Is Hyper-Preterism Biblical?

Welcome back to another episode of Revealed Apologetics. I'm your host Eli Ayala and today we're gonna be talking about a very interesting topic and it is relating to something what's called in theology eschatology.

Okay for those who are well versed in theological studies eschatology is a big old fancy word that you'll be familiar with but for those who are new to theology or just kind of diving into the topic eschatology deals with last things so eschatology is the study of end times right now of course the the topic of eschatology as is most topics in theology is very controversial and there are a wide spectrum of views out there you may be familiar with the very popular view which is the technical term would be a pre -millennial dispensationalism

I apologize in theological studies they're all sorts of you know all sorts of technical language that's kind of annoying and scary for people but for those who are initiated in theological studies this is kind of old hat but eschatology like all areas of theology is super important okay and so it's an important topic to discuss now growing up I grew up within a context that that taught let me see here someone's that taught from a pre -millennial dispensational perspective so if you guys are familiar with like the left -behind series you know where you have a rapture where Christians are taken and there are those who are left behind who undergo a seven -year tribulation you have the

Antichrist the mark of the beast and all those sorts of interesting topics I grew up with that perspective and it was only later in life where I picked up the book by Gary DeMar last day's madness the obsession of the modern church and I highly recommend you pick up that book that is the book that got me into this idea of partial preterism partial preterism okay this episode we're gonna be dealing with full preterism or hyper preterism but that book that I mentioned there before last days madness was a partial preterist sort of book and it critiqued the very popular pre -millennial dispensational perspective that kind of left behind theology and for the first time

I was opened up to this whole new perspective and I if I can use this word

I kind of was converted over to the partial preterist view what

I found very helpful and I'm sure my guest is going to dive into this a little bit more deeply but the issue of the time text the time text that you find all throughout scripture there's these words like soon and near as it relates to kind of these end time scenarios and prophecies those became very important to me as I was reading in Gary DeMar's book there and it really kind of swayed me in that position another interesting side note and I'm kind of this is all a precursor

I'm waiting for people to come in but I want to tell you a little bit about my story not a lot of people know this but one of the ways that got me into apologetics was actually my study of eschatology when

I came to Gary DeMar's book that's where I was introduced to American vision and of course when you get hooked to American vision and you look through their apologetic section there's all this in this material on Greg Bonson and so that was kind of like my gateway drug along with some other things into the realm of apologetics presuppositional apologetics and so I've never looked back since then that's kind of been a the door that got me into the whole realm of apologetics along with a bunch of other issues that I'm sure folks have heard in past episodes that I've alluded to now if you're interested more in my perspective

I'm going to be releasing a video and maybe a couple of weeks entitled everything

I believe and so literally what I'm going to do is I'm gonna do a live stream where I'm just gonna share my theological perspectives on every major theological topic okay so what's my view on creation what's my view on salvation what's my view on eschatology

I'll go into a little bit more details with respect to that so stay tuned for that all right well what is full preterism or hyper preterism and why is it an issue is it biblical and for to answer that question

I have a friend of mine Sam Frost who I don't want to introduce any of his background information

I want him to do that because interestingly enough Sam has had a very interesting relationship with the full preterist or the hyper preterist movement and so I want him to share with us a little bit about his experience there and what brought him out of that movement you know what are the biblical reasons and things like that and we'll kind of move the discussion from there

I also encourage questions as always if you have any questions you can put them in the comments please preface your question with the word question or the letter

Q so that I can differentiate between your question and the various comments that I am sure this conversation will produce so without further ado

I'd like to introduce my friend Sam Frost how's it going Sam all right well it's my pleasure you're looking a little choppy there hopefully you won't have any technical difficulties

I don't know I don't know any Bible jokes so let's see here okay are you okay there yeah yeah

I'm fine okay I think I could hear you look a little choppy but I could hear you so why don't you tell folks a little bit about who you are and your relationship with the full preterist position well currently right now

I'm have a THM working on my PhD and was just appointed as a elder of a local church here

Presbyterian and Reformed Church so Redemption Life Bible Church here in Newcastle Indiana with Pastor Tyler Jackson and been in church basically all of all of my life came out of the

Foursquare Gospel was baptized in the Foursquare Gospel Church went through the charismatic movement late 70s early 80s

Bible College explored several different denominations Bible College really opened up a lot of getting my bachelor's there opened up a lot of doors that you don't hear growing up just in a kind of a shell the

Foursquare Gospel Church they stemmed off like the Holiness Pentecostal Assemblies of God kind of movements kind of branched out there in the late 50s 60s and was founded and more or less most of the

Assemblies of God Church of God charismatic it doesn't really matter at least back in that in that time assimilated a dispensationalism that was the popular

Hal Lindsey view at the time and of course with reference to Schofield but it really was really was

Hal Lindsey that really put it on the map for me and so growing up as a child and then as a preteen and teen that that was my that was my view basically was the

Schofield reference Bible going to college real quick Sam so the

Schofield reference Bible position that that kind of reflect a kind of a pre -millennial dispensation right yeah okay and then of course

Hal Lindsey that Lindsey is doing just that so when you grow up as a child you know as a kid you know six seven eight years old you're starting to understand things you know you you implicitly trust the pastor that's that's teaching this was a relatively large church in the town here okay and good man

I mean I have fond memories of growing up in the church but going to college again you're exposed as you should be you're exposed to all of these different views that you did not know existed and of course church history and all of this and it wasn't until really my sophomore year professor because we were accredited we could get really high quality professors and we

I got professor Dal Robinson the Summer Institute of Linguistics and he was reformed and worked with Bible translation and all of that and that's where the bug really hit for theology and prior to those two years my first two years of college

I was wondering what am I doing here and then after like the second year somewhere around there the bug hit real hard and and I was the nerd that hung out in the library and was reading footnotes and making sure those footnotes lined up with the footnotes you know so when there was like a break in the class

I'd go to the library you know you're a bookworm you're a bookworm

I remember when you when you came to debate on Long Island and it was you myself and Anthony Eugenio I think they were picking you up from a bookstore that you were kind of wandering into or something like that you know you're a bookworm yeah my son and I my son is actually too we just collect books we look for books all the time so you know you're introduced and you know the new ways

I'm a millennial post -millennial you start hearing about this kind of stuff somebody handed me the Lorraine Bettner's book it was

Brian Starberg a friend of mine still and still to this day handed me a Bettner's book

Reformed Doctrine of Predestination I remember reading that and thinking this is structural

I mean you know Bettner does a great job in that in that book and that was the one that lost me into Reformed and Calvinism and thinking and then very early this is late 80s came across because I was working working in the bookstore campus bookstore and Dominion Press Gary North Ray Sutton James B Jordan David Chilton all those guys out of Tyler Texas started buying their book and of course read

Paradise Restored by David Chilton and that book and then I read it again and then I went running through the forms to anybody that would listen you've got to read this book so that that's my that was my foray into eschatology that's yeah that that book changed the whole nine yards so so so you grew up you grew up within the context of a premillennial dispensational perspective for those who don't know what that is that's kind of the left -behind sort of theology right the rapture people get left behind there's a seven -year tribulation at the end of the seven years

Jesus comes back you have a millennial reign the sort of the thing that most people are familiar with that's your background however after reading

David Chilton's book Paradise Lost you your eyes were open the scales were you know fell from your eyes and you're like oh my goodness everyone's got to check out this position now

Chilton was a partial preterist am I correct calling you could call him that partial preterist he he views you know all of Matthew 24 and then the bulk of Revelation as fulfilled in the 66 to 70

CE the war of the Jews and the Romans so so so why don't so why don't we start with with defining our terms then so most people will be familiar and I keep you saying left behind only because we're at a popular level people know the the books and things of course there are more sophisticated versions of that and I know there are variations within those perspectives but but when we speak of the the futurist perspective those who think that say for example

Matthew 24 Luke 21 Mark 13 the Olivet discourse is something that is in our future right that's usually associated with kind of the the dispensational view you would identify as a preterist now why don't you define for us what the term preterist is what you know if you could just give us a brief definition of the position and then perhaps we can dive a little bit into what full preterism is and what your problems are with it well

I you know hearing your introduction I don't know if I would call myself a preterist okay what what

I when I wrote this misplaced hope because I started talking

Chilton footnoted in his book days of vengeance which is his commentary on on Revelation sure

I read you know bought the first edition when the thing came out we were like waiting for this thing so it comes out we read it and he has a footnote there about a guy named

Max King and he's just in this little footnote says Max King believes that all prophecy was fulfilled in 70

AD well that okay that's my interest I thought now how in the world could anybody do that so I found the book he lived in Warren Ohio I'm in Indiana and I was at Florida at the time but I just I knew where Warren was and found the book ordered the book read it

