturous murder of 6 million Jews and 6 million non-Jew as well.
Then Jesus said, “Immediately after the distress of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.” This did not happen in the first century.
It just seems to me, that Preterism takes a misunderstanding of the word “Genea” (generation instead of race) and makes EVERYTHING else to be some metaphor that doesn’t even make sense metaphorically.
You must agree with C.S. Lewis then, as he implies that Jesus is a false prophet.
• C. S. Lewis said this: “It is clear from the New Testament that the disciples all expected the Second Coming in their own lifetime. And, worse still, they had a reason, and one which you will find very embarrassing. Their Master had told them so. He shared, and indeed created, their delusion. He said in so many words, ‘this generation shall not pass till all these things be done.’ And he was wrong. He clearly knew no more about the end of the world than anyone else.
Clearly this was written because of the Gary DeMar issue. But Gary has answered it beautifully on his podcast. He does not deny a final return of Christ. He is not a heretic. And frankly, Doug and jeff durbin did him dirty signing that letter. I learned about the preterist view through Jeff, who learned it from Gary. Now they’re trying to throw him under the bus
Gary won’t affirm a final BODILY return of Christ “in like manner” to his ascension
Doug: next time you do a deep theological talk like this, can you start off by defining terms? I'm fuzzy as to the exact definitions of preterism and partial preterism. It would be helpful first start with the definitions.
Full preterism (which is actual preterism since it's ... well ... full) teaches Luke 21:22, viz. that Jesus taught that every i-dot and t-cross of prophecy was fulfilled in/around the time of the events of AD 70, while partial preterism (a misnomer but apparently essential today) believes there are still prophecies to be fulfilled and that they cannot all be fulfilled until an end of time or end of the universe or some renewed Edenic earth situation (meaning things are being looked at in a materialistic manner instead of a spiritual manner).
Contrary to what Tony says, when people say preterism they mean partial preterism, and the heretical view is specified by the apron addition of the full designation. This is the common usage.
I was using logic, not how in your world the term is usually understood to mean; preterism is from the Latin for past, and thus preterist eschatology has to do with how that biblical eschatology is PAST. Partial preterism is therefore an oxymoron.
@@TonyDenton the fact you don’t like the word is irrelevant. Partial preterism is the name for a belief which exists.
Didn't say I don't like the word. My major in college was English grammar, rhetoric, composition, editing, etc., and I just like for folks to use words accurately, not making them mean what they want them to mean.
4:16 It is not an argument for leaving it in, but rather it is an argument for disregarding that person's underinformed conclusions. Whether or not the final conclusion should be to leave it in or take it out, has especially little to do with the conclusions of those who are especially underinformed.
Hi Doug the old testament saints are still waiting in Abrahams bosom for judgement while we go to be with the lord? That's so confusing.
Abraham’s bosom is now with the lord
Not confusing, false.
Im sorry I started reading the comments. I didnt know it was going to devolve into hate, and childish temper tantrums.
That's virtually every comment section.
When you’re discussing a heretical position that denies the bodily resurrection and return of Christ, it’s to be expected (though still sad) that the comments will be hateful and lack the love of Christ.
Where are the Scriptures that define "the end of History". Please don't quote scripture that speaks of the end of the Old Testament age, that is not the "end of History".
REFORMED THEOLOGY:
(Opening Statement)
BRAVO! 👊🥹✝️
Doug Wilson got a kool style , the way he hammers out the message
I'm willing to accept Wilson's comments on the Table of Contents as a creed provided we clarify that its authority comes not from being a creed but from its correspondence to the Word.
Every last thing has been fulfilled Gods has left nothing undone.
Where does the text of scripture teach such a thing?
@@daltonhennen4539 Revelation that’s literally what it’s teaching.
@@lemnisgate8809 do nations still train for war?
@@daltonhennen4539 the world goes on as it always has yet those who are truly in Christ no longer train for war, nice try though.
@lemnisgate8809 you can't spin it that way because that passage is about nations NOT taking up arms against OTHER nations. He will not grow faint or weary until he has established justice in the Earth and the coastlands await his law. That's Isaiah 42.
Also 1 corinthians 15 says he must reign until he has placed all enemies under his feet, and the LAST enemy is death. Habakkuk 2, the world will be as full of the knowledge of the lord as the waters cover the sea.
Not to mention people still die, which automatically means the resurrection and final judgment have yet to happen.
Not everyone who says, Lord Lord, will enter into my kingdom.
I will be honest. I felt like I walked into a room, and instead of being an old man, I was suddenly a child learning at the knee of my fathers books. I had to look up some of the words. I didnt get the gist of all of it but a vague guesstimate of the discussion. just when you think you know something. something like this discussion can come along and just rip that rug out from under you. it is painful to fall upon one's tailbone. but perhaps it is good and necessary thing, to keep us from getting too big for our britches.
David wasn't "still dead" on Pentecost (in sheol). Christ set captives free at ascension as well as being transfigured in to new form (metamorphosis). No point listening after that blunder....
Partial pret = partial Scripture knowledge, apparently.
Read Acts 2:29 and tell me what tense "is" is in
@@natedowney9590 Why can't futurists read more than one verse at a time? You seem to have missed verse 27 and the whole point of that section on David.
David's tomb (a grave that holds a decaying corpse made from dust) WAS and IS still there because he wasn't the Messiah. David was a prophet that pointed towards Christ, one of his own descendents that Sheol/death wouldn't hold. They weren't saying that David is in a "soul sleep" or that he was still in Sheol...