King made a very compelling 700 page argument it's a massive volume and I saw what he was doing because if in in the dispensationalist framework if Matthew 24 the bulk of that is fulfilled then those first Thessalonians 4 1st

Corinthians 15 Philippians 3 all of Revelation the problem was an all -or -nothing approach and the full were operating very much like a dispensationalist framework it's an all -or -nothing approach there's no partial piece milling progressive there's none of that going on whatsoever and because I was raised in a dispensationalist background and I had that framework it was very easy for me to go from Chilton's well what we call word partial preterism that actually is a pejorative that we full players were using against people like tomorrow because we would joke around saying how can you be partially pregnant so it was actually a silly term me and Preston and Stevens and others we started calling people like Eric more

Sam I do have to interrupt you your yeah your your image is freeze is frozen up if you can do if you could do me a favor

I could hear you but if you could sign off and then sign back in one more time and I'll tell a couple of eschatology jokes while we wait all right okay so we'll give we'll give

Sam an opportunity sorry about that I know you guys could probably hear but the visuals were

I don't want to I don't want it to distract from the content so so real quick so we've been talking about eschatology the study event times

Sam was explaining that he was raised within a dispensational premillennial perspective which is sort of like that kind of left behind theology and and then we were kind of going into preterism okay preterism refers to the belief that the majority of the prophecies that most people think are in our future actually have been fulfilled and of course you have different views as to what prophecies have been fulfilled and what prophecies are still yet to come so you have a variation within that so hopefully we'll have

Sam back here to kind of continue where we left off hopefully it's kind of a brief summary so just in case you missed it but let's see if we're a little better this time there we go better good okay good much better a thousand times better yeah so well so partial preterism was a phrase that we we pull prayers for hyper prayer that's what we came up with because we were trying to use the word preterist for ourselves because we we realized when

I when I came from the Damar camp and went over into the

Max King Don Preston camp it wasn't that it wasn't that hard of a jump okay the only the only thing that prevented that prevents

I would say people from doing that better better preterist into a hyper preterist is because the issue of bodily resurrection and the end of history the last day

Great White Throne judgment all of those things being future so but if everything is an all -or -nothing approach the dispensationalist approach and that is also the hyper preterist approach it's an all -or -nothing thing if you're operating in that framework and it's very easy to jump from one into the other and become a full preterist from a dispensationalist background and then

I wrote misplaced hope and that sold several thousand copies and the next thing I know

I'm speaking all over the United States at these conferences you know with Don Preston and Ed Stevens and Jack or John Noe and these are all full preterist you know these are all you know especially

Don Don Preston would he's I guess the he's the most vocal leader

I guess but yeah so hype but hyper preterism is very fragmented there's several different things camps and things going on with them but initially 2002 somewhere around there we launched off of R .C.

Sproul's book because I was studying Hebrew under dr. Bruce K Waltke and I noticed that R .C.

Sproul I was on the RTS the Reformed Theological Seminary yes that book right there and any local bookstore actually it's not any local bookstore you got to order it but yes

I enjoyed it when I was at Reformed Seminary there in Orlando doing my

Hebrew studied two years of Hebrew there and that book came out and I read it and lo and behold I couldn't believe it

Max King is mentioned in this book I thought little old Max King from Warren Ohio Church of Christ guy is mentioned by R .C.

Sproul well that just I knew that was going to throw the spotlight R .C.

Sproul readers on who's Max King and they're gonna start looking up this

Max King guy Ned Stevens which they did and so from that period 1999 2002 to roughly around 2004 2005 there was a big interest in WAVE and we we had probably four or five conferences a year during that period of time and then

I started also a hyper -preterist church we were running several conferences we had a debate with Don Preston and James B Jordan and we had a debate with Thomas Ice and Mark Hitchcock and Don Preston so we you know we were getting on the spotlight the problem was is the movement as a whole began to seriously fragment

I was even criticized for being a pastor because the type of preterism you don't have pastors hmm the the gifts of the ministry is for the building up of the man to complete maturity which happened in 70

AD hmm okay so so before you get there so okay so so so partial preterism is the view that the majority of prophecies biblical prophecies have been fulfilled especially the ones that most people today think are in our future so on a partial preterist view no future great seven -year tribulation no

Antichrist no literal mark of the beast sort of deal the millennium is not a a literal 1 ,000 years right yeah okay so so all of those things that many people looked in our future have already occurred now except some key things like the bodily return of Christ the bodily resurrection of both you know the dead and of course that the the transforming of the body of those who are alive right caught up with the

Lord and and so partial preterism awaits that future resurrection and that's what keeps it within orthodoxy am

I correct it's kind of yeah it still affirms those key central aspects of Christian theology now that said what is full preterism and why don't you unpack the reasoning behind why a full preterist kind of holds to the view that they hold so definition and explanation well it gets them back to that all or nothing so all prophecy falls or stands stands or falls together okay so with dispensationalism if you have some part of Matthew 24 70

AD then you have to have all of it that's that's how they think okay and so the their holy future all these prophecies and revelation is all future everything is all future and the full preterist arguing just like that says that all of these prophecies which stand or fall together is wholly past so they're all past and that includes resurrection of the dead great white throne judgment the whole nine yards even even the

Millennium which is from the ascension of Christ to 70 AD that's the Millennium that's the thousand years you can't have anything after 70

AD being fulfilled or being standing in need of being fulfilled because then you're off into a partial preterism so a thousand year reign for them is from the ascension of Christ yeah the 70

AD yeah yeah you got to have it that's really tiny I mean

I don't take a thousand to be literal but like dag I mean it would be a little bit longer just 30 or 40 years that's a hard look that was one of the hard ones to do but when you're so committed to 70

AD and in your mind and then you've got your reputation and everything you've got these books and all this stuff out there you got to do what you got to do so they hold that all of this all of this prophecy that kind of the end times prophecy

Matthew 24 Luke 21 Mark 13 and all these things revelation and of course they hold to as I as I would as well that the book of Revelation was completed before the year

AD 70 so before the destruction of the temple so they would they would shoehorn all of those prophecies through AD 70 so that's the key event the destruction of Jerusalem is where you have this this really this all of this prophecy coming together and finding its fulfillment before the generation passed away which is what

Jesus says in Matthew 24 right yeah they yeah everything so you think well what about resurrection of the dead yeah you've got to a spiritual eyes it okay you could use the phrase like Don Preston would use this is a covenant resurrection so basically it is a corporate body view so the church was in Adam and Adam was put to death in the body of Christ and the body of Christ was raised and made whole and complete in 70

AD I this I'm being extremely brief okay to get there but that's basically but the another view

Ed Stephen says no there were people that were literally raised in 70 AD and there was a literal rapture in 70

AD because because Stephens wants to hold to a bodily aspect because he finds that very hard to get away from and for Corinthians 15 however the it's ludicrous to assume that all these tens of thousands of Christians disappeared throughout the

Roman world and nobody noticed or so you can see the weaknesses there but when you're again when you're so committed to 70

AD being the the termination point mm -hmm then you have to you've got to reinterpret everything to fit that frame so I saw

I was thinking of something so one of the arguments and perhaps is this used by many

I mean it's used by partial predators but is this used by full predators as well the the argument that the book of Revelation was completed before the year 80 70 and one of the powerful evidences for that is the lack of mention of the destruction would they use that as kind of a piece of evidence yeah they fully endorsed the idea of Revelation being in other words that's that's an action that's a dogma obviously you have to have that in full predators well but but the reason why

I bring that up is that if the lack of mention of the destruction of Jerusalem in 80 70 is evidence that it was that it hadn't been destroyed yet all right wouldn't the silence of this apparent rapture be evidence against that yeah see me it would seem like a double standard in interpretation there there's a lot of double standards that goes on okay and especially when you start dealing with the early church or the who clearly did not think 70

AD resurrection of the dead and all of that they clearly did not do that so then you have to say well what happened to them well then they lost or did not understand what went on and all of us and it really becomes difficult there because now you're just revising you're acting sort of as a revisionist at that point because here's the other double standard that the perfection of God and the glory of the brightness of creation in the light of God himself showed up in 70

AD to perfect the church in all things and in church and and or in the in the body of Christ and to bring about the restoration of all things in perfection of truth the knowledge and within 30 years they didn't have a clue well wait a minute perfectus or not so we have to go through what

I call neo Gnosticism it's the only way around it our perfection is a spiritual perfection it's a covenant perfection it has nothing to do with tangibility perfection in other words we're all going to agree on everything yeah we start transcending and spiritualizing or becoming very esoteric in our explanations so so so do some full preterists believe it a bodily