Surely you're not implying that because David's tomb still exists that his soul is still awaiting evacuation from Sheol into reconciliation to the Father... That would make you a literal adversary to Christ's works;
-"to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord."
Also, futurists love to point out how "death" isn't defeated. Maybe you can tell me what "tense" verse 24 is in? Only 5 verses before 29;
-"putting an end to the agony of death"
Death = Sheol, the holding of souls until Christ reconciled them. Death IS defeated according to scripture. He led captives free upon ascension;
-"Therefore it says, “When He ascended on high, He led captive the captives, And He gave gifts to people.”
That's why Moses and Elijah appeared with Christ during His transfiguration/metamorphosis vision. They were freed from Sheol/death's captivity at His ascension.
The "orthodox" believers at that time had almost everything wrong about the Messiah, Doug's reasoning on that one doesn't make sense. I think Gary DeMar is asking the right questions, that is how reformations happen, Doug and the boys put way too much "faith" in the Creeds. I lean Ful Pret, but am happy with Partial Pret Post Mil as well, I am not 100% sure, but I do see more questions that need to be answered by the Partials than the Fulls and based on Scripture alone. Doug used very little scripture (based on the 3 questions they challenged Gary with) here.
I am in the same boat as you with being open an undecided thus far, but DW's arguments here are just silly. The people building fences need to justify them. We don't need to give them any credibility otherwise. I do think we should treat those who disagree, living or dead, in a charity that treats them like brothers, but no more. Listen to their arguments, but they get no special power over us.
I think its coming to a head, Full Pret is gaining ground and I am thinking rightly so, it simply makes the most sense, but I still have questions, but I had questions before...
@@georgechristiansen6785
The bottom line even from someone who grew up and still go to a Southern Baptist Church, is that once you accept Matthew 24 as a past event then you’re bound scripturally to put all time indicators exactly where they’re placed: IN THEIR GENERATION. Ask yourself this: what was the promised New Covenant and New Heaven and New Earth promises? Scripture (the Old Testament) ends promising the Spirit of God among men putting his laws on our hearts. Joel calls this the last days. Peter confirmed that was THEIR DAY AND THE SPIRIT BEING POURED OUT. In other words the point of Revelation 21 and 22 is the nations tasting of the tree for healing (symbolism for salvation in Jesus) and coming into an always open city (the New Covenant Church). There really is neither Jew nor Greek. We now live in the eternal New Covenant Kingdom Age FROM GENERATION TO GENERATION FOREVER. Offspring to Offspring. The Bible is about SPIRIT RESURRECTION NOT PHYSICAL. A new better body post physical death (1 Corinthians 15:42-50).
This is called an overrealized eschatology
@@cosmictreason2242 No. its called truth.
@@ChristCenteredEschatology pretty sure the video you’re commenting on argues that it’s a heresy 🤷
@@cosmictreason2242 I forgot that Doug Wilson video are the ultimate authority. I am sure when ever God needs an answer to something he call Doug and Doug gets him straitne out. To bad Doug was not there when Jesus was, he could corrected all the errors Jesus made.
It would have been nice to get statements on arguments full preterists use, such as the verses that say the resurrection of the dead and the judgment was about to happen.
We can't simply disregard these time statements without doing what Futurists do with partial preterist arguments (ignore or twist scripture). There has to be a completely logical explanation for these time statements other than their clear meaning, or full preterism is true.
To refute full preterism one also has to show that there are different comings of Christ (judgment in 70 AD and one in our future) something that is never taught or even hinted at in scripture.
These are just 2 arguments for full preterism. I'm not saying full preterism is the truth, but unless these arguments are dealt with I will never fully believe it to be false.
Since MT 16:27,28 provide us with the timing of the coming of the Lord in vengeance on that generation as being while some of the Disciples would still be alive; and since MT 23 & 24 give us so much more details of those events about to come on them, culminating with the return of Christ and the gathering of His elect from the four winds of the earth at the felling of that temple in Jerusalem; where is the scriptures that would allude to a still yet future, or “3rd coming,” of the Lord?
Can He not come 8 or 10 times? See Rev. ch.1-3.
Does Lazarus get resurrected or does he get born again?
And what about Ephesians 3:21 "world without end" ?
He was physically resurrected, as a Picture of CHRIST'S Eternal Resurrection Power. We can assume HE was Born Again (which is Spiritual, not physical, and Grants a New Nature, New Heart of flesh in place of the Heart of stone {Ez.}). They are never to be placed in contrast to one another tho
He was revivified. That’s difference
Here 12:25 I would like to point out that Christ fulfilled the prophetic Firstfruit typology pointing to him from Leviticus 23:10-11. He arose on the of first fruits.
Agreed on his last point...
The Hebrew "last day" was not the end of time or history. The Hebrews had no such idea of the end of time. This idea of the end of history or time is such a theological jump, that the rocks below, will not be kind for those who take that leap. It is pure presumption that the "last day" or "days" are anything other than the end of one age and the beginning of another. The Church age or Christian age has no end. The Kingdom is here, and it has no end. Of course you won't debate people like Dr. Don Preston on this very issue, since that probably wouldn't be good for your book sales (or maybe it would). You'll never know, unless you try. Don says the offer is still on. And you know who he is.
No one was resurrected in 70AD where did you get that from
Give him time folks, prophecy is unfolding at alarming rates, particularly in the area of judgement on a fallen world, as in the days of Noah.. Anyone who doesnt embrace at least the premillennial view will soon enough, the world is dissolving, not improving, Christ is returning, not staying hidden, and Christians who have never been persecuted might want to ask themselves why.
14:45 min mark
the sun will be darkened, and we do not revolve around the sun the sun circuits around us above( a local light)
now I understand why so many wrongly understand the written scriptures.
I was a partial Preterist for just over 20 years. But after after further study, I realized the full Preterist position is the correct one. A lot of light bulbs went on when I realized it was all fulfilled.
Hey Doug, as a partial preterist, when did ten gentiles take whole to the coat of a Jew and say; "We will go with you: for we have heard that God is with you"? And this to celebrate the feast of tabernacles of all things. Asking for a friend. BTW, did you see Johnny Mac's sermon on Zechariah 12-14 at the Shepard's Conference? Got any problems with it?
The Jew being referred to is Ye'shua/Jesus, no?
@@AnHebrewChild not from the context can you get that. It is any old Jew.
I'm not a partial preterist, but I do still appreciate you calling out the heresy of full preterism.
Freind, when You read Holy Scripture, do You really go 'None of this has happened, but one day, maybe this one i am reading about called Jesus, will ____". Naw, no CHRISTian Does This. So, [i will not speak for You] You do believe that CHRIST has Actually Accomplished some of what You read, right?
@@Chirhopher Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again
@@PresencePioneer He even stated quite boldly some of those standing in front of him would see him come. "For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done. 28 Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom." In their lifetime - judgement - ad70.
@@billhesford6098 What Jesus stated quite boldly was referring to the transfiguration.
@@paulbrennan4163 Coming in the clouds in the OC is clearly judgement. Babylon, Assyria, Egypt. Transfiguration had none of this.
Listen to minute 4:25 to minute 4:27 and before that put on your discerning Christian hat! Doug Wilson KNOWS that there is no Second Coming or at the very least he KNOWS that Scripture does not speak to a Final Coming of Jesus Christ! Funny, I listened to this before and did not pick up on that. Clever Lad!
The most shaken and nervous Ive ever seen Doug is in a three way discussion about Eschatology. Not his strong suite of talents to be sure. His otherwise fountain of wisdom however shouldnt be thrown out with the baby.
Martha’s eschatology is spot on
John 11:24
Martha said to him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection…
“on the last day.”
I prefer Jesus's: John 11:25 "I am the resurrection and the life." Matthew 22:30 "For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven."
Yes, the last day of the old covenant. Full preterism makes sense. Don't take verses out of their context.
Last day of what?
And when did Martha become a reliable theologian anyway?
@@georgechristiansen6785well, certainly not the last day of the Jewish aeon, since Martha wouldn’t have had a clue about that.
@@TheDareD3vil Why wouldn't she?
Jesus talked about it repeatedly.
Nothing you say makes sense Lazarus wasn’t resurrected he was resuscitated, what type of nonsense is that?
All of the New Testament writers, inspired by the Holy Spirit, wrote their texts to their first century readers, prophesying that the resurrection and the coming of the Lord were to occur in that generation then living and breathing at that time. There was no confusion or misunderstanding on the matter! Even Paul said to his readers; “We shall not ALL sleep.” He knew! Now, here is what we MUST conclude: Either the resurrection and the coming of the Lord did happen when and how they said it would; or God just flat out lied to them!
Are we then to assume that these writers, the Holy Spirit that inspired them, Jesus Christ who said it plainly, and God the Father who brought it forth, ALL got it wrong????????????? BOULDERDASH!
And if God did lie; what else might he have lied about? And can you really trust the bible which you don't believe is actually true and accurate, since you don't believe those prophecies have happened? Do you see how your believing that the bible, with its prophecies, are both true and accurate is the paramount of your faith? You must choose one way or the other! God requires that you believe what he has preserved. Choose..........They did not get it wrong!
Amen! All futurist eschatologies posit a failed Messiah! Totally unacceptable.
The sleep is physical death. Do we no longer physically die?
@@cosmictreason2242 We do not now die. We cast off the physical body to be buried and are united with our spiritual body fit to live there. Remember that Paul said there was a spirit in man that gave him human understanding. That is what goes to heaven.
@@makarov138 “it is appointed For man once to die and after this to face judgment” “the dead in Christ will rise first” sorry your opinion is unbiblical
@@cosmictreason2242 Then what did Jesus mean when he told his disciples: "You shall never die."? JN 11:26
Thank you from Breaux Bridge, Louisiana!
Okay, this is the last one... Minute 12:16 that verse has nothing to do with the Resurrections. Okay I am bored now. Doug Wilson, I thought you knew better.
Your voice sounds so familiar, but not sure from where.
JUMMMM!SO DANIEL 12/7 DOESN'T FULFILLLUKE 21/22,2 THESSALONIANS 1/7?OS DANIEL 12/4 DOESN'T FULFILL REVALATION 22/10?OR LUKE 21/24 DOESN'T FULFILL REVELATION 11/2?OR DANIEL 9/26,27 DOSENT FULFILL EZEQUIEL 38/16,REVALATION 20/9,LUKE 21/20?
I thought the video was going to explain and defend the position Biblically. I don't know, after reading Matthew Waymeyer's brilliant little book, "Revelation 20 and the Millennial Debate," I just can't believe anything other than a dispensational, futuristic premillennial position. I know that position catches a lot of flak today, but nothing else makes sense to me because it seems to spiritualize or allegorize texts when there is no warrant in the text to do so.