I mean if Jesus came back do they all spiritual eyes the second coming I mean

I'm thinking in terms of acts in the book of Acts where he's where the angel says after Jesus ascended to heaven just as you saw him left kind of the same way he's gonna come back so there seems to be a an essentially bodily element to his return well they believe that there is a that a bodily return of Christ occurred there's a there's a book okay is written by this guy here between the veils by Alan Bond are which is published by Don Preston okay arguing that at the

Ascension Jesus was reabsorbed back into the Godhead shed his earthly body and is now eternal logos again so there is no bodily humanity of Jesus in heaven ah and so if I'm if I could think ahead so if you were to say well wait a minute the

Apostle Paul says there's one mediator between God and man the man Christ Jesus they'll say well that was written before AD 70 and so that's how they they would get around it everything everything is fit into the brain now doesn't that affect the the role of high priest it is seem to me the prerequisites for being a high priest is that you're a man it it wrecks everything and I now when

I was leaving the movement around to 2010 this was one of the issues that I had because as a as a hyper preterist

I maintained the what we call the continuing incarnation of Jesus of Nazareth at the right hand of the

Father fully man fully God okay and we continued to maintain that the testimony of the early churches is is 2 plus 2 equals 4 clear hmm so if we got rid of that then we're then our eschatology is now forcing us to deny aspects of Christology so now we're getting into other areas where we even have to deny that so that we can keep our full preterist eschatology and guys like Alan Bond are and Don Preston have done just that Jesus is no longer a human being after after his ascension he ceased being human and was reabsorbed back in the

Godhead it sounds like a polynarianism and it just but the controlling factor is the the so -called you know these time texts and 70

AD so that controls every that's that controls everything and if Jesus is still if he ascended into heaven with the body a human body and it and is in heaven in a glorified human body then that defines what resurrection and glorification looks like for us and we can't have that because that didn't happen in 70

AD resurrection you see where I'm going with sure you've got to get rid of this and I wrote an article called you a mafia term you got to get rid of the body and because you have to and so I was not willing to go now 2010 and this 2021

I'm looking back at it now something in my spirit said right there there's this is that right there's something something is not right here again

I just focusing real quick on the bodily aspect I'm I'm thinking I remember but by the way someone's asking if you're a hyper preterist the answer is no

Sam used to be a hyper preterist back in the day and he came out of that position and so that's what we're talking about now but um

I'm thinking it's and again I'm I've never been a partial I mean a full preterist

I've never you know drank the Kool -Aid all the way every time when

I even when I studied partial preterism I and I would read some full preterist stuff I'm kind of like hmm that doesn't that doesn't right but I remember sitting in church once and something struck me when

I was reading about Jesus being the first fruit of the resurrection and that that kind of confused me at first I was like well wait a minute how can

Jesus be the first fruit of the resurrection there are others who have been resurrected before Jesus I mean he raised Lazarus from the dead he raised a little girl from the dead that read you know he raised that that guy a young man at the name in the

Gospel of Luke yeah and then I realized I learned later that Jesus is the first fruits of the resurrection because he's the first to ever be raised from the dead with a glorified body right and so you have kind of this bodily aspect to the resurrection and so he's never to die again it's it seemed to be a clear indication that he would remain in that state and as you said is the model that believers look forward to when they receive their resurrected body there's a very physical aspect to it that goes all the way back to Augustine and Tertullian and all the way through Aquinas through Calvin they all say the same thing

Westminster I mean you can go down the list Charles Hodge okay but Sam but Sam don't go through the list because I I know that many preterists full preterists will say well wait a the creeds it is not what church councils have said or what this father that father said our standard is the scripture and if I could throw a bone to the full preterist

I agree now I'm not missing the importance of the early church fathers by no means but it is true we do want to get to the scripture so I want to move in a different direction if you don't mind one of the strongest aspects in my opinion of the full preterist position are those time indicators so for example you know people ask me all the time you know do you think we're living in the last days and I'm like well

I mean no I mean why I would say I don't know and probably not that's my answer but I turn them to Hebrews chapter 1 where it says that God had spoken to you know the spoken to us through the the prophets and many times many ways but in these last days right he's spoken to us by his son

Jesus Christ and then he goes on to talk about you know the deity of Christ the last days are referred to as the days in which the author of Hebrews is living that struck me when

I first read that 1st John chapter 2 speaks of the and this is how you know that this is the last hour that Antichrist has come so the the author of well

John looks at the days in which he's living in as the last hour Paul says that these things have happened upon whom the ends of the ages have come and then in the book of Revelation which got me right there at the beginning at the middle and at the end but most specifically at the beginning before you get into the metaphor before you get into the symbolism of Revelation it says these are things that must soon take place the time is near right now me

Sam as a partial preterist one of the things that caused me to abandon dispensationalism was the force of those time those time indicators but a full preterist would say well

Eli why are you being so inconsistent indicators is what sets the context of the timing of these prophetic passages it's there in Revelation why don't you take the full the full depth so my question for you is how do you get around the time indicators and say yeah

I would say many of these things happened in 8070 but not the whole thing how do you get how do you differentiate the time indicate how do you differentiate between time indicators that suggest the events leading up to and including the destruction of Jerusalem and those events that you believe are still in our future well the last five years

I guess now keep in mind I was in Bible College and I graduated 89 you're old yeah

I don't know you look good we both have great so it's critical theory there is no way so and as you noted you know before you know a book work so I mean

I'm an avid reader and of course over 30 years you just develop a hat you know you read through all this kind of stuff so looking at that particular issue of these the time text and of course

Schweitzer his famous argument of a failed apocalyptic and Jesus thought this was all going to happen and of course it didn't happen and and a good deal of historical

Jesus going all the way back to Ernst Renan and others is based on this idea of failed apocalypticism that's being challenged today we're now in the third quest of historical

Jesus and so that scholarship has has kind of moved in understanding the when the aspect of these time text or what are utilized this time text some of it has to do simply just with translation for example in Revelation when it says for the these things must soon take place actually could translate that these things must swiftly take place it's not saying when they take place when they happen though they're swift

I can I stop can I stop and give a little push back there so are you a dispensationalist no okay so so when the dispensationalist what so when the dispensationalist will argue well wait a minute soon doesn't necessarily need to mean soon like you preterists you know you partial predators or Fulbright it could mean swiftly so doesn't that if we were to be consistent doesn't that remove the force of how we would argue against the dispensationalist well no

I don't think the I don't think our alternatives are preterism or dispensationalism there's other there's other aspects out there my book the parousia of the

Son of Man it covers a good deal of this but when you read you know in the

Greek text are they gonna stay in take so it's using that phrase the things which must necessarily take place swiftly that's just the prepositional phrase in take that's found numerous times in both

Greek classic literature as well as in the Septuagint for example in Psalm 2 kiss the

Sun lest his wrath flare up in take swiftly hmm doesn't mean kiss the

Sun lest he immediately he's gonna flare up and wrath on it might be 34 it you know who knows the fact is is that when it flares up it flares up fast so if it's acting adverbially it's just stressing the action when it takes place it's not saying when it takes place hmm that's just Greek and I would go

I could go to any I'm also Greek I've been reading about 30 years too okay so you know and then there's another word mellow they use the word the verb mellow now as a hyper preterist

I never really used that because I understood that mellow that term does not mean about to be and we try to say that that is about to be and I had a lexicographer explain the

Bauer Art Gingrich and Donker lexicon and how the listings are and about to be is the third listing and he said what that means is is all of those listings you see in English those are

English representations so as how English people use it I'm about to take out the trash not five years from now not a week from now

I'm on the verge of doing it right now so and you see that in the New Testament Paul was about to speak the vote was about to break apart and that's what that stress so mellow is really acting as a emphasis or an emphatic verb for the future active indicative and it's it's stressing the certainty the basal meaning of that word is the certainty so most translations will have going to or will but it's but in Greek it's an emphatic will it's put your money on it it's gonna happen bank on it you know it's a definite thing and so that's what it's stressing it doesn't mean about to and some full preterists really abuse that some partial preterists abuse that as well as far as the

Lord is near using either the verb or the noun English numerous times in the

Septuagint it's found where David says the Lord is near those who call upon him using

English Paul says don't grumble among yourselves the Lord is near what does that mean we know in the lexicons and you can consult any one of them they'll talk about spatial or temporal this coffee mug is near me it doesn't mean it's five minutes away from me it means it's right here it's at hand which which is literally what at hand means it's at hand it's or you find several parallels in both

Greek literature and also in the New Testament particularly the Septuagint you'll find parallels where the word parami is used with or in parallel with ingus meaning present or at hand if so if somebody is near my wife is near she's at hand she's present she's near in a spatial sense so when the