@@ophiuchus9071
I agree that scripture interprets scripture, but in coming to the conclusion that you have, I do not believe that you have done so.
Dr. Robert L. Thomas, in addressing those who assert that Jesus has already come, and how some utilize the account of Josephus in order to further their assertion that Jesus came in the clouds at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD, he asked in his "Theonomy and the Dating of Revelation:" "How is it that the “cloud-coming” of A.D. 70 involved no personal coming of Christ, but the “cloud-coming” at the end of history does (Acts 1:11; 1 Thessalonians 4:13 ff, Matthew 24:30; 26:64; Revelation 1:7; 2:5, 2:16, 2:25; 3:3, 3:11, 3:20; 16:15; 22:7, 22:12, 22:20)? Where did Christ distinguish between two such comings, and where did He say that He would personally appear at one and not at the other? The answer to both questions is “nowhere.”
When we let scripture speak, we know that His coming is yet future.
@@ophiuchus9071
What passage of scripture says that "coming in the clouds of heaven" is a phrase that means, "a spiritual judgment from God?"
In Matthew 19:28, 25:31, Jesus says that He will assume His glorious Davidic throne and reign over Israel *in the regeneration, at the time of His second coming when He comes in glory and all of the angels with Him, and not before* (cf. Luke 1:32-33, 2 Samuel 7:12-13, 17, Isaiah 9:7). At that time, the disciples of Jesus will judge/rule over the twelve tribes of Israel that has been restored. Until this happens, “difficult times will come” in the last days as “evil men and imposters will proceed from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived” (2 Timothy 3:1, 13); things will not be improving here on earth, but getting worse (cf. Luke 17:26ff, 18:8, Matthew 24:37).
While it is true that all authority has been given to Jesus in heaven and on earth (Matthew 28:18), and it is true that Jesus has indeed sat down at the right hand of God, having finished His work of making purification of sins for His people as promised for His first advent (Hebrews 1:3), *this is not His Davidic throne rule,* this is Jesus fulfilling His role as intercessor; “He always lives to make intercession for them” with the Father (Hebrews 7:25, 9:24, Romans 8:34). Jesus will remain seated at the right hand of the Father as Intercessor until the Father makes the enemies of the Son a footstool for His feet (Psalm 110:1), only then will Jesus rule “in the midst of Your enemies;” only then will “He will bring forth justice to the nations” (Isaiah 42:1); this time of Jesus’s rule is the Millennium after the Second Coming. Until then, “He (the Father) must reign until He (the Father) has put all His enemies under His (Jesus) feet” (1 Corinthians 15:25), lastly defeating death itself. Until the Millennium, it is the Father who reigns (1 Corinthians 15:25). This time of judgment takes place after the seventh trumpet of the tribulation, and it is at this time that “the kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ,” it is only then that Jesus first begins to reign (Revelation 11:15-19), when all things are subjected to Him (1 Corinthians 15:28), and we then see His coronation as King in Revelation 19.
This will fulfil the vision of Daniel 7:13-14 where He receives universal authority from the Ancient of Days. Note that in Daniel 7:9, the thrones are not even set up until the time of judgment (cf. Revelation 20:4). This is very significant. Jesus explicitly ties His Davidic throne reign with His second coming to earth and not before. This shows that Jesus’ kingdom is future from our standpoint. The kingdom of God is present wherever Christ is (cf. Luke 17:20-21), therefore the kingdom comes when Jesus comes again; while the kingdom of God was incomplete at His first advent since many rejected Him then, after His second advent when He is given an everlasting dominion, glory, and a kingdom, all the peoples, nations, and men of every language will serve Him (cf. Daniel 7:14), and this kingdom of God can only be seen by those who are born again (John 3:3) who will receive and possess the kingdom of God at this time (Daniel 7:18).
This truth makes positions like preterism, amillennialism and postmillennialism all impossible since these positions assert that Jesus is now reigning from the Davidic throne in His millennial kingdom in this age.
Incidentally, the “regeneration” spoken of in Matthew 19:28 refers to the “new heavens and new earth” of the Messianic age (Isaiah 65:17, 2 Peter 3:13), the renewal of the cosmos; the glorification of creation (Romans 8:19-23); the eschatological restoration of all things (Acts 3:21). So, because Jesus has not yet returned in glory with all of His angels, because there has been no judgment “in flaming fire” against those who do not know God nor obey the Gospel (2 Thessalonians 1:7-10, 2 Timothy 4:1, Matthew 25:31-46), because there has not yet been a glorification of the creation, Jesus’ Davidic Kingdom rule is yet future, therefore *any views that see Christ's Davidic reign as a present reality are necessarily false,* and any attempt to maintain those views require one to either spiritualize or allegorize the text, ignoring its plain meaning.
@@ophiuchus9071
That's pretty weak... You are taking Old Testament passages where the one is intent on creating a word picture designed to conjure up images of riders kicking up dust, and another passage describing a windstorm full of lightning, and intending to insert these passages into Jesus's words on His second coming? The reference to "coming on the clouds of heaven" is something that the angel recognized at His ascension when he said "This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven.” Furthermore, your position negates everything I said in my previous post where I pointed out the necessity that the second coming is yet future based on the fact that we are not now living in the regeneration.
I mean no disrespect, but this is a position that one can only hold to if he comes to the scriptures with this as his preconceived position. The scriptures do not permit preterism.
@@ophiuchus9071
So did Jesus come back at Pentecost, or did He come back in 70AD? I mean, how many times is Jesus going to return in your view?