Lord says I am with you always even under the end of the age in Greek you could express that I am near you or I'm by you or I stand beside you there's there's four or five different ways when you go through semantic domains like with Luo and Ida so so so with the words near soon you would you would argue that they don't necessarily entail what the full or even the partial preterist thinks that it that it means that it has a wider and broader semantic domain yes given the context you can determine it's most likely this reading and especially it should be most likely the reading that doesn't destroy the rest of your theology okay this is just surveying you know over the years pillaging every lexicon

I could get my hands on and that is the the the little and Scott that I've got the massive volume of theirs sure then

I've got all of the Greek and theological then they all say that they all express the same kind of sentiment so there when you dogmatically say it can only mean this it can't mean anything else then see that's where I start backing off because I've been down that road and it wreaks havoc and so as a scholar

I'm more standoffish and saying well actually I know that words have a an extreme variety of ways of being used and interpreting texts and the way we look at text we can text with bias we are

I was a hyper preterist so everything I was reading was 70 AD you get into that Karl Popper kind of problem where you see what you want to see and then you find some sort of obscure reference somewhere and then you say hey look here's proof here's confirmation and we did that a lot and so as I get older I'm standing back and I noticed that there's a lot of folks like you know

Tom Wright and Scott McKnight and a few others that are there's a few there's several others off the top of my head that are seeing that and then there are folks like TF Torrance and some of the

German scholars that I have found were back in the 50s that they were actually saying that CH Dodd was seeing some of that kind of stuff where what

Jesus was saying was the nearness of the kingdom or the kingdom is is at hand what he's another way of Luke Luke's way of saying it is that the kingdom has using a perfect chance the kingdom has come upon you in other words it's there why can't we see it it's among you but it's it's the invisible rule and reign of God and you can't see

God so the Pharisees asked when is the kingdom and Jesus says the kingdom of God is he uses the present he comes right back at him like and like he does in John 3 like the spirit in the wind yes wind but it's all around you in other words it's present it's near you have to have eyes to see and ears to hear and when you have eyes to see and ears to hear then you see the kingdom don't have eyes to see and ears to hear can't see the kingdom so so how do you respond because when

I when I read Revelation when I read when I read the time text it does seem contextually to refer to yeah this is not far it's soon more so than this is certainly going to happen that when it does happen it's gonna happen swiftly for me in a lot of areas that seems kind of a kind of a stretch but in the key areas where the part where the full preterist would push you how would you address and what's some what are some text that they would use to push you on with respect to some of these time text and how would you respond to them after several debates and the years that I've been out now and again

I don't my beef is not I you know I there's pushback that I have with DeMar and Gentry who

I consider dear brothers in fact DeMar and Gentry DeMar did it personally still does the

Kindle version and Kenneth Gentry publishes my book why I left full preterism his publishing arm so I consider them you know again dear brothers they know our different we know our differences and things like that but again in the fundamentals were totally in agreement sure so you know it's a it's an in -family squabble okay but I don't love the main pushback that full preterist have or the or the way they interpret these time text they strangle hold these these time text for example if Daniel 7 13 through 14 that's an ascension that the

Son of Man is coming to the ancient of days and what happens well the angels present him so he's coming to the ancient of days with the angels and what happens he's given all power glory authority honor and might and a kingdom that's ascension with the angels in power that and so you go back and you read

Matthew 16 and there's a ton of scholars and commentaries in both the

Reformed and Protestant that understood that Jesus is referring there to his ascension that's when he receives all glory and power so if you see that coming on the clouds of heaven to the ancient of days and the reception of all power glory honor and might and they're waiting for this to happen and at the end of Matthew he says all power and authority have been given to me that's

Daniel 7 13 all power and authority was given to the Son of Man and of course

Jesus saying now that it's all given to me go make disciples of the nations because the nations have been given to me

Psalm 2 the nations are your possessions they have been given to you kiss the

Sun lest his wrath flare up and takeh immediately or worth the flare now does the wrath of God cease in 70

AD I asked Don Preston this and because he believes everything's fulfilled in 70 AD he can't answer that question he won't answer the question he won't say that God's wrath is still being displayed and revealed post 70

AD he can't you can't argue that anymore but if the wrath of God is still being displayed it's being displayed in Takei it's rapidly quickly or David in the

Psalms he continually asked God come quickly come quickly Lord Lord quickly come and rescue me you know from my enemy so he's always asking this when you started reading

Revelation of Jesus that's standing there and he's talking to John and he and it says and he's in the midst of the candlesticks which we know are the churches right what's he doing in the midst of him

I thought he was up in heaven he's present he's at hand the time has come all power and authority is his his messianic reign has begun repent today is here and he's walking among the cable what's he doing

I'm searching the souls in the hearts in the minds and my reward is at hand it meaning

I have it in hand and I have the keys of death and life in my hand so he's going through these churches and he's pointing out all of these flaws and all these errors that they have how does he know all of this because he's at hand he's present he's near he's right there he's in the midst of them okay it's seen he's invisible and I this is where a lot of scholars talk about the hiddenness of God and the hiddenness of his reign that's the mysterious part of it that's not gonna that's temporary

Paul uses an interesting phrase in Thessalonians where he's where he says the manifestation of the presence of Christ okay right now we have the presence of Christ but we don't have the manifestation of it because I can't see

I've never seen Jesus so the full preterist believe in the manifestation I mean did that happen already yes there's no body there so the manifestation is invisible too so you get more you get more invisibility on top of the fulfillment well what's the fulfillment look like more invisibility you can't have a non

I mean manifestation it seems in contradistinction to what's hidden what spiritual something's manifest is made it's made known exactly okay here you find a lot of the hyper preterist they even have to redefine terms and words even on the lexicon they redefine these words it's like that's not the way

Greeks would have understood this I read a lot of classic you know literature or Sophocles and Aristophanes okay and that's just not how they would have understood that now they would have understood

Zeus who is on the clouds of the heavens and hurling down lightning bolts out of the heavens and judging people like they would have understood that sure

Jesus is now Zeus Jesus has all power and authority you can't see him but he's hurling down lightning bolts so that the

Paris here the coming of the presence of the Son of Man is like lightning bolts coming down out of heaven the

Greek mind would have thought yeah I get that that's Jesus's there is no

Zeus Jesus is raining on the clouds of heaven and judging hurling down lightning bolts and making judgments yeah and he will do so until he destroys the last enemy which is death and that hadn't happened yet so but the full preterist believes that it has the full preterist has been conquered and that's it every tear will be wiped away yeah all of the things that we associate with a genuine kind of removal of all these things the full predator says that's already happened even though we see death around us even though we see not just death atrocities just the horrible what seems to be kind of a victory of evil of sorts yeah we know that's not the case but it seems to be the case it seems to empty all those promises of their meaning all for the sake of applying a time text to certain elements of that and making it have to have been fulfilled at that time it seems the way we got around that was physical death we defined as biological death or natural death okay

Adam was always going to die the death that encountered the day that he ate unless God is a liar we would say okay the day you eat you will die well

Adam didn't physically die the day that he ate therefore it must be spiritual death and that's where we go so what swallowed up in 70

AD covenant death or separation from God death that's what was it so it's covenant so everything is everything is spiritualized in that sense hmm the death is not in reference to physical death that was never the problem so we would say now the

Lord has really done some interesting things in my the last five years of my life

I lost my father I ministered around his bedside and watched him with my sister go take his last breath and I you know loved loved very close to my dad and then 30 days later my wife's mother passed away in our home she had fourth stage cancer well we had to go to that 30 days later nine months after that my first cousin who

I consider like a brother he was murdered just completely blew us all away we were you know we loved this guy and he was horrible and then about six months after that another cousin died and then and then another died and then not even last year it was last

October my sister passed away who was just three years older than I was and despite was like my closest you know sibling my sister and I grew up together and we were extremely extremely close and I it's hard to talk about her not you know being here so the last four years five years has been a real the

Lord has been sending death and I've looked at death and I thought death is an enemy this is an enemy and it's this is a natural that this is

God's judgment upon our flesh and it's also what Jesus meant taking up our cross because you want eternal life you have to die to get it you have you have to go through resurrection which means you have to die because it's not realized in this it won't be realized in in this this this is under God's wrath the flesh is under God's wrath so we have to die to self and die to the flesh so that with Christ we are raised with him and will be renewed and glorified with him as he was that made a big impact you know on my thinking and how a lot of Christianity has has gone kind of gnostic in a lot of its applications you hear of Christians today talking about we get our bodies when we die and we go to heaven we get our bodies they just sidestep the resurrection complete sure that's crazy yeah that I understand it because we don't preach resurrection of the dead anymore and in our including our reformed churches our church is is changing a lot of that because I find that when you go through the the message of Paul particularly in Acts it's all he's talking about resurrection of the dead constantly he's constantly talking about the resurrection of Jesus and the resurrection of the dead yeah