@@ophiuchus9071
You said: *"Jesus was seated in heaven in 70 AD"*
I have already discussed Jesus's seating in a previous post. Please refer to that one.
You said: *"But on Pentecost, Jesus actually returned to them as He promised He would."*
I'm sorry, but the scripture doesn't say that at all. The Scripture says that the Spirit came and filled them. Jesus never returned after the ascension in Acts 1. The scriptures are clear that He will come in like manner to His ascension, and that is not what occurred in Acts 2.
You said: *"How can someone say Christ has not come to dwell in their flesh and still claim to be a Christian?"*
Don't put words into my mouth, that's not what I'm saying, and I think you know that. Yes, the scriptures talk about Christ being in someone (Cf., Galatians 2:20, Ephesians 3:17, etc.), however there is no warrant in scripture to equate this with the second coming. Again, see my earlier post explaining that this only occurs at the time of the regeneration, and not before.
You said: *"Have you been born again and received the Holy Spirit> Because this is necessary in understanding."*
Wait, so you think that because I am not a Preterist, then I am not a Christian? OK, this conversation is over. I will not respond any farther. Have the last word, whatever, I'm done.
The quick and the dead. Nice one
Minute 4:58 No darling she did not! Do you read her mind from the future? She believed that She and Her brother would be resurrected in the last days of the Covenant! Love it.
Hey Doug, Let’s debate Preterism vs Full Preterism on any channel you want. Standing for Truth, Apologetics Dog, or the Gospel Truth would be a few good ones.
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'm with you, it seems pretty clear that at least some preterist ideas are Biblical and reasonable, but I can't go all the way. Oddly full preterism seems entwined with New Perspective theology in my mind.
Nonsense. I'm a full preterist (Covenant Eschatology) and none of us believes such. Do you want to elaborate?
Nope. No connection.
In 1975, there was NO known New Perspective Theology
We were studying the Bible.
Not the word/windy church, Father's.
Eusibius was read because of his recounting of the Destruction of Jerusalem, mostly from Josephus.
The rest of the church Fathers were playing footsie with their heretical church father brethren.
Please go back to the Bible, Old and New Testaments.
Creeds are nothing but a pedagogical explanation in theological shorthand.
Useless for looking at the Word of God.
Except to point out the church theological missteps.
Futurists have no future in understanding the Eschaton of God Almighty the Lord Jesus Christ. Just failure after failure, hoping to guess right on some fictional dates and personality of Anti-christ or man of sin.
The futurists' futility is amazing and exhaustive.
They are like Darwinian Evolutionists, the Darwinians are looking for the missing link, which never shows up. And the futurists looking for that cloud carrying Jesus.
The clouds were real but not physically real. Oops.
Futurists can not see with spiritual eyes.
Does Christ still have His body? Does He look like us, and we Him? Has Christ always had a body? From eternity to eternity?
Before His incarnation He did not have a human body like ours although He could take an appearance like ours as He did with Abraham. One of the big things about His time on earth 2000 years ago was that He had an actual physical body like us, born of a virgin and therefore without sin. He became human. Recall that after His resurrection He allowed the apostles to touch Him and see for themselves that He was not just a spirit but that His actual physical body was alive again.
Gnostics of the time tried to teach that The Lord was in a spiritual body and wasn't actually human, which nullifies His work on the cross, or rather attempts to.
@@highlightning6693
You should really cut the biblical scholar man of God routine - it's impossible for heathen to believe in God his Son or written word especially caucasians - utterly impossible - example - "what did Christ look like" in his carnation - you'll say anything but what's written - because your people are haters of Christ - but go ahead describe his appearance
@@habakkuk2510 Are you a Black Hebrew Israelite?
@@habakkuk2510 most of what you posted reads like hostile rambling. The most we know about Christ's physical appearance comes from Isaiah 53:2 -
"He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. *He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him* ".
That's talking about Jesus.
I didn't try and describe the appearance of the Lord so I can only assume that your comment stems from some bitterness you have towards believers in general.
@@bigscarysteve
I've never read that term in the bible - it sounds like a cliche Caucasian made up to try to subtly hide their racism - are you a red Hebrew ed-o-mite??
I am SouthernBaptist and have come to partial preterism by way of Gary DeLamar (please forgive spelling if incorrect), so i own much to preterism but cannot agree.
Hopefully more of my SBC friends and brothers can explore an alternate end times view.
Thank you so much Pastor Doug for this wonderful commentary! So grateful for this message! It comes across loud and clear with love and clarity to the glory of the Lord!!! You've been a key influence in bringing me to Postmil as well as Gary for which I will always be grateful. I pray that he will come to see the truths in your message very soon and that God will be glorified.
Partial Preterism IS another form of Futurism. Regardless if it is correct or not, it's just ignorant to not see this obvious fact.
And the Creedal argument is simply ridiculous. One can EASILY trust that the church got the authorship of the NT correct via proximity (working backwards from there to get the OT) without insisting they could make authoritatively binding creedal statements. Those are two entirely different categories and DW's conflating the former with being a creed is simply wrong.
The problem big man is that you do not have the guts to step up to the plate and debate Don Preston and/or Michael Sullivan and see how well your arguments stand up. Until such time as you (and the other "Moscow Boys") grow a pair and publicly debate this position what you say here is just dribble. Be men, step up to the challenge and defend your position.
WHATABURGER and Doug.
While we're subtweeting Gary, can we also ask him to stop attacking strawman Hal Lindsay 1972 dispensationalism and begin interacting with what prominent academic dispys are teaching in 2023? That would be nice.