I do see a lot of emphasis on the resurrection of Jesus of course but not much on the nature of resurrection itself and we get that issue and so discount it because nobody knows what the molecules will look like right that's

I don't know how God made the moon but it said he made it sure good enough for me all right well very good so um okay so we're coming at the top of the hour

I want to kind of have get some summary questions in and then we'll take some questions from I got a couple of emailed questions and some questions in the comments here and maybe we could spend the rest of the again this is a huge topic and we barely scratched the surface so I'm sure someone will watch this and be like well

Sam didn't address a B and C well of course Sam can't address all of it it is a huge a huge topic but what in your opinion is the strongest argument for a full preterist position and what is its weakest point in your estimation just quickly that the strongest point is the perception that it creates about time that's that is it's that's the basis and foundation of full preterism the weakest argument

Eli's already made his eyebrows raise is the Millennium the thousand how you can reduce the symbol that represents a thousand down to 30 some years is unprecedented and that's a weak argument okay okay all right well um let's take some questions here let's see here we'll see if we can get to the email question because they're pretty long

I'm good when when I say sending your questions you got it you got it shorten the question

I mean people like ask Sam to and then it's like a paragraph it's like I'm not sure

I can do all that so I do apologize if your question doesn't get asked I'm just gonna go let's see here

I'm gonna go down the list here so I got a scroll down so give me a second okay so let's see here so mark raid maker or rate a maker ask questions

Sam according to Isaiah 65 and 66 and Revelation 21 and 22 there is a sickness death evangelism nations etc in the new heavens and the new earth yes if not why not thanks if you understand the question yeah

I do I don't particularly see it that way this is a case where you pick and choose what you're gonna spiritual eyes and metaphor meta make metaphor or not okay it says there won't be an infant that dies yet but a hundred years okay all right is that in the new heavens and new earth because where is the infant that lives a hundred

I don't see however when it says the wolf will like well then that spiritual hmm that's over here that's not spiritual it says death will still be in the well wait a minute that is then why isn't this over here well that's that's spiritual but this over here's look and clearly your framework is going on reading

Isaiah 65 what I think and I agree with most commentaries on that is

Isaiah is utilizing very clearly the language of Genesis 3 mm -hmm also

Deuteronomy and he's bringing that language in and what he's saying is is that when God is going to do is unlike anything you've ever seen before okay and all of the curses will be no more and he's using a very hyperbolic way of doing that so to press him in details of saying oh yeah that says that's gonna don't don't we don't do this to poetry

I don't know why we do it to the Hebrew prophets okay all right thank you for that Judd Noel or yes

Noel's I asked the question which parts of the book of Revelation do you believe I think there's a good question a lot of people ask this question which parts of the book of Revelation do you believe are in the future and why do you believe they're in the future given that John says that what he wrote was to take place soon and the time is near I don't again that gets back to how you are gonna translate the phrasing of near and what near means and where the time is at hand and then it also is going to get into how you translate these things must take place swiftly as I would that's a legitimate

I'd go head -to -head with any Greek scholar and translate it that way okay so that is what is he what time is at hand and the expression there the time is is at hand it's not going to be at hand three years from now it is at hand and then what he sees is the ruling and reigning all -powered all -powerful

Jesus of Nazareth with death and Hades or the grave in his hands having the keys in his hands who is the radiant glory who looks just like the ancient of days described in Daniel chapter 7 in other words he is the image that stands before the father as his image bearer and he is coming in the authority of the ancient of days himself the time is at hand

Messiah has seat has been seated at the right hand of the father and now his commands because all judgment has been given to him now his commands are being sounded forth and sounded out in judgment against the earth how long is that going to go along John does not tell us and so it's when you read

Daniel Daniel 8 he tells you needs Persians and Greece I mean flat -out just tells you right there you don't get that in John John is a what are these which trumpet is is that Mount Vesuvius you know here's the

Ottoman Empire is that one that like the historicist idea tries to locate each of the events of the trumpets or each of the events of the bulls in some time and place in history like the bubonic plague of the 14th century okay third bowl

I don't think that I don't think John is doing that I think what John is saying is that from the ascension of the

Lamb of God and reception of all power and the glory authority tribulation is coming okay so so if someone were to say which parts of the book of Revelation do you believe are in the future you would be hesitant to try and guess which is which is because it's ambiguous it's as you would know in your readings it's notorious when you think you have

Revelation figured out mm -hmm and you realize you look at another passage like and that's not a detriment to the book of Revelation just because we believe the

Bible is the Word of God and it's conveying information that doesn't mean that we are guaranteed that in every aspect of Scripture every aspect of it is is clear the parts that God intends to be clear are clear and the parts that God intends to be ambiguous for whatever reason we get what we can get from the

Scripture we study the Scripture and we exist within the church talking about these difficulties working them out and sometimes there are answers that we won't even find this side of heaven so that's not a it kind of reminds me of the

Calvinism and Arminian debates you know when you ask the question for example how do we reconcile meticulous divine sovereignty with human freedom and responsibility well there are a whole bunch of different models that someone might might apply to that question we believe that God is meticulously sovereign we believe that man is sufficiently free and morally responsible how does that work out the metaphysics of it all well the

Scripture doesn't tell us you you can adopt them a philosophical model to try to bring those together and some have argued quite convincingly with respect to certain positions but the

Bible doesn't have to tell us all of the metaphysics and all of the details I think a lot of people don't like living with an element of mystery but that's not to say that all

Scripture is mysterious it just means we need to you know we need to acknowledge some some aspects maybe so I want to get my my two cents you know you you said a whole boatload there and I've read that in several several places okay the

Bible probably raises more questions than it answers sure and God is not obligated to answer every question you've got this is this is the problem for folks like like you and I is

I have to be danger in danger or I have to be aware of the sin that I've got to be certain about everything

I see I'm lusting after certainty I want certainty absolute certainty and if I don't have it then well where's faith see what this is

Job I got the answers and apologists can slide into that very easy where they think they've got to have an answer for every that's what

I meant by the moon I'm a young earth guy you know forgive me I'm younger so I believe God spoke the moon into existence okay now if I have to explain to you every chain of cause and effect from the minutiae of particles that can be called a particle of how that came about and until I'm able to do that I can't say that God created the moon well you're hamstringing me but neither can the physicists right they can't tell me every causal effect this is why

I like David Hume but you know they can't do that either so we have to allow for that and if if John has created a revelation that Jesus himself personally gave to him and this revelation has more than anything else created this massive dialogue where we're constantly going to it what does this mean that's that's a good thing that keeps us talking yeah that that's maybe that's the intent of the vagaries of it maybe that's now

I want to be careful the vagaries of some aspects I know there are some people be like well the

Bible is just a mess you can't and that that's that's not we're saying at all I want to point out real quick because a lot of people will suggest this like look the

Bible you can make the Bible say whatever you want it to say that doesn't follow from anything all of the theological debates that we have the in -house kind of fighting if we want to use that language it does not logically follow that because there are multiple interpretations of a passage or a concept that therefore there's not a right one or we're unable to defend the right one that just doesn't follow at all

I mean I can give a math test to my students and they give all different sorts of answers to the question what is 2 plus 2 if the multiplicity of interpretations means

I can't know the right I was like well I guess I don't know what 2 plus 2 is because everyone has a bunch of different answers that doesn't follow at all so it's the same thing with Roman Catholicism when they they suggest like how do you interpret the

Bible without some infallible authority oh yeah it's like you guys are just an interpretive mess this person says that that person says that well wait a minute the existence of multiple interpretations doesn't falsify the reality that we could have a correct interpretation and and powerfully argue in favor of that specific interpretation it just doesn't doesn't follow even if you think we're incorrect that's just a bad argument but anyway okay so a mark comes back again he asks

Sam John Owen and John Lightfoot believed that 2nd Peter chapter 3 the heavens burning up the elements melting occurred in 8070 do you agree if not why not thanks

John Lightfoot writing back 16th century he was one of the first guys keep in mind

Reformation so Luther's running around looking for Jews to teach him Hebrew so he can translate the original into into German instead of from the

Latin and so very interesting books that I've got of that period of time where you have all these reformed people looking for Jews because to teach him

Hebrew so that they can read Hebrew you know because the Hebrew just wasn't but with Reformation and soul of scripture and all that sure that launches and a an appreciation for the

Talmud and the Hebrew scriptures and the Hebrew traditions and John Lightfoot was one of the first guys to actually go into and say you know what if you read the

Mishnah and the Talmud a lot of that stuff is like what Paul says you know it's

Jewish and so here you have the beginning of reading Paul and his Jewish context this is unheard of nobody was really doing this today it's it's staple it's standard but back then but Lightfoot was one of the first and so he's taking