It's not subtweeting. He's being called out directly. There is nothing obscure.
If I was on a deserted island and could only bring one Biblical teacher with me, it would be you Doug.
EPHESUS LOL
(Acts18:18-21) And PAUL after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren and he came to "EPHESUS", and left them there: but he himself entered into the synagogue, and reasoned with the "JEWS" when THEY desired him to tarry longer time with them, he consented not
But bade THEM FAREWELL, SAYING, I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem: BUT I will RETURN AGAIN unto YOU, if God will. And he sailed FROM Ephesus
(Zechariah 11:14) Then I cut asunder mine other staff, even Bands, that I might BREAK THE BROTHERHOOD BETWEEN JUDAH and ISRAEL
(kingdom split)
(2nd Chronicles 13:16-17) And the children of IsraYel FLED before JUDAH: and God delivered them into their hand.
And Abijah and his people SLEW them with a great slaughter: so there fell down SLAIN of ISRAEL five hundred thousand chosen men
(☝️War)
(2nd Chronicles 28:5-6) And he was also delivered into the hand of the king of ISRAEL, who smote him with a great slaughter For Pekah the son of Remaliah SLEW in JUDAH an hundred and twenty thousand in one day, which were all valiant men
(☝️War)
(Ezekiel 37:19,22) Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of EPHRAIM, and the tribes of ISRAEL his fellows, and will put them without him, even with the stick of JUDAH, and make them ONE stick, and they shall be ONE in mine hand and I will make them ONE NATION in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all(Christ) and they shall be NO MORE TWO NATIONS neither shall they be DIVIDED into two kingdoms any more at all
(☝️Both kingdoms made 1again)
(Ephesians 2:14) For he is OUR peace, who hath made BOTH ONE, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between "US"
☝️ Ephesians like all of Paul's epistles was written to ethnic Israelites NOT heathen - change your profile name
@@habakkuk2510 You have no idea who I am nor of my salvation in Christ.
You handle God’s Word like a fool.
@@Ephesians-yn8ux
You obviously didn't know that Ephesians along with all of Paul's epistles were written to ethnic bloodline Israelites - in your biblical ignorance the word "gentile" led you to believe his epistles were written to you heathen lol - so rather than speak "truth" you'll hurl insults and flat out lie to uphold your false blasphemous doctrine - example - who does the bible say Paul was preaching to in "Ephesus"?? forked tongue activate
👇
(Acts18:18-21) And PAUL after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren and he came to "EPHESUS", and left them there: but he himself entered into the synagogue, and reasoned with the "JEWS" when THEY desired him to tarry longer time with them, he consented not
But bade THEM FAREWELL, SAYING, I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem: BUT I will RETURN AGAIN unto YOU, if God will. And he sailed FROM Ephesus
@@Ephesians-yn8ux
Again who does the bible say Paul was preaching to in "Ephesus"??
👇
(Acts18:18-21) And PAUL after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren and he came to "EPHESUS", and left them there: but he himself entered into the synagogue, and reasoned with the "JEWS" when THEY desired him to tarry longer time with them, he consented not
But bade THEM FAREWELL, SAYING, I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem: BUT I will RETURN AGAIN unto YOU, if God will. And he sailed FROM Ephesus
You'd never get off the island. hehe
Minute 5:32 Riddle me this Doug Wilson... where did Lazarus go when he "died" the first time? Hmmm? Come on you know! You are smart, you know
Very well said!
I'd highly recommend Heaven Misplaced as well as Doug's commentary on Revelation, read before Chilton's Day's of Vengeance..... Gary North's Millennialism and Social Theory.
Ive been waiting for this
Great analysis, but I feel that most of your points regarding resurrection and the rising of the dead is easily rebutted by saying THE resurrection is referring to spiritual resurrection. Lazarus' first resurrection was physical, but he died, that wasn't the resurrection because as you said it's supposed to be into an undying body which is correct, it's a spiritual resurrection. In the same vein, Jesus' resurrection was manner A, but it had to be done in that manner to fulfill prophecy, ours would be very similar to His in that we will also be resurrected to a life with the Father, in manner B because there is no need for us to be resurrected into our corrupt bodies. And so on
I was just studying this intently last night especially 1 Cor 15:35-49 and this is the conclusion I come to as well. I also think faith in God is faith in the invisible God. No images, not bodies. Jesus came once in the body. Our faith is not in the body. Our faith is still in the invisible God. We don’t look for images and signs and wonders to ground our faith. I don’t look forward to a fleshly coming of Jesus Christ, his work is finished, he has made me clean and has reconciled me back into the presence of God now. That is glorious, that is the glorious fulfillment.
@@andreastarks2780 precisely, well put
I think you misspoke if you think Jesus will be getting a new body that’s not the one he ascended with
Chesterton’s fence is logically invalid to any surveyor, and to anyone who understands what a marking stone is.
Fences get put up by people who don’t know the true boundary with an alarming amount of ease. If the fence doesn’t coincide with the boundary markings (or have an express and blatant reason not to) then it should be torn down with haste lest anyone else assume the fence equals the true boundary and draw any further conclusions based on that wrong headed idea.
- an actual surveyor
Congratulations you just let out a bull who gores someone
Full Preterism is the only escatological view that is true to scripture. Any other position makes Jesus a false prophet. He CLEARLY promised His second coming would come in the first century
The only schatalogical view that it true to scripture? Well that's obviously what _you_ would say, but since Jesus never said anywhere that he would come in the first century then how could he possibly be a false prophet? Now I'm sure that you are well versed in the popular futurist view involving a generation in the future, but I have a slighty different view than that which I can support perfectly with scripture.