Moses Maimonides and reading a lot of this and how they spiritualize and make symbols out of everything and he starts saying the second

Peter 3 refers to 70 AD and that this that the other and it's acting typically of the consummation they always adds that the heavens and the earth now today

Eli you're probably familiar with what's called temple theology where Eden looks like a temple which looks like the tabernacle which looks like the

Solomonic temple and of course you have the covers of the tabernacle or blue skies blue and so you have that heaven on earth thing going on there okay and so the destruction of the temple is the destruction of heaven and earth

Lightfoot and John Owen now John Owen came after John Brown John and John Gill the three

Johns of the Reformation actually for this is John Brown John Gill John Lightfoot Brown not

James Brown James Brown did theology so these all these guys like oh and they followed

Lightfoot all they did was just follow Lightfoot and they quoted him at length okay because it's a however

Lightfoot who was on the Westminster divines of the Westminster Confession of Faith Lightfoot was present where they clearly are not using that verse there and Lightfoot was not largely followed and was over the

I'd say a hundred years was kind of dismissed he most fought him to extreme on second

Peter three they thought that's that's now it's interesting because dr. gentry Kenneth Gentry he doesn't go that route either he thinks

Lightfoot went too far on that one and I again the consensus the overwhelming is is that second

Peter three is not 70 AD it's very difficult to read it as if if now hyper preterist do and if that's the case and heavens and earth is all of that kind of thing then what happens if we take this language apocalyptic language and take it back to Genesis chapter 1 then

Genesis is not talking about physical creation it's talking about covenant creation Adam is not the first human being see we can now give it a room for science and many hyper preterist do this and now they think they have the answer for science and we can bring science in because Genesis is apocalyptic and the heavens and the earth is apocalyptic it's not talking about physical tangible things anymore and it's talking about physical death you see where they go with this because gnostic esoteric but they're forced to do that so anyway all right thank you for that um just asks and I think you addressed this so we can move quickly through this she says can you define what has been fulfilled in prophecy and what has yet to be that's a huge question boy so there are certain aspects that Sam said he doesn't know there are other aspects that I think you would attribute probably to 8070 what are some of those things perhaps you can share that or maybe not

I don't actually how would you identify your position yourself personally why don't you pretty committed on millennial with an optimistic outlook when it comes to all of that other subject of two kingdoms and the spiritual doctrine and all that kind of stuff okay

I I know I thoroughly and familiar with sound like a drink

I'll take an on millennial with a twist I I believe like the phrase last days that the early church it's even in the

Council of Chalcedon where it says but in these last days and they wrote that in the fifth century mm -hmm the last days is where that's the ascension and reign of Christ to the last day the last day

I think in John 6 is very clear I will raise up all who the father has given to me in the last day

I don't know how clear you can get there in Jewish speak that language is used in the last day that's the day of resurrection that's when all will stand before God just and unjust and be judged in the last day would it be correct that last days the phrase isn't does not always refer to the same thing it doesn't and so so writing because because the the phrase second coming of Christ is not even mentioned in the

Bible right you have to be careful not to assume second coming when you're interpreting certain passages that have time text in it where we sometimes are trained because of how we're taught to kind of just see those things as meaning the same thing same thing with Antichrist you know defining

Antichrist a lot of people will confuse Antichrist of 1st and 2nd John the man of lawlessness of 1st and 2nd

Thessalonian and the beast of Revelation you'll just assume they're kind of really close related as a matter of fact what was shocked me was if you do a word study in the book of Revelation that the word

Antichrist is mentioned literally zero times and it's written by John the same author of 1st

John where you do have the word Antichrist used and when we define Antichrist within 1st

John categories the picture looks very different than this conglomerate construction of this world dictator that is

Obama Trump and all the different presidents that have passed by it's a very different picture when you actually read the scriptures in its context but they get into our heads and that's how we read and it colors and listen

I love you know reading Deirdre and Lothard and and and Foucault and all these you know guys that that's known

Chomsky these language and critical if they you know ever since Immanuel Kant so if they've not if these guys have contributed anything they've contributed for example what

Clark or Carl F .H. Henry or Van Til was saying a long time ago is that we read according to our narrative yes well heck these

Gordon Clark and Carl F .H. Henry and Van Til were saying that back in the 30s 40s that they were saying this and it it's like the critical realists have caught up with the epistemology of the reformed who are saying of course we read according to our narratives we need the we need the correct narrative which is a which only comes by Revelation written in the scriptures of God that's how we read history it's how we so how do

I read history well I don't read it like a Hegelian I don't read it like a

Marxist I read it like the unfolding of the rule and reign of Jesus Christ who is calling out of the nations those who are his ushering in the end and the new heavens and a new earth as our inheritance for all of those from Adam to the last day will inherit and history is moving in that direction all history and so that gives history meaning but then

I just have to go back to Augustine which is what he said city of man so history now has a purpose and a goal sure so that's how

I read it I read it through the eyes of Scripture okay yeah very good thank you

Jess asks can you exegete 2nd Thessalonians chapter 2 verses 3 through 4 according to kind of a partial preterist perspective so let me read it for you 2nd

Thessalonians chapter 2 verses 3 through 4 says let no one deceive you in any way for that day will not come unless the rebellion comes first and the man of lawlessness has revealed the son of destruction who opposes and exalts himself against every so -called

God or object of worship so that he takes his seat in the temple of God proclaiming himself to be

God how would a partial preterist understand the man of lawlessness well

I'm currently in the last two years doing a study on this particular passage

I've collected over 15 major commentaries that all say the same thing that this is probably one of the most notoriously difficult passages of everything that Paul has ever written some scholars and these are high -caliber you know high -caliber guys they're liberal but nonetheless okay

I believe that 2nd Thessalonians is spurious it's not even Paul because this language just doesn't resemble anything like him at all this is a very problematic passage and just go through you know any commentary one guy one commentator noted that he collected over 350 identifications of the man of sin okay now is the it seems to me that the concern is not who this person is right at least in the immediate context of the person sometimes

Paul will use a singularity for a whole group of people Christ and now you know that Antichrist's plural right right but but not not that it's not important for the original hearers but for us

I and the general principle of the passage is not to identify for example 666 yeah it's the number of a man

I'm pretty sure the people who first read Revelation knew who it was but for future generations it's not important for me to know who it is

I mean I have my theories and I have my position but I mean the the strength and power of the book of Revelation is not diminished because I don't know who the man which 666 refers to or even this yeah or even the man of lawlessness yeah big

Yehuda says I guess he's asking me or saying to me the Apostles believe that Jesus would return in their lifetime or shortly thereafter the people who wrote the

New Testament believe this this worries me no I don't know that they give me a verse that they did yeah

I'm there there again that doesn't worry me one bit every passage that you speak of that you can bring up with respect to the the soon coming or the judgment

Matthew 24 Luke 21 Mark 13 I would believe that most of 24

Luke 21 Mark 13 the Olivet Discourse was in fact referring to the events leading up to and including the destruction of Jerusalem I actually hold to that as a partial preterist so I would understand those passages within that context and there's no problem with that you know there's no problem understanding those passages that this person might be referring to when you understand it in that in that fashion of course you have different perspectives there that's just mine

I'll go into it a little deeper when I share my views but how would you speak to that Sam well again this

Robert Hutchinson was the guy who's trying to remember showing that this is kind of being turned the liberal school was saying that Paul expected they all expected and then it was a failed piracy and it didn't happen but however if you read if you close read text like Ephesians 3 20 where he talks about the power which is operating in the church for the glory of the church and also those in Christ Jesus unto all and here it's passes

Toscanus whose ionis so unto all the generations forever that's a forward -looking look to generations far from beyond Paul and that's the word generation so Paul's looking down that the power of God be manifested in the church throughout all generations he's looking forward there and he's mentioning generations plural now if he thought the world was going to end in his own generation why would he even say anything like that there's a lot of other verses like that where Paul is not arguing

Paul understands that he is at the very foundation of which the

Apostles and prophets are in which he knew that he was of the foundation of an edifice that God is laying in fulfillment of the promise that the a that was made to Abraham that the nations would be blessed and called in and that's going to take more than 30 years he knew that this is a long haul of bringing the gospel wherever there's dirt and people and it's going to continue to go on well when is it going to end it's going to continue to go on well when is it going to end preach the gospel make disciples well when's it gonna end for how long preach the gospel go forth well when

I know I want to know the exact date when's it gonna boy just be busy when he comes be alert don't be deceived yeah that's yeah see we want it and Paul is not consumed with this question he's just not he's not at all his the 85 % of what he writes is on how do you live that's how do you live how are you living in light of such resurrection of Christ in the installment of Kings but the good things that are above where he is how are you living your life in light of that that's that's

Paul and he's not off on this eschatology a whole lot stuff other than resurrection and I think that's the that's the pattern of New Testament writing especially the epistles it's it's preaching theology and then moving into practical application oh yeah how do we live in light of these theological truths thank you for that but thank you so much

Judd I really appreciate your screenshot of $4 .99 every penny helps I appreciate it

Judd Judd asks is it possible Jesus could return in the next five minutes to bring about the last judgment and the resurrection of the dead if not why not

I'd say yes amen I agree yep be ready there's it's recognized there's two ways that the language this language of coming if you take

Urkamai I am coming so that's the common word the

Greek word Urkamai it's used all over the place let's go back to the Septuagint and God is coming I will come

I'm coming at you there's a lot of that going on one of the ways for example in Revelation it's a conditional sentence there if you repent

I will come to you what happens if they repent well then I'm not then you're then I'm good we're good there's a personal aspect of coming this is recognized in Reformed theology particularly if you read

Bob Inc who I'm reading going through right now and he says that I was my jaw dropped because he talks about the many ways that God comes and now through Christ who all authority's been given to the many who holds the keys of death and life in his hand who might find you two in a field and he might take one of you just like that next thing you know you're in a car wreck are you alert are you ready because you don't know the hour a day now that was another thing with what

I mentioned about death that's happened in my family the last five years is it has startled me and those passages when those passages really rang true like you know what and Eli I'm sure you reflect on this and you read this and Reformed divines a lot particularly

Owen and others that talk about you don't you don't you don't have tomorrow that's right there's an earth well can't you see that there's an urgency there then what do you do today you know with your family with what what did you how did you spend your time today will

I find faith on it seeing that I'm like oh that's the urgency that's what

Paul's talking about that's that's what it is we're laying around fat cats walk watching six hours of Netflix binge -watching

TV and say huh come on there's some good shows out there man yeah

I think I think urgency that's there's an urgency because I don't know and so I want my

Lord to find me if I get hit by a bus or a cardiac or my sister like my sister was fine until the last two weeks and then gone with a brain cancer that's what

I like the rarest things you've ever heard of in your life so it just blew us it was like she was here and then in two weeks that's it and she never smoked she never drank she went to the

YMCA she was as healthy as a horse and got cancer boom done that scared

I'm like man whoa I gotta be alert

I gotta be watchful here is that make sense absolutely and I think that's that's actually a good place to conclude because regardless of when

Jesus comes back I think that or that that message of urgency is important ultimately one day you're gonna meet your maker as Christians we want to be found busy doing the kingdom work and those who are not in Christ I mean you know people people get insulted when when when the

Christian says hey man you need to repent you need to you need to call upon the Lord Jesus in the back oh you're threatening me kind of like yeah like I am threatening you in the sense that like this is a threat a righteous

God will judge sin yeah I mean if you're not scared by that threat I mean that's okay

I mean I hope I hope you are in the sense that you reflect upon your own finitude and that one day yeah you're gonna come face to face with God and I say that because I believe that that's true and if you don't believe that's true yeah

I'm sharing this is why I believe it's true I'm willing to talk about why I think it's true and why you should be concerned about your eternal destiny but I mean yeah this is the coming of Christ is such an important topic that a theological topic is because it reminds us that history is linear

I mean we have a beginning point there's an ending point and there's a point in which the mercy and grace of God ends and that's why

Christians unfortunately they don't do it in the grace in more graceful ways but that's why Christians are so urgent and saying hey you need to repent you need to ask forgiveness of your sins you need to come to grips with the

God who has revealed himself all around you and there is is there an element of threat threat in that statement sure but there's also an element of salvation this idea that but there's a

God who you could know and that you could have this relationship with and and and yes all of our questions aren't answered we still have questions we still have concerns but it is it is quite a blessing to doubt towards Christ yeah

I know that one day I will have many of my questions answered and even though I see through a glass dimly there we'll have a fuller perspective in the future so I do urge or do urge folks who are may not be believers you know in the comments things like that this isn't a game

I mean I'm not trying to be you know fire and brimstone but you know if the Bible's true you're going to be judged for your sins and this is something that we need to take very seriously

Elton Elton thank you so much for you know yep I just want to give a shout out to Elton he was so kind to give a $20 super chat thank you so much for that he says

Sam Frost rocks by the way I have to say your your name is so cool

Frost I mean of course Sam Frost rocks he says thanks for sharing your experience and teaching us more about the problems with full preterism well -meaning interpreters but not truly biblical theology read his book why

I left full preterism that's Sam's book thank you so much for that out and I really appreciate that thank you what were you gonna say

Sam I apologize I was running and thank you Elton Elton is out there in California I believe he works with UCLA and Berkeley okay so but no

I wanted to ask you do you this is the personal question so you read a lot of Olin and Bowdoin can you know who all those guys well it's been a while but guy do you notice how like the style of Calvin and stuff the way that they ride in that urgency and that's yes

I was just reading Calvin Calvin on predestination against piggies and he was very yeah

I'm like that Calvin why you gotta be so mean like they wrote very different than the way people write today do you sense today that we we've lost that you know we got the emerging churches and secret friendly and everybody's got to be nice and we've lost that threat

I don't want to be threatening that's the last thing I want to I don't like confrontation

I don't want to be mean you're going to have I don't want to be that but read

Jesus my youngest son he's 23 and very intense reader like my state oh he reads a lot and he said you know you read

Jesus he's very intense his questions they don't beat around the bush it's straight for the regular every single time almost how could you stand walking around a guy like that all the time and I'm like you got a point yeah so my question to you is do you think we've missed some of that I mean yes and I think there there's it goes to two extremes

I think we can be completely on the other side of the spectrum and be so soft that we never speak of sin at all because we think it's offensive believers think who do you think you are threatening me you know all that sort of stuff and then you have the the non -stop fire and brimstone people who speak truth but they speak truth like jerks and that's why that's why

I always emphasize that letter part of first Peter chapter 3 verse 15 where it says that we'd always be ready to give a reason for the hope that's in us yet doing so with gentleness and respect and unfortunately a lot of Christians a lot of apologists especially apologists they will justify being jerks about it okay by appealing to the story where Jesus flips the the the tables right

I'll say well Jesus was like listen this is a completely different you're not

Jesus yeah you're number one you're not Jesus and number two you know most when especially when I observe the interaction you totally could have taken a different approach you need to learn to communicate being composed being patient and speaking with clarity but with firmness okay and in a way that reflects obedience to this to the scriptures that's how

God tells us how we are to do that I think today we have lost that there are a lot of people who are just unable to have a meaningful discussion with someone with whom they disagree

I mean I I've had I was telling folks I live out here in North Carolina now

I I had the opportunity to sit down with Hank Hanegraaff the the Bible Answer Man I had him on my show and then we stayed connected and when

I moved to North Carolina I was able to to go to the the CRI headquarters and meet him and what

I didn't expect was that he took me into his back office and we sat and talked about our disagreements for three whole hours and by the time we were done

I was like this is probably the the best conversation ever had it was loving it was respectful

I mean he is a very well known I'm a nobody I'm a guy on YouTube I got you know a couple of subs well we're almost on 3 ,000 almost so excited but I mean in comparison

I'm a nobody yet um he spoke to me as an equal and he heard my my my disagreement and I was able to hear his and we went a little back and forth and at the end of the day

I I didn't change my position on Eastern Orthodoxy yet we were able to have a respectful conversation which

I'm sure he would welcome more of more of in the future you see if you if you can't communicate with gentleness and respect but with firmness in your conviction you can't do that no one's gonna want to talk to you and none of this well

I'm just speaking the truth yeah but the Bible tells you to speak the truth in love there's a manner in which we do it we don't just speak the truth because you could defend the faith and you could share the faith unbiblically and I think that's the problem with a lot of people today they're either on the too soft or too hard these extremes is where we're being pulled and I think it's very difficult to find someone who is in a nice sweet spot in the middle where hey

I disagree with you I think you're going to hell when you die but because I love you and I know you disagree with me let's have a conversation you're going to hell unless you repent how could you say that well we disagree let's have a conversation you see so conversations with you know those in the you know

LBGTQ community and I and and I and I'm thoroughly you know

Leviticus 19 I come at it and creation and Adam and Eve and male and female and this is it you know this is

I'm very but if I find that they're asking me why why do you believe and the conversation remains that remains at that tone tonight and and I also run into like the critical theory and I say well let's approach it from critical theory

I've got my narrative and you've got yours so let's see do you want to understand where I'm coming from right and that's and I found that that way hex kind of works because then they can say whoa whoa yeah then you're being consistent if the