And actually it is full preterism that makes God a false prophet - in several different ways. Scripture for exampe points out the fact that there is a future hope for Israel. Full preterism denies this.
I was always taught that those mentioned as leaving their graves in Matthew 27:52-53 were only those saints who had died since the beginning of the preaching of John the Baptist, thus linking this passage to Luke 16:16.
Doug can you define the word "universe" in 2 Macabees 7:23
thanks!
God bless
Minute 7:41 Actually not it is not! You are just guessing
Fun and good read but not really an argument. Doug just stated his position. Fine. However, what these signatores and a bunch of others are doing to a dear brother, Gary, is wrong. Publicly and behind his back, calling him heretic, insulting him personally. Doug should get his name off that letter without any doing from Gary. This letter was made and sent and published with bad blood. These "we do this out of love" is a bunch of crap. Gary is a brother in the Lord, a gift to the Church. Stop this craziness. Act like men, not like little jealous kids and little good for nothing gang affiliates. You are men of God. We have respected you and Sandlin, and Jeff and James, and Britto, etc for a long time. Hell, even Jeff has praised Gary as his heroe. Gary has been asking these questions for a long time. 25 years! So, what if he is a preterist? So friking what? Like you have all figured out. Has he denied our Lord? The Trinity? Justification by faith? A lot of people watching. What a shame.
You are speaking as a fool
@@cosmictreason2242 Says the one who is guilty of Hell Fire by calling one a fool who professes Christ!
Gary DeMar along with the rest of the ICE brothers is where the Truth is faithfully taught!
These wishwashy tossed around with every wind of doctrine idiots that achieve nothing as far as having a regenerating effect on the World remind me of the Laodicean Church spoken of in Revelation! Yes, He will spew you out of His mouth!
The arrogance and lack of biblical understanding presented in this video is extraordinary.
so too, the comments.
Minute 6:43 Douggy come on, We who are in Christ do not die and go to Hades or Sheol anymore! We go to be with Our Father and Christ! But somehow I think you already know this. Clever.
Excellent
So is gary demar Full Preterist yet or not 😅
He is, yes
@@TwentyTwoThirtyThree No he is not, he is simply asking the right questions, and he doesn't call Full Prets heretics, he sees their points, but has not crossed over, he's in process and may stay a Partial Pret, but the "other side" is upset with him for just asking questions.
@@mcgragor1 Pastor Joel confirmed with Gary himself that he holds to the full preterist view. This is also why he was dropped from the roster at Joel's church conference.
@@TwentyTwoThirtyThree No, Pastor Joel wanted him to affirm or deny some questions like the others, Gary would not, but he has said clearly, even recently, he is NOT a FP, what he is saying, is he thinks FP who love Jesus and are otherwise orthodox, should be counted as brothers and that the FP indeed have some very good points, and Partial Prets have some very hard contradictions, with some of their affirmations, that need to be sorted out.
He remains a Partial, Post Mil, but with questions and may be on the fence with some, but remains where he was, but thinks we need to be talking about these things. That is my best interpretation of what I think he has been saying.
@@mcgragor1 your interpretation? Because my previous comment was confirmed my Joel in an email.
Brother Doug (I'm being sincere here) You are a futurist post mill theonomist. Isn't FP actually a threat to your futurist Postmill Theonomist position? Love in Christ (sincere again) brother David up her in snowy but - yeah - melting Canada.
I've been studying end times and preterism for the past year. I was not sure which way on the scale I was leaning, but FP was making sense. However, when I looked at 1 Cor. 15 where Paul talks about the last enemy to be destroyed is death, and the fact that evil still exists in the world meaning that Satan is still devouring, I cannot in good conscience accept a FP view. I do believe that the OD is reference to 70AD only. I also believe that the rapture has occurred, also in 70AD, but was not a physical phenomenon. I draw this conclusion from the fact that 1 Cor. 15:52 states, that we will all be changed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. The trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. Now compare this with 1 Thess. 4:16-17. The Lord will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. The trumpet blowing tells us that this is the SAME event. The dead in Christ rise first. This is the same as 1 Cor 15 where the dead are raised incorruptible. Then v. 17 says that we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. So, the change that occurs in 1 Cor. 15 is a spiritual change. Paul is obviously talking about the same event in 1 Cor 15 and 1 Thess. 4. However, in 1 Thess. 4, he expounds upon how we are changed. He doesn't tell the Corinthians anything about being caught up and going anywhere, only that they will be changed. Yet, it is clear that he is talking about the same thing in 1 Thess. 4. However, even as a PP, I believe that there was a resurrection of OT saints and martyrs in 70AD which would correlate with the beginning of the millennium that we are currently in. After all, someone was reigning with Christ for 1000 years per Revelation 20:4. How else would the martyred souls be reigning with Christ? So, while I believe that a resurrection has already occurred, I also believe that there is still some finality remaining in regard to death, Satan, and final resurrection and judgement. While Jesus is reigning, all things have not been put under His feet yet.
Subjugated, not destroyed.
Might I suggest that you take a long look at my extended YT video series on 1 Cor. 15 and the resurrection? I think you will find it enlightening to say the least.