Bible is the Word of God then I can see where you would condemn our lifestyle and yeah that point

I've done my work that's it that's when I do apologetics

I'm a people know who follow my channel I'm a presuppositional list and presuppositional argumentation tends to be very aggressive because it is a kind of all -or -nothing like you know what the

Christian God exists you could have no foundation for knowledge you could have no that argument can sound very aggressive but we do need to learn how to even approaching that form of argumentation not to always have the

I'm trying to win an argument mentality I am trying to win in the sense that I want to convey my position in a way that doesn't give you the full force of what

I'm trying to say but even as a presuppositional list that's my claim you need the

Christian worldview but sometimes the unbeliever will say something I've never heard of and I'm like you know what I'm gonna put my

I want to win hat over here and I want to understand where this person's coming from genuinely not simply to set him up so that I can give him the you know the although there's a place for that you know if I'm doing a debate yeah right if I'm doing a debate

I want to set you up but I'll tell you I'm setting you up because that's the point of a debate you want to draw out a position and show why you you know but but but even in doing that I think there's a way to go about it where at the end of the day the two people disagree but they have respect and you've you've you've carried yourself in such a way that it it adds longevity to the dead to the dialogue the person wants to talk more hey let's talk a little bit about this and I think we need to learn that art and skill not everything is a debate of a win or lose sometimes it is let's draw this out within the context of a relationship now

I've had several encounters like scores of those in the hyper predators camp that have come to me you know how do you do with that and then

I've gone into a phone call and then we start talking and they come out they see the error of it and then they come out and the

Lord has allowed me to do that hundreds of times I'm very aggressive on hyper because I consider it heretical it's it destroys the foundation of everything that that Christianity is and stands for and represents and where it's going and even a teleology a future because it doesn't have a future it's just I go to heaven and I think the

Bible is more than just dying and going to heaven so I but I when

I noticed that if someone's coming at me in a genuine way of really wanting to know Sam how did you leave this you were such a major player up here in the movement how did you come out of it and if I say well here's here's how

I here's how I did then I know you know there's a lot more listening instead of you know now

I do condemn hyper -preterism as heretical and I'm not alone in that Gentry and Damar and others do the same as well

I mean you can't hold of the Westminster Confession and be a full preterist there's it's it's it's impossible so or any confession they don't have but I could

I could I could just picture someone saying but it's not the confession it's the Word of God well let me just say real quickly the points of the confession that we are to affirm is strongly argued from Scripture they're not simply confessions they are they have scriptural demonstration dropped out of the sky right right well go ahead and so and I'm very strong on what solus group it doesn't mean just me and my

Bible and that's all me and my body well you need a little Josephus in there too don't you so you know so but I but I've really noticed if there's genuinity in the conversation even against an opponent then they're go

I'm going to return genuinity back and then there are like you said there are times where you just say something and you know nothing's going you shake the best off he's like you know what

I'm sure you're so hardcore that I'm not even you're not even open right

I like how you said that too because we tend to forget right yeah when you when you bring a powerful argument against an opponent and you be like this person cannot respond to this and guess what they don't they don't have a response but they don't turn to your position they be like how is this person rejecting what

I'm saying that argument is so perfect you're forgetting something yes you're forgetting something that you are not simply giving an argument and that's it you you forgot a key element to this whole apologetics thing is that ultimately it is the spirit that changes heart oh yeah

I knew that well you don't argue like you know that you're really arguing as though the power is within yourself and then you get upset when the person doesn't really you know doesn't convert so to speak because of the argument you gave those two work together

I think it's very important one of my favorite verses in the Bible and this is the truth is one of my favorite verses in the Bible and Paul talked to them about the kingdom of God and some believed yes

I'm like is he's gonna pull what will Sam Sam you've got the rules he's looking at the he's reading it right and some believe and in the book of Acts Paul was giving a

Bible study up on the second floor third floor of some house imagine falling asleep at a

Bible study that was at any rate

I just want to give a quick shout out here Nathan Burns thank you so much for your $9 .99 super chat

I so appreciate that Nathan says love you guys tell Sam I love him he loves you

Sam thank you thank your brothers here thank you so much for that super chat I really do appreciate that and Lazarus Lazarus one dollar and ninety nine cents thank you so much

Lazarus he says can Sam recommend some books against full preterism I'm sure you can actually that is written by the guy that's on there right now is this one called hope resurrected mmm big old giant book

Lance Connelly okay look that so there's several that are out there nice I have several so oh my website

I don't know if you post things it's vigil VIG IL dot blog okay vigil dot blog and that has a lot of books that are written by X full preterist people that have come out of it and they've written what in your opinion is the best book like if he's very humble that is yeah by the way thank you so much

Lazarus I appreciate it um if you if you could only recommend one book to equip someone to respond to their full preterist friend or you know or acquaintances whatever which book would that be for folks to get their hands on well of course

I'm gonna say mine I mean it was a person I was in the movement for so long and and okay you know

I I know for 10 years I lectured for 10 years with these guys so it's a very personal thing and there's not a lot of them out there but there's it's an increasing thing but dr.

Gentry Ken Gentry has been just absolutely wonderful with me and took the manuscript from what

American Vision was doing Gary DeMar which you can get on Kindle on that one and then Ken wanted it and so I yeah

I'd recommend you know Ken's out Ken has a book too specifically I think yeah yeah he does refuting hyper preterism or something it says have it's called have we missed the second coming but it's a small it's a small book so folks want to pick that up as well it's yeah

I tried to get Ken on here I've had he doesn't do a lot of this kind of stuff no no

I which is a lot to offer and I think you know yeah folks who won't read his book and totally learn from a good conversation he's got some good stuff on YouTube to a but all right urban reform podcast of our friend

Ricky rolled on is saying what's up Sam oh that's Ricky yo okay he's

I think you've been on his show as well okay all right well this has been really enjoy and enjoyable is that a word enjoy anything that's right that's right this has been a really good conversation

I hope folks really do check out some of the resources that you mentioned and sorry for the some of the technical difficulties at the beginning of this episode but the audio was fine so that that shouldn't be an issue

I do want folks to know that I may be I will be but maybe this

Wednesday I'll be having Michael Jones of inspiring philosophy on to discuss whether the

Bible Jesus the idea of Jesus was borrowed from pagan mythology that's kind of an area that he specializes in so I'm looking forward to that possibly on Wednesday he has to get back to me if not

Wednesday will definitely be moving it maybe the week after or something like that I'll keep you guys posted and this

Thursday I'll be having a Christian apologist dr. Phil Fernandez to talk about kind of a general apologetics topics keeping it general but I'm sure you guys will find that help he's from New Jersey he's got this nice New Jersey grunge to his voice

I like it I like it I listen to a couple of his lectures I really like his stuff so I'm looking forward to finally getting to meet him and to talk to him for for a little bit what else is coming up I'll be coming out with another online course so folks know that I teach a an online course on my website revealed apologetics called precept you which is a course you could sign up for and learn presuppositional apologetics but for those who are really really beginners

I'm creating a course on systematic theology so I'm working on that now and then

I'll be releasing that and that's going to be for like the beginner like hey I really want to get into this theology stuff and so I'll be making lectures recording lectures and putting that on the website for folks to sign up I'll definitely keep you guys updated so and those who've already signed up for the apologetics course thank you so much your financial contribution helps tremendously so I greatly appreciate that especially folks who gave super chats as well so that's it for this episode is there any last final thoughts that you'd like to share before we soon sign off yeah yeah but soon in like 30 seconds not 30 years now no

I appreciate coming on here and you know whatever we can do to promote and help what you're doing I've watched a few episodes and it's it's great

I would recommend on the systematic theology Robert Raymond I do have that yeah yes

I see it right there yeah he's somewhere he's somewhere there I love Robert Raymond's stuff not just a systematic theology but he's got some other great but but but for folks who when

I teach systematic theology I I've taught for over 10 years middle school and high school students and I've taught them you know with respect to apologetics

I've taught them the transcendental argument the cosmological argument I really try to water it down for the average person so if you're interested in learning systematic theology it's not going to be overly technical but it will be deep we will get into some issues but I want to make it as practical as possible we know it's not going to be a historical analysis here's the doctrine this is why it's important here's how you defend it from Scripture here's what here's how it connects with these other doctrines so I'll let folks know about that when when that's completed so thank you so much yes absolutely thank you so much for taking the time and I'm looking forward to possibly doing something in the future if you're willing all right well that's it for this episode thank you so much for listening and behaving in the comments

I get to look every now and then the generally good behavior today so I do appreciate it but if you have any questions on God the

Bible theology apologetics you could email me at revealed apologetics at gmail .com thank you so much