It helps to know that Revelation was written in the 90s. Preterism Of any kind is DOA
Biological death was not the last enemy. If it was then why do we still dies biologically when Christ died in our place. Are we really going to say that Christ died to pay the penalty for our sins, but we still have to pay it anyways? Why did Jesus teach that if we believe in him we will never die (John 5:24, 6:50, 6:58, and 11:25) Was he wrong or did he lie?
There is still sin and death in the new heavens and the new earth (Isa. 65:20 and Revelation 21 - 22). Evil does not require Satan, we are perfectly capable of it on our own ( James 1:14-15)
When is the last trumpet? If you believe the last trumpet is past (and it is) then you must believe the resurrection is past (and it is). If you believe the resurrection is past then you must believe the second coming and the end of the age are past (and they are). In other words you are a full preterist and do not realize it.
@@cosmictreason2242 There is no good evidence that Revelation was written in the 90s. In fact the evident is overwhelmingly in favor of the early date. Even if it wasn't, what took place shorty after the 90s that could have fulfill the Revelation? If Revelation was written in the 90s it was a false prophecy.
I think the millenial reign ended with great schism between East and west
Martha's eschatology wasn't necessarily correct one. Jews of Jesus' times believed in demons and ghosts... and bodily resurrection... as some Christians do now.
Demons exist, the idea that you need to be deadfed three days before your soul passes on odd a superstition God entertained in order to prove resurrection
Bingo.
There were more fringe groups than just Sadducees and Pharisees.
1,) Theologians are the ultimately authority and God’s word must be conformed to fit their view.
2.) Martha’s resurrection doctrine - Lazarus will rise again at the resurrection at the last day.
Jesus’s resurrection doctrine - I am the resurrection and the life.
Doug’s resurrection doctrine - Martha is the one that is right.
We must follow the outline of the believers who rejected Christ?
No where does Christ affirm a resurrection of our physical bodies and Paul clear taught otherwise.
Christ said that those worthy of the resurrection at the end of the age (Matthew 24:3 - Mathew 24:34, Heb. 9:26, 1:1-2, 1 Cor. 10:11) would be like angels in heaven (Matthew 22:30).
3.) Doug’s primary eschatological sources seem to be predominately extra biblical.
4.) What is a better resurrection? Is not the resurrection body (spiritual 2 Cor. 15:44) that God gives us (2 Cor. 15:38), which is not the physical bodies we already posses (2 Cor. 15:37), better than our fleshly bodies (2 Cor. 15:42-44)? Why did Abraham long fore a heavenly country and not an earthly one (Heb. 11:16).
There is no biblical text that talks about the end of history. Only the end of the age, which came at the destruction of the temple (if you believe Jesus that is).
5.) Once again, the early church defines the Bible, might as well toss our bibles in the trash.
Jesus said the final coming would be before some who were standing there listening to him would die (Matt. 16:27-28), which is consistent with all his other teaching and the teachings of the apostles.
Romans 8:18 Paul says the glory which is *about to be revealed*. Agree with Doug or agree with Paul.
The telos is the consummation of all things. The telos (goal of the ages) according to Paul came upon Paul and his generation (1 Cor. 10:11). Once again, agree with Paul or agree with Doug.
Christ resurrected here (on earth) as a sign (Matt. 12:40). No where does the Bible tells us that Christ still has his physical body and John certainly did not think so (1 John 1:1 and 1 John 3:2).
The creature (8:21) is mankind, not animals and trees.
Again, the Bible does not teach the end of the world. There is death and sin in the new heavens and the new earth, if you believe God’s word that is (Isa. 65:20 and Revelation 21 - 22).
6.) Let’s dig up the graves of dead Christians, after all they can’t still be there since we are resurrected the way Jesus was and he was resurrected after 3 days and his body did not see decay. Why do we get to be resurrection into perfect glorious bodies, but Jesus body still had his wounds?
7.) of course Mathew 27 wasn’t the general resurrection, that would be at Jesus’s second coming, which was to be in the first century (Matthew 16:27-28, Mathew 10:23, Rom. 13:11-13, 1 Cor, 15:51-52, 1 Thess :4:17, 2 Thess. 1:5-9, 1 Peter 1:7, and Heb. 10:37, just to name a few).
8.) 1000 does not symbolize a long period, it symbolizes completeness. A day in your courts is better than a 1000 elsewhere does not mean that 1001 days elsewhere is a good deal (Ps. 84:10), it means that to be in the presence of God is far greater than being anywhere else. God owns all the cattle not just the ones on a certain 1000 hills (Ps. 50:10).
Preterism must be wrong because futurist could use it against my (Doug Wilson) point of view. What a meaningless point.
You may all agree the full preterism is wrong, but the Bible teaches otherwise. Of course, we know who your ultimate authority is.
Doug Wilson says of the fullpreterist: “The boundaries of the scripter he is appealing to are creedily defined.” In other words, the creeds define the Bible. Sorry, Doug, but the creeds are subject to God’s word, not the other way around.
Full preterist do not take a scripture not creeds approach. We do take a different approach then you in that we believe the creeds must be in line with the scripture or they are wrong. You define God’s words by the creeds, we define God’s words by God’s word.
Provide a single passage that places the second coming in our future.
Full preterism is the only biblically consistent eschatology.
Too bad he’s hasn’t applied these principles to the false trinity.
Apokatastasis 1 Timothy 4:10
My eyes crossed on this one
same. I had to google some of the words. not every person, certainly not even every Christian are familiar with this subject. it is new to me as well.
You speak so quickly and say so much, I bearly need to speed the video up.